Government Study Projects Failure of Cap and Trade
A new study by the federal government, commissioned by Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) and Rep. Edward Markey of (D-MA), and perhaps intended as a weapon against opponents of Pelosi’s national energy tax, has instead, blown up in their faces.
The Study by the Energy Information Administration, which provides official energy statistics from the U.S. Government itself, addresses the economic impacts of H.R. 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009.
This act, the televised circus-like passing in the House of Representatives, of which started the Jolly Rogers website, is a complex bill that regulates greenhouse gas emissions through various mechanisms, incentives and programs.
The study found that electric bills for the average household will increase dramatically – between 19 and 30 percent and even with the rosiest of scenarios – that is, a proliferation of clown cars across America by 2030, there will only be between a 12 and 20 percent reduction in CO2 emissions.
According to the government study, Cap and Trade “increases the cost of using energy, which reduces real economic output, reduces purchasing power, and lowers aggregate demand for goods and services. The result is that projected real gross domestic product (GDP) generally falls…”
This means, that an American household with a bill of $70 a month, will see that cost balloon to nearly $100 – and all this while they are dutifully cruising around in their clown cars, and trying to pay for these things without jobs. The study seems to agree with previous work by the Heritage Foundation and the National Black Chamber of Commerce – both which found that “cap and trade” could destroy as many as 2.5 million jobs.
In fact EIA projects total discounted GDP losses between 2012 and 2030 to be about $566 billion on the low side, with a potential loss of nearly $1,897 billion.
And it doesn’t stop there. According to the government’s own most recent study – commissioned by the very people trying to force this energy program onto the public, the whole thing requires the U.S. “significantly increase the total amount of new electric capacity due to the retirement of many existing coal-fired power plants that otherwise would be expected to continue operating beyond 2030.
So, for this wonderful utopian plan to work, the citizens have to absorb higher and higher bills, drive smaller and smaller cars, build an entire grid of new electric-producing stations and destroy all the old ones – across the entire nation. And we must do it while more and more families lose their main source of income.
Lastly – and here’s the capper – the EIA study found that this new energy substitute requires that in “all cases” site and planning processes must be changed so that they can “support a large-scale transformation of the Nation’s electricity infrastructure by 2030.”
So all those pesky public hearings which have been necessary in the past, before the government begins to build a particular project – all that would need a bit of work. Basically, we’d have to just allow the government to seize whatever land they want, so they can begin building immediately.
The study summary ends with this paragraph:
Challenges beyond 2030. As previously noted, the modeling horizon for this analysis ends in 2030. Unless substantial progress is made in identifying low- and no-carbon technologies outside of electricity generation, the ACESA emissions targets for the 2030-to-2050 period are likely to be very challenging as opportunities for further reductions in power sector emissions are exhausted and reductions in other sectors are thought to be more expensive.
So can anyone explain to me with numbers and facts like these, why this even passed through the House? Is there any explanation for even a few people to continue to support this? Is it likely that the other countries producing massive amounts of greenhouse gasses, will sign on to this kind of a plan as well? Because if you accept the global warming scenario, you have to remember the most important term in there – “global.” Without global support, a program like this in the U.S. will simply bankrupt the country – of course, we already are bankrupt. The alleged stimulus plan did that.
For the rest of you out there, just barely making it from month to month with your $70 electric bill – hold on. Just hang in there. Change will come. Not “change we can believe in,” but real change. The storm is upon us – the darkness is upon us – but tomorrow will be a new day. And we will one day breathe again as a truly free people.
And for you people in the ivory towers – you Congressmen – our alleged leadership, know this:
We are coming for you. We are coming for you all.
-We The People.
*****
The complete EIA study of the results of H.R. 2454, should it pass into law and become active are here:
Did the GOP Dirty 8, AKA the Cap-and-Tr8ors, Receive Green to be Green?
Just out of curiosity I began digging on the past and current donations of the 8 Benedict Arnold’s of the Republican Party who voted in favor of cap-and-trade.
As I began to investigate who donated significant amounts to each candidate’s piggy bank, I noticed there was a common trend; these 8 GOPers all had enviro-groups, unions, & alternative energy companies putting money in their coffers.
As an interesting aside, there is a PAC called the Tuesday Group PAC and for all intents and purposes, it may as well be called the RINO PAC ~ 6 out of the 8 tr8ors were funded by this PAC.
Those same 6 are also funded by the Republican “Main Street” Partnership PAC ~ another RINO group.
Recall that GE and Honeywell at one point tried to merge – Honeywell has contributed to almost all of these 8 candidates and GE to some as well. GE is predominantly Democrat, so that should tell you something and at times GE has contributed for the 2010 campaign but did not contribute prior to that… Could the “eight” be getting a deal from both? GE and Honeywell are advocates of global warming and the cap-and-trade system.
Mary Bono Mack:
Mary Bono Mack is part of the energy and commerce committee, headed by none other than, Henry Waxman, of the Waxman-Markey notoriety. One could surmise that she was promised something by Waxman and Pelosi and possibly wanted to make her “boss” proud. However, I was also interested to find out who donates to her.
In 2008 the following contributed:
General Electric (enough said) ~ $4.5K
Edison International/Edison Electric Institute ~ $10.75K
PG&E Corporation ~ $3.5K
Calpine Corporation ~ $2.5K
Sempras Energy ~ $2.5K
Excel Energy, FirstEnergy Corp, Electric Power Supply Assn, American Electric Power, Constellation Energy, etc. ~ $10K
SEIU (union is for a cap-and-trade system) ~ $10K
B&D Consulting/Lobbying ~ $3.5K
Honeywell International ~ $10K
And What about 2010?
General Electric (enough said) ~ $1K
Edison International ~ $5K
B&D Consulting/Lobbying ~ $3K
Honeywell International ~ $1K
Mike Castle:
Mike Castle is part of the Education and Labor Committee and is backed by a lot of trade/labor unions – most of which support a cap-and-trade system. He is also part of the Financial Services Committee, which I also question…
Contributions in 2008:
PEPCO Holdings, Inc. ~ $2.5K
Koch Industries (supported by EPA) ~ $1K
Operating Engineers Union ~ $5K
Other AFL-CIO Unions ~ $8.5K
National Education Assn ~ $10K
SEIU ~ $6K
Financial Institutions ~ $371.9K
League of Conservation Voters & Sierra Club ~ $770
Honeywell International ~ $10K
Contributions in 2010:
The Operating Engineers Union (In ‘08 wrote a memo to the senate thanking them for attempting to bring cap-and-trade back) ~ $5K
NRECA (for cap-and-tax) ~ $1K
Heavily Funded by Financial Institutions (kick-backs were put into the cap-and-trade bill for financial companies/mortgages ~ $44.5K
Mark Kirk:
Mark Kirk is on the Appropriations Committee and has been a long-time RINO from Illinois.
Contributions in 2008:
Exelon Corporation (put out press release congratulating the House reps for passing cap-and-trade on Friday). ~ $34.1K
Financial Institutions ~ $136.5K
National Education Assn ~ $19K
Goldman Sachs ~ $15.7K
Honeywell International ~ $5K
League of Conservation Voters ~ $1K
Ocean Champions ~ $4K
Republicans for Environmental Protection ~ $4K
Solar Energy Industries ~ $2K
Peabody Energy(Coal Mining company that thinks Waxman-Markey is cup half full legislation)!? ~ $2.5K
Edison International ~ $2K
Westinghouse Electric ~ $2K
Operating Engineers Union ~ $6K
PMA Lobbying Group (under investigation) ~ $2K
Microsoft Corp. ~ $1.5K
Contributions in 2010:
GE ~ $1K
Honeywell International ~ $1K
Operating Engineers Union ~ $10K
Leonard Lance:
There isn’t much information prior to Mr. Lance’s election in 2008, however, he currently sits on the Financial Services committee.
Contributions in 2010:
League of Conservation Voters ~ $250
Honeywell (believes in cap-and-trade) ~ $1K
Public Service Enterprise Group ~ $1K
National Education Association ~ $1K
Financial Institutions ~ $49.7K
Frank LoBiondo:
Contributions in 2008:
Public Service Enterprise Group ~ $6.5K
Honeywell International ~ $3.5K
Labor Unions ~ $235.8K
Sierra Club/League of Conservation Voters ~ $1.3K
Contributions in 2010:
Labor Unions ~ $53.2K
John McHugh:
Contributions in 2008:
Constellation Energy ~ $10.8K
Honeywell International ~ $10K
Operating Engineers Union ~ $10K
PMA Group ~ $10K
Electric Companies (heavily funded by them incl. Exelon, Edison, FirstEnergy, Progress Energy, etc.) ~ $34K
Environmental Services (MWH Americas) ~ $1K
Labor Unions ~ $133.5K
Contributions in 2010:
Operating Engineers Union ~ $10K
Honeywell International ~ $5K
Labor Unions ~ $11K
Dave Reichert:
Contributions in 2008:
It appears that Dave is an enviro-nut RINO. He was on the Space Committee and receives a lot of funding from Microsoft.
Microsoft ~ $48.2K
National Education Assn ~ $10K
Avista (support cap-and-trade) ~ $1.3K
Puget Sound Energy ~ $7.9K
Financial Institutions ~ $121.5K
Illinois Tool Works gave to Mark Kirk which is understandable but why also to a rep. from Washington state? ~ $2K?
Contributions in 2010:
GE ~ $1K
Honeywell International ~ $3K
Operating Engineers Union ~ $5K
Labor Unions ~ $4.5K
Chris Smith:
Contributions in 2008:
Operating Engineers Union ~ $10K
Laborers Union ~ $10K
National Education Assn ~ $3K
SEIU ~ $5K
Other Labor Unions ~ $92K
League of Conservation Voters ~ $250
Contributions in 2010:
Operating Engineers Union ~ $10K
Other Labor Unions ~ $13K
The Washington Examiner had a brief article on some of the campaign contributions that various members of the GOP 8 were a part of, many of which are already captures here – but as a source you can go here.
I believe there is a lot more investigation that will need to be done in order to fully grasp what these 8 were promised from Waxman and Pelosi, rather than just reviewing their campaign contributions. I also have suspicions regarding the New Jersey 3 as to where many of these green companies and technologies reside. New Jersey has its very own clean energy initiatives/policies for its state and a long list of companies who are involved.
I hope we can get to the bottom of it and find out what it takes to sell out your party, your constituents, but worst of all; your country.
The GOP Cap-And-Tr8tors
The country was sold into government slavery and economic chaos by the traitorous GOP 8, who voted for the Cap and Tax bill today. The House spent over 5 hours debating this piece of legislation and there were high hopes that the Democrats didn’t have enough votes to pass it. It turns out that the GOP had some Benedict Arnold’s in their midst.
I have two new posters for these RINOs:
(created by Leo Alberti via Michelle Malkin)
(H/T FReeper Tophat9000)
If these 8 traitors had voted against the bill the final vote would have been 211 ayes vs. 220 nays, rather than 219 ayes vs. 212 nays. Jeff Flake was MIA for his daughter’s beauty pageant and Rep. Sullivan was in rehab.
There were also 44 Democrats who voted against this nightmare:
PA-4 Altmire, Jason
NY-24 Arcuri, Michael
GA-12 Barrow, John
AR-1 Berry, Robert
OK-2 Boren, Dan
AL-2 Bright, Bobby
PA-10 Carney, Christopher
MS-1 Childers, Travis
CA-20 Costa, Jim
IL-12 Costello, Jerry
PA-3 Dahlkemper, Kathleen
AL-7 Davis, Artur
TN-4 Davis, Lincoln
OR-4 DeFazio, Peter
IN-2 Donnelly, Joe
TX-17 Edwards, Thomas
IN-8 Ellsworth, Brad
IL-14 Foster, Bill
AL-5 Griffith, Parker
SD-0 Herseth Sandlin, Stephanie
PA-17 Holden, Tim
AZ-1 Kirkpatrick, Ann
NC-8 Kissell, Larry
OH-10 Kucinich, Dennis
GA-8 Marshall, James
NY-29 Massa, Eric
UT-2 Matheson, Jim
NC-7 McIntyre, Mike
LA-3 Melancon, Charles
ID-1 Minnick, Walter
AZ-5 Mitchell, Harry
WV-1 Mollohan, Alan
VA-2 Nye, Glenn
TX-27 Ortiz, Solomon
ND-0 Pomeroy, Earl
WV-3 Rahall, Nick
TX-23 Rodriguez, Ciro
AR-4 Ross, Mike
CO-3 Salazar, John
CA-13 Stark, Fortney
TN-8 Tanner, John
MS-4 Taylor, Gene
IN-1 Visclosky, Peter
OH-6 Wilson, Charles
To see the entire Roll Call Vote visit here.
I want to know what each traitor was offered to sell us out and I’m very curious to figure out the money trail in New Jersey, which has a huge clean energy program as well as various renewable energy sources. Even Rohrabacher R-CA didn’t vote for the bill even though Clean Energy Fuels Corp. (the company that T. Boone Pickens and Pelosi are vested in) is headquartered in his district (46).
It would have been nice if the media actually did its job and discussed real news that has a massive effect on the lives of Americans, rather than Michael Jackson’s obvious drug use and death. Most Americans are opposed to this legislation, but many were unaware that Congress was voting on it today – Wouldn’t it be nice if we could one day have an objective media that would actually give both sides to every story and read things like the suppressed EPA report on GloBull Warming? It’s late, so I can dream about it…
More Obama Cover-Ups, At This Point What’s New?
Obama has become quite good at covering up incidents, but I guess you have to be good if you want to be engaged in the Chicago Political MachineMafia… That’s why the latest cover-up by the EPA for recent emails regarding some interesting findings regarding GloBull Warming, and the latest Obama administration cover-up of the canning of the bio-ethics panel for embryonic stem cell research, come as no surprise.
The EPA must be aware that something fishy is going on with the global warming alarmism. Why else would they cover up recent emails, found by the Competitive Enterprise Institute, that voiced the opposite concerns of what Democrats, the UN, and the EPA would have you believe?
CEI is submitting a set of four EPA emails, dated March 12-17, 2009, which indicate that a significant internal critique of EPA’s position on Endangerment was essentially put under wraps and concealed. The study was barred from being circulated within EPA, it was never disclosed to the public, and it was not placed in the docket of this proceeding. The emails further show that the study was treated in this manner not because of any problem with its quality, but for political reasons.
CEI hereby requests that EPA make this study public, place it into the docket, and either extend or reopen the comment period to allow public response to this new study. We also request that EPA publicly declare that it will engage in no reprisals against the author of the study, who has worked at EPA for over 35 years.
The emails, attached hereto, consist of the following:
1) a March 12 email from Al McGartland, Office Director of EPA’s National Center for Environmental Economics (NCEE), to Alan Carlin, Senior Operations Research Analyst at NCEE, forbidding him from speaking to anyone outside NCEE on endangerment issues;
2) a March 16 email from Mr. Carlin to another NCEE economist, with a cc to Mr. McGartland and two other NCEE staffers, requesting that his study be forwarded to EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation, which directs EPA’s climate change program. The email notes the quantity of peer-reviewed references in the study, and defends its inclusion of new research as well. It states Mr. Carlin’s view that “the critical attribute of good science is its correspondence to observable data rather than where it appears in
the technical literature.” It goes on to point out that the new studies “explain much of the observational data that have been collected which cannot be explained by the IPCC models.” (Emphases added); [Read More Here.]
This data will never reach the media, and even if it did, most far left media outlets will not disclose the information anyway. Nobody wants to destroy the scheme that has been built up over the last few years. The jig is up Democrats, but they have too much money to make from cap and tax and passing Green legislation. They would rather pad their pockets than release this information to the American public.
The latest firing and cover-up happens to involve the bio-ethics panel for embryonic stem cell research. Bush implemented this panel for opposing views and ethics regarding that specific type of research. The panel expired in September and only had one other meeting before that time, however, Obama fired he panel before allowing them to expire appropriately when their time was up. This sounds very familiar to the IGs who happened to disagree with Obama or were investigating his cronies. He fired those IGs and now this panel before their contracts expired. I’m not sure why Obama feels it so difficult to allow the law to reign supreme and just not renew the contracts when time is up. There is something extremely suspicious about all of this.
The White House has dismissed the members of the President’s US Council on Bioethics just a few months before their mandate expires, indicating their services are no longer required by the President and that he is looking for a more “practical” advisory board.
So, if you don’t agree with Obama and his agenda count yourself on the enemy list – you are bound to get fired or savaged by his media minions.
