Skip to main content

June 7, 2010 – Imagine – the entire mid-Atlantic and Northeast coast under a tornado watch. I wonder if that’s ever happened before. Considering the damage done throughout the Midwest over the weekend, it was a logical step. America’s “outback” is enduring more and more violent weather with each passing year.

E-magazine Grist has been running an outstanding series of articles by David Roberts about the American Power Act (APA). Lambasted by many for its replacement of the Clean Air Act’s stationary-source regulations with a cap-and-trade system of pollution control, there are, according to Roberts, still many reasons for supporting the APA. What might those be?

- the cap part of cap-and-trade, as defined by the APA, will provide long-term predictability, something investors value highly

- because the Supreme Court ruled in 2007 that the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) is authorized to regulate atmospheric pollutants, it will have authority to enforce this cap

- the new legislation includes energy-efficiency provisions, a renewable electricity standard [I’m not sure what that means], and electric vehicle incentives

- it distributes pollution allowances to the affected industries in order to ease the transition

- it dedicates financial resources for the slowing of deforestation

- it reconnects America to the international climate change process

- it resoundingly supports nuclear energy (make of that what you will)

- EPA will be given authority to set performance standards for old, coal-fired power plants

Because our country’s old plants are a very significant source of greenhouse gases, the EPA can shut them down, retrofit them, and/or switch the source of energy. The work of decades is finally being made into law. This is a bill worth supporting! (Too bad Lindsey Graham didn’t stick around long enough to actively seek passage of the APA. The Kerry/Lieberman/Graham juggernaut would have been a force to be reckoned with.)

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Truly, There's Nothing to be Afraid of

February 26, 2013 – The 1960s scared conservatives worse than I knew – worse than a lot of us knew, I guess.   Certainly I lived through that period.   Certainly young adults found their voices, and had the nerve to object to being put through the meat grinder called Vietnam.   Black Americans continued to seek justice and equality in their adopted homeland.   Change was inevitable.   It’s understandable that conservatives wanted a say in what those changes would be.   Their fearful reaction was – and is - badly overblown.   Others’ happiness is nothing to fear.     These longed-for changes cost conservatives nothing but their unearned, self-satisfied atrophy.   Young people went on dying, even so. It turns out all of that change scared the socks off market fundamentalists.   Determined to return the country to its previous perceived state of inertia, Lewis Powell wrote a memorandum for the US Chamber of Commerce, urging a sh...

A Rock and a Hard Place

October 8, 2012 - Such a pickle: we have the coal, but no longer want to burn it.  China wants the coal, but shouldn't burn it because of the resulting air pollution.  Coal mining companies in the U.S. are ready and waiting to ship their coal to China.  Citizens of the U.S. living on its west coast are adamant they want nothing to do with exporting coal.  That includes Oregon Governor John Kitzhaber.  Kitzhaber's April 25 letter to Interior Secretary Ken Salazar expresses his profound skepticism about shipping coal by way of Oregon's ports.  He has requested that a programatic Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) first be conducted for all five of the export projects currently being considered, as well as a comprehensive policy review.  Here is part of a press release announcing his letter: "I have concerns about proceeding in this direction [exporting coal to China via Oregon ports] in the absence of a full national discussion about the ramif...