moonbattery.gif


« The Three Moonbats | Main | Open Thread »


November 2, 2008

Obama Promises to Bankrupt Coal Industry

People in coal country are going to have to cling all the more bitterly to their guns and Bibles if Obama gets a chance to deliberately destroy the coal industry:

A partial transcript, via NewsBusters:

So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can; it's just that it will bankrupt them because they're going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that's being emitted.

You might think that not even Obama could be enough of a fool to prevent us from using our plentiful coal reserves when the economy is already teetering. But to implement their radical agenda, the Moonbat Messiah and friends will require an extreme economic crisis. Jacking up taxes in the face of a recession may do the job, but if it doesn't, The One has other tricks up his sleeve — such as using the global warming farce as a pretext to throw tens of thousands out of work and make energy astronomically expensive.

Hat tip: Ace of Spades HQ; on tips from V the K and J.

Posted by Van Helsing at November 2, 2008 9:15 AM

Comments

Amazing, and yet it won't be enough to change the minds of people in the coal producing states which obviously have the most to lose.

If this Obama clown gets elected we are in for a painful ride.

Posted by: Cartman at November 2, 2008 9:43 AM

He will bankrupt a heck of a lot more than just the coal industry.

Posted by: Jimbo at November 2, 2008 10:14 AM

Amazing, and yet it won't be enough to change the minds of people in the coal producing states which obviously have the most to lose.

The media will make sure they don't hear about it.

Posted by: V the K at November 2, 2008 11:11 AM

Coal companies will go out of business, miners will be unemployed. The railroads will lose a huge % of their current revenue and have to layoff thousands. Our electricity bills will go through the roof. Anybody still left manufacturing here in the US will STRONGLY consider leaving now -- more unemployment -- higher cost of everything.

We are in trouble if Obama is elected President

Posted by: Michman at November 2, 2008 12:56 PM

The people that are wound up about what Obama said obviously do not understand the idea of cap and trade systems. Such a system would make it near impossible to expand coal beyond the current levels (about half of electricity). It would not close down existing power plants or bankrupt the entire coal industry.

Cap and trade systems were devised by (mainstream and conservative) economists who think it would be better to use economic forces and markets to gradually bring about changes, rather than use command and control government regulations.

In a coal cap and trade system, existing users (power plants and industry) would be given coal use credits based on how much they are using now. Those credits could be sold or transferred. If someone absolutely had to use coal for a new power use, they would have to go out and obtain credits from someone else that had them. If a coal plant somewhere converted to something that was carbon free (nuclear, wind, solar, geothermal, etc), then they would be in a position to sell the credits that they had been using for the coal plant. Selling them would help fund the conversion to less polluting sources of energy.

These type of last minute alarmist warnings are rather boring - especially when they are based on distortions. Obama would cap coal use at current levels, not close down the entire industry. Someone should be ashamed.

Posted by: Jonathan Byron at November 2, 2008 1:06 PM

The one who should be ashamed is Obama, for threatening to bankrupt those who supply energy to consumers, and who could reduce our dependence on foreign oil.

The ones who should be ashamed are the shysters who propagate these 'cap and trade' schemes, attempting to create an artificial market in response to a non-crisis global warming crisis for their own enrichment. The net effect of cap and trade is to drive industry and jobs from developed countries to developing countries where industry pollutes freely, resulting in a net global increase in pollution.

The Democrat plan to reduce energy demand is to keep the United States in a state of permanent recession; Obama's tax and regulatory policies seem precisely aimed at that end.

Posted by: V the K at November 2, 2008 1:20 PM

This entire thing is a bit silly. Most of the right wing blogosphere is currently screaming that Obama wants to "bankrupt the coal industry". This is, of course, based upon an audio clip where Obama says no such thing. I'm not talking about the word "bankrupt." I'm talking about the word "industry." Obama is clearly talking about a market based cap and trade system that would make development of NEW dirty coal fired power plants unfeasible uneconomically: "So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can; it’s just that it will bankrupt them." That is, after all, the point of cap and trade.

Given that the debate on this ended a long time ago, and given that McCain also supports cap and trade, I don't expect this to have traction with anyone but right wing bloggers. The only people who are going to be outraged by this are people who are looking hard for something to be outraged about.

Posted by: Sphere at November 2, 2008 3:11 PM

Wow, yet another pathetic attempt to push your faux outrage on the rest of us. A talk about learning to make clean coal, good for all of us who actually breath air, turns into "destroying the coal industry." You people are pathetic. I can't wait to read this comments on Nov. 5th

Posted by: PensiveGadfly at November 2, 2008 5:44 PM

Yes, and it is SO silly that you moonbats are coming out of the proverbial wood work like cockroaches to tell us how much of a non-issue it is.

Enjoy your cognitive dissonance.

Posted by: MH at November 2, 2008 6:40 PM

Also, pair this with what lead screeching moonbats Reid (Coal makes us sick!) and Pelosi have said about the coal industry and Joe "The Gaffer" Biden has said (No clean coal!) and Nobama's statements are all the more damning.

On June 20, 2008 Harry Reid stated, ""The one thing we fail to talk about is those costs that you don't see on the bottom line. That is coal makes us sick, oil makes us sick; it's global warming. It's ruining our country, it’s ruining our world. We’ve got to stop using fossil fuel.” All while, Nancy Pelosi is "trying to save the planet."

Moonbattery at its finest.

If I were as insulated against reality as these idiots, I would probably think that these were feasible ideas.

But, I have the advantage of living in a little place called reality.

Posted by: MH at November 2, 2008 6:45 PM

Another day, another audio or video of Obama's words that most of the electorate would find deplorable and the press either buries, impugns or circles the wagons....again. Pieces of utter trash.

Posted by: Mark E at November 2, 2008 7:13 PM

The people that are wound up about what Obama said obviously do not understand the idea of cap and trade systems.

Um no. The people who are telling others not to get wound up over cap-and-trade systems are the ones who don't understand them. The rest of us understand them juuuuust fine, thanks.

Such a system would make it near impossible to expand coal beyond the current levels (about half of electricity).

And this is a good thing; given that neither domestic drilling in the US or nuclear power are likely to be allowed to grow in terms of contribution to electricity generation? Do you think that maintaining economic growth is likely without maintaining growth in power supply? Or should we just kinda shut the whole "economy" thing down, leave it as it is now, and just concentrate on spreading around what's already in the system to make sure we're not being racist?

It would not close down existing power plants or bankrupt the entire coal industry.

Yeah, you're right, only coal industry players trying to expand their business would be bankrupted. So as electricity demand grows there will be no concurrent growth in supply meaning that producers will either need to charge more for electricity, or maintain constant revenue at current levels while dealing with the effects of inflation on coal prices, wages, and countless other overheads. In other words they would go bankrupt. It just wouldn't happen *immediately*, though. So yeah that's almost the same as not going bankrupt. Except for the bit where you go bankrupt.

Cap and trade systems were devised by (mainstream and conservative) economists who think it would be better to use economic forces and markets to gradually bring about changes, rather than use command and control government regulations.

Yeah, conservative economists like Ross Garnaut in Australia who gleefully commits to signing away 1% of GDP in the next two years to give a good example to China so they will stop building thousands of coal-fired power plants and save Australia from global warming. As for the idea that the government issuing a command to limit emissions to a certain amount or trade them, or face sanctions; how you interpret that as being alternative to governments commanding and controlling via regulation is beyond me. Maybe it's another one of those special magic tricks like where power companies can't increase the amount of coal-fired power they produce but there will still magically be enough electricity to support economic growth, and the electricity producers will magically earn enough revenue on the same output to keep apace with higher costs as the economy grows.

In a coal cap and trade system, existing users (power plants and industry) would be given coal use credits based on how much they are using now. Those credits could be sold or transferred. If someone absolutely had to use coal for a new power use, they would have to go out and obtain credits from someone else that had them.

Um yeah. That's kinda the point. Doing that will bankrupt them. Your stupid moonbat Jesus just told you so in his own fucking words. Were you not paying attention?

If a coal plant somewhere converted to something that was carbon free (nuclear, wind, solar, geothermal, etc), then they would be in a position to sell the credits that they had been using for the coal plant. Selling them would help fund the conversion to less polluting sources of energy.

Wow, fantastic! But buying them would bankrupt whoever was trying to replace your "green" boondoggle adventure into unproven, unreliable and low-yielding power production sources which have proven themselves unable to compete on the free market because they are so inefficient. Hooray.

These type of last minute alarmist warnings are rather boring - especially when they are based on distortions.

Wow. For you to claim that others' arguments are based on distortions given the tripe you just came out with is truly audacious. The Audacity of Irresponsible, Inaccurate Whiney Liberal Bullshit.

Obama would cap coal use at current levels, not close down the entire industry. Someone should be ashamed.

Yep. And guess what, it's you. You and your douchebag messiah. Go learn something about economics - anything at all - beyond reading editorials in leftist magazines. Seriously, I hereby challenge you to do it. Pick up a fucking textbook, research some history; do something to back up your argument with facts before spewing ignorant, inaccurate nonsense and acting high and mighty about your superior enlightment.

Posted by: Jonathan Byron at November 2, 2008 1:06 PM

Posted by: mandible claw at November 2, 2008 9:19 PM

This entire thing is a bit silly. Most of the right wing blogosphere is currently screaming that Obama wants to "bankrupt the coal industry". This is, of course, based upon an audio clip where Obama says no such thing.

Um except for the bit where he said that anyone wanting to start a new coal fired power plant would be bankrupted. I mean, it would be presumptuous in the extreme to think that companies who might want to start new coal plants - and be bankrupted - might be companies in the coal industry. Hey, if we're splitting hairs, I guess it could be argued that people wanting to start new coal-fired power plants could conceivably be mostly hair-dressers; and so as demand for coal-fired power grows we may only see the hair-dressing sector be bankrupted.

I'm not talking about the word "bankrupt." I'm talking about the word "industry."

What you're doing is trying to obfuscate the actual issue with semantics. Either you're doing it deliberately or you're too damn stupid to realise that conservatives are not objecting to Obama's statement because we think he said he wants to deliberately bankrupt the entire coal sector.

Obama is clearly talking about a market based cap and trade system that would make development of NEW dirty coal fired power plants unfeasible uneconomically: "So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can; it’s just that it will bankrupt them." That is, after all, the point of cap and trade.

Um, yeah, so on one hand building new coal power generating capacity will bankrupt people, who are in the coal industry, which is the point of cap and trade; but to suggest that Obama's comments indicate that the coal sector will be bankrupted is a mischaracterization. Um okay well that makes everything perfectly clear.

Perhaps instead of trying to tell conservatives about economics you should think beyond Obama's off-the-cuff flippancy to what the implications are for the coal sector should his stated policy aim come to fruition. Let me see if I can dumb this down sufficiently for you to grasp it; it's a very, very simple concept, but I've learned that overestimating liberals on economics is a perilous trap. Let's see, where to start: there is a thing called an "economy," which needs to grow in order to improve the conditions of those who participate in it; or at least to maintain their conditions at the same level as population grows. Since we no longer live in the dark ages in which the economic process consisted of tilling fields by hand and bashing bits of metal into crude tools using hammers and fire; and since at least those among us that are of conservative bent don't want to return to those times, it is imperative that we maintain supply of electricity in order to power our endeavours to keep the economy growing. Since as the economy grows it requires more electricity, we may need to look at making more electricity. You know, so we will have more of it. Because we need more. Are you following so far?

Now, we get to the hard part: there are several ways of making electricity. (Yes, you do have to make it, it doesn't magically appear by itself when you plug in your Prius.) If you want to make electricity you can burn coal, or use oil, or nuclear power, or wind power, or solar power, or many other types of power. Some of these types of power generation can be done much more reliably and economically than others. See if you can guess which ones are which; for an extra hint, they're the ones that survived the free market and don't have to be imposed by government. Now we get down to the really difficult part: since we need to have more electricity (we discussed this, remember), which are the best fuels to use if we want to make it? Can you explain why we should not penalise people who are going to use more of those fuels to produce the extra electricity that we need, and, as your moonbat Messiah told us, bankrupt them?

Given that the debate on this ended a long time ago, and given that McCain also supports cap and trade, I don't expect this to have traction with anyone but right wing bloggers.

Hey, maybe it won't. But when your idiotic economic engineering tomfoolery bites you in the ass a couple years down the track in the form of power shortages, and the general public remembers that you opposed new coal power on phony high-handed environmental principles, you will lose all the precious political power you gained by sacrificing the economy and the welfare of the general public. Again.

The only people who are going to be outraged by this are people who are looking hard for something to be outraged about.

Posted by: Sphere at November 2, 2008 3:11 PM

Oh there's no need to look for things to be outraged about. Your douchebag moonbat messiah dishes up new outrages constantly, and he's not even President yet.

Posted by: mandible claw at November 2, 2008 9:43 PM

This is amazing. Anyone who has looked into cap and trade knows that is a disastrous scam. Obama more or less admitted it. Yet, he is for it so the brainless try to find a way to justify this outright lunacy. Good luck powering your electric cars with no electricity. This is a textbook example of the government creating a crisis under the guise of 'good intentions' so that they can later sieze more money and power when they attempt to 'fix' it. Just look at Fannie/Freddie.

Posted by: Anonymous at November 2, 2008 9:52 PM

PUMA + COALGATE = OBAMA RIP

Posted by: Anonymous at November 2, 2008 10:11 PM

HITLER WAS A ENVIROMENTALIST TO

Posted by: Spurwing Plover at November 2, 2008 10:12 PM

One important part of the Cap and Trade idea is that the number of credits goes down each year, making the ones that remain more expensive. Yes, it WILL bankrupt the entire industry and shut down the coal plants. It WILL increase energy costs, probably by 75%, in a few years. The ramifications of such high power costs cannot be underestimated. Without cheap and abundant power, all US industry will falter and we will accelerate our headlong charge toward achieving third world status. If AGW were real, I could accept this idiocy more placidly.

Posted by: Flylow at November 5, 2008 10:22 AM

Dear Readers....Obama also plans to bail out the auto industry, send more entitlements to people who reproduce with mutiple partners and won't work, subsidize people who buy what they can't afford, let CEOs like Frank Rains walk away with $90 million, dialogue with the likes of Iran and Muslim extremists who have made their agenda of putting the West under Sharia Law very clear, and eventually sending the US down the same road as Europe. The European liberal elitists remain in denial to this day and some speculate that by 2040, with a Muslim majority, Europe will be under Sharia laws. Seem far fetched, not hardly. Take some time to look at the demographics over there. Europe's huge social welfare programs are supporting mutitudes of Muslim immigrants who do not assimilate, reproduce only with other muslims, refuse to recognize their new countries, and vow allegiance only to Islam. Europeans are below population replacement growth...Muslims immigrants in Europe average 6 plus children. The liberal left, politically correct Europeans have paid for their inevitable demise with welfare. We should all be worried about where our liberal super majority will take America. M. Simmon

Posted by: M. Simmon at November 5, 2008 12:30 PM