PRESIDENT OBAMA ISSUES MAJOR ‘GREEN ENERGY’ EXECUTIVE ORDER
via the Blaze
Between conservatives focusing all their attention on the successes/failures of the Republican National Convention in Tampa, Fla., and the left having a meltdown over the supposed “racism” and unprecedented disrespect of Clint Eastwood’s “Empty Chair” routine, little attention has been given to an executive order issued last Thursday by President Barack Obama that targets industrial “efficiency” and carbon emissions.
“Today, we are taking another step to strengthen American manufacturing by boosting energy efficiency for businesses across the nation,” said President Obama.
“This action will cut costs, increase efficiency, and help our businesses create strong, middle class jobs. We’ll continue to do everything we can to put more people back to work and build an economy that lasts,” he added.
The order, which aims to increase the number of cogeneration plants in the U.S. by 50 percent by 2020 and slash carbon emissions by 150 million tons per year, is the administration’s latest effort to “deploy cleaner and more efficient energy production in the country by working around political resistance to climate change and ‘green’ energy legislation on Capitol Hill,” Reuters reports.
“The Federal Government has limited but important authorities to overcome … barriers, and our efforts to support investment in industrial energy efficiency and CHP [Combined heat and power] should involve coordinated engagement with a broad set of stakeholders,” the order says.
Translation: If duly elected representatives of the people get in the way of “climate change” (formerly known as “global warming,“ formerly known as ”global cooling”) legislation, work around them.
“The man is legislating by presidential fiat!” conservative author and radio show host Mark Levin said Friday. “This is unconstitutional.”
The order dictates that the Departments of Energy, Commerce, and Agriculture, and the Environmental Protection Agency coordinate their actions to provide “policy and technical assistance” to states in order to ensure energy efficiency targets are being met.
What could possibly go wrong?
The order also “establishes a new national goal of 40 gigawatts of new combined heat and power capacity by 2020, a 50% increase from today,” according to a statement from the White House.
“Meeting this goal would save energy users $10 billion per year, result in $40 to $80 billion in new capital investment in manufacturing and other facilities that would create American jobs, and would reduce emissions equivalent to 25 million cars,” the statement adds.
Sure, it sounds nice and (like most things in this administration) it promises a great return on investment, but are there any possible downsides to this executive order?
“This is a fiat from on high for these utilities to change the way they process energy — an enormous capital expense and many of them are going to close down,” Levin argued. “And they only have eight years to do it as part of this ‘cap-and-trade,‘ ’green’ energy, ‘climate change’ bull crap.” > > > READ MORE
Job one for Mitt Romney will be to invalidate every executive order issued by Barack Obama.
Absolutely! That and repeal Obamacare! It boggles my mind how brazenly he ignores the Constitution and … NO SITTING SENATOR OR CONGRESSPERSON SAYS SQUAT!?!?!?!? ugh! Get Obama OUT … then get Boehner, McCain and McConnell out … then go down the list of RINO’s … WE can’t quit after Obama’s out!
““Today, we are taking another step to strengthen American manufacturing by boosting energy efficiency for businesses across the nation,” said President Obama.”
Now that is what i call convolutef logic.
omg … I missed that! Un-freaking-believable! hahaha Pathetic if it wasn’t indicative! I do sometimes feel like I’m singing to the Choir here, though … hoping just one … at least ONE has the Break-through revelation of TRUTH! We must hope, yes?
Pingback: Blogsense-By-Barb | Grumpy Opinions
I don’t think I’ve seen such a fundamentally poor understanding of science, history, and economics in my life. Global warming is a scientific issue with massive supporting evidence. A program that requires companies to pay for their own pollution has a sound economic logic and many such programs are already in existence. Only third world, corrupt governments allow industry to be free from regulations that protect consumers.
I have have voted Republican in every election in my life. Now I realize my party has been taken over by people with no regard for facts, no respect for expert opinion, and a refusal to educate themselves.
I don’t know if I can actually bring myself to vote for Obama, but no way will I ever vote for a conservative candidate again. Thanks for finally opening my eyes.
The more important issue to my mind is the escalation in the President’s use of Ex Orders to circumvent Congress on unpopular issues!
“The order dictates that the Departments of Energy, Commerce, and Agriculture, and the Environmental Protection Agency coordinate their actions to provide “policy and technical assistance” to states in order to ensure energy efficiency targets are being met.
What could possibly go wrong?” (from the article)
What is your experience with gov-run operations … especially when coordinating between multiple agencies. This is nothing but a ruse of red tape to further regulate an already dying industry – just as the President wishes.
This is NOT about the validity of GREEN ENERGY … but about government. Whether it is Constitutional to continually override or circumvent the legislative body – CONGRESS – to impose his wishes. Sounds kinda like TYRANNY to me … or monarchy, perhaps!
Vote your conscience, but don’t moan about the consequences!
John you clearly have no scientific education to be making these statements. The specific gravity of CO2 is 1.52 or in other words 152% heavier than air and sinks to the ground when it released. The ultra libs in the IPCC state that CO2 will rise into the atmosphere and stay there for 100 years. Not unless and until we repeal the law of Gravity. I am a very educated intellectual who has written numerous scientific refutations of the Great Global Warming Hoax. If you have any interest you can drop me a line at marriagecoach1@yahoo.com and I will send them to you.
John Wilder
My goodness, what a profound discovery you have stumbles upon! This also applies to the great “Rain Hoax.” A bunch of liberal scientists seem to think that water can actually fall from the sky. Of course, any highly educated intellectual knows that water is heavier than air, so how does it get up there? Liberal nonsense, nothing more. As for those supposed clouds, nothing but a liberal myth. Sure, satellite spectroscopy, balloons and aircraft have measured water vapor, methane, co2, etc at various points in the atmosphere; but they were all put up there by liberal college professors who want more public funds. Everyone knows that our atmosphere is nothing but homogenous layers of gas that go from lightest to heaviest.
Pingback: Very Inspiring Blogger Award | Citizen Tom
water vapor is very light and is part of the Hydrologic cycle. As to measurements of CO2 in the atmosphere, this is wind blown stuff like dirt, when the wind dies down the dirt and the CO2 settle back down. Even the scientists admit that there has been an 80 ppm increase in atmospheric CO since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution.
The fractional equivalent is 8/100,00ths of 1! I actually tried to graph this for a paper that was published. The tightest graph that I could draw was 12 marks per inch and still be legible. At that rate I would have had to have a graph that was 694 feet long to illustrate 100,000 marks and the increase on that graph would represent 3/4 of an inch. This is called a TRACE amount by any legitimate standard. The government even has legal allowances for trace amounts of rat droppings in our food.
Thanks, John, for your detailed rebuttal!
Atmospheric co2 has increased? I thought you said it sinks to the ground because it’s heavier than air.
I don’t know why you feel the need to dispute the idea of global warming; the evidence for it is overwhelming. I suggest you examine a resource like NASA or realclimate.org if you would like to actually learn something about why 97% of climatologist and every reputable scientific organization in the world accept the evidence for global warming.
I don’t dispute global warming I dispute the cause. No where near 97% of scientists believe in anthropogenic warming. Ask yourself this question, if CO2 is so bad, then why do we literally manufacture it in the lab and then pump it into soft drinks which then escapes. If they were really serious about reducing CO2 they would have called for an immediate ban on soft drink production, beer, wine, liquor and yeast bread baking because they all cause billions of cubic feet of CO2 to be released annually. They don’t really want to reduce CO2 just tax it. Follow the money.
and John you might have missed NASAs announcement that after extended readings from their satellites that CO2 has actually NOT CAUSED WARMING but then you would not have heard that because the ultra left media don’t practice ethics and tell both sides of the story accurately and fairly.
Hey John not that you care but here is a link to the NASA data
http://news.yahoo.com/nasa-data-blow-gaping-hold-global-warming-alarmism-192334971.html
Yahoo news, seriously? Go to NASAs website and look up their official position.
Hey John
Already been there and done that and they state that it is indeed water vapor which is the chief culprit in global warming theory. I say THEORY because that is all it is. There have been NO SCIENTIFIC EXPERIMENTS DONE ACCORDING TO THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD proving anthropogenic warming. It is much more likely that is indeed cycles in the weather pattern just like we have always had. We have had much higher and much lower temps not having anything to do with mankind. Refer to the principle of Occam’s Razor for a scientific basis to judge this.
My pleasure, have you ever noticed that libs can’t merely disagree, they feel the need to put others down as stupid while they are merely pseudo intellectuals and lack critical thinking skills
First of all, I’m not a liberal. As I mentioned before, I have been strongly conservative all of my life. Second of all, you attacked my education. That’s fine, but don’t get upset at me for putting you down.
John I did not attack your education, I merely suggested that you don’t have much in the way of scientific education based upon your responses and as to you being a conservative, you certainly don’t sound like anyone that I have ever chatted with who claims to be a conservative. Global warming is about politics and taxes not science. Many on the IPCC are bit scientists at all. The IPCC claims peer review but there have been many scientists who have lodged complaints and refutations and they get sand bagged and not even mentioned much as less given any credibility.