Obama orders new rules on coal-fired plants, sets condition for Keystone pipeline
Source: FoxNews.com
Published June 25, 2013 / FoxNews.com
President Obama pressed ahead Tuesday with his climate change agenda, calling for new regulations on coal-fired power plants and setting a new condition for the approval of the controversial Keystone pipeline.
....
Going around Congress and unveiling what was likely to be his most controversial plank, Obama said he was ordering the Environmental Protection Agency to create the first-ever carbon emissions limits for existing power plants.
....
Further, Obama weighed in for the first time in months on the contentious issue of the proposed Canada-to-Texas Keystone pipeline. As the State Department reviews the stalled project, Obama said it should only be approved if it doesn't significantly boost emissions.
"Our national interest will be served only if this project does not significantly exacerbate the problem of carbon pollution," he said. "The net effects of the pipeline's impact on our climate will be absolutely critical to determining whether this project is allowed to go forward."
Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/06/25/obama-to-unveil-new-climate-regulations-as-adviser-pushes-war-on-coal/
I thought for sure that this would cause coal stock Cliffs Natural Resources to nosedive today, just as it did yesterday. Oddly, it was up in the afternoon.
http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=CLF&ql=0
Disclaimer: I own some shares of stock that will be affected by this news. I am not posting this story for any reason other than its news value, though.
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)Just like the domestic spying has "oversight."
truebrit71
(20,805 posts)...and if carbon emissions increase (surprise surprise) or the damn thing ruptures and poisons the Oglala Aquifer he can always lay the blame off on the State Dept....which is also his plan...
Yay!!
blkmusclmachine
(16,149 posts)Now Obama just has to sell it.
zeemike
(18,998 posts)The sales pitch...they are going to promise us it will be all right...and if you don't believe it you are a racist...or maybe an eco terrorist...
But there was never any doubt in my mind that it would be approved....to much big money invested it it...they are going to sell that oil to the world no matter what we think or what damage it does.
SunSeeker
(51,550 posts)Even CNN would have been better.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/25/politics/obama-climate-change/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
Javaman
(62,528 posts)Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)SunSeeker
(51,550 posts)Liberal_Stalwart71
(20,450 posts)BanTheGOP
(1,068 posts)I'm talking about general news links and other links that can be obtained by neutral and other progressive sources. Obviously, if we are citing about something stupid that someone from a oppressive website like Fox puts out, then of course we have to include that link. But I think the mods should have the power to change a general purpose link, as we certainly don't want to increase the hit count (and ad revenue) for those bastards.
SunSeeker
(51,550 posts)Seems that it's just implied in the TOS. But it would probably be helpful to have it spelled out.
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)There are more issues to look at on this project than just emissions.
Doctor_J
(36,392 posts)WTF has happened to DU? Did you get paid to post this?
nineteen50
(1,187 posts)no mention of fracking, sets the stage for approval of xl pipeline and CALLS for regulations. 7 years of CALLS FOR just hot air and no movement.
Kolesar
(31,182 posts)read a newspaper
nineteen50
(1,187 posts)read a recent history of this administration.
Kolesar
(31,182 posts)you fell off the wire.
Time for a distraction
nineteen50
(1,187 posts)he was already here.
djean111
(14,255 posts)Unless he was being subtle and implying that leaks are emissions....?
Don't think so. Think Keystone was always a done deal, leaks and breaks be damned.
muriel_volestrangler
(101,312 posts)and if he can do this without Congress, it could achieve something.
BBC commentary:
But this is part of what the White House calls an "all of the above" strategy which includes new efficiency standards on trucks, electrical appliances and government buildings - a change that will lift the US out of the 1950s design age; a reduction in short-lived greenhouse gases like methane and soot; a further doubling of wind power, especially on public land; future-proofing infrastructure against climate damages and more.
There are things to upset environmentalists, like the absence of any commitment to drop Keystone XL and the continuing support for biofuels. Nor is the plan as precisely quantified as the UK's climate policy, for instance, which commits to methodically cutting emissions through to 2050. But if the president has the stomach for a legal fight over bypassing Congress on coal, if he's willing to impose extra measures in a few years and if his policies don't get overturned, today's announcement could help the US achieve its international carbon pledges up to 2020. That would be a start.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-23032890
PSPS
(13,595 posts)President Empty Suit
Civilization2
(649 posts)What a monumental cave to corporate power.
Ca$h moves everything around me,. . get the money, dollar, dollar bill y'all.
DCBob
(24,689 posts)and focus on one item and continue the unrelentless bashing of the President. Its really getting tiresome.
Nihil
(13,508 posts)and focus on one item and continue the unrelentless cheerleading for the President. Its really getting tiresome.
Oops. Am I out of step with the ra-ra gang?
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)The White House, the actual sourse.
http://www.whitehouse.gov//the-press-office/2013/06/25/remarks-president-climate-change