Unbound utilities, unchecked environmentalism, and short-sighted planning responsible for when/if the lights go out.
Years ago I wrote on the EPA regulations that essentially write off the future of coal for electrical generation.
Shortly after that that I wrote another piece which described the layers of problems facing the folks in rural areas, and specifically the Upper peninsula with the failure to support our coal burning electrical platform. However, the meat of the piece better describes the way in which natural gas providers have also played a a part in defeating coal.
Coming amidst an impending decision by the EPA on the Utility MACT (maximum achievable control technology) rule that is expected to lead to job loses, plant shutdowns, and rolling blackouts across the country, this strange partnership raises a question. What does Chesapeake stand to gain, by pouring money into a seemingly disparate organization with extremely different objectives and priorities? Politico writes:
The ads come as the coal industry is at war with the Obama administration over new rules to curb pollution from coal-fired power plants. The EPA is expected to issue new rules on Friday to curb air toxics from power plants, which are estimated to cost industry about $10.9 billion each year.Stricter rules for power plants are expected to offer a competitive advantage to the cleaner-burning natural gas industry.
Oh, so its an end-justifies-the-means kind of thing. Rent seeking. But when questioned, Chesapeake officials have stated that the flood of cash to ALA is merely business as usual for the company, which donates to “a wide variety and number of health and medical-related organizations. Well that’s very responsible of them, bravo for being so charitable.
Of course we all know better.
(18)Nuh Uh.
(1)
Conveniently, the bigger power concerns in the state capitulated to ridiculous 10% energy mandates during the Granholm administration.
