From World Net Daily:
The man President Obama has chosen to be his science czar [i.e. John Holdren] once advocated a shocking approach to the “population crisis” feared by scientists at the time: namely, compulsory abortions in the U.S. and a “Planetary Regime” with the power to enforce human reproduction restrictions.
Baltimore Gas & Electric is leading the way to electricity rationing, courtesy of President Obama.
The utility announced to day that it filed with local regulators an application to install 2 million so-called “smart meters” in the homes of its residential customers.
Smart meters allow local utilities to control electricity use in your home.
Using a $200 million Department of Energy grant — part of the $787 billion Obama Stimulus package enacted earlier in the year — BG&E plans to charge customers for the balance of the costs.
BG&E claims that benefits to consumers (about $5 per month) will amount to about three times the cost of the meters.
Not only is this benefit trivial, it’s pretty phony. It comes from you using less electricity or using electricity at less convenient times — things you can already do without the meter. What’s the benefit from doing less or being inconvenienced?
We don’t know about you, but we’re not interested in selling our freedom to use electricity as we choose — especially for a lousy $5/month.
Also, consider that, since smart meters allow two-way communication, each meter represents a node from which a hacker can gain entry to the grid and wreak havoc.
The ultimate purpose of the meters is to allow local utilities to ration electricity as demand is rising faster than supply, a phenomenon that can be traced to the greens blocking construction of new power plants and transmission lines. Rolling power outages are already being planned for the Baltimore-Washington area starting as early as 2011-2012.
Smart is the new dumb.
Waxman-Markey’s emissions reductions goals will be more difficult to meet than previously thought, warned the electric utility industry in a July 6 letter to Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (R-NV).
Edison Electric Institute chief Tom Kuhn wrote,
“H.R. 2454 would require a reduction of GHG emissions of 3 percent below 2005 levels by 2012–only three years from now. In reality, accounting for growth in electricity demand since 2005, the 2012 requirement is closer to a 10 percent reduction in projected GHG emissions. Achieving this near-term reduction would impose an abrupt and significant price increase on electricity consumers. The House bill also would require a very aggressive 17 percent reduction in GHG emissions below 2005 levels by 2020. Again, we support a more reasonable and achievable 2020 target that will help cushion the cost impact on our consumers.”
So does EEI oppose Waxman-Markey? Amazingly, the answer is no. Instead EEI suggests: (1) price collars,
“We also strongly support inclusion of a price ‘collar,’ consisting of both a floor and a ceiling on emissions allowance prices, in climate legislation. This critical consumer protection measure would help limit economic harm to energy consumers, U.S. workers, and the economy, while discouraging market manipulation and encouraging technological development.”
(2) more free carbon allowances,
“Under H.R. 2454, allowances would sharply decline from 35 percent to zero over a five-year period from 2025 to 2029. Such a swift phase-out will lead to abruptly higher energy prices for consumers. Instead, we recommend a longer phase-out period of at least 15 years to help protect consumers from sudden energy price shocks.”
and (3) greater ability to participate in the fraudulent carbon offsets market,
“In addition, a number of improvements are needed in the offsets provisions. In the early years, offsets will be one of the few tools utilities will have for meeting targets. Quantitative restrictions, such as the 20 percent discount for international offsets, should be eliminated both to bolster the supply and to lower the price of domestic and international offsets. Moreover, a number of severe qualitative restrictions should be either eliminated or eased in order to assure a full and affordable supply of offsets.”
Like the American Chemistry Council’s Cal Dooley, EEI’s Tom Kuhn is ready to sell-out America to get a deal that he naively thinks will work for his industry.
Chicago-based utility Exelon Corp. expects that Waxman-Markey will boost its profits by $1.1 billion (39 percent), according to a report in Restructuring Today (July 13).
Because of its nuclear fleet, the largest in the U.S., Exelon will have plenty of carbon credits to sell to other emitters.
Exelon is trying to exploit its potential Waxman-Markey boon in its efforts to acquire Princeton, NJ-based NRG Energy, which is expected to spend $1.3-2.3 billion to reduce its carbon emissions under Waxman-Markey and which opposes the takeover.
In a letter to NRG shareholders, Exelon said:
We are offering you securities in a company… whose value rises rather than declines as carbon is priced into the marketplace…
Ironically, both Exelon and NRG are members of USCAP, the industry-environmentalist coalition lobbying for greenhouse gas regulation.
So not only will Waxman-Markey cut into fossil fuel-based NRG’s profits, it may very well mean the end of the company.
It makes you wonder what NRG CEO David Crane was thinking when he joined USCAP. If he thought that it’s better-to-be-at-the-table-than-on-the-menu, he was wrong since now he has two problems (carbon regulation and takeover) instead of one or even none.
BTW, if you want to see which regions of the country will be paying more for electricity thanks to David Crane’s bad judgment, click here for a list of NRG’s generation facilities in Texas, the Northeast, South and Southern California.