Yuck: Utility association chief [hearts] new EPA chief Gina McCarthy

A Capitol Hill staffer intimated to me that NOBODY from industry lobbied against Gina McCarthy’s confirmation as EPA chief.

Bloomberg reports:

“Gina’s confirmation and experience bring greater certainty to the agency at this critical time,” Tom Kuhn, president of the Edison Electric Institute, a Washington-based group representing utilities, said in a statement after the 59-40 vote yesterday. “Gina has a keen understanding of the challenges facing our industry, and we have had a long and constructive relationship.”

4 thoughts on “Yuck: Utility association chief [hearts] new EPA chief Gina McCarthy”

  1. Individual utilities cannot criticize the EPA because the agency can retaliate. And speaking out against unnecessary environmental regulations also paints a target on the company’s back for the wackos and shareholder activists. The only hope of reversing the damage being done by the EPA rests with industry trade groups. But sadly, they’re all wrapped up with inside-the-beltway political correctness. People like Tom Kuhn should be going to bat for CO2-emitting industries, but instead they’re kissing up, trying to conciliate the beast that will eventually consume them.
    The headline is correct. Yuck.

  2. Why would the energy industry lobby against someone they hate? That would make the greens support that person all the more. If they make industry upset, that’s a good thing, right?

    Besides, if you lobby against that person, you have almost 100% chance that they will still be in office when one of your plant’s 10 year permits are going to be renewed. In the past, the EPA has held up wastewater renewal applications for over 10 years (note, it’s a 10 year permit, so this involves actually skipping renewal cycles) because they asked for justified and legally allowable increases. I shudder to think what the EPA would do if they actively bore a specific grudge.

    Why do you think I don’t use my surname here?

  3. Utilities are terrified of any negative comments from the greens, especially when their permit applications go to public notice. They know how much damage the EPA can do to them. So, they suck up to the agency, do their green things and do great publicity about how green they are. Besides, it doesn’t cost them much. All of this green stuff can be passed on to the rate payers. I’m sure if the Senate was so manned that they thought a complaint could derail her nomination, they would make negative comments. However, in the interest of self preservation, they “love” her. Besides, they don’t have to pay for the increased costs in the end.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.