Manufacturers go Judas: 1.5% of allowances is the new ’30 pieces of silver’

American manufacturers are ready to sell America down the river if they can get an extra 1.5 percent of the CO2 emission allowances allocated in the Waxman-Markey bill.

In a July 15 letter, the American Materials Manufacturing Alliance (comprised of the Aluminum Association, American Chemistry Council, American Forest & Paper Association and the American Iron and Steel Institute) asked Sen.  Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) to increase the free allowances allocated to energy-intensive manufacturers from 13.5% to 15% percent — a modification “valued at billions of dollars over the life of the program.”

Beyond the “30 pieces of silver” nature of the manufacturers’ request, granting it would mean that some other special interests would have to lose 1.5% of free allowances — so look for an intensified struggle among  the rent-seeking thieves for the free taxpayer money that free allowances represent. Over the life of Waxman-Markey, Congress would issue $9 trillion worth of allowances.

Here are the Judases that are willing to betray America to the Marxist-Socialists for an extra 1.5% of Waxman-Markey’s free allowances:

Steel's Tom Gibson
Steel's Tom Gibson
Aluminum's Steve Larkin
Aluminum's Steve Larkin
AFPA's Donna Harman
AFPA's Donna Harman
Chemical's Cal Dooley
Cal Dooley: Willing to screw America for Waxman-markey lite

Hillary Clinton: Ugly American?

During her visit to India to persuade that country to join in a new global warming treaty, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stopped at the undistinguished brick-and-sandstone headquarters of the hotel division of Indian tobacco giant ITC Ltd. The building’s L-shaped design maximizes natural lighting which reduces energy use and makes the building “green.”

As the Washington Post reported,

Clinton likened the squat, plain-looking building — which was constructed with U.S. assistance — to a new version of the Taj Mahal, grandly declaring it was “a monument to the future.”

But if Hillary thinks that this…

ITC-green-centre

… is the new this…

taj-mahal

… then it’s no wonder that the India rejected her pleas to reduce its emissions and forego improvement in its standard of living.

Ad Space: The New Frontier in Washington Post Pay-to-Play?

Just because the Washington Post‘s sponsored salon concept failed to launch doesn’t mean that pay-to-play journalism is dead at the newspaper.

Sunday’s Outlook section, the opinion/book review section of the newspaper, features three front-page articles which, essentially, are advocacy pieces for increased funding of NASA.

In addition to the self-explanatory “Let’s Reach for the Stars Again” and “Return to the Heavens, for the Sake of the Earth,” Outlook’s front-page spotlights a book review (“We Used to Call Them Space Cowboys“) that concludes by observing that manned space exploration “was the kind of thing that great nations do.”

Inside the Outlook section is another article touting robots in space (“Robots With the Right Stuff“), a piece taunting Americans with the notion that a living hot-air balloon like Richard Branson may out-compete NASA (“Rocketing Past NASA“) and a final article (“You’re Not the Center of the Universe, You Know“) opining that we can overcome our “infinitesimal place” in space by being clever enough to figure out the universe’s master plan.

You may agree or disagree with articles’ general implication — that U.S. taxpayers should step-up funding of space exploration — but what’s more interesting is that the Outlook section this week seems to have been sponsored by Lockheed Martin and Boeing, federal contractors that would no doubt like to nurse off the taxpayers via NASA contracts.

Both Lockheed Martin and Boeing took out full-page advertisements in the Outlook sections — which probably cost about $125,000 each.

So has the Post replaced the aborted $250,000 salons with $250,000 worth of advertising for pro-whatever articles in the Outlook section? Will the Outlook section next feature a series of pro-climate bill articles accompanied by full-page ads from climate bill rentseekers like Exelon, General Electric, Goldman Sachs and others?

Hey Washington Post ombudsman, inquiring minds want to know.

The real energy crisis…

This excerpt from a ClimateWire story (“Carbon Capture: Consultants help companies tap into stimulus dollars,” July 17) describes the real energy crisis:

Take the case of Joe Tondu, president of Tondu Corp., an independent power generator looking to construct new plants.

Tondu said his firm couldn’t build coal plants because no one would approve its permits, and it couldn’t build carbon-capturing coal plants because their costs remain too high.

When the company struck out to invest in renewables, it met another roadblock: To get stimulus funds from the Department of Energy, Tondu would have to get an environmental impact review for each project. That would have offered local interests “a huge opportunity to stall your project for years and years and years,” he argued, and it ultimately derailed the company’s plan.

“It’s almost unbelievably easy to slow down … it created another hurdle we just couldn’t get through,” he said

We’re not running out of energy. The crisis is being caused by the government and greens who have choke-holds on the ability of businesses to produce energy.

Smart Democrat of the day: Sen. Byron Dorgan

Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-ND) rails against the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill and all the opportunities created therein for carbon market speculation in a July 16 Senate floor speech.

Sure, Dorgan is misinformed on the need for a cap on carbon emissions, but first things first: the Senate version of Waxman-Markey neededs to be defeated and then we can move on to re-educating those who have been deceived by Al Gore and the greens.

Dorgan should be congratulated — at least so far — for his courageous stand in favor of taxpayers and consumers and against the likes of the morally bankrupt Al Gore, Goldman Sachs and others who would sell our country down the river in order to profit from cap-and-charade.

Utility con of the day: Pepco’s Thomas Graham

Commenting on Washington, D.C.-based utility Pepco’s application to the Obama administration for $254 million in federal stimulus grants to upgrade its grid, Pepco region president Thomas Graham said in a statement,

“Every dollar we obtain from the federal government offsets the cost customers would otherwise pay to make these important improvements to the system.”

While this is technically true, it overlooks the fact that Pepco customers will be paying for the improvements through taxes.

Moreover, since virtually all utilities plan on tapping into the taxpayer honeypot, all ratepayers and taxpayers will be paying for all the money utilities obtain from the Obama stimulus ATM.

To paraphrase Milton Friedman, there is no such thing as a “free grid improvement.”

If Graham doesn’t know that, then Pepco needs to hire smarter executives. If Graham did know that, then Pepco needs to hire more honest executives.

Video: Sen. Boxer chastised for playing black groups off each other in hearing

Watch Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) get chastised for trying to pit the NAACP and another black-led business group against the National Black Chamber of Commerce in a racially-charged Senate hearing on climate.

Sen. Boxer’s seems to insist that the view of the NBCoC is offset by the NAACP’s view simply because both are black groups.

Carbon sequestration: A costly pipedream

Need to disabuse someone of the notion that carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) is a viable strategy?

University of Houston energy expert Michael Economides says in this recent study that CCS for just Kyoto Protocol-type CO2 cuts in the U.S. would require the drilling of 161,429 injection wells by 2030 at a cost of 1.61 trillion dollars — and there’s no guarantee that the CO2 would stay sequestered, much less accomplish anything for the climate.

That price tag doesn’t include the cost of capturing the CO2 at the point of generation, purchasing rights of way for pipelines, pipeline installation costs, liability insurance etc. Economides says the total cost may be as high as $1 trillion annually.

Waxman-Markey-type CO2 limits, which are much more Draconian than the Kyoto Protocol, would obviously be even more expensive.

It’s quite a price to pay for something that may not work and, even if it did, would accomplish nothing.

Greens move to block new TVA reactor

The Sierra Club and other green groups petitioned the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to stop the construction of a second reactor at the Tennessee Valley Authority’s Watts Bar Plant in Tennessee.

WBIR TV (Knoxville) reported,

“TVA keeps pushing for more nuclear reactors in spite of massive cost overruns they always have when they build them,” said Bill Reynolds, a member of the Tennessee chapter of the Sierra Club, in a written statement.

The group also raises concerns about the safety of the reactor design.

Obama-meter alert for CT, MA, NH

Northeast Utilities is applying for $100-150 million in Obama stimulus funds to install so-called “smart meters” for 200,000 customers in Connecticut, Massachusetts and New Hampshire, reports Smart Grid Today.

One if by land, two if by sea… and three if through your home’s electrical hook-up?

Paul Revere rides again to warn of Obama-meter-armed rentseekers trading consumer freedoms for taxpayer lucre.
Paul Revere rides again to warn of Obama-meter-armed rentseekers trading consumer freedoms for taxpayer lucre.

Sharkholm syndrome: Empathy for sharks… from victims?

Shark attack victims testified on Capitol Hill yesterday in favor of a nationwide ban on shark-finning — the practice of cutting-off a shark’s dorsal fin and throwing back the rest, reports Energy & Environment Daily.

Recruited to testify by the Pew Environment Group, Al Brennika was attacked in 1976 while surfing by a 7-foot lemon shark. He testified that,

“I was limbed. They get finned. It gives me … empathy for their situation.”

Brennika was one of several shark-attack victims at the hearing apparently suffering from Jaws-version of Stockholm syndrome.

That’s today’s insight into the mind of an environmentalist and the nutty way environmental policy is made in Washington, DC.

House bill strips salary from climate czar

An amendment to the 2010 Financial Services bill (H.R. 3170) offered by Rep. Paul Broun (R-GA) would prohibit the payment of salaries to Obama climate czar Carol Browner, her deputy and anyone on the Council on Environmental Quality, according to Energy & Environment Daily. The vote is expected today.

A Broun spokesman told E&E that,

“These federal agencies do answer to Congress, but the people that oversee them in the White House do not. This is not right. … If the administration feels that there needs to be an overarching person or agency to facilitate the flow of information between the numerous federal agencies beneath them, then that’s fine, but this person, or people, need to be confirmed by the Senate and be subjected to congressional oversight.”

Browner probably doesn’t need/want the money anyway since:

  1. She’s married to DC super-lobbyist Tom Downey, who until Browner’s White House appointment, lobbied on energy and environment issues. Now Downey’s firm has limited its practice to taxes, healthcare, financial services, agriculture, banking, trade, communications, labor, housing and more.I’m sure having a spouse who directly reports to President Obama is of no use on those issues.
  2. Browner is a socialist who, I’m, sure would rather redistribute her salary to the masses.