Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Newspaper contacts | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Did court go too far in its EPA/coal-fired plants ruling?

November 2, 2013

U.S. Supreme Court justices already have ruled that President Barack Obama’s Environmental Protection Agency has the authority to shut down coal-fired power plants....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(17)

sideliner

Nov-02-13 5:48 AM

Again, an op-ed all about the money and nothing about the damage done to the environment by coal. When cleaner methods of energy production are available we absolutely should be using them. Look at what's going on in China as a result of the burning of coal.

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrShaman

Nov-02-13 5:49 AM

"For another, it has been pointed out that even if global warming alarmists are right, unilateral action by the U.S. would have only a miniscule effect on the situation."

*

Deja vu.....

*

See:

China's Capital To Replace Some Coal-Fired Heating Plants [Reuters]

2 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrShaman

Nov-02-13 5:53 AM

"Much of the lost generating capacity will be replaced by new gas-fired power plants. Undoubtedly, the cost of electricity generated there will be higher - perhaps twice as much - than power from coal-fired units."

*

Shouldn't credit be given, to the "conservative"-psychic who made this prediction???

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

rick424

Nov-02-13 8:50 AM

EPA needs to go further. Kinda of ironic, there was a story in this newspaper about Centralia a couple of days ago.

2 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

VXerick

Nov-02-13 9:34 AM

Not a problem folks. It's a progressive plan to incrementally remove all forms of fossil energy and replace it with new technology that brings a lot more money to the pockets of the elite. Energy and climate change are huge sources of money with nothing positive for the common citizen.

The end result will be government run and subsidized energy, as they now run or are in the process of running other facets of our lives. Transportation, the banking system, whatever they can get their paws into to control the people, while lining their pockets. GM is an example of our energy future. A whole lot of money down the government drain.

4 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

MrShaman

Nov-02-13 11:59 AM

"Not a problem folks. It's a progressive plan to incrementally remove all forms of fossil energy and replace it with new technology that brings a lot more money to the pockets of the elite. Energy and climate change are huge sources of money with nothing positive for the common citizen." - VXerick

*

Yeah....sure....that's why it's Republicans who keep bringing-it-up...

*

See:

'War on Coal' Talking Point Rises From The Grave Again

-

"Last week, it was Republicans Ed Whitfield and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell claiming that they would make the “war on coal” a staple of next year’s midterm elections. Not being one to miss the opportunity to misinform the public, Republican Senator Rand Paul from Kentucky made it clear this week that he, too, would be using the “war on coal” as a major talking point for the next 12 months in an attempt to smear his political opponents."

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

DavidBross

Nov-02-13 10:01 PM

"For another, it has been pointed out that even if global warming alarmists are right, unilateral action by the U.S. would have only a miniscule effect on the situation." This is the crucial sentence for me. If the alarmists are right, they aren't alarmists. They are accurately pointing significant dangers that need to be addressed!! Also, the editorial would have us continue down a road that leads to disaster, even if the "alarmists" are right. This reminds of the kids trying to get out of something by saying,"I didn't do it. But, he did it first." Funny logic from kids. Not funny when important decisions are being made.

1 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

thinblueline

Nov-05-13 6:07 PM

Right-on...

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

RichSaunders

Nov-05-13 6:24 PM

I guess the Sun Gazette finally has broken down and admitted that our commander in chief has superhuman powers. If not, then how do you explain the SG editors complaining about "President Obama´s EPA" overstepping its authority to shut down coal-fired power plants when he took office on January 20th, 2009 but the Supreme Court ruled on the case Massachussetts vs the Environmental Protection Agency on April 2, 2007. That is two years before Obama became President, when you know who was still clearing brush and choking on pretzels.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

RichSaunders

Nov-05-13 6:25 PM

What you call "global warming activists" I simply call "scientists". Or more importantly, "the ENTIRE global scientific community". Or 97% of every living, breathing scientist on the planet.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

RichSaunders

Nov-05-13 6:28 PM

Umm, Sun Gazette, you might want to look up in the dictionary the word "miniscule". I am pretty sure that 20% of the world´s greenhouse gas emissions is not "miniscule". 5.5 BILLION tons of carbon dioxide is not anywhere near "miniscule". The world´s leading polluter per capita every year for the past 50 years is not "miniscule". Try a thesaurus.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

RichSaunders

Nov-05-13 6:31 PM

The funny thing is that I am not alone in casting doubt on the extreme position of the Sun Gazette on this one. You know who else thinks there is absolutely no debate on whether human activity due to greenhouse gas emissions is causing global warming? the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Chemical Society, the American Geophysical Union, the American Medical Association, the American Meteorological Society, the American Physical Society, the Geological Society of America, the US National Academy of Sciences, Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences, the Canadian Geophysical Union, the Canadian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society, the Australian Institute of Physics, the Australian Meteorological and Oceanographic Society, the Brazilian Academy of Sciences, the European Academy of Science, the European Federation of Geologists,the French Academy of Science, the German Academy of Natural Sciences,the Indian National Academy of Scienc

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

RichSaunders

Nov-05-13 6:31 PM

....and the International Alliance of Research Universities, the International Research Institute for Climate and Society, the Isreali Academy of Science, the Korean Academy of Science, the Latin American Academy of Sciences, the Norwegian Academy of Science, the Spanish Academy of Exact Sciences, the Royal Astronomical Society, the Royal Meteorological Society, the Science Council of Japan, the World Meteorological Organization and the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

RichSaunders

Nov-05-13 6:36 PM

Every single major international scientific society or academy agrees that global warming due to human activity is indeed happening. Not a single one argues the contrary. There are PLENTY of industry lobbying groups who argue the contrary, but none of them are scientific or academic, but rather funded by oil and gas companies.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

RichSaunders

Nov-05-13 6:41 PM

The Sun Gazette has every right to make the argument FOR or AGAINST regulation on coal fired power plants. What they cannot HONESTLY do is mislead their readers into thinking there actually exists any doubt about the anthropomorphic greenhouse gases causing global warming. That is definitely NOT in question, as long as you ask any scientist or person with an advanced degree in climate studies, oceanography, physics or chemistry. Opinion is one thing, but Sun Gazette you owe it to your readers to present SCIENTIFIC FACTS as such. If you fail to do so, you will evidence yourselves as shills to the energy industry.

0 Agrees | 1 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

catmantwo

Nov-07-13 11:48 AM

One does not have to against natural gas to be for coal. One does not have to be against oil to be for solar. All forms of energy should be looked at together. One energy type will not be enough. I too openly question global warming. How vain for humans to think that they can have a greater impact the all the powers of nature and the solar system. Want to stop methane gas, eliminate all the cattle in the world first. Powering your home with wind or buying crappy barely bright lightbulbs will not make a single difference to the life of our planet. Global warming may be nothing more than a clever myth and a money making scam for the political elite. It also keeps university professors employed be obtaining government grants. Remind us all in north central PA again in mid January and February about global warming.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

catmantwo

Nov-07-13 11:51 AM

Glad the Sun Gazette does not buy into the whole global warming scam. Good editorial.

0 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 17 of 17 comments
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or
 
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web