President Biden just pledged to shut down 60% of America’s electric power

[Valletta]

First, Team Biden announced it will stop production of all new coal plants in the United States.

President Biden just pledged to shut down 60% of America’s electric power

The Biden administration’s proposals aren’t likely to change the planet’s temperature by even one-tenth of a degree, but they might just destroy the 21st-century American industrial economy a…

nypost.com

Joe is not a king, he has no authority to shut down any industry he chooses. He can lobby for a law to be passed, but such an order would be an attack against our Constitution.

 

[USincognito]

Got a source for this story from an actual newspaper instead of a right wing propaganda organ?

 

[USincognito]

US joins in other nations in swearing off coal power to clean the climate

The United States is now committed to the idea of phasing out coal power plants, joining 56 other nations in kicking the coal habit. Saturday's announcement by U.S.

apnews.com

>> U.S. Special Envoy John Kerry announced that America was joining the Powering Past Coal Alliance, which means the Biden Administration commits to building no new coal plants and phasing out existing plants. No date was given for when the existing plants would have to go... <<

>>Coal power plants have already been shutting down across the nation due to economics, and no new coal facilities were in the works, so “we were heading to retiring coal by the end of the decade anyway,” said climate analyst Alden Meyer of the European think-tank E3G. That’s because natural gas and renewable energy are cheaper, so it was market forces, he said.

As of October, just under 20% of the U.S. electricity is powered by coal, according to the U.S. Department of Energy. The amount of coal burned in the United States last year is less than half what it was in 2008. <<

Hmm. It appears the opinion piece by Stephen Moore is a senior fellow at the Heritage Foundation and chief economist with FreedomWorks. is playing fast and loose with the facts.

 

[Tuur]

Just a little under 50% of US electricity is produced by natural gas and goal. Natural gas, 39.8%, coal, 19.5% Here an officially government sanctioned source: Electricity in the U.S. - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA).

Now we have an administration who wants eliminate a source of 20% of the nation's electricity while at the same time they want to increase electricity usage by phasing out gas appliance and fossil fuels. Nice. So far haven't seen much effort to replace that 20% with nuclear, which is reliable. And before someone starts shrieking the renewables catechism, if you don't have a way of storing renewable electricity, you have to have conventional generation as a backup. As it stands now, we don't have enough energy storage for the renewables we already have.

 

[Desk trauma]

So far haven't seen much effort to replace that 20% with nuclear, which is reliable.

Coal plants are being replaced with natural gas plants, the go up faster and cheaper then run night and day cleaner. After the "nuclear renaissance" fiasco demonstrated that we still cannot bring new nuclear capacity on line in the US without ruinous cost overruns no company is going to try that again for a generation regardless of it being green or reliable once online.

 

[rambot]

I thought there was a forum rule about misrepresenting titles?


Cause this one's a doozy

 

[Desk trauma]

Stop production of something that’s not being produced, and hasn’t been for almost a decade, bold move.

 

[Laodicean60]

"nuclear renaissance" fiasco

With the electrification of America, nuclear is the best way forward compared to fossil fuels if we want to maintain our standard of living. I am glad to see work on the electrical grid is being addressed. The cart before the horse, it takes time to build power infrastructure and the government is motivating people with EV's with an already overworked grid. Peace

 

[Fantine]

I am shocked that our country is still getting 40% of its energy from coal. How backward! We have a lot of catching up to do.

Now I see why Manchin is considering being a presidential spoiler...he would rather keep the profits from his coal investments, even if it means throwing the 2024 election to an authoritarian dictator with 91 pending indictments and even more civil suits.

The idea that any plants would be closed before there were other energy sources to replace them is ridiculous.

 

[Desk trauma]

With the electrification of America, nuclear is the best way forward compared to fossil fuels if we want to maintain our standard of living.

Doesn't matter, US companies are not going to take the risk after watching the latest debacle.

 

[Laodicean60]

latest debacle.

Educate me?

 

[rambot]

I am shocked that our country is still getting 40% of its energy from coal. How backward! We have a lot of catching up to do.

Now I see why Manchin is considering being a presidential spoiler...he would rather keep the profits from his coal investments, even if it means throwing the 2024 election to an authoritarian dictator with 91 pending indictments and even more civil suits.

The idea that any plants would be closed before there were other energy sources to replace them is ridiculous.

40% from coal AND NG. I think it was only 19% coal

 

[Tuur]

Coal plants are being replaced with natural gas plants, the go up faster and cheaper then run night and day cleaner. After the "nuclear renaissance" fiasco demonstrated that we still cannot bring new nuclear capacity on line in the US without ruinous cost overruns no company is going to try that again for a generation regardless of it being green or reliable once online.

Having helped draw up plans for a rolling blackout (that we didn't have to implement, I was glad to see them come online. That was back in the 1990s. Natural gas is more expensive than coal because it's not as energy dense, and yes it's cleaner. Since the push is on to eliminate gas appliances, don't be surprised if they're next on the elimination list.

 

[KCfromNC]

Stop production of something that’s not being produced, and hasn’t been for almost a decade, bold move.

Glad in addition to running his administration, Obama is also letting Biden use his time machine.

 

[Godsunworthyservant]

First, Team Biden announced it will stop production of all new coal plants in the United States.

President Biden just pledged to shut down 60% of America’s electric power

The Biden administration’s proposals aren’t likely to change the planet’s temperature by even one-tenth of a degree, but they might just destroy the 21st-century American industrial economy a…

nypost.com

Joe is not a king, he has no authority to shut down any industry he chooses. He can lobby for a law to be passed, but such an order would be an attack against our Constitution

Let me start by saying that the article you quote is very inflammatory as it's title indicates he "pledged to shut down 60% of America's power" which is patently false. As a reading of the article reveals what he "pledged" was that his administration would not approve funding for any new coal powered electric plants in the US and that they would strengthen the rules for methane emissions. That's hardly "shutting down" 60% of America's power. As a matter of fact, if you read their entire set of proposals, they are simply trying to replace the coal powered electric plants with more environmentally friendly methods of power production. You mention that "Joe is not a king and has no authority to shut down any industry he chooses". Again, he didn't say he was going to or even had the authority to shut down any industry, so that statement is a false equivalency. Of all people, President Biden knows that he can't rule by fiat. I think we'd be much better served if all presidents understood that fact. That said, while I am in agreement that we should generate power in an environmentally friendly way as possible, but as a Christian, I don't really care how they produce my power as long as it's affordable

What I question is why Christians would want to be involved in promoting antagonistic partisan political propaganda when it could seriously damage their credibility to witness to that half of the country who vehemently oppose those views and who may see their actions as intended to inflame already sharp political divides. What is more important to your Christian life, to propagate political discord or to preserve your Christian testimony with every one and not just those who agree with your political views?

I have a litmus test for any issue on which I must take a position. It's simply this. I ask myself, what if this position is wrong? If the consequences of it being wrong will affect my Christian life in any negative way, then I will abandon it. In this case, I feel I can safely say, "If I'm wrong, so what? If you're wrong, then what?" So, if I choose not to become involved in the propagation of this type of inflammatory partisan political rhetoric, since Christ never taught us to be involved with politics in any way, I don't believe God will ask me on the judgement day, Why didn't you get involved in the partisan political fray of your time? But on the other hand, if I do get involved, then it's just possible that God might ask, Why did you involve yourself with worldly politics and alienate so many to your Christian witness? Just a thought.

 

[iluvatar5150]

Since the push is on to eliminate gas appliances

I thought that was mainly due to safety/health risks, not greenhouse gases.

 

[Laodicean60]

What I question is why Christians would want to be involved in promoting antagonistic partisan political propaganda when it could seriously damage their credibility to witness to that half of the country who vehemently oppose those views and who may see their actions as intended to inflame already sharp political divides.

Why don't you start a discussion?

 

[Godsunworthyservant]

Why don't you start a discussion?

New at this. Don't know how yet, so I'm practicing by replying to others.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Educate me?

Don't you remember the nuclear crash of the 1970s and 80s? Pushed by the anti-nuke movement and driven into full collapse with the TMI incident in 1979.

There was a modest revival tried in the early part of the century, but mostly what we got from it was the completion of a couple plants abandoned after TMI at enormous costs.

There are reasonable ways forward technologically with better, safer and more modular reactors. I'd be perfectly fine if they put one at the site of the local coal plant that is closing shortly. The problem is financial. Nuclear, even when subsidized is expensive and the insurance, waste, and liability costs are just too oppressive.

 

[rambot]

New at this. Don't know how yet, so I'm practicing by replying to others.

Nothing wrong. Your reply was absolutley perfect.

I would shorten it to: Christians shouldn't lie to make (let alone prove) a point. It's not good witness.

And I agree 100%. Claims and statements need to be based on things that are true.