The EPA Wrecking Ball

By Alan Caruba

The Environmental Protection Agency is using its power to advance the objective of the environmental movement to deny Americans access to the energy that sustains the nation’s economy and is using the greatest hoax ever perpetrated, global warming—now called “climate change”—to achieve that goal.

“This standard isn’t the once-and-for-all solution to our environmental challenge,” said Lisa Jackson, the EPA administrator, “but it is an important commonsense step toward tackling the ongoing and very real threat of climate change and protecting the future for generations to come. It will enhance the lives of our children and our children’s children.”

This is a boldfaced lie. Its newest rule is based on the debasement of science that is characterized and embodied in the global warming hoax. It will deprive America of the energy it requires to function.

Since the 1980s the Greens have been telling everyone that carbon dioxide was causing global warming—now called climate change—and warning that CO2 emissions were going to kill everyone in the world if they weren’t dramatically reduced. The ball was put in motion with the United Nations 1997 Kyoto Protocols when many nations agreed to this absurd idea and carried forward by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change ever since.

The Environmental Protection Agency was created to clean the nation’s air and water where it was deemed that a hazard existed. Like most noble ideas and most Congressional mandates, the initial language was vague enough to be interpreted to mean anything those in charge wanted it to mean. Add in the global warming hoax and you have the means to destroy the nation.

Now it means that the source of fifty percent of all the electricity generated in the United States is being systematically put out of business and please do not act surprised; that’s exactly what Barack Obama said he intended to do if elected President.

This is evil writ large.

Shutting down utilities that use coal, an energy source the U.S. has in such abundance that it could provide electricity for the next hundreds of years, and ensuring that no new ones are built fits in perfectly with all the Green pipedreams about "renewable" energy. Solar and wind presently provide about two percent of the nation’s electricity and, without government subsidies and mandates requiring their use, they would not exist at all.

How stupid is it to not build more nuclear power plants when this form of power doesn’t emit anything but energy?

How stupid is it not to use coal when the U.S. is the Saudi Arabia of coal?

How stupid is it to begin to find reasons to regulate and thwart fracking, the technology to access trillions of cubic feet of natural gas that has been in use for decades?

How stupid is it to cover miles of land, far from any urban center, with hundreds of solar panels or huge, ugly wind turbines that kill thousands of birds every year?

The sun does not shine all the time, nor does the wind blow all the time. In the event of overcast skies or a day without wind, traditional plants—those using coal, gas, nuclear or generating hydroelectric power—have to be maintained as a backup. Take away the coal-fired plants and there were be huge gap in the national grid.

Darkness will descend and Americans will begin to live with blackouts and brownouts that will undermine every aspect of our lives. It’s bad enough when a town or even a city briefly loses power because of a storm, but imagine that occurring on a regular basis because there just aren’t enough utilities generating power!

What kind of people stand by idly while its own government conspires to take away the primary source of energy that everything else depends upon? The answer? You. The answer is the many elected politicians that have done little to rein in a rogue government agency intent on undermining the nation by denying it the ability to generate power with the least expensive source of electricity, coal.

The EPA, an unelected bureaucracy, has just ensured that all Americans, industries, small businesses, and individuals will begin pay far more for electrical power.

Richard J. Trzupek, the author of “Regulators Run Wild” and an environment policy advisor for The Heartland Institute, said of the new rule, “With around 50,000 megawatts of coal-fired power set to be forcibly retired in the next few years—thanks to the draconian policies of Obama’s EPA—this rule ensures that no new modern, efficient coal fired power plants will be built to fill the gap.”

In a triumph of crony capitalism, Trzupek notes that “The big winner will be Obama’s good friend, GE Chairman Jeff Immelt. Since solar and wind cannot fill a 50,000 megawatt baseload gap, the only way to ensure continued reliability of the grid is to build a lot of natural gas-fired plants quickly. And who is the biggest supplier of natural gas-fired combustion engines? GE of course.”

If you think that environmental organizations like the Sierra Club and Friends of the Earth, among many others, are seeking to “protect” the Earth, you are seriously mistaken. They have been among the leading opponents of coal and they have had allies in Congress such as the Majority Leader of the Senate, Harry Reid, (D-NV) who has said “Coal makes us sick. Oil makes us sick.”

NO! Coal provides the engine of our nation’s electrical power and oil provides the energy that fuels our transportation and is the basis for countless products that enhance and improve our lives every day.

We are witnessing the destruction of the nation by the environmental movement and the EPA has just provided you with the most dramatic example of that plan.

© Alan Caruba, 2012

GE Stabs the US in the Back

By Alan Caruba

In 1876 Thomas Alva Edison opened a laboratory in Menlo Park, New Jersey for the purposes of exploring how to produce and distribute electricity. History records that he invented the incandescent electric light bulb there. By 1890, he had established the Edison General Electric Company, now know simply as GE.

In 2011, Jeffrey Immelt, the CEO of GE and the chairman of President Obama’s “Jobs Council” is eliminating jobs for American employees of GE at a furious pace. To add insult to injury, in 2010 GE paid no federal taxes at all despite worldwide profits of $14.2 billion. GE claimed a tax benefit of $2.3 billion.

From an America corporate icon to an American disgrace, GE epitomizes how federal policies, cronyism, and rent seeking is destroying America from within by avoiding taxes and shipping jobs overseas. Keep in mind, none of this is illegal. It is, however, unconscionable.

A recent article at TheEconomicCollapseblog.com took a look at the way GE is “moving jobs and economic infrastructure to China at a blistering pace.” For example, “GE makes more medical-imaging machines than anyone else in the world and now GE has announced that it is ‘moving the headquarters of its 115-year-old X-ray business to Beijing.”

The article notes that, “Under Immelt, GE has shipped tens of thousands of good jobs out of the United States.” Even the liberal learning Huffington Post reported that “As the administration struggles to prod businesses to create jobs at home, GE has been busy sending them abroad. Since Immelt took over in 2001, GE has shed 34,000 jobs in the U.S. according to its most recent annual filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission. But it has added 25,000 jobs overseas.”

“At the end of 2009, GE employed 36,000 more people abroad than it did in the U.S. In 2000, it was nearly the opposite.”

The last GE factory in the U.S. that made light bulbs closed last September. This came on the heels of the federal government’s ban on the 100-watt incandescent light bulb and its push to require Americans to purchase the new CFL light bulbs as part of Obama’s green jobs initiative. The CFL bulbs have been universally denounced as providing less equivalent light, costing more, and using mercury as part of their manufacture.

When John Rice was appointed GE’s head of global operations, responsible for growth in markets that include China, India, the Middle East and Brazil, the Huffington Post revealed that GE planned to spend $500 million on research and development and new customer innovation centers in China, adding more than a thousand jobs there. “More than $1.5 billion is expected to be put toward joint ventures with Chinese state-owned enterprises in high-technology sectors.”

At the same time, Daily Finance.com revealed that GE “is arming China to compete with Boeing—and America.” Peter Cohen that “General Electric plans to sell its aircraft electronics to Chinese companies” noting that China just flight-tested a prototype stealth fighter” as it continues to build up its military. GE is selling technology “it developed for U.S. companies like Boeing to Boeing’s Chinese competitors.”

“America is being de-industrialized at lightning speed and very few of our politicians seem to care,” says TheEconomicCollapseblog while noting that in 1979 there were 19.5 million manufacturing jobs in the United States and today there are 11.6 million.

“The United States has lost a staggering 32% of all its manufacturing jobs since the year 2000.”

While President Obama berates the Congress for the lack of free trade agreements, he neglects to say that several such agreements with Latin American nations linger on his desk and none can be acted upon by Congress until he sends them for approval.

While Jeffrey Immelt flies around in his corporate jet and issues vacuous, hypocritical statements about jobs for Americans, he and his close friend in the White House are undermining the economy. Other U.S. corporations are following suit.

The U.S. corporate tax is the highest in the world, but you will not hear any talk of lowering this tax rate, only meaningless class warfare blather about taxing “millionaires and billionaires” more when, in truth, those taxes will fall heaviest on small business owners.

This is the deliberate destruction of the U.S. manufacturing sector.

© Alan Caruba, 2011

GE's Really Big, Bad Ideas

By Alan Caruba

Why would General Electric abandon the incandescent light bulb? In 1890 Thomas Edison established General Electric after having achieved fame with it and other inventions. Not only will this iconic invention no longer be manufactured in the United States by next year, but the government has ruled that it cannot even be purchased here.

That is a level of stupidity that defines much of U.S. manufacturing and energy policy these days and explains why so many jobs have been out-sourced to other nations. It demonstrates what harm can be done by a government that has interfered so much in the industrial and financial marketplace that the nation totters on economic ruin.

It goes without saying that you don’t become the chief executive of GE without having demonstrated a lot of smarts and managerial ability, but a recent Wall Street Journal article, “GE Chief Slams U.S. on Energy” made me wonder if Jeff Immelt shares the same nation with me, if not the same planet.

Immelt is all about new sources of energy like wind and solar even though, combined, they produce about three percent of the electricity Americans use every day and, without government subsidies and other government-granted credits, they would barely exist. The reason is obvious. The wind does not blow all the time and the sun is often either behind clouds or it is night time.

In a speech to the Gridwise Global Forum on September 23, Immelt got a lot of facts backward. For example, he reportedly “praised China’s approach to energy and criticized what he called a stalled effort to revamp U.S. energy policy.”

China is building a new coal-fired plant almost weekly in order to ramp up its ability to compete internationally. It is no accident that the nations that use the most energy are also the most successful. It has been U.S. energy policy to slow the building of coal-fired plants even though the U.S. is estimated to have several hundred years of coal with which to supply their needs and ours.

Immelt worried that GE was facing tougher competition around the world selling “equipment to produce renewable (wind and solar) and nuclear energy. GE believes its rivals receive more help from their governments.”

He neglected to mention an effort in the U.S. Senate that would “impose a Renewable Electricity Standard (RES) that would force electric utilities to generate a large and increasing percentage of their power from wind and solar—rising to 15% by 2021”, according to Dr. S. Fred Singer of the Science & Environmental Policy Project.

The RES would give so-called renewable or “clean” energy producers an economic advantage that ignores the obvious. Coal, gas, and nuclear energy are cheaper and more plentiful. Consumers will see their energy bills soar if the RES becomes law.

Immelt noted that the electric grid system in America needs an upgrade and in this he is right. Left unsaid is that both solar and wind require heavy investment to transmit the energy generated, usually in places far from urban or suburban centers, to the grid. Also left unsaid is that most of the wind turbines and solar panels in use today in America are made in China.

Immelt was correct, too, in noting the failure to get behind the production of nuclear energy in the U.S. Most of the plants operating today were built in the 1970s and, for reasons I have never understood, a multi-billion dollar repository for nuclear waste, Yucca Mountain in Nevada, has been closed to use. Meanwhile, nations like India have embarked on an aggressive program to increase and integrate nuclear power for electricity production.

Jack Welch was famous for instilling new life and vitality into GE before his retirement and replacement by Jeff Immelt. In April, Businessweek magazine devoted its cover to a story, “Can GE Gets Its Juice Back? A company renowned for innovation and talent development has lost its way. Inside Jeff Immelt’s quest to find the light.”

GE’s earnings from continuing operations were described as “ho-hum”, having sunk 38% in 2009” and expected to stay flat this year. In an annual shareholder letter, Immelt spoke of a “decade from hell.” You won’t find many corporate leaders or financial analysts that have much good to say of GE these days.

And perhaps that might have something to do with GE’s failure to support the best, proven ways to generate electricity? Or to have failed to protect the American consumer from a government-imposed ban on incandescent light bulbs?

© Alan Caruba, 2010