Washington state refuses to allow coal export terminal, in legal battle with 6 states

 

Washington State via the court will try and stop the coal export terminal. This is a federal port. Just another in the list of judges who will put their nose into it. Stopping utility lines, laying pipelines and improving refineries, – don’t even consider building a new one. But forget the impact of the huge solar panels that fry birds in an instant. Wind farms that are equally as devastating. A wink and a nod to them. The list is endless. They would have us go back to being Hunter-Gatherers. First some history and what we need to remember at this election time, and then will include here what the wacko birds are trying to do. In this case, stopping exporting coal and costing thousands of jobs.

Keep in mind: There are 400 coal-powered electric plants in the United States. They generated 30 percent of the nation’s electricity.(Jul 31, 2015)  Some states like Ohio, 54 percent comes from coal.

McCarthy: “The hicks in flyover country were too stupid to understand that we were doing them a favor by killing their jobs”.

 

 

 

Recall this? This one says it all:

EPA Chief: ‘Hicks in flyover country too stupid that we were doing them a favor killing their jobs

She implement controversial environmental regulations such as the Clean Power Plan (CPP) — which are viewed as job-killers in coal country — and told reporters earlier this year that she gave up talking to “climate deniers.”

“I don’t check out flat Earth society and I’m not talking to climate deniers,” she said in October. “That’s it. Sorry, I know I’m supposed to be for everybody, but my patience has worn thin over eight years.”

 

Trump repeals coal mining regulations, signs legislation

In case we wonder why we elected Trump, and what will happen if we don’t support the man in November by electing conservatives. I give you a few of what we were up against and lucky for us, Trump won:

 

 

EPA ‘clean coal’ rule would increase power prices by 70 or 80 percent

An Obama administration official has said that the new clean coal rules could increase electricity prices by as much as 80 percent.
Dr. Julio Friedmann, the deputy assistant secretary for clean coal at the Department of Energy, told House lawmakers that the first generation of carbon capture and storage technology would increase wholesale electricity prices by “70 or 80 percent.”
The Obama administration’s plan to fight global warming includes limiting carbon dioxide from new power plants. In order for new coal-fired power plants to be built, however, they would need to install costly carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology.

Hillary Clinton ‘We’re going to put coal companies out of business’

 

 

Top EPA official Obama’s “coal regs will be painful all of the way”

Obama’s war on coal hits our electric bill

EPA shuts down one of the largest Coal Mines in U.S.

It is the first time in the agency’s 40-year history that it has canceled a federal water permit for a project after it was issued.

The EPA noted in its own press release that it was asserting a rarely used authority

Obama’s promise to bankrupt coal industry to cost 1,000 jobs in upper Midwest

 

Now the latest:

A lawsuit has pitted six landlocked states against Washington State over a simple question: Who owns the federal ports?

Washington State is denying the states the permits required to build a large coal export terminal along the Columbia River. The states have sued and Washington filed a motion for dismissal.

But U.S. District Court Judge Robert Bryan rejected Washington State’s motion, setting the stage for a legal showdown over who really gets final say over which products flow through the nation’s sea ports.

“We’re talking about the Constitution and the rule of law,” said Montana Attorney General Tim Fox, “One state can’t discriminate against another state’s commodities in this way.”

Montana and Wyoming are leading plaintiffs and two of the largest coal-producing states in the country. The Powder River Basin contains 2.5 billion tons of recoverable coal and currently supplies 40 percent of the coal used in the United States. But as many states wean themselves off of electricity from burning coal, coal companies are looking to boost exports, primarily to Asia. But they have a major problem: there are no ports along the West Coast currently set up to load coal onto ships.

Four other states, Kansas, Utah, South Dakota and Nebraska, have joined the lawsuit against Washington State.

The Millennium Bulk Terminal, proposed for the port in Longview, Wash., was supposed to solve that obstacle. It was designed to export 44 million metric tons of coal a year. Important allies and trading partners Japan and South Korea were eager to buy the coal. But after conducting an environmental impact study, the state of Washington denied the terminal a required water permit.

“I think we’re on sound ground,” said Washington’s Democratic Governor Jay Inslee, “because we’re enforcing our environmental rules for clean air and noise and some other issues.”

Snip…

“It is insulting to all Washington residents that proponents of this facility have chosen to minimize and ridicule the impact diesel emissions from the largest operation of the largest coal export facility in North America would have had on the people of Cowlitz County,” said Ecology’s spokesman Dave Bennett.

But Governor Jay Inslee makes no secret of his disdain for coal. In his 2007 book, “Apollo’s Fire: Igniting America’s Clean Energy Economy,” Inslee wrote, “coal is killing us. If we fail to restrain growth of CO2 emissions all six billion of us on this little spaceship are at risk.”

He also wrote that coal and cars are in a race to be the greatest danger to our climate. And at a recent news conference in which he announced Washington state would file its 32nd lawsuit against the Trump Administration over the dismantling of president Obama’s Clean Power Plan, Inslee said: “We’re breathing smoke from Mississippi, we’re breathing smoke from the rest of the United States. We have an interest in reducing coal smoke from all over the United States.” More at Fox News

Advertisements

CA Fires of Hell? Thank Obama and the Environmentalists

 

The fires of Hell have descended on CA – thank the environmentalists. This was a disaster waiting to happen and not the cause of so-called climate change. Better yet, we Americans who live in that vast space located between the coasts could have given you a clue. We could have told you what was happening. But then again, it was those who probably never step into a woods made the policies. One of the few legacies of Obama that has now born fruit.

Diseases are devastating the Forest. It’s the worst of both worlds, small fires are not allowed to burn allowing forests to rejuvenate with new growth and browse necessary to sustain animal life. Appropriate logging has been stopped or severely curtailed thus limiting barriers to these hellish fires as well and help keeping forests healthy.

 

“Hotter, drier, longer forest fires we are witnessing today have nothing to do with dangerous manmade climate change. They have a lot to do with idiotic forest mismanagement policies and practices.”

 

This past week, The New York Times reported on California’s wildfires stating that “Since 2012, according to state emergency management officials, there has not been a month without a wildfire burning — a stark contrast to previous decades, when fire officials saw the fall and winter as a time to plan and regroup,”

 

As California burns, many Californians have been asking why the dramatic increase in wildfires in the last five years? Except for Governor Jerry Brown. Governor Brown claims that devastating fires are the “new normal.” Supporting Obama-era regulations have resulted in the new normal: an endless and devastating fire season.

What’s the significance of 2012?

Obama-Era Eco-Terrorism through Environmental Regulations

Under Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, “the Obama administration finalized a rule governing the management of 193 million acres of national forests and grasslands, establishing a new blueprint to guide everything from logging to recreation and renewable energy development,” The Washington Post reported in 2012. “The rule will serve as the guiding document for individual forest plans, which spell out exactly how these lands can be used.”

These Obama-era regulations introduced excessive layers of bureaucracy that blocked proper forest management and increased environmentalist litigation and costs — a result of far too many radical environmentalists, bureaucrats, Leftist politicians and judicial activists who would rather let forests burn than let anyone thin out overgrown trees or let professional loggers harvest usable timber left from beetle infestation, or selectively cut timber.

In a 2016 Townhall column, Paul Driessen explains:

Eco-purists want no cutting, no thinning – no using fire retardants in “sensitive” areas because the chemicals might get into streams that will be boiled away by conflagrations. They prevent homeowners from clearing brush around their homes, because it might provide cover or habitat for endangered species and other critters that will get incinerated or lose their forage, prey and habitats in the next blaze. They rarely alter their policies during drought years.

The resulting fires are not the “forest-rejuvenating” blazes of environmentalist lore. They are cauldron-hot conflagrations that exterminate wildlife habitats, roast bald eagle and spotted owl fledglings alive in their nests, boil away trout and trout streams, leave surviving animals to starve, and incinerate every living organism in already thin soils … that then get washed away during future downpours and snow melts. Areas incinerated by such fires don’t recover their arboreal biodiversity for decades.

Read the full thing over at the  Daily Wire  that covers the works on this terrible practice.

California: Draconian water law – no showering and laundry the same day!

This sounds like living is really going to be cozy in the coming years in California. Since the average use now is about 100 gallons of water per person per day and Jerry is going to reduce it almost in half. It will be interesting to see how all the high rollers deal with this. No doubt just paying the fine, but it sure could get expensive.

California Gov. Jerry Brown has signed a draconian new water-rationing law that limits per capita daily water usage to less than the amount needed to shower and do a load of laundry.

To ensure compliance, the government of California urges the use of creative surveillance systems to spy on all residents. Utility providers will be obligated to report on violators, and urban retail water suppliers “shall use satellite imagery, site visits, or other best available technology to develop an accurate estimate of landscaped areas.”

Assembly Bill 1668 establishes a limit of 55 gallons per person daily as the standard for indoor residential water use, starting in the year 2022. Violators will have to pay a fine of $1,000 per day during normal seasons and $10,000 per day if “the violation occurs in a critically dry year immediately preceded by two or more consecutive below normal, dry, or critically dry years,” the law states.

According to the attentive folks at The Organic Prepper, this allotted water ration exceeds the amount required for taking a shower and doing a single load of laundry and excludes taking baths altogether.

Snip….

Writer Daisy Luther notes that an ordinary load of laundry uses about 40 gallons of water, while an eight-minute shower uses some 17 gallons of water. A bathtub holds 80 to 100 gallons of water. This means combining a shower and laundry on the same day would use 57 gallons of water, two gallons above the limit. H/T and more at  Breitbart and  Organic Prepper

D.C. Court smacks down Trump in attempt to overturn Obama made EPA ‘Rule’

The USA had now turned into nothing less than a country ruled by Progressives courts. Obama made a rule that some bureaucrat, not Congress, made and the D.C. Court in a 9-2 decision does not permit Trump to over turn it. This is just the beginning. The friendly Obama loaded  D.C. Court will strike down more of Trump’s roll backs no doubt. Hopes for Obamacare rule roll backs can be forgotten:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) must enforce a rule regulating methane emissions the Trump administration repealed earlier this year, a federal court ruled Monday night.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia made the ruling after the court decided in July that the EPA unlawfully delayed acting on former President Barack Obama’s methane rule, which sets greenhouse gas emission levels and requires the energy industry to fix leaks.

EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt sought a two-year pause on the rule so the agency could “look broadly” at a host of Obama-era rules. The oil and gas industry opposes the regulation, arguing it’s unnecessary and duplicative of already existing rules. The industry also self-regulates methane leaks.

More at Daily Caller

John Kerry: ‘There would have been no Paris Accord if there had been penalties

We hear the sky is falling now that Trump refuses to redistribute our wealth to the rest of the world via the Paris Accord. But you know the drill. John Kerry, the master negotiator that he is, rises up in his righteous anger yesterday. Let’s just look how his mind worked when we first heard his words of wisdom on the agreement when it was first approved. I am sure “Public Shaming” would have really done the trick in compliance. It’s working great for his Iran deal he negotiated.

“So that is a serious form of enforcement, if you will, compliance. But there is no penalty for it, obviously, but if there had been a penalty, we wouldn’t have been able to get an agreement.”

On December 14, 2015 I posted this and see if you can follow his logic.

Here Kerry opines on two insights on the Global Warming “agreement.”Kerry: Public Shaming is ‘Most Powerful Weapon in Many Ways’ to Enforce World Climate Agreement. The other astute observation?

While discussing the global climate change agreement made in Paris over the weekend, Secretary of State John Kerry acknowledged on Fox News Sunday that there wouldn’t been an agreement at all if there were binding penalties for countries not meeting emissions standards.

President Obama, Kerry said, was determined to “get an agreement that would move the world in the right direction.” As such, Kerry said that the “best thing we can do” to get countries to reduce their carbon emissions was a “mandatory reporting requirement.”

In a bit of circular logic, Kerry said that countries would have to retool their reduction levels every five years to meet their commitments, but he couldn’t say there was anything beyond their own word to force them to so.

“The best thing we can do in an effort to try to change people’s thinking is to do this mandatory reporting requirement,” Kerry said. “The mandatory reporting requirement has to be updated every five years. Every five years, it is mandatory that countries retool their reduction levels in order to meet the demands of meeting the curve of reduction to which they have committed. So that is a serious form of enforcement, if you will, compliance. But there is no penalty for it, obviously, but if there had been a penalty, we wouldn’t have been able to get an agreement.”

Bonus: 

The Dept. of Interior off to a rocky start in cleaning up their piece of the swamp

Here is a disappointing story.Obama added a bee to the endangered specie less than 60 days before he left office. This could have been removed with the 60 day rule but was not. Of concern, was why? The rule was so poorly written that it is ripe for the lawsuits by the environmentalists. Newly minted Secretary of the Interior Ryan Zinke knew how to make an entrance: He arrived at his first day of work in Washington on the back of a horse. He best saddle up and look at the species that inhabit his little piece of the swamp.

…Whatever the reason, Trump’s Interior Department opened a real can of worms when it let the Obama Administration’s last-minute endangered species designation for the rusty patched bumblebee (RPB) take effect March 21 – exactly 60 days after President Trump issued his regulatory Executive Order.

The designation has serious adverse implications for Mr. Trump’s ambitious plans for infrastructure improvements, economic growth, job creation, and reining in regulatory abuse and overreach.

Rusty-Patchd Bumble Bee potential habitat

Already, officials in the Minneapolis area have delayed a road construction project – purportedly near a patch of potential RPB habitat – while they look for signs that the bees are actually nesting there. Another Minnesota group is trying to use hypothetical threats to RPBs to delay construction of a wastewater treatment plant that would prevent pollution from reaching sensitive state waterways!

In issuing the “endangered” designation, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) advised that “The rusty patched bumblebee is likely to be present in scattered locations that cover only 0.1% of the species’ historical range.” Thus, government agencies need only be consulted or issue a permit for developers to “take” (disturb, harm or kill) the bees in these limited areas.

However, 0.1% of the RPB’s historic range is still an area of roughly 6,000 square miles: 3.8 million acres – equivalent to all of Connecticut and Rhode Island combined. And that’s just the beginning.

The real kicker is that no one knows where that 0.1% area might be, scattered in tiny bits and pieces all across the 13 Northeast and Midwest states where the rusty patched bumblebee has supposedly been observed (by amateur entomologists) since 2000. That’s 378 million acres: equal to the combined land area of Montana, North and South Dakota, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Illinois and Indiana!

More at Whats up with that

Trump hogties the EPA, will he stop their illegal human medical experiments?

Now that Trump is drying up much the EPA swamp, is he going to permanently shut down the illegal medical experiments that harken right back to Josef Rudolf Mengele, the so-called angel of death out of Nazi Germany? The left is so quick to paint Trump as this right-wing nut case, but it was Obama’s EPA that would return to human medical experiments. It’s a good thing the U.S Public Health Service called off the infamous Tuskegee syphilis experiments in 1972. Had someone sued to stop the horror, a federal judge like Anthony Trenga might have stopped the suit — not the experiments.

A return to a post I did back in 2013:

A federal judge decided to shut down the lawsuit rather than the government’s human experimentation program.

To Judge Trenga, however, the important thing apparently was to nitpick to death the effort to stop the experiments with a narrow reading of the federal rules of civil procedure.

Judge Trenga determined that the EPA’s decision to endanger the lives of its study subjects, including inducing them to sign a fraudulent consent form, did not constitute a “final agency action” under the Administrative Procedures Act. Judge Trenga also determined, as the American Tradition Institute was not being harmed by the experiments, it didn’t have standing to pursue the case. Now the story:

The suit accuses the EPA of paying as many as 41 participants $12 an hour to breathe in concentrated diesel exhaust, for as long a two hours at a time. The exhaust was directly piped in from a truck parked outside the Chapel Hill facility. According to the lawsuit, the fine particulate matter, called “PM2.5,” was piped in at levels 21 times greater than what the EPA calls its “permissible limit.”

Milloy added some historic perspective to the mix. “In the context of rules established after scientific horrors of World War II and the Tuskegee syphilis experiments, the notion that EPA would pipe high levels of PM2.5 and diesel exhaust into the lungs of unhealthy people to see what would happen is simply appalling,” he said in a press release announcing the lawsuit.

“Unhealthy” is an accurate assessment. The 41 subjects who took part in the experiment included people who were elderly or suffering from asthma, hypertension or metabolic syndrome. One of them, an obese 58-year-old woman with a history of health problems and family history of heart disease, experienced an irregular heartbeat (atrial fibrillation) and had to be hospitalized as a result. Another subject developed an elevated heart rate.

Then again, the study subjects really weren’t “asked” to risk their lives, since the EPA researchers failed — and, in fact, refused — to warn them that PM2.5 could kill them. At the very least, exposing study subjects to a dangerous and deadly toxin without their consent is also known as “assault and battery.”

Given that the EPA long ago determined that any exposure to PM2.5 could cause death (as well as a host of other serious health consequences) within hours or days of inhalation, the experiments are fundamentally illegal. Federal regulations and the Nuremberg Code strictly prohibit scientists from treating human subjects like expendable guinea pigs. In the experiment in question, the study subjects were asked to risk their very lives for $12 per hour.

The American Tradition Institute sued the EPA in October to stop an ongoing experiment in which the agency was exposing elderly study subjects (up to 75 years of age) to concentrated levels of a deadly (according to EPA) air pollutant known as PM2.5 (soot or dust much smaller than the width of a human hair).

The lawsuit claimed the experiments were illegal in that they blatantly violated virtually every major standard developed since World War II for the protection of human study subjects used in scientific experiments.
Given that the EPA long ago determined that any exposure to PM2.5 could cause death (as well as a host of other serious health consequences) within hours or days of inhalation, the experiments are fundamentally illegal. Federal regulations and the Nuremberg Code strictly prohibit scientists from treating human subjects like expendable guinea pigs. In the experiment in question, the study subjects were asked to risk their very lives for $12 per hour.

The EPA engaged in disturbing experimentation that deliberately exposed human beings to airborne particulate matter the agency itself considers lethal. The experiments were conducted at EPA’s Human Studies Facility at the University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill. “That EPA administrator Lisa Jackson permitted this heinous experimentation to occur under her watch shocks the conscience,” said Milloy.

Full story at Front Page Mag and  Washington Times

From an earlier post: Lisa Jackson & EPA conducting illegal human medical experiments  

%d bloggers like this: