http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MGM2NGJhMmIwODVlMzc2N2ZiMzAzMzZlNDEzYTQy

Monday, March 02, 2009

“Electricity Rates Would Necessarily Skyrocket” [Yuval Levin]

If anyone has any doubt that a cap and trade system will raise the cost of electricity for American consumers, here is a video of Barack Obama (from a conversation with San Francisco Chronicle editors in January of 2008) clearing it up:

"Under my plan of a cap and trade system electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket, even, you know, regardless of what I say about whether coal is good or bad, because I'm capping greenhouse gases, coal powered plants, you know, natural gas, you name it, whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, they would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money. They will pass that money on to consumers."

*********************

Comments made in Jan 2008 by Obama


video here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ydqg7ThZB04

Oh my!

McCain Pushes 'Cap-And-Trade' Plan to Fight Global Warming

By Dan Gainor

Business & Media Institute
3/19/2008 1:40:08 PM

GOP presidential nominee John McCain is using the idea of global togetherness to promote “a cap-and-trade system” to battle climate change. He said “Americans and Europeans need to get serious about substantially reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the coming years or we will hand over a much-diminished world to our grandchildren.”

According to the Arizona senator, whose opinion column appeared in the March 19 Financial Times, the United States needs to work with Europe to create a replacement for the Kyoto treaty.

We need a successor to Kyoto, a cap-and-trade system that delivers the necessary environmental impact in an economically responsible manner.” He said America needs to be willing to be “persuaded” by our European allies. McCain’s column was headlined “America must be a good role model.”

However, he never addressed the potential costs of his proposal.

http://www.grist.org/article/2009-04-22-mccain-slams-obama-on-climate/

McCain flip flopped? My point is, doesn't matter who got elected, we were going to see change either way. It's damned if we do and damned if we don't....depends on who you believe. I'm just waiting for the world to end in 2012 and end the debate.

The part that made me chuckle is that this is the first time the Obama administration has admitted any tax on the higher-ups is passed on directly to consumers - like anyone with the slightest of economics or business knowledge can comprehend. Like there's a difference between a tax on energy suppliers and a tax on income...


The cap and trade is, in fact, genius for those that hold extremely environmentally-conscious views.

you see, by selling credits and fining those that violate limits, you increase tax revenues. However, the results are two-fold. By taxing the providers in this manner, you increase costs that are directly passed on to the people. Simple supply and demand analysis shows that as price increases, quantity demanded falls, and therefore, less energy is used.I personally feel that this is the core goal of cap and trade, not better emissions from energy suppliers.

I personally think we are all being manipulated. We have had the technology to power homes with alternative sources. I remember many many years ago, Johnson Controls developed hydrogen fuel cells that were intended to power individual residential homes. This would take you completely off the grid and would leave utility companies scrambling for customers. What ever happened to that? All you ever hear about is they are trying to make them smaller to power cars. But, we already had them, although bigger, that would power homes.

I tried to find a link on the web but it appears the military has secured the website. (navy)

There is much out there that we are not being told.

economics, my friend. simple cost vs benefit analysis. Do you realize the cost of a hydrogen fuel cell that can power an entire home? it is easily over the average value of a home even 3 years ago. They are far from cheap. There is a large difference from using hydrogen as fuel (cheaper) and creating hydrogen from a water molecule (not so cheap). Not to mention the environmental changes from all that water vapor output.

I disagree about the costs. I see Japan is moving forward with a program on powering homes this way under an experimental program. They lease it to you for $9,500 for 10 year lease. I also see a home builder in Montana is trying it out as well on houses he is building in a development. Adds $40,000 to the cost of a home.

MCain has not fip flopped.

McCain, coauthor of multiple cap-and-trade bills in the past, addressed an energy symposium sponsored by the Reform Institute on Tuesday. In his remarks, he called for bipartisanship on climate and energy policy—but offered scathing criticism of the Obama administration’s plans, calling them “irresponsible, ill-conceived.”

“What the Obama administration has proposed is not cap-and-trade,” he continued. “It’s cap-and-tax.”

“The president’s proposal of auctioning 100 percent of the carbon credits is bad economic policy that would cost businesses billions of dollars and allow for little or no transition into a low-carbon system,” said McCain. “Let me be clear. I am a supporter of a strong cap-and-trade system, but I will not and cannot align myself with a giant government slush fund that will further burden our businesses and consumers.” McCain said he favored “a limited number of credits” being auctioned off to help fund a cap-and-trade program, but he argued that the vast majority should be distributed to emitters free of charge.

***************

Remember when there were some in Congress that wanted to freeze government spending. Sure wish that idea had of caught on way back when. McCain wants to cap emissions at current levels and provide incentives to those that reduce emissions below these levels.

Geez, he even has a way to pay for his program.

Big Difference - Obama wants utilities (consumers in the end) to pay for emissions that they currently aren't paying anything for.

I guess it's time to do our own gettin' off the grid with installing our own wind and/or solar systems.

The consumer/citizen pays for the fact that we must use electricity in the form that it is provided to us in to be able to function in society?

Hmmmm...

Are they going to make us pay extra for every carbon monoxide molecule that comes from our car exhaust as well?

Wow...

Waste will go down... I guess?

EXACTLY!! That was the point I was trying to make! F all this cap and trade. F the utility companies! F the smart grid! Every home should have it's own power source!

Get OFF the grid!

That's the direction we should be going.

What would you wanna' bet, if folks started providing their own juice, BHO and his crew would want to make using natural resources illegal or tax the heII out of doing it.

Do you believe, he still has supporters willing to follow him into the gates?

I disagree, they won't tax alternatives...if I see anything, I see incentives to convert!

My Ex (yea, she got the house) the solar water heater was going out...tank leaks. She asked me to research. I found a new 85 gallon solar tank but it cost $1,000. Then I called some solar installers and they came out and put a complete new system in...tank, collector, pump and controls,...complete for $1,000...all new!

The reason it was so cheap were the government tax incentives and rebates. It would have cost $4,500 geetas!!

I'm thinking about going solar on my new place...there are even incentives now for photovoltaics but the payback is still way out there. I think if enough people install, the price will come down. Just like LCD TV's.

Aloha

I quoted prices off what I was told. you are correct in me being wrong, however, you are missing many other costs in your numbers as well...

You also have to feed the beast hydrogen. a 3kwh cell costs around $15k. That will run on a kilo of hydrogen for 5 hours. the average household consumes 25 kwh per day, meaning you need 1.6 kg hydrogen per day (if i understand how kwh works correctly) at currently around $5 a kilo. that is far from more efficient.

again, being green is a good idea at heart, but there's a reason the technologies are still in the shadows, they are simply not going to return better benefits for more cost.