- This topic has 6 replies, 5 voices, and was last updated 16 years ago by .
-
Posts
-
Imagine if John McCain had whispered somewhere that he was willing to bankrupt a major industry? Would this declaration not immediately be front page news? Well, Barack Obama actually flat out told the San Francisco Chronicle (SF Gate) that he was willing to see the coal industry go bankrupt in a January 17, 2008 interview. The result? Nothing. This audio interview has been hidden from the public…until now. Here is the transcript of Obama’s statement about bankrupting the coal industry (emphasis mine):
Let me sort of describe my overall policy.
What I’ve said is that we would put a cap and trade system in place that is as aggressive, if not more aggressive, than anybody else’s out there.
I was the first to call for a 100% auction on the cap and trade system, which means that every unit of carbon or greenhouse gases emitted would be charged to the polluter. That will create a market in which whatever technologies are out there that are being presented, whatever power plants that are being built, that they would have to meet the rigors of that market and the ratcheted down caps that are being placed, imposed every year.
So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can; it’s just that it will bankrupt them because they’re going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that’s being emitted.
That will also generate billions of dollars that we can invest in solar, wind, biodiesel and other alternative energy approaches.
The only thing I’ve said with respect to coal, I haven’t been some coal booster. What I have said is that for us to take coal off the table as a (sic) ideological matter as opposed to saying if technology allows us to use coal in a clean way, we should pursue it.
So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can.
It’s just that it will bankrupt them.
Amazing that this statement by Obama about bankrupting the coal industry has been kept under wraps until this time.
UPDATE: NewsBusters’ Tom Blumer has found out that the San Francisco Chronicle story published on January 18 based upon this January 17 interview did not include any mention of Obama’s willingness to bankrupt the coal industry which you can hear on the audio. You can read the story here when you scroll down to the “In His Own Words” section. Way to cover up for The One, SF Chronicle!
Coal is in trouble no matter who gets elected.
McCain said he would “transition away from coal entirely.” But GMAB is right; if we are at all concerned about protecting the beautiful environment that Hashem gave us, we would do better to invest our money in solar, wind, and other “green” energy sources.
Actually, I find it way more frightening that the LA Times refuses to release a video of Obama attending and speaking at a dinner honoring the well-known Palestinian terrorist-academic Rasheed Khalidi, where many anti-semitic diatribes were yelled from the podium by various other Palestinian sympathizing academics with ties to Hamas, Hezbollah, and the PLO. McCain is demanding that this tape be released, but of course, the LA Times is fully aware of the damage that this would cause Obama, so rather than inform the public, as is their supposed duty, they continue to hoodwink and misinform in order to manipulate a major election.
He wouldnt bankrupt the coal industry – he would just restrict its growth. There are plenty of coal plants out there right now and they would continue to use the product. Older plants are also grandfathered in for environmental purposes. You only have to meet the standards that were put out at the time you built the plant or if you increase the capacity of the plant.
Coal is a major pollutant; many parents worry about mercury in vaccines, but the fact is that all of us breath in much more mercury due to pollution from coal plants. And of course this mercury is present in the earth and water too, and throughout the food chain. This has a much bigger impact, at least in the short term, than carbon dioxide.
That said, 50% of our energy is generated from coal, so there’s no way to just get rid of it now. I agree that solar & wind energy are great “green” sources, but right now only about 1% of our electricity energy comes from wind & much less than that comes directly from the sun. Wind & solar cannot be generated everywhere, and neither is available all the time, so they cannot provide most of our electricity.
Personally I think the answer in the medium term is more nuclear power plants. Currently 20% of our energy comes from nuclear, which produces no pollutants (except waste heat) and no greenhouse gases. Both candidates want to build more nuclear plants; Obama just wants to resolve waste disposal issues first, especially the status of the Yucca Mountain disposal site.
SJSinNYC, also note that the Bush administration loosened the definition of what consitutes a significant improvement requiring upgrades in scrubbers & other pollutant controls.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.