In case you haven't yet heard the news, the Obama administration has recently unveiled its climate change regulations, which will apply to new and existing power plants. But while the higher-ups are patting their backs for taking this "important" step towards combating climate change, the rest of us are left scratching our heads. After all, for such a grand scheme, the regulations set forth won't do much to impact global temperatures. Climatologists state that we can expect to see a change of less than two hundredths of a degree (Celsius) by the year 2100, negligible by any standard.
But while they won't do much to lower the Earth's temperature, surely enterprises, smaller businesses, and even consumers should see some benefit from these regulations, right? Unfortunately, no. In fact, the opposite is true, with experts predicting that energy bills will become higher while lost income and fewer jobs give way to a weaker economy. How can this be? Read on to learn more about what restrictions the regulations impose and how they impact our nation as a whole.
The main focus of Obama's energy restrictions policy is on reducing carbon dioxide emissions produced by coal-fired power plants. Existing power plants are being forced to reduce emissions to 32 percent below 2005 levels (on average) by 2030. New power plants, on the other hand, will have to adhere to carbon dioxide regulations set forth by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and install carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) technology. Because coal is responsible for providing nearly 40 percent of America's electricity, the plan initially seems like a great way to reduce the impact of our global footprint. In practice, though, many are beginning to feel that this is a "war on coal" which could significantly impact the everyday consumer, which would eventually "trickle up" to enterprise.
The new restrictions could actually be the beginning of the end of new coal-fired power plants due to the fact that there is no credible basis in existence to claim that CSS is sufficiently demonstrated today. CSS creates issues with technical scalability, the liabilities of storing the captured carbon dioxide for the long-term, and of course, excessive costs. These problems are especially important to consider once you realize that CSS does not yield any environmental benefits. The costs that will be imposed on both new and existing power plants to meet Obama's restrictions will halt the growth of the coal-fired power industry while raising operational expenses. The end result will be financial hardship placed on the average American.
Americans will feel the pain of increasing energy costs both through their direct energy consumption as well as through the purchase of goods and services that rely on energy throughout the production or service process. The cumulative economic impact of raising energy prices will result in hundreds of jobs being lost and a loss in economic growth of more than $2.5 trillion. No matter which way you slice it, the regulation hurts more than it helps and should be fought and shut down as quickly as possible.
A Better Way
Most people are of the mindset that our federal government should not move to endorse or restrict any type of energy source or technology. Instead, the government should be focused on enforcing policies that would generate innovative ideas for stimulating the economy while offering competitive prices. You don't have to hold your breath for this to happen in order to start saving money, though. Work with a team of partners aligned to meet your energy consumption goals.
Contact us today to learn more about our Energy Sourcing services and how we keep costs managed, no matter what.