- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: US EPA defends carbon capture tech underpinning new power plant rule
Posted on 4/30/24 at 1:34 pm to ragincajun03
Posted on 4/30/24 at 1:34 pm to ragincajun03
quote:
The EPA estimated the rule could cost the industry between $7.5 billion and $19 billion through 2047 to comply.
Apply this amount of money to China or India, and they might actually have breathable air.
0
Posted on 4/30/24 at 1:35 pm to Oilfieldbiology
quote:
Agree to disagree. Their limits on suspended solids, biological oxygen demand, lead, benzene and many other dissolved chemicals have lead to cleaner water ways. Regulations on NOx and SOx and airborne particulates have lead to cleaner air around industrial sites.
However, the political crusade against CO2 is not something they should be attacking in my opinion.
Oh, the EPA should exist and it is definitely needed. It has done good things.
How the EPA is allowed to operate is the issue. Our Legislature should create law and the EPA should be the body that assures said laws are followed.
Posted on 4/30/24 at 1:37 pm to ragincajun03
quote:
EPA
Sould not exist.
And add the Dept. of Ed, Labor, Heath & Human Svc., Energy, IRS, FBI, ATF, NSA, CIA, and Homeland Security to the list of things that should not exist while you’re at it.
Posted on 4/30/24 at 1:38 pm to LegendInMyMind
quote:
How the EPA is allowed to operate is the issue. Our Legislature should create law and the EPA should be the body that assures said laws are followed.
Agree 100%. I have the same thoughts about the LA state legislature pushing everything to a constitutional amendment as opposed to doing their jobs and writing laws.
Posted on 4/30/24 at 1:39 pm to LegendInMyMind
quote:
Oh, the EPA should exist and it is definitely needed. It has done good things. How the EPA is allowed to operate is the issue. Our Legislature should create law and the EPA should be the body that assures said laws are followed.
The EPA sounds good on paper. But history shows that any power we give the federal government will be abused by the federal government. Our Founding Fathers knew this. That’s why they put so many restrictions on the federal government.
Posted on 4/30/24 at 1:44 pm to ragincajun03
First of all this mandate by the EPA is likely illegal and will get overturned in the courts. Laws have to come from congress.
Second, depending the proximity to a CCS reservoir to new power plants the CCS project can be a money maker or money loser. The closer you are to a reservoir the less CCS infrastructure you need to build. Some power plants are just not close to geologic reservoirs and CCS is just not feasible. I hope EPA is taking this into consideration.
Second, depending the proximity to a CCS reservoir to new power plants the CCS project can be a money maker or money loser. The closer you are to a reservoir the less CCS infrastructure you need to build. Some power plants are just not close to geologic reservoirs and CCS is just not feasible. I hope EPA is taking this into consideration.
Posted on 4/30/24 at 1:47 pm to CSinLC
quote:
Build Nukes - Solved
This.
Posted on 4/30/24 at 1:51 pm to Darth_Vader
The laws of physics, chemistry, and economics [101,102] are the only real methods of addressing the CO2 fog. What the EPA does is try to circumvent those basics to get a political purpose. Government credits to force a solution will always fail, because with new information the government will want to change and drop support.
And this is why companies that do major long term stuff, have to be very careful. I would go as far to say no new utility projects because of EPA restrictions and not guaranteed hand outs
And this is why companies that do major long term stuff, have to be very careful. I would go as far to say no new utility projects because of EPA restrictions and not guaranteed hand outs
Posted on 4/30/24 at 1:53 pm to ragincajun03
quote:
The EPA estimated the rule could cost the industry between $7.5 billion and $19 billion through 2047 to comply
Absolutely seems like this would reduce inflation
quote:
But the agency also estimated that the carbon limits will provide up to $370 billion in climate and public health net benefits over the next two decades.
Lololol who comes up with these analyses.
Posted on 4/30/24 at 4:55 pm to imjustafatkid
quote:
Your assumption that the federal government values literally anything, other than control, is flawed.
The EPA basically started because the Cayahouga River in Cleveland caught on fire, and it was really embarrassing, and people decided that enough was enough.
When you say "federal government," is it a core group of people in a smoke-filled room pulling all of the strings?
What does the federal government boogeyman look like in your imagination?
This post was edited on 4/30/24 at 4:57 pm
Posted on 4/30/24 at 5:33 pm to ragincajun03
The irony that the inflation reduction act includes steps to make energy multiples more expensive is not lost on me.
Wake up America!
Wake up America!
This post was edited on 4/30/24 at 5:35 pm
Posted on 4/30/24 at 5:35 pm to NolaLovingClemsonFan
This guy gets it!
Posted on 4/30/24 at 5:40 pm to imjustafatkid
quote:
The EPA shouldn't even exist.
They are making a clear argument for their own abolishment TBH.
Posted on 4/30/24 at 6:53 pm to Violent Hip Swivel
quote:
What does the federal government boogeyman look like in your imagination?
See OP.
Posted on 4/30/24 at 7:55 pm to No Colors
quote:
Biden saying that big corporations will pay this energy tax is the exact same thing as Trump saying China will pay for the tariffs.
Tariffs offer an incentive to onshore manufacturing and jobs. A tax on energy production provides no such positive benefit.
Posted on 4/30/24 at 7:56 pm to RonLaFlamme
Trump's targeted tariffs actually worked.
Posted on 4/30/24 at 8:52 pm to nvasil1
quote:
The damage to the environment caused by solar and wind farms far outweighs their benefits.
Freaking this!
Posted on 4/30/24 at 8:59 pm to GumboPot
Fwiw, it does say the CCS is not a required; it’s just a method for compliance.
Also, I have some doubt this will apply right away to existing power plants. I assume this will be more effective for new builds
Also, I have some doubt this will apply right away to existing power plants. I assume this will be more effective for new builds
Posted on 4/30/24 at 9:15 pm to ragincajun03
I am going to go out on a limb. I might not be a crack pot scientist, but in the years after we go total zero carbon emissions, and we still get hit by a Category 6 hurricane, I am going to call bull excrement on manmade climate change.
Posted on 4/30/24 at 9:52 pm to ragincajun03
The ultimate plan is to remove all fossil fuels from power production and go to renewables. Not only will it enrich China in the process (who is building coal plants like it's going out of style), but it will weaken our own nation and make us dependent on them. If Biden was deliberately trying to enrich China and make the US poor, there is not a more effective method than what the alphabet agencies under him are doing.
America needs exponentially more baseload power generation (natural gas, coal, nuclear, or hydro). There are some other technologies on the horizon like geothermal but it is far from scalable. And the industrial power storage with batteries has the same issue as wind and solar - low energy density. So we will spend billions of dollars cutting down hundreds of thousands of acres of trees to build intermittent, weather-dependent power generation that is reliant on material and processing from China.
The real battle on the horizon will be between tech bros and the climate change lobby. The amount of power that will be needed for data centers and artificial intelligence is orders of magnitude more than what our aging grid currently supplies. So they will build out their own on-site generation, likely in the form of combined cycle natural gas since permitting and construction of nuclear takes decades. I think small modular reactors (SMRs) are the future and are very promising but we are a long way off from NERC approving anything.
Reality is coming at us fast. Expect plenty of brownouts and crises in the future for areas heavily investing in renewable power. California and Germany are the poster children - if the climate really is changing, let's make our power generation dependent on it.
America needs exponentially more baseload power generation (natural gas, coal, nuclear, or hydro). There are some other technologies on the horizon like geothermal but it is far from scalable. And the industrial power storage with batteries has the same issue as wind and solar - low energy density. So we will spend billions of dollars cutting down hundreds of thousands of acres of trees to build intermittent, weather-dependent power generation that is reliant on material and processing from China.
The real battle on the horizon will be between tech bros and the climate change lobby. The amount of power that will be needed for data centers and artificial intelligence is orders of magnitude more than what our aging grid currently supplies. So they will build out their own on-site generation, likely in the form of combined cycle natural gas since permitting and construction of nuclear takes decades. I think small modular reactors (SMRs) are the future and are very promising but we are a long way off from NERC approving anything.
Reality is coming at us fast. Expect plenty of brownouts and crises in the future for areas heavily investing in renewable power. California and Germany are the poster children - if the climate really is changing, let's make our power generation dependent on it.
Page 2 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News