Saying that science had put to rest the question about whether the planet was warming, Obama vowed to use his executive powers to act, arguing that limiting emissions would spur technological advancement and new jobs.
“I don’t have much patience for anyone that denies that this challenge is real,” Obama said in the speech at Georgetown University. “Sticking your head in the sand might make you feel safer but it’s not going to protect you from the coming storm.” The centerpiece of the president’s plans, which require no congressional input, are the first-ever limits on carbon emissions from all power plants....There are about 6,597 power plants in the U.S., 589 of which are coal-fired, according to the Energy Information Administration. Last year, coal plants accounted for 38 percent of electricity produced in the U.S., followed by natural gas and nuclear power which produced 29 percent and 20 percent, respectively.
Actual reductions under Obama’s plan are unlikely to begin until 2018,....
The president’s plan also includes $8 billion in new loan guarantees for carbon-capture projects, as well as proposals to promote renewable energy development on federal lands, the construction of more climate-resilient infrastructure, and energy-efficiency standards for appliances and federal government buildings. ....
As the administration rolled out pieces of the plan, the proposals reignited battles with industry groups and Republicans. ...
The president’s plan is helped by a recent change in the government’s calculation of the social cost of carbon emissions, a measure that’s used to determine the costs and benefits of climate rules. The U.S. government now assumes it is worth about $36 per ton to avoid emitting carbon, an increase from the $22 per ton price previously used.
The president pledged more than three years ago to cut U.S. carbon-dioxide emissions 17 percent below 2005 levels by the end of the decade. An administration-backed effort to pass a market-based system to price carbon dioxide failed in the Senate during Obama’s first term, after the White House prioritized votes on the health care law.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-06-25/...ower-plant-emissions.html
Da hat Jacob Pedersen von der Sydbank ja nicht ganz unrecht,solche Aussagen haben wir schon früher gehört und es ist nichts draus geworden und man weiss nicht,wie das realisiert werden soll.Der nächste President wird das wieder umschmeissen.Es sei allerdings so ,dass es schlimmer für die Windindustrie nicht mehr kommen könne . Es habe immer wieder gute Absichten gegeben und nichts sei passiert.Es durch den Kongress zu kriegen sei fast nicht möglich,deswegen muss er von seinen Befugnissen als Präsident Gebrauch machen.Das Risiko,dass eine nächste Regierung unter den Republikanern es wieder zurückfährt, sei unübersehbar.Die Branche riskiere eine Stop-and- Go-Politik,das kann teuer werden ,weil aufgebaute Kapazitäten nicht ausgenutzt richtig kosten.Jakob Pedersen erwähnt auch,dass 6 der 30 Staaten in USA bereits zurückgerudert sind bei Windenergie
http://energiwatch.dk/Energinyt/Politik___Markeder/article5667571.ece |
Thread abonnieren
