Skip to content

President Obama’s CO2 Plan Hurts Americans

August 11, 2015

The University of New Hampshire may request an apology from me for using the politically incorrect word “American.”

Perhaps I should say Comrade, but I’m hopeful we haven’t reached that point yet.

The new final Clean Power Plan, issued by the EPA, requiring the cutting of CO2 emissions, relies heavily on Americans reducing their use of electricity: Supposedly, by improving energy efficiency.

Supporters of the Clean Power Plan say,

“Increased energy efficiency and falling costs for renewable generation would allow consumers to cut their bills.”

At best, this is grossly misleading. At worst it’s a blatant falsehood.

Pinocchio. Photo by D. Dears

Pinocchio. Photo by D. Dears

Renewables currently cost two to four times more than electricity generated from natural gas. Even if the cost of renewables are dramatically reduced, renewables will still increase the cost of electricity as a result of the new Clean Power Plan.

Proof that renewables will increase the cost of electricity is found in data published by the Energy Information Administration (EIA).

The EIA is biased toward wind and solar, yet their Leveled Cost of Electricity (LCOE) estimates for 2019, four years from now, are:

  • Natural Gas Combined Cycle 6 cents/kWh
  • Wind, onshore 8 cents/kWh
  • Wind, offshore 20 cents/kWh
  • PV solar 13 cents/kWh
  • Concentrating solar 24 cents/kWh

Currently, wind and solar cost much more than these future estimated costs, so the EIA data reflects major cost reductions for wind and solar over the next four years.

But even with these cost reductions, the cost of wind and solar generated electricity remains higher than electricity generated using natural gas.

The administration repeatedly claims that renewables are becoming less costly, and some people claim they are reaching grid parity. The EIA data proves these claims to be bogus.

Every claim such as these is misleading, if not completely false.

The new Clean Power Plan will increase the cost of electricity, not reduce it.

The idea that Americans can reduce their total bill for electricity by reducing their usage of electricity through improved energy efficiency is also grossly misleading.

There are very few applications in the typical American home that could be cut significantly as the result of improved energy efficiency. Without these cuts, monthly electricity bills of Americans will increase.

There are essentially only two items that can improve efficiency while lowering costs: They are automatic thermostats and LED lighting.

Thermostats can result in more efficient use of air-conditioning and heating by maintaining temperatures closer to desired levels, especially when the home isn’t occupied.

The initial cost of LED lighting is higher than for incandescent bulbs, but savings can offset the initial cost if lamps are used more than 4 hours each day. Replacing any incandescent bulb used less than 1 hour per day with an LED lamp would be a bad investment and increase homeowners’ out-of-pocket costs.

Virtually, all other proposals for economically improving energy efficiency are bogus, or are really attempts to force people to use less electricity.

For example, doing the dishes or laundry at nighttime may reduce the evening peak, but doesn’t save electricity. Replacing furnaces and refrigerators can improve efficiency, but the cost of the new furnace or refrigerator won’t be recovered by savings from using less electricity, so the total out-of-pocket cost for American homeowners is greater.

Hanging the clothes outside to dry saves electricity, but has nothing do with improving efficiency.

The new Clean Power Plan (CPP) increases costs further by requiring greater use of renewables, wind and solar, rather than allowing natural gas to replace coal for power generation. More renewables means more costly electricity.

There is little, if anything, about Obama’s CPP that will reduce the cost of electricity.

It’s an indisputable fact that the CPP will increase what Americans pay for electricity.

The next article will explain why the CPP is a disaster for the average American, why electricity will cost much, much more, and why it circumvents Congress, the representatives of all Americans, and undermines the American form of representative government.

* * * * * *

NOTE:

It’s easy to subscribe to articles by Donn Dears.

Go to the photo on the right side of the article where it says email subscription. Click and enter your email address. You can unsubscribe at any time.

If you know people who would be interested in these articles please send them a link to the article and suggest they also subscribe.

© Power For USA, 2010 – 2015. Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from this blog’s author, Donn Dears LLC, is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Power For USA with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.

Advertisements
7 Comments leave one →
  1. Bryan Leyland permalink
    August 11, 2015 11:35 pm

    Dear Don,

    You could also mentioned that wins at eight cents/kWh does not provide power when it is needed. So the system is to spend more money providing backup. This adds to the cost of wind.

    Have you ever wondered why our crazy electricity market pays the same price to someone who generates power when it is needed and to someone who generates power randomly and, often, at times when it’s not needed?

    We do live in a crazy world.

    Kind regards,

    Bryan Leyland

    Phone +64 9 940 7047 Mobile +64 21 978 996 bryanleyland@mac.com http://www.bryanleyland.co.nz

    >

    • August 12, 2015 9:40 am

      Bryan:
      It’s crazy, as you say, that reliability doesn’t get a premium price or that wind and solar, both unreliable, aren’t paid less.

  2. Richard Berryman, P.G. permalink
    August 12, 2015 7:51 am

    I grew up in Oklahoma and Texas during the hot temperature days in the 1930’s and 1940’s
    with no air conditioning. Why do the environmental whackos want us to return to those days ? Will Rogers is still correct today when he said, “some men learn by reading, some
    by observation, the rest have to pee on the electric fence.” The latter group being our dumb
    environmentalists.

    • August 12, 2015 9:26 am

      Will Rogers was right. He also said ignorance is knowing what’s not true, which fits extreme environmentalists perfectly.

  3. catcracking permalink
    August 12, 2015 4:24 pm

    Has any claim by the Administration on any subject turned out to be true or accurate?
    My years of experience has taught me to look at the track record of the individual to evaluate the veracity of any thing they say.
    Look at what the Navy is paying for fuel!!
    http://freebeacon.com/issues/obama-clinton-foundation-donors-sold-green-fuel-to-military-for-149-per-gallon/

    • August 12, 2015 5:21 pm

      I agree. An individuals or organizations track record usually says it all. And the elites, in this case the Clintons, profit.

Trackbacks

  1. Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup #192 | Watts Up With That?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s