ShareThis Page

EPA choking supply

| Wednesday, March 26, 2014, 9:01 p.m.

News coverage about electric bills that tripled has not asked what caused the spot price to rise so dramatically. Most stories assume a lack of price regulation.

Cold weather increasing demand and a shortage of supply caused the price to rise. Our supply of electricity is diminishing because our federal regulators are shutting down coal-fired generators — not because they are dirty, but because they make too much carbon dioxide.

High energy prices are a result of insane regulations that limit supply, not of regulators being unable to regulate the price.

Carbon dioxide is a trace gas essential for the circle of life on Earth. Mother Nature makes 95 percent of greenhouse gas, mostly by ocean vapor.

Current CO2 at 400 parts per million could climb to 500 ppm and we would increase plant yield and lower water demands naturally. More CO2 means higher plant yield with less water.

The Chinese know this and have no intentions of limiting plant food. Why should we?

Imagine a world where man-made plant food was no longer considered pollution and climate change was a function of solar cycles and not politics. Limiting man-made CO2 is a spectacular hoax that limits life, liberty and our power choices.

EPA rules limiting CO2 are federal tyranny and will lead to power shortages and much higher prices for everything. When our highly educated liberal friends accept that they have been had on CO2 and the circle of life, they may ask what else they were lied to about.

Daniel Fritch

Evans City

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.