how the technology works

156,000 jobs open need workers!!!!

Everything from truckers to school teachers. Created by the oil and gass energy inspite of the obama administration.

Answer to; Why the "rich" are calling for more taxes on themselves in support of the OBAMA agenda.

this is one of the best explinations on why the ultra rich that we see calling for communism/socialism/"make me pay more takes" ect that we see on tv news or pushing the presidents adjenda. It just put it together for me. I have had this question in my head for a long time; Why would they advocate for pulling the whole system down? Can they not see that it will hurt them and their family? http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/10/marxism_versus_the_middle_class.html

OBAMA's INSANITY using the EPA to force the closure of over 50 electric power plants (28 GW) in a recession with absolutely no replacement power.

With the country in a goverment caused prolonged recession and it's future at stake OBAMA throug the EPA is attempting to force it's collapse. Hurting the very "poor people" he claims to want to protect by forcing their energy costs to skyrocket for absolutely no other logical reason than his agenda. Take a look at what this will do to Chicago Obama's home town. How can he not see the problembs this will cause. Their electrical grid is already unstable. They need more power plants not less. Where is California"s power going to come from now : they buy their summer power from the grid. Which is why they have such high power bills.

Do you remember the 2003 power outage that cascaded from OHIO to CANADA? It was started due to the shutdown of a power plant in OHIO. It went off line due to a fault as per normal procedure. However the electric grid was at max load. That ment now there were not enough power plants to support the electric grid load and one by one each plant tripped off line on overcurrent as they tried to hold the load on the grid. Each time a plant went off line the process sped up the tripping off of others as the load becomes greater with less powerplants holding it up. Think of people holding a large box which weighs more than any of them can hold alone. Then take away one guy and see how long the box stays in the air as one by one people cant hold the load any more.

From Wikapeadia
The Northeast blackout of 2003 was a widespread power outage that occurred throughout parts of the Northeastern and Midwestern United States and Ontario, Canada on Thursday, August 14, 2003, just before 4:10 p.m. EDT (UTC−04).[1] At the time, it was the second most widespread blackout in history, after the 1999 Southern Brazil blackout.[2][3] The blackout affected an estimated 10 million people in Ontario and 45 million people in eight U.S. states.

"Findings;
In February 2004, the U.S.-Canada Power System Outage Task Force released their final report, placing the causes of the blackout into four groups:[11]
First, that FirstEnergy and its reliability council "failed to assess and understand the inadequacies of FE’s system, particularly with respect to voltage instability and the vulnerability of the Cleveland-Akron area, and FE did not operate its system with appropriate voltage criteria".
Second, that FirstEnergy "did not recognize or understand the deteriorating condition of its system".
Third, that FirstEnergy "failed to manage adequately tree growth in its transmission rights-of-way".
Finally, the "failure of the interconnected grid’s reliability organizations to provide effective real-time diagnostic support."
The report states that a generating plant in Eastlake, Ohio (a suburb of Cleveland) went offline amid high electrical demand, putting a strain on high-voltage power lines (located in a distant rural setting) which later went out of service when they came in contact with "overgrown trees". The cascading effect that resulted ultimately forced the shutdown of more than 100 power plants.
A preliminary report says four or five capacitor banks in the Cleveland-Akron area were removed from service for government inspection, including capacitor banks at Fox and Avon 138-kV substations. These reactive power sources are important for voltage support, but were not restored to service that afternoon despite the system operators’ need for more reactive power compensation. The normal practice is to inspect in off-peak seasons, but government officials demanded the inspection when inspectors were available. The final report does not mention this government demand. The lack of reactive power compensation caused the protective relay trip that brought the system down. The same thing also caused the 1965 blackout.
This trip caused overloading of other transmission lines, tripping their relays. Once these multiple trips occurred, multiple generators suddenly lost parts of their loads, so they accelerated out of phase with the grid at different rates, and tripped out to prevent damage."
"IER Identifies Coal Fired Power Plants Likely to Close as Result of EPA Regulations"
Coal
Posted October 7, 2011 |

“So if somebody wants to build a coal-fired plant they can. It’s just that it will bankrupt them…”

– Barack Obama speaking to San Francisco Chronicle, January 2008



EPAs 28 Giga-Watt (GW) Assault on Coal

The United States has the world’s largest coal resources. In fact we have 50 percent more coal than Russia, the country with the next largest reserves. But coal use in the United States is under assault.

Before becoming President, Barak Obama promised to bankrupt coal companies. As President, he has tried various strategies to force Americans to use less coal. After failing to pass a national energy tax (cap-and-trade), the President vowed to continue his attack on coal stating, there is “more than one way to skin a cat.”

Currently, EPA is leading the Obama administration’s assault on coal with a number of new regulations. Two of the most important are the “transport rule” and the “toxics rule” (Utility MACT). Combined, these regulations will systematically reduce access to affordable and reliable energy. According to our report:

EPA Regulations Will Close At Least 28 GW of Generating Capacity
EPA modeling and power-plant operator announcements show that EPA regulations will close at least 28 gigawatts (GW) of American generating capacity, the equivalent of closing every power plant in the state of North Carolina or Indiana. Also, 28 GW is 8.9 percent of our total coal generating capacity.

Current Retirements Almost Twice As High As EPA Predicted
EPA’s power plant-level modeling projected that Agency regulations would close 14.5 GW of generating capacity. That number rises to 28 GW when including additional announced retirements related to EPA rules, almost twice the amount EPA projected. Moreover, this number will grow as plant operators continue to release their EPA compliance plans.

Announced and Projected Retirements Higher Than Worst Case Scenarios
Analysis by the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC), the entity in charge of grid reliability, projected that EPA’s Transport Rule and Toxics Rule would close 20 GW of generating capacity. This list indicates that at least 28 GW will retire. EPA’s Transport Rule and Toxics Rule push U.S. energy security past the NERC worst case scenario.

EPA’s New Regulations Will Hit States Trying To Get Back On Their Feet
Current announcements and EPA projections indicate that EPA regulations have a dramatic impact on states reeling from economic hardship.

Ohio: 2,894 MW retired, 8.6% of state total generating capacity.
West Virginia: 2,448 MW retired, 14% of state total generating capacity.
Indiana: 2,168 MW retired, 7.5% of state total generating capacity.
Tennessee: 1,376 MW retired, 6.2% of state total generating capacity.
Missouri: 1,325 MW retired, 6.3% of state total generating capacity.
Wisconsin: 902 MW retired, 5% of state total generating capacity.
You can download the excel document by clicking here:

We have enough energy

All the world wants a good paying job so why is the current administration against the American energy which could more than provide them. First Thorium Reactors. We have more than enough fuel to power the world here in the USA. A technology discovered and proved reliable and effecient in the 50's, but Thorium reactors do not make nuclear weapons, so we did not build it as we "the government" needed nuclear weapons to compete with the Russians. Her is a presentation from a guy at NASA who stumbled on the now almost forgotten technology. (by the public at large).

From "theblaze.com" Harold Hamm is more than a little disappointed in President Obama.

The founder and CEO of Continental Resources—the 14th-largest U.S. oil company—had a few minutes of exclusive face time with the president at the White House recently, where he told Obama that America had enough oil within its borders to “replace OPEC.”

Obama was unmoved.


Gregory Bull/AP
“Oil and gas will be important for the next few years,” Hamm recalls the president telling him. “But we need to go on to green and alternative energy. [Energy] Secretary [Steven] Chu has assured me that within five years, we can have a battery developed that will make a car with the equivalent of 130 miles per gallon.”

“Even if you believed that, why would you want to stop oil and gas development?” Hamm asks in a Wall Street Journal interview. “It was pretty disappointing…President Obama is riding the wrong horse on energy.” Hamm adds that the U.S. could be “completely energy independent by the end of the decade. We can be the Saudi Arabia of oil and natural gas in the 21st century.”

But the gatekeepers are keeping those gates shut.

“This shouldn’t happen in America,” Hamm told the WSJ.

By all rights, the feds should be falling at Hamm’s feet. He discovered the Bakken oil fields of Montana and North Dakota that have pushed the U.S. into third place among world oil producers and could yield, Hamm says, 24 billion barrels:

If he’s right, that’ll double America’s proven oil reserves. “Bakken is almost twice as big as the oil reserve in Prudhoe Bay, Alaska,” he continues. According to Department of Energy data, North Dakota is on pace to surpass California in oil production in the next few years. Mr. Hamm explains over lunch in Washington, D.C., that the more his company drills, the more oil it finds. Continental Resources has seen its “proved reserves” of oil and natural gas (mostly in North Dakota) skyrocket to 421 million barrels this summer from 118 million barrels in 2006.
“We expect our reserves and production to triple over the next five years.” And for those who think this oil find is only making Mr. Hamm rich, he notes that today in America “there are 10 million royalty owners across the country” who receive payments for the oil drilled on their land. “The wealth is being widely shared.”
Speaking of North Dakota, Hamm and many other forward-looking businesspeople have been singing the state’s economic praises for quite some time. Hamm told the WSJ that the Obama administration should study North Dakota, which boasts America’s lowest unemployment rate at 3.5%, if it wants to get the U.S. out of its fiscal quagmire:

“We can’t find any unemployed people up there. The state has 18,000 unfilled jobs,” Mr. Hamm insists. “And these are jobs that pay $60,000 to $80,000 a year.” The economy is expanding so fast that North Dakota has a housing shortage.
HERE IS THE KICKER EVEN AFTER OBAMA WAS TOLD THIS : "if D.C. allowed more drilling permits for oil and natural gas on federal lands and federal waters, “I truly believe the federal government could over time raise $18 trillion in royalties”—which is more than the U.S. national debt."

THIS ARTICLE IS A MUST READ.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204226204576602524023932438.html

This more evidence on the OBAMA administration's deliberate attack on the energy producing industries in this country. Knowing that the energy industry can get us OUT OF DEBT nationally, and put us back at full employment with high paying jobs, why would the president and his supporters chose otherwise? Everybody wants a high paying job. Producing our own energy would do that, and keep the money circulating in the USA instead of going to foreign countries which dramically increases federal tax dollars. With this in mind I do not understand how any one would chose the opposite. In fact to attack them on purpose just leads us to where we are going: bankrupting the USA. Billions of income dollars lost due to lost drilling in the gulf and denied/delayed drilling permits, the federal goverment dragging approval of new nuclear reactors ect (ref "project no project") combined with new excessive spending (QE1, QE2, green energy doomed to start projects like solendra, ect.)