Agenda for Paul Ryan: Eliminate Carbon Reduction Scheme

The EPA gratuitously determined that CO2--which you exhale and which all plants inhale--is some sort of poison when found in the atmosphere. The decision was a pure power-grab, not authorized by Congress. Evidently the EPA has far too much money at its disposal.

That'll cost you, big-time.

A dramatic reduction in the carbon dioxide emitted by power plants in Wisconsin, where about two thirds of power comes from coal plants, would likely carry a price tag numbering in the billions of dollars, according to a new state assessment. The reduction would hinge on “carbon sequestering” –scrubbing the gas, often blamed for global warming, from emissions and storing it underground. Although the process would be a dramatic undertaking for electric utilities in the state, it could be prompted by new federal restriction on carbon emissions now being developed.

The only "good" news is that the Doylet Administration wants to pump the carbon to Illinois, a payback for Illinois' importation of carp into Lake Michigan. Or something like that.

And THAT would cost money, too:

The Wisconsin panel found the state lacks in suitable geologic formations and would need to build the pipelines at an estimated construction cost of $2.93 billion with yearly maintenance costs exceeding $100 million.

That little old lady ("typical customer") that WE invents? You know, the one who has one 60-watt lightbulb, no air conditioning, and no electronics, who pays only $70.00/month for electricity?

She'll have to turn off the lightbulb.

Paul Ryan should be trimming EPA budgets hard. Not some namby-pamby "freeze," Paul. A 20% reduction would seem like the hint EPA needs.