WolfeNotes.com

Massive Loophole Explicitly Allows New Fossil Power Plants To Be Built

Existing Fossil Power And Fossil Imports Can Continue Operating Forever

The Bill Will Not Reduce ANY Greenhouse Gas Emissions

“You will never hear the Chemistry Council saying anything bad about the DEP. ” ~~~ Dennis Hart, Executive Director of NJ Chemistry Council (3/4/24 testimony to the NJ Senate Environment Committee on SCR 11)

Back in January when Senate Concurrent Resolution SCR 11 was posted for Committee consideration, I wrote Chairman Smith the sponsor to request amendments to make the bill actually reduce greenhouse gas emissions, prevent construction of new fossil plants, and phase out existing fossil (see the email to Smith below).

I knew Smith was not serious when neither he nor environmental groups expressed support or even replied to my suggested amendments.

There was no media coverage either.

But now, after an even lame SCR 11 was gutted, its safe for the media to cover the issue.

(the amendments were not even drafted when they were approved and still are not posted on the OLS website. Smith is over heard on live mike saying he just wants to get the bill out of committee, even though the amendments technically did not exist.)

I got a belly laugh but was not surprised to read today’s NJ Spotlight report that Smith had gutted his own lame bill: (NJ Spotlight)

But [fossil industry] critics argued the ban could threaten the reliability of the power grid, especially at a time when the state is moving to intermittent sources like offshore wind and solar energy. To an extent, Smith agreed, noting the bill was amended to allow new peaking gas-power plants, which often come online quickly during times when power demand strains the grid’s capacity to provide electricity. 

 A loophole that large swallows the entire SCR 11. Why even pass the bill if a loophole defeats the core sole purpose of the legislation?

I sense that NJ Spotlight reporter Tom Johnson had a smile on his face and enjoyed the humiliation served up to new Sierra Club Director Anjuli Busot-Ramos, who – just like DEP Commissioner LaTourette and NJ Spotlight editors – fails to understand the difference between misinformation and disinformation: (NJ Spotlight)

Both Ramos and Pringle also objected to putting the issue before voters, predicting a multimillion-dollar campaign by the fossil fuel industry to sway voters against the ban. “Our fear is we won’t be able to compete,’’ she said. “We don’t have millions of dollars to combat the misinformation.’’ 

Note how Pringle and Ramos rightly criticize the fossil industry but give Chairman Smith a pass for gutting his own bill in response to their criticism.

Remarkably, despite the fact that an already lame SCR 11 was competently gutted and will do nothing at all to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, un-named environmental groups still supported it!: (NJ Spotlight)

Several other environmental groups backed the resolution, however.

Now I have to listen to the testimony and be sure to name these idiots.

[Update: As I suspected, the corrupt cheerleaders at NJ League of Conservation Voters SUPPORTED this sham (at time: 1:10:00)

Dave Pringle’s opposition to the bill was based on economics, not climate science. He expressed a reliance on market forces to stop the construction of new power plants. Total Neoliberal BS – let the market solve the problem. He also opposed the bill because he was afraid he would lose the public debate and the voters would defeat the ballot question. He might be right that the fossil industry would spend millions on a disinformation campaign, but he revealed a disdain for the intelligence of the voters and no trust in democracy. And no confidence in his ability to win a public debate. What a tool.

Ms. Ramos’s testimony was even worse. She began with the outrageous claim that as a former DEP employee she could tell the Chairman that DEP has “great regulations on air toxics”. She then supported “clean hydrogen”. She misled about the impact of the new EJ law on permit renewals and modifications by implying that the EJ law could reduce greenhouse gas emissions and air toxics – she failed to note that the law did nothing to change current DEP air toxics standards, methods, technical manuals, cumulative risk standards, risks management, or air permitting regulations and that the law prohibits DEP from denying renewals and modifications of current permits.

Doug O’Malley was a no show and no other climate or environmental groups even testified.  ~~~ end update]

In the meantime, check out my request for amendment below.