What's Missing From Consumers Energy's Announcement?

The Detroit News: Consumers Energy plan calls for more than doubling capacity by 2040

Consumers Energy says it will more than double its system capacity by 2040 by using an “all-of-the-above” mix of natural gas, solar, wind, pumped and battery storage as part of a long-term supply proposal.  

Energy matters.  America's economy, businesses, and consumers all depend on available, reliable, and (relatively) inexpensive energy.

And we as a country have been deliberately negligent in maintaining that available, reliable, and (relatively) inexpensive energy - whether going for the Greenies with their no building of power plants whether coal or nuclear at all, to the Green New Deal with its demand of having unreliable solar and wind to replace reliable baseline power.

That Consumers is announcing they will double production capacity is welcome news, especially as all coal plants in Michigan have been set to close by 2032 and we're down to two nuclear plants from five and energy demand has not decreased.

In short, there's not going to be much in the way of reliable baseline production aside from some natural gas plants.  

Certainly that will be badly needed, as there's been scant increase in reliable production capacity. But notice that nuclear is missing from the  “all-of-the-above” mix.

Nuclear provides excellent baseline power and is reliable and yes, safe, and verily non-polluting and not even making those greenhouse gases the Greenies fret about, so long as you don't put communists in charge of it. 

A pity Consumers isn't leading the way with the new SMR reactors or even the large safe reactor designs. 

Michigan Dems Bent On Both Raising Cost Of Energy And Reducing Reliaiblity In the Name Of Global Warming

Michigan Dem's ideology is about to both raise energy prices in this state while at the same time reducing reliability.

The Detroit Free Press: Michigan Senate passes clean energy bills targeting reduced greenhouse gas emissions

Senate Bill 271 requires utilities to generate energy using at least 15% renewables through 2027, 50% from 2030 to 2034, and then 60% from 2035 on. Separately, utilities would be required to have clean energy portfolios of 80% by 2035 and reach 100% clean energy by 2040. The 50% renewable energy target for 2030 matches the goal set by Gov. Gretchen Whitmer in the MI Healthy Climate Plan unveiled last year.

Also, can a political hack spew anymore cliches per minute than  Senator Geiss in this one short declaration:

“This legislation marks the beginning of taking bold action to address this urgent crisis, one that is a clear and present danger, and failure to tackle it meaningfully cannot be an option. In fact, the cost of doing nothing is dire and detrimental to the health and welfare of our state and her people,” said Sen. Erika Geiss, D-Taylor. 

Seriously, she only missed "the fierce urgency of now" from that world salad.

Meanwhile, global warming is perhaps not exactly caused by human activity, and going out of our way to  inevitably raise energy prices in Michigan while reducing reliability is a fool's errand.

Indeed, even the current love affair with electric cars seems to be coming upo against economic reality: Forget the UAW strike, the real crisis may be a lack of demand for EVs

Now add even more government-mandated EVs on the road trying to charge form the reduced reliability and more expensive renewable energy being mandated by Michigan Dems.

Why Michigan's Democrats seem hell-bent on making energy both less reliable and more expensive is anybody's guess.

Biden To Ban Russian Oil Imports With No Real Proposed Replacement

Except perhaps, to enrich our enemies in Iran and Venezuela instead of Russia, because increasing US production to the level Trump had it at is bad per Biden the Democrats, even as he lies and claims he's doing all he can to increase production and conveniently forgets his closing of Keystone and multiple oil and gas leases.

Youtube: President Joe Biden bans all Russian oil imports over Ukraine invasion

Do note he was rather late for the scheduled 10:45 am announcement. claiming he was on a phone call.  Probably they had to pump him up full of Adderall and wait for the Aricept to kick in before having him make the address.

At the end of his short address, he then refused to take a single question, and quickly walked out of the presentation room without looking back.

Biden did an excellent job of demonstrating the "Old Man Yells at Clouds technique" during the address,  threatening American oil producers  and accusing them of price gouging.  

Yet again in Biden-land it's the wreckers and kulaks to blame, when instead the increases began and are are due to his energy policies pre-Ukraine crisis and his inflating the economy by throwing trillions at it.   Note we weren't importing 8% of our oil form Russia pre-Biden. The Ukraine crisis is just making all this worse and showing the bad choices by Biden and the Democrats that got us here.

Biden also trumpeted his release of 30 million barrels from the strategic reserve - the same release where oil prices went up the same day of the release.  Brilliant and effective strategy there.

He also had the occasional weird stumble where he clearly was tripping over his words and changed statements mid-stream.

In short gas and oil prices in the USA are going to go up even higher, prices of items dependent on transportation (ie just about everything) will also go up higher,  and the Biden Administration has no solution for it and refuses to push for the one solution that might alleviate it - a rapid increase of American oil production with the Administration getting the hell out of the way and cutting the red tape they've laid to stop it, not to mention the need for immediately  reversing his policy of closing oil and gas leases on federal lands.  Chance of him doing so?  Slim to none but watch the polls to influence his actions, just as they did with Covid - assuming he can win over the prog-greenies to the necessity of it.

Top Men are really running this show. Top. Men.

With Much Fanfare, A Drop In The Bucket

The Detroit News: Nations agree to release 60 million barrels of oil amid war

Fifty percent, 30 Million of the 60 Million barrels from the International Energy Agency 31 member countries will come from one country:  The USA. 

Apparently the other 30 can maybe cough up a million barrels each.  Some show of unity.

 60 Million barrels is however less than nothing and will maybe cause a dip in prices for a day or less. Biden released 50 million from the US Strategic Reserve to much fanfare and the price of oil didn't even dip much at all.  60 million will do even less considering how many more nations are affected.

You'll note in the article that even this measure does not get rid of the special exception to all the harsh sanctions on Russia - Oil and gas sales and money flows from same remain untouched under the sanctions.  After all, it is winter in Europe and they're dependent on Russian gas as they live out their Greenie fantasies.

Instead of this silly 60 million barrel showmanship, Biden and the rest should get serious about oil development to really deal with the problem - restart the Keystone pipeline that Biden shuttered; reopen the oil and gas leases Biden closed;  give support to the Israel-Greece-Europe pipeline that Biden stopped supporting and ended;  and importantly have Europe do some actual reliable power generation.

We'll know people are serious about energy supply, prices and hitting Russia where it hurts when these steps take place.   Until then, its energy theater, and prices will stay high hurting consumers while the elites that caused the problem remain above it all.

Decline Is A Choice

An awful lot of the convenience and benefits of living in modern western civilization is predicated on having cheap, reliable, energy.

A lack of cheap energy can result in a loss of jobs, as factories decided to go where electricity is available at better rates, as is the case with Ford's decision not to build its new plants in Michigan:

 The Detroit News: Whitmer: Michigan lacked 'real opportunity' to compete for Ford plants

Perhaps if our energy policy at the state level wasn't hell bent on reliance on unreliable renewables and shutting down reliable energy sources, we might have had that opportunity dear governor.  The demonstrated inability of our state power grid to weather storms this summer likely didn't help either.  That's 11,000 jobs going elsewhere. 

Among the reasons stated for this decision: 

Michigan's electricity prices are one factor that puts the state at a disadvantage for such projects. In July, the average industrial price of electricity per kilowatt-hour in Michigan was 8 cents compared with the national average of 7.53 cents, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Tennessee's price was 5.85 cents, Kentucky's was 6.06 cents and nearby Ohio's was 6.63 cents.

Those rates are caused by deliberate choices made at the state level to make energy more expensive here than elsewhere. such as shutting down our state's coal and nuclear plants and not building more, while overly subsidizing wind and solar in our cloudy state

The environmental movement along with its fellow travelers is hell-bent on  reducing the West's competitive advantages and standard of living, purportedly in the name of stopping climate change.  A lot of Europeans may either pay sky-high energy prices if available or may well freeze to death this winter in pursuit of that quixotic goal.

Forbes: Winter Is Coming: Can Energy Catastrophe Be Averted?

Why a catastrophe?  The switch away from reliable baseline power from coal and nuclear to unreliable wind and solar has put them in quite a pickle, with supply unable to meet the demand, and the Biden Administration and fellow Democrats at the national and state level wish to follow suit with a similar policy which will lead to the same results.

The energy crisis in Western Europe this summer has been brought on by premature retirements of hundreds of coal and natural gas power plants in favor of massive over-reliance on wind power and, to a lesser extent, solar. Ironically, this crisis is taking place just as House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and congressional Democrats attempt to ram through their massive $3.5 “budget reconciliation” bill that is in large part designed to recreate the European model in the United States.

Decline in our quality of life and economies is a choice being deliberately made by our "leaders" today.  Of course, they wont take responsibility for the consequences of these choice.  They also won't suffer from such shortages and can afford increased costs - the average American or European, not so much.

Michigan Democrats Demand Vehicle Electrification While Demanding Electricity Generation Reduction At The Same Time

On the one hand, we have Democrats pushing for the total electrification of vehicles which means a much higher demand for electricity.

NPR: Whitmer signs orders to help automakers in shift to “mobility” business

The Detroit News: Biden makes electric pitch at Ford plant: 'There's no turning back'

On the other hand, we have Democrats pushing for the closure of power plants that produce electricity without building sufficient replacement reliable baseline power.

Fox 2: DTE officially closing River Rouge Power Plant Friday

That's 840 megawatts of reliable power to Michigan being dropped without a reliable replacement at the behest of the Michigan Public Service Commission and advocacy groups.

So, where's the additional electricity to power all these electric vehicles going to come from, not to mention to satisfy the existing demand for power?

After all, we're now being told electricity will increase 50% in peak hours this summer, meaning during from 2pm to 7pm due to increased demand in the summer months - without all these new electric vehicles demanding power at that time.

The Detroit News: Consumers Energy electricity rate increases 50% during peak hours

Note the reason for the increase:

The higher cost during certain times of the day is a part of a greater trend in the energy industry seeking to reduce power generation as it pivots to relying on greener and renewable resources by providing a financial incentive to ratepayers to not use the dishwasher, do laundry or vacuum when energy demand is at its highest.

So there's a goal of reduced generation of power being sought  (with the goal to totally eliminate reliable coal powered plants that create rather inexpensive electricity by both  Consumers Energy and DTE) and replace it with far less reliable wind and solar.  Then, at the very same time mandate a highly increased demand for power for the electrification of vehicles at the same time by the same people.

What could possibly go wrong? 

So Texas, How's The Preview Of The Green New Deal Working Out For You?

So it turns out windmills don't handle icing conditions very well. Solar doesn't do well when covered in snow or in overcast conditions either.

MSN :   Texas electric grid operator says frozen wind turbines are hampering state's power output: report

About half of Texas' wind power generation capacity has been put on ice amid the state's historic winter storm, according to a report.

Oops. Add to that a sudden demand for natural gas for heating instead of electricity generation and there's not enough capacity to provide power.

It's definitely a cautionary tale of over-reliance on unreliable sources of energy such as solar and wind.    It's another cautionary tale of the failure to maintain and build an energy infrastructure able to keep up with the demand and have enough at the margins to handle an emergency. 

Pushing for the Green New Deal and not building reliable nuclear power and clean coal plants instead of expensive and unreliable wind and solar are going to end up putting us all in the dark and cold.

Putting The Electric Car Before The Horse (Power)

While GM announced the they have plans to exclusively offer electric vehicles by 2035 on January 28, its only today that people are asking the question that policy poses: 

The Detroit News: EVs are coming: Can Michigan's power grid hold up?

Behind a paywall, as that's how Detroit News rolls these days.  But the answer at first glance would be no.  

We haven't built a new power plant in Michigan in decades and a few windmills aren't going to cut it.  

Going to all-electric vehicles sounds nice until you realize there is insufficient electricity generating capacity and infrastructure to meet the demand from such a fleet of electric powered vehicles.

Indeed as noted in an op-ed article not behind a paywall, the answer is no.  Especially as Michigan under Dem Governor Granholm denied the permit to build a 600 Megawatt coal plant and there has been no further serious power generation plant built  in Michigan since.

We simply don't have the generating capacity nor the infrastructure to support an all-electric vehicle fleet.  Meanwhile the supporters of vehicle electrification are in general the same people preventing new generating capacity from being built.

New Year, New Green Power Fail

The Detroit Free Press: California company cancels $177M Saginaw solar plant

A California-based solar power company says it's canceling plans to build a $177 million solar panel factory in Saginaw.

San Jose-based GlobalWatt Inc. said the project would create 500 jobs when first announcing it in 2009. At that time, Saginaw was one of two communities in the running for the project.

But GlobalWatt chief executive Sanjeev Chitre tells WNEM-TV that the Saginaw project now is on hold. He says a struggling economy and overseas markets are reasons for the move and says the company might reconsider if the market expands.

The tax subsidy being offered was around $84,000 per job being claimed to be created by the project. Now, no jobs will result.

Yet more vaporware "green jobs", brought to you by tax subsidies galore.

Of course, its not like this wasn't predicted: MEGA Questions Surround GlobalWatt, Another Green Industry Failure

Apparently, Democrats really suck at choosing Green Energy Winners and Losers while being great at throwing away tax money in the process.

Obama, in one Key(stone) decision, causes three lousy results for the US

Obama, by deciding to delay the Keystone XL project, to appease his greenie base in order to buck up his electoral base, has deprived the US of lots of much needed good jobs, not to mention a secure supply of energy coming from a friendly country.

Between the delay on Keystone, the ban on Gulf drilling, and EPA regulations on Coal plants, its clear that Obama isn't interested in an assured and ample supply of energy for the US.

If we're going to get out of this current economic mess, we're going to need, among other things, cheap, reliable energy to power our industry and shift our consumers spending from power to more economically growth-spurring activities.

In addition, Obama's really snubbing our good neighbor to the north (er, actually also our neighbor to the south if you live in the Detroit area): Canada drowned out by U.S. election noise

As a special bonus, the oil Canada is producing may get shipped to China instead.

So Obama has succeeded in making three problems worse for the price of one decision:

Diminishing our energy supply and raising energy costs, and at the same time snubbing one of our proven allies.

How's that for an Obama lousy policy trifecta?

Speaking of Energy - Green Jobs to lay off 140 Michigan workers

Remember Granholm's multiple proclamations that Michigan would be a Green Energy mecca and that Green Energy = jobs for Michiganders?

Not so fast.

Energy Conversion Devices to lay off 140

From the Detroit Free Press:

Energy Conversion Devices said this morning that it plans to layoff 140 employees at one of its solar panel plants in Auburn Hills.

The layoffs are likely to occur in October when the Rochester Hills-based company plans to move some final assembly work to one of its underutilized plants in Tijuana, Mexico.

The affected Auburn Hills plant will not be idled and will employ 140 workers after the layoffs. But to reduce costs, only the first three steps in the thin film solar panel manufacturing process will occur there, said Martha Duggan, ECD’s vice president of government and regulatory affairs.

. . .

ECD is still proceeding with plans to retrofit its manufacturing line at the affected Auburn Hills plant with next-generation technology. In January, ECD had received a federal tax credit for making this investment, which is expected to create 600 jobs over time.

Glad to see those tax credits creating expected jobs while layoffs occur now isn't it. Anyone know the amount of that tax credit? Perhaps those 140 people laid off will be counted as jobs "saved or created" with the credit if they're rehired later.

It is certainly interesting that it is more cost effective for ECD to ship solar panels from Michigan all the way to Mexico for finishing and it still saves them money to do so. It must burn up a lot of carbon credits to ship them so far.

You Would Think A Prime Location For This Sort Of Thing Would Be Washington D.C.

Colorado firm gets approval to make energy from manure

Weld County will soon be home to an 80-acre, 24/7 operation that will convert cattle manure into enough biogas to power a small city.

Heartland Renewable Energy of Longmont, Colo., got the go-ahead from county commissioners last month to build the plant about 10 miles east of Gilcrest, Colo.

Construction is expected to begin this fall on what will be the first solid-waste disposal site of its kind in Colorado and one of the largest in the U.S. It should be complete in about 18 months.

Considering all the manure emanating from D.C., Heartland may have a second location already picked out....

Green Energy hits a stumbling block - Not in Your Back-Lakeshore

Plan for wind energy farm on Lake Michigan has neighbors howling

Its NIMBY tilting at Windmills.

proposal to construct a massive wind turbine farm, capable of producing 1,000 megawatts of power, over 100 square miles of Lake Michigan, a few miles offshore from Pentwater and Ludington, has many residents howling.

At a meeting in Ludington last week, residents gasped and jaws dropped when developers unveiled drawings showing 100 building-size turbines spinning within sight of Lake Michigan beaches.

"Would anyone put these in the Grand Canyon? This is our Grand Canyon, our beautiful spot," said Pentwater resident Mary Stiphany, adding that the hulking turbines would obstruct views and hurt tourism. "It would be such an eyesore."

The response is an indication that making the dream of alternative energy real in a spot as treasured as the Great Lakes may be harder than imagined.

Renewable energy has consequences and costs too, and blocking some scenic views with one hundred to two hundred 35-story high wind turbines would be one of them.

The again I'm surprised the people wouldn't feel wonderfully virtuous to gaze out on a massive farm of 200 spinning turbines in front of their formerly scenic beaches and lakescapes.

Of course, a nice compact nuclear plant would take up much less room and produce more, and more reliable, power to boot. But we can't have that in this brave new green world.

Governor Goes Green Energy but misses Efficiency

It is a display of the error prone nature of the Granholm administration in microcosm - do something flashy and trendy yet economically meaningless or even counterproductive - short term illusionary savings for long term expense.

This example is her making the Governor's Mansion a showpiece of green technology that doesn't make much economic sense. The "green" changes to the Governor's mansion:
Detroit News: Gov's home goes green with solar panels, wind turbines

Gov. Jennifer Granholm is taking her campaign for green technology to the governor's residence, where a wind turbine has been erected and solar panels soon will go up to increase the home's energy efficiency.

With a new sprinkler system that saves water by taking the weather and what's planted into account and a small area of the garage roof covered with sedum plants and a special membrane to keep it cool, the residence provides an example of ways consumers can save money by using Michigan products.

But when you look at the costs involved it doesn't make economic sense for your average resident and it doesn't make sense for the mansion either:

Example A - The Solar panels:

The $20,000 in solar panels that will be mounted later this month on a section of the roof over the front door are being donated by United Solar Ovonic of Auburn Hills. The panels will provide about $300 of electricity a year.

So for a $20,000 cost you save $300 per year - that means it will take over 67 years to pay off the installation cost of the panels alone. I suspect no one is buying for that much of a long-haul and indeed I doubt the panels will last that long. Indeed, one should note these panels were donated. I doubt the Michigan budget could afford such inefficient extravagance. In other words, solar isn't going to be a winner for Michigan residents.

Example B - A mighty wind:

Mariah Power of Reno, Nev., and MasTech Wind of Manistee donated the $9,000 wind turbine to the state. After federal and state tax breaks, the turbine would cost about $3,000.
. . . .
The residence will get the largest savings from a recently installed 30-foot-tall wind turbine, which is expected to save about $1,200 a year on the home's annual $10,900

Once again, donated. If the tax breaks weren't a part of the equation (after all you're paying for them with your tax money) your payoff period for the windmill is 7.5 years, assuming the predicted savings are correct. With the tax breaks the period is a lot better at 2.5 years. Of course, this estimate may be predicated on the turbine spinning extra fast in response to all the hot air coming out of the Governor's mansion, not to mention if you need various zoning exceptions and permits to install it.

Example C - Then there's the sprinkler:

The new sprinkler system is expected to save about $1,450 annually and was donated by A&H Lawn Service Inc. of Saline, Green Meadows Lawn Care & Landscaping of Clinton and HydroLogic of Minneapolis. The system for the 5-acre site -- including special irrigation for the vegetable garden -- cost $50,000, but a homeowner on a typical suburban lot would pay only about $5,000, A&H President Timothy Austin said.

Wowza - At a cost of $50,000 for a saving of 1,450 it will take 35 years to pay this off had it actually been paid for. Since the housholed ratio is likely the same (the $5000 above would mean a savings of $145 per year, for the same 35 year payoff period if you don't count maintenance and repairs over that time this doesn't make a lot of economic sense and indeed your kids probably can't even run through it.

Yes going "Green" is certainly fashionable, and it's nice that Michigan companies are getting in on the lucrative takings at the federal trough given the decision of the government to push ahead with these inefficient but pretty-sounding programs in the name of fighting global warming and raising the cost of everyhting we do or create in America. It is also very nice that companies donated very expensive installations as demonstrators, but of all three that extol such "savings", only the wind turbine seems to offer any real economic payoff and indeed decent return on the energy invested in creating, installing and operating them.

Energy Bill Costs

Unsurprisingly the Democrats weren't very upfront about both the potential costs of this loathsome bill and its potential benefits.

Thankfully, Kenneth W. Chilton in The Detroit News gives a good estimate of both:

The Costs:

Fortunately, a back-of-the-envelope" estimate for the costs and benefits of greenhouse gas reductions provides a pretty clear picture. On the cost side, the Congressional Budget Office estimates that any cap-and-trade bill that would reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 15 percent could cost the average household roughly $1,600 (in 2006 dollars). Further, "The rise in prices would impose a larger burden, relative to income, on low-income households ...." (Households in the lowest income quintile spend 21 percent of their income on energy-intensive items compared with 4 percent for the highest one-fifth of American households.)

A Heritage Foundation analysis finds that Waxman-Markey would, by 2035, raise electricity rates 90 percent, gasoline prices 74 percent, residential natural gas prices 55 percent and an average family's monthly energy bill by more than $100.

The (dubious) Benefit:

One estimate by Paul Knappenberger, an environmental scientist with 20 years experience as a climate researcher, concludes "by the year 2050, the Waxman-Markey Climate Bill would result in a global temperature 'savings' of about 0.05 degrees Centigrade ... about two years' worth of warming." In short, this legislation creates very high costs for American households and produces NO discernable benefit!

There you have it, every American household can expect to pay lots more for gasoline, electricity, home heating and every single product manufactured or grown that uses energy as an input (Here's a clue - that is pretty much everything you purchase these days).

All to save a measly projected .05 degrees worth of "Climate Change" in 41 years. Any rational person or congresscritter after reading the CBO analysis would have voted no on this abomination. Rationality is always in short supply in politics, but on this bill it it may have skipped town completely or is as scarce as Astatine.

On the other hand the representatives that voted for this bill clearly realized this will increase the cost of both tar and feathers and are trying to avoid people being able to afford both and apply same to their tender hides.

Energy Bill passes - Local Democrats help to turn out the lights in Michigan

No doubt you've heard by now that the Waxman cap-and-trade energy bill, complete with its last minute 300 page amendment passed by a vote of 219-212 in the House.

And our local Michigan Democrat representative, Gary Peters, the freshman Congressman who made a name for himself doing an Inspector Renault "I'm shocked simply shocked to find AIG Salary bonuses here" shtick, bonuses which was inserted by a Democrat, in a bill passed by Democrats and signed by a Democrat president, decided to further along Michigan's decline by voting for this bill that he hadn't even read.

Peters won his seat in just this past election defeating Knollenberg in what used to be a Republican area. Here's hoping people wake up to the damage he and the Democrats are doing to the economy of this state from this bill among others and vote him out promptly.

Other Michigan Democrats further voted to help put a nail in Michigan's industrial coffin (make no mistake the bill, seeking to cut carbon emissions to 1800s levels will be a manufacturing job killer- jobs need energy and most reliable energy sources these days does give off carbon emissions. As the bill didn't mandate the construction of a new nuclear reactor in every state I doubt they're aiming to keep energy production at current levels but to force it to be cut which will cause it to become more expensive (ever heard of supply and demand? - its not just a good idea, its a law!).

These Democrats included-

Democrats Carolyn Cheeks Kilpatrick of Detroit, Gary Peters of Bloomfield Township and Mark Schauer of Battle Creek had considered voting against the bill, but ultimately voted yes.

Cheeks Kilpatrick (Mommy of Kwame) by the way is now under investigation for violating House Ethics rules for a little junket trip to St. Maarten that was sponsored by some corporations for her.

Indeed the Democrats had to scrape up every vote they could find:

Rep. Ellen Tauscher, D-Calif., confirmed by the Senate on Thursday to an administration post, put off her resignation from Congress until after the final vote on the climate change bill.

And indeed the Democrat leadership had to scrape some from inside the bottom of some whiskey barrels apparently:

And Rep. Patrick Kennedy, D-R.I., who has been undergoing treatment at an undisclosed facility, returned to the Capitol to support the legislation. He has said he struggles with depression, alcoholism and addiction, but has not specified the cause for his most recent absence.

Can a congressman vote while under the influence, or just being influenced by Pelosi, lobbyists, and the White House?

Of course, the Eight Republicans who voted for this execrable bill, which would not have passed without them (it passed 219-212 -- had they voted no it would have been different) deserve their own special recognition -

Eight Republicans voted in favor of the legislation. They are: Mary Bono (CA), Mike Castle (DE), Mark Kirk (IL), Leonard Lance (NJ), Frank LoBiondo (NJ), Chris Smith (NJ), John McHugh (NY), and David Reichert (WA). Nicely done indeed. (Thanks to Powerline for the line-up - they've got some great stuff on the shenanigans that went into this bill)

. On the upside, one Michigan Republican showed some backbone:

Vern Ehlers of Grand Rapids, a research physicist who has pushed environmental legislation, was one of a handful of Republicans the Democratic leadership had hoped to win over, but he voted no.

Thanks to representative Van Ehlers for standing firm for what's right.

This bill, a lobbyist's dream for cap and trade, for an unproven problem of global warming, will drastically harm our state's and the nations economy, and increase the price of everything while it does so. Hopefully the Senate will find the backbone to kill this abomination because the House just sold America out for a mess of green potage.

Thanks so much for further moving Michigan into economic decline. For Michigan Democrat Representative Schauer to say this bill will create Michigan jobs is beyond ridiculous - unless you count new hires for lobbyists from Michigan's power plants to go plead with congressmen for energy credits so they can keep the lights on here a little longer as new and desirable jobs for this state.