In article
,
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote:
On Jun 23, 7:12*pm, MiNe 109 wrote:
In article
,
*"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!" wrote:
Oh, so you're really REALLY ****ed because the bill doesn't go *far*
enough!
My bad. I thought you were really REALLY ****ed about something else.
LoL.
Is Scotty arguing both sides again?
Either that or he's arguing that we aren't spending enough fast enough.
You'd think he'd be happy about the lower electric bills.
http://www.grist.org/article/epa-wax...electricity-bi
lls/
Today, the Environmental Protection Agency obliterated these phony
numbers with the release of its economic analysis of H.R. 2454. The EPA
estimated the bill would actually lower household electricity bills:
As a result of energy efficiency measures, consumer spending on
utility bills would be roughly 7% lower in 2020 as a result of the
legislation.
Thatšs right lower bills. In 2007, this would have saved the average
residential user $84, or 23 cents per day. EPAšs analysis also found:
The overall impact on the average household, including the benefit
of many of the energy efficiency provisions in the legislation, would
be 22 to 30 cents per day ($80 to $111 per year).
We donšt have to just wish we were there we can have a clean energy
economy for the cost of a postcard stamp a day. And the EPAšs analysis
does not ŗtake into account the benefits of reducing global warming.˛
--
Stephen