The link below will take you to where there is a detail attack on almost every aspect of this silly theory.
Once more it is an attempt to have a small little universe so the small little christian god will fit in better.
The physical aspects of neo-Velikovskianism and the Electric Universe are perhaps their greatest weakness, and are one of the many things focused on by their critics. Like Velikovsky's own "theories" before them, they fly in the face of everything known about cosmology, astrophysics, and geology and are outright contradicted by observation and often violate basic physics. I will briefly outline problems associated with several concepts peculiar to the Electric Universe here. The Electric Star hypothesis ignores everything known about such things as atomic & nuclear physics, electromagnetism, neutrino physics, the solar wind, convection, and the behavior of neutral gasses (see below for a full critique of this concept).
Furthermore, neo-Velikovskianism has many of the same underlying currents of thought possessed by other pseudosciences. Not only do its proponents claim that much if not most of "mainstream" science is completely wrong despite clear and overwhelming evidence to the contrary, but they also claim that the mainstream is deliberately supressing their views for personal reasons. Ted Holden in particular has claimed that scientists have "... doctored and falsified [evidence] at every turn because it does not fit with scientists' pre-conceived ideas...". Others have claimed that Halton Arp (and other fringe scientists) is a "modern-day Galileo" subjected to a scientific inquisition of sorts. Such claims are wholly unsubstantiated paranoid conspiracy theories, and are considered one of the hallmarks of a crank. It is also important to point out that neo-Velikovskianism is remarkably similar to creationism in its methodology in that it starts with ancient myths, assumes them to be actual and accurate descriptions of nature, and then attempts to construct a theory on that basis. It also requires that scientific laws that conflict with ancient myths must be revised to fit those myths. As Velikovsky said in Worlds in Collision "[L]aws must conform with historical facts, not facts with laws." Robert Carroll, author of The Skeptic's Dictionary, has stated that "Because of his uncritical and selective acceptance of ancient myths, [Velikovsky] cannot be said to be doing history, either." For these reasons, Velikovskianism is considered to be not only pseudoscience, but pseudohistory as well. Finally, few neo-Velikovskians could be considered qualified to speak on matters on astrophysics, cosmology, geology, etc. Few of them have advanced degrees in science or have actually worked as scientists. Many are engineers by profession (e.g. Thornhill, Juergens, and Don Scott), some are comparative mythologists (e.g. Talbott, Dwardu Cordona, and Ev Cochrane), and others still belong to professions that have little to nothing to do with the physical or life sciences (Velikovsky himself was a psychoanalyst). While this is not by itself sufficient to argue against their claims, it does give one reason to be skeptical of them given their fringe nature as it can be safely assumed that they misunderstand and are ignorant of basic physics and/or simply don't know what they're talking about (which certainly seems to be the case here), plus the fact remains that the conclusions of non-experts are generally quite unreliable.
Neo-Velikovskianism, including the Electric Universe, because of its pseudohistorical usage of ancient myths as a guide to scientific truth, its use of electricity to explain all or nearly astrophysical phenomena (despite not needing to do so, since gravity, mechanics, and relativity are more than sufficient to explain most astrophycial processes), its use of spurious analogies to laboratory experiments, its often outlandish theories unsubstantiated by any physical evidence, and its outright violation of basic physical principles and rejection of practically all standard physics, it is regarded as complete and utter pseudoscience by the scientific community.