Skip to content

EnvironMENTAL Protection Agency

December 6, 2009

EPA Poised to Declare CO2 a Public Danger
Article: WallStreetJournal

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will early next week, possibly as soon as Monday, officially declare carbon dioxide a public danger, a trigger that could mean regulation for emitters across the economy, according to several people close to the matter.

Such an “endangerment” decision is necessary for the EPA to move ahead early next year with new emission standards for cars. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson has said it could also mean large emitters such as power stations, cement kilns, crude-oil refineries and chemical plants would have to curb their greenhouse gas output.

The announcement would also give President Barack Obama and his climate envoy negotiating leverage at a global climate summit starting next week in Copenhagen, Denmark and increase pressure on Congress to pass a climate bill that would modify the price of polluting.

While environmentalists celebrate EPA’s authority to regulate greenhouse gases, it has caused many large emitters to cringe at the potential costs of compliance.

According to a preliminary endangerment finding published in April, EPA scientists fear that man-made carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are contributing to a warming of the global climate. Senior EPA officials said in November the agency would likely make a final decision in December around the time of the summit.

So, in other words… the EnvironMENTAL “protection” Agency doesn’t understand the basic concept of photosynthesis? Seriously, EPA… How can you even call yourselves scientists? Are you going to slap a tax on every breath we take? Every fart? Not to mention that we ALL know that “Global Warming” is a hoax set up to line the pockets of political has-beens such as Al Gore. We’re going to be forced to pay MORE money… for something that has been proven time and time again to be completely fraudulent. No, really. Google this: “Photosynthesis”. I learned about it in the fourth grade; and I went to PUBLIC schools for crying out loud.

Joe Mendelson, Global Warming Policy Director for National Wildlife Federation, said the endangerment decision, would happen at “absolutely the right time.”

“With House legislation passed, a bipartisan Senate bill in the works, and strong EPA action a virtual certainty, the president goes to Copenhagen with a very strong hand to play,” Mr. Mendelson said.

The EPA declaration would also ratchet up the pressure on U.S. lawmakers to pass legislation that analysts say would cut emissions in a more economically efficient way. Although the House has passed a climate bill, movement of similar legislation in the Senate has faced much more resistance and passage becomes more difficult in an election year.

So, you’re telling me that during an “election year”; our officials who represent us are more likely to resist passing phony legislation that will negatively impact us as a society and the quality of life we all enjoy? Get right out of town.

The EPA’s Ms. Jackson and President Obama’s energy and climate czar Carol Browner have said they would prefer Congress to take action but are prepared to move ahead in the absence of lawmakers crafting their own law.

Industry experts say the Clean Air Act–under which the EPA is making its endangerment finding–was designed to regulate more regional and localized air pollution, and would be a much more blunt tool than Congress could craft. Critics, such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, say the endangerment declaration could spark a cascade of litigation and regulation that could harm the economy.

The EPA, meanwhile, says it would regulate in a sensible way. The agency has already moved forward on two rules that would guide regulation of greenhouse-gas emissions, primarily through a proposal to set the threshold level at 25,000 tons a year and requiring such large emitters to report their emissions.

If the EPA decided to move ahead with emission regulations for stationary sources such as utilities, new rules would likely be in place by 2012 and could set stringent emission standards to require firms to install the best available technology.

Two people close to the matter who met with White House officials earlier this week said one change between the proposed endangerment finding issued earlier this year and the final announcement expected next week is the inclusion of the potential cost to society of no emission regulations.

4 Comments leave one →
  1. Cuss permalink
    December 8, 2009 3:52 am

    Where in the constitution is the fed. gov’nt in charge of breathing? If carbon dioxide is not produced trees and plants die. Can someone with a fucking brain and a mouth piece call these fuckers out and stop pandering to all this crazy shit?

    • December 10, 2009 1:53 am

      I’m pretty sure it’s not in the Constitution… which is probably why they’re hellbent on destroying it. So they can run with all of the chaotic ideas they WANT.

      There are plenty of people with brains and mouths calling these fuckers out; unfortunately, their platform isn’t big enough.

  2. December 10, 2009 6:07 pm

    The government has f&%ked up the forests with their controlled burning BS and will f&%k up the earth with their carbon dioxide controls.

    • December 11, 2009 2:34 am

      We still have the power to stop it. It might not SEEM like we do; but once we lose hope… we lose our will to fight.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: