PDA

View Full Version : CO2 & the EPA...crime for exhaling?



prncssmdc
12-07-2009, 06:56 PM
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB126003232518778287.html?mod=rss_Today's_Most_Pop ular

From the Wall Street Journal today....

EPA Poised to Declare CO2 a Public Danger
By IAN TALLEY

WASHINGTON--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.

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.

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.


All I have to say is this....I call bullshit. CO2? Really, now it could be a crime to exhale? You know what keeps running through my mind as I read this and see more about it in the news? Penn and Tellers social experiment on di-hydrogen monoxide. Unfortunately, this time it's not an experiment.

scribble
12-07-2009, 11:50 PM
Yeah, because breathing out releases such a high ppm ration of CO2 that breathing is sure to be regulated...


I will refrain from further comment until I have the opportunity to confer with the resident Certified Hazardous Materials Manager at school tomorrow.

prncssmdc
12-08-2009, 11:24 AM
"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."

What is their definition of "sensible"? This does not "guide" the EPA in any way. It allows them total control over something that is naturally emitted by every living breathing animal on this planet AND is necessary for plant life to continue to survive if I remember my 5th grade biology.

The big issue I have with this is...who regulates the regulators? In the case of the EPA, no one. Not a good idea regardless of which side of the political OR green house warming fence you stand on.

What can be done if they go to far? What is too far? Until there is an answer to those basic questions they (the EPA) should not be allowed this broad of a brush to paint with.

ENG733INE
12-08-2009, 11:27 AM
Has anyone ever seen spaceballs? this seem odd to me...... all we need is another drewish princess

jozak78
12-10-2009, 12:16 AM
has anyone seen the simpsons movie? just put a bug dome over the biggest polluters

randal
12-10-2009, 12:36 AM
It has become impossible to get out of your bed in the morning without violating some local, state, federal, whatever law or regulation. You likely don't know you have violated the law and law enforcement officers cannot keep up with the numbers of laws being put on the books to enforce them.

The EPA has ruined families and business with their laws. In their wetlands act they have what is called the Glancing Goose Test: If a migrating goose glanced over its shoulder and spotted a small pond, even if it didn’t stop, the mere glance extended the nexus of federal control and regulations to that privately owned body of water.

Anybody read "Unintended Consequences" by John Ross? I'm afraid that day is coming if they keep on pushing people. And no, I'm not advocating the actions that were written about in that book.

PSYCtest040
12-10-2009, 07:30 AM
WTF?!?!?!?!?!?!? Are we, as a society, that afraid to vote out these idiot incumbents? I swear, the longer these idiots stay in power the stupider they become.

TxFF
12-12-2009, 01:13 PM
WTF?!?!?!?!?!?!? Are we, as a society, that afraid to vote out these idiot incumbents? I swear, the longer these idiots stay in power the stupider they become.

No we as a society are too stupid to understand these politicians are idiots. Every year the average IQ goes down a fraction of a point... its like the real life Global Warming!

WEMT-I312
12-14-2009, 11:16 PM
No we as a society are too stupid to understand these politicians are idiots. Every year the average IQ goes down a fraction of a point... its like the real life Global Warming!

In honor of StreetDoc67, who no longer resides here, we call that climate change!

Ditch Doc
12-16-2009, 11:54 AM
Guess I have been gone a while...
Not to hijack or anything, but what happened to streetdoc?

SpotsyMedic
12-16-2009, 03:01 PM
Guess I have been gone a while...
Not to hijack or anything, but what happened to streetdoc?

Yeah, Anthony. Why don't you fill Ditch Doc in on where StreetDoc is? <snort>

medic pathetic
12-16-2009, 04:31 PM
Streetdoc is alive and well. He is on an indefinite hiatus from the board(by choice), but you can find him on facebook.

Ditch Doc
12-16-2009, 04:32 PM
Cool, thanks!