EPA’s carbon dioxide rules endanger human health and welfare
Legal challenges by states and industry groups over the Environmental Protection Agency’s efforts to regulate carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases could and should be decided in the challengers’ favor. Whether that will happen in this highly politicized, semi-scientific matter of “dangerous manmade global warming and climate change” remains to be seen. Regardless of what the DC Court of Appeals decides, the case will almost assuredly return to the Supreme Court, where the outcome is equally uncertain.
In Massachusetts v. EPA, the Supreme Court said EPA had the authority (but not the obligation) to regulate CO2 under the Clean Air Act’s “capacious definition of air pollutant.” EPA could do so, the court ruled, if its administrator concluded that GHG emissions “may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.” In other words, the administrator’s opinion was not sufficient. The agency
On January 19th, President Obama announced his decision to deny an application by Trans-Canada for construction of the proposed Keystone XL pipeline that would have brought crude oil and tens of thousands of jobs from the tar sands of Alberta and North Dakota's Bakken field to refineries in Texas and Louisiana. Despite the devastating consequences of this action, we at CFACT were not surprised.
Mr. Obama blamed Republicans in Congress, saying he did not have enough time to review routing changes through Nebraska that have yet to be finalized. The truth is that his Senate allies blocked language that would have given him until 30 days after the new route through Nebraska was finalized.
This President who talks about "shovel-ready jobs" has had, since 2008 when the application was first filed, plenty of time to "study" it. Some still hold out hope that, should Mr.Obama be reelected, he will revisit his decision and issue the permits in 2013.
We beg to differ, taking our cue from the public statements and actions of Mr. Obama and key
EPA mercury rules for electricity generating units are based on false science and economics
The Environmental Protection Agency clams its “final proposed” Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) rules will eliminate nearly all toxic pollution from electrical generating units, bring over $60 billion in annual health benefits, and prevent thousands of premature deaths yearly – all for “only” $11 billion a year in compliance costs.
All of this may be true in the virtual reality of EPA computer models, linear extrapolations, cherry-picked health studies and statistics, government press releases and agency-generated public comments. However, in the real world inhabited by families, employers and other energy users, the new rules will bring few benefits, but will impose extensive costs that the agency chose to minimize or ignore in its analysis.
Emissions of mercury and other air toxics from power plants have been declining steadily for decades, as older generating units have been replaced with more
With the science anything but settled and the proposed solutions incredibly harmful to world economies, the world will be far better off if no new climate treaty comes out of Durban.
The good news is that the prospects for a new commitment period in the model of the Kyoto Protocol seem slim. The differences between the developed and developing world's negotiating positions are too great. Couple this with a U.S. Senate that will not ratify a new treaty (our allies have made clear that they do not want to go it alone again) and a full out, binding treaty, would surprise everyone.
However, there is much at stake in Durban for carbon profiteers who bet their financial futures on an endless flow of global warming cash. Kyoto's carbon markets are set to expire in 2012 which could send would-be carbon traders out in search of gainful employment. Alternative energy corporations also face lean times ahead if the developed world's appetite for subsidies and guarantees continues to dry up (a drought which will only accelerate in the absence of a treaty). The public is ca
Recent Responses
February 28, 2012 04:13 PM
EPA has lost it's way on warming
EPA’s carbon dioxide rules endanger human health and welfare
Legal challenges by states and industry groups over the Environmental Protection Agency’s efforts to regulate carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases could and should be decided in the challengers’ favor. Whether that will happen in this highly politicized, semi-scientific matter of “dangerous manmade global warming and climate change” remains to be seen. Regardless of what the DC Court of Appeals decides, the case will almost assuredly return to the Supreme Court, where the outcome is equally uncertain.
In Massachusetts v. EPA, the Supreme Court said EPA had the authority (but not the obligation) to regulate CO2 under the Clean Air Act’s “capacious definition of air pollutant.” EPA could do so, the court ruled, if its administrator concluded that GHG emissions “may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.” In other words, the administrator’s opinion was not sufficient. The agency
Continue ReadingJanuary 23, 2012 03:44 PM
Deep Green Obama and the Pipeline Wars
On January 19th, President Obama announced his decision to deny an application by Trans-Canada for construction of the proposed Keystone XL pipeline that would have brought crude oil and tens of thousands of jobs from the tar sands of Alberta and North Dakota's Bakken field to refineries in Texas and Louisiana. Despite the devastating consequences of this action, we at CFACT were not surprised.
Mr. Obama blamed Republicans in Congress, saying he did not have enough time to review routing changes through Nebraska that have yet to be finalized. The truth is that his Senate allies blocked language that would have given him until 30 days after the new route through Nebraska was finalized.
This President who talks about "shovel-ready jobs" has had, since 2008 when the application was first filed, plenty of time to "study" it. Some still hold out hope that, should Mr.Obama be reelected, he will revisit his decision and issue the permits in 2013.
We beg to differ, taking our cue from the public statements and actions of Mr. Obama and key
Continue ReadingDecember 20, 2011 01:18 PM
No benefits, extensive harm
EPA mercury rules for electricity generating units are based on false science and economics
The Environmental Protection Agency clams its “final proposed” Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT) rules will eliminate nearly all toxic pollution from electrical generating units, bring over $60 billion in annual health benefits, and prevent thousands of premature deaths yearly – all for “only” $11 billion a year in compliance costs.
All of this may be true in the virtual reality of EPA computer models, linear extrapolations, cherry-picked health studies and statistics, government press releases and agency-generated public comments. However, in the real world inhabited by families, employers and other energy users, the new rules will bring few benefits, but will impose extensive costs that the agency chose to minimize or ignore in its analysis.
Emissions of mercury and other air toxics from power plants have been declining steadily for decades, as older generating units have been replaced with more
Continue ReadingNovember 28, 2011 06:23 AM
U.N. Needs To Stop, Reassess
With the science anything but settled and the proposed solutions incredibly harmful to world economies, the world will be far better off if no new climate treaty comes out of Durban.
The good news is that the prospects for a new commitment period in the model of the Kyoto Protocol seem slim. The differences between the developed and developing world's negotiating positions are too great. Couple this with a U.S. Senate that will not ratify a new treaty (our allies have made clear that they do not want to go it alone again) and a full out, binding treaty, would surprise everyone.
However, there is much at stake in Durban for carbon profiteers who bet their financial futures on an endless flow of global warming cash. Kyoto's carbon markets are set to expire in 2012 which could send would-be carbon traders out in search of gainful employment. Alternative energy corporations also face lean times ahead if the developed world's appetite for subsidies and guarantees continues to dry up (a drought which will only accelerate in the absence of a treaty). The public is ca
Continue Reading