EPA to Global Warming Deniers: GFY

[one...two...tree 2,762]

EPA: Greenhouse Gases Are Danger To Human Health

by The Associated Press

The Environmental Protection Agency has concluded greenhouse gases are endangering people's health and must be regulated, signaling that the Obama administration is prepared to contain global warming without congressional action if necessary.

EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson scheduled a news conference for later Monday to announce the so-called endangerment finding, officials told The Associated Press, speaking privately because the announcement had not been made.

The finding is timed to boost the administration's arguments at an international climate conference beginning this week that the United States is aggressively taking actions to combat global warming, even though Congress has yet to act on climate legislation.

Under a Supreme Court ruling, the so-called endangerment finding is needed before the EPA can regulate carbon dioxide and five other greenhouse gases released from power plants, factories and automobiles under the federal Clean Air Act.

The EPA signaled last April that it was inclined to view heat-trapping pollution as a threat to public health and welfare and began to take public comments under a formal rulemaking. The action marked a reversal from the Bush administration, which had declined to aggressively pursue the issue.

Business groups have strongly argued against tackling global warming through the regulatory process of the Clean Air Act. Any such regulations are likely to spawn lawsuits and lengthy legal fights.

The EPA and the White House have said regulations on greenhouse gases will not be imminent even after an endangerment finding, saying that the administration would prefer that Congress act to limit such pollution through an economy-wide cap on carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.

Nevertheless, the EPA has begun the early stages of developing permit requirements on carbon dioxide pollution from large emitters such as power plants. The administration also has said it will require automobile fuel economy to increase to a fleet average of 35 miles per gallon by 2016, another push to reduce carbon dioxide emissions.

The EPA's readiness to tackle climate change is expected to give a boost to U.S. arguments at the climate conference opening in Copenhagen this week that the United States is making broad commitments to reduce greenhouse gases.

While the House has approved climate legislation that would cut emissions by 17 percent by 2020 and about 80 percent by mid-century, the Senate has yet to take up the measure amid strong Republican opposition and reluctance by some centrist Democrats.

Sen. John Kerry (D-MA), lead author of the Senate bill, has argued that if Congress doesn't act, the EPA will require greenhouse gas emissions. He has called EPA regulation a "blunt instrument" that would pose a bigger problem for industry than legislation crafted to mitigate some of the costs of shifting away from carbon emitting fossil fuels.

The way was opened for the EPA to use the Clean Air Act to cut climate-changing emissions by the Supreme Court in 2007, when the court declared that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are pollutants under the Act. But the court said the EPA must determine if these pollutants pose a danger to public health and welfare before it can regulate them.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.p...oryId=121152734

[Joseph & Ana 0]

Yes - we must use another angle to convince people, since the man-made GW was proven to be BS.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I see the CGW has attracted a new follower. Nice.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I see the CGW has attracted a new follower. Nice.

He'll only believe it if Glenn Beck tells him to.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I see the CGW has attracted a new follower. Nice.

He'll only believe it if Glenn Beck tells him to.

Yes, there's a bit of a difference between the CGW and the CGB.

[Danno 1,228]

Wait a minute, I am confused by the shell game.

You are calling it "Global warming" again..... has or has not the earth (globe) actually been cooling for the last decade?

[Joseph & Ana 0]

Doesn't matter. Al Gore says no, and so does Barbara Boxer, so they agree.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Too bad there's no vaccine for Sore Loseritis.

[NickD 203]

Certainly a qualitative statement, but not a quantitative one. Yes, being a locked in a room with a 100% CO2 would kill us, but we are just talking about 300-600 ppm. CO isn't very nice, anything about CO causing global warming? HC's are definitely nasty and far worse is when they added lead to it that may very well be the cause that we have nutty aggressive leaders today.

EPA has a history of making drastic errors to kill us, like putting sulfuric acid into the air and these highly cancerous MBTE's. Kind of like attacking one problem and creating new ones. EPA should be responsible for developing technology to reduce both industrial and automotive pollution. In my opinion, they are controlled by the oil and refrigeration industries Now saying R-134a is a harmful global warming refrigerant, could be because DuPont came out with a new one, but HC based that has flammability questions.

Oh, well, not only jobless with our industries exported, but will also be walking, but talking about mass transportation that was never economically feasible. I give up.

[Joseph & Ana 0]

Sore loser? That would be Al Gore.

I haven't lost anything. I have no problem cleaning up the air and the water. Cap and trade is proven with numbers that it will not work. It serves no purpose but to generate revenue for the government.

The new technology is already being developed. The volt and other hybrids were being developed long before Obama took over GM. Wind, solar, and geo-thermal were already being utilized and studied further. The energy efficient lightbulbs were already being sold, and new ones developed. So what exactly, other than government control, is the point?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Sore loser? That would be Al Gore.

I haven't lost anything. I have no problem cleaning up the air and the water. Cap and trade is proven with numbers that it will not work. It serves no purpose but to generate revenue for the government.

The new technology is already being developed. The volt and other hybrids were being developed long before Obama took over GM. Wind, solar, and geo-thermal were already being utilized and studied further. The energy efficient lightbulbs were already being sold, and new ones developed. So what exactly, other than government control, is the point?

I don't know, mister expert, but apparently all your p!ssing and moaning about it will continue in spite of the facts.

[Joseph & Ana 0]

Sore loser? That would be Al Gore.

I haven't lost anything. I have no problem cleaning up the air and the water. Cap and trade is proven with numbers that it will not work. It serves no purpose but to generate revenue for the government.

The new technology is already being developed. The volt and other hybrids were being developed long before Obama took over GM. Wind, solar, and geo-thermal were already being utilized and studied further. The energy efficient lightbulbs were already being sold, and new ones developed. So what exactly, other than government control, is the point?

I don't know, mister expert, but apparently all your p!ssing and moaning about it will continue in spite of the facts.

I'm not the one trying to convince the world of a hoax like you are on a daily basis. Take a look in the mirror.

GW = BS

Pollution = Fact that needs to be dealt with

[SMR 368]

The EPA rules by fiat. Did you vote for them? Do you even know who they are? Why do we trust them?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Joseph, your training is near complete.

[Nina~ 431]

Joseph, your training is near complete.