EPA to Declare CO2 a Public Danger
[Guest post by DRJ]
The Wall Street Journal reports the Obama Administration’s EPA will declare CO2 a public danger as early as Monday:
“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 EPA reportedly plans to establish “stringent” emission standards and large emitters are said to “cringe” at the costs of compliance, costs that will undoubtedly be passed on to consumers. Meanwhile, Obama can travel to Copenhagen and proclaim he’s doing all he can to fight climate change … except for this part:
“The UN estimates the 12-day “green” confab will produce 40,584 tons of CO2 equivalents, roughly equal to Morocco’s carbon footprint in 2006.”
Not to mention 1,200 limos and 140 private planes. That’s what I call an inconvenient truth.
— DRJ
looks like tomorrow will be a fun day for Wall St…..
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 12/6/2009 @ 3:49 pmMore economy destroying policy from the Obama administration.
You’d think it was intentional …
SPQR (26be8b) — 12/6/2009 @ 3:58 pmWe have to destroy this country in order to save it.
Patricia (b05e7f) — 12/6/2009 @ 4:00 pmWell, let’s see:
Carbon dioxide is being emitted when the EPA is shooting its mouth off. So less talk?
We need more attention on the “crisis rules for thee but not for me” business.
Eric Blair (0b61b2) — 12/6/2009 @ 4:01 pmoh, and that “economic recovery” the MFM has been trying to BS us into believing was happening? you can forget about it… permanently.
this will strangle what’s left of American industry. everything will be cheaper to import than make or grow stuff here, except of course, no one will be w*rking, so who’s going to be able to buy stuff?
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 12/6/2009 @ 4:03 pmEPA 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.”
In a bold move to send a clear message to Lisa Jackson all Power stations will shut down for Monday
Some reporter on a bicycle might catch up with her on the dirt street while she pushes her SUV to her darkened and very cold skyscraper, for her earth shaking revelations. But probably not.
Story will be posted on the lamp post outside the paper and there will be no film at 11.
Big newspaper hiring: Help wanted, scribes, lots of them.
TC (0b9ca4) — 12/6/2009 @ 4:06 pmQuit breathing you anti-science denialists!
JD (344488) — 12/6/2009 @ 4:07 pmKeep in mind that the boffins sounding off about this at the EPA will not suffer from the results of their oral CO2 emissions.
Eric Blair (0b61b2) — 12/6/2009 @ 4:13 pmIs someone who weighs in excess of 400-lbs a “large emitter”, and would it be socially correct to “shut them down”?
AD - RtR/OS! (f2588c) — 12/6/2009 @ 4:13 pmOr, someone who talks non-stop (like your average Progressive activist)?
Saying Obama has a tin ear for facts would be an insult to Sn.
Brother Bradley J. Fikes, C.O.R. (0ea407) — 12/6/2009 @ 4:36 pmThis is the sort of thing that hurts certain states disproportionately. And the harm what will be done is based on a lie. A blatant in your face dirty socialist lie.
That’s not good for America.
happyfeet (71f55e) — 12/6/2009 @ 4:39 pmI think this is probably the most important ramification…
The Wall Street Journal douchebag doesn’t explore this. I think probably cause this is a big time payoff for a bunch of dirty socialist trial lawyers.
Our little country is astoundingly corrupt, really.
happyfeet (71f55e) — 12/6/2009 @ 4:52 pmSo now we can’t exhale? What will the plants do.
This is moving from absurd to insane.
bill-tb (365bd9) — 12/6/2009 @ 5:00 pmI was gonna say that’s a wrap on exhaling, but somebody beat me to it.
glenn (757adc) — 12/6/2009 @ 5:22 pmI’m to stop breathing? Are they going to issue permits? I have huge lungs, btw ….
htom (412a17) — 12/6/2009 @ 5:23 pm“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”.
If the EPA makes such an adoption/stand they should be eliminated as an agency.
We all should flood Washington with demands for Lisa’s removal from the office.
TC (0b9ca4) — 12/6/2009 @ 5:46 pmRemove her Today
Just another career politico bureaucrat.
TC (0b9ca4) — 12/6/2009 @ 5:52 pmI heard Hewitt talk about this months ago when it was on the horizon. Environmental law is a specialty of his, and he thought this would be insane and a looming disaster. This is a way for the exec. branch to do all kinds of mischief without the Congress needing to come to any agreement and pass a cap and tax bill.
It should not be surprising that this announcement is to happen when the Copenhagen conference is about to start, never waste an opportunity to promote the one’s greatness.
Absurd. And this is what our advances in science and technology in the 21st century brings us.
Meanwhile, I saw an article today about a true danger near nk- the potential migration of Asian carp into Lake Michigan from canals that link between the Mississippi River and the lake. These things get to 4 ft long and 80 pounds and would wreak havoc on current fish populations. (One type of these don’t like outboard motor noise/vibrations and they jump out of the water. People can be seriously hurt when one of these things jumps up and hits someone in a passing boat).
MD in Philly (227f9c) — 12/6/2009 @ 5:58 pmWe should boycott the EPA!
Secret Squirrel (6a1582) — 12/6/2009 @ 5:58 pmwell… the good thing I guess about opening CO2 up to litigation is that all kinds of discovery might be possible about the phony science the EPA is using to perpetrate this fraud.
This might could be a good thing.
happyfeet (71f55e) — 12/6/2009 @ 5:59 pmWHY NO HEARINGS ON “GLOBAL WARMING”?
Because they can’t get scientists to lie under oath. In fact,
most reputable scientists say the planet is getting cooler.
“Voodoo” science is being used as an excuse to impose draconian
legislation. The truth is: that 97% of CO2 emmissions — the
cause of so-called global warming — occur naturally; of the
final 3% America only contributes .6% — a negligible amount.
These globalist have a hidden agenda with their proposals, and it
is not to promote the public interest. It is an agenda to give
“big brother” more control over our lives, and a gradual
imposition of a regressive consumption tax. These monies will be
used to pay for further taxcuts for the rich, and to add to the
over 200 billion dollars — according to Ralph Nader — of
corporate Welfare benefits they illegally receive.
Also, the “multinationals” intend to use this farce as an excuse
Secret Squirrel (6a1582) — 12/6/2009 @ 6:09 pmto make our domestic producers less competitive. Through the Federal
Reserve (higher interest rates), and the administration’s strong
dollar policy (up from 83 to 143), they have begun their assault
on American industry, and the American people. Since the passage
of NAFTA and GATT our trade deficit has quadrupled, and is increasing
exponentially. People are now losing their jobs in droves.
You’re a very dark little squirrel.
happyfeet (71f55e) — 12/6/2009 @ 6:12 pmracist!
redc1c4 (fb8750) — 12/6/2009 @ 6:26 pmJust a Squirrel
TC (0b9ca4) — 12/6/2009 @ 7:48 pmThe ridiculous emanations from the politicos will finally end any credulousness the public has for politicians and, I’m sorry to say, scientists for a generation. The final result for all this lying and bullshit will be an unpleasant situation for those of us who want to live in liberal ( in a a classic sense) society. I just don’t see any alternative.
Mike K (2cf494) — 12/6/2009 @ 7:54 pmHappyfeet: I like the “Dirty Socialist” appellation. That succinctly distills the essence of these people. We are really headed for some hard times IMO, and I fear what is coming. California is going to go down first – the unfunded public employee pensions are going to hit soon and may well be the first domino to fall. I wake in the middle of the night worrying about the future. This is not a happy time. Does anyone else feel the constant sense of dread that I do?
William Wilson (40bc94) — 12/6/2009 @ 10:27 pmIf the mobs burn down all of the EPA offices, would that contribute to, or combat, global warming?
AD - RtR/OS! (f2588c) — 12/6/2009 @ 10:34 pmCO2 is nuthin compared to oxygen. O2 is highly corrosive. Plus, you’ve heard that “the dose makes the poison.” An overdose of oxygen can result in oxygen toxicity, with symptoms including muscle twitching and spasms, nausea and vomiting, vision impairment, convulsion, and even death. I, for one, hope the EPA acts immediately to curtail this deadly menace.
grs (b9e726) — 12/6/2009 @ 11:05 pmgrs – and do not forget Dihydrogen Monoxide – which causes thousands of deaths every year, according to the CDC … for 2005, for example, the CDC statistics show that there were 3,582 fatalities due to Dihydrogen Monoxide …
And even the climate scientists admit that Dihydrogen Monoxide is the most prevalent greenhouse gas …
One hears so little about it, that one has to suspect that the sellers of Dihydrogen Monoxide must have paid off this Administration !
Alasdair (205079) — 12/6/2009 @ 11:17 pmSo don’t they have to prove that CO2 you exhale is a danger? Does that mean all liberals will refrain from exhaling?
Remember, the liberals did the same thing with DDT, no science just the 1972 EPA ruling, and 30-40 million African children have died for it.
bill-tb (365bd9) — 12/7/2009 @ 4:11 am21.WHY NO HEARINGS ON “GLOBAL WARMING”?
It’s actually worse than that. Congress did hold hearings several years ago. They had a couple prominent statisticians independently look at the data and at McIntyre’s criticism of “the hockey stick” and basically agreed with him, as I understand it (the papaer that wasn’t “important enough” for Nature to publish).
MD in Philly (227f9c) — 12/7/2009 @ 6:20 amI declare Obama and his enviro-whackos to be more than a public nuisance.
PCD (1d8b6d) — 12/7/2009 @ 7:00 am“General Public declares EPA a public nuisance.”
mojo (8096f2) — 12/7/2009 @ 8:25 amJust today, I read an editorial from the Los Angeles Times warning that if we do not take action, the United States will become a threat to humanity.
I wonder why not a single newspaper editorial pointed out that the United States can stop global warming simply by detonating its arsenal of thermonuclear weapons. Carl Sagan and four other scientists proved this to be true back in 1983.
Michael Ejercito (6a1582) — 12/7/2009 @ 10:13 am(Observed the following bit on the net. Jake)
Freedom Lovers: At least something will be rotten in the state of Denmark when the White House Squirrel (tied to Acorn) arrives in Copenhagen to find ways to CHEW us out and SNUFF out freedom! Speaking of Copenhagen, we’ve gotta find ways to cope with that publicity hog!
Jake (24864b) — 12/8/2009 @ 11:54 amSquirrel Watcher
A day late and a dollar short.
A little long, but pretty convincing to a lay person. If this is the quality of the science, then I am embarassed to be associated with them.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/12/08/the-smoking-gun-at-darwin-zero/
We knew the WHY of hiding the decline.
Now we might have a pretty good idea as to the HOW.
Dr. K (adb7ba) — 12/8/2009 @ 5:41 pmDr. K., technically “HIDE THE DECLINE” refers to a specific, different problem – that the tree ring proxies that the recreations of historical climate depend upon breakdown in the last half century and don’t match recorded temperatures.
But the undocumented manipulations of the raw temp data that Will E. discusses there must be explained before we can trust the claims of temperature increases on recent decades.
SPQR (26be8b) — 12/8/2009 @ 5:44 pmSPQR, I agree that this is technically not the “hide the decline” mentioned in the e-mails.
But the result is the same:
They lied
Dr. K (adb7ba) — 12/8/2009 @ 5:49 pmYep, Dr. K. I only intended to preempt the usual AGW defenders’ retort that you are misrep’ing what “hide the decline” is about.
The AGW people have never adequately explained why the tree ring data breaks down against recorded temp. But that’s not a surprise since they use a temp proxies trees that dendrologists say are precipitation proxies …
SPQR (26be8b) — 12/8/2009 @ 7:14 pm[…] Dr. K pointed this out the other day — so that's another good reason to read the comments […]
Patterico's Pontifications » Why the CRU may have Destroyed its Raw Data (e4ab32) — 12/9/2009 @ 5:59 pm