Friday, April 17, 2009

To Regulate or Legislate, That Is EPA's Question

In keeping with the environmentalist religion's inexorable march towards the abrogration of freedom and economic destruction, the EPA's has released their unsurprising "finding" that we are all going to roast to death along with their ultimatum that Congress must pass laws to curtail "emissions" or they will regulate them:
WASHINGTON – The EPA on Friday declared that carbon dioxide and five other greenhouse gases sent off by cars and many industrial plants "endanger public health and welfare," setting the stage for regulating them under federal clean air laws. The action by the Environmental Protection Agency marks the first step toward requiring power plants, cars and trucks to curtail their release of climate-changing pollution, especially carbon dioxide from the burning of fossil fuels.

"The (EPA) decision is a game changer. It now changes the playing field with respect to legislation," said Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., whose Energy and Commerce subcommittee is crafting broad limits on greenhouse emissions. "It's now nolonger doing a bill or doing nothing. It is now a choice between regulation and legislation."
Here is the EPA's press release and here is an EPA page that links to the two public hearings that will be held in May in Arlington, VA and Seattle, WA.. The public can also submit in writing. I encourage anyone able and willing to submit in writing or attend a hearing. I doubt it will help stop this freight train, but we can try. On a positive front, here is a post on ARC that provides some details about Dr. Keith Lockitch and Dr. Willie Soon's recent UCLA panel event to debunk climate change.

Start setting some money aside. This is going to cost you.

6 comments:

Harold said...

"Start setting some money aside. This is going to cost you."Absolutely. Not to sound like a conspiracy theorist, but do you think that this is a stealth attempt at nationalization of energy and refining industries? Undoubtedly people will see significant increases in things like the price of fuel. There will be "outrage" and the politicians will blame yours truly for "inflating the price" and call for more regulations/fixes on what people pay at the pump, the lab, the supermarket, etc.

Can't wait till the ARC video becomes available. Especially liked this quote by Dr. Lockitch:

The real threat we face is not “anthropogenic climate change,” but what you could call misanthropogenic climate policy."

z said...

"Is this a problem? If yes, then we get more power and funding. If no, then we don't. People, we can't let the public screw us. We are the E.P.A. Lets show 'em who's the boss!"

Doug Reich said...

Harold,

Yes, I loved that line by Dr. Lockitch too.

I think the energy industry has been effectively nationalized. Consider that utilities that produce electric or nuclear power are essentially government agencies. Energy exploration is largely prohibited or at least entails massive government intervention since the "government" owns most of the land in this country. Building a refinery is practically impossible - I think only one has been built since the 1970's.

In what way does the government not exercise de facto or de jure control over the domestic energy industry? They can hardly take a breath without government intervention. So, I don't think it is a stealth effort - I think it is an overt effort that has largely taken place!

Let me know what you think.

Doug

Harold said...

"In what way does the government not exercise de facto or de jure control over the domestic energy industry?"Well, that's a good point. Pretty much everything we do requires permits or notification of government agencies. Personally, I don't do compliance but I am aware of those in my line of work whose sole job is making sure that our refineries are following regulations created by our meddling government. And then, with a straight face, the same politicians talk about keeping America competitive. Consider the following from a summary of the Waxman-Markey Bill:

Title IV: "Transitioning to a Clean Energy Economy""To ensure that U.S. manufacturers are not put at a disadvantage relative to overseas competitors, the draft authorizes companies in certain industrial sectors to receive “rebates” to compensate for additional costs incurred under the program. Sectors that use large amounts of energy, and produce commodities that are traded globally, would be eligible for the rebates. If the President finds that the rebate provisions do not sufficiently correct competitive imbalances, the President is directed to establish a “border adjustment” program. Under that program, foreign manufacturers and importers would be required to pay for and hold special allowances to “cover” the carbon contained in U.S.-bound products." (Emphasis added)

Are these people serious? Unfortunately, yes.

"So, I don't think it is a stealth effort - I think it is an overt effort that has largely taken place!"Yes, it has happened and there have been calls for direct takeovers of these industries, but it's rarely that explicit, and that's why I say it's a stealth attempt. They won't come out and say "we need to take this over, because it's the role of the government" (which it isn't). They just talk about the danger to the nation and the need for "serious policies" to address these "imminent threats".

Regards,

Harold said...

Ok, for some reason my post formatting looks weird. It appears fine in the preview, but in publishing it screws up.


Sorry about that.

Doug Reich said...

Harold,

Thanks - that quote from the regulation is unbelievable!

Re your last point about stealth vs. overt - that's just the difference between fascism and socialism - same thing just socialism is more explicit while under fascism there is nominal private ownership but the govt calls the shots - we are moving toward fascism