Posted on 06/26/2012 11:29:23 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach
Full Title:
*******************************************************
From Rueters By Ayesha Rascoe
WASHINGTON (Reuters) – An appeals court on Tuesday upheld the first-ever U.S. proposed regulations governing heat-trapping greenhouse gases, handing a setback to major industries like coal-burning utilities and a victory to the Obama administration and environmental groups.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit unanimously ruled that the EPA’s finding that carbon dioxide is a public danger and setting limits for emissions from cars and light trucks were “neither arbitrary nor capricious.”
In the 82-page ruling, the court also found that the EPA’s interpretation of the Clean Air Act to regulate carbon dioxide regulations is “unambiguously correct.”
The court also said it lacked jurisdiction to review the timing and scope of greenhouse gas rules that affect stationary sources like new coal-burning power plants and other large industrial sources.
The court in February heard arguments brought by state and industry challenging the EPA’s authority to set carbon dioxide limits.
(Additional reporting by Jonathan Stempel, writing by Chris Baltimore; Editing by Gerald E. McCormick)
Full story: http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/26/us-usa-co2-ruling-idUSBRE85P10920120626
h/t to reader Jack Simmons
Second and fourth sentences are contradictory.
From the comments:
**********************************************EXCERPT**************************************
Judges with no knowledge of science have no business pontificating that CO2 is a “public danger”. Utter stupidity.
*****************************************EXCERPT**************************************
This is a victory for science. The Court noted that the EPA relied on assessments by the IPCC, USGCRP and NRC and stated:
These peer reviewed assessments synthesized thousands of individual studies on various aspects of greenhouse gases and climate change and drew “overarching conclusions” about the state of the science in this field.
REPLY: It might be a “victory for science”, and the poor science pushed by eco-activists like Hansen and McKibben, but it is also a tragedy for America. – Anthony
****************************************EXCERPT**********************************
quidsapio says:
A victory for what science Phil? What science supports the contention CO2 is a pollutant?
What does “mot” mean?
***************************************EXCERPT***************************************
Court upholds EPA’s greenhouse gas rules (essentially Carte Blanche to destroy a nation’s economy)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2899668/posts
—
can’t get enough out about this one.
what an incredible power grab.
and a kidney punch to the nation’s energy supplies.
There is also serious subject/predicate disconnect in the headline.
When bloggers try to type fast to be “first” with the news.
Ah, the new media.
But check out the cool blog name! Anthony Watt? Watts up with that? Eh? Eh?
Looks to me like the title got changed for some unknown idiotic reason.
I don’t pretend to know what goes on in the minds of bloggers or their adherents.
I thank God every day for this.
There is a thread previously posted...source -- The AP wjere I believe they reported the news as though it applied to power plants.
Does this mean we have to remove our catalytic converters?
“A catalytic converter or “Cadillac converter” (colloquially, “cat” or “catcon”) is an exhaust emission control device which converts toxic chemicals in the exhaust of an internal combustion engine into less toxic substances. Inside a catalytic converter, a catalyst stimulates a chemical reaction in which toxic byproducts of combustion are converted to less toxic substances by way of catalysed chemical reactions. The specific reactions vary with the type of catalyst installed. Most present-day vehicles that run on gasoline are fitted with a “three way” converter, so named because it converts the three main pollutants in automobile exhaust: an oxidizing reaction converts carbon monoxide (CO) and unburned hydrocarbons (HC), and a reduction reaction converts oxides of nitrogen (NOx) to produce carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrogen (N2), and water (H2O).[1]”
Damn, I thought it was applesauce.
That has two “Ts.”
LOL.....but see #14!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
It is unambiguously correct to state that a human being’s body is a transportation device that emits the same evil gas. Each ambulation is a threat to public safety. Every one of them, including the arbitrary and capricious ones, should be regulated by the EPA as well.
- HH