Skip to comments.Business Fumes Over Carbon Dioxide Rule
Posted on 12/07/2009 9:51:54 AM PST by BradtotheBone
Officials gather in Copenhagen this week for an international climate summit, but business leaders are focusing even more on Washington, where the Obama administration is expected as early as Monday to formally declare carbon dioxide a dangerous pollutant.
An "endangerment" finding by the Environmental Protection Agency could pave the way for the government to require businesses that emit carbon dioxide and five other greenhouse gases to make costly changes in machinery to reduce emissions -- even if Congress doesn't pass pending climate-change legislation. EPA action to regulate emissions could affect the U.S. economy more directly, and more quickly, than any global deal inked in the Danish capital, where no binding agreement is expected.
Many business groups are opposed to EPA efforts to curb a gas as ubiquitous as carbon dioxide.
An EPA endangerment finding "could result in a top-down command-and-control regime that will choke off growth by adding new mandates to virtually every major construction and renovation project," U.S. Chamber of Commerce President Thomas Donohue said in a statement. "The devil will be in the details, and we look forward to working with the government to ensure we don't stifle our economic recovery," he said, noting that the group supports federal legislation.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Regulations” can be litigated, and will be. As with any so called, “climate treaty”, we will never allow them to go into effect. bttt
July 2, 2009
Senate May Pass U.S. Climate Bill, Reject Treaty, Kerry Says
By Jim Efstathiou Jr. and Daniel Whitten
....”Passing domestic climate-change legislation remains the most crucial step, Purvis said.
Ironically, The EPA came out and said There are no findings that Co2 is dangerous to the environment... Funny.... 6
Internal Memo Confirms EPA Regulation of CO2 Will Hurt Economy!
by Patriot-in-Chief on May 12, 2009 ·
ABC News Correspondent Jake Tapper is reporting on an internal Obama administration memo to the EPA. The memo is warning that regulation under the clean air act will damage the economy, especially small business and communities.
That nine-page memo voices a concern that EPA is making a finding based on (1) harm from substances that have no demonstrated direct health effects, such as respiratory or toxic effects, (2) available scientific data that purports to conclusively establish the nature and extent of the adverse public health and welfare impacts are almost exclusively from non-EPA sources, and (3) applying a dramatically expanded precautionary principle.
If the EPA goes forward with a finding of endangerment for all six greenhouse gases, the document warns, it could be establishing a relaxed and expansive new standard for endangerment. Subsequently, EPA would be petitioned to find endangerment and regulate many other pollutants for the sake of the precautionary principle (e.g., electromagnetic fields, perchlorates, endocrine disruptors, and noise).
This is of course directly the opposite of the Obama administrations message to the public that Cap-and-Trade would be an economic boon to our country. Read the orignial memo here: EPA memo http://patrioticmind.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/epa.pdf
More information on this whole ongoing scam can be found here. http://patrioticmind.com/2009/04/taxing-the-very-air-we-breathe/
Update: Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) blogs on the Smoking Gun memo at Heritage.org.
Guest Blog: Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) Uncovers EPA Deception
Posted May 12th, 2009 at 3.39pm in Energy and Environment, Ongoing Priorities.
EPA Holds Smoking Gun Memo from the White House
VIDEO at link
Today I exposed a smoking gun White House memo to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The memo warns that regulation of small CO2 emitters will have serious economic consequences for businesses and the overall economy. I was questioning EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson during the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee budget hearing.
I received the memo this morning, thats marked Deliberative: Attorney-Client Privilege. In this memo Counsel for the White House repeatedly, repeatedly suggests a lack of scientific support for this proposed finding. This is a smoking gun, saying that the EPA findings were political and not scientific.
The EPA has failed to release the memo and has ignored the advice.
The nine-page White House memo undermines the EPAs reasoning for a proposed finding that greenhouse gases are a danger to public health.
This misuse of the Clean Air Act will be a trigger for overwhelming regulation and lawsuits based on gases emitted from cars, schools, hospitals and small business. This will affect any number of other sources, including lawn mowers, snowmobiles and farms. This will be a disaster for the small businesses that drive America.
To quote from the memo to the EPA, making the decision to regulate carbon dioxide under the Clean Air Act for the first time is likely to have serious economic consequences for regulated entities throughout the US economy, including small businesses and small communities.
The memo is an amalgamation of findings from government agencies sent from the Office of Management and Budget to the EPA.
This smoking gun memo is in stark contrast to the official position presented by the Administration and the EPA Administrator.
Despite the findings in the memo, the White House has given the EPA the green light to move ahead with regulation under the Clean Air Act.
According to government records, the document was submitted by the OMB as comment on the EPAs April proposed finding that greenhouse gases are a danger to public health and welfare.
The memo - marked as Deliberative-Attorney Client Privilege - doesnt have a date or a named author. But an OMB spokesman confirmed to news agencies that it was prepared by Obama administration staff.
BACKGROUND: The White House brief questions the link between the EPAs scientific technical endangerment proposal and the EPAs political summary. Administrator Jackson said in the endangerment summary that scientific findings in totality point to compelling evidence of human-induced climate change, and that serious risks and potential impacts to public health and welfare have been clearly identified
The White House memo notes, the EPA endangerment technical document points out there are several areas where essential behaviors of greenhouse gases are not well determined and not well understood.
It warns about the adequacy of the EPA finding that the gases are a harm to the public when there is no demonstrated direct health effects, and the scientific data on which the agency relies are almost exclusively from non-EPA sources.
The memo contends that the endangerment finding, if finalized by the administration, could make agencies vulnerable to litigation alleging inadequate environmental permitting reviews, adding that the proposal could unintentionally trigger a cascade of regulations.
The views expressed by guest bloggers on the Foundry do not necessarily reflect the views of the Heritage Foundation.
You realize that the next step will limit the age of citizens to 65 and kill them off thus cutting CO2 emissions by millions of cu ft. Also save on Social Security thereby millions in raises for Senators, Representatives, and a 100% increase for the King Obama. Also increase his vacation trips. Gotta watch these communists. /s/
There’s more than one way to stifle and destroy a nation..
The Left knows that, maybe some on the right will eventually wake up and respond .. but as long as folk like Grahamnesty and othrs fall for the baited hoax..
Our political and educational systems are so infiltrated, nothing short of a massive purge of the idiots taking us down the drain will do.
November 2010 ,, on e can only hope we have something left to save before it gets here.
I was thinking something similar. We all exhale CO2 with every breath. So does this mean that we are all polluters, subject to controls of bureacrats?
I say we should remove ALL CO2 from the atmosphere!! If the tiny amount that we now have (0.04% of the atmosphere) is harmful, we should have zero tolerance.
Too damn bad for the plants. We are trying to SAVE THE PLANET!
I wish that was only sarcasm.
***We all exhale CO2 with every breath. So does this mean that we are all polluters, subject to controls of bureacrats?***
Back in the old days of the TV show SEA HUNT they were often experimenting with a contraption that would convert co2 back into oxygen. They called it a “re-breather”. Maybe the gov will require all people to wear one of these things, or else you must pay a high, high, tax for the privelege of polluting. (Subsidized for the poor of course)
I imagine that union businesses will be exempt from any ‘decrees’.
Union members will be grandfathered into the regulations.....
Surely our representatives would not buy that argument? Well, here is Mary Bono Mack (R-CA) after she vote for Crap and Trade:
"The last thing I want is the EPA coming in and regulating every small business and farm in California. This federal bill is actually LESS stringent than the regulations we're seeing coming our way as a result of AB32. Furthermore, this legislation REMOVES the authority for the EPA to regulate GHG's, and also puts the brakes on the State's regime."
According to Bono, Crap and Trade is a much better deal.
But business leaders oppose Crap and Trade, right?
From the WSJ article: An EPA endangerment finding "could result in a top-down command-and-control regime that will choke off growth by adding new mandates to virtually every major construction and renovation project," U.S. Chamber of Commerce President Thomas Donohue said in a statement. "The devil will be in the details, and we look forward to working with the government to ensure we don't stifle our economic recovery," he said, noting that the group supports federal legislation.
Somebody in the Dem camp is diabolically clever at picking off senators who at least pretend to be opposed in princliple to the far left's legislative agenda. Whoever that is, he/she may be Mephistopheles in disguise. I am very concerned when I read what politicians and "business leaders" say.
They probably got a bribe for their districts. Is that Sonny Bono’s second wife? Sonny was elected with the 1994 wave, fond memories!
Her excuse was that EPA regulation would be worse than Crap and Trade. A couple of female R senators from Maine wouldn't do that, would they?
Crap and Trade might come back in 2011. If, in the meantime, the EPA starts CO2 regulation, they will surely use that argument again.