Beam me to Planet Gore !
Posted on 05/17/2010 6:26:45 PM PDT by EBH
EPA announced a final rule to address greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the largest stationary sources, while shielding millions of small sources of GHGs from Clean Air Act permitting requirements. The phased-in, approach will address facilities like power plants and oil refineries that are responsible for 70%of the greenhouse gases from stationary sources that threaten American’s health and welfare.
“After extensive study, debate and hundreds of thousands of public comments, EPA has set common-sense thresholds for greenhouse gases that will spark clean technology innovation and protect small businesses and farms,” said EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. “There is no denying our responsibility to protect the planet for our children and grandchildren. It’s long past time we unleashed our American ingenuity and started building the efficient, prosperous clean energy economy of the future.”
EPA’s phased-in approach will start in January 2011, when Clean Air Act permitting requirements for GHGs will kick in for large facilities that are already obtaining Clean Air Act permits for other pollutants. Those facilities will be required to include GHGs in their permit if they increase these emissions by at least 75,000 tons per year (tpy).
In July 2011, Clean Air Act permitting requirements will expand to cover all new facilities with GHG emissions of at least 100,000 tpy and modifications at existing facilities that would increase GHG emissions by at least 75,000 tpy. These permits must demonstrate the use of best available control technologies to minimize GHG emission increases when facilities are constructed or significantly modified.
Under the new emissions thresholds for GHGs that begin in July 2011, EPA estimates approximately 900 additional permitting actions covering new sources and modifications to existing sources would be subject to review each year. In addition, 550 sources will need to obtain operating permits for the first time because of their GHG emissions.
In April 2010, EPA set the first national GHG tailpipe standards for passenger cars and light trucks. When GHG emissions limits for these vehicles go into effect in January 2011, EPA is also required to address GHG emissions from stationary sources under the Clean Air Act’s permitting programs, which it is doing in this most recent plan.
The final rule addresses a group of six greenhouse gases: carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6).
EPA issued a proposed rule in October 2009 and held a 60-day public comment period. The agency received about 450,000 comments, which were carefully reviewed and considered during the development of this final rule.
For more information, see http://www.epa.gov/nsr/actions.html#2010.
Are they still planning to tax cow farts?
Well folks, here it comes...
bump
“After extensive study, debate and hundreds of thousands of public comments, EPA has set common-sense thresholds for greenhouse gases that will spark clean technology innovation and protect small businesses and farms,” said EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson
Just because she said it, that doesnt necessarily make it true.
Do not fear laws ,fear regulations made by bureaucrats.
EPA is why I really despise Richard Nixon.
After extensive study, debate and hundreds of thousands of public comments, EPA has set common-sense thresholds for greenhouse gases that will spark clean technology innovation and protect small businesses and farms.
This may be the largest lie in American history.
EPA and common sense don’t fit in the same sentence.
ping
Collegians protest Gore honorary degree in Knoxville
Global Warming on Free Republic
Will we shut down the EPA before they outlaw mankind’s presense on the planet?
If people like this would just quit breathing it would reduce CO2, however plants would die
We shall see how “final” it is.
This is the “final” term of the EPA in this form.
“EPA is why I really despise Richard Nixon.”
To be fair, if there was no EPA, the US would be like parts of the former USSR by now. The short life expectancy in those parts is suspected by many to be caused by “anything goes” unregulated industrial pollution, not drinking. There are cities there where you trade about 20 years off of your life for a good wage.
However, in the past 15 years, with it’s primary mission complete, the EPA has gone completely and totally out of control.
So what business organizations are going to challenge this in court?
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.