Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

EPA Shifting Its Emphasis to ‘Sustainability’
Cybercast News Service ^ | 12/2/10 | Susan Jones

Posted on 12/02/2010 8:11:46 AM PST by Nachum

(CNSNews.com) - The Environmental Protection Agency, marking its 40th anniversary this week, announced that "sustainability concepts" will govern its programs from now on.

EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson said her agency has commissioned a "groundbreaking" National Research Council study that will help the agency "incorporate sustainability into the way the agency approaches environmental protection."

The announcement signifies an important step toward building a society that can meet its needs while preserving the ability of future generations to meet their needs, the EPA said in a Nov. 30 news release.

Historically, environmental programs have focused on reducing air pollution and water pollution and identifying and monitoring chemical and environmental risks to human health and the environment. But, the EPA explained, today’s challenges involve the sustainable use of energy, water, materials and land – “and require solutions that stress the linkages between energy use, water use, environmental protection, human health, quality of life, and the global economy.”

What does that mean? The EPA gives an example of a sustainability solution – the Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves, a public-private international partnership that’s intended to improve the health of African women and at the same time protect the Third World environment.

In nations where women still cook over smoky fires, giving them inexpensive, clean-burning stoves will not only improve their health, the thinking goes – it also will reduce pressure on natural resources (wood for fires), protect women who will no longer have to forage for fuel, and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. One solution solves a variety of health and environmental problems, in other words.

In 1983, the National Research Council conducted a study that helped the EPA incorporate "risk assessment" and "risk management" in its work. Twenty-seven years later, the EPA is asking the NRC do another study, to help the EPA shift its focus to "a sustainability framework."

WaterSense

Two weeks ago – in what could be construed as a “sustainability” move ahead of the “sustainability” study – the EPA announced the nation’s first “WaterSense” homes.

WaterSense is a partnership program sponsored by EPA that seeks to protect the nation’s water supply by offering people a simple way to use less water.

The program will help homebuyers cut their water and energy use while at the same time saving money on utility bills.

The EPA said four WaterSense-labeled new homes built by KB Home in Roseville, California, will help families save an average of 10,000 gallons of water and at least $100 on utility costs each year.

“The construction of the first WaterSense labeled homes, and the plans to build more, mark the beginning of an innovative approach that gives homeowners the chance to cut their water and energy bills and protect a vital environmental resource,” EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson said.

WaterSense homes use about 20 percent less water than a typical new home, the EPA says. They include efficient plumbing fixtures and hot-water delivery systems, water-efficient landscape design, and other water and energy-efficient features.

As CNSNews.com has previously reported, the EPA administrator already has made “environmental justice” a priority for her agency.


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: emphasis; epa; shifting; sustainability

1 posted on 12/02/2010 8:11:52 AM PST by Nachum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Jet Jaguar; NorwegianViking; ExTexasRedhead; HollyB; FromLori; EricTheRed_VocalMinority; ...

The list, ping

Let me know if you would like to be on or off the ping list

http://www.nachumlist.com/


2 posted on 12/02/2010 8:12:35 AM PST by Nachum (The complete Obama list at www.nachumlist.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

How did the earth get along all these billions of years without the EPA?


3 posted on 12/02/2010 8:12:56 AM PST by pnh102 (Regarding liberalism, always attribute to malice what you think can be explained by stupidity. - Me)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

The House needs to defund and defang the EPA.


4 posted on 12/02/2010 8:13:16 AM PST by thethirddegree
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Looks like Agenda 21.


5 posted on 12/02/2010 8:13:20 AM PST by ConjunctionJunction (I can see November from my house!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
The EPA is now all about helping third world countries. There is a heavy emphasis on Africa, but other countries are also in the mix.

Is this why we have an EPA?

Education, EPA, Energy, NPR -- these are the first four parts of government that I would defund 100%.

6 posted on 12/02/2010 8:15:28 AM PST by ClearCase_guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
Then municipalities double water rates because of shrinking revenues. It happens every time.

Water does not get "used". It's borrowed and returned.

7 posted on 12/02/2010 8:16:05 AM PST by blackdog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

“sustainable use of energy, water, materials and land”

The ‘land’ part scares me to death.


8 posted on 12/02/2010 8:17:16 AM PST by lacrew (Mr. Soetoro, we regret to inform you that your race card is over the credit limit.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thethirddegree

Like the UN, the EPA has drifted so far from its original mission, it has become a monster.

Also like the UN, it has become the home of ideological bureaucrats with a constant stream of money, searching for a mission.


9 posted on 12/02/2010 8:19:00 AM PST by PGR88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

No good can come from this.

What is “sustainable” anyway? I have yet to see agency or anyone actually define it.


10 posted on 12/02/2010 8:19:10 AM PST by ProfoundMan (Time to finish the Reagan Revolution! - RightyPics.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

“We have an Environmental Justice court order here to bulldoze your property sir”- Six figure government clerk, 2021.


11 posted on 12/02/2010 8:19:22 AM PST by blackdog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thethirddegree
The House needs to defund and defang the EPA.

They won't. Congress likes these agencies because it allows them to play the almighty and powerful overseer.

12 posted on 12/02/2010 8:20:21 AM PST by Dahoser (Separation of church and state? No, we need separation of media and state.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: ProfoundMan
Swimming pool in the back yard, and not a government worker? That's an environmental justice crime!

This stuff is scary.

13 posted on 12/02/2010 8:22:12 AM PST by blackdog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: lacrew
The sustainable growth people basically want everyone to live in urban areas. Detroit, Newark, East St Louis -- in a truly sustainable world, all humans would live in areas like that. The flip side is that the land where people plant gardens, raise chickens, and have access to firewood is considered "unsustainable" and must be depopulated.

It's about Control. Ownership of land gives you too much of it.

14 posted on 12/02/2010 8:22:37 AM PST by ClearCase_guy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ConjunctionJunction

It IS Agenda 21. Go to freedom21.org for the counter movement.

“Sustainable development” is nothing less than the state totally controlling everything about your life and property.


15 posted on 12/02/2010 8:22:43 AM PST by MrB (The difference between a (de)humanist and a Satanist is that the latter knows who he's working for.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: ProfoundMan

Requiring a definition usually ends any discussion with a leftist,
and it is the reason that they choose forums in which no questions can be asked.


16 posted on 12/02/2010 8:23:48 AM PST by MrB (The difference between a (de)humanist and a Satanist is that the latter knows who he's working for.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

don’t forget the FDA...


17 posted on 12/02/2010 8:25:57 AM PST by phockthis
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ProfoundMan
What is “sustainable” anyway? I have yet to see agency or anyone actually define it.

"Sustainability" means "whatever leftists think they want at the moment".

This is not to be confused with what leftists said they wanted yesterday or what they'll say they want tomorrow.

They want what they want, they want it now, and if they don't get it the world will end.

This is how things are to be forever.

18 posted on 12/02/2010 8:26:40 AM PST by rogue yam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

Can I hear a “Soylent Green?”


19 posted on 12/02/2010 8:27:27 AM PST by AbolishCSEU (Percentage of Income in CS is inversely proportionate to Mother's parenting of children)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: rogue yam

Actually, seriously,

leftists DO derive their power from ambiguity and unequal application of law.


20 posted on 12/02/2010 8:28:57 AM PST by MrB (The difference between a (de)humanist and a Satanist is that the latter knows who he's working for.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

I am sick and tired of being sick and tired of PHONY government research, studies and polls.


21 posted on 12/02/2010 8:30:26 AM PST by RatRipper (I'll ride a turtle to work every day before I buy anything from Government Motors.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrB

Thanks for the link!


22 posted on 12/02/2010 8:34:12 AM PST by ConjunctionJunction (I can see November from my house!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

It’s time to ban the word ‘sustainability’ and the EPA! That word has gotten on my last nerve! You hear it everywhere now...in business, in healthcare, in farming,etc.

ENOUGH!!


23 posted on 12/02/2010 8:35:02 AM PST by penelopesire (Let The Congressional Hearings Begin!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: rogue yam

I looked at the “Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves” web site. I could not find what they are using to replace the wood and dung used in third world kitchens. Does anyone know? My first guess would be some sort of petroleum product, but cannot tell from the continual lack of details on the Left (your point). If they actually told people what their intent was, there would be an instant response. Can’t have that, you know. Got to keep the proles in the dark.


24 posted on 12/02/2010 8:40:02 AM PST by Pecos (Liberty and Honor will not die on my watch.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: MrB

I was perfectly serious.


25 posted on 12/02/2010 8:45:39 AM PST by rogue yam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson said her agency has commissioned a "groundbreaking" National Research Council study that will help the agency "incorporate sustainability into the way the agency approaches environmental protection."

Blatantly unconstitutional power grab. Agency missions are determined by Congress at their creation. They may NOT be altered by unelected administrators, or even presidents.

26 posted on 12/02/2010 8:46:16 AM PST by Red Boots
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrB
"Requiring a definition usually ends any discussion with a leftist, and it is the reason that they choose forums in which no questions can be asked."

I have a question for them. How do they expect people so poor that they have to cook their food on wood fires to be able to afford to buy expensive imported fuel to run their new "clean" stoves? They will use them for the photo ops. then discard them and go back to "traditional methods" when the fuel runs out.

Question really is, how much will this "green" "feel good" photo opp cost Americans???

The silence is deafening!

27 posted on 12/02/2010 9:05:38 AM PST by Spitzensparkin1 (Arrest and deport all illegal aliens. Illegal is not a race - it is a crime. WhooRaah! Arizona!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: MrB
The now not-so-hidden goal of Agenda 21 and initiatives like it is to de-populate the rural areas and shove everyone into more 'manageable' urban areas. The 'excess' will be dealt with in the camps. Arbeit Macht Frei, nicht war?
28 posted on 12/02/2010 9:12:37 AM PST by Noumenon ("We should forgive our enemies, but not before they are hanged.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
Is the Environmental Protection Agency sustainable?
29 posted on 12/02/2010 9:17:20 AM PST by E. Pluribus Unum (DEFCON I ALERT: The federal cancer has metastasized. All personnel report to their battle stations.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: E. Pluribus Unum

They issued themselves a waiver.


30 posted on 12/02/2010 9:46:16 AM PST by blackdog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

The article starts off about EPA’s Lisa Lefty touting change to sustainability, and immediately falls off a cliff with some crap about smokey African stoves as though the EPA was a division of the UN. THAT tells me something.


31 posted on 12/02/2010 9:51:37 AM PST by rockinqsranch (Dems, Libs, Socialists, call 'em what you will, they ALL have fairies livin' in their trees.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ProfoundMan
What is “sustainable” anyway? I have yet to see agency or anyone actually define it.

It's a Marzist catch word from Agenda21 (total control over your life under the UN and NWO).

pdf with more info.

From the pdf:
"Humanity stands at a defining moment in history. We are confronted with a perpetuation of disparities between and within nations, a worsening of poverty, hunger, ill health and illiteracy, and the continuing deterioration of the ecosystems on which we depend for our well-being. However, integration of environment and development concerns and greater attention to them will lead to the fulfilment of basic needs, improved living standards for all, better protected and managed ecosystems and a safer, more prosperous future. No nation can achieve this on its own; but together we can - in a global partnership for sustainable development."
32 posted on 12/02/2010 10:10:54 AM PST by algernonpj (He who pays the piper . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: algernonpj; All

more at Henty Lamb’s Archive on wnd:

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=43&authorId=70&tId=8


33 posted on 12/02/2010 10:15:15 AM PST by algernonpj (He who pays the piper . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: MrB; rogue yam; algernonpj
Requiring a definition usually ends any discussion with a leftist,

Very true. I had the opportunity to attend a "sustainability" conference a couple years back and the best definition they could come up with was "making the infinite from the finite". That's right up there with skittle-defecating unicorns. I suggested some kind of thermodynamic definition to see if we really were "saving" anything and you'd have thought I had defecated sans skittles.

This has been a peeve of mine since that day and I've yet to find a decent definition from any sustainability advocate that's any more accurate than what you've just said.


34 posted on 12/02/2010 10:28:51 AM PST by ProfoundMan (Time to finish the Reagan Revolution! - RightyPics.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: thethirddegree

Stuff ‘em through a hole in the ice...


35 posted on 12/02/2010 10:31:43 AM PST by Dead Corpse (III, Alarm and Muster)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Sustainability is a code word for “redistribution”.


36 posted on 12/02/2010 10:35:51 AM PST by andy58-in-nh (America does not need to be organized: it needs to be liberated.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: andy58-in-nh

It is also one of the main words in the U.N.’s Agenda 21.


37 posted on 12/02/2010 10:37:45 AM PST by sport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: ProfoundMan

Defining the terms takes away a leftist’s power to contemporaneously manipulate the meanings to fit everyone’s desire to be on the side of the angels.


38 posted on 12/02/2010 11:18:11 AM PST by MrB (The difference between a (de)humanist and a Satanist is that the latter knows who he's working for.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: MrB

On the coast of Maine we have the Gateway 1 project. Agenda 21 all the way. Basically concentrate people and businesses into the two dozen towns in the midcoast area, keep Rt 1 in between a 2-lane scenic cartpath, have people living with businesses and make it so people will be “nudged” to use rail and bicycles. Scary. Of course this is all being couched as “protecting the true Maine.”


39 posted on 12/02/2010 2:35:18 PM PST by NewHampshireDuo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Nachum

Placemark for reading later.


40 posted on 12/02/2010 9:22:30 PM PST by little jeremiah (Courage is not simply one of the virtues, but the form of every virtue at the testing point.CSLewis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson