EPA Closer to Regulating Greenhouse Gases
A new finding is intended to spur action at the Copenhagen climate change conference.
Kevin Bullis 12/07/2009
- 13 Comments
On the first day of the Copenhagen climate change conference the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has found that greenhouse gases constitute a threat to human health--a prerequisite for the agency to start regulating the gases.
The timing of the announcement is intended to boost efforts to reach a climate change agreement at the conference. Many countries have criticized the lack of action on climate change from the U.S., but now U.S. negotiators have an argument that their country is taking greenhouse gases seriously. If Congress fails to legislate for greenhouse gas emissions reductions, the EPA will step in.
"Today's action is a step towards enduring, pragmatic solutions to the enormous challenge of climate change," EPA administrator Lisa Jackson said (according to a copy of her speech). "It also means that we arrive at the climate talks in Copenhagen with a clear demonstration of our commitment to facing this global challenge. We hope that today's announcement serves as another incentive for far-reaching accords in our meetings this week."



RD
212 Comments
Bureaucrats
Congress is hazardous to our health, and DC should be shut down. Only a bureaucrat would claim a life-essential gas is dangerous to life. CO2 has declined 94% since animals started roaming Earth, and if it dropped to 150ppm, nearly all plants and animals would perish. So what does the EPA do, it buys into taxing propaganda that carbon will fund government. This is all a game of control.
VOTE OUT the PROGRESSIVES in 2010. We MUST take back control of government, AND this time, we must stay true to conservative, minimalist government roots.
Reply
claudioona
2 Comments
Re: Bureaucrats
Nothing is more essential to life than water. This fact does not make floods less deadly and harmful.
Reply
tomlanzilotta
8 Comments
Re: Bureaucrats
I don’t think anyone is claiming that natural cycles of CO2 are dangerous to life. The concerns are the effects of burning billions of years of stored carbon in a hundred year period. What is amazing to me are all the externalities associated with the burning of carbon that most people don’t even realize. One example is that my pregnant wife can not eat certain types of fish due to the high level of mercury contamination. In my opinion a lot more needs to be done to reduce pollution levels and we cannot rely on the government alone to accomplish this.
Reply