From Yahoo News
h/t to Adolfo Giurfa
EPA for the first time looks to mandate reporting of the gases linked to global warming
WASHINGTON (AP) — The federal government wants to require companies for the first time to disclose how much greenhouse gases they’re releasing.
The Environmental Protection Agency is proposing mandatory reporting of the gases blamed for global warming at approximately 13,000 facilities nationwide.
The facilities include refineries, automobile manufacturers, power plants, coal mines and large manure ponds at farms.
Together, the facilities account for about 85-90 percent of the country’s greenhouse gas emissions.
The EPA requires no reporting of greenhouse gases. The information will be needed if it decides to control greenhouse gases or if Congress passes a law limiting the pollution.
Companies would have to file their first reports in 2011.
Should the the EPA ever demand my report, I think I’ll follow Jim Hansen’s lead and do a little “civil disobedience”. Assuming the trend holds, I’d likely send back something like this:
(when you figure it out)
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Human respiration at 1 kg CO2/day, global emissions from 6.77 billion humans alone is about 25 billion tons/year.
Compare EIA’s estimate of about 5.8 billion tons CO2/year from energy related CO2.
Should the appropriate response to EPA’s proposal be that shown by Medina City Council? – where “City Council Members Can’t Stop Laughing After Meeting Interrupted… by Farts.”
Those companies should all move to India! Not just they would free themselves of these kind of pressures, they would also force this Administration to rethink their economical priorities.
Gee!
I wonder why so many people are pessimistic.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/business/general_business/53_say_it_s_likely_the_u_s_will_enter_a_depression_similar_to_1930_s
Probably because they are staring straight down the barrel of intrusive socialism.
(Myself, I would have voted “not very likely”).
snip–bridge too far ~ charles the moderator
Good night!
CO2 = tax for social programs
Just destroy the economy.
Only one thing to do.
Figure out how to make some money off this.
At this point it is every man for himself.
Hey folks – just an English Teacher’s kid’s take on things, but why do we talk about vapors that absorb (and, of course, re-radiate) in the infrared portion of the spectrum as if they are necessary for the function of cool-weather nurseries?
i.e. If CO2, CH4, HOH etc. are’nt capable of heating things up unless constrained in an agricultural ‘hothouse’, why do we refer to them as ‘greenhouse gasses’? Why not refer to them as “so-called greenhouse gasses”, “alleged greenhouse gasses” or simply “‘greenhouse gasses'”? Let’s be forthright and honest in our scepticism!
Tom
The tax will bounce off the company on to the comsumer. Just a long winding road to gain submittance from the public for environmental taxation. The scientific accuracy doesnt matter, only public acceptance. They’re expecting some strife from you, but not your children and your grandchildren. Thats why the climate propaganda starts in school-figuring that the tax will ramp up fiercely by then. Thats right, your heirs are really going to thank you for being so thoughtful of their future.
This is fun! The first class action lawsuit will be directed at government i.e. ALL government and related industry, military, laboratories and agencies to disclose THEIR GHGs. And, since the scientifically accepted definition of GHGs specifies predominantly (85-95%) water vapor – steam releases (a variable dependent on ambient temp) MUST be included along with water.
Next lawsuit will be directed at States having greater or lesser amounts of fresh water. They must provide evaporation tables and estimates for the release of their water into atmosphere as water vapor. Wow. This can provide the tort attorneys twenty years of steady income. Thanks EPA!
If we look at it the other way around it is funny..(up to now)
Reply: I hear ya, but we have to have some limits here ~ charles the moderator
“”Wouldn’t it be interesting to see reporting for say the White House, NASA, the Military and even the EPA…who would they trade with?””
The worst part is that news outlets (newspapers and television news) will be exempt.
Consumer Unite
Since we the consumer Pay All Taxes on goods and services, send a message to government. Tell them you will cut your spending by 15% if they try to regulate CO2.
Also, inform your representative you will work to remove him or her from officer if he or she votes for any type of CO2 regulation.
Talk about helping the poor, a 40% utilitiy bill increase should help them…….
Maybe Obama is going to give some free electricty to get around this increase.
The answer is simple… over-report your emissions by using peak capacity figures remember the reporting will be as we are coming out of recession, so make sure you use the number the Government likes to use, “what our economy can produce” not what it is producing. So use the highest production numbers you have on record.
If all businesses do this there will be a cushion in issued permitts making them worth basically nothing because of supply and demand, bid the permits into the dirt at the auction. The government will have a surplus of permits and they cannot be removed from the pool, the system is like roll over minutes, so buying too many one year allows you to use them in the future. They reduce the pool the next year by 1% or whatever and then you purchase all the permits because they will be at the supply and demand low price. (by purchasing them all you create the “perception” that the production is up so they will not try and lower the cap to drive the prices up. If you ever worked with a Government Agency you know they spend all of their budget surpluses in the last month to make sure to maintain funding levels. Same idea.
Then hold them and refuse to release them into the system the next year and leave the excess in the Government hands, alternate like this back and forth and the Government will get about 10% of expected revenue over the first 3-5 years and will be forced to scrap the system due to costs.
Simple.
OK, I’ve been thinking, and that’s always dangerous. I have a stupid question.
According to dogma:
1. Manmade CO2 is a dangerous gas that is causing world temperatures to rise and it is reaching a point of no return.
2. The U.S. is the second leading emitter of manmade CO2.
3. According to the Energy Information Administration (US), transportation is responsible for 34% of the US total manmade CO2(2007).
4. Catalytic converters convert CO and unburnt hydrocarbons to CO2
Why is there not an immediate government order to remove all catalytic converters from all U.S. automobiles? After all, what’s a little localized acid rain and smog compared to the end of the world?
Why is there no push to come up with a different converter that would convert these substances to something other than CO2?
Could it be that there is an ulterior motive?
OK, All skate…
More youth manipulation
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/mar/10/climate-change-environment-scientists?commentpage=1
” Tom in toasty warm Florida (10:41:09) :
Does steam count as a greenhouse gas?”
You mean like a taking a shower tax?
We have this in Europe and at least in my country, these carbon-credit assignments are just another source of corruption.
Also, inform your representative you will work to remove him or her from office if he or she votes for any type of CO2 regulation.
And threaten to drag them through lots of mud.
“helvio (13:21:03) :
Those companies should all move to India!”
They just might.
I told the Dept. of Agriculture census that I sold off all my livestock a few years ago.
What the government doesn’t know won’t hurt me.
Why is it that the bureaucrats honestly believe that large companies will pay these ridiculous taxes. In the modern world, it is far too easy to just relocate to a country without pointless regulation and just ship all the goods in. It would cost far more than the revenue lost to open every packet and see it it was made in a “green fashion” so everyone else in the world will ignore the regs and make money from the uk/us sabotaged economies.
Are there no businessmen/women creating these laughable laws, or does the destruction of the western economies fit nicely into their plans.
The only people that will be left to pay these taxes are the public service workers who cannot relocate.
I wonder if there is a correlation to the increases in CO2 with the increases in attendance at worldwide sporting events? With all that cheering and shouting, not to mention those at home and in bars watching via cable and satellite, not to mention all the CO2 being released from all the beer and soda being poured, not to mention more and more events are held at night so artificial lighting is needed, not to mention the increased travel of teams to ever farther locations around the world.
Let’s ban all sports. They don’t actually need to play the games, just set up computer models to determine the outcomes.
Pierre Gosselin (11:40:41) :
We’re not talking about a nanny state taking over here.
This is going to be more like your clean-freak mother in law coming in to tell you how to look after yourself.
She’s righteous, self-obsessed, certain, uptight, loud, annoying, And once in the house – very difficult to get out…