EPA’ s Lisa Jackson panders to Copenhagen on opening day. Planned for months of course, with public comment ignored. It is now the people -vs- the EPA, coming to a courtroom near you.
From the EPA press release:
EPA: Greenhouse Gases Threaten Public Health and the Environment
Science overwhelmingly shows greenhouse gas concentrations at unprecedented levels due to human activity
WASHINGTON – After a thorough examination of the scientific evidence and careful consideration of public comments, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced today that greenhouse gases (GHGs) threaten the public health and welfare of the American people. EPA also finds that GHG emissions from on-road vehicles contribute to that threat.
GHGs are the primary driver of climate change, which can lead to hotter, longer heat waves that threaten the health of the sick, poor or elderly; increases in ground-level ozone pollution linked to asthma and other respiratory illnesses; as well as other threats to the health and welfare of Americans.
“These long-overdue findings cement 2009’s place in history as the year when the United States Government began addressing the challenge of greenhouse-gas pollution and seizing the opportunity of clean-energy reform,” said EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. “Business leaders, security experts, government officials, concerned citizens and the United States Supreme Court have called for enduring, pragmatic solutions to reduce the greenhouse gas pollution that is causing climate change. This continues our work towards clean energy reform that will cut GHGs and reduce the dependence on foreign oil that threatens our national security and our economy.”
EPA’s final findings respond to the 2007 U.S. Supreme Court decision that GHGs fit within the Clean Air Act definition of air pollutants. The findings do not in and of themselves impose any emission reduction requirements but rather allow EPA to finalize the GHG standards proposed earlier this year for new light-duty vehicles as part of the joint rulemaking with the Department of Transportation.
On-road vehicles contribute more than 23 percent of total U.S. GHG emissions. EPA’s proposed GHG standards for light-duty vehicles, a subset of on-road vehicles, would reduce GHG emissions by nearly 950 million metric tons and conserve 1.8 billion barrels of oil over the lifetime of model year 2012-2016 vehicles.
EPA’s endangerment finding covers emissions of six key greenhouse gases – carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons and sulfur hexafluoride – that have been the subject of scrutiny and intense analysis for decades by scientists in the United States and around the world.
Scientific consensus shows that as a result of human activities, GHG concentrations in the atmosphere are at record high levels and data shows that the Earth has been warming over the past 100 years, with the steepest increase in warming in recent decades. The evidence of human-induced climate change goes beyond observed increases in average surface temperatures; it includes melting ice in the Arctic, melting glaciers around the world, increasing ocean temperatures, rising sea levels, acidification of the oceans due to excess carbon dioxide, changing precipitation patterns, and changing patterns of ecosystems and wildlife.
President Obama and Administrator Jackson have publicly stated that they support a legislative solution to the problem of climate change and Congress’ efforts to pass comprehensive climate legislation. However, climate change is threatening public health and welfare, and it is critical that EPA fulfill its obligation to respond to the 2007 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that determined that greenhouse gases fit within the Clean Air Act definition of air pollutants.
EPA issued the proposed findings in April 2009 and held a 60-day public comment period. The agency received more than 380,000 comments, which were carefully reviewed and considered during the development of the final findings.
Information on EPA’s findings: http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/endangerment.html
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Bingo.
That’s exactly it.
And I sincerely hope more people wake up and smell the coffee BEFORE that happens.
Geoff in Calgary
You guys have no idea. I work for a state environmental agency, in the Air side of things, and the EPA and Ms. Jackson are going whole hog and trying to kill industrial development (well… they want mythical ‘green’ jobs).
The Endangerment finding is only one part. There’s the GHG reporting requirements that are kicking in, and worst of all, the NSR (New Source Review) tailoring rule.
The tailoring rule would regulate everything down to about 50mmbtu/hr natural gas combustion sources (a small industrial boiler, or large apartment sized unit). And that’s ONLY if they get away with setting the major source threshold at 25,000 tons of CO2. If it goes by the regular rule (which, since its hardwritten into the Clean Air Act, it should), the thresholds are 100 or 250 tons…. basically your house if you burn gas or oil.
This is unequivocally a power grab/blackmail move from an Administration that promised to ‘depoliticize’ the EPA.
On the non-GHG side, we’ve also got the issue of the EPA lowering NAAQS to levels beyond natural, which is also a way to kill growth.
gaak!
Ron de Haan (17:50:58) :
Obama is popular abroad because he doesn’t pursue America’s interests. He’s a push-over.
IMHO,
the sleeping giant will be put out of its misery with public servants such as Mr Markey. The drivel being foisted as truth is so offensive to me that I have trouble containing my anger.
Bill Oreilly needs a swift kick to the head, and desperately needs to evaluate the state of the Nation in regards to this Climate fraud. I have spent extensive time testing replacement solvents in response to the Montreal Protocol; I will not suffer from another such UN mandate.
Red
outstanding in the cornfield
Beyond biofeedback
Without a matching bill passed through the Senate this doesn’t really have any teeth, am i right???
Reply: Patience is a quality possessed by some, desired in all. ~ ctm
Very true. It always shows right up as awaiting moderation, but this time just disappeared. Never seen that happen and then had a comment actually post afterward. Lesson learned.
Why don’t we ban DIESEL first, it’s the one that causes health effects, petrol is much much healthier!!! This will push people into buying more diesel cars!!
In 2002, the US Environmental Protection Agency concluded that diesel exhaust is a “likely human carcinogen”, and a “chronic respiratory hazard to humans…it is reasonable to presume that the hazard extends to environmental exposure levels”.
Health effects of diesel exhaust
* Coughs and phlegm… See More
* Lightheadedness, nausea
* Increased susceptibility to allergens like dust or pollen
* Irritation of eyes, nose, throat and lungs
* Inflammation of lungs, and increased asthma attacks
* Respiratory diseases such as chronic obstructive pulmonary disease
* Lowered resistance to respiratory infection
* Macrophages overwhelmed by particles result in immune reactions that cause inflammation and ‘sticky’ blood, increasing risk of clots and both heart and lung disease
* Mutations in chromosomes and damage to DNA
* For people exposed chronically to 1µg/m3 of diesel exhaust, a rate of lung cancer in the range of 34 to 650 people per million
* Possible cause of multiple chemical sensitisation, leading to changes in red and white blood cells, bleeding, liver damage, and degeneration of the nervous system.
There are two things about diesel exhaust that affect our health: one is the particles and their size; the other is what the particles are made of. Particles are made whenever something is burned – whether wood, petrol, tobacco, gas or diesel. Diesel is popular for fuel economy, but the size, number and composition of the particles in its exhaust make it more toxic than other fuels.
Burning diesel creates fine particles of oily carbon, ash, sulphates, and sulphuric acid that are ejected out the exhaust pipe and into the air. Diesel exhaust is thickest when the engine is old, working hard, or badly tuned, and the fuel has impurities.
While only 10 per cent of cars and trucks run on diesel, they’re responsible for around 80 per cent of fine particles from vehicles. Along with road grit, bits of brake lining, tyre rubber, and exhaust from other fuels, they form mostly invisible dust storms in the concrete canyons and suburban savannas of our cities.
The high hazard zone for health is considered to be 150 metres either side of busy roads – particularly within 50 metres. Depending on the number of vehicles trailing plumes of particles in their wake, levels here can be two, three, up to 10 times higher than the usual city background – which is already unhealthily high.
As particle concentrations in the air rise, so do death rates, from a variety of causes. And the impacts add up over a lifetime. At greatest risk are children, with their developing lungs; the elderly, on top of a lifetime of exposure; and people with emphysema, asthma, and chronic heart and lung disease.
Lisa Jackson incompetence is staggering.
Maybe Americans should start paying attention to who they vote for instead of paying so much attention to who is winning America’s Got Talent.
After 30 years of political involvement, the one thing that seems different about this issue is the extent of energy and anger it generates in people who are far from being activists. I have never seen an educated, bourgeois group more primed for civil disobedience than right now. You can see it in comments here, and much more clearly in comments on news websites.
By all means, fight through FOI, fight through the courts, fight through the ballot box. But I suspect that politics has been permanently infected with Gramsci and Alinsky – control the institutions, then work as a radical. We may be forced to street action that is not in keeping with our basic political views simply because we have no option. I hope not. I fear so.
BTW, Jeremy, you are spot on about The Economist. What was a delightfully English, sceptical, rational magazine 30 years ago seems to have suffered the slow infiltration of advocates that all useful institutions seem to suffer (remember when Amnesty International stood for something real?). What happened to prudent, rational conservatism? They were on the wrong side on Iraq, and now on climate change.
This dumb admin furthers my belief that all upper level government officials should be forced to take IQ tests and have those results be made public.
By the way, a quick bit of math, since “big” polluters are those that put out 25k tons of CO2 then what do about human populations that are above 60k? Groups that big will be breathing out even more CO2 per year!
Actually, now that I think it through, any company that employs over 60k people will be eligible for regulation under these new laws due to their “emissions.”
Morons.
So does that mean there will be nore more fizzy (carbonated) soft drinks, champagne, beer?? Maybe they’ll have to use Nitrogen instead?
What about CO2 fire extinguishers? Ban them??
Also means no more heavy-breathing prank phone calls (you could go to jail AND get fined for polluting)…
“Andy_ (18:08:27) :
Without a matching bill passed through the Senate this doesn’t really have any teeth, am i right???”
Unfortunately, that’s not correct. The Clean Air Act and Amendments grabs ‘pollutants’. Declaring GHGs an endangerment is the first step to officially calling them a pollutant. Then existing rules kick in to force the regulation.
P Wilson (17:59:57) :
Couldn’t find estimates of that, but I haven’t ever seen respiration addressed. It is a large chunk.
I felt physically sick watching that. I just wonder what will happen as temperatures continue to drop. How will they justify things then? And precisely how do they propose to stop climate change. King Canute tried to show he was not omnipotent by demonstrating that he couldn’t hold back the tide. These people would have us believe that they can.
Nitrous oxide? I knew they didn’t have a sense of humor.
Gasoline (“average formula”) C8H18
2C8H18 + 25O2 –> 16CO2 + 18H2O
EPA, more water vapor (already at high temperatures) than CO2 is produced from burning fossil fuels in cars. Water vapor is thousands of times more important to the greenhouse effect than CO2.
What was all that about the government that no longer fears it’s people? I seem to remember something about that. I hope the government remembers.
….she is beyond incompetent, she makes me want to hammer my iron ring with a 10 pound sledge.
Andy_ (18:08:27) :
Without a matching bill passed through the Senate this doesn’t really have any teeth, am i right???
The Executive is bypassing the Legislative with this move. The Executive is abusing its powers. The Executive knows it will never get passed the Legislative on this. So it is just exercising power on its own. All in the Legislative (House and Senate) and Judicial (courts) Branches are obligated to react to this misuse of power by the Executive to maintain a system of checks and balances.
Lisa Jackson – ” EPA will … help Congress craft … legislation that fufills THE VISION OF THE PRESIDENT . “
What’s make these people think a revolution isn’t coming?
So Americans now pollute by merely existing and you’ll be taxed on that “pollution”. So you’ll be taxed just for being alive and existing ultimately.
We had a tax on existence imposed on us in the UK. Twice. It was called the poll tax and was VERY unpopular. I see trouble ahead!
debreuil (18:25:52) :
they watched Blue Velvet to come to that scientific conclusion. 😉
Does anyone have a CV for Lisa Jackson. I searched online to see what her pubs & qualifications are, but couldn’t find anything. I see that she has two Chem.E. degrees, but, is she qualified as a scientist? Has anyone looked up her master’s thesis to see what her scientific chops are?
Seems to me that we are witnessing the historic moment of an attempted power grab via back-door by the Big Green. Just as outlined in their leaked documents. If they succeed, they will be able to intrude in and dictate the course of every aspect of each individual’s life. Red plague painted green. If the U.S. citizenry allows this, the rest of the world will follow down the drain.
Why do I keep thinking of Jabba the Hut when I watch Lisa Jackson? I don’t know…