Excerpts from: EPA left to pick up climate change where Congress dropped the debate By David A. Fahrenthold and Juliet Eilperin
The Obama administration told Congress to find a way to regulate greenhouse gases — or else.
Last month, Congress refused: Democratic leaders in the Senate declined to take up climate legislation before their August break, which means it looks effectively dead for this session.
Now the White House is stuck with “or else.”
The Environmental Protection Agency will soon begin regulating greenhouse gases factory by factory, power plant by power plant. That could be unwieldy, expensive and unpopular — even President Obama has said it’s not his preferred solution.
But for now, it’s his only option.
The next few months could bring a climax to the long-running debate over how to combat climate change, with the EPA trying to implement its rules and industry groups and opponents in Congress seeking to block it with lawsuits or legislation.
The administration will cite a mandate from the Supreme Court, which ruled in 2007 that greenhouse gases could be regulated like other air pollutants. But opponents will say it has chosen an approach that stretches the law and could impose serious economic costs.
The result of their fight could be the first limits on greenhouse gases from American smokestacks — or a significant defeat for the White House and environmental groups.
The administration “wanted to be able to hold out the threat of clean-air regulation [by the EPA], as a way to . . . try to get people to the table,” said Jeffrey R. Holmstead, an EPA official under the Bush administration, who now works for the law firm Bracewell & Giuliani. “They’re now faced with the kind of unenviable task of trying to make it work.”
=======================
Read complete WaP article: EPA left to pick up climate change where Congress dropped the debate
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Folks, this is the end-game I’ve been waiting for….cap & trade was simply a financial mechanism to make imposition of carbon regulations more palatable to the private sector. Carbon regulation is coming, hold onto your hats.
For decades, USEPA has regulated sewage outfalls via the Clean Water Act’s “National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System” (NPDES) permitting and regulatory process, and they will simply adapt this model to the Clean Air Act for major point-source contributors of carbon dioxide.
The Supreme Court has already ruled in the EPA’s favor, and the SCOTUS is only becoming more liberal, so I don’t expect legal challenges to stand up. Congress won’t be able to do anything, have you seen them trying to overturn CERCLA (Superfund)?
That law certainly had vast economic impact and helped drive US manufacturing to Mexico and China.
EPA is also considering carbon dioxide regulation using the Clean Water Act, under the premise that carbon dioxide in the atmosphere leads to acidification of coastal waters. Please see:
http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2010/03/12/12greenwire-some-see-clean-water-act-settlement-opening-new-4393.html
John W. says:
August 4, 2010 at 12:03 pm
… But I wonder how the EPA beaurocrats respond to threats? We can save $100 B over the next ten years if we shut the agency down and put all of them on the street.
_________________________________________________
I think it is time to do a very though house cleaning of ALL the various bloated federal departments. I just talked on the phone to one of these people in a different federal department, and I swear the IQ was some where close to that of a turnip. I have more intelligent conversations with the 4 and 5 years olds I do entertainment for on weekends!
Here is the REAL in government problem:
THE INDUSTRY-TO-GOVERNMENT REVOLVING DOOR
Texas has drawn a line in the sand. I suspect Obama will have to deploy the New Black Pampers to that state also.
The states have a 21 month period to respond for which the EPA has given 2 months and ignored state responses.
I can see Noviembre from mi casa.
You can remove the “I voted for Obama” bumper sticker with acetone. Acetone is a VOC. Next year acetone may be an illegal contraband.
“The Clean Air Act, which was last amended in 1990, requires EPA to set National Ambient Air Quality Standards (40 CFR part 50) for pollutants considered harmful to public health and the environment. The Clean Air Act established two types of national air quality standards. Primary standards set limits to protect public health, including the health of “sensitive” populations such as asthmatics, children, and the elderly. Secondary standards set limits to protect public welfare, including protection against decreased visibility, damage to animals, crops, vegetation, and buildings.” (http://www.epa.gov/air/criteria.html)
The US Supreme Court ruled in April, 2007 that EPA had the authority to regulate the emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act of 1970, as amended. The Supreme Court decision was based on the potential endangerment which could be caused by climate change driven by CO2 and other GHG emissions, rather than on direct human endangerment resulting from exposure to these gases.
EPA issued an Endangerment Finding regarding greenhouse gases in December, 2009. (http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/endangerment.html) The language reproduced above states that EPA must now set an NAAQS for CO2 as well as the other listed greenhouse gases. The contemporaneous Cause or Contribute Finding was limited to new motor vehicles, though they are obviously not the only sources of CO2 and other GHG emissions of concern. For example, the UN Food and Agriculture Organization (UN FAO) has determined that “the livestock sector generates more greenhouse gas emissions as measured in CO2 equivalent – 18 percent – than transport.” (http://www.fao.org/newsroom/en/news/2006/1000448/index.html)
Could one say that you have failed to show just _who_ and or _how_ ‘they’ would benefit by this action of winning the war on the ‘independent American farmer’?
I mean, to believe in such an idea (US govt et al having it in for po lil dirt farmers) it would help some of us to actually understand how this works, as in, who benefits, who the players are (not like this is simple superstition or reading between some mythical ‘lines’ in historical documents) …
And, I would also have to add caution, many rules are regulation are in-effect for the purpose of assuring food-purity, and now-a-days some means of providing traceability of a raw food product back to its source/supplier/farmer. You don’t suppose could be confusing/conflating rules/regulation with the intent to ‘stifle’ small farms/farming … are you?
.
The most dangerous threat of all:
People like me who were once life long voting democrats, now willing to go on the stump for ANYONE running against a democrat. And get this, I am still a liberal. But I don’t suffer educated fools. It has come to this. I believe that stupid conservatives can govern better than educated democrats. Which brings me to the most insane thing I thought I would NEVER say! Bush Jr was a better pres than Obama will ever be. Now excuse me while I go throw up.
Steve Fitzpatrick says:
August 4, 2010 at 12:19 pm
“Either house of Congress can effectively block an EPA regulation; one house or the other can make the EPA administrators lives miserable, for as long as desired, by forcing them to testify before multiple committees, and can refuse to approve the EPA budget in the absence of a specific agreement to not implement a specific regulation. If either house changes hands, CO2 regulation by the EPA is dead.”
I’d like to share in your optimism. While you are correct in that if one house changes hands……. But, realistically, the Senate won’t. Only 1/3 are up for re-election. The house maybe, but I wouldn’t bet that way either. And even still, if it did change hands, it would need to political will to fight the onslaught of the MSM, the White House, and the Senate and the CAGW groups. I haven’t seen a conservative leader with that kind of intestinal fortitude since Reagan. OTOH, 2 years from now, I fully expect an entirely different political climate. Hopefully reminiscent of the global political wave that swept in about the 1980’s or so.
GHG’s
NOX,COX,SOX, CH4 and CFC.
I have that kind of dust too! Wonder if city folks now what kind of dust we are talking about.
Wasn’t the SCOTUS ruling on regulating emissions from cars? If so, how does that give the EPA authority to rule on emissions elsewhere? From the decision,
PGOSSELIN writes They’re going to end up hurting a lot of poor folks.
There are no “poor people” in Congress.
Regarding:
“wws says:
August 4, 2010 at 12:02 pm
Texas declared War on the EPA yesterday – read this:
http://www.globalwarming.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/epa-texas-letter.pdf
YOWZA! But its about time someone fought back.
President Obama is very like our former Prime Minister Blair.
Each knows what we want to hear so they say it but it’s not backed up by any real worldly wisdom or any sound political philosophy.
My opinion is that both the most influential western democracies, the US and UK have become progressively more decadent since WW2 and even more so since the fall of the old Soviet Union.
The values of self discipline, hard work and personal responsibility that created our supremely successful societies and sustained us during periods of adversity have evaporated and the old certainties are now lost in confusion and doubt.
It’s not just the climate that is forever cycling between one state and another. So also do human affairs cycle between freedom and authoritarianism and I fear that after so many decades of success the democratic, capitalist, freedom loving approach to human progress and societal organisation is fading away in our two nations as we move along the next downslope.
It is always necessary to protect one’s freedoms or they will be lost but most citizens today are overconfident, satiated in most of their day to day desires and ignorant of the lessons of history.
Any blame lies with our ruling elites who suffer from a guilt complex born of the emotional conflict between their personal good fortune and the observation that many remain poor and weak.
Their lack of confidence has corroded our education systems and our economies with the consequences that are all too apparent.
How to pull it all back ? There lies a problem. It’s a fine line between freedom and serfdom.
Personally I think the vigour and developing wealth and capitalism of the world’s other nations will take over from the decadent west unless sense is restored very soon.
India and China will not be denied. The day of the Western Powers would appear to be over unless we can restore our values without resorting to primitive authoritarianism which the so called ‘progressive’, ‘liberal’ types seem to advocate.
Abuse of language is a feature that Orwell foresaw. The words ‘progressive’ and ‘liberal’ now represent those who seek to take power and subjugate the masses.
They may try but with modern communications and systems they are already doomed.
It’ not just until November we have to worry about – remember there will also be a ‘lame duck’ session. If Reid goes down, expect him to try to exact as much revenge as he possiby can.
@ur momisugly Pamela Gray says:
August 4, 2010 at 1:28 pm
The most dangerous threat of all:
…………………………….. Now excuse me while I go throw up.
Pam, purging is good for you. Trust me, you’ll feel much better after getting that pollution out of your system. 😉
CO2 can only be classified as a pollutant because of it’s “GHG potential”. It’s beneficial for plants and life-preserving in human bodies (without CO2, hemoglobin wouldn’t give oxygen up).
It shares all three aspects with H2O. So; why don’t you force the EPA to regulate H2O as well. For a start, they could enforce covering all water areas with plastic skins to reduce evaperation… Hey! I just solved the global warming problem.
Cancun, here i come!
Eric says:
August 4, 2010 at 12:15 pm
I voted for Obama, but I hope that next time around I have an alternative other than Sarah Palin types.
DonB says:
Being out of the US during the last election I am not sure what a “Sarah Palin type” is.
Could you please define that term and give some concrete examples so that I will recognize one if I meet one. Is it something similar to an Al Gore type or a Jimmie Carter type?
Pamela Gray,
I feel your pain.
Hear, hear! drum beatings in the middle of the jungle!…Carbon hunters approaching!
For the records: I am a european leftist liberal, as they can positively get!
But, man, this current US-american administration really s***s (self-snip).
And no, I DON’T buy the Global Warming-Myth (GWM)! That’s why I am here.
And that’s why I will stay here – because there is no other place on the net for getting the latest comprehensive, as well as comprehendable FACTS on the global climate (“change” deliberately omitted!), like on WUWT.
old construction worker says:
August 4, 2010 at 12:01 pm
PW Townsend says:
August 4, 2010 at 11:38 am
‘As soon as the EPA institutes regulations it all goes to the courts. Get ready to rumble.’
Bingo, we have a winner
Or congress could declare CO2 a non pollutant and take it out of the EPA hands. It would save the Tax Payers/Consumer a lot of money and Law Makers’ jobs.
————————————————————————————
But that would be logical, straightforward and sensible, Old Hand Worker – and hence, has no chance in hell to happen (Besides: You can bet, that two thirds of all members of Congress are heavily invested in the “Chicago Carbon Trading Exchange” already.)
What these boilermen should do when the EPA arrives is shut all the dampers on their furnaces to make sure they’re only producing carbon monoxide and not It’s evil poisonous twin CO2 in this crazy upside down world.
I remember when carbon dioxide was the targeted result of combustion and It wasn’t that long ago.
Theo Goodwin says:
August 4, 2010 at 12:41 pm
Yesterday, Missouri voted 70% against the individual mandate in Obamacare. If the EPA “forges ahead” and voters are given the opportunity then they will vote at least 70% against EPA regulation of CO2. Their first opportunity might be the November election. At this moment, Obama is probably getting an earful from just about every Democrat congressperson. If Obama tells Lisa to “forge ahead” then we have to worry whether he is bent on destruction of his presidency and the Democrat Party.
________________________________________________________
I think the “game” is much deeper than that. I think Obama’s mandate was to fatally cripple the US as a world power so as to usher in “Global Governance” http://www.sovereignty.net/p/gov/gganalysis.htm
Energy – we already know about this and what it does to what is left of the US manufacturing base and American jobs.
Money – Obama doubled the US money supply by April 2009. The Fed PRINTED (counterfeit) close to a TRILLON dollars in three months. Americans will now have to pay back that money to the bankers with real wealth, their labor, along with interest. Coupled with the multiplication factor of the fractional reserve banking system this destabilized the USA as the world’s “Hard Currency” in the eyes of China and Russia.
Food – Almost there. The bill to wipe out US farming has passed the house. The famine set up by Cargill VP during Clinton’s watch is about to come home to roost. And even the EPA has gotten into the act with the threatened “farm dust ” reg. http://farmwars.info/?p=1565
Educationby 12th-grade, we’re at the bottom of the heap, outperforming only two countries, Cyprus and South Africa: http://www.enterstageright.com/archive/articles/0804/0804textbooks.htm
Economic principles: http://spectator.org/archives/2010/07/28/the-timeless-principles-of-ame/2
Money supply http://research.stlouisfed.org/fred2/data/BOGUMBNS.txt
Minimum Wage http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/blminwage.htm
The progressive (s) destruction of the USA (and the rest of Western Civilization) is absolutely terrifying if you actually bother to look.
Henry chance says:
August 4, 2010 at 1:08 pm
“The EPA is hyperventilating on dust. If they rule against dust on dirt roads, we are stuck with paving all of them with asphalt or closing them. …..”
Huh? When did they start having spasms over dirt roads? Geez, I can’t keep up with the insanity!
I wonder if the EPA could be sued for regulating some greenhouse gases but not all of them? If they are forced to regulate water vapor, it may be their undoing.