Guest Post by Willis Eschenbach
A few months ago I wrote a post about the previous head of the EPA, Carol Browner, and her risible claim that she was creating jobs. Her successor, Lisa Jackson, is worse.
Lisa has just ordered that in the future, American coal will be burned in the most polluting way possible. She ruled that coal can’t be burned in new US power plants, so it’s going to be exported to shabbily built highly-polluting furnaces in third world countries. That’s environmental protection at its finest.
Having done that, now she has jetted off to Paris with her usual granola entourage, which consists mostly of nuts and flakes. I guess when the party is in Paris, video-conferencing is soooo last week …
CONTACT:
Alisha Johnson
Johnson.alisha@epa.gov
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
March 28, 2012
EPA Administrator Leads U.S. Delegation to Paris for Meetings on Economic and Environmental Cooperation
WASHINGTON – Today U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lisa P. Jackson arrived in Paris, France to meet with environmental leaders from more than 40 nations to discuss the Agency’s international efforts on urban sustainability. During the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Environment Policy Committee’s ministerial meeting, Administrator Jackson will represent the United States in discussions about the upcoming Rio+20 Conference on Sustainable Development, and talk about ways in which the environment committee can support the global conference’s efforts.
EPA has a long history of international collaboration on a wide range of global environmental issues. In recent years, EPA’s bilateral and multilateral partnerships have increased efforts to address environmental and governance challenges. In collaboration with other nations through the OECD, EPA is furthering its mission to protect the environment by ensuring national security, facilitating commerce, addressing climate change, and promoting sustainable development.
“Furthering its mission”??
Y’know, it’s funny but I don’t recall any of those things being in the EPA’s mission. Foolish me, I thought the Environmental Protection Agency was about, well, protecting the environment …
The EPA sees “ensuring national security” as part of their mission?
The EPA thinks their job is “facilitating commerce”?
The EPA believe in the fairy tale of “sustainable”, and sees their task as “promoting sustainable development“?
Please, someone, anyone, put these folks out of their misery. Why are they babbling about national security? Why is some unelected bureaucrat jetting to Paris to discuss “urban sustainability”?
What does that even mean, urban sustainability? The cities of the planet have sustained themselves for centuries without clueless, gormless bureaucrats meeting in Paris to discuss how to sustain them.
My advice?
Hey, I’m never one for putting people’s emails up on the web, but Alisha Johnson drew the short straw and they list her email at the start of their press release above as the person to contact about this colossal waste of money in time of scarcity. So I’d let her know how you feel about Lisa’s little shopping trip.
Then email your Senator and Congressman, and tell them the same. The EPA, and indeed the US, should not be involved in international efforts on urban sustainability. That’s not its mission any more than “national security” is the mission of the EPA. Name me one thing that these international conferences have actually achieved … it’s just another excuse to hang out at very large government expense in a glamorous foreign city.
I’d write more, but this subject angrifies my blood mightily, and I fear I might wax wroth and utter wildly entertaining but eventually counter-productive speculations as to the species and familial inter-relationships of Ms. Jackson’s various antecedents, and cast aspersions on her personal habits, genetic challenges, and cranial horsepower … wouldn’t want to do that, so I’ll stop here.
My regards to all,
w.
Willis, if I email my Minn. congressional reps they will tell me the EPA is about progress. They will call me crazy.
An environmentalist wrote recently “Environmentalists have lost their way.” Here’s his view of Utopia that I am obstructing.
….[we can halt]..”the growing divide of wealth between rich and poor. If instead ALL our national money were to be created by the State, and be SPENT into circulation, then nearly all outstanding debts could be paid off. The Green Party has from its start had the policy to issue ‘Citizens‘ Incomes’ – birthright payment of an income sufficient to meet basic needs. Given this, we could cease the futile demand for ‘full employment’ and instead pay attention to fostering [environmental changes] (The growing ‘Transition Town’ movement goes a long way toward this.)
………… we’ve been telling ourselves particular stories about who we are – the founding myths of our culture are all about endless progress, human centrality, the idea that we can control the natural environment and that we are separate from nature, that our technology will save us.”
http://www.theecologist.org/Interviews/378231/paul_kingsnorth_environmentalists_have_lost_their_way.html
WIllis;
I sent Anthony a article written by a friend about Agenda 21.. it is in PDF format with links and source links…
its not about anything in science its a systematic reduction of the US in stature and power.. its about global dominance.
Bill H says:
March 31, 2012 at 9:56 pm
Thanks, Bill. Despite people’s assumptions, Anthony and I only communicate sporadically, and I wouldn’t dream of recommending what he should or shouldn’t publish unless he asked me specifically. He is the same with me, he never recommends what I should or shouldn’t write about. And both of those are just fine by me, we basically trust the other guy’s judgement and stay out of each other’s way.
So I fear I can’t help with your friend’s article, that’s up to Anthony.
w.
Commented to both my Senators.
Didn’t bother with my Congresswoman, as she’s only a short time temp until the Nov Elections. (Though as a Dem is most likely to win the seat outright.)
My opinion is that the EPA should primarily be a science research agency. It does the science and states determine on an individual basis what code requirements they want to adopt. They could provide resources for compliance enforcement to the states, but have no direct enforcement abilities.