EPA to "listen" to (then presumably ignore) the public on power plant CO2 emissions

I’m posting this list of meetings at major cities around the USA in case anyone wishes to go and make your case. Based on my previous experiences, in my opinion, the EPA only does this for show, and they aren’t really interested in listening to the public’s ideas and concerns, but they have to keep up appearances.

OTOH, climate issues have turned sour in the last couple of years, so it is possible they might detect the change, especially if enough people voice negative opinions. It might make some difference to this draconian organization, though when they can’t even get the terminology right, and use “carbon pollution” instead of carbon dioxide, I have my doubts. It might be more satisfying and effective to show up with some rotten fruit and vegetables and pelt them from the audience like in the old days when people didn’t like the show.

There is a place to email comments if you can’t or don’t wish to show up in person.

EPA to Hold Public Listening Sessions on Reducing Carbon Pollution from Existing Power Plants

Release Date: 10/18/2013

Contact Information: press@epa.gov

WASHINGTON – Following through on President Obama’s Climate Action Plan, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will hold 11 public listening sessions across the country to solicit ideas and input from the public and stakeholders about the best Clean Air Act approaches to reducing carbon pollution from existing power plants. Power plants are the nation’s largest stationary source of carbon pollution, responsible for about one third of all greenhouse gas pollution in the United States.

The President’s Climate Action Plan takes steady and responsible steps to cut the harmful carbon pollution that fuels a changing climate while continuing to provide affordable, reliable energy. The feedback from these 11 public listening sessions will play an important role in helping EPA develop smart, cost-effective guidelines that reflect the latest and best information available. The agency will seek additional public input during the notice and comment period once it issues a proposal, by June 2014.

The Clean Air Act gives both EPA and states a role in reducing air pollution from power plants that are already in operation. The law directs EPA to establish guidelines, which states use to design their own programs to reduce emissions. Before proposing guidelines, EPA must consider how power plants with a variety of different configurations would be able to reduce carbon pollution in a cost-effective way.

For more information on these sessions and to register online, go to: http://www2.epa.gov/carbon-pollution-standards/public-listening-sessions. For those who cannot attend these sessions, input can be e-mailed to carbonpollutioninput@epa.gov by November 8, 2013.

More information about EPA’s carbon pollution standards for the power sector: http://www2.epa.gov/carbon-pollution-standards

Public Sessions on Reducing Carbon Pollution from Existing Power Plants (all times are local):

DATE: Wednesday, October 23, 2013

TIME: 9:00 am – 12 Noon; and 2:00 pm – 5:00 pm EDT

EPA REGION & LOCATION:

US EPA Region 2

290 Broadway, Room 27A

New York

DATE: October 23, 2013

TIMES: 2:00 – 5:00 pm; and 6:00 – 9:00 pm EDT

EPA REGION & LOCATION:

US EPA Region 4

Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center

Bridge Conference Rooms

61 Forsyth Street, S.W.

Atlanta

DATE: Wednesday, October 30, 2013\

TIME: 9:00 am – 5:00 pm MDT (last 2 hours for call ins)

EPA REGION & LOCATION:

US EPA Region 8

1595 Wynkoop Street

Denver

DATE: Monday, November 4, 2013

TIME: 4:00 – 8:00 pm CDT

EPA REGION & LOCATION:

US EPA Region 7

11201 Renner Blvd.

Lenexa

DATE: Monday, November 4, 2013

TIME: 10:00 am – 3:00 pm EDT

EPA REGION & LOCATION:

US EPA New England

Memorial Hall

5 Post Office Square

Boston

DATE: Tuesday, November 5, 2013

TIME: 9:00 am – 4:00 pm PDT

EPA REGION & LOCATION:

US EPA Region 9

75 Hawthorne St.

San Francisco

DATE: Thursday, November 7, 2013

TIME: 9:00 am – 8:00 pm EDT

LOCATION:

US EPA Headquarters

William Jefferson Clinton East

1201 Constitution Ave.

Washington, DC

DATE: Thursday, November 7, 2013

TIME: 10:00 am – 3:00 pm CDT

EPA REGION & LOCATION:

US EPA Region 6

Auditorium- 1st floor

J. Erik Jonsson Central Library

1515 Young St.

Dallas

DATE: Thursday, November 7, 2013

TIME: 3:00 – 6:00 pm PDT

EPA REGION & LOCATION:

US EPA Region 10

Jackson Federal Bldg.

915 Second Ave.

Seattle

DATE: Friday, November 8, 2013

TIME: 10:00 am – 4:00 pm EDT

EPA REGION & LOCATION:

US EPA Region 3

William J. Green, Jr. Federal Building

600 Arch Street

Philadelphia

DATE: November 8, 2013

TIME: 9:00 am – 4:00 pm CDT

EPA REGION & LOCATION:

US EPA Region 5

Metcalfe Federal Building

Lake Michigan Room

77 W. Jackson Blvd.

Chicago

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
0 0 votes
Article Rating
128 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Brian H
October 28, 2013 12:23 am

the stuff we call pollutants are perfectly harmful things…

harmless
Duh.

D. Patterson
November 1, 2013 12:32 am

Jan Kjetil Andersen says:
October 24, 2013 at 11:32 am
I am not sure what you mean here D. Patterson. It is a fact that the CO2 level has increased from approximately 280 ppm before industrialization to 400 ppm today. That is an increase of approximately 40%. Don’t you accept any of that?

No, I do not accept that, because it is a false claim based upon falsified and/or corrupted data. Worse yet, even the corrupted ESRL data from Mauna Loa does not support your claim. At best a particular time period may see some tens of parts per million increase, and at worst there may have been a more than 100 parts per million decrease in atmospheric carbon dioxide concentrations, as disclosed in U.S. Senate testimony.

It is also widely accepted by almost all well informed people, “warmists” and “skeptics” alike, that this increase is caused by human CO2 emissions, is that the point you have problems with?

That is just you bloviating with self-serving propaganda to claim a fantasy victory lap of some bizarre kind. Back in the real world you are going to have to explain how its is remotely possible for human emissions of >1% to >4% of annual carbon dioxide emissions to constitute all or virtually all of the increase in carbon dioxide concentrations, especially in those time series in which carbon dioxide levels decreased. You are also need to explain how Nature is responsible for nearly all carbon dioxide emissions each year and then somehow fails to be responsible for none of the atmospheric carbon dioxide increases (or decreases) or virtually none of them. Somehow I suspect you cannot and will not.

1 4 5 6