EPA resists greenhouse gas regulation

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said on Friday that Congress, not the EPA, should regulate greenhouse gases.

EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson hosted a conference call with reporters on Friday where he said that existing law, the Clean Air Act, is "ill-suited" to addressing greenhouse gas emissions.

Instead, Johnson said that Congress should draft legislation to address climate change.

"It's really at the feet of the Congress to come up with good legislation that cuts through what will likely be decades of litigation and regulation," he said on the call.

A document published by the EPA on Friday, called Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR), compiles concerns from other government agencies and solicits public comments.

The ANPR was issued in response to a Supreme Court ruling last April that compelled the EPA to regulate greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide as pollutants if they affect human health.

With the Clean Air Act, the EPA cannot adequately address climate change regulations because of the complexity of the task, which affects other government agencies, the U.S. economy, and potentially individual citizens, Johnson said.

Earlier this week at the G8 meeting of industrialized countries, world leaders called on countries to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 50 percent by 2050, but it was unclear whether 1990 or today's levels serve as a baseline.

Although hailed as a victory by the Bush administration, environmentalists said that the targets are too low to avert the most serious effects of climate change.

The Sierra Club, an environmental advocacy group, lambasted the EPA's move on Friday, saying that "the first thing the next administration will do is toss the Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking into the circular file."

Most businesses believe that some sort of climate change regulation that put limits on air pollution will take hold in the next president's administration.

These regulations could let green-tech companies make money from reducing carbon dioxide emissions. But, in general, most start-ups are not expecting to monetize those reductions in the near term.

[greeny73]

The EPA should at least be putting in a recommendation - they have the luxury of not having to deal with the political side and can look at the science. Congress will have their hands tied by powerful lobby groups and constituents whose jobs rely on dirty industries. This is just an irresponsible way of avoiding the chance to make a difference.

[suyts]

greeny, have you looked at the numbers lately? There is nothing to do about CO2, it isn't doing anything harmful. According to Jim Hansen's own manipulated data, June 1988 was warmer than Jun 2008.
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/tabledata/GLB.Ts+dSST.txt
Obviously, CO2 isn't causing any warming. Man continues to increase CO2 output and yet, the earth cooled over a 20 yr period of time.
Now, do you really think we need to increase the cost of power just because some people in this country have an unreasonable fear of the normal variances of our earth's climate?

[BBernsten]

Please read-Americans need to know!!!!!!!!

NHTSA Hearings 8/4/08

I just returned from the NHTSA hearings held today (August 4, 2008) in Washington D.C., regarding the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for NEW Corporate Average Fuel Economy standards (CAFÉ) for years 2011-2015.

IMPORTANT FACTS: You will not believe what you are reading.

1) The 414 pages DEIS analysis was based on an average gasoline price of USD $2.16/gallon for 2011-2020. A calculation approved by the NHTSA administrators/managers. Would you believe it???????????

2) The new CAFÉ rules were also established, negotiated and pre-approved by the NHTSA?s management along with the influence of domestic automotive companies and their lobbyists. We have now established fuel standards for 2011-2020 that are presently met throughout the rest of the Western world (see elow)
As one guest speaker said today ?are they on another planet??

NHTSA ?NEW Fuel Standards? (2011-2015) decision:

Automobiles are to achieve 31.2 mpg by 2011 and 35.7 mpg by 2015. Light trucks are to achieve 25 mpg by 2011, and 28.6 mpg by 2015.

The NTHSA is also setting a goal of 35 mpg on average for 2020.

America needs to know:

The European Union is currently establishing standards, with a goal of reaching 48.9 miles per gallon for new passenger vehicles as early as 2012. The current EU standard already requires more than 40 miles per gallon about 15% higher than the U.S. goal set for 12 years from now.

Japan currently has a standard of about 40 miles per gallon. Japan aims to further improve fuel efficiency by 17% by 2015, reaching 46.9 miles per gallon.

China has a current average of slightly under 35 miles per gallon. Chinese fuel standards are on target to reach the government?s goal of 35.8 miles per gallon by 2009. China will not only meet, but exceed, the goal just established by the United States for 2020 ? more than a full decade earlier.

Australia is targeting 34.4 miles per gallon by 2010.

Canada is targeting 34.1 miles per gallon by 2010.

Under the current administration, purchasing an electric vehicle is becoming more of a necessity rather than an alternative.
BG Automotive Group, Ltd.
http://www.BGelectricCars.com

[RegulationRita]

If you are interested in Greenhouse Gas emissions you may be interested in an upcoming EPA meeting:

Public Hearings for the Mandatory Reporting Rule for Greenhouse Gases

The EPA is announcing two public hearings to be held for the proposed rule "Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases," which will be published separately in the Federal Register. One hearing will be held in Arlington, Virginia (which is in the Washington, DC, area) on April 6 and 7, 2009. The other hearing will be held in Sacramento, California, on April 16, 2009.

In a separate notice of proposed rulemaking, EPA is proposing a regulation to require reporting of greenhouse gas emissions from all sectors of the economy. The rule would apply to fossil fuel suppliers and industrial gas suppliers, as well as to direct greenhouse gas emitters. The proposed rule does not require control of greenhouse gases, rather it requires only that sources above certain threshold levels monitor and report emissions. The signed notice of proposed rulemaking was posted on the EPA Web site prior to publication in the Federal Register, and contained the same public hearing dates presented in this announcement.

74 FR 12782-12783 (Vol. 74, No. 56)

Proposed Rule for 40 CFR Part 86, 40 CFR Part 87, 40 CFR Part 89, 40 CFR Part 90, 40 CFR Part 94, 40 CFR Part 98, 40 CFR Part 600, 40 CFR Part 1033, 40 CFR Part 1039

This information came from http://www.CyberRegs.com