Views and debates on climate change policy
Home | Panelists | Staff Blog | RSS

Post Carbon

EPA chief: U.S. making up for lost time

updated 11:30 a.m.
By Juliet Eilperin
COPENHAGEN--The United States has been "fighting to make up for lost time" in the fight against global warming since President Obama took office, Environmental Protection Agency administrator Lisa P. Jackson said Wednesday.

In the Obama administration's keynote speech at the U.N.-sponsored climate talks here, Jackson said more progress has been made in the last 11 months than what "happened in the last eight years prior" under former president George W. Bush.

Making a pitch to an international community that has demanded bolder action from Washington on climate change, Jackson detailed a list of measures ranging from stricter fuel economy standards to the promotion of renewable offshore energy projects.

But Jackson's biggest applause line came when we said she was "proud" of the EPA's declaration Monday that greenhouse gases endanger public health and welfare. "That is a decision that has been a long time coming," she said to a packed crowd in the U.S. Pavillion.

Jackson wouldn't comment publicly on the state of the U.N.-sponsored climate talks. But she has made the case for the U.S. position in a series of closed-door briefings over the last 24 hours, including meetings with Connie Hedegaard, the Danish chair of the climate conference, and Xie Zhenhua, vice-chairman of China's National Development and Reform Commision.

Jackson said she discussed with Hedegaard, who is guiding negotiations here, the significance of the greenhouse gas declaration. "No one can say we are a nation that is...a climate denier," Jackson told The Washington Post. "We are finally leading the world for us to have a united solution" to global warming.

In her session with Xie, Jackson said, she discussed how the two countries could collaborate on a new memorandum of understanding in which the U.S. has agreed to help China track its greenhouse gas emissions. "We think that's very important," she said.

Jackson said she has emphasized in her meetings that while the Obama administration will push Congress to enact legislation next year curbing greenhouse gas emissions, it will move ahead with plans to both finalize greenhouse gas rules for vehicles in March, and then curb the carbon output from large emitters like coal-fired power plants.

"We will continue to think about how the Clean Air Act applies," she said.

It's unclear whether Jackson--who also met with youth activists and African women affected by climate change, and joined deputy special envoy for climate change Jonathan Pershing in addressing more than 250 non-governmental group representatives--succeeding in convincing delegates here that the U.S. has done what it takes to help secure a global climate pact.

On Wednesday morning, Xie told Reuters the U.S. needs to lay out a more ambitious reduction target than its current proposal to cut America's emissions "in the range of 17 percent" below 2005 levels.

"I do hope that President Obama can bring a concrete contribution to Copenhagen," Xie said.

In her speech, Jackson said that in light of the scientific finding, the EPA is obligated "to take reasonable efforts to reduce greenhouse pollutants under the Clean Air Act."

In a sign of how intensely people are watching the Obama administration's actions at this conference, dozens of people gathered at the door of the small pavilion long before Jackson started speaking--only to be turned away because the room was full.

While Jackson deflected questions about the ongoing state of negotiations, she fielded several queries about Monday's endangerment decision, which she said opens the door to regulate greenhouse gas pollution under the Clean Air Act. At the same time, she said, the White House still will push Congress to produce a U.S. climate bill.

"This is not an either/or moment," Jackson said. "This is a both/and moment."

By

Juliet Eilperin

 |  December 9, 2009; 8:05 AM ET Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg     Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati  
Previous: Copenhagen's morning reads | Next: Quote of the day from Copenhagen

Comments

Please report offensive comments below.



Perception is everything in this game. I noted a report from the Heritage Foundation, an excerpt which is as follows:

"... So how did those Kyoto emissions reduction pledges turnout? According to U.N. data, between 2000 and 2006, the 27 European signatories actually increased their emissions by 0.1%. Canada even saw a 21.3% emissions rise. Meanwhile, the U.S., who was not bound by the treaty since the U.S. Senate voted 95-0 not to subject our economy to costly regulations that China and India were specifically exempted from, actually reduced our emissions by 3% over the same time period..."

Posted by: awunsch | December 10, 2009 3:08 PM
Report Offensive Comment

The reason GISS claims that warming is continuing is as follows:

yrloc=[1400,findgen(19)*5.+1904]

valadj=[0.,0.,0.,0.,0.,-0.1,-0.25,-0.3,0.,-0.1,0.3,0.8,1.2,1.7,2.5,2.6,2.6,2.6,2.6,2.6]*0.75 ; fudge factor

As you can see from the code, a built in warming "correction" rising from .1 to 2.6 massages newly observed data and "corrects" it so observed temperatures will continue to rise even if actual temperatures do not.

This warming claim is fraud, pure and simple.

Posted by: pub123 | December 10, 2009 11:08 AM
Report Offensive Comment

EPA Chief, who was appointed by whom, and takes orders from whom prior to making a decision ???

POTUS MaoBama, aka "The Liar in Chief" Man Child currently sitting in the Oval Office !!!

Posted by: thgirbla | December 9, 2009 10:00 PM
Report Offensive Comment

One would have to assume that Lisa Jackson is a beneficiary of AA?

In any event, all of this nonsense is simply getting people ready to sweep this knuckleheads out of office at the first opportunity.

Posted by: Ombudsman1 | December 9, 2009 9:49 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Welcome to what a soft tyranny looks like.

First of all Bush was only president for 8 years, he could not set back anything more than 8 years. The only thing he set back was the onslaught of punishment promised by the Obama administration who endorses the hoax of man made global warming.

Posted by: thelaw1 | December 9, 2009 9:29 PM
Report Offensive Comment

In the industrial world one country, Spain, has tried to built a green economy. It has proven ridiculously expensive and has destroyed not created jobs. Second, the science of climate change does have problems. Instead of stating as fact that scientists can predict the future, they should be asking for funds to advance our understanding of climate.

Posted by: jeffreed | December 9, 2009 9:16 PM
Report Offensive Comment


This is going to drive more jobs away from America - what are these people thinking???

.

Posted by: 37thand0street | December 9, 2009 8:43 PM
Report Offensive Comment

"On Wednesday morning, Xie told Reuters the U.S. needs to lay out a more ambitious reduction target than its current proposal to cut America's emissions "in the range of 17 percent" below 2005 levels." Sure we'll take all the jobs and business you run off with your Cap and Trade program and we'll make promisses like N. Korea
does and just give you lip service with no real action in return. The Clean Air Act ran off your big manufacturing plants and the Global Warming program will give us the rest of what's left. Double the electric rates and see whats left and blame it on Nafta.

Posted by: bcooper530 | December 9, 2009 8:36 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Geez - these dumb a$$ democrats are ruining this country in short order. I can't wait until the adults return to running this country.

Posted by: gorams1 | December 9, 2009 8:25 PM
Report Offensive Comment

I don't understand something. My understanding is that CO2 emissions under Bush actual DECLINED. The noise from the above article is that Bush did nothing and now BHO has to make up for it.

http://www.motherearthnews.com/Renewable-Energy/US-Carbon-Dioxide-Emissions-2008.aspx

http://www.eia.doe.gov/neic/press/press204.html

Am I missing something or are these reports bogus???

Thanks for any clarification.

Posted by: mzarowitz | December 9, 2009 8:15 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Another phony crisis by the Administration to justify it's actions and threaten Congress!

Posted by: Jimbo77 | December 9, 2009 7:55 PM
Report Offensive Comment

I sure hope no one believes that Obama did not order this proclamation. The translation by Obama is "yes we need jobs, and as I said, this will raise electricity rates by 40%, jobs will be lost, but I will hire everyone to a govt. job." That way we will level the wealth world wide. That is where we are headed.

Posted by: gsms69 | December 9, 2009 7:01 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Time to defund the EPA.. DISBAND them and lets move on.. we can form a new department with ALL new people who can think..
While there is NOTHING wrong with being more energy minded, I could care less if my compact car runs on onion peels as long as it runs.. however, UNTIL they make the energy for it to run on oil peels DON'T PROMISE WHAT WE WON'T DO and that's cut back.. and DON'T TELL ME MY KIDS WILL HAVE TO SEND MONEY VIA TAX DOLLARS TO CHINA AND INDIA BECAUSE THE UN SAID SO..I think you can figure out what I think the UN can do after their food for oil boondoggle.. There is NO more of a climate change than there has ever been.. there is no GLOBAL WARMING but it does sell books and makes millionaires just ask GORE.. watch the history station planet earth and than quit sitting on your brains..

Posted by: lcky9 | December 9, 2009 6:56 PM
Report Offensive Comment

This is the kind of post that really bothers me. We've known since the 1940's that CO2 is a greenhouse gas. His comment is like saying, "until they can prove aspirin causes overdoses when used improperly, we should ignore the them and eat it by the handful." A little is a life saver, a lot is harmful. Same with CO2.
Are you smarter than a fifth grader?Here is the grade-school science. Planets have what is called a "black body" temperature, which is how warm the planet would be due to internal, gravity/pressure induced heat without an atmosphere. On Earth this is 5 degrees centigrade. Because we have an atmosphere, we have greenhouse warming that raises our temp to around 14 degrees centigrade at present. In past times, when the sun ran warmer or when there was much more volcanism, our atmosphere has been hotter. At times, increased overall warming has caused temporary increased glaciation in certain locales due to the interruption of certain ocean currents like the gulf stream, but the earth seeks balance; increased ice increases planetary albedo, or reflectivity, so it cooled down again, which changed the ocean currents back, and caused the ice to retreat again.
At present, the retreating ice is causing increased warming, and melting permafrost will accelerate warming by releasing more methane from the now-frozen bogs of China, Canada, and Siberia.
Local, temporary weather does not necessarily reflect long term global climate patterns. Some times one short term effect is followed by an opposite long term effect.
For instance. a large volcanic eruption obviously brings millions of tons of hot gases to the surface, but it also causes an ash cloud. Thus, there is short-term cooling from the shade of the ash cloud feflecting the sun, and when the dust settles, the co2, co and methane is still there, as well as the waste heat. The globe continues on an up-trend in warming.
Dude, pick up a text book.

The only thing I can guess about this kind of post is that there is an organized group of bloggers paid by the coal companies to obscure the real issues by peddling ignorance. the simple fact is, more co2, more co, more methane, more heat.

Posted by provemewrong:
"Until the EPA can PROVE that CO2 is a harmful Greenhouse Gas, I recommend everyone ignore them.
Inevitably, they will try and force people to comply... At which point the opportunity to fight it in court (all the way up to the US Supreme Court) will be presented."

Posted by: jacquescustodian2 | December 9, 2009 5:50 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Abolish the EPA. Prosecute Lisa Jackson, for power-grabbing crimes against the Constitution.

Posted by: pgr88 | December 9, 2009 5:31 PM
Report Offensive Comment

If it comes down to my job and a polar bear, well, I have an answer.

I'll kill the bear for it's coat and it won't have to worry about being hungry, cold or wet any more.

That's what I call a WIN-WIN scenario!!!

Posted by: Computer_Forensics_Expert_Computer_Expert_Witness | December 9, 2009 5:22 PM
Report Offensive Comment

GKAM Wrote:"You're not one of those who was suckered, fooled, hornswoggled, by that frat-boy, Lifetime Failure into letting him send our sons and daughters to shoot, blast, burn, and kill the sons and daughters of others in their own country, their own cities, their own homes? How are you going to pay back those trillions of dollars wasted in the Destruction of Iraq?"

If you are going to give us your creditials about how you are qualified to judge Global Warming you might want to make sure you can do basic math. The US has not spent trillions on Iraq, in fact it hasn't spent even a trillion dollars yet. Also please subtract the billions we were spending enforcing no-fly zones and keeping troops in Saudi Arabria and Kuwait to keep Hussien in check. I really get tired of the trillions of dollars argument with no mention of the monies that were spent and would continue to be spent if we didn't invade.

The US should have licensed a few nuclear power designs long ago and allowed power companies to build more nuclear plants. The amount of pollution in coal mining and the air pollution of burning coal could have been drastically reduced. We helped invent the technology and other countries like France took it to heart. From what I read 90% of their power is generated from nuclear power.

And before you start calling me a denier or right wing repug etc... I fully believe that man-made gasses are warming the Earth. My only question is whether the current glacial melts, droughts etc... are man-made or are the part of a normal warming cycle. They seem to early for the current computer models. I also question the current solutions to the problem. I would like to see Thorium Nuclear Power Plants and Butonal fuel powered cars researched more. Ethanol is a poor subsitute for gas and wind/solar can't be used everywhere.

Posted by: Silmiril | December 9, 2009 5:16 PM
Report Offensive Comment

The Obama administration warned Congress that if it doesn't move to regulate greenhouse gases, the Environmental Protection Agency will take a "command-and-control" role over the process in way that could hurt business.

Command-and-Control economics. How Soviet can you get. Now they will even tax the air. Lenin, Stalin, & Mao would be GREEN with envy.

Posted by: NormReisig | December 9, 2009 4:59 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Let's say that human activity has had some impact on the environment. It is possible, and I am not going to dismiss this as perhaps a possibility. But, what is unknown is how much that impact is and if that impact is necessarily solely negative. Now, the U.S. government is talking about a cap-and-trade approach, an approach that is going to force American companies and businesses to spend money to further cut emissions. We are told China and India, developing nations with potentially enormous numbers of consumers who will want "goodies," such as cars and PC's, etc., like Americans have, will also somehow be cutting greenhouse emissions. Leaving aside the dubious prospect of that really happening is the fallacy of engaging in an approach based on unknowns. Again, we don't know what the extent of human impact is on the environment. Even assuming it is something, their is a fallacy in engaging in an expensive, perhaps impossible scheme, as Obama has proposed, without knowing if it is really necessary or desirable. Especially when that approach is going to cost American jobs and probably result in more jobs shipped overseas. That's not good for America nor good for our country.

Posted by: magnifco1000 | December 9, 2009 4:29 PM
Report Offensive Comment

thehamptons1 wrote>>>We are in a near depression with millions unemployed, companies and jobs fleeing our country and a deficit that can't be repaid in generations

Republicans supported Bush creating an agency in the White House specifically for the purpose of ASSISTING U.S. corporations moving jobs overseas.
Later, the Republican Congress gave HUGE TAX BREAKS to U.S. corporations that moved jobs overseas.

Fox News didn't report those FACTS??
shocking!

Posted by: angie12106 | December 9, 2009 4:26 PM
Report Offensive Comment

John1263>>>8 years of bush set back environmentalism by decades more. But what do you expect from a president, a party, a movement, who think science is to be ignored and disdained as the devil's work?

Basically, Big Oil ran the country for 8 years from the White House - while Bush & Cheney told us their Iraq War would be paid with Iraq's oil and our gas prices would decrease.
HAHAHAHAHA

The same folks who believed that tale are now duped into believing global warming is a hoax.

Posted by: angie12106 | December 9, 2009 4:21 PM
Report Offensive Comment

How can the Human Induced Global Warming supporters not require actual provable facts to be presented before drinking the Kool Aid?

I only have one question. Can they provide the raw data to allow all this nonsense to be independently verified?

if the answer is no (which it is) then stop trying to force the square peg in the round hole and go away...

This is no longer a debate about science, its a debate about honesty and integrity.. Something the Climate fanatics lost years ago according to the emails...

Posted by: ProveMeWrong | December 9, 2009 4:17 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Somebody said that the greatest danger to our country would come from within. I think we are witnessing that now. Global warming, CO2 emissions and radical Muslims are not our nation's greatest threat.

We are in a near depression with millions unemployed, companies and jobs fleeing our country and a deficit that can't be repaid in generations. Our government is infringing on our liberties, rights and freedoms at a blinding pace. The transfer of wealth, not only within our country, but from our country to the world is now becoming a reality.

This senario plays right into the hands of any radicals that might admittedly want to "TRANSFORM AMERICA". Better wake up America and hope 2010 and 2012 gets here soon.

Posted by: thehamptons1 | December 9, 2009 4:11 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Lisa Jackson had a similar job in New Jersey before getting the post with Obama.

She helped destroy the business environment here. And now she is doing it for the Country.

Posted by: manbearpig4 | December 9, 2009 4:01 PM
Report Offensive Comment

It's interesting that those who feel that global warming is real and manmade (even Bush said so) talk about scientific data and observations, while those opposing this view answer by throwing out words like liberal, communist, socialist and the like. In the debates about globel warming and other environmental issues the term "saving the earth" is often used. The fact is that humans can't destroy the earth. We can only make it uninhabitable for humans. How many jobs will be created then?

Posted by: browneri | December 9, 2009 3:58 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Well! Guess Al Gore and Immelt will have to put their billions of dollars they are looking to steal from us on hold for a while - one can only hope. What a crock.

Posted by: marine2211 | December 9, 2009 3:56 PM
Report Offensive Comment

To quote NASA: "2008 is the ninth warmest year in the period of instrumental measurements, which extends back to 1880 (left panel of Fig. 1). The ten warmest years all occur within the 12-year period 1997-2008."
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/gistemp/2008/

1998 was a record hot year because it was the peak of a large El Nino, a hot period. Now we're in the trough of La Nina, a cold period. And yet the earth has not gotten cooler as it should have.

Posted by: angie12106 | December 9, 2009 3:55 PM
Report Offensive Comment

The statement of "independence" from East Anglia with regard to temperature observations is false. All four so-called "independent" collection agencies use East Anglia's now discredited "correction process" to record temperature data. Satellites have no temp gauges at all and use East Anglia formulas to "guess" the correct temperature.

Further, "Undergraduates in calculus classes learn that nonlinear dynamical systems are impossible to analyze. Introductory physics classes learn there is no solution to the three-body problem, and the atmosphere is a lot more complicated than just three asteroids cycling around each other in space."

Below are excerpts from e-mail messages from the scientists behind the petition to the American Physics Society to revisit AGW science.

Princeton University's Robert Austin:

I view it as science fraud, pure and simple, and that we should completely distance ourselves from such unethical behavior by CRU, and that data files be opened to the public and examined in the full light of day. We as taxpayers pay for that work -- we are owed examination of the analysis.

Princeton University's William Happer:

The APS has not responded to our petition. We submitted the petition several weeks ago... Prof. Callan, the president elect of the APS, who works in the same building in Princeton University as Professor Austin and I, has been unable to find time to discuss the petition with us.

We have independently contacted as many members of the APS as we can to ask for their support of the petition. We are getting about as many supportive as negative responses, so I would judge that about half the membership of the APS agrees with us. Those who oppose us usually have little or nothing to say about the science and plenty of things to say about what evil people we are. Those who agree with us are troubled by the lack of scientific support for the current APS statement and the highly political nature of it.

Posted by: pub123 | December 9, 2009 3:53 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Lisa P Jackson's comments are those of an increasingly out of touch and aristocratic federalist. She sees no need for discussion, no need for compromise, no need but for her to dictate her own notions of right and wrong. She is a member of the ruling class; the rest of us no but peons.

Congress should fire her. But I forgot, congress has become part of this oligarchy as well. It will never happen.

The federal government is quite literally out of our control. I doubt our country will continue. It will break up just as the USSR did.

Posted by: rwyoung | December 9, 2009 3:52 PM
Report Offensive Comment

12thgenAmerican wrote>>>>one more thing to impeach for. when the cost of this hoax hits us there is going to be huge trouble. vote these fools out.

Yes, we tried to warn you about Bu$h's Iraq hoax in 2004 - but the fools elected him again.

Posted by: angie12106 | December 9, 2009 3:49 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Good to see America LEADING for a change on something other than War!

There's an obvious reason Bush appointed Big Oil executives to important positions in his cabinet and administration!


Posted by: angie12106 | December 9, 2009 3:44 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Lisa Jackson - Get on your knees btch and suk my left nut and suk it good

Posted by: MrPotatoHead98 | December 9, 2009 3:42 PM
Report Offensive Comment

There's little argument that the world needs to clean up its environmental act and be more respectful of our planet. However, the U.S. can't be expected to foot the bill for every third world country.

If Obama and his radical cronies get their way the environmental issue can pave the way to a world government and a world currency which they seem to support. The proposed Copenhagen Treaty would create a governing body with power to tax and fine American companies operating within the U.S.

If we agree to this it will be an unconstitutional act because we cannot have a foreign body with power to tax or regulate our companies.

Also, the transition to a world government will be the logical next step since the governing body will already be established. Next, a world currency would be much easier to handle the transfer of money between the haves and the have nots.

Better keep a close eye on this one. It's a perfect tool for Obama and crowd. Hurry up 2010 and 2012.

Posted by: thehamptons1 | December 9, 2009 3:39 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Until any changes to regulations affect someone somehow, no legal action can be taken up to force them to prove their manipulated data.

When that time comes (and it will, sooner than the tree-hugging hippies would like), THEN a lawsuit can be brought against the offending entity and fought up to SCOTUS again...

Hopefully this time, they will require PROOF that CO2 evidence has not been tampered with... Something they cannot state anymore since all the raw data was destroyed in the 80's to "make room"

Yeah Right...

Unfortunately for the Human Induced global warming crowds, no matter how hard they scream that the majority is wrong at this point, they will never be able to PROVE IT and as such have become the laughing stock of the world.

Enjoy your newfound blind ignorance.... Just like the last time it came around...

Posted by: ProveMeWrong | December 9, 2009 3:39 PM
Report Offensive Comment

This will never fly, ignore it. EPA cannot demand anything unless ratified by congress

Constitution is very clear.

Only "CONGESS" can make law

EPA can kiss my AZZ

Posted by: MrPotatoHead98 | December 9, 2009 3:38 PM
Report Offensive Comment

one more thing to impeach for. when the cost of this hoax hits us there is going to be huge trouble. vote these fools out.

Posted by: 12thgenamerican | December 9, 2009 3:35 PM
Report Offensive Comment

The measures being suggested by the EPA, whose director is appointed by President Obama, and for that matter the the whole enviromental approach of this administration are out of touch with reality.

This country is in a deep recession which may well turn into a double-dip recession if President Obama and the EPA doesn't stop forcing these job-killing measures on the American nation and DO something about unemployment.

Posted by: BruceMcDougall | December 9, 2009 3:19 PM
Report Offensive Comment

2012 can't come soon enough. We have a bunch of imbeciles running our country.

Posted by: DCer1 | December 9, 2009 2:46 PM
Report Offensive Comment

I guess part of the problem is there is now a rank of true believers that accuse any skeptic of being a "denier!" - If they aren't sure that man and CO2 explain ALL the warming, if they have grave fears of wrecking the US economy over something even scientists cannot quantify is a USA component to warming, if they have grave doubts over the ability of Blessed Solar Power and Wondrous Wind to replace a 60 trillion dollar global fossil fuel and nuclear and hydro dam infrastructure overnight.

Well, I am a big skeptic, and call me a denier if you like....but I see no "exciting green jobs" replacing all that will be lost to India and China if the EPA dictates a doubling of American energy costs. I see no way that worship of solar and wind power compensates for their inherent unreliability and lack of ability to be scaled up to be any more than 5%-8% of power, and only that on certain days and seasons. And long before "Global Warming" is an actual condition that is harming mankind and nature - at worst projections - other more dire and immenent threats - like overpopulation and loss of species habitat will result in mass extinctions, loss of adequate potable water in several fast-breeding nations.

Long before the possible worst case bad days of Global Warming, we will face an energy crisis in no small part driven by the same AGW environmentalists who say only wind, solar, and what they used to call "Miracle Ethanol" but have largely shut up about recently will magically compensate for their relentless opposition to coal use, "evil nuclear power", awful hydro dams, terrible drilling for oil and natural gas.

What is really going on is that the Green Movement, and powerful wealthy VC banks (Goldman Sachs)and vendor companies (General Electric, China traders)- have managed to put all the attention on AGW - and away from the more serious and urgent environmental threats. It is an ideological and NYC financier-driven phenomena.
Ideological in the long-standing Leftist loathing of anyone but them enjoying the "evil Western lifestyle with their evil SUVs and evil fast food and crass materialism." A sense that only good people serving as good government functionaries or private sector favored by the Left who are also engaged in planet-saving can fly in a private jet in good conscience or nibble on dainties at Copenhagen that took 4 times their weight in oil to be created, transported, and served into a "crusading environmentalist lawyer's mouth".

This will not end well. Not if the public is hit with liberal democrats bypassing Congress and ramming more lost jobs and a big cut in standard of living onto the public - with much of the money hijacked from the public later discovered to have gone to enrich Algore, GE, Goldman Sachs or squandered on Blessed Solar and Wondrous Wind boondoggles orchestrated by Dem Party donors..

Posted by: ChrisFord1 | December 9, 2009 2:37 PM
Report Offensive Comment

epa,hud,aid,r BS agencies which spend taxpayers $$$ as if they win the lottery everyday. cater to the pols,whiners that keep them in business.

Posted by: pofinpa | December 9, 2009 2:33 PM
Report Offensive Comment

@yogi11. No one reads the data because they won't share it, or lost it.

Posted by: mike83631 | December 9, 2009 2:31 PM
Report Offensive Comment

China is a country which has little or no regulations pertaining to greenhouse emissions or air pollutants at this time. China is also the country where the biggest increase into the future of greenhouse emissions will occur. As millions come into the Chinese middle class, that will be millions who want cars and superhighways. Thus far, China has also shown a successful ability to manipulate the United States, as demonstrated by China's large trade surplus with America. From currency manipulation, a union free workforce to export subsidies, China has far and away received "the better deal," when it comes to trade. Now, after this, are we in America suppose to accept and believe Chinese "sincerities" when it comes to greenhouse emissions? What's most likely is splendid talk from China and praise for "Obama's leadership," however, the greenhouse emission goals will never be met. They are simply part of this Communist nations 5 or 10 year master plan. And, we all know what that means. As for Obama, taken in and "rolled," by the Chinese, he will subject American industry to draconian and extreme greenhouse emissions goals. Making us even less competitive with China and other countries. That's the danger here, and what will probably happen.

Posted by: magnifco1000 | December 9, 2009 2:24 PM
Report Offensive Comment

GKAM:
Since you don't not have a degree that in itself enables you to earn a living either on your own or employed with a profitable business, how much grant monies do you receive from taxpayers?

Posted by: sperrico | December 9, 2009 2:17 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Obama wants to prosecute CIA and Justice Officials for their anti-constitutional activities.

It's a FINE precedent! Then in 2012, the rest of American can do the same to EPA officials.

Posted by: pgr88 | December 9, 2009 2:13 PM
Report Offensive Comment

fcs25 asserts: "All this does is show the real agenda of Obama and his socialistic administration.It has nothing to do with "saving" the planet...that's hype and spin for the liberal dead heads that are to dumb to know when they have been had."
------------------------------------------------------

Excuse me, fcs25, but I have a Master of Science in the environmental sciences, but have to listen to those of you whose opinions come not from an understanding of thermodynamics and atmospheric circulation, but from political prejudice.

You're not one of those who was suckered, fooled, hornswoggled, by that frat-boy, Lifetime Failure into letting him send our sons and daughters to shoot, blast, burn, and kill the sons and daughters of others in their own country, their own cities, their own homes? How are you going to pay back those trillions of dollars wasted in the Destruction of Iraq?

You will excuse us if we invest our credibility elsewhere.

Posted by: gkam | December 9, 2009 2:12 PM
Report Offensive Comment

"American capacity for denial says we are yet too primitive to let reason and facts prevail over fear and passions."


Yeah, you are so right. The United States is so primitive, it has managed to become in both absolute and relative terms the most powerful nation in the history of mankind.

Posted by: Bob65 | December 9, 2009 2:06 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Is it possible for anyone, anyone at all, in the Obama administration to give any speech on anything without first mentioning George Bush? This entire administration is a bunch of petulant crybabies.

And it is nice to see that those who griped and moaned about an executive with too much power under Bush are hypocritically applauding when the EPA gives itself the ability to essentially dictate laws that will affect every segment of American society.

There is no way such a move, with its necessary onerous regulations, paperwork, litigation etc. will not do damage to the American economy. After this was announced, I wonder how many companies yelled "China, here we come".

Posted by: Bob65 | December 9, 2009 2:00 PM
Report Offensive Comment

At last we have an administration willing to acknowledge facts. Nobody "supports" global warming, it just is, like the Earth orbits the Sun. Recently, it's taken place because humans released millions of years worth of buried carbon into the atmosphere for the cheap energy contained within.

Those of you more interested in science fiction, tune to the SciFi channel, or focus on a less-important topic for your stories.
For readers honestly trying to understand background facts, I've posted a graph of our energy use from various sources over the last two centuries (from the US DOE's 2006 Annual Energy Review) online at:

www.sciencetime.org/blog/?p=116

the reality of global warming and ecological consequences:

www.sciencetime.org/blog/?p=95

and increasing sea levels:

www.sciencetime.org/blog/?p=125

We use lots of energy, with too many emissions of greenhouse gases, and still have about 300 years worth of coal. Our concern is surviving a changing climate. We depend on the present climate for growing crops right where farms just happen to be. With climate change comes not just warming, but broader variations in things like last frost date, first frost date, and rainfall patterns. Food production depends on these climate measures. As the climate changes, insect pests and plant pathogens find new habitable areas of the globe, perhaps in these agricultural areas. Nobody can predict whether such things will happen, but if they do, and food production fails, I would call that a problem. So, what is an acceptable risk? How confident are you that no problems will arise? Humans experienced potato famines, changed eastern forests through release of the chestnut blight, and so on. Climate change brings on new risks. Are you comfortable with a 10% risk of agricultural collapse? 1%? 50%?

The sooner we find new, clean sources, the better.

Will Wilson

Posted by: willwilsn | December 9, 2009 2:00 PM
Report Offensive Comment

The aforementioned National Academies does not use data from East Anglia University, which is at the center of the email scandal. Not every scientist in the world uses the same computer programs to analyse the same data. New data comes in all the time - this is how science works. New linkages are made, new analyses tried. For the last 30+ years, the overwhelming majority of the data point to a very strong link between human pollution and an uptick in global warming. Look at the people in National Academy's Committee on America's Climate Choices (http://americasclimatechoices.org/committeeslate.shtml). They are not connected in any way to the email scandal. Most climate scientists are not and stil says the overwhelming evidence points to man-made global warming.
I don't know why I bother - nothing anyone says will ever prove to you that this is happening. Many of the predictions of global warming are coming true (another part of scientific method - make predictions about future occurances based on current observations - if they come true, your theory becomes strengthened - this is happening all over the planet with global warming).
Enough said. Let there be a full-blown, exhaustive review of all the data (and again - regardless of what Fox & Friends says, not ALL the data in the entire world on global warming was destroyed. More like a book out of the library was lost) and all the reports to reassure the public that this is real, it is happening here, we are the primary cause, and we can fix it if we act soon.

Posted by: erikpdumont | December 9, 2009 1:51 PM
Report Offensive Comment

All this does is show the real agenda of Obama and his socialistic administration.It has nothing to do with "saving" the planet...that's hype and spin for the liberal dead heads that are to dumb to know when they have been had.

Posted by: fcs25 | December 9, 2009 1:29 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Please, more of you non-scientists who don't have a clue about what the data say about global warming, tell us some more about how climate change research is "false science." Where are you getting this? You don't know how to read data--you don't have the faintest idea how to read the numbers generated from thousands of observations across the planet for the past 30 years. You're talking out of your... hat. You listen only to people like Rush and Glen, who also don't know how to read data and are ideologically driven to try to convince you that somehow climate change research is a liberal plot.

When did you stop believing in science? Was it right after our rocket passed Pluto and sent pictures back? Was it when scientists decoded the human genome? When Dr. Salk discovered a polio cure? The scientists examining global warming impacts are just as competent, and they follow the same method as Dr. Salk. What is driving you to deny what the scientists are saying? Open your non-rational minds for a moment and try to reflect on where you're getting your "data." From ideologues, not from scientists. Think about it for half a second and if you're honest you'll have to admit it's true. But self-reflection for a denier is difficult, I understand.

This is not a partisan problem. It's a human race problem. Scientists are not hippies playing games with humanity. Get your heads out of your...hats...and acknowledge you don't know science, and that your denial stems from non-scientist ideologues manipulating you to deny science. Scientists, who follow scientific method (look it up), are telling us very bad times are coming if we don't change our ways of generating and using energy. Instead of listening to Rush, listen to the people who know.

Posted by: yogi11 | December 9, 2009 1:27 PM
Report Offensive Comment

PROVEMEWRONG: It's already been proven that CO2 is a leading greenhouse gas, and it already went to the Supreme Court. That's why EPA is acting the Surpreme Court decision made it imperative that they act. See Massachusetts v EPA, 2007 (http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/06pdf/05-1120.pdf). Incidentally, all the evidence you need from American scientists can be found at the National Academy of Sciences (http://americasclimatechoices.org/). Read the science yourself instead of listening to what Fox News tells you.

POSTED BY: ERIKPDUMON
=========================

Guess again.

When raw data is destroyed, there is no way to prove anything one way or another.

And considering that ALL of the data around the world all relied on the same hardware and flawed equations (including our own data here in the US) you cannot state that the debate is closed. If anything, it is just getting started.

Heck, even Al Gores teacher has warned against this dramatic action without hard evidence... Something you would know if you kept up with this debate.

I dont care how loud you scream the debate is over... I will ask again, PROVE IT

And no, relying on a SCOTUS decision that was made with manipulated data to skew results tells me that you are dumber than most.

unfortunately for you.. most Americans have more common sense in their little pinkys than to believe someone when they say "Trust us" when there is NO WAY TO VERIFY.

Do you understand that? If not, I suggest you look into buying some of the bridges for sale in NYC.

one can only hope that others actually learn something from FACTS instead of conjecture which is what you seem to prefer.

Posted by: ProveMeWrong | December 9, 2009 1:22 PM
Report Offensive Comment

I am one who believes that the main stream media has it wrong about global warming and climate change. Because President Obama might be taking the wrong approach and may even have personal and other private reasons for his proposed actions, it does not change the fact that the earth is warming.

In fact, the earth has experienced warming periods previously, but no one can deny that human activity produces waste heat which, naturally would add to any natural warming the earth is experiencing. This additional heat from life on earth would not have naterialized during the time of the dinosaurs and other creatures that preceeded them. Icebergs do not melt and break up because of cooling; snow does not recede from mountain tops because of cooling, and ice fields do not melt because of cooling. And, because we have one global environment, heating anywhere on the planet would affect the earth's environment.

Certainly, Carbon Dioxide produces heat, but fortunately the earth was able to balance carbon dioxide emissions because the trees took in carbon dioxide and gave off life sustaining oxygen. But the activities of man have been altering this process by direct destruction of forests, and especially by destruction of organisms in the ocean (plankton) that also contributed to the production of oxygen that produced the balance with the carbon dioxide emissions.

Cap and trade is a partial solution to the economics of climate change, but it would not solve the problem of global warming that leads to climate changes in different parts of the world because a credit from some small nation that permits a larger nation to produce the additional carbon emissions that the smaller nation does not produce serves only to increase the total carbon foorprint on the environment. Also reliance on green technologies that benefit special groups and certain people, would not provide the real solution.

Posted by: CalP | December 9, 2009 1:19 PM
Report Offensive Comment

It is ironic that just as global warming activists gain the political ascendancy, the scientific foundation has crumbled away. Skeptics and lukewarmers (those who believe CO2 is warming the planet but not enough to cause a catastrophe) started gaining ground in 2007. Now Climategate has exposed much of the alarmist science to be exaggerated, skeptics have gained new scientific vigor and are demanding a reassessment of climate science.

What papers are unaffected by the CRU scandal? Papers based on satellite temp records and papers based on Argo ocean data. Both of those data sets are open for everyone to see and neither of them show exceptional warming. In fact, ocean heat content has not increased since 2004. This is contrary to the claim CO2 has caused an energy imbalance on earth. If we had a real energy imbalance, ocean heat content would go up year over year unabated.

You say you just can't believe scientists would be deceptive?

Regarding Phil Jones email about using "Mike's Nature trick" to "hide the decline." Phil is talking about splicing the surface temp record on the end of a proxy reconstruction to hide the fact the proxies did not track temperature well over the last few decades, something Michael Mann said no one did. On the disinformation website known as RealClimate, Mann wrote:
"No researchers in this field have ever, to our knowledge, "grafted the thermometer record onto" any reconstruction. It is somewhat disappointing to find this specious claim (which we usually find originating from industry-funded climate disinformation websites) appearing in this forum. Most proxy reconstructions end somewhere around 1980."

See Comment #4 at http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2004/12/myths-vs-fact-regarding-the-hockey-stick/#comments

Here Mann is denying he used the trick Phil Jones says he learned from Mann and that Jones now says is not a deception at all. The trick was used by Mann in 1998 and 1999, by Jones in 1999 (according to the email) and by Crowley in 2000. It may have been used many more times than that.

If CRU is willing to deceive people about the Divergence Problem and conspire to hide the deception with climate scientists (or pseudoscientists) on both sides of the Atlantic, what exactly would be below them?

All the data, metadata, methods and code must be made public. Then we need a completely new assessment of the science. After that, we can decide if we need Copenhagen or the involvement of EPA or not.

Posted by: RonInIrvine | December 9, 2009 1:17 PM
Report Offensive Comment

GE and Goldman Sachs want "climate change" laws as their next big pot of gold, and Obama is happy to oblige.

Posted by: pgr88 | December 9, 2009 1:12 PM
Report Offensive Comment

The EPA seems intent on becoming the 4th branch of Gov't - and an unelected one at that.

The EPA should be closed. Investigate anti-constitutional crimes committed by its top administrators.

Posted by: pgr88 | December 9, 2009 1:09 PM
Report Offensive Comment

It seems growing numbers of physicists, members of American Physical Society, want their organization to rescind the 2007 statement the APS made on global warming. The bureaucracy seem to be dragging its feet, offering only a public statement dated prior to Climategate. The APS will not make any statement on Climategate directly.

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2009/12/08/taking_liberties/entry5933353.shtml

Posted by: RonInIrvine | December 9, 2009 1:07 PM
Report Offensive Comment

After seeing all the comments from the climate-deniers, I just had to chime in. I guess it's understandable that most of the comments come from that side, because that's where the anger is strongest. But that doesn't change the facts.

Is the connection between human activity and global warming proven beyond a doubt? No, and it never will be. We simply can't run the kinds of experiments that would provide anything like "proof." But the underlying science is straightforward and sound, and the evidence for the effect is strong. What's more, the consequences of inaction are too terrible to ignore.

Posted by: tenor | December 9, 2009 1:05 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Global Warming Is Too Big To Fail

The “Climategate” emails involving Michael Mann and Philip Jones disclose a political agenda driving man-made global warming. Researchers employed tactics manipulating peer review of articles and refusing requests for basic data. (now found destroyed) Small wonder such research produced models unable to predict past, present or future temperatures.

Earlier the UN adopted flawed papers by Michael Mann and Malcolm Hughes for their Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), thereby setting expected research standards. The suspect methods combined temperature readings from current centuries with selected ancient tree ring, ice core, and coral reef data.

Recently, MIT researchers prophesied weak ocean mitigation of carbon dioxide (CO2), which is claimed as the major source of global warming. However, atmospheric CO2 represents less than one particle for 10,000, making finding Waldo in a puzzle more likely. Water vapor that CO2 bonds with (think of carbonated water) is 25 times more plentiful in the atmosphere, and 2.5 million times more plentiful in oceans. When a single hurricane uses enough energy to power Japan for a year, how can weather have minimal influence on CO2 reduction, which also has minimal atmospheric presence?

Habibbullo Adbussamatov contradicted scientific consensus by suggesting changes in the sun’s radiance accounts for changes in Earth temperatures. He noted data from NASA’s Mars Global Surveyor and Odyssey reveal Mars temperature variations agree with the Earth’s.

The overriding influence of Sun and ocean, and legitimate peer review remains suppressed. Politicians and capitalists, who benefit from a Copenhagen treaty, dictate maintaining this scientific heresy.

Posted by: nolannelson | December 9, 2009 1:04 PM
Report Offensive Comment

PROVEMEWRONG: It's already been proven that CO2 is a leading greenhouse gas, and it already went to the Supreme Court. That's why EPA is acting the Surpreme Court decision made it imperative that they act. See Massachusetts v EPA, 2007 (http://www.supremecourtus.gov/opinions/06pdf/05-1120.pdf). Incidentally, all the evidence you need from American scientists can be found at the National Academy of Sciences (http://americasclimatechoices.org/). Read the science yourself instead of listening to what Fox News tells you.

Posted by: erikpdumont | December 9, 2009 1:01 PM
Report Offensive Comment

"Making up for lost time" is the best way to sum this up. After 8 years of the best friend the oil industry ever had in office, it's nice to have some leadership for a change.

Contrary to what many think, including our mainstream media, the climatology was in overwhelming consensus on this long before the 2006 IPCC meeting. That was more or less held to create an official document for what scientists already almost universally believed (give or take a few oil-funded "skeptics").

Posted by: B2O2 | December 9, 2009 12:57 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Folks -- you have short term memory loss. The Supreme Court is the branch of government that ruled EPA (executive branch) was negligent for not making a statement about whether or not greenhouse gases should be regulated. Here's a 2007 WaPo article on the ruling: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/02/AR2007040200487.html
Some of the comments made in recent weeks in regards to the EPA, greenhouse gas emissions, etc. are false, misleading, and at best, ignorant.

Posted by: stranger_station | December 9, 2009 12:56 PM
Report Offensive Comment

I'm so saddened by the zealous deniers of science posting here today. They don't know what they are talking about, but they sure act like they do.

As an aside, if you were to label everything that the University of East Anglia has ever done as invalid, there would still be absolutely overwhelming, valid, evidence that climate change is quite real and the result of human activity. We obstruct action to address the challenge at our grandchildren's peril.

Posted by: WorldCup | December 9, 2009 12:42 PM
Report Offensive Comment

This is just another way and means for the Obama administration to bankrupt America and further their cause of wealth redistribution. I wish we could stem their outhouse emissions!

Posted by: GordonShumway | December 9, 2009 12:41 PM
Report Offensive Comment

These people are nothing but fascist. When are people going to wake up to the fact that these extremist are using this false science to justify taking away your freedoms, controlling your life choices and enriching their friends without doing one thing for the enviroment? But the cool aid drinkers on the left "believe" these fascist are going to save the world and not hurt them. It is always the other people who will have to pay for this in both terms of money and freedom but never fear thier turn will come and there will be no satisfaction telling them we told them so.

Posted by: Pilot1 | December 9, 2009 12:34 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Until the EPA can PROVE that CO2 is a harmful Greenhouse Gas, I recommend everyone ignore them.

Inevitably, they will try and force people to comply... At which point the opportunity to fight it in court (all the way up to the US Supreme Court) will be presented.

Without hard evidence (the stuff that was destroyed), there is no way to prove or disprove and therefore cannot be enforced by law.

This is all posturing to try and create a fake precedent without having to take it to court right away...

Posted by: ProveMeWrong | December 9, 2009 12:33 PM
Report Offensive Comment


If only chubby Al Gore, with lots of fat and meat, would willingly sacrifice himself to hungry polar bears.

Posted by: sperrico | December 9, 2009 12:30 PM
Report Offensive Comment

Correction: Make that "I WILL actively and vigorously work to unseat them".

Posted by: Lilycat11 | December 9, 2009 12:22 PM
Report Offensive Comment


Just look at the comments from the Obama-haters here, "forgetting" how these very disasters, bungles, frauds, swindles, and endless wars are from their adolescent, macho aggression and incompetence!

They were suckered, fooled, hornswoggled, by a frat-boy, lifetime alcoholic failure, and now face the frustration of exposure. I guess I'd be angry, too if I had taken over an entire country and ruined it in only eight years.

But their uncomfortability will turn more serious when those in international jurisdictions present their cases for International Crimes.

Now, we face all the disasters of Bush, but have the world's biggest Bad Debt to carry at the same time. How can we do it, unless we start to tax the millionaires who looted the Middle class? Let's put them in prison first (Hard Time in Folsom or Pelican Bay), then we'll try them.

Posted by: gkam | December 9, 2009 12:20 PM
Report Offensive Comment

I am embarassed that we have government representatives like Lisa Jackson, an environmental zealot whose strings are being pulled by Carol Browner. These environmental zealots are zeroed in on their personal agendas, regardless of the dubious science, altered data, subterfuge and outright lies on which they rely to sell their bill of goods. There is no one here who doesn't believe that we should be good stewards of the planet. However, there is a huge difference in doing our part to be responsible for our environment and in being so narrowly focused as to treat the subject as religion. They play perfectly into the hands of the corrupt UN, which wants nothing more than to gain as much control over all nations as possible, and whose members detest the United States. Jackson, Obama, and the rest are fools. They certainly are far from the best and brightest among us. I have written to my representatives in Washington and let them know in no uncertain terms that if they vote for, or even allow without opposition this outrageous power grab by a government agency and the deliberate attempt to disrupt and destroy our society as a whole I will not actively and vigorously work to unseat them. I will unceasingly encourage others to do the same. These people would be laughable if they were not so dangerous.

Posted by: Lilycat11 | December 9, 2009 12:19 PM
Report Offensive Comment

one more nail in our coffin from the evil buffoon in the white house and his commie friends.

Posted by: carlbatey | December 9, 2009 11:55 AM
Report Offensive Comment

The UN is the most corrupt organization in the World. The majority of its members and its representatives do the bidding of despots who take great care to devert money given to them for their country to their Swiss accounts. Few, if any, success stories come from the UN. If you think the world is doing great deeds for the environment you must not travel much. Of course in some places, such as Europe, where they have large, standardized nuclear power plants, the same people that yell about American actions are the same ones that have led the charge to ensure that the US hasn't built a new nuclear plant in over 30 years because they worry about the nuclear waste. So, no many what point of view you have the American people are going to be the losers. More expensive energy, autos driven by unproven expensive technology, and decreased standard of living while the rest of the world tries to catch up.

Posted by: staterighter | December 9, 2009 11:54 AM
Report Offensive Comment

one more nail in our coffin from the evil buffoon in the white house and his commie friends.

Posted by: carlbatey | December 9, 2009 11:54 AM
Report Offensive Comment

We will eliminate jobs and charge more for energy which with health care and war taxes we'll have less income to dispose of. Our economy nor standard of living will ever recover.

Posted by: FLvet | December 9, 2009 11:41 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Lets see; Obozo gets a nobel peace prize and 1.4 million dollars for future actions that goes into his private piggy bank. Now Obozo commits billions of US taxpayer money to please the same people. How do you spell Rod Blagoyavich?

Posted by: jcdooley | December 9, 2009 11:25 AM
Report Offensive Comment

From the article: "But Jackson's biggest applause line came when we said she was "proud" of the EPA's declaration Monday that greenhouse gases endanger public health and welfare."

I read this and was embarrassed. This has been obvious to the rest of the frakking planet for twenty years but the best we can do is acknowledge these things aren't good for our health now?

Then, of course, I read these comments and am reminded of why this is the best we can do. Because of the people who, rather than being embarrassed, think this is some kind of assault on their freedom. Who do nothing but repeat buzzwords like "socialist!" or put the word scientists in quotation marks.

Yes, continue to deny the obvious until we and have been technologically outpaced by every other country in the modern world. I'm sure you'll all be making tons of money then.

Wish we could grow up, PaulCo, yes, but doesn't seem likely, does it?

Posted by: kszimmerman | December 9, 2009 11:24 AM
Report Offensive Comment

This is the path of the Anti-Christ Obama. The Anti-Christ Obama will bring peace. The Anti-Christ Obama will bring the world under one rule; Where no nation is above another nation. The Anti-Christ Obama will have millions follow him blindly. The Anti-Christ Obama will have millions that will Worship him. This is it folks. Stand up and fight it or be a sheep and follow the Anti-Christ Obama.

Posted by: makom | December 9, 2009 11:18 AM
Report Offensive Comment

"EPA: U.S. making up lost time " - the left-wing POST

Yeah we are making up for lost time thanks to the Democrat Party and one of their "Big Donors" environmentalists...

For thirty years they have together BLOCKED US industries attempt to build nuclear power plants.......how did they do it?

They introduced required "Environmental Impact Studies" which took years to complete and caused investors to drop out.

Posted by: allenridge | December 9, 2009 11:17 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Obama rushes off to Scandinavia again to put our nation in financial endangerment to accept a peace prize for escalating the war and his political hack, EPA boss Lisa Jackson from NJ, shows up in Copenhagen and announces she has declared war against greenhouse gas.

This Scandinavian nightmare is so absurd it could be a comedy skit on SNL. While he is visiting Oslo and Copenhagen, Obama should check out how well universal health care works in Norway and Denmark. Too bad we can't afford universal health care, due to the escalation of the war in Afghanistan and the war against global warming.

Posted by: alance | December 9, 2009 11:09 AM
Report Offensive Comment

The decision by EPA was a coup d'etat against the people of the US by a group of entrenched environmental zealots in the government. We are all potential criminals now.

When the Republicans take back the Congress, they should defund the EPA by about 75%. And pass legislation that nullifies this bogus "finding."

The economic power of the United States is not for seizing. This decision will not stand.

Posted by: theduke89 | December 9, 2009 11:03 AM
Report Offensive Comment

American capacity for denial says we are yet too primitive to let reason and facts prevail over fear and passions. We have a long list of deficits compared to other modern nations including in education and health, the facts are in, yet some of us lie to others and ourselves to protect our fears. How anyone can be comfortable with denials of everything from Holocaust to evolution to global warming worries me. We should grow up, but I doubt we will.

Posted by: paulco | December 9, 2009 10:36 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Obviously, we should all
just go back to the Garden of Eden,

We don't really need powerplants,
of internal combustion engines,
for that matter,
I quess we don't really
need Government Mandated
Healthcare, Or legalized Marijuana,
Or unfair Tax burdens, or bail outs,
or POLITICIANS!

Talk about unhealthy emmisions!

Washington should just try to
Shut the Heck up!


Posted by: simonsays1 | December 9, 2009 10:36 AM
Report Offensive Comment

green jobs and ham,

The EPA should be able
to shut down coal fired
power plants, just because
the US has huge reserves
of coal, is no reason to
burn it.

as for jobs?

We don't need jobs,
we just need photo Ops;
Obama with a hard hat,
biden with a green ham sandwich,
they are about to trash
our standard of living,
to make the world think
less poorly of us.

Thank you Mr. Obama.

Posted by: simonsays1 | December 9, 2009 10:32 AM
Report Offensive Comment

To paraphrase Seth Lipsky (author of "The Citizen's Constitution: An Annotated Guide") "Where the hell does the government get the power to do that?"

Posted by: JohnMD1022 | December 9, 2009 10:09 AM
Report Offensive Comment

Hopefully, the Democrats' global-warming policy is another reason they'll lose power in the 2010 and 2012 elections.

Posted by: DoTheRightThing | December 9, 2009 9:59 AM
Report Offensive Comment

The more I think about these climate warming statistics the less faith I have in them. These "scientists" are not using raw observed data for their projections for the simple reason that everyone seems to agree that the raw data is unreliable because the collection sites are compromised over time, generally do to man made activies such as adjacent construction and movement of the sites. So the "scientists" "adjust" the data. Then they run the "adjusted" data through a computer program, and walla, they have the result to an incredible degree of accuracy. Of course computer programs are the dumbest things on earth. They only give you exactly the result that you program them to give. The "scientists" at East Anglia University and their associates can't show you the raw data, they conviently destroyed it 20 years ago. And they won't allow anyone to see the code for their software programs. It has been more years than I care to remember since I was at University but I do recall that anything that can't be verified is not science. I think the only question is whether this is junk science, since it is not verifiable, or fraud science, since it has been manipulated to give a perdetermined result.

Since this is the principle "science" relied upon by the EPA I look forward to the law suit that forces the EPA to defend its findings. The "scientists" at East Anglia University and their associates have been very good at ducking and dodging, but they won't get away with that in an Amerian court of law.

Posted by: jdonner2 | December 9, 2009 9:46 AM
Report Offensive Comment

had

Posted by: johng1 | December 9, 2009 9:42 AM
Report Offensive Comment

"more job killers from the democrat socialist party." Posted by: charlietuna666 | December 9, 2009 8:40 AM
------------
You guys should have studied while you have the chance.

Posted by: johng1 | December 9, 2009 9:42 AM
Report Offensive Comment

This has nothing to due with pollution and everything to do with politics. The EPA has had 20 years to stop sewage plants along the Potomac river from polluting the Chesapeake Bay and failed. They fail to clean up obvious pollution to set up a new economic destruction program all in the name of "change". This would be the appropriate time for congress to reign in the EPA and tell them what they can and cannot do and hold them accountable for accomplishing it or eliminate them.

Posted by: Tuerke9 | December 9, 2009 9:29 AM
Report Offensive Comment

As for "job killing" the same argukentwas made about things like cars when they were invented. They put buggy makers and saddlers and whip makers right out of business. Amazing that the economy was able to survive - of course we will be hiring ditch diggers to invent new solar, wind, geo, wave techologies. it will be minimum wage workers who will manufacture these new high tech materials. It will be so destructive -- but only for oil companies who do what most carriage makers did at the beginning of the 20th century and tried to stop the inevitable. The few who saw the handwriting on the wall did just fine.

Posted by: John1263 | December 9, 2009 8:47 AM
Report Offensive Comment

I'll never forget that nit wit "st. reagan" coming into the WH and making a big to do about taking off the solar panels President Carter had installed. A huge synmbolic f you to energy efficiency and modernization of our energy infrastructure. He then dismantled the programs that were making the US a leader in laternative energy research and development. Much of that fedgling research ended up sold to European firms, from whom we are now buying it back.

8 years of bush set back environmentalism by decades more. But what do you expect from a president, a party, a movement, who think science is to be ignored and disdained as the devil's work?

However, we are Americans. With some prodding we can be workd leaders, but we are starting WAY behind he rest of the developed world, courtesy of conservative ideology.

Posted by: John1263 | December 9, 2009 8:45 AM
Report Offensive Comment

more job killers from the democrat socialist party.

Posted by: charlietuna666 | December 9, 2009 8:40 AM
Report Offensive Comment

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company