EPA Takes First Step Toward Regulating Pollution Linked to Climate Change

[Renae]

WASHINGTON -- The debate on global warming is set to heat up again with the Obama administration's release on Friday of an EPA proposed finding that carbon dioxide and five other greenhouse gases are a danger to public health and welfare.

The finding is the first step to regulating pollution linked to climate change.

Congressional sources told The Associated Press that Environmental Protection Agency will announce its proposal Friday and begin a comment period before issuing a final ruling. The EPA also will say tailpipe emissions from motor vehicles contribute to climate change. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because the finding hasn't been announced.

The action was prompted by a Supreme Court ruling two years that said greenhouse gases are pollutants under the Clean Air Act and must be regulated if found to be a human health danger.

EPA Takes First Step Toward Regulating Pollution Linked to Climate Change - First 100 Days of Presidency - Politics FOXNews.com

And we will soon all suffer immeasurable loss of economic and personal liberties.

I wonder, if the same folks that spent 8 years or so screaming about the fact the Government might tap their phone lines if they dialed up a terrorist will protest the impending infringements and impediments to their freedoms.

Somehow, I think they won't.

 

[winston53660]

EPA Takes First Step Toward Regulating Pollution Linked to Climate Change - First 100 Days of Presidency - Politics FOXNews.com

And we will soon all suffer immeasurable loss of economic and personal liberties.

I wonder, if the same folks that spent 8 years or so screaming about the fact the Government might tap their phone lines if they dialed up a terrorist will protest the impending infringements and impediments to their freedoms.

Somehow, I think they won't.

What do polluting and tapping phones have to do with each other. The last I checked polluting was not any where near considered a Constitutional right.

 

[Middleground]

It's absolutely incredible that they are planning law to stop industry from polluting!!! Damn them, there's nothing I enjoy more than to inhale other's toxins, and I can't believe they are thinking of taking that right away from me!!!

 

[BulletWounD]

What do polluting and tapping phones have to do with each other. The last I checked polluting was not any where near considered a Constitutional right.

Define "polluting." If I light a camp fire which releases carbon emissions into the atmosphere, is that "polluting?" This is nothing short of a top-down collectivist authoritarian method of solving what may or may not be a real problem. The free market has made great strides in producing energy efficient products because there is a growing demand for them. Now the government wants to step in and force everybody to follow their agenda.

 

[winston53660]

It's absolutely incredible that they are planning law to stop industry from polluting!!! Damn them, there's nothing I enjoy more than to inhale other's toxins, and I can't believe they are thinking of taking that right away from me!!!

I guess some people forget images like this:

NOAA 200th Top Tens: Historical Events: Earth Day 1970: Firefighters battle the 1969 Cuyahoga River fire

 

[BulletWounD]

It's absolutely incredible that they are planning law to stop industry from polluting!!! Damn them, there's nothing I enjoy more than to inhale other's toxins, and I can't believe they are thinking of taking that right away from me!!!

I don't want inhale your breath, yet I am forced to. Damn you.

 

[winston53660]

Define "polluting." .

From approximately 1947 to 1977, the General Electric Company (GE) discharged as much as 1.3 million pounds of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) from its capacitor manufacturing plants at the Hudson Falls and Fort Edward facilities into the Hudson River.

The primary health risk associated with the site is the accumulation of PCBs in the human body through eating contaminated fish. Since 1976, high levels of PCBs in fish have led New York State to close various recreational and commercial fisheries and to issue advisories restricting the consumption of fish caught in the Hudson River. PCBs are considered probable human carcinogens and are linked to other adverse health effects such as low birth weight, thyroid disease, and learning, memory, and immune system disorders. PCBs in the river sediment also affect fish and wildlife.

Hudson River PCBs | Region 2 | US EPA

That is pollution and it is NOT a Constitutional right.

 

[BulletWounD]

That is pollution

Sure is... But carbon dioxide is not a toxin.

 

[winston53660]

Sure is... But carbon dioxide is not a toxin.

Sure try breathing it for a couple of seconds on a massive scale.

 

[BulletWounD]

Sure try breathing it for a couple of seconds on a massive scale.

Try breathing any gas (including oxygen) and see what happens.

 

[winston53660]

Try breathing any gas (including oxygen) and see what happens.

I'll stick with this nitrogen rich atmosphere held in balance.

 

[Renae]

What do polluting and tapping phones have to do with each other. The last I checked polluting was not any where near considered a Constitutional right.

Obviously you haven't really bothered to do any research into what they intend to do, and the impact that such will have. You just assume that they are doing some good works for the Earth and we should all smile and nod in acceptance.

CO2, labeled a pollutant and regulated by the EPA...

What does it mean, will it effect your life and how? To what end? What is the cost?

And the above, go ahead, you MG and the others whose initial reaction is "So what it's pollution!?"

ANY ACTION that creates CO2 will get regulated. BREATHING creates CO2, turning on your lights.. CO2, driving your car...

That item you just purchased, the container it's in, the production of the item, the transportation, display.

ALL stages, from start to finish, CO2.

And now the EPA is going to regulate it.

Think about that, how much impact will the EPA have on our economy, on our lives.

 

[BulletWounD]

Obviously you haven't really bothered to do any research into what they intend to do, and the impact that such will have. You just assume that they are doing some good works for the Earth and we should all smile and nod in acceptance.

CO2, labeled a pollutant and regulated by the EPA...

What does it mean, will it effect your life and how? To what end? What is the cost?

And the above, go ahead, you MG and the others whose initial reaction is "So what it's pollution!?"

ANY ACTION that creates CO2 will get regulated. BREATHING creates CO2, turning on your lights.. CO2, driving your car...

That item you just purchased, the container it's in, the production of the item, the transportation, display.

ALL stages, from start to finish, CO2.

And now the EPA is going to regulate it.

Think about that, how much impact will the EPA have on our economy, on our lives.

Agreed. I don't understand why the environmental movement is so much in love with authoritarianism. Why can't they spread the message WITHOUT the authoritarian measures of fixing it? I can only conclude that it is because the environmental movement has been co-opted by hardcore leftists and authoritarians.

 

[winston53660]

ANY ACTION that creates CO2 will get regulated. BREATHING creates CO2, turning on your lights.. CO2, driving your car...

.

Oh man to funny and to reactionary suddenly breathing is going to be regulated:spin:

 

[Renae]

Agreed. I don't understand why the environmental movement is so much in love with authoritarianism. Why can't they spread the message WITHOUT the authoritarian measures of fixing it? I can only conclude that it is because the environmental movement has been co-opted by hardcore leftists and authoritarians.

If the threat was serious, I'd agree with some of these measures. Take mercury for example, yeah probably not the best thing to get playing around with... I had a florescent bulb shatter at my last duty station and we had to evacuate the area and call in hazmat to clean it up... A bit excessive no?

 

[Renae]

Oh man to funny and to reactionary suddenly breathing is going to be regulated:spin:

I was pointing out things that produce CO2. I left that in there to see if any of you would, in your inability to answer the questions posed, would latch on to that, congrats! You're a winner!

 

[winston53660]

If the threat was serious, I'd agree with some of these measures. Take mercury for example, yeah probably not the best thing to get playing around with... I had a florescent bulb shatter at my last duty station and we had to evacuate the area and call in hazmat to clean it up... A bit excessive no?

Yes a bit excessive but knowing your hyperbole I seriously doubt your anecdotal story.

 

[BulletWounD]

If the threat was serious, I'd agree with some of these measures. Take mercury for example, yeah probably not the best thing to get playing around with... I had a florescent bulb shatter at my last duty station and we had to evacuate the area and call in hazmat to clean it up... A bit excessive no?

Jeeze. I've broken a florescent bulb before. I just swept it up and threw it in the trash. I had no idea it was that serious. =\

 

[winston53660]

Jeeze. I've broken a florescent bulb before. I just swept it up and threw it in the trash. I had no idea it was that serious. =\

Did ya eat lead paint chips as a kiddo as well?:mrgreen:

I'm just kidding.

 

[Renae]

Yes a bit excessive but knowing your hyperbole I seriously doubt your anecdotal story.

You still won't answer the questions. Thanks for playing.

 

[winston53660]

You still won't answer the questions. Thanks for playing.

I did answer the question. I said it was a bit excessive I also doubt your anecdotal story about having to bring HAZMAT in.

 

[Renae]

I did answer the question. I said it was a bit excessive I also doubt your anecdotal story about having to bring HAZMAT in.

Okay. Doubt away.

You had to call the FD, they sent in a guy with a resperator and special vacuum. And we all laughed about it, but rules be rules man.

 

[GottaHurt]

The enviroloons, it's always one hair brained scheme after another.

 

[Truth Detector]

It's absolutely incredible that they are planning law to stop industry from polluting!!! Damn them, there's nothing I enjoy more than to inhale other's toxins, and I can't believe they are thinking of taking that right away from me!!!

I think it is funny that you and others think it is about pollution and not political power to generate more revenues.

I am always amused by rabid environmentalist arguments to reduce pollution when it could be done by simply stopping ALL production. This is what I find so disingenuous about the "environmental green" radicals; this isn't about making everyone safer; this is about an agenda to force all nations back to the dark ages.

I just wish they could be honest and make the following statement: “We demand that all factories be closed and that NO amount of pollution regardless of those who will starve, die and cease to exist as a result. The planet is more important than human life.”

Carry on.

 

[Arch Enemy]

This thread started out strong, but then it turned into a conspiracy theory and an interpretation that Government will regulate turning off and on switches.

I think Nixon had the right argument, that there should not be the language of the economy and price applied to human health and well-being.

from the article:
""Even if you believe that man-made gases are causing global warming, does it make any sense us to unilaterally tax ourselves when all that will do is send our manufacturing jobs to areas where they don't have any emissions standards like China and Mexico?" Inhofe asked."

Does Inhofe realize that the answer to his conundrum could very well be Government regulation?