EPA Rules Carbon Emissions Endanger Human Health

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Political Junky, Dec 9, 2009.

  1. Political Junky
    Offline

    Political Junky Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 27, 2009
    Messages:
    19,541
    Thanks Received:
    2,948
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Ratings:
    +5,534
    EPA Rules Carbon Emissions Endanger Human Health | CafeSentido.com

    9 December 2009 :: J.E. Robertson

    The United States’ Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has ruled that carbon and other greenhouse gas emissions pose a danger to human health, two years after the US Supreme Court gave it the authority to regulate carbon emissions for that very reason, under the Clean Air Act. The finding gives new weight to the American administration’s efforts to help achieve international consensus on aggressive emissions reductions at Copenhagen.

    There has been criticism from some quarters of the business community, and from the &#8220;climate-skeptic&#8221; movement, suggesting that the EPA&#8217;s ruling is little more than an ideological aggression against open markets. In fact, the EPA has taken far longer to recognize the science produced by its own experts, and thus follow the mandate of the Supreme Court, than most observers expected. <more>
     
  2. Navy1960
    Offline

    Navy1960 Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,821
    Thanks Received:
    1,188
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Arizona
    Ratings:
    +1,189
    Carbon dioxide is used by plants during photosynthesis to make sugars, which may either be consumed in respiration or used as the raw material to produce other organic compounds needed for plant growth and development. It is produced during respiration by plants, and by all animals, fungi and microorganisms that depend either directly or indirectly on plants for food. It is thus a major component of the carbon cycle. Carbon dioxide is generated as a by-product of the combustion of fossil fuels or the burning of vegetable matter, among other chemical processes. Small amounts of carbon dioxide are emitted from volcanoes and other geothermal processes such as hot springs and geysers and by the dissolution of carbonates in crustal rocks

    Carbon dioxide - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Carbon dioxide is used to produce carbonated soft drinks and soda water. Traditionally, the carbonation in beer and sparkling wine came about through natural fermentation, but many manufacturers carbonate these drinks artificially. In the case of bottled and kegged beer, artificial carbonation is now the most common method used. With the exception of British Real Ale, draught (draft) beer is usually transferred from kegs in a cold room or cellar to dispensing taps on the bar using pressurised carbon dioxide, often mixed with nitrogen.

    As a byproduct of the metabolic processes providing our bodies with energy, carbon dioxide needs to be constantly expelled from our body. Blood plasma and red blood cells provide the means to carry this metabolic byproduct from various tissues in your body to your lungs,

    How Blood Transports Carbon Dioxide - Associated Content - associatedcontent.com

    So then does this mean the EPA is going to start passing out fines for breathing to much, plants, Volcanos, and soda, just to name a few? Among the almost endless number of economic job killing policies the EPA has been famous for this one will rank right up there with the best of them.
     
  3. Zoom-boing
    Offline

    Zoom-boing Gold Member

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2008
    Messages:
    25,061
    Thanks Received:
    7,258
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Location:
    East Japip
    Ratings:
    +10,109
    A few months back I joked about uncle taxing us on our very breath. I had no idea it might actually happen.
     
  4. PoliticalChic
    Offline

    PoliticalChic Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2008
    Messages:
    55,677
    Thanks Received:
    15,570
    Trophy Points:
    2,190
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +24,784
    Senator Barrasso of Wyoming got hold of a 9 page White House memo which indicates that the lack of scientific support that CO2 is a pollutant, and in fact, that the EPA plan to mark it as such is political.
    Council in this memo questions EPA findings: “ making a finding of harm for substances that have no demonstrated health effects…making the decision to regulate CO2 under the Clean Air Act …a serious economic effects on businesses small and large.”
    Lisa Jackson implies that the Supreme Court “mandated” the EPA regulate, where the actual decision says “may.”

    [youtube]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/i-SvGLPjm5w&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/i-SvGLPjm5w&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/youtube]

    During today's EPW Committee hearing, Senator Barrasso asked EPA administrator Lisa Jackson about a "smoking gun" OMB Memo on the Serious Economic Impact Likely From EPA CO2 Rules.

    WASHINGTON -- The head of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said Tuesday a finding that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are a public health danger won't necessarily lead to government regulation of emissions, an apparent about-face for the Obama administration.
    The comments follow revelations of an administration document warning the EPA of potential economically harmful consequences from an agency finding last month that proposes declaring greenhouse gases a danger to the public
    EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson previously has said that such a decision "will indeed trigger the beginning of regulation of CO2," echoing similar remarks by White House climate czar Carol Browner.
    Mr. Barraso called the document a "smoking gun" that shows the endangerment findings "were political, not scientific."
    The White House legal brief starts by questioning the link between the EPA's scientific argument for endangerment and its political summary
    EPA Chief Says CO2 Finding May Not 'Mean Regulation' - WSJ.com
     
  5. theHawk
    Offline

    theHawk Registered Conservative

    Joined:
    Sep 20, 2005
    Messages:
    10,834
    Thanks Received:
    2,063
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Germany
    Ratings:
    +5,718
    The EPA needs to be dismantled, it has way too much power as is.
     
  6. Oscar Wao
    Offline

    Oscar Wao Victory is Mine

    Joined:
    Dec 15, 2008
    Messages:
    2,139
    Thanks Received:
    301
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Location:
    Quahog, RI
    Ratings:
    +301
    Heh, it's just one of the many that need to go...

    The DOE would be another good one to get rid of.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1

Share This Page