How The EPA Could Cut Carbon Emissions Even More Than We Thought By 2020

[flacaltenn]

From the OP cite:

And arguably one of the best plans was submitted by the Natural Resources Defense Council.

Oh OF COURSE --- National energy policy written by ThinkProgress and the NRDC.. A bunch of teddy bear selling, lobster eating lawyers.. THAT's the technical expertise that will save America... .

I don't see "ThinkProgress" mentioned in the quoted line. And do you really see that ad hominem attack as a valid argument? "Lobster eating lawyers"??? Is THAT supposed to represent the technical expertise that YOU think will save America? Are there any other classes of people you'd like to blame?

Your level of isolation from conscious thought sometimes is amazing. Like a Zen master..

Q) WHO is making the judgement in the quote I posted about "the best plans"??
A) That would be ThinkProgress, the idealogically corrupted source of the OP.

As for NRDC itself --- there is no Technical competence there that would recommend that group of lawyer to be designing America's energy system.. I'd stick with the folks who have DEMONSTRATED ability to produce energy and infrastructure.. NRDC does not like EITHER of those things..

 

[Politico]

skookerasbil Matthew is not naive. He knows exactly what he is saying.

 

[skookerasbil]

skookerasbil Matthew is not naive. He knows exactly what he is saying.

I think this Matthew guy is a very bright guy who is just lacking information. He needs a wee bit of schooling on how bureaucracies work. Most people on the far left are clueless ( so are many on the right as well ). And as I said......this is a non-partisan issue. Doesnt matter which party is running things. These agencies create their own reason for existence and will ALWAYS ensure their agency will grow......the way they operate demands growth. These agencies are constantly evolving and NEVER decreasing in size and scope.........the level of corruption is profound but will never be confronted by any politician. 100% certainty.( unless there is government collapse)

This is the best book I have read about government bureaucracies and how they work.....read it back in 1980. One of the most eye opening books I have ever read......real fascinating stuff >>>

[ame=http://www.amazon.com/American-Defense-Policy-Peter-Hays/dp/0801854733]American Defense Policy: Peter L. Hays, Brenda J. Vallance, Alan R. Van Tassell, Brent Scowcroft: 9780801854736: Amazon.com: Books[/ame]



You never look at government agencies the same way again.........

 

[Stephanie]

Here is what this agency is up to.....we need to demand they be defunded

SNIP:

Published March 25, 2014
• FoxNews.com



Feb. 28, 2014: EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy speaks with coal industry leaders in Beulah, N.D.AP

In what critics are describing as a government land grab, the Environmental Protection Agency proposed a change Tuesday to the Clean Water Act that would give it regulatory authority over temporary wetlands and waterways.

The proposal immediately sparked concerns that the regulatory power could extend into seasonal ponds, streams and ditches, including those on private property.

"The ... rule may be one of the most significant private property grabs in U.S. history," said Louisiana Sen. David Vitter, the top Republican on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.

The EPA proposal would apply pollution regulations to the country's so-called "intermittent and ephemeral streams and wetlands" -- which are created during wet seasons, or simply after it rains, but are temporary.

At issue is whether the smaller streams and wetlands are indeed part of the "waters of the United States."

The Supreme Court ruled on the issue in 2001 and 2006. The second ruling restricted the federal government's authority by stating such waters must be "relatively" permanent or continuously flowing and sizeable, like "oceans, rivers, streams and lakes."

In defending the proposed change, the EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers said Tuesday that determining Clean Water Act protection for streams and wetlands became "confusing and complex" following the high court decisions.

"For nearly a decade, members of Congress, state and local officials, industry, agriculture, environmental groups, and the public asked for a rulemaking to provide clarity," the agencies said in a joint statement.

They also argued such waters "form the foundation of the nation's water resources" and the changes would not extend the federal government's reach. "To be clear, our proposal does not add to or expand the scope of the waters historically protected under the Clean Water Act," EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy said in a video accompanying the announcement.

The EPA also said roughly 60 percent of "stream miles" in the country only flow seasonally or after rain but have a "considerable impact" on downstream waters -- and that about 117 million Americans, or one in three, get their drinking water from public systems that rely in part on such streams.

The proposal is now subject to a 90-day comment period in which federal officials vowed to conduct a "robust" public outreach effort that will include discussions across the country to gather the input needed "to shape a final rule." The agencies said the proposed change is supported by the latest peer-reviewed science.

However, Vitter accused the EPA of "picking and choosing" its science while trying to "take another step toward outright permitting authority over virtually any wet area in the country."

He also warned the proposed change, if approved, would open the door for more environmental groups suing private property owners.

Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, echoed those concerns, saying the change "could result in serious collateral damage to our economy."

"t appears that the EPA is seeking to dramatically expand its jurisdictional reach under the Clean Water Act," she said in a statement. The senator added that the change could have a huge impact on Alaska.

"If EPA is not careful, this rule could effectively give the federal government control of nearly all of our state -- and prove to be a showstopper for both traditional access and new development," she said.

FROM:
EPA land grab? Agency claims authority over more streams, wetlands | Fox News

 

[boedicca]

This is so great!

Let's inflict even more damage upon our economy with insane carbon restrictions so that China can continue to pollute!