Stop The Gutting of the Clean Air Act Before June 10th

[Madeline]

Please read the following and consider calling your senators to tell them to vote NO on Murkowski's amendment.

Lisa P. Jackson: The Murkowski Resolution: A Step Backward for American Clean Energy

Here are the contact numbers for the US Senate:

Save the Clean Air Act

 

[CrusaderFrank]

"Oil addiction" What a fucking crock

 

[martybegan]

Ah the famous Clean Air act Carbon Regulation end around.

The Clean Air act is fine the way it is, where it concentrates on NOx SOx and ROx (particulates) as well as VOC's and other toxics/environmental hazards.

If people want to regulate carbon go ahead, just have the balls to legislate it as a stand alone, and let people see the consequences of said actions.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Gut it? I say dismember it and bury the pieces all over America.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

What about windmill addiction? What about Al Gore addiction? What about Obama addiction?

Far more harmful... in my opinion.

 

[Madeline]

Soggy, how can anyone who lives in Louisiana support the oil companies?

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Please read the following and consider calling your senators to tell them to vote NO on Murkowski's amendment.

Lisa P. Jackson: The Murkowski Resolution: A Step Backward for American Clean Energy

Here are the contact numbers for the US Senate:

Save the Clean Air Act

To reduce our dependence on foreign oil we need t to expand our drilling efforts. Fact is oil is the life blood of this country. I hear talk about wind, solar and other alternatives but what people fail to realize none of these are viable to run our cars or our homes. It's one thing to have the technology and another thing to distribute it to all Americans.

 

[Madeline]

Lonestar logic, the amendment seeks to gut the clean air/emissions levels of new cars sold here -- provisions that increase the efficiency of those cars and thereby reduce our dependence on oil, foreign or domestic.

How is opposition to this amendment at all contrary to the move away from fossil fuels?

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Soggy, how can anyone who lives in Louisiana support the oil companies?

Oil has been big business in Louisiana since the first offshore well was drilled there in 1947.

Drilling Moratorium Could Imperil Louisiana's Expansive Oil Industry | PBS NewsHour | June 4, 2010 | PBS

 

[Old Rocks]

We have 3% of the world's oil reserves. We use 25% of the worlds oil. We cannot drill our way out of that.

The technology exist to change most of our private transportation over to electricity. This technology has been fought, and stymied, by the oil companies for the last two decades.

Revenge of the EV1: crushing EV1 crushed GM

Continueing to use petroleum for tranportation is to continue to fund both sides of the terror war, and to continue to prop up people like Chavez.

Chinese auto makers are already ahead of us on hybrids and EVs, in spite of the fact that both the US and Japan has manufactured very successful EVs in the past two decades, only to see an oil company, Chevron, no doubt with the full support of the industry, shut down production of those vehicles.

 

[Madeline]

Then Louisianaians need new jobs, Lonestar logic.

Thankies, Old Rocks.

 

[Old Rocks]

Soggy, how can anyone who lives in Louisiana support the oil companies?

Oil has been big business in Louisiana since the first offshore well was drilled there in 1947.

Drilling Moratorium Could Imperil Louisiana's Expansive Oil Industry | PBS NewsHour | June 4, 2010 | PBS

So, they get to pay for this with the destruction of their seacoast eco-system. I bet they are really pleased with that bargain.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Lonestar logic, the amendment seeks to gut the clean air/emissions levels of new cars sold here -- provisions that increase the efficiency of those cars and thereby reduce our dependence on oil, foreign or domestic.

How is opposition to this amendment at all contrary to the move away from fossil fuels?

Here's some facts for you to consider.

"Since the concentration of GHGs in the atmosphere is uniform across the globe, there's no way an individual country, much less individual states, could bring their concentrations down without the entire world doing so. And there's a provision in the Clean Air Act that says if a state can show it's in nonattainment because of international pollution -- which is more or less true by definition for greenhouse gases -- it doesn't have to meet the NAAQS."

A closer look at the Clean Air Act provisions preempted by the Senate climate bill | What the Senate climate bill does to the Clean Air Act | Grist

Does the Senate climate bill “gut” the Clean Air Act? | What the Senate climate bill does to the Clean Air Act | Grist

 

[Lonestar_logic]

We have 3% of the world's oil reserves. We use 25% of the worlds oil. We cannot drill our way out of that.

The technology exist to change most of our private transportation over to electricity. This technology has been fought, and stymied, by the oil companies for the last two decades.

Revenge of the EV1: crushing EV1 crushed GM

Continueing to use petroleum for tranportation is to continue to fund both sides of the terror war, and to continue to prop up people like Chavez.

Chinese auto makers are already ahead of us on hybrids and EVs, in spite of the fact that both the US and Japan has manufactured very successful EVs in the past two decades, only to see an oil company, Chevron, no doubt with the full support of the industry, shut down production of those vehicles.

Yes we could if we increased production.

 

[del]

Soggy, how can anyone who lives in Louisiana support the oil companies?

most of them drive cars and live indoors.

happy to help you out

 

[Granny]

Yes, the situation in the Gulf of Mexico is a disaster - no question about it. I'm not a helzapoppin' environmentalist, but I also don't throw trash on the highways. In my opinion, BP has done a really crappy job of trying to stop the oil flow. People are angry at BP and they should be - but here's the thing: Americans cannot live without oil, not only for gas, but for heating fuel, plastics, and other stuff ... like Vaseline.

You can't throw the baby out with the bath water.

America has vast amounts of natural resources to make this country self-sufficient on that matter. Nobody wants to use them. How about wind mills? Oh no - they'll ruin our view of the ocean, mountains, corn fields - whatever. How about solar panels? Oh no - we don't want to use them ... well, maybe in a house here and there ... but the huge fields of solar panels it would take to generate any real power? Nah. What about oil? Oh no - we can't be drilling ground wells and we absolutely cannot have any more off-shore drilling. AND they ruin the view. Coal? God forbid! That filthy stuff - not to mention the mines, both underground and strip mines! Natural gas? Well .... . Nuclear power!? Oh no, not in my little corner of the world!

We can't have it both ways - can't have our cake and eat it, too. And having EPA or any other government agency in control is NOT the way to go.

If I had my guesses - I'd say Murkowski's bill is a back-door approach to cap and tax. Can't remember right off the top of my head - but isn't she another Illinois Democrat sucking up to Obama and the rest?

 

[martybegan]

We have 3% of the world's oil reserves. We use 25% of the worlds oil. We cannot drill our way out of that.

The technology exist to change most of our private transportation over to electricity. This technology has been fought, and stymied, by the oil companies for the last two decades.

Revenge of the EV1: crushing EV1 crushed GM

Continueing to use petroleum for tranportation is to continue to fund both sides of the terror war, and to continue to prop up people like Chavez.

Chinese auto makers are already ahead of us on hybrids and EVs, in spite of the fact that both the US and Japan has manufactured very successful EVs in the past two decades, only to see an oil company, Chevron, no doubt with the full support of the industry, shut down production of those vehicles.

Electric cars have more of an issue with the consumer than anything else. For short commutes they would be great, but until you can fully charge a battery in the time it takes to fill up a gas tank E cars will not be able to replace Internal Combustion Engine Cars.

Who wants to spend 2 hours waiting for you battery to charge on a trip? Fix that issue and electric cars could work.

 

[Douger]

Soggy, how can anyone who lives in Louisiana support the oil companies?

The easy answer ? A huge amount of people in Loozeranna get their dope and liquor money from the oil companies.
Just like the fools in the coal mines of West, by Gawd, Virginia see their "success".
Cops actually think they protect and serve and the unemployable dolts in the military think they are defending freedom.
It's a cross between greed and brainwashing.
Horrible stuff that the vast majority can't keep clear of.

 

[WillowTree]

Please read the following and consider calling your senators to tell them to vote NO on Murkowski's amendment.

Lisa P. Jackson: The Murkowski Resolution: A Step Backward for American Clean Energy

Here are the contact numbers for the US Senate:

Save the Clean Air Act

awwwww another libturd wants us to vote for our electric bills to go up 300%.. That's why we call you libturds..

 

[del]

Please read the following and consider calling your senators to tell them to vote NO on Murkowski's amendment.

Lisa P. Jackson: The Murkowski Resolution: A Step Backward for American Clean Energy

Here are the contact numbers for the US Senate:

Save the Clean Air Act

funny how she never once says what the actual resolution is, maybe she hasn't had time to read it?

is she a bush appointee?