Home | About | Donate

EPA's Plan to Repeal Clean Power Plan 'Will Put Us All in Danger'


#1

EPA's Plan to Repeal Clean Power Plan 'Will Put Us All in Danger'

Julia Conley, staff writer

Internal document shows agency could soon move on repealing key rule meant to reduce U.S. carbon emissions


#2

But a year ago, everybody here was saying that Obama did absolutely nothing for the environment, so how bad could Trump be? And when I tried to point out stuff like the Clean Power Plan, and the new “Waters of the US” rule, I was savagely attacked as just a “shill for Killary”…


#3

The clean power plan was self congratulatory at best for the Obama administration. It was far to lax to really get to the meat of the problem by phasing out coal fired plants as rapidly as possible; but hey at least is was something. Now the head of the EPA wants to roll back the inadequate measures even more. So we have a literal scorched Earth cabinet that couldn’t give a shit about the current or future generations in the name of the almighty profit margin even if it makes Earth uninhabitable for vast numbers of the current indigenous inhabitants in a continuation of the sixth extension we are currently in. In the future, if there’s any future, this will be the administration blamed on the vast numbers of perished species and the especially includes enormous numbers of humans. We need real action now and I’m afraid it’s going to be too late real soon, if it isn’t already.


#4

The reason that Obama created the Clean Power Plan was he could not get Congress to act. It would have been much better to pass legislation to reduce emissions. The CPP was Plan B. If anybody has a problem with it they should blame the Republicans (as usual) for making it impossible to pass legislation such a carbon tax or a cap and trade program. It wasn’t even clear that the EPA had the authority to regulate carbon dioxide emissions but the courts said they did. And over 20 Republican governors are challenging in court the EPA’s authority to implement the CPP under the Clean Air Act. The critical thing is to identify where the problem lies. It is the Republican Party. That should be as obvious as anything yet many people have trouble seeing that.


#5

I think you have to ignore such rhetoric from a group on the left if you can. Everything is used by them to attack the center left Democrats as if they were the basis of all evil on the planet. Some of the attacks on the Democrats have merit but some are total nonsense such as the example you gave. I guess nonsense and politics are inseparable. Whether people really people believe the nonsense they are saying or they are knowingly saying nonsense to score political points is hard if not impossible to determine. I guess the only thing to do is follow what one really believes despite the attacks. I think all serious environmentalists believe Obama tried to do a lot for the environment, particularly with regard to climate change. During his first term he got legislation to improve overall vehicle fuel efficiency standards to over 50 mpg by 2025. And during his second term he created the CPP. Also, he gave speeches to lead the nation in the fight against climate change. And perhaps most important he was the person who played the biggest role getting the Paris Climate Agreement. The claim that Obama did absolutely nothing for environment belongs in the category of alternative facts or simply is a display of complete ignorance about Obama’s accomplishments.


#6

You had to remind me about the new CAFE standards which will be rescinded - and with them - the end of electric vehicles too…

Ultimately, it is going to be up to the civilized world to use economic sanctions and other pressure to force the US to join the world in addressing global warming (and join the world in lots of other ways too. The USA resolutely marches to a different, psychopathic drummer - and this way predates Trump.


#7

Is the EPA a person (s), place(s),thing (s) or an ideal with a mission?
At it’s founding it’s mission was to enforce and be run as a “Do no harm”, and instead it became a “RUN with Allowances of the least amount of harm”.
It was always under sway of the professional politicians and its top administrators were of same social strata as those of business and politicly connected interest,
Every advance upon cleaning environment did not cost the polluters as it was taxpayers that financed each and every improvement.
Twisted at times (corrupted individuals) in their reports by competing business interest they ruled against the least powerfull.
Did not have any affect upon their employees as win lose or draw their paychecks kept on coming
PEA was set up as a middle man to help defray and delay public attention allowing polluters to not have to face intelligent people in courts of law.
In fact many an Instance when public gathered info it was the SO AS citing poor techniques in data gathering who launched own investigative procedures thereby delaying justice to the harmed public.