Comments on: CO2 Regulation under the Clean Air Act: Economic Train Wreck, Constitutional Crisis, Legislative Thuggery

By: Climate Emails Stoke Debate: Scientists' Leaked Correspondence Illustrates BitterFeud - Page 4 - Volconvo Debate Forums

Wed, 09 Dec 2009 23:01:22 +0000

[...] to worry a bit. Obama's job-creating ajenda is at work as his EPA Moves Forward on CO2 Regulation. MasterResource CO2 Regulation under the Clean Air Act: Economic Train Wreck, Constitutional Crisis, Legislative [...]

By: NAAQS Petition Confirms Mass v. EPA Is Bottomless Well of Absurd Results | OpenMarket.org

Thu, 03 Dec 2009 20:54:24 +0000

[...] by misreading the Act to include authority to regulate CO2 as an “air pollutant,” the Supreme Court set the [...]

By: EPA “Tailoring Rule” confirms Mass v. EPA set the stage for administrative quagmire and economic disaster | GlobalWarming.org

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 21:33:45 +0000

[...] delays (p. 44502). However, the ANPR considerably understated the risks, Glaser, the Chamber, and CEI argued. Well, you can now get the lowdown straight from the horse’s mouth. Here’s what [...]

By: EPA “Tailoring Rule” confirms Mass v. EPA set the stage for administrative quagmire and economic disaster (updated 3:15 pm) | GlobalWarming.org

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 21:03:44 +0000

By: EPA “Tailoring Rule” confirms Mass v. EPA set the stage for administrative quagmire and economic disaster | OpenMarket.org

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 16:18:47 +0000

[...] delays (p. 44502). However, the ANPR considerably understated the risks, Glaser, the Chamber, and CEI [...]

By: Manuel Lopez

Manuel Lopez — Thu, 01 Oct 2009 05:25:18 +0000

let’s cut to the chase. Whenever a health and safety regulation is anywhere on the horizon, big business and their agents come out of the woodwork talking about the devestation that will come down on America. Are these minions talking about the health and safety of the people? No, they are concerned with preserving the status quo of American business empires. Just like the Cigarette execs who stood up and loudly proclaimed that there was no evidence that cigs posed a health danger, so to will corporate interests state that contrary to the laws of science, carbon dioxide is absolutely harmless and therefore should not be regulated. Thw wheels of justice turn slowly, but they turn surely.

By: Carbon dioxide by any other name would fertilize as well: Myron Ebell quoted in Climatewire | OpenMarket.org

Wed, 23 Sep 2009 15:55:29 +0000

[...] The Supreme Court takes the cake, however, deciding in Massachusetts v. EPA (April 2007) that carbon dioxide is an “air pollutant” merely by virtue of the fact that it is “emitted into” the air. By that logic, even zero-pollution, completely clean air is “air pollutant,” as long as it it “emitted.” This sort of terminological confusion is not harmless. By defining CO2 as an “air pollutant” merely because it is “emitted,” the Court set the stage for a gigantic regulatory chain reaction under the Clean Air Act that could easily dwarf Waxman-Markey and the Kyoto Protocol in cost and scope, as I explain here. [...]

By: Even the Generals are Worried! Mission Creep, Climate Change, and National Security (Part 2) — MasterResource

Wed, 16 Sep 2009 06:02:09 +0000

[...] implications of litigation-driven CO2 regulation under the Clean Air Act (CAA). As discussed in an earlier post, once EPA finalizes its proposed finding, under CAA Sec. 202, that greenhouse gas emissions from [...]

By: ECO-BUSINESSWIRE.COM › Everything you always wanted to know about EPA greenhouse gas regulations, but were afraid to ask

Tue, 15 Sep 2009 20:59:18 +0000

[...] the friction, some conservatives, like the Competitive Enterprise Institute’s Marlo Lewis, are arguing that it is illegal for EPA to unilaterally change the threshold. The rule, if it goes into effect, [...]

By: EPA proposes illegal rule | OpenMarket.org

EPA proposes illegal rule | OpenMarket.org — Wed, 02 Sep 2009 18:08:26 +0000

[...] the gory details, see my blog post on MasterResource.Org and my comment on EPA’s proposed endangerment finding. « [...]