Posted on 09/20/2009 4:55:50 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
More than a year after Bay Area air pollution regulators became the first in the nation to charge businesses for pumping greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, the program has raked in close to $1.7 million. And as early as this week, the state may follow suit by imposing similar fees on large California polluters as part of an ongoing effort to cut greenhouse gases 20 percent by 2020.
The proposed program from the California Air Resources Board and the fledgling regional effort are designed to use the fees to pay for measuring, monitoring and studying the emissions blamed for global climate change.
While health and environmental advocates say tracking greenhouse gases is an important step in the state's plan to battle climate change, big emitters say there is a risk of creating an unfair hodgepodge of regulations and fees.
"We continue to have a lot of problems with (the program)," said Dennis Bolt, manager of the regional office for the Western States Petroleum Association, which represents many of the Bay Area's largest oil refineries. "If every district, county, city in the nation does this ... when you roll that up, it's pretty punitive."
Last year the Bay Area Air Quality Management District voted to charge about 2,500 businesses for emitting greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide. The fee, which currently amounts to 4.5 cents per metric ton of greenhouse gases, is widely seen as too small in most cases to deter the discharge of carbon dioxide and other gases. Instead, the fees were set to generate money for further study.
The largest emitters - refineries, power plants and cement factories, for example - must pay hundreds of thousands of dollars each year. Other businesses - including auto shops, coffee roasters and restaurants - pay $1 or $2 per year.
(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...
fee=tax
global warming=climate change
ruse=scam
CARB=crap
What about all those Californians who are pumping CO2 into our atmosphere with each breath they take? Shouldn’t they be fined also?
And you wonder why we have the highest gas prices in the country?
And they also want to outlaw some flat screen TVs.
I checked on their consumption - it costs about $3/month to run them - they consume 100-200watts - 2 light bulbs.
The idiocy of these imbeciles is beyond belief.
The idiocy of these imbeciles is beyond belief.
.. and spreading.
it’s a form of madness.
those fees would have gone to employees as salary increases or bonuses but now go to gov hacks.
Just another way for gov’t to get more $ without having to deal with our 2/3rd majority requirement to raise taxes.
We may need to move beyond debating whether states can succeed from the Union, and instead consider whether they can be expelled. Losing an entire coast may be preferable to being contaminated by this degree of wild-eyed and suicidal irrationalism. I'm only half kidding.
China is nice this time of year. Take a look: http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=2895773n&tag=related;photovideo
China is nice this time of year. Take a look: http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=2895773n&tag=related;photovideo
All these businesses including the power plants need to leave California I am sure algore can figure how to get the place back up and running after that.
Morons in Ca. are gonna tax the state into oblivion!
Look on the bright side. Folks in Michigan will get to upgrade their chant to, "We're Number Forty-Nine!"
Trying to laugh, but actually this is pretty serious.
You can't pick up a refinery and move it. This insanity is going to cost us ALL in the price (and/or simple availability) of fuel and other commodities. And that's not even counting what the inevitable bailout will cost us.
Madness. Liberal insanity. It’s a mental disorder.
>> the state may follow suit by imposing similar fees on large California polluters
One state’s dastardly polluter is another state’s welcomed employer.
Screw Kalifornia — come to Texas, y’all!
(It’s a pretty safe bet that in spite of what the Ka. Enviroweenies say, you’re prolly cleaner than half of us who are already here.)
California should be sued to prove their global warming case and the need for any sort of carbon tax, regulation, etc.
Shame about your homepage pics disappearing. I get my shopping ideas from those pictures. (Love my new P220 Equinox, btw!)
They should tax the US Forest Service for the emissions from their forest fires. They emit huge amounts of carbon:
www.westinstenv.org
TO OFFSET GREENHOUSE GAS DAMAGE CAUSED FROM CALIFORNIA WILDFIRES DURING 2001-2007, STATE’S 14 MILLION CARS WOULD NEED TO BE LOCKED IN GARAGES FOR 3½ YEARS, STUDY FINDS
A raging wildfire can burn out of control for a long period of time, but eventually it will be extinguished. However, the effects of that wildfire can linger for years and be a prime contributor to global warming.
A study by Dr. Thomas M. Bonnicksen, Professor Emeritus of Forest Science at Texas A&M University , released today found that California ’s increasing wildfire crisis is causing more destruction and undoing much of the progress California is making to fight global warming.
Dr. Bonnicksen, who holds a Ph.D. in forestry from the University of California, Berkeley, and has studied California forests for more than 30 years, is author of America’s Ancient Forests: from the Ice Age to the Age of Discovery (John Wiley, 2000).
This report, entitled “Impacts of California Wildfires on Climate and Forests,†chronicles how the wildfires that scorched California from 2001 to 2007 seriously degraded the forests in the state and contributed to global warming. The report notes that political and economic obstacles to managing and restoring forests contribute to causing the wildfire crisis.
Emissions from the last seven years of wildfires documented in this study are equivalent to adding an estimated 50 million more cars onto California’s highways for one year, each spewing tons of greenhouse gases. To offset this damage, all 14 million cars in California would have to be locked in garages for 3½ years to make up for the global warming impact of these wildfires.
From 2001 to 2007, fires burned more than 4 million California acres and released an estimated 277 million tons of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, resulting from combustion and the post-fire decay of dead trees. That is an average of 68 tons per acre.
This study and previous studies use a new computer model, the Forest Carbon and Emissions Model (FCEM), to estimate greenhouse gas emissions from wildfires and insect infestations, and opportunities to recover these emissions and prevent future losses.
“Our most important question is: Can we recover from our mistake of letting forests become unnaturally overcrowded with trees and vulnerable to catastrophic wildfires?†said Dr. Bonnicksen, “the answer is yes, if we care about restoring our forests and fighting global warming.â€
There are many other harmful effects of these wildfires as well, including killing wildlife, polluting the air and water, and stripping soil from hillsides. Ironically, the greenhouse gases they emit are wiping out much of what is being achieved to reduce emissions from fossil fuels to battle global warming.
“While California’s actions to reduce global warming are significant, reducing the number and severity of wildfires may be the single most important action we can take in the short-term to lower greenhouse gas emissions and really fight global warming,†Bonnicksen said.
Some public forests in California have more than 1,000 trees per acre when 40 to 60 trees per acre would be natural. These dense forests contain small trees that can carry fire into the canopy, and heavy concentrations of woody debris lying on the ground intensify the flames, which helps increase the size and severity of forest fires. Reducing the number of all sizes of trees per acre by thinning is effective in helping prevent crown fires in forests.
Yet that is only part of the wildfire tragedy.
During the seven years covered by this study, California wildfires deforested about 882,759 acres of public and private land. Only an estimated 120,755 acres were replanted. That means about 762,004 acres of forest was converted permanently to brush because no live trees remain standing to provide seed for a new forest. That is an average loss of 109,000 acres of forests each year, or the equivalent of nearly four times the area of San Francisco.
California’s forests are dwindling due to permanent deforestation from wildfire. In addition, the estimated 134 million tons of carbon dioxide (CO2) released by fires and the decay of dead trees from forests that were permanently converted to brush from 2001 to 2007 will continue to worsen global warming.
Harvesting dead trees to prevent them from releasing CO2 from decay, storing the carbon they contain in long-lasting wood products, and using the money from the sale of the wood to replant a young forest that absorbs CO2 through photosynthesis, is the only way to restore deforested areas and recover this greenhouse gas from the atmosphere, Dr. Bonnicksen said. He added that this is done routinely on private industrial forestland but rarely on public forestland. Therefore, he said, it is critical to expedite and increase the harvesting of fire-killed trees and replanting of young trees on public forests destroyed by wildfire.
The immensity of greenhouse gas emissions from California’s wildfires and the permanent loss of huge areas of forest are a warning.
The report emphasizes that every effort must be made to reduce the amount of fuel in public and private forests to prevent catastrophic wildfires. That means managing forests to make them healthy, productive, and resistant to crown fires.
Major constraints to managing and thinning private forests are government regulations and the high cost of Timber Harvest Plans (THPs). Solving this problem by streamlining regulations and reducing THP costs on private forests, and expediting environmental reviews for thinning and timber harvesting on public forests, could dramatically reduce wildfires and greenhouse gas emissions.
***
Data used in this report come from a variety of government and other sources. They include the U.S. Forest Service Pacific Southwest Region Ecosystem Planning Staff, U.S. Forest Service Region 5 Silviculturalist, California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE), and the National Interagency Fire Center (NIFC).
The "disappearance" is only temporary until September 27th.
Photobucket advised that I've exceeded my monthly bandwidth allotment and it gets renewed then.
The Equinox is a fine Sig. I really like the grips a lot, but Sig won't sell them seperately, so instead, I put KN Nill grips on a few of my Sigs.
Good! My checking account is safe for another week. You’re right about the Equinox and the grips. My only complaint is that it’s almost too pretty. I’m in love...
They are "pretty" but remember, Sigs are combat weapons. Take a few self defence classes and get some holster wear on that baby. :)
unfortunately it's worse than that
I wonder what penalty Pennsylvania would incur for their underground coal fires?
- - - and what do they call “greenhouse gasses?”
Answer: water vapor and harmless carbon dioxide.
Wonder if there's a way I can get in on that....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.