carbon scam ping
Posted on 10/04/2007 3:57:12 PM PDT by decimon
AMSTERDAM, Netherlands - The United States is moving toward the regulation of carbon emissions, a U.S. energy official said Thursday, despite the Bush administration's adherence to a voluntary approach to controlling the primary gas blamed for climate change.
"There will be carbon regulation of some sort," said Dan Arvizu, director of the National Renewable Energy Lab of the Department of Energy, told an international conference on biofuels.
He spoke a week after briefing President Bush's global warming conference of major carbon-emitting nations.
"I am neutral as to which kind of carbon management regulation there will be. It is very clear to me that there will be carbon management, whether it will be a direct tax, carbon cap-and-trade or some other instrument," Arvizu said.
Arvizu did not say he was speaking for the Bush administration. But some of his listeners thought it was significant that he spoke after the Washington meeting, which brought together the United States, leading industrial nations that have embraced stringent mandatory controls, and developing countries that are totally unregulated, including China.
"He's picking up the vibe" in Washington, said Patrick Mazza, chairman of the biofuel conference and research director of Climate Solutions based in Seattle.
Arvizu later told The Associated Press the United States "is headed in a different direction than we were a few years ago." He said executives of utility companies and U.S. oil giants — two lobbies that had resisted regulation — now want predictable and transparent carbon policies.
"Certainly my reference point has changed dramatically," he said. "The position of this administration is beginning to evolve."
In his speech to the Washington conference, Bush reiterated his view that each nation should set targets for itself and decide how it will combat global warming without hindering economic growth.
But Arvizu said that, while Bush remained in favor of voluntary targets, his position is not as rigid as it once was, and he made a point of telling the Washington meeting that he has accepted a mandatory renewable fuel standard for vehicles.
He said the U.S. government would invest $2 billion over the next four to five years to develop alternative transportation fuels and reduce dependency on oil imports. The focus on ethanol will shift to a "more robust biofuel," he told industrial leaders and environmentalists who are working on new biofuel solutions.
Transportation accounts for 30 percent of U.S. carbon emissions, he said, compared with a global average of 20 percent.
Nineteen eighty foooooorrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr
“Mr. Arvizu, the President of the United States is on line 1 . . .”
LLS
Oh, who could have predicted such a thing?
Want to fly somewhere? How about all those people driving to Yankee stadium for a baseball game? Oh - and I bet it takes a LOT of energy to make a movie in Hollywood. Why, you gotta pay a “carbon tax” to the UN! Or whoever. Can you imagine the layers of buearcracy that will result? More nonsense jobs for people unwilling to work, we need more of that; *nods*
Are they going to regulate my exhaling?
ping
Not JUST your “exhaling”.....
Yes. You will hereby be known as a carbon death form.
What next? Oxygen credits/offsets because of too many trees planted to reduce C02? We are heading into the dark ages when politicians parade around as scientists. People 150 years from now are going to be laughing their butts off. And many have already started.
Suck my tailpipe, Dan. I already don't comply with your emissions laws, not gonna change.
BTW, if we are in a non attainment zone (EPA I know, but has to be bad, right) how come the jets don't have cats? Sure, joke I know, but I can easily see in the sunrise the major pollutant and it is not my straight piped 350.
Laughing is seditious.
Carbon “regulation”...funny way to say tax.
“People 150 years from now are going to be laughing their butts off.”
They will be cursing us for our stupidity and the damage we`ve done.
Arvizu - “The focus on ethanol will shift to a “more robust biofuel,” he told industrial leaders and environmentalists who are working on new biofuel solutions.”
Translation = More CO2 produced. Higher food prices. More de-forestation.
no just the amount of toilet paper u can use
You're probably right but this could kick them in the empennage too.
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.