Posted on 01/17/2014 8:51:38 AM PST by thackney
The Obama administration is focused on paring greenhouse gas emissions from the nation’s power plants, and at least one senator wants refiners to be in the crosshairs too.
During a Thursday hearing on President Barack Obama’s climate action plan, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., pressed Environmental Protection Agency administrator Gina McCarthy to begin zeroing in on carbon dioxide emissions from refiners, industrial ovens and commercial boilers.
The EPA has been obligated to tackle carbon pollution from power plants and refineries since a December 2010 settlement with conservationists. Obama directed his EPA to focus on new and existing power plants first, however, and his climate action plan left out any mention of refineries. That was a tacit acknowledgement that any new limits on refinery emissions could be years away.
Whitehouse used the Environment and Public Works hearing to press for action:
“A ton of carbon released from a power plant: Does that do more or less harm than a ton of carbon released from a refinery, a kiln or a boiler?” he asked McCarthy.
It’s the same, McCarthy responded.
“So at some point we probably should start looking at refiners, kilns and boilers that release tens of thousands of tons of carbon as well,” Whitehouse observed.
McCarthy indicated the message was clear. “Point taken,” she said.
The exchange was brief — but it was a reminder that even though refineries aren’t getting scrutiny now, it probably won’t always be the case.
McCarthy separately said Obama wisely instructed the EPA to focus its attention on power plants, which represent a third of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions and about 60 percent of the emissions tied to stationary sources.
In writing the new rules, she said, “we’re trying to be very careful and deliberate.”
All this will do is drive up prices and force refining off shore along with all those jobs.
Every move that government makes these days should consider if it will affect jobs. Of course they don’t give a damn about the middle class.
Yup. That and former transport clown ray lahood saying the tax on gas should be raised. How about we penalize the prius drivers and their ilk for not contributing enough to keep the roads maintained. (maintained. Right! LOL!)
Let RI lead the way, Sheldon. Let them accept no ‘dirty’ oil. No oil gets transported to RI from refiners that Whitehouse finds objectionable. As we used to say in the Carter era “let that yankee freeze in the dark”.
And its just one of an army of regulators strangling this nation. My congressman was in Hillsdale talking about OSHA and the attack on family farms (under 10 employees). For 40 years those farms have been exempt but not any more.
http://www.hillsdale.net/article/20140117/NEWS/sthash.VNciHfPZ.gbpl
This is just one tiny, focused example of why American industry has an uphill battle competing or prospering.
Federal agencies are simply incapable of leaving anyone alone.
They provide a taxpayer feathered nests for busybodies to settle in and stay forever.
There is an unsafe level of carbon dioxide, at which point human beings are unable to breathe in enough oxygen to sustain life, but at any given moment, our own bodies are absorbing and releasing carbon dioxide in an endless cycle that does not even end with death.
As an atmospheric gas, carbon dioxide has an insignificant effect on climate. Water vapor is VASTLY more important, because of very important distinction between CO2 and H2O - water has a triple point at which it may simultaneously exist as a solid (ice), a liquid (water at 0 degrees Centigrade) and a gas (water vapor), under normal atmospheric conditions. Carbon dioxide sublimates from the solid state (dry ice) to a gas at -78.5 degrees Centigrade.
So CO2 has virtually NO effect of atmospheric temperatures, as it exerts neither an heat absorption nor a heat dispersal effect on the surrounding molecules of the atmosphere, as water does.
Carbon dioxide cannot possibly have the effects attributed to it by the "global climate change" playtime "scientists" who claim there is a cause-and-effect relationship between atmospheric carbon dioxide and any warming effect.
It does the same amount of harm - none.
I guess Sheldon never uses electricity
Somebody need to plant a tree in his a**, to absorb the CO2 he is creating, just by talking crap.
No, the Middle-class is foremost on their mind. We are their number one enemy.
Just discontinue selling gasoline, Diesel and heating oil in the State.
The Federal Government is a bloated, self-perpetuating, metastasizing cancer. It only gets bigger, and the number of laws enacted, monitored and enforced by that cancerous growth only gets bigger, bigger and bigger with each passing day.
It’s the same, McCarthy responded.
I'm sure both tons feed an equal number of plants for a set period of time, you obnoxious jerk.
MIT Climate Scientist: “Climate Change Is A Dream Come True For Politicians”
EPA chief unable to say if the world has gotten warmer
'Not looking good': Coal workers see future dim amid regulation burden
EPA denies politics delayed pollution rules
Suing the EPA! Interview With Attorney Shannon L. Goessling
EPA Administrator Doesn’t Want To Contradict Obama On Global Warming: Refuses To Say
Global Warming on Free Republic
The control of CO2 emissions, as though CO2 were a pollutant, is a very costly, destructive policy for America. It will increase our cost of living, it will make us less competitive in the global market. It will shut down some of our industry and cause power shortages in places. It will increase unemployment, it will decrease revenue from taxes, and will therefore increase the national debt.
And it will have ZERO effect on the environment or climate or weather.
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.