There is a link to the document. Before anyone gets upset, they should at least read the Executive Summary and the Executive Director's Recommendations.
There is no scientific or political consensus on CO2 as a greenhouse gas and global warming. On the other hand, there is no disagreement on the need to reduce emissions of methane, NO2, SO2, CFC, VOC, soot particulate, etc, etc.
Oh, I read it before I got upset.
TNRCC -aka- "TRAINWRECK" as it is known by its bureaucrat-employees, is an exacutive monster that releases new initiatives to self-perpetuate its own expansion. When -IS- the last time TNRCC requested that its funding be cut?
The willy nilly interchanging of "local pollution" and "global warming" is ludicrous, but expected for this bunch. The study talks of studies on global GHG, and then immediately applies that to "Local (Texas) Pollution control," without proving a measurable link. If Texas' CO2 output was INCREASED by gubbmint mandate to 10 TIMES its present value, could that even be detected in the GLOBAL atmosphere??? Probably not, but the TNRCC would not finance such a study for fear that it might be inconclusive just like the false positive studies of the enviro-panickers.
IOW, if all pollution is bad, less pollution is better...no matter the cost. WRONG!!!! If the cost-benefit ain't proven, and it is admitted that the GHG->Warming is not even conclusive, how can you keep a straight face and advocate reduction methods Draco would be proud of??