Green-energy gurus not holding breath on CO2 rules

marketwatch ^ | 6/3/2009 | Steve Gelsi,

[shove_it]

Although the Waxman-Markey energy bill in Congress has made some major strides toward becoming sweeping greenhouse-gas regulations, proponents of new carbon-dioxide emissions rules don't expect any major moves from Washington in the near term.

Stephen Ward, chief of staff for Senate Energy Committee Chairman Jeff Bingaman, D-N.M, said Wednesday that lawmakers fear a ratepayer backlash, followed by a stampede to repeal future carbon-dioxide laws if the costs get passed too quickly onto businesses and consumers.

"A repeal could set us back decades," he said at a room full of alternative-energy financiers at the Lazard Capital Markets Alternative Energy Investor Summit. Compared with a measure passed by a key House committee last month, Ward foresees "a more modest bill" coming from the Senate. See story about the Markey-Waxman bill.

Carbon-emission measures are running into objections from Democrats from states that rely heavily on coal-fired power, as well as from the Republican side of the aisle, Ward added.

[...]

[shove_it]

Not so fast Rep. Nostrils.

[steelyourfaith]

 

Beam me to Planet Gore !

[Adder]

“A repeal could set us back decades,” he said at a room full of alternative-energy financiers at the Lazard Capital Markets Alternative Energy Investor Summit.

And thats a GOOD THING!

Effin crooks and robbers; liars and more names I can’t euphemize.

[I want off. The idiots are scaring me....]

[xcamel]

Earwax-Malarkey Carbon Tax & Scam Ping - (POGW)

[Fresh Wind]

...lawmakers fear a ratepayer backlash, followed by a stampede to repeal future carbon-dioxide laws if the costs get passed too quickly onto businesses and consumers.

ROFL!! Don't want to wake up the "ratepayers" by raising rates too quickly. That's just like King-to-be Obama's comment about being OK with $4.00 per gallon gas, but wishing that the price hadn't gone up so fast. And, what's this about repealing future laws? Why not repeal them BEFORE they become laws?

[theBuckwheat]

Allowing the government to regulate CO2 is a wide-open door to trash the already hobbled Ninth and Tenth Amendments. There is no human activity that this does not touch. We might as well allow the government to regulate water vapor, which BTW is many times more a “greenhouse gas” than is CO2.

We have morphed a Constitution designed to preserve life and liberty by chaining government with enumerated powers into a document that empowers government to regulate the very everyday activities of all humanity.

This is so wrong, especially given the specious nature of the theory of CO2 and AGW.

[spintreebob]

I plan to serve carbonated beverages at my libertarian Republican Liberty Caucus meeting tomorrow. As those beverages fizz, they release CO2 into the atmosphere. Maybe I should kill that plan.

Well, my guests will be breathing and exhaling CO2 as is common with animals. So should I tell my guests to stop breathing?

Come to think of it, maybe the excuse for abortion is to limit the production of CO2 producers.

[The Great RJ]

What members of Congress fear is not so much the repeal of these draconian carbon taxes, but that voters will throw them and the Democratic party out of Washington for decades for imposing them. They have good reason to fear.

[SueRae]

Sewer rat Waxman’s bill is going to be D.O.A. in this (or hopefully any other) economic climate. Tell Al Gore to go home. Tell Jeff Immelt to stuff it. It isn’t happening.

c’mon 2010, we have to neuter this beast.

[Buckeye McFrog]

well, if they don’t pass CO2 limits they won’t have to hold their breath, now would they?

Confirms tha Obama thesis that Dems are cool with skykrocketing energy rates, as long as the rocket ascends slowly...