Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 05/13/2010 1:35:24 PM PDT by NormsRevenge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-34 next last
To: NormsRevenge

Lets move to regulate the EPA.


2 posted on 05/13/2010 1:36:54 PM PDT by o_zarkman44 (Elect Chuck Purgason, US Senate, Missouri! http://www.purgasonforsenate.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

the rule applies only to large polluters such as power plants, refineries and cement production facilities that collectively are responsible for 70 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States.

They’ll around to the other 30% soon enough... got to set your priorities, yaknow.. like Obama and the ‘Jobs are #1 priority’ focused like a laser regime..


3 posted on 05/13/2010 1:37:34 PM PDT by NormsRevenge (Semper Fi ... Godspeed .. Monthly Donor Onboard .. Chuck DeVore - CA Senator. Believe.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NormsRevenge
" ... a step to limit emissions widely very narrowly blamed for global warming."
6 posted on 05/13/2010 1:38:14 PM PDT by knarf (I say things that are true ... I have no proof ... but they're true)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NormsRevenge
Well, now, that's going to jump-start the economy.

/s

7 posted on 05/13/2010 1:38:31 PM PDT by Scott from the Left Coast
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NormsRevenge

That should’nt result in too much of a problem for these companies. Just mass firings due to expense. All by design of course.


8 posted on 05/13/2010 1:38:42 PM PDT by albie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NormsRevenge

This problem has a rather simple solution. Do not build or modify facilities. Of course, the EPA will effectively force modifications through other regulations and other forms of coercion. The companies can close facilities and import the fuel or just charge customers if possible.


9 posted on 05/13/2010 1:39:35 PM PDT by businessprofessor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NormsRevenge
The EPA said it is completing a rule requiring large polluters to reduce the amounts of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases that they release into the air. Those emissions can exacerbate asthma and other breathing problems.

Bullshit. Sulfur dioxide and other real pollutants can exacerbate asthma, but carbon dioxide does no such thing. It feeds plants and that's about it.

10 posted on 05/13/2010 1:39:41 PM PDT by xjcsa (Ridiculing the ridiculous since the day I was born.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NormsRevenge

Hey...WASHINGTON....THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS GLOBAL WARMING.

And we are NOT buying your “Climate Change”, “Cap & Trade” OR “AMERICAN POWER ACT” BS...so shove it.

You’ve been found out, we are awake and we’ve had enough!!! Pfffft


12 posted on 05/13/2010 1:43:20 PM PDT by Lucky9teen (I'll just say the 2nd amendment to the Constitution is there for a reason!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NormsRevenge
Carbon dioxide is not associated with causing asthma.

Well, thats not going to slow them down.

13 posted on 05/13/2010 1:43:51 PM PDT by corkoman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NormsRevenge

Might makes right. :-{


14 posted on 05/13/2010 1:54:15 PM PDT by rhombus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NormsRevenge

Greenhouse gases like, say, water vapor???


15 posted on 05/13/2010 2:01:16 PM PDT by beethovenfan (If Islam is the solution, the "problem" must be freedom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NormsRevenge
...carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases that they release into the air. Those emissions can exacerbate asthma and other breathing problems.

Since this EPA ruling is based on total Bravo Sierra, could this not be challenged and correspendingly overturned by the courts (Like that matters to 0 re: FCC)

16 posted on 05/13/2010 2:08:46 PM PDT by Drill Thrawl (Another day, another injury, another step closer. Are you prepared?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NormsRevenge

The EPA is unconstitutional since Article 1 Section 8 does not specifically grant the federal government the power to regulate energy. It needs to be abolished.


17 posted on 05/13/2010 2:11:10 PM PDT by Man50D (Fair Tax, you earn it, you keep it! www.FairTaxNation.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NormsRevenge
Let's look at those numbers again.

The regulatory threshold under the Clean Air Act is 250 tons per year.

EPA said they would "tailor the reg" so that only those companies emitting(or, as some say, spewing) 25,000 tons would be regulated. At the 25,000 ton threshold, about 12,000 companies would be regulated.

Now, they have "tailored" the reg even further and the threshold is 75,000 tons.

18 posted on 05/13/2010 2:14:39 PM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NormsRevenge

It would be great if the epas’ ac failed on a hot day due to over regulation.


22 posted on 05/13/2010 2:22:33 PM PDT by mapmaker77
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NormsRevenge
I know immigration, legal and illegal, from south of the border is an issue.

Once oil refineries and chemical companies shut down in the US and move operations and equipment to Mexico due to this EPA nonsense, it will be the influx of Americans into Mexico that's going to be the monkey on Mexico's back.

24 posted on 05/13/2010 2:29:12 PM PDT by chemicalman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NormsRevenge

I suspect that latest Iceland volcano exhausted more CO2 than all off mankind
for the last few years. If these green shooters would shoot it straight for once,
then we could actually make something work...as long as those involved
are willing to actually work.

The leftist-better-than-thou who bilk the taxpayers to fund their ponsi scheme need not apply.


26 posted on 05/13/2010 2:37:24 PM PDT by soycd
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NormsRevenge

Besides the fact that CO2 is necessary for life to exist on this rock, the “greenhouse” effect is fraud.


29 posted on 05/13/2010 3:00:12 PM PDT by SouthTexas (Congress is out of order!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach; Rurudyne; steelyourfaith; Tolerance Sucks Rocks; xcamel; AdmSmith; Berosus; ...
Thanks NormsRevenge.
a step to limit emissions widely blamed for global warming.

31 posted on 05/13/2010 3:23:15 PM PDT by SunkenCiv ("Fools learn from experience. I prefer to learn from the experience of others." -- Otto von Bismarck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: NormsRevenge
EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson said the rule applies only to large polluters such as power plants, refineries and cement production facilities that collectively are responsible for 70 percent of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States.

I thought the pols in DC were responsible for all those gas emmissions.
32 posted on 05/13/2010 3:24:05 PM PDT by algernonpj (He who pays the piper . . .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-34 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson