Ah yes, the ole 4 branches of gov’t;
Executive
Legislative
Judicial
Regulatory
Parts per BILLION...barely at detectable levels. So what would be the consequences of having say 72 parts per billion rather than 68 parts per billion? The difference between these levels are well within measuring error. Billions in higher costs for what possible benefit?
I seem to recall that being a background level on a hot sunny day in some environments.
If so, it is almost unachievable.
Is that correct?
.
Everyone knows that global warming affects weather and weather causes lightning. Since lightning causes ozone, we have to shut down the coal industry. There.
The EPA site describing the proposed rule and allowing for public comment is
http://www.epa.gov/air/ozonepollution/actions.html#nov2014 .
Probably local cost but worldwide benefit calculation, which is bogus.
Yes it sound like a new gate way for new taxes fees and fines.
This is actually a means of killing economic activity because vegetation, and particularly trees, emit sufficient VOC (volatile organic compounds) to produce enough ozone to exceed the standard.
We really have clean air in this country, for various reasons. My city (Pittsburgh) was very dirty decades ago. They cleaned it up due to regulations, and losing industry. the EPA should go to China.
time to start a bonfire in the back using a cup of kerosene and an old tire to get er going?
I estimate that providing me with a lifetime, tax free income of $750,000 per year would provide the public over 1 trillion dollars in public health benefits over the rest of my lifetime. Where do I go to enact such legislation?
Los Angeles is detrimental to the rest of America. Let them gag and suffer from their excesses but don’t penalize the rest of the country
Perhaps a big earth quake will solve the smog problem
“stricter”?
Iteotwawki
“It also estimated then that the rule would deliver up to $100 billion a year in public-health benefits. “
Another figure pulled out of their asses.