Posted on 10/06/2017 9:37:41 AM PDT by rktman
The 43-page document, titled, “Repeal of Carbon Pollution Emission Guidelines for Existing Stations Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units” details how the EPA plans to repeal CPP through a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM). This version of the document obtained by Breitbart News remains subject to change through inter-agency review.
The agency contends that the EPA, under former Administrator Gina McCarthy, exceeded its authority to regulate carbon emissions as stipulated by the Clean Air Act. The document proposes to eliminate the Clean Power Plan, and then suggested that they might release an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) that will reflect a more thoughtful and modest approach to regulating air pollution given the EPA’s limited statutory authority.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
I thought I read that the USSC has already spoken.
We all know that nothing written or spoken holds any water any more. ;-(
SCOTUS said the EPA may regulate, not that they must regulate.
L
CO2 is not a dangerous pollutant.
Anyone believing that it is should stop exhaling.
Problem solved.
Yep. Its even worse than that, our whole existence is carbon based.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon-based_life
Carbon is a key component of all known life on Earth. Complex molecules are made up of carbon bonded with other elements, especially oxygen, hydrogen and nitrogen. Carbon is abundant on Earth. It is also lightweight and relatively small in size, making it easier for enzymes to manipulate carbon molecules.[citation needed] It is frequently assumed in astrobiology that if life exists somewhere else in the universe, it will also be carbon-based.
It is appropriate that this taxpayer funded fraud be discontinued.
Wind and Solar power are more devastating to the environment than anything they pretend to replace, ESPECIALLY when measured on a per kilowatt basis.
When you factor in unreliability and the need to back it all up with RELIABLE power, it is even worse.
WHAT! You mean the cost benefit ratio ain’t working? LOL! Who’d a guessed?
Interestingly, the USSC ruled the EPA has the authority to regulate CO2 as they see fit, as enabled by the Clean Whatever Act.
Any challenge to this in Court will be onerous, but short-lived.
From the article:
EPA spokesperson Liz Bowman said in a statement to Breitbart News, “While we can’t comment on the authenticity of the document, what we can say is that the Obama Administration pushed the bounds of their authority so far that the Supreme Court issued a stay – the first in history – to prevent the so-called ‘Clean Power Plan’ from taking effect.”
Under the doctrine of “Chevron Deference,” the Courts must defer to the administrative agency’s decision on how policy is implemented if that policy is a reasonable reading of the statute directing their policy. So long as the agency jumps through the Notice and Comment hoops and other rules regarding rulemaking, the agency can do what it wants without judicial review.
The case of Massachusetts v. EPA was a case where the Court did order the EPA to regulate CO2, but it was pretty much an aberration from Chevron Deference. The decision has been heavily criticized, even by the left who loved it when it came out. The decision was used against the left in the 5th Circuit case of U.S. v. Texas, the DAPA decision, as it justified giving Texas standing to sue the Federal government over immigration policy. Having seen their monster turned against them, the left might not be so willing to use Massachusetts v. EPA as precedent.
So my take is that if the proper rulemaking procedures are followed, the SCOTUS will defer to the agency in regard to “greenhouse gas” emissions. If they don’t, they will have to throw out the whole basis of the administrative state. You might like that, but the alternative is the administrative state run by judicial fiat instead of executive direction, and we should not favor that.
It is appropriate that this taxpayer funded fraud be discontinued.
Wind and Solar power are more devastating to the environment than anything they pretend to replace, ESPECIALLY when measured on a per kilowatt basis.
When you factor in unreliability and the need to back it all up with RELIABLE power, it is even worse.
“CO2 is not a dangerous pollutant.”
Didnt 5 of the supreme idiots and workd reknowned scientists decide that it is and can be regulated?
What? You don’t think it is sensible economics two build TWO power plants (Wind or Solar PLUS 100% back up) instead of ONE to generate the same reliable output (like we used to do)?
Where on earth did you study economics? You troglodyte, you.
Exclusive: EPA Document Proposes to Eliminate Clean Power Plan ‘in Its Entirety’
GOOD! THE SOONER,THE BETTER!
HA! Robert B. Reichhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh published an op-ed just two days back saying it couldn’t be done.
Congress should amend the Clean Water Act to remove EPA authority to regulate CO2. Of course, it won’t.
Damn..... If the EPA really does this will be kicked out of the Paris accord?
“Of course, it won’t.”
There’s more of a chance that Democrats would give it up in a deal with Trump, than the Republicans ever considering it.
Republicans are cowardly, feckless and without value.
Oh, and deceitful liars now exposed.
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.