Thursday, February 9, 2012

EPA Carbon Regulation Power Grab

The USA should be proud of our accomplishments in cleaning air and water since the 1960s.  I would think most of us are satisfied about the cleanliness of our air and water.   But, like do-gooders and those-who-must -be-seen-to-be-doing-something, the EPA continues to churn out regulations to will hurt economic activity--just when we need more economic activity not less.  I don't hear any public demand for additional regulations, do you? 

The most egregious power grab is where the EPA has decided to regulate carbon dioxide.  They do so under the guise that carbon dioxide is "harmful or threatening to human health".  

Unlike other gases such as sulfur dioxide, carbon dioxide is naturally occuring at about 0.030%, plants require it for their photosynthesis and the level has only risen only to an less-than-astounding 0.038%!  (that's 380 ppm) 

To call such levels harmful to human or public health is a vast overstretch that must be reversed.  To put things in perspective, my exhaled breath has 4.00% or 100 times the naturally occuring carbon dioxide levels.   Even at that, there is no threat to anyone around me!   It's absurd!   Regulators are really jumping on the global warming bandwagon here.   Only if you're a Polar Bear or on a low-lying Pacific island is there any future "threat".   I don't want to be dismissive here as I have empathy for both polar bears and low-lying Pacific Islanders.

The problem is that there is no limit to what the EPA may try to do under such a guise--including regulating my exhaled breath (to be ridiculous)!

You can see why sulfur dioxide is appropriately regulated.  Other than volcanic eruptions, is not a naturally occuring atmospheric pollutant.  Mostly through burning of coal, man emits sulfur dioxide and, if not regulated and reduced, has shown to cause acid rain, deforestation and harm to human respiration.  It is an irritant to human respiration.  Carbon dioxide is not an irritant to human respiration.  To this day, sulfur dioxide emissions are reduced and that's largely a good and desireable thing for the public.

The EPA will continue it's self-aggrandisement unless this regulatory mandate is overturned.  They will inject themselves further into the business community and hurt the economy.  Already this administration is cancelling coal burning power plants and removing permits for existing plants under this regulation.   You think that this won't eventually hurt the economy?   I guarantee that we need more energy, not less.

The administration is generally hostile to conventional hydrocarbon energy---which will remain our predominant source of energy for the next century.   So, to curtail conventional energy supplies means higher costs now and in the future. Obama is actually of in favor of raising conventional energy costs so that it makes his favored alternatives more attractive. And it's working!  What he doesn't understand is that he hurts moms, pops, poor people, and retirees with such policies and hurts economic activity and wealth creation. It's an extremely untimely philosophy.  

The truth is that the economy has to be prosperous to be able to afford environmental remediation.  If the economy is declining and we're attempting more remediation (cost), it will accelerate the decline.

Do yourself a favor, vote him and his absurd followers out of office!

No comments: