Slashdot Mirror
EPA Announces Repeal of Major Obama-Era Carbon Emissions Rule (nytimes.com)
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The New York Times (Warning: source may be paywalled; alternative source: The Trump administration announced Monday that it would take formal steps to repeal President Barack Obama's signature policy to curb greenhouse gas emissions from power plants, setting up a bitter fight over the future of America's efforts to tackle global warming. At an event in eastern Kentucky, Scott Pruitt, the head of the Environmental Protection Agency, said that his predecessors had departed from regulatory norms in crafting the Clean Power Plan, which was finalized in 2015 and would have pushed states to move away from coal in favor of sources of electricity that produce fewer carbon emissions. The repeal proposal, which will be filed in the Federal Register on Tuesday, fulfills a promise President Trump made to eradicate his predecessor's environmental legacy. Eliminating the Clean Power Plan makes it less likely the United States can fulfill its promise as part of the Paris climate agreement to ratchet down emissions that are warming the planet and contributing to heat waves and sea-level rise. Mr. Trump has vowed to abandon that international accord.
In announcing the repeal, Mr. Pruitt made many of the same arguments that he had made for years to Congress and in lawsuits: that the Obama administration exceeded its legal authority in an effort to limit greenhouse gas emissions from power plants. (Last year, the Supreme Court blocked the rule from taking effect while courts assessed those lawsuits.) A leaked draft of the repeal proposal asserts that the country would save $33 billion by not complying with the regulation and rejects the health benefits the Obama administration had calculated from the original rule.
In announcing the repeal, Mr. Pruitt made many of the same arguments that he had made for years to Congress and in lawsuits: that the Obama administration exceeded its legal authority in an effort to limit greenhouse gas emissions from power plants. (Last year, the Supreme Court blocked the rule from taking effect while courts assessed those lawsuits.) A leaked draft of the repeal proposal asserts that the country would save $33 billion by not complying with the regulation and rejects the health benefits the Obama administration had calculated from the original rule.
...you can be sure good things are happening for the rest of the country!
Oy vey! It's anudda Shoah, I tells ya! Anudda Shoah!
No need to drag it out we see whatâ(TM)s going on. Having whores piss on a bed that Obamaâ(TM)s was not enough apparently.
But more importantly:
Fuck you.
Trump is the symptom. You are the problem.
We don't think we're better. We know it.
I didn't realise that Obama had been a Major. When was that? Anyway, as long as they don't repeal the President Obama-era emission rules we should be fine.
What's next? Penalize solar and wind and other renewables? Tax people who already have solar panels on their houses and businesses? All so some ass-backwards, mostly dead already coal industry can hang on for a while longer? When will this insanity end?
So do they go beyond the Paris Treaty requirements or not?
Or appointed federal alphabet soup agencies to craft a legacy (no I'm not talking about SCOTUS appointments). Easy come easy go. I bet the president after Trump will reverse what Trumps EPA did as well. If you want a legacy you get law passed through Congress. How's that healthcare repeal coming? Obamas legacy is in the ACA good or bad.
This is great news.
The EPA didn't have the legal framework to regulate CO2 emissions, so they basically used some crackpot policy that CO2 caused asthma and shorten life expectancy. The primary reason they wanted to cut CO2 was for climate change but they legally couldn't regulate on that reason.
Free market will drive energy production towards its natural destination, which is away from fossil fuels, and even nuclear. Distributed power generation and storage is where the future (currently) lies - the tipping point has already been reached. Solar production is not skyrocketing because the CAA pushed power companies away from fossil fuels. The core reason is the global manufacturing industry has slowly, and finally, ramped up photovoltaic cell production to the point that it is extremely competitive. Battery technology (not just driven by energy demands, but primarily by mobile computing which requires very high-density, long-lasting batteries) has been increasing steadily as well. Couple the two together and you have a big part of the future of energy production.
So as with many things in politics, this move is purely... political, and really doesn't matter either way. Sort of like the Paris Agreement.
Better known as 318230.
Probably not.
and what they deserve.
So when will they change the name of the department to reflect what it has become. The Environmental Exploitation Agency.
http://www.businessinsider.com...
Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
Natural gas killed it. Cheaper, fewer emissions, fewer miners killed. Does't matter what the cheeto in charge wants or legislates, natgas has killed coal.
I remember as a kid dad driving past oil fields burning off natural gas. I couldn't believe it was cheaper to burn it off that to sell it. Still can't, to be honest.
The prohibiting of access to capital to poor people through regulations making it required to pay lawyers a million dollars to stay legal makes the U.S. a communist country. This leads to negative growth which curses the administration. To keep it looking like growth is happening, the government prints trillions of dollars to pump into the economy. This would lead to inflation making the dollar worthless, so the military forces all oil producing countries to sell their oil in U.S. dollars which the rest of the world must buy to pay for oil, propping up the U.S. dollar.
Utilities have strong economic reasoning to use Nat gas, and wind. And most states are fighting against coal powered plants. As such, coal will continue to disappear. Hopefully, nukes and Geothermal will get subsidies. We need clean baseload power.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
another initiative or policy by the previous administration, that is. anyone keeping track? must be at least 20 items so far, if not more. anything tied to obama is fucked. and not the nice, friendly kind of fucked, either, but rather the ass raping with a diamond-tipped jackhammer kind.
I wonder what the jobs:deaths ratio will turn out to be for that decision by the end of this presidential term.
Nullius in verba
Tax breaks, kickbacks, cut price land, access to private property, and so on and so forth, dumbfuck.
I'd encourage everyone to actually read the EPA's document as it lays out the ways in which the Clean Power Plan doesn't follow the law on the books.
In short, the Clean Air Act, which Obama used to justify his regulation, authorizes specific ways of regulating pollutants. The regulation here wasn't in line with those authorized approaches, so it was without legal authorization.
Obama COULD HAVE put in place a policy that was actually legal. He didn't, for better or worse, and so his plan was found wanting by the courts before being corrected presently.
As for Trump, we should celebrate the moments where he recognizes the legal constraints of his office. With so many people worried about him being authoritarian, let's encourage these shows of legal restraint.
one of the party's central tenets is low taxes on business lead to better outcomes for the country. These sorts of tax breaks are exactly what they stand for.
Not that I'm in favor of letting the invisible hand sort it out mind you. When in anyone's life has a bad situation been made better by leaving it alone and hoping for the best?
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Nice try Mr. Steele, but everyone knows that 4chan/pol trolled you, pillow biter!
If you want to drive electric cars, you'll need electricity.
Consider every time you charge your Tesla, 32-33% of that charge comes from coal, in the US.
Can't have it both ways.
Morons.
Too bad only a small handful of persons or legal-persons will actually see any of it; the rest of us are just going to eat all of the sludge and fallout, while also paying for these cuts and "savings" that they've made upon our backs.
These "persons" should not be allowed to continue living.
You are white and using facts, so you are clearly a fascist pig. Emperor Obama can do no wrong, and Trump is evil. That is all
It's the hottest planet in the solar system because of its CO2 based runaway greenhouse gas situation. It's remarkably bad model to want to emulate.
I'm sick of seeing do-it-yourself bumpfire spam
Here's a manual on how to make a full-auto sub machinegun.
https://mega.nz/#!hPhQULhJ!upgCjT1m5oWRBk4PPGTaX9pyjbtn6KXHacYCQPStxv4
Repealing such rules, making it cheaper to burn oil or coal, push the "when" even further back. And THAT is the problem : it will allows for even more gigatons of CO2 in the atmosphere in the mean time, when such a rule may , at a slight cost, have slowed down the emissions. So unless you are a climate change denier, repealing such a rule is a very obvious "fuck you" to future generations, just for a SHORT TERM benefit, fuck the long term. Thanks the FSM I will be dead and I have no children, when the effects will start to be felt. I will shed a tear for the children of others. But that's about it. After all THEIR parents voted for Trump and will vote for republican in the near future.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
Devoid of ideas of his own trump just wants to repeal everything that Obama did, whether it is good, bad or indifferent
> What's next? Penalize solar and wind
Been there, seen that, done that. In Hungary, the reigning Putin-lapdog regime trickily banned wind energy installation to create artificial demand for a new 2 x 1200MW nuclear fission powerplant being built by Rossia-Atomflot.
They decreed wind turbines create noise and disturb people, so any of them must be located at the arbitrarily determined distance of at least 11km (6nm) from any populated areas. Except Hungary is a small european country, 20% smaller than Pennsylvania for comparison and has 10 million inhabitants distributed rather evenly. Therefore no point exists in the country which could meet that condition.
The European Union tried to look into that obviously illegal regulation enacted by one of its member states, but german industrialists on Putin's payroll blocked the investigation. (Germany just loves russian oil and gas, as wind and solar cannot meet all their needs and they only have poor quality and very dirty "brown coal" domestically.)
Climate change is all bullshit scare tactics from nutbag lefties
Climate change is a con
FUCK YOU ALL LEFT WING CUNTS
One way is a flat tax on income (not corporate profit). You and I pay a tax on income, why shouldn't a corporation?
What's an appropriate tax rate? Well, the function of government for the country is much like "general overhead and administration" in a corporation. Typically corporations spend between 20%-25% of revenue on this (Forbes, 2012), so let's say government should spend no more than 25% of (citizens'+corporations') income/revenue. And that's for all government - Federal, state and local. (Personally I pay much more than that of my income when I add it all up,)
Advantages - progressive (the more you make the more you pay), simple (would save over 6 billion hours of tax preparation effort annually - equivalent to 3 million full time workers (Forbes, 2011)), removes distortions from the economy caused by loopholes ("the invisible hand" is allowed to work). Forces the elimination of inappropriate government functions - they'd still need to figure out how many dollars go to what purposes, but if you mimic what is in a company's overhead and administrative costs, you'd see a lot of what the governments do is best done by someone else or simply not done. (Zero-based budgeting is a wonderful mechanism - it should be used by government, instead of "this year is x% more than last year for everything we do.")
Disadvantages - The Federal, state and local governments would need to fight it out to see who gets what piece of that 25% (maybe start with 15%/7%/3% and adjust as needed). And I'm not sure that's a disadvantage - each level of government would have to justify its percentage of the pie.
Basically, we have not had a healthy debate in this country about what the proper role of government is. Since the days of "the Great Society", the perceived role has been allowed to expand to include functions never conceived of by the Founding Fathers. Which explains the unsustainable debt the nation has. Time to get back to basics, dramatically simplify the tax code, and rein in the size and scope of government.
except it's not an executive order.
the EPA is an independent federal agency, bound by law establishing its charter to work to improve and protect the environment in order to protect the public health. the Clean Power Plan falls under that jurisdiction.
The guy who said the election was rigged won the presidency with the second-most votes.
Trump's tax-break policy is incomplete but it seems the middle-class will be subsidizing their richer colleagues: Quel surprise!
This is the problem Trump has with his repeal Obama-care pledge. If it really happens, all those 'eevil gubbermint' voters will realize their government actually helps them.
Here is a real CO2 vs atmosphere graph using real data that even Trump can understand.
(some additional context)
There is ample precedent and case law that the EPA not only has the authority to regulate CO2 emissions, it also has an obligation to do so. Here are two relatively recent decisions:
Massachusettes v EPA: a 5-4 decision from 2007 that said that, under the wording of the Clean Air Act, CO2 emissions fall under the EPA's jurisdiction. Indeed, the ruling went so far as to say that the EPA cannot ignore CO2 pollution by failing to regulate it.
Utility Air v EPA: a 7-2 decision from 2014 (authored by Scalia) that, among other things, allows the EPA to regulate the emissions of large stationary polluters - particularly power plants.
Perhaps we need a cap on the maximum age of POTUS? This one seems to think like it's 1955.
On the one hand you take life too seriously, and on the other, you do not take playful existence seriously enough. Seth
I remember as a kid in the 1960/70s not being allowed outside during summer vacation due to "Smog Alerts". So glad we're making America great again. Looking forward to the enjoyable times of not letting my kids play outside.
Here is a real CO2 vs atmosphere graph using real data that even Trump can understand.
Different 'AC'
Corrected the link, though I'd dispute whether Trump could understand / usefully interpret what it's telling us. Frankly, with no context given, I'm not even sure what the original poster thinks it says...
Most of Obama's signature programs have been built on a foundation of sand. Executive Orders, Policy changes, etc.
The result is that they can and have been easily reversed.
Now if you want to re-instate such programs and policies, do it the right way and come to the table prepared to abandon the hysteria and alarmism and actually deal in good faith when measuring the effects vs good economic policy. Then real legislation can be created to lock in the policies.
I believe that most of the Envirowacko's agendas can be restated and implemented in economic terms that don't include doomsday scenarios and zealotry.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
And it won't end with Trump and EPA regulation rollbacks. You freaks will go so far left that it will be almost a certainty that Ted Cruz will be elected President in 2024 and more state legislatures will swing Republican. At that time we have a real chance at a constitutional convention to get balanced budget and congressional term limit amendments in the constitution.
But at least you'll still have /. to whine and complain on.
It burns!
This is sounding more and more like the GWB years: stall and stammering until a massive disaster occurs allowing the administration to look tough and take power, looking inept THE ENTIRE TIME while raiding the coffers and doing the really dirty work behind the scenes.
After all, "never attribute to malice what can be explained by stupidity"
Same playbook from GWB. They're very competent, they just don't want YOU to think so.
-
He's going to build a wall between US and Mexico. He's going to ally with the Russians. He is going to attack North Korea. These are not anti-Obama ideas, these are his own ideas.
What you're saying is that you would take a President who was lawful evil above someone chaotic good? I don't buy that.
How this administration has no ideas of their own?
Yup. I've said before that anything that's done with a pen & a phone can be undone with a phone and a twit.
Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
Yeah Yeah, we heard it all before. Destroying the planet blah blah blah. We have to do something blah blah. We need renewable energy, no coal or fossil fuels, CO2 bad, blah blah. Same message that I ignore because I don't believe you. You don't speak for me. Your so-called science is lefty-biased. Punish the bad republican evil, racist, homophobic, anti-science, selfish, uncaring fools. You words have no meaning anymore, your message falls on deaf ears, because it's to politicized to be believed, other than as the rantings of crazed partisan hacks. Just shut the fuck up. We don't want your stupidity. We don't trust the messenger.
We are fortunate that it can't be affected by a pen and a twat.
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate