pageok
pageok
pageok
EPA's Endangerment Finding:

Word is that the White House has given the go ahead for the Environmental Protection Agency to make a formal finding that the emission of greenhouse gases may be reasonably anticipated to harm public health and welfare, perhaps as early as tomorrow. This finding is the trigger for the regulation of greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act. So, if such a finding is made -- and presumably finalized after a notice-and-comment rulemaking -- the next step will be for the EPA to begin developing regulations to control GHG emissions from motor vehicles and other sources.

Real American (mail):
this isn't just the politicization of science, but the fabrication of it.
4.16.2009 4:28pm
JoeSixpack (mail):
I just emitted some harmful greenhouse gases in my office after having Chipotle with extra hot sauce for lunch. Is this the kind of "other sources" the EPA is talking about regulating?
4.16.2009 4:37pm
rick.felt:
That made me chuckle, don't think it didn't.
4.16.2009 5:00pm
josil (mail):
Junk policy based on junk science.
4.16.2009 5:01pm
rosetta's stones:
This is what happens when you allow a gang of blackrobed fascists to dictate that the CAA covers everything from frisbees to flatulence (to paraphrase one of said fascists).

We are about to launch off on arguably the most costly set of actions ever initiated anywhere, and nary a vote's been cast on the foundations for it.

Oh that's right, there were some votes, per the 1st paragraph.
4.16.2009 5:02pm
Connecticut Lawyer (mail):
I wish I could find some silver lining in this. Oh well, this is the platform Mr. Obama ran on, and he won, so we all have to live with the consequences.

I suspect that the first thing the EPA is going to do is adopt draconian fuel mileage standards. Whatever happened to all the "no-profits-before-people" people? Don't they care that forcing people into econo-death boxes will result in thousands of additional automobile fatalities every year? Actually, that could be two-fer for the left, because surely some plaintiffs' lawyers will figure out how to hold the car companies accountable for all those deaths.
4.16.2009 5:13pm
Houston Lawyer:
First we need to prohibit the publication of the results of crash tests of the "Smart" car.

When the EPA's edicts are challenged, do plaintiffs get to argue that the science behind the finding is based primarily on politics? Does a hypothesis backed up by data that can't be duplicated count as science in a court room?
4.16.2009 6:13pm
Sagar:
i would like them to regulate moisture in the air since it is the biggest component of GHGs.
4.16.2009 6:24pm
John Moore (www):
We are doomed. The ministry of carbon emission will rule the country.

Seriously, this is a horrible action, but the current congress will only use it as an excuse to put in "cap and trade" (better described as lobby and loot).
4.16.2009 6:47pm
Oren:

Don't they care that forcing people into econo-death boxes will result in thousands of additional automobile fatalities every year?

Europe has uniformly smaller cars and a lower per-mile fatality rate. Fatal crashes are usually car+car (not car+tree) and are made worse by disparity in the car sizes, not the absolute size of each vehicle.
4.16.2009 6:47pm
Oren:
Forgotten link to my last post. Note that our curve stops dropping around 1990.
4.16.2009 6:51pm
rosetta's stones:

Fatal crashes are usually car+car (not car+tree) and are made worse by disparity in the car sizes, not the absolute size of each vehicle.


Oren, I think you may be mistaken. Last I checked, 1/2 of vehicle fatalities occur in single vehicle accidents. And mass is life, in any accident, as should be intuitively obvious.
4.16.2009 7:00pm
John Moore (www):

Europe has uniformly smaller cars and a lower per-mile fatality rate.


They also had smaller cars and much higher rates not that long ago. What's the difference?

As rosetta points out, mass counts, even in a single vehicle accidents. At higher mass, the marginal cost of added protection for the passenger is less than at lower mass.

Of course, you don't want the mass *behind* you.
4.16.2009 7:19pm
FantasiaWHT:

regulations to control GHG emissions from motor vehicles and other sources.


Let's boycott the Olympics! All those athletes exerting themselves and converting so much more oxygen into carbon dioxide than your average person. We should subsidize people who don't ever get any exercise.
4.16.2009 9:29pm
Splunge:
Actually, Oren, I looked into this once, and IIRC you and the NYT are both barking up the wrong tree. At least in the NYT's case, we can be sure this is on purpose to grind their particular axe.

As I recall, the most plausible explanation for the difference between European and American fatality rates is the age distribution of drivers. If you look at fatality rates for 35 year old drivers with 18 years of experience, say, I recall they looked quite similar, actually somewhat worse in Europe (perhaps because the average adult driver has less experience).

But as I recall the US has a larger proportion of its 16 through 18 year olds driving, and these folks have terrible accident statistics.

This may also explain part of the more rapid decline in death rates in Japan and France, both of which experienced larger declines in birth rates in the 70s than the US, producing larger declines in the number of teenagers in the late 80s and 90s.

You'll also note a little bump up in the US graph peaking around 1979, which may be related to the fact that peak in the Baby Boom generation was born in 1960, 19 years earlier. Indeed, there's a similar blip up in Britain around the same time, and a little later in France and Japan, which may reflect the later typical age of driving in the latter two.

In any event, I suggest the human factors involved in car performance matter at least as much as the throw-weight of metal involved.
4.16.2009 9:37pm
Fiftycal (mail):
ALL RIGHT! At last the good nanny state will be able to tax AIR! The last frontier in taxation. Since animals, like humans, take in air and expell the "deadly greenhouse gas" CO2, how long will it take for EPA to demand "registration" of the "manufacturing unit"? And how much will that tax be? And what happens if you don't pay your bogus globull warming personhood tax? Will they put you in CO2 jail? Will you have to have a "permit" to jog? Heavy breathing? I want to be the new "czar" of breathing.
4.16.2009 11:20pm
ray_g:
"When the EPA's edicts are challenged, do plaintiffs get to argue that the science behind the finding is based primarily on politics?"

IIRC something like that happened with the EPA second hand smoke studies.
4.17.2009 9:31am
John Moore (www):

When the subject is torture, it's hard to find comparisons other than Nazis or their ilk. If it will make you feel better, though, we'll all switch to Stalin.

You lack of imagination is sad.
4.17.2009 7:48pm
John Moore (www):
oops... resend after reconnect... hence wrong thread
4.17.2009 9:18pm

Post as: [Register] [Log In]

Account:
Password:
Remember info?

If you have a comment about spelling, typos, or format errors, please e-mail the poster directly rather than posting a comment.

Comment Policy: We reserve the right to edit or delete comments, and in extreme cases to ban commenters, at our discretion. Comments must be relevant and civil (and, especially, free of name-calling). We think of comment threads like dinner parties at our homes. If you make the party unpleasant for us or for others, we'd rather you went elsewhere. We're happy to see a wide range of viewpoints, but we want all of them to be expressed as politely as possible.

We realize that such a comment policy can never be evenly enforced, because we can't possibly monitor every comment equally well. Hundreds of comments are posted every day here, and we don't read them all. Those we read, we read with different degrees of attention, and in different moods. We try to be fair, but we make no promises.

And remember, it's a big Internet. If you think we were mistaken in removing your post (or, in extreme cases, in removing you) -- or if you prefer a more free-for-all approach -- there are surely plenty of ways you can still get your views out.