READ ABOUT DETROIT AND SOLUTIONS TO ITS PROBLEMS. CLICK HERE.
Showing posts with label EPA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label EPA. Show all posts

Wednesday, December 26, 2012

Obama Sidesteps Congress To Impose Cap And Trade

SEARCH BLOG: OBAMA and CAP AND TRADE.

The Heritage Foundation points out that the Obama administration once again sidesteps Congress through the Environmental Protection Agency which has set mileage standards so high that only a few vehicles will meet the standards... requiring manufacturers to purchase "credits" from other manufacturers if they cannot meet the standards.  The unanswered question, of course, is how will the other manufacturers meet the mileage standards?

Well, the answer to that is through the magic of EPA mileage calculations.  If you have a plug-in electric car with a range of 25 miles, the EPA does a little numerical dance and says that car gets 100 MPGe... that's miles per gallon equivalent.  You won't actually get anywhere near 100 miles per gallon, but the Obama administration gets its way into forcing manufacturers to make cars people don't want or can't afford for little or no benefit.

As stated in the article:

The new CAFE standard requires American families to bear all the costs the regulation imposes, while allowing special interests receive all the benefits. As Loris and Morgan note in their paper, “Under this new mandate, the Energy Information Administration warns that new cars priced under $15,000 may no longer be available.” While the federal government acknowledges the regulations will drive up the sticker price of vehicles, “consumers will likely realize only a fraction of the fuel savings that the government claims.”
This is not the only way the new fuel efficiency will affect car buyers. It also limits consumer choice. Consumers have other preferences as well, including weight and engine power, for safety, enjoyment, and practical reasons. Ignoring those preferences and forcing companies to make vehicles that are lighter and thus more fuel efficient has the unintended consequence of making them less safe.
It makes all of the 51%-ers feel good that they are helping save the planet and fundamentally changing the United States.  But I'm guessing that this picture will not change much.


Hey, high level government officials are exempt ... from so many laws affecting you commoners.

RELATED:


SATURDAY, APRIL 03, 2010


..

Monday, September 24, 2012

Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] Sued

SEARCH BLOG: EPA

The EPA does many questionable things and, in the name of protecting us, subjects us to many economic risks.  But who knew the EPA was in the business of experimenting on humans with toxins and carcinogins... and not even informing their "test subjects" what was occurring!

From Steven Milloy via Anthony Watts:

Major Landmark lawsuit filed against the EPA for immoral illegal human experimentation

This is just one more unethical, immoral, and in this case illegal, action undertaken by the Obama administration in the name of going "Forward."  It seems abortion can now take place any time between conception and old age.

The replacement of the stars and stripes with this is more than symbolic.

Friday, August 31, 2012

Energy Independence By 2020

SEARCH BLOG: ENERGY and ROMNEY

In last night's nomination acceptance speech, Mitt Romney set a goal of having the U.S. become energy independent by 2020.  That's similar to John Kennedy's goal of putting a man on the moon... a huge leap of faith.

In the post "North American energy independence by 2020″, David Middleton gives all sorts of facts and figures that conclude that "Based on these numbers, North American energy independence could be achieved by 2027." Now that is North American, not U.S., energy independence.  Still, that is directionally where Mitt Romney wants to take the U.S. [h/t Anthony Watts]

There are many issues to be resolved ... and quickly ... if the U.S. is to seek energy independence.
  • Export policy - would ... and could ... the U.S. restrict its exports of oil, coal, and natural gas to force consumption at the local level?  Conversely, would the U.S. make it more difficult to import oil from beyond North America?
  • Regulation - can the Environmental Protection Agency regulations be reeled in?  Can the regulatory and permitting processes be streamlined and accelerated?
  • Taxation - will tax code reflect energy policy?
  • Overcoming entrenched opposition - becoming energy independent is not simply a matter of resources development.
The fastest way to energy independence is:
  • Reversal of the coal-to-natural-gas conversions occurring under the Obama administration for the generation of electricity.
  • Expansion of nuclear powered electricity generation to augment coal as a substitute for natural gas.
  • Development of a natural gas infrastructure to fuel vehicles as an alternative use of natural gas rather than to fuel electricity plants ... combined with incentives to automotive manufacturers to expand their offerings for natural gas powered vehicles ... a decades-old technology that is primarily limited to fleets at present.
  • Expansion of oil exploration in federally-controlled lands/offshore.
  • Streamlining the judicial process to settle a myriad of blocking lawsuits that will come from those special interests who are philosophically opposed to these actions.
This is all possible under the heading "anything is possible."  Is it probable or plausible?  A better question is: will someone lead the way in the face of fanatical and often irrational opposition?

MONDAY, AUGUST 31, 2009

2012 IS HERE

..

Monday, July 23, 2012

Welcome To Obama's Unemployed Economy

SEARCH BLOG: ECONOMY

It has been 3-1/2 years since Barack Obama took over as President of the United States.  During that time, he claims to have "created" millions of jobs, but the record says that any job creation has been just enough to tread water... there has been no employment improvement during his term.  The U.S. Unemployment Rate under Obama is above January, 2009 when he took office. [source]


The number of unemployed persons [in thousands] has not been reduced since Barack Obama took over as President of the United States. [source]


During the time since Barack Obama took over as President of the United States, the U.S. national debt has skyrocketed, tax rates are about to go up, spending on government programs has run amok, and what do we have to show for it?
A stimulus bill equivalent to 1,567 Golden Gate bridges. A 2011 federal budget equivalent to 6,788 Golden Gate bridges. And yet we don't have a single one. 
Because that's not what Big Government does: Money-no-object government spends more and more money for less and less objects. For all the American economy has to show for it, President Bob the Builder took just shy of a trillion dollars in stimulus, stuck it in his wheelbarrow, pushed it halfway across the Golden Gate Bridge, and tossed it into the Pacific. 
Instead of roads and bridges, Obama-sized government funds stasis and sclerosis: The Hoover Dam of regulatory obstruction, the Golden Gateway to dependency. Last month, 80,000 Americans signed on to new jobs, but 85,000 Americans signed on for Social Security disability checks. Most of these people are not "disabled" as that term is generally understood. Rather, it's the U.S. economy that's disabled, and thus Obama incentivizes dependency. What Big Government is doing to those 85,000 "disabled" is profoundly wicked. Let me quote a guy called Mark Steyn, from his last book: 
"The evil of such a system is not the waste of money but the waste of people. Tony Blair's ministry discovered it was politically helpful to reclassify a chunk of the unemployed as 'disabled.' A fit, able-bodied 40-year-old who has been on disability allowance for a decade understands somewhere at the back of his mind that he is living a lie, and that not just the government but his family and his friends are colluding in that lie."   [source]
And so where do we stand on the cusp of President Barack Obama's re-election victory?

US poverty on track to rise to highest since 1960s

US poverty on track to reach 46-year high; suburbs, underemployed workers, children hit hard

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The ranks of America's poor are on track to climb to levels unseen in nearly half a century, erasing gains from the war on poverty in the 1960s amid a weak economy and fraying government safety net.
Census figures for 2011 will be released this fall in the critical weeks ahead of the November elections.
The Associated Press surveyed more than a dozen economists, think tanks and academics, both nonpartisan and those with known liberal or conservative leanings, and found a broad consensus: The official poverty rate will rise from 15.1 percent in 2010, climbing as high as 15.7 percent. Several predicted a more modest gain, but even a 0.1 percentage point increase would put poverty at the highest level since 1965.
Poverty is spreading at record levels across many groups, from underemployed workers and suburban families to the poorest poor. More discouraged workers are giving up on the job market, leaving them vulnerable as unemployment aid begins to run out. Suburbs are seeing increases in poverty, including in such political battlegrounds as Colorado, Florida and Nevada, where voters are coping with a new norm of living hand to mouth. [source]
So, Mr. President, just what about your term as President of the United States, qualifies you for a second term?  IT CAN'T BE THE ECONOMY.

The fact that your Democratic Party Congress and you conspired to pass the largest government program in history?  The fact that your Justice Department and you have repeatedly ignored laws passed by Congress?  The fact that you have an activist anti-energy/anti-business Environmental Protection Agency?  The fact that your foreign policy is focused on supporting the ascendancy of the Muslim Brotherhood throughout the Middle East and Northern Africa?


Tell us again why you should have another term.

2012 IS HERE

..

Sunday, April 29, 2012

EPA Has Lost Its Way

SEARCH BLOG: EPA

The EPA was originally authorized to seek out sources of air, water, and ground pollution... poisons that fouled our environment... and seek to remedy that.  Unfortunately, along the way, the EPA has become an advocacy agency for radical environmental groups with the intent of minimizing human presence.  What better way to do that then to attack the sources of energy needed for our survival?  Below is a copy of the video that was originally on YouTube, but then pulled. American Power blog got it through Daily Caller which got it from MRC-TV:



Needless to say, the EPA has been under assault from Congress and private citizens on this one.  Here is the text of an email I sent on April 25:
Mr. Gray: 
This video of Region VI Administrator Al Armendariz is one of most disgusting examples of government arrogance I have witnessed in my nearly 7 decades. 
http://youtu.be/ze3GB_b7Nuo [since removed]
I would hope that the "government of the people" doesn't just mean the government of the elite bureaucratic people who believe they have all of the answers. Mr. Armendariz' threat of heavy-handed Nazi-type government is purely inappropriate under any circumstances. Perhaps it is time for the EPA to go back to its roots rather than being a front for every misguided eco group. We don't need, for example, E15 fuel when E85 and E10 have been around for years and provide minimal benefit while raising the cost of corn for animal feed. Naturally, you are aware that non-subsidized ethanol will increase gas prices, again making the EPA a very popular agency. 
We don't need CO2 scams and schemes when most scientists now admit that the backcasting by climate models is so poor that any forecasts of climate change is pure fiction. Focus on clean air, clean soil, and clean water. Chasing vapor schemes at taxpayer expense and then threatening the energy foundation of our great nation is not, nor should it be, in the EPA charter. 
It is no wonder that the EPA is no longer seen as a beneficial agency and is rapidly overtaking the TSA as the most despised arm of government. With PR from the likes of Al Armendariz, the EPA will absolutely be the most despised agency. 
Also via American Power, "Ed Morrissey has the apology, at Hot Air, "EPA: Hey, sorry about that whole “crucify” thing, we’re all about being ethical.""


Take the time to read that post and this: 
SCOTUS hits EPA with an epic smackdown on Sackett
That is something which could impact any individual.

2012 IS HERE

..

Tuesday, March 27, 2012

Obama And Democrats Using EPA To Kill U.S. Fossil Fuel Industries and Economy


SEARCH BLOG: COAL

You may not remember this video, so here it is again:



Today's headlines - HAPPENING NOW WHILE YOU SNOOZE:

EPA to impose first greenhouse gas limits on power plants

Washington Post - 13 hours ago

The move could end the construction of conventional coal-fired facilities in the United States. The proposed rule — years in the making and approved by the ...

In-Depth: New Limit Pending on Emissions‎ New York Times

Blog: EPA's New Carbon Emissions Rule Spells The End For New Coal-Fired ...‎ Slate Magazine (blog)

EPA Takes Aim at Coal Plants‎ Wall Street Journal
The new rules will essentially make it unviable to build new coal-fired power plants, unless they are fitted with yet-to-be-commercialized carbon-capture technology. The rules would limit the permissible emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases to a little more than half of what a typical coal plant emits today, administration officials have said. 
While in the State of Maryland...

House panel approves offshore wind farm bill 

[Maryland Gov. (D)] Martin O'Malley's environmental agenda cleared an important hurdle Monday as his bill seeking to foster development of an offshore wind farm near Ocean City won approval from a [Maryland] House committee.  
There you have the Democratic Party energy-starvation, economy-killing agenda wrapped up with a bow around it.  Does this make you happy?  If so, start watching your bank account.

Meanwhile, in Australia where the government with the same Obama-orient energy philosophy was just resoundingly repudiated by voters:

Vic government dumps carbon target state's environment and climate change policies and they would be confirmed after talks with state and federal environment ministers in May.

Carbon target scrapped 
Queensland tsunami is heading for federal ALP Brisbane Times - 34 minutes ago
On Saturday the Liberal-National Party swept all the state seats in his ... In 2010 Rudd and Swan won first preference votes of 44 per cent and 41 per cent ...

International: Australian ruling party plunges in polls‎ The West Australian

Labor continues to lose ground‎ Sky News Australia

Newman urges PM to ditch carbon tax‎ The Age

Monday, February 20, 2012

Energy - Obstructionism As Policy

SEARCH BLOG: ENERGY and OBAMA

It started as a fight against a bogeyman.


But Obama supporters said that it just was meant as a "push" toward clean coal.

Then, with the EPA as the point agency, a variety of oil exploration and drilling efforts were prevented after it became clear that the "Cap and Trade" ploy had failed.

The latest obstruction, of course, is the Keystone pipeline which has ground to a halt.  See:
THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 16, 2012Energy Shortages Are Not Real
MONDAY, JANUARY 23, 2012Obama - Keystone Kop
By the way, if you are curious how much energy was obstructed by Obama's interference with the Keystone pipeline, click here.

The question is: can we live with this policy of energy obstructionism?


Well, can we?  Should we have to?

RELATED:
SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 18, 2012No Inflation Or Not

Thursday, January 12, 2012

Home Grown Energy

SEARCH BLOG: NATURAL GAS

Energy dependence; what energy dependence?

If fact, with so many new shale gas deposits — located all over the U.S.now every market can be served with “local” gas, greatly reducing the need for pipelines. Dividend paying pipeline companies have been some of the best performing stocks for resource investors, but the shale gas supply glut may drag them down now as well.  [source]
Wow, what a problem!  Too much of a good thing.

Well, there's always the EPA to the rescue.
The EPA has issued a draft report confirming what many environmental groups have long suspected: Natural gas drilling is causing groundwater contamination.
Strangely, the same process doesn't seem to affect ground water in Great Britain.
Fracking has proved controversial in the US, where shale gas is already being exploited on a large scale and where footage has been captured of people able to set fire to the water coming out of their taps as a result of gas contamination. 
But Professor Mike Stephenson, of the British Geological Survey, said most geologists thought it was a "pretty safe activity" and the risks associated with it were low. 
He said the distance between groundwater supplies around 40-50 metres below the surface and the deep sources of gas in the shale a mile or two underground, made it unlikely methane would leak into water as a result of fracking. 
Well, better to be safe by eliminating coal and natural gas as energy sources.  Co2 might be a problem; methane might be a problem.  We'll just burn wood from the national forests.  [image]  No, a better solution: we'll import everything because there is no environmental impact from foreign products.  Hey, Canada.  Send us your fuel.

Addendum:


EPA: Power plants are main global warming culprits


Still acting on a theory that has been shown to be based on manipulated data feeding unworkable models.

2012 IS HERE

..

Wednesday, September 22, 2010

Peak Oil In North Dakota

SEARCH BLOG: OIL

Many decades ago, I spent 5 winters in North Dakota.  That was the longest 10 years of my life.  Oh, the people were great, but you have to love open spaces and 160° of temperature variation from summer to winter in order to really be happy there.  But while most of the country has been struggling to cope with the "Great Recession," North Dakota has been...


Apparently, North Dakota hasn't heard about "peak oil."  In a state normally awash in wheat, potatoes, and sunflowers, oil has become the bumper crop.  That doesn't go the the heads of those North Dakotans.  They are a hardy and conservative bunch.  Maybe they will by some new center line reflectors for their roads or tractor warning signs.  They might even buy some of that oil that is producing the government revenues and use it to heat their government buildings.  Might as well keep it in house... although there is plenty of natural gas in those wells.

So, expect a ruling from the EPA to ban drilling in North Dakota.  Can't have one state setting a good example, you know?

Further reading: Understanding the Belief in Peak Oil: Is The End Near?

2012 IS GETTING CLOSER

..

Friday, September 17, 2010

Ignore Facts: False Basis For So-Called Clean Energy Does Not Matter

SEARCH BLOG: GLOBAL WARMING

Now that it has become apparent to all but the most die-hard alarmists, the CO2 basis for clean energy is going to be conveniently ignored by the EPA and it will press forward on its agenda without the basis for its agenda.

From The Detroit News:

Moving past ‘climategate’ key to building clean energy future


BY SAULIUS MIKALONIS


Uncertainty may be the condition that “impels man to unfold his powers,” as the German philosopher Eric Fromm said. But it tends to keep the wallet shut when it comes to investing in new technologies, such as clean energy. Now, it’s becoming increasingly certain that producing energy from coal is going to get more expensive fairly quickly, and that will help sustain growth in wind energy, solar power, advanced batteries and other technologies in Michigan and around the country. What has changed? For starters, the “climategate” scandal is essentially over. This tempest, which raged for most of this year, was sparked by allegations that scientists fudged the global warming data the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency relied on to determine that greenhouse gases threaten the public health and should be regulated under the Clean Air Act.


In July, the EPA formally rebutted the charges [well maybe "rebutted"; not exactly "refuted" or "proved false"] and denied 10 petitions filed by the state of Texas, the Commonwealth of Virginia, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and others asking the agency to reconsider its finding.


It’s highly unlikely that the courts will reverse the EPA’s decision, which is being challenged by the U.S. Chamber in a federal lawsuit.


What all this means is the state and federal programs supporting clean energy (much of it money that used to go to the petroleum industry) should continue to grow uninterrupted, and that in turn will help retain and attract new private inves tors. States that turn their backs on this type of investment will be on the outside looking in. [full story]
One more nail in the Democratic Party's political coffin.  To be fair, the story was written by an attorney.  To be fair, the EPA is run by attorneys.  To be fair, the Democratic Party is run by attorneys.  So, science has little to do with agendas except when it can be used to justify a pre-determined agenda... even false science.

2012 IS GETTING CLOSER

..

Tuesday, August 31, 2010

Government Says: Buy A Car Rated Grade A

SEARCH BLOG: AUTOMOBILES

From The New York Times:

WASHINGTON—The Obama administration on Monday proposed labeling each passenger car with a government letter grade from A to D based on its fuel efficiency and emissions, part of a broader effort by the government to promote electric cars and other advanced-technology vehicles.


The new rules, released jointly by the Environmental Protection Agency and the Transportation Department, would be the most substantial changes in 30 years to the familiar price and mileage labels affixed to new cars on sale at dealerships.


Currently the labels must show how many miles per gallon a car gets and its estimated annual fuel costs. Under the rules proposed Monday, new labels would carry a letter grade assigned by regulators.


Electric vehicles and gas-electric hybrids would get the highest grades under the proposed system, while larger, more powerful models such as sport-utility vehicles or muscle cars would get lower grades because they burn more petroleum and pump out more carbon dioxide, U.S. officials said. The labels would also show the difference in gas costs associated with that vehicle and others in the same class.
Grade A Vehicles

2012 IS GETTING CLOSER

..


Thursday, July 29, 2010

We Don't Need No Stinkin' Legislation To Kill Da Economy - We Got Da EPA

SEARCH BLOG: EPA

You'd think that bad science and bad economics couldn't possible prevail... but it looks like Janet Jackson or was it Lisa Reno... anyway, the chubby-cheeked air-head [full of CO2?] at the EPA plans to complete the Obama deconstruction of the Constitution and a free-market economy by saving us from... plant food.




So, you think the economy is bad now.  Just wait until the back-door cap and trade [without the trade] hits your pocketbook along with the newly-minted Obama elimination of the Bush tax cuts.

The naive ones who voted for the anointed one are about to get the first two installment payments of the bill for their new form of government.  Unfortunately, so are the rest of us.

2012 IS GETTING CLOSER

..

Saturday, July 03, 2010

Obama Uses EPA To Cripple U.S. Oil Refining

SEARCH BLOG: EPA and ENERGY

Once again, the EPA saves us from energy independence.

EPA pulls permits for two Texas City refineries
By T.J. Aulds
The Daily News
Published July 1, 2010
TEXAS CITY — The Environmental Protection Agency on Wednesday rejected the air quality permits for 122 industrial facilities in Texas, including the BP and Valero refineries in Texas City. 
The pulling of the flexible air permits that are issued by the state under EPA’s authority means the facilities do not have legal operating permits.
EPA Regional Administrator Al Armendariz said none of the facilities will be required to shut down but all will be required to obtain new permits under stricter guidelines.
Earlier this year, the agency pulled more than 200 permits, citing what it said were deficiencies in the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality’s flexible air permitting process. -- HT Weasel Zippers [read more]
We will now obtain our gasoline from ... China?

Ever since the BP oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, the Obama administration has effectively shut down Gulf of Mexico oil drilling and now, through the Energy Prevention Agency, oil refining.  Someone is going to get very wealthy from this mess as the U.S. economy continues its protracted downward spiral.



This has to make the Gulf coast residents extremely happy with the big O... obstruction of the containment process, obliteration of the fishing industry, ossification of the economy... Obama!  Yes we can!


2012 IS GETTING CLOSER

..

Tuesday, May 11, 2010

Energy Report

SEARCH BLOG: ENERGY

Yesterday's The Wall Street Journal had an entire section devoted to energy developments.

If you don't get that newspaper, you can access the online version here.

The world's focus has temporarily moved away from energy issues due to the financial problems in Europe.  That diversion will be short-lived compared with the probable fallout from the Federal government's inexorable incursion into the energy marketplace.



What\
As individuals, we are going to feel the pinch in our pocketbooks in the near future and the pinch will become a vise as regulations and restrictions choke off coal and oil.  The Wall Street Journal rightly focuses on natural gas as the only viable U.S. alternative to those energy sources.  The bureaucratic and political nightmare surrounding nuclear power in the U.S. makes it unlikely that the French solution has a chance here.  Wind and solar energy may someday... decades from now... achieve 15% of our energy supply.  Those are not solutions... simply stopgaps... because they are subject to the whims of the weather.

Ultimately, technological advancements will make some clean, reliable, safe, inexhaustible energy source available to the world.  But for now, natural gas appears to be the heir-apparent to coal and oil... unless the EPA gets in the way again.

Yes, natural gas does produce CO2.  So what?

2012 IS GETTING CLOSER

..

Thursday, May 06, 2010

EPA Fights Economic Recovery

SEARCH BLOG: EPA

The Federal government is like Hydra with each head speaking a different language and each mouth devouring what suits its particular head with no regard to the overall needs of the body.

While the Obama administration is desperately trying to salvage the economy  by spending us into oblivion, the EPA is preparing to devour anything that springs to life as a result of that spending.

We've all heard about the big EPA efforts.  Toward the bottom of this post is an example of how the EPA is forcing individuals to choose between what they want to buy and buying from U.S. companies.  But first, topping the list, of course, is the potential economy-killing "Cap and Trade" proposal being pushed by President Obama and to be enforced by the EPA.  One commentary on this from the Mackinac Center for Public Policy...

If President Barack Obama can't get his controversial "cap-and-trade" energy legislation passed, some experts feel he'll turn to the Environmental Protection Agency to get the same results.
The concern over the growing power of the EPA was the focus of a forum last week during the "Defending the American Dream" summit in Clarkston.
Keynote speaker Sarah Palin said that EPA stood for "Economic Punishment Agency."
Others talked about the EPA's growing power since it ruled carbon dioxide was a pollutant last year. The EPA can control through the Clean Air Act how much carbon dioxide is emitted.
Cap-and-trade legislation refers to the government controlling emissions that are tied to energy production. Companies would be allowed a certain level of emissions and then have to purchase or trade for the ability to exceed their limit.  [Read more]. 
Once the EPA sets its mind on a course, you can be certain it will devour all in that path:

Despite the many problems cited with turning cereal grains into ethanol (price spikes, shortages, etc.) and a new study saying ethanol damages engines, the EPA is going ahead with plans to raise the amount of ethanol mandated in fuel mixes:
The Environmental Protection Agency is expected to issue a rule in the next few weeks that would permit oil companies to increase the percentage of ethanol in automotive fuel to 15 percent, up from the current level of 10 percent, so they can meet E.P.A. quotas for renewable fuels.
Like a true bureaucracy, the quota is much more important than the fact that increasing ethanol percentages could cause more pollution and damage car engines according to a new study:
But now the industry says it has conducted tests that confirm the higher-ethanol blend will cause problems in many cars.
Half of the engines tested so far have had some problems, said C. Coleman Jones, the biofuel implementation manager at General Motors, who spoke on behalf of the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers.
More ethanol will confuse exhaust control systems and make engines run too hot, destroying catalytic converters, automakers say. It can also damage engine cylinders, they say.
For some car owners, “you will be walking, eventually,” Mr. Jones said. The industry is urging the E.P.A. to delay any changes to the fuel mix until after 2011, when more complete testing will be done.
The EPA’s answer?
An E.P.A. spokeswoman declined to discuss the E.P.A.’s specific plans beyond its November letter, in which the agency said it planned to make a decision by midyear. The agency said at that time that it was leaning toward allowing the change.
Bureaucratic inertia has set the ball in motion and facts simply don’t matter. [Read more]

But let's get personal here.  When you make purchase decisions, you may be unwittingly forced to chose against U.S. manufacturers and for imported goods simply because foreign manufacturers are free to use products in production that are forbidden to U.S. manufacturers.

Case in point: the purchase of new cabinets for the home we are building....

Some years ago, we purchased maple cabinets and bookcases for our home and had them professionally finished in white.  We decided that we liked that look and sought to find a source.  It turns out that the old, durable paints were high in volatile organic compounds that evaporated a short time after the paint was sprayed.

As explained to me by a company that sells a large variety of cabinets and bookcases from many different manufacturers, if we want what we want, we have to buy Canadian.  It seems that Canada doesn't have the same restrictions as the U.S. when it comes to VOCs.  [If someone has information to the contrary, I welcome a comment here].  As a result, Canadian cabinets sold in the U.S. are not compliant with the production regulations forced on U.S. manufacturers.

So, we get what we want, the EPA gets what it wants, and the U.S. manufacturers can apply for TARP funds.

2012 IS GETTING CLOSER

..

Saturday, April 03, 2010

New Mileage Rules To Save Us From Global Warming

SEARCH BLOG: AUTOMOBILES and GLOBAL WARMING

From the L.A. Times:

Future cars, now

California's Air Resources Board should set standards that push the industry beyond old under-the-hood technology to achieve cleaner, more efficient cars.

Two federal agencies, working with California, have taken the biggest step in the nation's history to reduce the United States' global warming footprint. On Thursday, the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration announced specific rules that require automakers to build cars, SUVs and minivans that will average 35.5 mpg by 2016 and cut their greenhouse gas emissions by 30%, thereby saving an estimated 1.8 billion barrels of oil.

It's been a long haul. For a dozen years, the auto industry stymied efforts in Washington to improve fuel economy standards. California stepped in, enacting its own emissions law in 2002 under the federal Clean Air Act. Last May, President Obama instructed the EPA and NHTSA to use the California benchmark to set new national standards for fuel economy and emissions.

These national rules are a good step forward, but they're not enough. Now it is time for California to show the way again.

... To cut global warming, the auto companies must build clean, smaller cars -- without sacrificing safety. Safety is a function of design and technology, not just of size.

[Read more....]

[source: University of Central Florida]

It appears that size matters... something about physics.



Well, the rest of us are so glad that California leads the way for the nation... especially in unrealistic demands or solutions to problems. It reminds me of when our children were younger and didn't understand that everything came with a cost. They only knew one thing:
I want it, I want it, I want it, I want it...
I want it, I want it, I want it, I want it ...
I want it, I want it, I want it, I want it...
I want it, I want it, NOW!

Related post: New Vehicle Mileage Rules


2012 IS GETTING CLOSER

..

Can"t Find It?

Use the SEARCH BLOG feature at the upper left. For example, try "Global Warming".

You can also use the "LABELS" below or at the end of each post to find related posts.

Blog Archive

Cost of Gasoline - Enter Your Zipcode or Click on Map

CO2 Cap and Trade

There is always an easy solution to every human problem—neat, plausible, and wrong.
Henry Louis Mencken (1880–1956)
“The Divine Afflatus,” A Mencken Chrestomathy, chapter 25, p. 443 (1949)
... and one could add "not all human problems really are."
It was beautiful and simple, as truly great swindles are.
- O. Henry
... The Government is on course for an embarrassing showdown with the European Union, business groups and environmental charities after refusing to guarantee that billions of pounds of revenue it stands to earn from carbon-permit trading will be spent on combating climate change.
The Independent (UK)

Tracking Interest Rates

Tracking Interest Rates

FEDERAL RESERVE & HOUSING

SEARCH BLOG: FEDERAL RESERVE for full versions... or use the Blog Archive pulldown menu.

February 3, 2006
Go back to 1999-2000 and see what the Fed did. They are following the same pattern for 2005-06. If it ain't broke, the Fed will fix it... and good!
August 29, 2006 The Federal Reserve always acts on old information... and is the only cause of U.S. recessions.
December 5, 2006 Last spring I wrote about what I saw to be a sharp downturn in the economy in the "rustbelt" states, particularly Michigan.
March 28, 2007
The Federal Reserve sees no need to cut interest rates in the light of adverse recent economic data, Ben Bernanke said on Wednesday.
The Fed chairman said ”to date, the incoming data have supported the view that the current stance of policy is likely to foster sustainable economic growth and a gradual ebbing in core inflation”.

July 21, 2007 My guess is that if there is an interest rate change, a cut is more likely than an increase. The key variables to be watching at this point are real estate prices and the inventory of unsold homes.
August 11, 2007 I suspect that within 6 months the Federal Reserve will be forced to lower interest rates before housing becomes a black hole.
September 11, 2007 It only means that the overall process has flaws guaranteeing it will be slow in responding to changes in the economy... and tend to over-react as a result.
September 18, 2007 I think a 4% rate is really what is needed to turn the economy back on the right course. The rate may not get there, but more cuts will be needed with employment rates down and foreclosure rates up.
October 25, 2007 How long will it be before I will be able to write: "The Federal Reserve lowered its lending rate to 4% in response to the collapse of the U.S. housing market and massive numbers of foreclosures that threaten the banking and mortgage sectors."
November 28, 2007 FED VICE CHAIRMAN DONALD KOHN
"Should the elevated turbulence persist, it would increase the possibility of further tightening in financial conditions for households and businesses," he said.

"Uncertainties about the economic outlook are unusually high right now," he said. "These uncertainties require flexible and pragmatic policymaking -- nimble is the adjective I used a few weeks ago."
http://www.reuters.com/

December 11, 2007 Somehow the Fed misses the obvious.
fed_rate_moves_425_small.gif
[Image from: CNNMoney.com]
December 13, 2007 [from The Christian Science Monitor]
"The odds of a recession are now above 50 percent," says Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Economy.com. "We are right on the edge of a recession in part because of the Fed's reluctance to reduce interest rates more aggressively." [see my comments of September 11]
January 7, 2008 The real problem now is that consumers can't rescue the economy and manufacturing, which is already weakening, will continue to weaken. We've gutted the forces that could avoid a downturn. The question is not whether there will be a recession, but can it be dampened sufficiently so that it is very short.
January 11, 2008 This is death by a thousand cuts.
January 13, 2008 [N.Y. Times]
“The question is not whether we will have a recession, but how deep and prolonged it will be,” said David Rosenberg, the chief North American economist at Merrill Lynch. “Even if the Fed’s moves are going to work, it will not show up until the later part of 2008 or 2009.
January 17, 2008 A few days ago, Anna Schwartz, nonagenarian economist, implicated the Federal Reserve as the cause of the present lending crisis [from the Telegraph - UK]:
The high priestess of US monetarism - a revered figure at the Fed - says the central bank is itself the chief cause of the credit bubble, and now seems stunned as the consequences of its own actions engulf the financial system. "The new group at the Fed is not equal to the problem that faces it," she says, daring to utter a thought that fellow critics mostly utter sotto voce.
January 22, 2008 The cut has become infected and a limb is in danger. Ben Bernanke is panicking and the Fed has its emergency triage team cutting rates... this time by 3/4%. ...

What should the Federal Reserve do now? Step back... and don't be so anxious to raise rates at the first sign of economic improvement.
Individuals and businesses need stability in their financial cost structures so that they can plan effectively and keep their ships afloat. Wildly fluctuating rates... regardless of what the absolute levels are... create problems. Either too much spending or too much fear. It's just not that difficult to comprehend. Why has it been so difficult for the Fed?

About Me

My photo
Michigan, United States
Air Force (SAC) captain 1968-72. Retired after 35 years of business and logistical planning, including running a small business. Two sons with advanced degrees; one with a business and pre-law degree. Beautiful wife who has put up with me for 4 decades. Education: B.A. (Sociology major; minors in philosopy, English literature, and German) M.S. Operations Management (like a mixture of an MBA with logistical planning)