By Dina Cappiello, Associated Press
Washington (AP) - For Lisa Jackson, the new EPA administrator,
the next step for the agency when it comes to climate change will be
decided by a single question: Do heat-trapping gases pose a risk?
In an interview Tuesday with The Associated Press, Jackson said she was closer to having an answer.
She said the Environmental Protection Agency will soon decide whether greenhouse gases are a danger to human health and welfare, the legal
trigger for regulation under federal law.
"We are going to be making a fairly significant finding about what
these gases mean for public health and the welfare of our country,"
Jackson said.
Jackson said the American people deserve an opinion, after years of the
Bush administration not taking a position on the matter -- a track
record that she referred to as a deafening silence.
"If EPA is going to talk and speak in this game, the first thing it
should speak about is whether carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases
endanger human health and welfare," she said. "It is a very fundamental
question."
Recent EPA decisions have hinted that the agency was leaning toward
using the Clean Air Act to regulate the gases, a step the Bush
administration refused to take despite prodding from the Supreme Court.
In his first week in office, President Barack Obama directed the agency
to review a decision by the Bush administration denying California and
other states the right to control greenhouse gases from automobiles.
On Tuesday, the EPA announced it was reviewing a Bush policy that
prohibits using the federal permit process to require new coal-fired
power plants to install equipment to reduce carbon dioxide, the most
prevalent greenhouse gas.
Jackson said Tuesday that the agency was now turning its attention to
the broader question of regulation under the Clean Air Act as part of a
series of steps it was taking to move toward what she called a
carbon-constrained future. The federal law has been used since 1970 to
curb emissions that cause acid rain, smog and soot.
In 2007, the Supreme Court ruled that it could be used to curb carbon
dioxide and other greenhouse gases, but the Bush administration refused
to use the law, saying it was the wrong tool.
Jackson took a different position Tuesday during one of her first interviews since winning Senate confirmation Jan. 23.
"It is clear that the Clean Air Act has a mechanism in it for other pollutants to be addressed," she said.
But Jackson also said the EPA would not act alone and regulation at the
federal level would not prevent states from taking their own steps or
preclude Congress from passing legislation to limit greenhouse gas
emissions, something Democratic leaders on the Hill are already working
on.
The United States is under pressure to take some action on global
warming in advance of negotiations, scheduled for later this year in
Copenhagen, on a new international treaty.
The Bush administration pulled out of the last treaty, the 1997 Kyoto
Protocol, citing a lack of participation by developing countries and
harm to the U.S. economy. In the late 1990s, during the Clinton
administration, the Senate balked at ratifying the agreement.
We are so screwed
Given the recent barrage of oh-so-intelligent governmental decrees and decisions, we will all probably no longer be allowed to exhale. As we have seen, we cannot let factual science get in the way of public policy.
Given the recent barrage of oh-so-intelligent governmental decrees and decisions, we will all probably no longer be allowed to exhale. As we have seen, we cannot let factual science get in the way of public policy.
Be glad you don't like in California, we just got the biggest tax increase in U.S. history.
FTA:
In an interview Tuesday with The Associated Press, Jackson said she was closer to having an answer.
End quote.
What! She hasn't gotten the answer from the Messiah yet? Email must be slow. I just can't imagine what the answer is going to be, the suspense is killing me?!!??
(/sarcasm)
Did anybody here what Steven Chu said ? Reporters asked him about the upcoming opec meeting and what he plans to say. He didn't know what he's suppose to say ! He said he had to talk to the administration first. And he admitted that he is naive and this sort of thing is out of his realm. When it comes to allocating money for altenative energy projects he's ok but when it comes to figuring out how the hell we are going to live our lives he doesn't have a clue. Amazing somebody so smart can be so stupid !
Thanks so much for putting this online.