US News
US rules global warming threatens public health
Apr 17, 2009, 16:20 GMT
Washington - In a landmark ruling Friday, US President Barack Obama's administration found that greenhouse gases threaten US air quality and public health, setting the stage for new limits on industry emissions that cause global warming.
The so-called 'endangerment finding' by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) had long been anticipated by environmental groups and marks the latest shift on US climate policy since Obama took office in January.
The ruling, which now has to be submitted for public comment for 60 days, would allow the government to regulate greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide under existing clean air laws in the United States.
'This finding confirms that greenhouse gas pollution is a serious problem now and for future generations,' EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson said in a statements.
Former president George W Bush had rejected imposing mandatory limits on climate-damaging pollution and the decision comes nearly two years after the US Supreme Court ruled that the EPA must consider regulating greenhouse gases under the existing Clean Air Act, a 1990 US law governing air pollution.
The US is taking its first steps as a nation to confront climate change,' said Vickie Patt of the climate group Environmental Defense Fund. 'EPAs action is a wake up-call for national policy solutions that secure our economic and environmental future.'
The EPA's ruling could pave the way for tougher federal standards on emissions from cars, power plants and other sources global warming.
But it remains unclear how far the administration will use this authority. Congress is considering new legislation this year to create a cap-and-trade system that would force polluting companies to pay for their emissions.
Jackson, while not yet announcing any new limits, said the 'solution' to global warming was finding ways to encourage green energy technologies.
COMMENT
blog comments powered by DisqusLatest Headlines in US
- 1. Mitt Romney Addresses Tea Party Summit Pictures
- 2. Seven injured as US Navy plane crashes into apartments
- 3. At least three injured in US Navy plane crash
- 4. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, others to face death penalty trial
- 5. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, four others to face death penalty trial
Older Talkback
page: 1
page: 1
Obama steps up and deals with itApr 17th, 2009 - 16:57:45
The real shame of this is the 8 year opportunity wasted under Bush ..... as if the economic situation left us by Dubya were not bad enough.
From a budget surplus to a 1.3 trillion deficit handed off from Bush to Obama; without war costs included - Bush used annual supplementals. 90 percent of our National Debt came about under three Republican Presidents - Reagan, Bush 1, and Bush 2.
This is going to require, over time, a wholesale move to non-pollutiing energy sources (eventually heavily solar); on an incremental basis. Bush walked away from a pilot project for 'clean coal' because of the cost:
'Around the same time, the world's leading clean coal experiment, FutureGen in America, collapsed after the Bush administration slashed its commitment to the billion-dollar project.'
..... but we have a $300 billion cost OVERRRUN on weapons projects at the Pentagon. The F-22 created jobs in 44 different states; making it very difficult to cut back.
'It makes economic sense to invest in the smaller, simpler, less expensive F-35, even though it's slower and less maneuverable. The Joint Strike Fighter is primarily a ground-attack aircraft that will be used by the Navy, Air Force and Marines and by the allies who will help pay for it. The trick is making sure F-22 workers are still available when needed for F-35 production. Connecticut is far from the only state worried about losing these skilled workers. Some 44 states and 90,000 workers have a stake in the manufacture of the F-22. Surely Congress, which holds the purse strings, can work out a compromise with Mr. Gates.'
-----
This is the REAL PORK in the budget; because it's a weapons system designed for warfare that we don't engage in any longer.
We have 135 F-22's - and not ONE of them has a mission in Iraq or Afghanistan. Not ONE!
www.ainonline.com/index.php?id=6&tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=20415&cHash=73a 7597c5b
'The Pentagon is increasing production of the General Atomics Predator and Reaper armed UAVs and withdrawing 250 strike aircraft. The long-awaited statement on the U.S. Fiscal Year 2010 budget by Secretary of Defense Robert Gates confirmed an end to F-22 production at 187 aircraft, offset by a slight advance in the pace of the F-35 program.'
www.upi.com/Top_News/2009/03/31/GAO-Weapons-cost-overruns-rising/UPI-75 531238509774/
WASHINGTON, March 31 (UPI) -- Cost overruns for the U.S. Department of Defense's major weapons projects continued to soar last year, U.S. Government Accountability Office says. In a report released Monday, the congressional watchdog said that in 2008, cost overruns on the projects were 42 percent higher than initial estimates, compared with 27 percent over estimates in 2000, The Washington Post reported.
The overruns totaled nearly $300 billion, while the average delay for programs such as new fighter jets lengthened from 21 to 22 months, Gene Dodaro, acting comptroller general of the GAO, said in the report.
Report this comment