EPA Estimates Its Greenhouse Gas Restrictions Would Reduce Global Temperature by No More Than 0.006 of a Degree in 90 Years

Tough new rules proposed by the Environmental Protection Agency restricting greenhouse gas emissions would reduce the global mean temperature by only 0.006 to 0.0015 of a degree Celsius by the year 2100, according to the EPA’s analysis.

THAT’s saving the planet?

The authors cite the EPA’s own staff to show that greenhouse gas regulations, which would require major sources of CO2 (carbon dioxide) to obtain permits and limit their output, could seriously harm the economy if implemented.

“It is clear throughout the country, PSD (Prevention of Significant Deterioration) permit issuance would be unable to keep up with the flood of incoming applications, resulting in delays, at the outset, that would be at least a decade or longer, and that would only grow worse over time as each year, the number of new permit applications would exceed permitting authority resources for that year.” the EPA wrote in the Federal Register on June 3.

Lest you think SD would not be seriously and negatively affected since it’s not a heavy industrial state, among other proposed regulatory issues are some that specifically target rural areas (dust standards, animal CO2, etc.)

Other proposed EPA regulations include:
— pending regulations on emissions from industrial and commercial boilers which the Republican staff says are stringent enough to make some factories shutter rather than become compliant, and risking 798,000 jobs;
— higher emissions standards for cement plants, which involves 15,000 jobs;
— and increased National Ambient Air Quality Standards for the amount of ground-level ozone to 60 parts per billion, which the EPA estimates could cost $19 billion to $90 billion to implement.

Top House Republicans have formed the Rural America Solutions Group aimed at working on issue that effect agricultural areas of the country, and held a forum Wednesday on what they termed “the EPA’s Assault on Rural America.”

They heard from witnesses representing the beef and cattle industry, farmers, coal workers, and others affected by the many new and proposed regulations laid out in the report.

At the forum, Rep. Frank Lucas (R-Okla.) said, “In many instances, the EPA is overreaching its authority. Instead of operating within the law, EPA believes it can dictate to Congress that legislation needs to be passed for more government authority. And if Congress doesn’t act, it threatens to regulate anyway. Every day, the EPA seems to demonstrate how vastly disconnected it is to the folks who feed us.”

Republicans invited EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson to attend the forum, but she did not appear, nor did she send a representative.

All this for a alleged small fraction of one degree over a century? There is another issue at play here…and it’s NOT climate change. Can you say P-O-W-E-R, D-O-M-I-N-A-N-C-E, and C-O-N-T-R-O-L?