There’s good news and bad news from Arizona, according to a report in the Arizona Republic.
The good news is that the state is refusing to implement the EPA’s new climate regulations, which go into effect today.
The bad news is that the state is allowing the EPA to enforce the rules since it is afraid the agency might otherwise move to stop construction projects and hurt the state’s economy.
But why not force the agency’s hand? Make it go to court. Force Obama to explain why he wants to hurt the state for no good reason. Make a federal judge rule against the state. Make the Supreme Court rule against the state. Put the rogue federal government on display for all to see. Light a fire under Arizona’s governor and its congressional delegation.
Let’s not just go gently into that good night.
Just as I thought. Another warmist troll. You have no response whatsoever to facts. Everything in my response was data taken from warmists scientists studies and EPA’s GHG inventory. If it is disinformation then it is from your side of the tracks, you twit. This is directly from your “science”. Go back to RealClimate and stop making an open fool of yourself.
As for Arizona’s case, this is not how it works. EPA has statutory and now judicial authority to take over any State’s permitting program and SIP. No company will be able to obtain a federal permit or will be able to exceed any NSPS emission limit for GHGs even if Arizona invokes its 10th Amendment right. Arizona will have to go to Court and sue the EPA for damages for any loss of industry in the state. But since all other states are in the same boat, there would be no case for AZ.
Wow! Full sentences and no misspelled words. How refreshing for a liberal post. I am impressed. The use of the f bomb really drove home your point.
But let me ask you, are the “scientists” you refer to Al Gore? Is it Pachauri of the IPCC? Or is it the laughable Michael Mann? Or the disgraced “scientists” frauds at the CRU? Or is it the NASA astrologist Hansen? What major changes had to be made to AR4 because of these “scientists” exaggerations and outright fraud? Of 10,257 scientists who were “selected” for an AGW consensus survey, how many were chosen to represent the consensus of 97% of all “scientists”? Answer: 77 out of 10,257 (most did not even bother to respond).
As for the money, how much have Al Gore and Pachauri profited from the CAGW scam?
As for the science, natural sources of CO2 emissions are 20X greater than anthropogenic sources. How much increased CO2 in the atmosphere is attributable to deforestation in the world? Have you planted your tree today? Are you a hypocrite? I thought so. What is the GWP of water vapor compared to CO2? How much water vapor is in the atmosphere compared to CO2? Can you explain how global temperatures have stabilized for the past decade (except in Hansen’s mind), even though CO2 concentration continues to increase at 2 ppmv/yr? Can you explain why the earth has had far more CO2 in its atmosphere in the past but still had lower global temperature? Can you explain to me why Greenland is still much colder than it has been for almost all the past 10,500 years? Can you explain how the area of thick Arctic ice has doubled since 2008? Should I keep going?
I will defend Steve. He is not about getting money from someone else. He is not about getting more money than someone else. He favors us getting to keep as much of what we produce as we possibly can. We should be able to keep all of it except for the parasites in Washington who wish to take it away from us in taxes or in driving the costs of things that others produce out the roof or tying us up in regulatory knots so we can’t produce anything in the first place.
We measure what we create with the dollar. We measure our grain with bushels. Your laughter becomes obviously silly if you “hail the almighty lord, our bushel. Oh god, oh lord, oh bushel above all!” You may keep your vulgarities to yourself.