An Explosion and/of CO2 Regulation
Subscribe today for Free Enterprise Updates
- Latest business trends and best practices
- News about legislation and regulation impacting business
- Business how-to articles from industry experts
- Commentary and interviews with newsmakers in business and politics
Warning received via email:
For the filming of a TV pilot, there will be a simulated explosion on Wednesday, March 25 between 9:30 a.m. and noon near Key Bridge in the District. The explosion will produce a 20 to 30' fireball that will last for approximately 2 minutes...The explosion will take place on the Potomac River just north of the Key Bridge and Jack's Boathouse (K / Water Street, NW under the Whitehurst Freeway). In the scene to be filmed, there will be six (6) sculling boats on the Potomac River and one of them blows up.
"If the nation is serious about regulating greenhouse gases the Clean Air Act is the wrong tool for the job and it's really at the feet of Congress to come up with good legislation that cuts through what will likely be decades of regulation and litigation," Johnson told reporters in a teleconference.
Oops, sorry, my bad that is from last July, here is yesterday's:
The Environmental Protection Agency's new leadership, in a step toward confronting global warming, submitted a finding that will force the White House to decide whether to limit greenhouse gas emissions under the nearly 40-year-old Clean Air Act. Under that law, EPA's conclusion -- that such emissions are pollutants that endanger the public's health and welfare -- could trigger a broad regulatory process affecting much of the U.S. economy as well as the nation's future environmental trajectory.
But what does it mean man! Bill Kovacs explains in the news:
Bill Kovacs, vice president of environment, technology and regulatory affairs at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, said the finding would automatically provoke a tangle of regulatory requirements for businesses large and small. The “EPA is putting in motion a set of decisions that may have far-reaching unintended consequences,” he said. “Specifically, once the finding is made, no matter how limited, some environmental groups will sue to make sure it is applied to all aspects of the Clean Air Act. (KansasCity.com)
"By moving forward with the endangerment finding on greenhouse gases, EPA is putting in motion a set of decisions that may have far-reaching unintended consequences," said Bill Kovacs..."This will mean that all infrastructure projects, including those under the president's stimulus initiative, will be subject to environmental review for greenhouse gases. Since not one of the projects has been subjected to that review, it is possible that the projects under the stimulus initiative will cease. This will be devastating to the economy." (Washington Post Chat)
Bill Kovacs, vice president of environment, technology, and regulatory affairs at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, said a so-called endangerment finding by the EPA is the wrong path to limiting emissions. The EPA should let Congress establish a system because lawmakers could set emissions standards that won’t harm businesses, he said. (Bloomberg)
And the Administration agrees:
"The president has made quite clear on this that the way to deal with greenhouse gases is to work with Congress in order to put together a plan that deals with this and creates a market for renewable energy," White House spokesman Robert Gibbs said yesterday. (ibid)
Of course there are those who disagree with us, and the White House, according to them all that is needed for this to work is for the EPA to:
"enforce new global warming regulations with common sense, focusing on large emitters of greenhouse gases to achieve reasonable reductions while spurring trillions of dollars worth of economic growth and green-collar jobs."
Hold on, give me a minute, "common sense...reasonable," must stop laughing. Ok, I will concede one point, this approach will spur economic growth and create thousands of jobs...for the EPA.