• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Timing is Everything: EPA Delays CO2 Regulations

    Environmental Protection Agency

    Let’s wait until the economy recovers a little before we step on it with costly environmental regulations. That was the message from Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Administrator Lisa Jackson in a response to eight Democratic senators from industrial coal states the authority of the EPA to regulate greenhouse gases. Administrator Jackson said by April she will “take actions to ensure that no stationary source will be required to get a Clean Air Act permit to cover its greenhouse gas emissions in calendar year 2010.”

    As the Clean Air Act is currently written, the EPA could regulate sources or establishments that emit 100 or 250 tons or more of a pollutant per year. The EPA is proposing a “tailoring rule” that would amend the CAA so that only entities that emit 25,000 tons of carbon dioxide equivalent per year would be affected. But even the 25,000 ton threshold is subject to change said Jackson: “I expect the threshold for permitting will be substantially higher than the 25,000-ton limit that EPA originally proposed.” These regulations for the largest of emitters are expected to take place between the latter half of 2011 and 2013.

    Smaller entities would be exempt from carbon dioxide regulations – for now. Schools, farms, restaurants, hospitals, apartment complexes, churches, and anything with a motor–from motor vehicles to lawnmowers, jet skis, and leaf blowers–could be subject to regulations – but no sooner than 2016 said Jackson.

    Although Jackson is delaying the regulatory pain, the business uncertainty the EPA is creating is preventing economic recovery today. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), in a response to Lisa Jackson’s statement, said, “Until the specter of command-and-control regulations goes away, it will remain a counterproductive threat hanging over the work that must be done to find common ground.” A December 2009 National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) survey of small and independent business owners asked owners to rank the single most important problem they faced. Behind poor sales, taxes and government regulations/red tape finished second and third, respectively. Government regulations and red tape jumped three spots from a year ago.

    Even without regulations, the prospect of them is enough to impose economic harm. Rising uncertainty can drive down investments in riskier projects and prohibit expansion. The EPA may be delaying carbon dioxide regulations but they’re also delaying a quicker economic recovery with looming uncertainty.

    Posted in Energy [slideshow_deploy]

    13 Responses to Timing is Everything: EPA Delays CO2 Regulations

    1. reid simpson houston says:

      I can't imagine that the fall elections could have anything to do with the decision to push implementation into 2011.

    2. Joe D., Louisiana says:

      Hopefully sometime soon, this will all be looked back on as an "Inconvenient Mistake". CO2 is not a pollutant and is not going to melt the polar ice caps and climategate is showing everyone that AGW is a farce. I'm sure the senators from big coal states are very concerned about the EPA and what it can do to further damage our already ailing economy with this mess. Somebody needs to drive a sliver stake in the heart of this demon.

    3. TonyfromOz Coomera Q says:

      Go back and read that second paragraph very carefully. See where it mentions that this 'new' 'tailoring rule' that says this will only apply to those entities emitting 25,000 tons of CO2 each year.

      Whew! Seems a lot, eh!

      That accounts for every single power plant from three sectors, coal fired, petroleum, and the natural gas sectors. This makes up 70% of all electrical power consumed in the whole of the US.

      There are more than 600 coal fired power plants alone.

      Of that, the largest 130 of those coal fired plants emit this much CO2, (25,000 tons) and wait for it, every day.

      All that coal fired power supplies electrical power on a 24/7/365 basis.

      Each year, just to supply America with electrical power, nearly 3.5 Billion tons of CO2 is emitted from plants in those three sectors I have mentioned above.

      They will have to keep doing that, and for decades to come, because that is the only way that level of electrical power can still be available to where it is required, Residential (38%) Commerce (37%) and Industrial (24%).

      Renewable power currently supplies only 3.5% of all consumed power, and they cannot supply their power on that 24/7/365 basis, ever.

      There is no feasible replacement for that level of power in the long term, let alone the short term.

      See now how carbon cap and trade is a goldmine for the government that introduces it. They're not legislating to reduce emissions, just to make money from what is a captive target, and one that will remain a captive target for decades to come.

      Shut that down that amount of electrical power, and you send the US back to the Stone Age.

      What we need is for our politicians to tell us the truth. Either that, or actually check first before opening their mouths or rushing ahead with legislation aimed to do only one thing, to rake in huge amounts of money, money from power plants that will pass on those costs directly down to the consumer, all of you.

    4. Daversity says:

      Tragically–these threats and past efforts have forced businesses and whole industries out of the country. To where? Other parts of the "Globe."

      If in fact, the emission of CO2 does actually contribute to global warming does anyone believe that whether that emission occurs in Kansas, Bangladesh, or Egypt it makes any difference?

      Does anyone believe that the processes a US manufacturer, coal power producer, drill site, or nuclear power plant might use would be more polluting, wasteful or dangerous than the equivalent in Bangladesh, Egypt, China or even Russia?

      Wake up people–if we are creating a hazard wouldn't we be better off knowing about it and fixing it? Or were we all more comfortable feeding our dogs melamine?

      For the first time in my adult life I am no longer proud to be a citizen of this government!

    5. Tim Az says:

      The EPA is now the tool the liberals will use to keep America on the path to collapse and a new socialist utopia. That is until we clean house at the EPA and restructure or eliminate the EPA all together. There will be no recovery until the EPA is made to submit to the people of the US.

    6. Jeanne Stotler,Woodb says:

      Tonyfromoz, you certainly jest when you suggest that politicians tell us the truth? Most would not know the truth if it rose up and bit them in the __S, It would be nice if all the fear mongering and coniving facts would stop but hese are career liars, that is how they get elected, it's like leading lemings, they don't want the rest of us to have an opinion not alone voice one, that is why they are so against the tea party and consrvative movement, the sleeping giant is awake and we are thinking and acting. God Bless Americans who are acting to protect this country.

    7. Drew Page, IL says:

      Natural gas and nukes are the way to go. But the development of these sources of energy should be left in the hands of private enterprise. The government should act to clear the way for developing these sources of energy and oversee the safety of nuclear power plants and the disposal of nuclear waste through the NRC.

    8. Pingback: PA Pundits - International

    9. Lloyd Scallan - New says:

      The CO2 lie is just another in the long list of the "man made global warming" crowd that is hell bent on destroying our economy and thus our nation. Obama is using the EPA as yet another shill to deflect blame to anyone but himself. Like Obama, these socialist and Marxist will not stop just because almost all of their

      so called "evidence" has been discredited. They have been working towards this day for almost 100 years. If they are stopped, we must do it.

    10. Mike, Wichita Falls says:

      Timing delays imply political considerations. Large-emitter regs going into effect after the 2010 mid-term elections? Small-emitter regs going into effect during Obama's last year of a potential second term. If CO2 were really a threat to the planet and mankind, shouldn't it be heavily regulated NOW? If the CAA dictates implementation this year, is the EPA changing the law by bureaucratic fiat versus enforcing it as an executive agency is obligated to do?

      I suspect, like Obamacare, CO2 regulations will be used to reward those emitters who vote or contribute to the "right" politician and punish those emitters who vote or contribute to the other guy…you know, the one who loves freedom.

      My goodness! Lawnmowers for crying out loud!?! Well, if I can't mow my lawn, I'll have to use handclippers which will increase my CO2 output. Will I need a permit to handclip my lawn? Maybe I can get an exemption from the Obesity czar.

      Commissar Jackson left off barbeque pits. Oops! I better not give her any more ideas.

    11. Sam, WI says:

      Nuclear power probably would be able to replace at least most of the electricty generated by coal. Except the NRC does its best to make sure no new plants are built. Even if the president appropriates money to do so.

    12. Spiritof76, NH says:

      Time to shut down EPA and start paying the national debt. They are a useless bureaucracy that wastes tax pyer funds. How else would you classify them when they declare CO2 is a pollutant?

    13. Jeanne Stotler,Woodb says:

      fourth grade science ;lesson: Co2 is exhaled, trees convert this to O2 which is inhaled, ie: trees need CO2, we need O2 to live and if we inhale we must exhale or suffacate, there are other elements in the air that are toxic but CO2 is NOT one of them.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.