Tumblr Icon RSS Icon

Feinstein endorses EPA decision: “Hopefully, this will encourage the Senate to pass a comprehensive climate change bill quickly. If it does not, the Obama Administration should be commended for having the courage to protect our environment and our Earth.

Posted on

"Feinstein endorses EPA decision: “Hopefully, this will encourage the Senate to pass a comprehensive climate change bill quickly. If it does not, the Obama Administration should be commended for having the courage to protect our environment and our Earth."

Share:

google plus icon

Yesterday, EPA announced a new rule to require use of best technologies to reduce greenhouse gases from large facilities when “constructed or significantly modified.”

Today, Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), chair of the Senate Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies appropriations subcommittee, released a statement:

“The Environmental Protection Agency has determined that greenhouse gas emissions pose a real threat to public health and safety, and has proposed a carefully targeted plan to regulate large industrial and commercial facilities under the Clean Air Act.

I fully support EPA’s actions to require that the nation’s largest stationary emitters, responsible for roughly 70 percent of America’s carbon footprint, take appropriate steps to contain these harmful emissions and improve energy efficiency.

Those who recognize that the Earth is in jeopardy, that global warming is real and that the climate is warming more quickly than anticipated, understand the urgent need to take action. We cannot lose time.

Hopefully, this will encourage the Senate to pass a comprehensive climate change bill quickly. If it does not, the Obama Administration should be commended for having the courage to protect our environment and our Earth.”

Hear!  Hear!

« »

2 Responses to Feinstein endorses EPA decision: “Hopefully, this will encourage the Senate to pass a comprehensive climate change bill quickly. If it does not, the Obama Administration should be commended for having the courage to protect our environment and our Earth.

  1. David Levy says:

    This is very encouraging, it shows that EPA under Gina McCarthy (deputy administrator for Air policy) is determined to move ahead with or without cap-and-trade. It also demonstrates a healthy lack of faith in market mechanisms: energy efficiency investments might have the potential for a positive rate of return, but there are many organizational and market barriers. And carbon prices under cap-and-trade will be far too low to make a meaningful difference. See http://climateinc.org/2009/07/carbon-markets-to-serve-the-planet/ on the problems of carbon markets, and http://climateinc.org/2009/08/whacking-the-mac/ on energy efficiency.

  2. Dr. Matania Ginosar says:

    The EPA decision should include:
    1. Electrical power plants should be operated according to their emission of CO2, first with the lowest emissions. Now many utilities have natural gas plants that they do not operate much of the year since coal is cheaper. This should be implemented ASAP, there are no technical limitation. and just a small increase in price which is already the lowest.

    China has already done it on a mass scale and shut thousands of high emitting power generators.

    2. The Senate bill should protect the EPA rules just issued to control power plants emissions. It is very important ruling and if contains in a Senate bill may prevent future presidents and others from weakening it.

    3. The senate bill reliance on CCS is misguided. I understand the political pressure, but CCS is a risky, unproven technology. To risk our future on it is not wise and would take ten years or more to demonstrate. Recent studies found that it would also be very expensive. We should in parallel replace/convert coal power plants to natural gas combined cycle (typically over 45% efficiency) that cut the CO2 emission to just one third – cut it by two thirds! A major national reduction of CO2.

    Building conservation will cut our natural gas usage drastically at low technology and low cost, and short time, thus having lots more natural gas available to be used for electricity. This is also an American resource. Coal is the worse.