WR
Page 1 of 2 1 2 >
Show 100 posts from this thread on one page

WR (http://forums.webrats.com/index.php)
-   Edge of the Hole (http://forums.webrats.com/forumdisplay.php?f=34)
-   -   Cheney’s Office Pressured EPA Over Regulating Greenhouse Gases (http://forums.webrats.com/showthread.php?t=144492)

ddoubleez 07-24-2008 10:07 AM
Cheney’s Office Pressured EPA Over Regulating Greenhouse Gases
 
Cheney’s Office Pressured EPA Over Regulating Greenhouse Gases:

Quote:
A new congressional report has determined Vice President Cheney’s office and the oil industry blocked efforts by the Environmental Protection Agency to rule that greenhouse gases should be regulated under clear air laws. The report says that there was wide senior-level support at the EPA for concluding that greenhouse gases are a danger to the public and that the EPA should regulate emissions. But the EPA ignored its own senior-level staff after concerns were raised by Cheney’s energy adviser, F. Chase Hutto, along with unidentified individuals from ExxonMobil and the American Petroleum Institute.


http://recent-us-news.com/data/arti...9.06.34.33.html

What do you think?

FattyJJ 07-24-2008 02:29 PM
Re: Cheney’s Office Pressured EPA Over Regulating Greenhouse Gases
 
duh, is the first word to come to mind. He and his office will just claim executive privilege, and ignore congress's questions.

Krasch 07-25-2008 01:47 AM
Re: Cheney’s Office Pressured EPA Over Regulating Greenhouse Gases
 
And that's also assuming that the contents of the report are in fact true and not concocted by the Democrats to try and derail McCain's bid for the White House.

I'm not at all saying that's the case, but I have to at least wonder if the report is truly unbiased.

ddoubleez 07-26-2008 02:31 AM
Re: Cheney’s Office Pressured EPA Over Regulating Greenhouse Gases
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Krasch
And that's also assuming that the contents of the report are in fact true and not concocted by the Democrats to try and derail McCain's bid for the White House.

I'm not at all saying that's the case, but I have to at least wonder if the report is truly unbiased.


I am confused, would it be the epa that is trying to keep a republican out of office, or would it be the third party that reported it to congress?

Maybe it is the newspapers even?

For someone that shouts so loudly about conspiracies, you sure come up with quite a few yourself..........

And McCain is a supporter of the human influenced global warming therory...

Krasch 07-26-2008 12:37 PM
Re: Cheney’s Office Pressured EPA Over Regulating Greenhouse Gases
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ddoubleez
I am confused, would it be the epa that is trying to keep a republican out of office, or would it be the third party that reported it to congress?

Maybe it is the newspapers even?

For someone that shouts so loudly about conspiracies, you sure come up with quite a few yourself..........

And McCain is a supporter of the human influenced global warming therory...

What can I say, I'm a skeptic...

And to blindly trust such an apparently partisan report (at least on it's face) in the middle of a Presidential Election year is something I'd find difficult regardless of it's slant.

fmb 07-26-2008 11:16 PM
Re: Cheney’s Office Pressured EPA Over Regulating Greenhouse Gases
 
I have spent a considerable number of years working in hazardous materials emergency response and handling waste issues for my current employer. Having said that, I can say three things about the EPA: 1) practically all the top level folks are scientists or have science degrees; 2) they have always talked straight with me; and 3) they see things in shades of black and white, no gray areas exist with 'em.

On the surface, I'd trust what the EPA has to say; of course, I would dig a bit deeper and attempt to confirm what these guys are saying...

I am a Republican, but can see some truthfulness to the article.

ravenshrike 08-06-2008 01:22 AM
Re: Cheney’s Office Pressured EPA Over Regulating Greenhouse Gases
 
The EPA needs to be fucked up the ass with a rusty spork.
http://stiffrightjab.com/2008/08/04...-from-flooding/

Quote:
Lynn Moses will be locked up in federal prison next Wednesday. His crime? Protecting the city of Driggs, Idaho from flooding.

When Mr. Moses began to develop a subdivision along Teton Creek in 1980, Teton County required him to implement an engineer’s plan to modify the Teton Creek stream bed to prevent the flooding of subdivision property, caused by the buildup of gravel bars and downed trees, during high water flows in the spring.

In fact, the county would not allow him even to record the plat for the subdivision until the modification work had been done, and only allowed the development after requiring the homeowner’s association to maintain the flood control channel year after year.

Teton Creek used to be a flowing stream, but irrigation diversion over 100 years ago dewatered the Creek and left the stream bed dry for all but two months a year at the most. Water only fills the stream bed when irrigators have more water than they can use. (Note: this means there is no “aquatic environment” here, nor any “wetland.”)

Officials from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers were invited to a planning meeting with the county and Mr. Moses in 1980, but they soon left the meeting after informing county officials that they had “classified the stream as intermittent and therefore outside their jurisdiction.”

So working on plans developed by an engineer and approved – in fact, required – by the county, Mr. Moses got to work and cleared the channel of gravel bars and downed cottonwood trees to ensure that the channel would serve as a flood control structure.

For years he has walked the entire length of the creek to evaluate conditions and then remove gravel bars, sand, logs and debris as necessary to keep the channel clear and satisfy the subdivision’s obligation to the county.

When Driggs flooded in the spring of 1981 – due to a clogged culvert under a county road – the county approached the Corps a second time, asking for funding and help to replace the culvert with a bridge to prevent future flooding. Once again, the Corps said, Nope, not our problem, not our fault, not our responsibility to fix, we don’t have jurisdiction.

Why? Because, they repeated again, Teton Creek is an intermittent stream and we have no jurisdiction unless there is water in the stream bed at least three months out of the year. Thus twice the federal government pointedly and definitively washed its hands of the whole thing.

Since 1982, all Mr. Moses has done is to provide the necessary maintenance to ensure that the stream bed does not get clogged with gravel, sediment, fallen trees, and other debris so that the stream bed can continue to siphon flood water away from homes and the city of Driggs.

He did his work when the stream bed was dry, of course, and never put anything into the stream bed, only took “pollutants” (sedimentation, sand, gravel, etc.) out.

Tellingly, in 1984, when the Forest Service needed to build a road, they came to this same stretch of Teton Creek and – without any kind of permit – contracted with Mr. Moses to excavate between 5,000 and 6,000 cubic yards of gravel from the bed, all of which was inspected by government officials.

Every four or five years, when new staff would replace the old, and a generation would arise “who knew not Joseph,” Mr. Moses would receive a letter from the Corps of Engineers, insisting that he needed to get a permit from them for his maintenance work. He’d write them back, informing him that, according to the Corps itself, they had no jurisdiction over intermittent streams. That would be that.

He’d hear nothing for another four to five years, after which another staff rotation led to another letter from the Corps and to a similar reply from Mr. Moses. And so it went for over 20 years.

An aggressive Corps staffer tried to convinced the U.S. Attorney to prosecute Mr. Moses in 1995, and the U.S. Attorney told him to take a hike since the Corps had no jurisdictional authority to initiate legal action.

According to former state legislator Lee Gagner, the Corps “discussed his process many times with him, but could not show where they had jurisdiction on the seasonal, intermittent stream.” Gagner adds, “[T]o this day they do not have written rules indicating this to be true.”

As far as Gagner knows, the Corps never completed what is called a “Jurisdictional Determination” that their own rules even gave them any authority over this particular intermittent stream. (Jurisdiction is determined on a case-by-case basis with intermittent streams.)

At this point, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), emboldened by newly granted bureaucratic authority, jumped in and went right after Mr. Moses, indicting and prosecuting him for violating the Clean Water Act in the years 2002, 2003 and 2004 for doing nothing more than the routine maintenance on the channel he had been doing for 20 years, under requirements imposed by local government.

Presiding federal judge Lynn Winmill, who has a well-deserved reputation for judicial activism, refused to allow Teton County commissioners to testify to the original agreement, nor would he allow the aggressive Corps staffer to testify about the refusal of the U.S. Attorney to prosecute in the mid-90s.

Before the jury was dismissed to enter into deliberations at the conclusion of his trial, Judge Lynn Winmill instructed the jury, believe it or not, to disregard every bit of information from 1980 to 2002, including the Corps’ denial of jurisdiction and the mandate from local government for Mr. Moses to maintain the flood channel.

Instructed by this notoriously activist judge to ignore facts, reason and legal history, the jury returned with a guilty verdict, finding Mr. Moses guilty of “discharging” “pollutants” into one of the “waters of the United States.”

His conviction ignores the fact that no evidence was ever presented in court that Mr. Moses “discharged” anything into the stream bed at all. He only removed sand and gravel bars that were already there and which he was contractually obligated to remove. He was extracting material from the channel, not discharging material into it.

No evidence was presented in court by the EPA that there was any water at all in the stream bed during those years for Mr. Moses to “discharge” anything into. The EPA claims that “fallback” – material from the bank falling back into the stream bed – represents a “discharge,” but it offers no objective criteria for deciding how much “fallback” it takes to cross the magic threshold, meaning the EPA used sheer speculation to assert a violation.

Worse, Mr. Moses has been convicted of “pollut(ing) a spawning area for Yellowstone cutthroat trout,” despite the fact that there have been no fish in this stream bed for more than 150 years. Mr. Gagner, who has lived near the flood channel for 18 years, says he has never seen fish in this stream bedStepeh. And it’s not even possible for the stream bed to serve as a spawning ground since it only has water two months out of every year in the first place.

Although the director of the EPA in Idaho, Jim Wernitz, asserts that Mr. Moses had damaged “wetlands” associated with the stream, there are no wetlands there! The very word requires that land be, well, wet, but the stream bed is bone dry for at least 10 months out of every year. Wernitz is apparently ignorant of the fact that the Government had previously stipulated that there are no wetlands surrounding the storm channel, nor any “aquatic environment” that could be damaged. (Art. Cont.)
They have people pulling shit like this and you think they're competent enough to judge what effect CO2 has on our environment? Especially when the hotspot signature that indicates CO2 driven warming is occurring doesn't exist? HA!

fmb 08-06-2008 09:51 PM
Re: Cheney’s Office Pressured EPA Over Regulating Greenhouse Gases
 
That's some weird stuff. I can't place all the blame on the EPA; the judge in this case bears much of the responsibility. What a joke.

Any appeal made?

ravenshrike 08-08-2008 12:44 PM
Re: Cheney’s Office Pressured EPA Over Regulating Greenhouse Gases
 
Not yet, but it's unlikely that the judge will allow for him to stay out of jail until said appeal is made.

ddoubleez 08-13-2008 01:05 AM
Re: Cheney’s Office Pressured EPA Over Regulating Greenhouse Gases
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ravenshrike
The EPA needs to be fucked up the ass with a rusty spork.
http://stiffrightjab.com/2008/08/04...-from-flooding/

They have people pulling shit like this and you think they're competent enough to judge what effect CO2 has on our environment? Especially when the hotspot signature that indicates CO2 driven warming is occurring doesn't exist? HA!


Study was not done by the epa, only commissioned......... Little off here...

93crawler 08-13-2008 10:17 PM
Re: Cheney’s Office Pressured EPA Over Regulating Greenhouse Gases
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ravenshrike
The EPA needs to be fucked up the ass with a rusty spork.
http://stiffrightjab.com/2008/08/04...-from-flooding/

They have people pulling shit like this and you think they're competent enough to judge what effect CO2 has on our environment? Especially when the hotspot signature that indicates CO2 driven warming is occurring doesn't exist? HA!

Well, the EPA was established by Nixon, a Republican in 1970...so you would kind of be fucking yourself in the ass. Yeah, we definitely don't need anyone or any agency to regulate and provide oversight for business and industry, because they definitely would regulate themselves :rolleyes: .

Where you been deez, haven't seen you in quite a while, this board seems to be crawling with Republicans any more, I sometimes think I've entered a Republican forum when coming in here any more. You need to delete your pm's, I tried to pm you the other day, but you reached your limit for capacity.

ddoubleez 08-14-2008 12:04 PM
Re: Cheney’s Office Pressured EPA Over Regulating Greenhouse Gases
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 93crawler
You need to delete your pm's, I tried to pm you the other day, but you reached your limit for capacity.


I can not pm you for the same reason..

ravenshrike 08-14-2008 12:38 PM
Re: Cheney’s Office Pressured EPA Over Regulating Greenhouse Gases
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ddoubleez
Study was not done by the epa, only commissioned......... Little off here...

? I'm officially confused. I'm bitching about two things. 1. That they charged Moses with violating the CWA. 2. That they classify CO2 as a pollutant even though the empirical evidence refutes the need for such an action. If CO2 were causing any sort of climate change, there should be a disproportionate heating of the tropopause. There isn't.

ddoubleez 08-15-2008 01:32 AM
Re: Cheney’s Office Pressured EPA Over Regulating Greenhouse Gases
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ravenshrike
? That they classify CO2 as a pollutant even though the empirical evidence refutes the need for such an action. If CO2 were causing any sort of climate change, there should be a disproportionate heating of the tropopause. There isn't.


you can not find a period of extreme global warming that is not accompanied by increased co2 and ch4.....

you may want to expand on you understanding of the relationship of a layer of gas and the heating of a solid and liquid..... Thanks in advance.... In addition you may want to explain this to nasa so they can fire all their climateolgists for being so short sighted.....

Hint: The oil and gas we are burning were the result of two extreme global warming events 90 and 150 million years ago, when the planet was sequestering co2 and ch4.......... We suck all the oil that the planet buried and what do you think will happen, maybe another extreme global warming event? Hmm.....

I have offered this link up dozens of times, but here it is again.... This will give a very understandable explanation of the relationship of co2 oil and the climate.... ENJOY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :clemson:

http://www.abc.net.au/science/crude/

ps the article featured in the off topic post is more of an indcation of how piss poor a govenment works when everything is deregulated and the government itself is broke.... You would only have to think for a moment that the subdivision probably should not have been built there in the first place and he was not trying to save a subdivision, he was trying to profit off undeveloped land that should not have been built on..... A cop writes me a ticket or arrests me for littering, this does not mean he is obligated to teach or help me from violating the laws..........

ravenshrike 08-17-2008 01:57 AM
Re: Cheney’s Office Pressured EPA Over Regulating Greenhouse Gases
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ddoubleez
you can not find a period of extreme global warming that is not accompanied by increased co2 and ch4.....

Right, um you do realize that A.) Ice core data is inherently unreliable from a scientific standpoint because in order to obtain the samples we change the sample adding heat, current atmospheric conditions, and a reduction in pressure and B.) the CO2 increase follows the temperature change by quite a large length of time and is rather easily explained away by the fact that the oceans hold less gases as the temperature warms. The reason for large length of time is that it takes that long for a temperature cycle to affect the ocean depths.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:03 PM.
Page 1 of 2 1 2 >
Show 100 posts from this thread on one page
click on one of our sponsors! OR REMOVE ADS

Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.