Isra-Mart srl:Republicans try to roll back climate science in EPA fight

www.isra-mart.com

Isra-Mart srl news:

The GOP yesterday launched its most audacious legislative landgrab to date in the ongoing battle for the future of US climate change policy, effectively rejecting the scientific consensus on climate change.

Republicans this month proposed a bill that would stop the Federal government from making any regulations designed to address global warming, and overturn the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) key ruling that greenhouse gases represent a threat to public health and as such can be regulated under the Clean Air Act.

The Energy Tax Prevention Act of 2011, which was proposed by representatives Ed Whitfield and Fred Upton, yesterday received its first hearing in front of the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Energy and Power and during a series of tense exchanges Republicans repeatedly accused EPA administrator Lisa Jackson of abusing her authority and acting on "mixed" climate science.

Upton, who chairs the committee and this week confirmed he does not believe in manmade climate change, said the EPA's rules targeting emissions from cars and power plants would damage the US economy. "I know American manufacturers can compete – but not if they are saddled with burdensome regulations that put us at an unfair advantage,"he said.

Jackson, a witness at the hearing, argued that repeated studies had shown the agency's emissions rules would create jobs. She cited a new report from green investor group Ceres, which suggested EPA requirements for upgrades to industrial plants to use the most efficient technology available would create nearly 1.5 million temporary jobs through to 2015.

Republicans on the committee also alleged that the EPA's endangerment finding was overly reliant on a report from the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) that has since been shown to contain a handful of errors, which have been corrected.

The endangerment finding, for which environmental groups battled for three years, followed a key legal decision in a court battle between the Bush-era government and the state of Massachusetts. In that decision, the EPA was forced to agree that it was capable of regulating greenhouse gases as pollutants under the Clean Air Act, if they were found to endanger public health. Last year, that endangerment finding was filed, leaving the EPA with the option of regulating carbon dioxide.

This created a legal instrument for the Obama administration to use if other legislation designed to put a price on carbon was unsuccessful. With the failure of cap-and-trade legislation last year, that course of action looked more likely, making the endangerment finding even more of a political lynchpin.

Jackson rejected outright that the science behind the endangerment finding ruling was inconclusive. She said the agency relied on a wide range of peer-reviewed climate research beyond the IPCC report, including studies from the US National Academy of Sciences and other leading US science bodies that all show human actions are warming the planet.

"I am not here to tell your committee that greenhouse gases are not a problem," she said.

Her stance was supported by a letter circulated by Democrat representative Henry Waxman, which was written by Jackson's predecessor during the Bush administration, Stephen Johnson, which accepted greenhouse gases were responsible for rising temperatures and the EPA should act to regulate emissions.

Meanwhile, David Hawkins, director of climate programs at the Natural Resources Defense Council, explained in written testimony to the committee yesterday that the proposed legislation would go further than simply overturning the endangerment finding and blocking rules on emissions from industrial and power plants.

"The bill would also bar EPA and California, and all other states, from any role in setting standards to reduce these emissions from motor vehicles starting with the 2017 model year," he said.

California and the EPA had agreed last year to act in lockstep when it came to setting vehicle emission standards, ending a long-standing feud on the issue that began during the Bush era.

Hawkins accused the committee of toying with scientific fact. "It is extreme for this committee to vote to repeal a formal scientific finding of a threat to health and welfare, made by a duly constituted expert agency on the basis of a voluminous scientific record," he said. "If Congress has ever done this before, I am not aware of any example."

However, Republicans look set to reject the economic and scientific arguments against the bill and remain fully committed to neutering the EPA using any mechanism available.

The Energy Tax Prevention bill now sits alongside a separate bill from representative Ted Poe of Texas that would withold funds for the EPA to regulate greenhouse gases, while a Senate bill put forward by senator John Barrosso would similarly strip the EPA of its right to regulate emissions. An additional bill proposed by Democrat Jay Rockefeller that could secure some cross-party support also proposes that the EPA delay its emissions rules for two years.

In addition, Republicans yesterday set out proposals that would cut the EPA's budget by $1.6bn (£996m) and also slash the budget for high-speed rail projects by $1bn for high-speed rail – reducing spending on energy efficiency by $900m – and trim the budget for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency.

The various bills attempting to curtail the EPA's powers are likely to be blocked in the Senate, which is still controlled by the Democrats, and even if they do pass, they would almost certainly be vetoed by the president.

However, Republicans hope the all-out assault on the EPA will secure significant concessions from the administration, particularly given GOP threats that it could refuse to authorise the budget unless significant spending cuts are agreed.