Posted by Warren Beatty on 14 January, 2012 at 8:00 am. 23 comments already!


President Barack Hussein Obama, on January 10, 2012, made a speech to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) personnel praising their efforts. Obama said that EPA regulations are good for the economy and create jobs and that the agency “touches” the lives of every American every day. He actually said that! Obama told EPA employees, “We can make sure that we are doing right by our environment and, in fact, putting people back to work all across America.”

Really? Well, here are some (but certainly not all) EPA regulations and what the EPA is doing:

  • Biofuels – the Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) was enacted in 2007 with the goal of reducing America’s dependence on foreign oil. Fuel companies, by 2011, were to be blending in 6.6 million gallons of cellulosic biofuel into domestic gasoline and diesel. But there is one small problem with EISA: biofuel technology has not caught up to EPA requirements. Cellulosic biofuels only exist in small amounts as various research companies desperately try to come up with a way to produce the biofuel which doesn’t require massive government subsidies. But did that one little problem stop the EPA? To quote the late John Belushi, “Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooo.” With no economically viable supply of cellulosic biofuel to be had, the fuel companies were unable to comply with EISA requirements. The EPA is planing to impose fines on the fuel companies for failing to meet EISA guidelines.
  • Energy Production – EPA administrator Lisa Jackson said, ” “We have no data right now that lead us to believe one way or the other that there needs to be specific federal regulation of the fracking process.”    [emphasis mine]   But did that little fact stop the EPA from pursuing its agenda? Noooooooooooooooooooooooo. While charging fracking drillers with contaminating groundwater, the EPA suppressed information about the fact that well water in Pavillion, WY, had been “contaminated” with polluting chemical never used in fracking. The EPA issued a draft report in early December, 2011, alleging that fracking may have been responsible for drinking-water pollution in Pavillion, WY, thus causing a “chilling” effect on the development on a source of domestic energy. This practice of issuing draft reports before scientific analysis has been completed is a violation of the constitutional rights of citizens, and a corporation is a citizen. Once a company’s reputation has been damaged as a result of false or incomplete reports receiving extensive national media coverage, that company and its investors have suffered irreparable harm.
  • Mercury Elimination – While the EPA recently issued new regulations to reduce mercury emitted be electric power plants (that will increase electricity prices), it chooses to ignore three inconvenient facts:
    1. EPA studies indicate that power plants emit an estimated 41-48 tons of mercury per year. Yet volcanoes, subsea vents, geysers, and other sources emit 9,000-10,000 tons per year! US power plants account for less than 0.5 percent of all the mercury in the air Americans breathe. The EPA demands that utility companies spend billions every year retrofitting coal-fired power plants that produce half of all US electricity.
    2. The EPA based its “safe for humans” mercury criteria on a study of Faroe Islands inhabitants, whose diet is quite different from our own. They eat few fruits and vegetables, but do eat pilot whale meat and blubber that is laced with mercury. Their diet is very low in selenium, a natural defense against mercury.
    3. the EPA is actively downplaying mercury’s health risks when it comes from broken compact fluorescent lights (CFLs) inside homes. In a pamphlet extolling the virtues of CFLs, the EPA says it’s a “myth” that the mercury used in compact fluorescent lights is “dangerous in your home.”

To be “fair and balanced,” I have to cite the ONE regulation that Obama overruled: he directed the EPA to withdraw the proposed regulation to reduce concentrations of ground-level ozone.

So Obama praises the efforts of the EPA. Can we then safely assume that he favors EPA regulations and we will see more of them? After all, for the most part, the EPA has been his lap dog and does his bidding.

But that’s just my opinion.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x