EPA on GHG

From the EPA website:

On December 7, 2009, the Administrator signed two distinct findings regarding greenhouse gases under section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act:

  • Endangerment Finding: The Administrator finds that the current and projected concentrations of the six key well-mixed greenhouse gases–carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6)–in the atmosphere threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations.
  • Cause or Contribute Finding: The Administrator finds that the combined emissions of these well-mixed greenhouse gases from new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle engines contribute to the greenhouse gas pollution which threatens public health and welfare.

EPA Climate Change Webpage

5 Responses to “EPA on GHG”

  • Tali says:

    Better late than never! :)

  • Dave Kee says:

    I have never been never been more proud of the agency where I worked for 35 years. Everyone needs to understand that if the Republicans return to power they will kill this initiative, and extreme climate change will become a certainty.

  • brad says:

    Actually I don’t know if the Republicans will or even can kill this initiative. The determination that greenhouse gases are pollutants under the Clean Air Act was made by the Supreme Court under the Bush Administration; EPA was required to determine whether GHGs were dangerous. Based on 10 years of reviewing all the evidence for and against, EPA concluded that they are indeed dangerous.

    While climate change skeptics are making the most out of the recent “Climategate” fiasco and arguing that all the data are flawed, in fact the data involved in Climategate were just one of many lines of evidence that the clmate is changing and humans are the leading cause. The scientific journal Nature, arguably the most respected and prestigious scientific publication in the world, concluded that nothing in the Climategate emails altered the basic conclusions about climate change, nor did it suggest any serious attempt to suppress findings by skeptics (the papers that Phil Jones wanted to keep out of the IPCC report actually ended up being cited in the report).

    Basically, while it’s impossible to “prove” human-induced climate change, it’s equally impossible to “disprove” it. So I think any future administration would have a very hard time building a credible case for deciding that GHGs are not actually harmful.

  • Graham says:

    Sadly, making a credible case for anything has little/nothing to do with current American politics. Still, there is hope that the EPA’s hammer will do what the Congress’ scalpel failed at; providing the legal impetus to rethink the way we use transportation and emit greenhouse gases.

  • randomray says:

    This drives me crazy . I want to say that all this pollution was really bad before it was decided that it helped cause global warming . Apparently simply poisoning people , animals , and plants wasn’t enough for a change . I don’t think that the over all gas milage for cars has gone up since the 70’s but hp has gone up 60 % . I have always driven a small car when I need to drive and ridden a bicycle when I could . sigh …

 
© 2011 EcoVelo™