November 30, 2006
Why does Attorney General Greg Abbott want to flood Houston?
The State of Texas filed an amicus curiae brief with the Supreme Court ostensibly on behalf of the EPA but really for TXU and other companies here that SPEW CO2 into the atmosphere. The case isn't about if CO2 contributes to global warming (despite what Myron says, we already know that it does), it's about whether or not the EPA should be regulating CO2 output as well as other carbon emissions. Basically, the entire case involves whether we can consider carbon a pollutant, which the EPA would then be obligated to control.
This is the dumbest goddamn thing I think I've heard since the TEC's decision on Monday to allow public officials to call a 'bucket of cash' merely a 'bucket'. Here, SC and Attorney General Greg Abbott, let me help you to understand. Arsenic occurs in nature. HOWEVER, when it's concentrated too much, it becomes a POISON. CO2, when there is too much of it in the atmosphere (like that produced, oh, I don't know, BY COAL FIRED POWER PLANTS), is a poison as well. Of course, before it reaches poisonous levels, it will already have allowed the atmosphere to heat up to such an extent that human life will be unsustainable. Even for you, Attorney General Greg Abbott and there won't be anyone left for you to sue.
The facet about this that really irritates me? Attorney General Greg Abbott did this all himself, with no input from TCEQ.
But in Texas, where the state climatologist says global warming is a pressing concern and scientists say the Gulf Coast could be flooded within the century, the attorney general has joined a smaller coalition of states that sides with the EPA, which says the gas is not a dangerous air pollutant.The Texas attorney general's office did not even consult the state's environmental agency before signing onto the legal brief submitted to the high court, according to one of the agency's commissioners.
"The State of Texas' intervention in this case wasn't derived from any formal request" from the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, said Larry Soward, one of three members of the commission. "This agency did not ask the attorney general to intervene in the lawsuit on our behalf, nor have we been involved.
"It's routine or common course for the agency with regulatory authority to be integrally involved. And that hasn't been the case."
The balls on this cocksucker, no? He doesn't know a damn thing about the environment, other than that sometimes trees fall, yet he thinks EPA shouldn't be regulating carbon emissions?
Posted by mcblogger at November 30, 2006 09:20 AM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.mcblogger.com/movabletype/mt-tb.cgi/1204
Comments
Post a comment
Thanks for signing in, . Now you can comment. (sign out)
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)
