Headsetoptions.org Web Design, SEO, WordPress, Etcetera

If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!

 Originally posted at D.C. Watch

Supreme Court agreed will hear arguments from attorneys for the Sierra Club and the White House as to whether or not the Bush administration must regulate carbon dioxide to combat global warming. The decision means the court will address whether the administration’s decision to rely on voluntary measures to combat climate change are legal under federal clean air laws.

David Bookbinder, an attorney for the Sierra Club said “This is the whole ball of wax. This will determine whether the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is to regulate greenhouse gases from cars and whether EPA can regulate carbon dioxide from power plants.” In response, John Felmy, chief economist of the American Petroleum Institute (API) said, “Fundamentally, we don’t think carbon dioxide is a pollutant, and so we don’t think these attempts are a good idea.”

Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant, excess carbon dioxide is. It’s like drinking, when consumed in limited amount it helps your heart; when binged, it’ll hits your liver, kidney and your head. Obviously API will have issues if CO2 were labeled a pollutant, after all, their bottom line relies on sale of automobiles which fuel consumption of petroleum products.

My doubt however is not how clever the two groups lawyers are, but rather how the Supreme Court, who’s members are political appointees, would rule against the very people who put them in place (read Bush). I remember in 2001, when the Republicans were taken to the Supreme Court, they won an election with less popular votes than the Democrats. Need I say more?

Tags: Urban, News, Global Warming, EPA, Sierra Club, Oil, Bush, Hybrid, Activism, Carbon, weather, Sustainability, Environment, Economics, politics, API, greenhouse, Supreme Court