By Gregg Goodnight
The Supreme Court is required to stop the abuses of regulation due to the grave error of the 2007 ruling in Massachusetts v. EPA. This ruling is reason for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to expand a regulation that was never intended under the US Constitution or the Clean Air Act of 1970 or permitted by subsequent amendments.
For the purpose of protecting the earth from catastrophic warming, the EPA has assumed authority to regulate carbon dioxide as a greenhouse gas. The proposed regulations would control countless details about our personal and economic lives. These will include heating homes, levels and modes of travel, purchasing costs and the competitiveness of businesses. Governments are picking winners and losers between technologies, industries and companies. This in fact Expansion of government power is not found in the texts of the US Constitution or the Clean Air Act – and clearly not the intent of their authors.
Many advocates of this government’s overzealous approach have promoted the “climate change” hypothesis that global temperatures and extreme weather events are caused by man-made greenhouse gases. Full scientific scrutiny of the theory is countered with the assertion that it is “stable science”. Theorists refuse to argue or even discuss their scientific basis. In fact, the basic science is so weak that its proponents fear that their theory will not be able to survive the test.
According to data from the past 150 years – the time period for which the instrument has recorded temperatures – the earth has warmed by about one degree Celsius, the oceans have risen a modest 7 inches, and the frequency and intensity of weather events has increased. extremes do not increase. The words of the alarmists are propaganda.
Even a cursory review of the recent climate record suggests that modest and favorable trends in global temperature and weather patterns are normal and are most likely the result of natural cycles. course. Earth is nearing the end of a 12,000-year Holocene ice age, a geologically brief interval between unusual cold spells lasting thousands of years. During this time period, there were seven periods when the global average temperature was higher than today. Modern global temperatures are neither unusual nor extreme.
Our current mild warming began shortly after the end of the Little Ice Age at the end of 18order century and predated by more than 150 years any accelerated use of fossil fuels. One can recall Washington’s crisis in the Forge Valley and Napoleon’s army freezing when they returned from Moscow to get a historical perspective. Immediately after these events, the current warming cycle began and continued until a recent 20-year pause began after 1998. Increased atmospheric CO2 could not have caused this recent warming. because the effect cannot precede the cause.
Another contradictory and embarrassing fact for global alarmists is the Medieval Warm Period from AD 1000-1250, when global temperatures were higher than today. The Vikings settled Greenland and the grapes were grown in northern England. All of this at low atmospheric CO2 levels. Many alarmists have falsely asserted that the period did not exist despite thousands of contemporary accounts and overwhelming scientific evidence to the contrary.
It is clear that the extremely mild warming of the past 150 years has a significant natural component and possibly a anthropogenic (artificial) factor, but there is no scientific basis to declare a “emergency”. about climate”. However, globalists see this unproven hypothesis as a means of expanding government control, which will necessarily reduce individual liberties and hinder functioning. efficiency of the free market.
It is clear that the EPA’s claim to have jurisdiction under the Clean Air Act leads to unlawful actions. To facilitate Biden’s “War on Coal”, improper regulations are being applied in the management process including Soot Standard, Power Plant Wastewater Standard, Development Code haze emissions, and other regulations. The rules have the expected effect of shutting down many US coal-fired power plants to meet their CO2-cutting commitments under the unauthorized Paris Agreement.
It is important that the Supreme Court restricts the unwarranted extension of the Clean Air Act to the undesirable area of “climate change”. If the proponents of this ambiguity want to limit CO2 emissions, actions must be justified through proposed new laws, debated, revised and through our democratic process. .
Gregg Goodnight is a retired professional chemical engineer and a proud member of the CO2 Coalition residing in Pearland, Texas, his current interests include climate science, power grids, and public policy in energy energy.
This commentary was first published on February 24, 2022 at Real clear energy
Related
