Quote:
Originally Posted by Xazy
Sorry latecomer to the thread here.
So basically we make a rule, that does not really affect the businesses that much, but make us taxpayers pay more. This will enable us to create a whole new group of jobs for people to oversee it all. Now we can trade a commidity how much carbon we can emit, just amazing. Yep you can buy and trade polluting permits. Also there is a study by the EPA, that says that there will be limited energy growth, including some fo the silly stuff like farmers paying for rainforest to be saved in brasil, that works as them doing their part. Oh and a 98 page report that administration does not want us to see was suppressed, read the article about it here.
If you want to read the Carlin report that was not released here it is
Either way there are so many things in this bill including, how every new house needs to have an outlet in the garage for a hybrid. How before you sell your home a federal agent will rate your energy efficiency (This is a free service for now), etc... As I said elsewhere, good thing MJ died, so they can push this bill through under the radar. |
That the piece Carlin wrote is being called a report, and that people are saying it has been suppressed, is a joke. What he did was a literature review that the EPA decided against including in the final report. There was not one line of original research in what he submitted, he just did a lit review and forwarded it to the group that was doing the final report.
I work part time and do some consulting for a private research institution that evaluates a federal children's mental health initiative. They write congressional reports as well. Ive submitted materials to be included in the congressional report that were left out. That was to be expected, given how many research analysts are there.
In fact, it is so obvious that that is NOT a report that you can see it in the title:
"
Comments on Draft Technical Support Document for Endangerment Analysis for Greenhouse Gas Emissions under the Clean Air Act"
So the guy, who is an
economist, by the way, writes some comments on a report, the authors ignore him, and all of the sudden its "suppressing a report?"
Again, the challenge remains: find me a piece of original research that disputes global warming that is being suppressed without reason and well talk about conspiracy. Before that, open letters by theologians and comments by economists are not new and relevant research.