Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) yesterday introduced a bipartisan disapproval resolution to prevent the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from regulating greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) under the Clean Air Act.

Calling the proposed regulations an "economic train wreck," she told the Senate:

"...I continue to believe that this command-and-control approach is our worst option for reducing the emissions blamed for climate change. The Clean Air Act was written for Congress to regulate criteria pollutants, not greenhouse gases, and its implementation remains subject to oversight and guidance from elected representatives."

Murkowski said EPA's GHG regulations could close businesses, lay off workers, restrict U.S. energy production, make housing less affordable and raise the price of consumer... more »

Here's an excellent example of how duplicative regulations can cause problems for the economy and American consumers. At issue is the EPA's new authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) under the Clean Air Act.

In March, EPA is expected to finalize a rule that will expand the reach of the Clean Air Act to cover any facility that emits GHGs, which EPA estimates at six million. EPA also will attempt to delay its enforcement on "small emitters" (up to 250 tons per year) for five years.

Although EPA says its new rules should protect small businesses from requirements under the Clean Air Act, laws in about 40 states require small businesses to comply.

As a result, millions of small and large businesses could be surprised to learn that they have to obtain Clean Air Act operating perm... more »

With the unemployment rate standing at 10 percent, concerns about the economy are trumping support for climate legislation. News reports from around the country indicate a growing unease with legislation or regulations that are aimed at reducing greenhouse gas (GHGs) emissions due to their potential impact on jobs.

The Wall Street Journal today reports that several states are urging the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to "go slowly" in promulgating new climate rules. South Carolina, for example, sent a letter to the EPA on Dec. 23, saying "the proposal will cause chaos and warned that many construction projects--and jobs--are at risk," the Journal reports.

Similarly, members of Congress are concerned about EPA's plans to regulate GHGs. The Associated Press reports that Rep. Earl Pome... more »

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) today proposed to tighten U.S. ground-level ozone standards to protect people as well as plants. Under the new guidelines, the "primary" standard aimed at protecting public health would be reduced to 0.060 and 0.070 parts per million (ppm) measured over eight hours from the 0.075 ppm level set in March 2008.

API reacted swiftly in a statement:

"The action lacks scientific justification. EPA acknowledges the newer studies on ozone do not materially change any of the broad scientific conclusions regarding the health effects of exposure. Given that conclusion, there is absolutely no basis for EPA to propose changing the ozone standards promulgated by the EPA Administrator in 2008. To do so is an obvious politicization of the air quality standard setti... more »

In a move that should raise eyebrows across the country, the Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM) last week agreed to adopt a low-carbon fuel standard (LCFS) to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from vehicles and possibly from home heating-oil furnaces. Although on the surface this agreement might sound environmentally friendly, it's likely to do more harm than good.

Today's cars and trucks are designed to make the best use of carbon. In the internal combustion engine, gasoline is mixed with oxygen and subjected to a spark to create the chemical reaction that powers your car. The hydrocarbon molecules in the gasoline split apart releasing energy.

Hydrogen atoms combine with oxygen to form water vapor, and carbon atoms combine with oxygen to create carbon dioxid... more »