Bob McCarty Writes

By issuing an endangerment finding on CO2 today, EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson effectively placed an economy-wide tax on energy use.  How can this be?  Because 85 percent of the U.S. economy runs on fossil fuels that emit carbon dioxide, according to a Heritage Foundation post today.

Among those issuing immediate responses to the EPA actions today was American Petroleum Institute President Jack Gerard. He said this:

Jack Gerard, API President

“This action poses a threat to every American family and business if it leads to regulation of greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act.  Such regulation would be intrusive, inefficient, and excessively costly.   It could chill job growth and delay business expansion.  The Clean Air Act was meant to control traditional air pollution, not greenhouse gases that come from every vehicle, home, factory and farm in America.  A fit-for-purpose climate law is a much preferred solution.

“There was no compelling deadline that forced EPA’s hand on this decision. It is a decision that is clearly politically motivated to coincide with the start of the Copenhagen climate summit. EPA’s finding is inadequate, unsupported by the record and fails to demonstrate a significant risk of harm to public health or welfare.

“API members are reducing greenhouse gas emissions and investing in technology to reduce them further.  Between 2000 and 2008, U.S.-based oil and natural gas companies invested $58 billion in low-carbon energy technologies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, more than either the federal government or all other U.S.-based private industry combined.”

Unfortunately, this is only the beginning folks.  Time to wake up!

* * *

UPDATE 12/07/09 AT 10:09 p.m. Central: The National Association of Manufacturers has weighed in on the matter, saying the following here:

The NAM is concerned that the EPA did not seriously take into consideration any of the thousands of comments manufacturers made on this proposal. The endangerment finding will have a cascading effect on the ability of all manufacturers to grow and prosper. By declaring GHG emissions a threat to public health and welfare through its endangerment finding, the EPA is paving the way to begin regulating carbon emissions across the board, including large stationary sources such as manufacturing plants, hospitals and libraries under the Clean Air Act.

Let me be clear: the NAM supports cost-effective efforts to address climate change but believes the appropriate authority to address this should be Congress. The EPA is moving forward with an agenda that will put additional burdens on manufacturers, cost jobs and drive up the price of energy. This finding comes when unemployment is hovering at 10 percent, and many manufacturers are struggling to stay in business. It is doubtful that this endangerment finding will achieve its stated goal, but it is certain to come at a huge cost to the economy.

Our nation needs a comprehensive federal policy that will achieve environmental results without inflicting unnecessary economic harm. This is a complex issue that deserves a rigorous, public and transparent debate in Congress.

By forcing manufacturers to meet unrealistic goals and placing burdensome costs on them, the EPA is hurting America’s competitiveness.

EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson has stated herself that she would prefer Congress address this issue; therefore, we are disappointed the EPA chose this power grab move.

We will continue to work with Congress to address this important issue and urge the EPA to think about the economic harm it is inflicting before moving forward with additional rules.