|
|
Tuesday, April 3, 2007
|
|
| |
unbossed: "In its Massachusetts vs. EPA ruling issued yesterday, the Supreme Court found that the Clean Air Act does, in fact authorize EPA to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from vehicles. The ruling states: 'While the Congresses that drafted §202(a)(1) might not have appreciated the possibility that burning fossil fuels could lead to global warming, they did understand that without regulatory flexibility, changing circumstances and scientific developments would soon render the Clean Air Act obsolete. The broad language of §202(a)(1) reflects an intentional effort to confer forestall such obsolescence.' The majority opinion (PDF), authored by Justice Stevens, conveyed that the five justices were unimpressed by the administration's excuses for why EPA shouldn't be regulating these emissions (or why the court shouldn't be deciding whether it could)."
Blogs for Bush: "While there are some who state that CO2 cannot be considered a pollutant, since it is a compound necessary for the cycle of life itself, the bigger picture demands an answer as to why SCOTUS has inserted itself in a debate that is clearly extra-Constitutional in scope. Secondly, to whom is the EPA, a governmental agency, but not a branch of government, accountable? Thirdly, where is the check and balance against SCOTUS in this matter, in which they have clearly overstepped their bounds in the balance of power in extra-Constitutional areas of policy that clearly belong to the purview of the Representative (Executive and Legislative) branches of government? Also, has SCOTUS, via their ruling, created another branch of government, unaccountable to the governed?"
Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi (via The Gavel): "The Bush Administration is becoming increasingly isolated in its refusal to take action to prevent global warming. The scientific consensus on global warming is rock solid. The House and Senate are moving ahead. The Administration insisted that the Environmental Protection Agency's hands were tied, but the Supreme Court today debunked that argument. It's time for the Administration to join the search for solutions to climate change.
"Regarding pollutants from power plants and factories, the Administration has used the regulatory process as a backdoor way to rewrite clean air laws so that the President's corporate allies don't have to upgrade their air pollution controls when they upgrade their plants. The Supreme Court put a stop to this practice today. We will all breathe more freely -- literally -- as a result."
Category: 2008 Presidential Election
6:28:20 AM 
|
|
The Pueblo Chieftain keeps driving the conversation around the Aurora Long-Term Contract with the Bureau of Reclamation. Here's an article about opposition from the Lower Arkansas Water Conservancy District. From the article, "A long-term federal water storage and exchange contract with Aurora fails to mention protection of the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project or the needs of the Arkansas Valley as a purpose or need. The Bureau of Reclamation says the environmental assessment sufficiently covers protection of the Fry-Ark Project in the details of the study. The chairman of the Lower Arkansas Valley Water Conservancy District disagrees, however, and says a full environmental impact statement is needed. 'It's the obligation of the bureau to fulfill the purpose and need of the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project, which was to benefit the people of the Arkansas Valley,' John Singletary said Monday. 'Obviously, when you have a river that is 200 percent overappropriated, I have difficulty finding their conclusion acceptable.'[...]
"A final draft of the proposed contract is available for public comment until June 4. The purpose and need of the environmental assessment was written by the bureau based on Aurora's proposal, said Kara Lamb, a spokeswoman for the bureau. 'Yes, it reflects what Aurora was requesting,' Lamb said. 'We studied what they were requesting as compared to what would happen were they not to make that request.' The bureau's environmental report says the purpose and need for the action is to allow Aurora to more efficiently move water from the Arkansas to the South Platte basin for present needs and future growth. It does not mention any benefits to the Fryingpan-Arkansas Project or to the Arkansas River basin...
"'Something's wrong with the study,' Singletary said. 'Somebody walked through it with a white cane, because if you drive through the valley, you can see what's happened.' Aurora should have realized the risks and expense of moving the water it purchased on the Rocky Ford Ditch and Colorado Canal beginning in the 1980s, Singletary said. 'I've always told Aurora it's not our job to help them move the water out of the valley,' Singletary said. 'It's not the bureau's job, either.'"
Category: Colorado Water
5:53:06 AM
|
|
Here's a short article about noctilucent clouds from the Denver Post. From the article, "Since their discovery 120 years ago, strangely luminescent clouds called noctilucent clouds have been creeping slowly toward the equator.
Once confined to Earth's poles, the bizarre clouds have now been spotted above central Colorado, and they appear to be getting brighter and more numerous, too, said David Rusch, a University of Colorado atmospheric scientist. This month, NASA plans to launch the $110 million AIM (Aeronomy of Ice in the Mesosphere) mission to measure noctilucent clouds and the circumstances in which they form - which may be linked to climate change. The satellite will measure air temperature and pressure, moisture content and cloud dimensions. Researchers at the University of Colorado at Boulder will control the satellite, process data and try to understand what some call the planet's most mysterious clouds.
"Noctilucent clouds appear only at night, when their altitude - 50 miles up in the atmosphere - lets them catch sunlight no longer visible from Earth's surface, said James Russell, an atmospheric scientist at Hampton University in Virginia, the NASA mission's principal investigator. That makes noctilucent - 'night-shining' - clouds appear almost iridescent, he said. Most normal clouds are less than 10 miles up...
"Researchers have many ideas about why noctilucent clouds may be growing in number and brightness, and most of them are related to global warming. The greenhouse gas carbon dioxide, which warms Earth's surface, paradoxically cools the upper atmosphere, CU's Rusch said. Noctilucent clouds - which are made of ice crystals, not water droplets - need very cold temperatures to form, he said. In the atmosphere's coldest reaches, there's very little water vapor, a key ingredient for cloud formation, Rusch said. Observed increases in water vapor in the atmosphere - a consequence of warming - may also make it easier for the clouds to form, he said. Methane, another powerful greenhouse gas, may also be involved, said Scott Bailey, an engineering professor at Virginia Tech in Blacksburg, Va. Methane's presence can increase the amount of water in the upper atmosphere, through a complicated chemical dance."
Category: 2008 Presidential Election
5:41:49 AM
|
|
|
|
© Copyright
2007
John Orr.
Last update:
5/1/07; 9:42:49 AM.
|
|
|
