Forum Overview :: Motherfucking News
 
Re: In summary by CrackerBarrel 01/29/2003, 6:13pm PST
Mischief Maker wrote:

Lufteufel wrote:

E. L. Koba wrote:

He never really specified how he planed on cutting power plant emissions 70% over the next 15 years, now did he? Nukular is the only way I can think of


Many coal-fired plants are still completely exempt from the Clean Air Act of 1970. I haven't seen any numbers relating to total power plant emissions, but the EPA has said that bringing these plants in line with current clean air regulations would be like removing 20% of the cars on the road.


You want to know something really sick on top of that?

Those grandfathered plants are prevented from expanding without upgrading to meet modern emission standards by the "New Source Review" in the Clean Air Act. It's to keep plants that pollute at Eisenhower-era levels from expanding and spewing out even more. Guess what part of the Clean Air Act the Bush administration's been quietly pulling the teeth from this past year?

And of course the "Clear Skies Initiative" is Bullshit. All of its emission caps are weaker than the ones the original Clean Air Act would reach by the time it goes into effect.

I could go on and on...


And what's sicker still is the memory of Dick Cheney's flabby greasy face on my TV urging me that we need to burn more coal to lighten our dependance on oil. The logic there is stunning.
PREVIOUS NEXT REPLY QUOTE
 
I don't know about the rest of you... by Bodybag 01/28/2003, 10:39pm PST NEW
    Re: I don't know about the rest of you... by Senor Barborito 01/29/2003, 12:00am PST NEW
        Re: I don't know about the rest of you... by Rightbug 01/29/2003, 11:11pm PST NEW
        Re: I don't know about the rest of you... by Diotallevi 01/30/2003, 7:32pm PST NEW
    In summary by E. L. Koba 01/29/2003, 2:14am PST NEW
        Re: In summary by Senor Barborito 01/29/2003, 4:14am PST NEW
            Germany HO! by Zseni 01/29/2003, 11:24am PST NEW
            Re: In summary by E. L. Koba 01/29/2003, 11:40pm PST NEW
        Re: In summary by Jhoh Creexul 01/29/2003, 11:12am PST NEW
        Re: In summary by Lufteufel 01/29/2003, 2:30pm PST NEW
            Yeouch, thanks for that (nt) by Senor Barborito 01/29/2003, 3:02pm PST NEW
            Re: In summary by Mischief Maker 01/29/2003, 3:37pm PST NEW
                Re: In summary by CrackerBarrel 01/29/2003, 6:13pm PST NEW
            Re: In summary by creativepig 01/29/2003, 3:57pm PST NEW
        Re: In summary, W is a two-faced cocksucker. by CrackerBarrel 01/29/2003, 5:35pm PST NEW
            Re: In summary, W is a two-faced cocksucker. by Senor Barborito 01/29/2003, 5:43pm PST NEW
                Re: In summary, W is a two-faced cocksucker. by CrackerBarrel 01/29/2003, 5:55pm PST NEW
            Re: In summary, W is a two-faced cocksucker. by E. L. Koba 01/29/2003, 11:49pm PST NEW
            Re: In summary, W is a two-faced cocksucker. by veronica 01/30/2003, 2:15am PST NEW
                Re: In summary, W is a two-faced cocksucker. by Diotallevi 01/30/2003, 7:35pm PST NEW
                    Zing! well, let me explain by veronica 01/30/2003, 8:12pm PST NEW
                        What if they're layered together like shko everlasting gobstopper? -nt- by Entropy Stew 01/30/2003, 8:16pm PST NEW
            Re: In summary, W is a two-faced cocksucker. by Diotallevi 01/30/2003, 7:28pm PST NEW
                Re: In summary, W is a two-faced cocksucker. by CrackerBarrel 01/30/2003, 10:44pm PST NEW
        Re: In summary by Diotallevi 01/30/2003, 8:01pm PST NEW
            Re: In summary by CrackerBarrel 01/30/2003, 10:53pm PST NEW
 
powered by pointy