Share this Post:

unEARTHED. The Earthjustice Blog

EPA's Jackson: Senate Face Off with Climate Change Skeptics

    SIGN-UP for our latest news and action alerts:
   Please leave this field empty

Facebook Fans

Related Blog Entries

by Liz Judge:

Today, a U.S. Supreme Court ruling once again affirmed the Environmental Protection Agency as the most rightful and authorized regulator of clima...

by Liz Judge:
Cleaning Up Biggest Polluters - Will Congress Have Our Backs?

As I write this, the Senate is debating an amendment to a small business bill that would block the Environmental Protection Agency from setting limits...

by Liz Judge:
The New Majority: We Can't Go Backwards Fast Enough!

"Doh!" should be the motto of the new majority in the House, but here's one from House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) that might work as well: "The ...

Earthjustice on Twitter

View Liz Judge's blog posts
23 February 2010, 2:44 PM
The drama comes to a boil in Congress this week
EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson

Today, EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson came out swinging in EPA's battle to defend its December 2009 endangerment finding against the likes of Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Alaska's oil- and coal-embedded senator, and Jim Inhofe (R-OK), Congress' most notorious climate change denier.

The showdown took place in Jackson's testimony before the Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee on EPA's 2011 budget proposal, which includes funds—chump change in relation to the agency's overall budget—to implement the endangerment finding.

In her opening remarks at today's hearing, EPW committee chair Barbara Boxer drove home just how behind the United States is on climate change legislation. "While the whole world is going green, the one place we can't seem to address climate change legislation is the Senate."

Even more potent were Bernie Sanders' comments on the validity of the science used to inform the EPA finding, a 200-page synthesis of major scientific assessments by all the leading U.S. scientific agencies:

I find it incredible, I really do, that in the year 2010, on this committee, people are saying there is a doubt about global warming. There is no doubt about global warming. The scientific community is almost overwhelmingly united in saying that global warming is real ... It is dangerous to reject science.

Then he got serious and cut directly to the heart of the issue, calling out opponents of the finding for being in bed with special interests:

If you want to protect the oil interests, get up there and say you are protecting oil interests. If you want to protect coal, protect coal; that's not a problem. We understand that a lot of campaign contributions are coming to you, fine. But let's not argue about what the overwhelming majority of scientists in this country agree on. And let us move forward to a clean-energy future.

And while Inhofe continued to make his predictable noise about climate change today, Murkowski still remains the loudest voice behind efforts tear down the finding and cut the agency off at its knees in its attempt to make good on the Massachusetts v. EPA Supreme Court ruling (which determined that greenhouses gases should and need to be regulated under the Clean Air Act—read more about Earthjustice's victory and role in this landmark case). 

Murkowski's efforts to nullify the endangerment finding and undermine the EPA's ability to enforce the Clean Air Act caught national attention last month when The Washington Post uncovered her allegiances to big-polluter industries, two of whose lobbyists were identified as ghost authors in her official Senate protest of the EPA finding. Read more about the WaPo's investigation here and here.

And as data from the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics reveals, Murkowski is not only the Senate's leading opponent of the EPA's regulation of greenhouse gases but also the Congress's top recipient of campaign funds from electric utilities. Coincidence? You'd have to be crazy to think so.

Next in this unfolding drama is Jackson's testimony tomorrow before the House Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies. Expect Republican opponents to grill Jackson, as they did today. And as she did in today's testimony and in the letter she wrote yesterday to several coal-state senators who had questions about the finding, expect her to come out strong and yet again give Congress a slew of compelling reasons (and then some more) to rally against Murkowski's obstructionist efforts when it comes to a vote in March.

And then what? Keep your eye out for the Murkowski Dirty Air Act vote when it comes to the Senate (a date TBD in March; we'll keep you informed on the play-by-play and vote date), and if you want to really make a difference yourself, take just one minute now to tell your Senator to oppose Murkowski's attacks and support the Clean Air Act. If enough of us speak up, they will hear us, and they will have no choice but to act in the best interest of this country and its future.

This committee provides expertise and resources to assist CNRG with branding, public relations and marketing initiatives and strategies in support of CNRG's strategic plan. The membership is comprised of Board and non-Board members with marketing and communications experience. boots side zip

Very informative and trustworthy blog. Please keep updating with great posts like this one. I have booked marked your site and am about to email it to a few friends of mine that I know would enjoy reading

" There is no doubt about global warming. The scientific community is almost overwhelmingly united in saying that global warming is real ..."

Oops.. I'm sorry to say this, but I think everyone kind of knows for sure that

it's not true!!!!
Quote from this URL:
" Unequivocal." That's quite a claim in this skeptical era, so it's been enlightening to watch the unraveling of the absolute certainty of global warming caused by man. Now even authors of the 2007 United Nations report that "warming of the climate system is unequivocal" have backed off its key assumptions and dire warnings. "

Do not worry about climate change. We can stop climate change. We can remeady.
Most of people believe climate change are very complex, and no single technology or strategy that will solve the problem of climate change.
But It is a misunderstand. Current environmental technology are wrong and bad. The basic priciple are wrong.
If we change the wrong method, We can slove climate change, water pollution, energy etc.

manure, humic acid(water pollutant, air pollutant, soil pollutants) + O2 (with electric energy) + bacteria=
1. GHG emitted(CO2, CH4, votalic organic matter, NO3 NH3, H2
2. sludge may digest with CH4 and CO2
3. remaing pollutant may water pollution source
4. emitted GHG may be comeback with rain
It make environmental crisis only

My new method
manure, humic acid(water pollutant, air pollutant, soil pollutants) + CO2(GHG) + algae+catalyst+ sun energy= clean air+clean water + biomass

Waste water treatment is an ongoing process driven by necessity. However, current treatment process requires significant energy use accounting for approximately three percent of all electricity usage in the US. Many practical design and operating decisions on waste water treatment plants can have significant impacts on the overall environmental performance, in particular the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The main factor in this regard is the use of aerobic or anaerobic treatment technology. Current waste water treatment adapt the mineralization. But mineralization are wrong concept. Few organic substance becomes impregnated by inorganic substances. The two manures had the highest average mineralization rates of approximately 60 percent. The aerobically treated product from Birch Bay and the lime-stabilized aerobically treated product from Brewster were next highest, ranging between 49 and 55 percent( CHARLES L. HENRY et al.1996). So current waste water treatment method are incompatible.
It also creates sludge (biosolids) and greenhouse gas emissions (VOC, CH4, CO2, NOX, etc.). The biosolids are reused as compost and fertilizers creating more greenhouse gases. These gases emitted in atmosphere returns to land and water stream in rainfall. Some pollutants that are not emitted remain in water even after treatment. This small amount of untreated pollutants is delivered straight to our home through tap water. So, the current process does not completely eliminate pollutants, and it creates dangerous greenhouse gas emissions that drives global warming. Global warming is one of the most deteriorating factors to the earth, and it poses threat to livelihood of human being in the future.

The end products of compost are composed of humus, humic acid and fulvic acid. The current activated sludge process is unable to degrade these end products. These are emitted to air using aeration process that requires significant energy use. So, there is still a need to change the current process to reduce energy use and greenhouse gas emissions and reverse the global warming trend.

There is one way. This new approach provides the solution by cultivating algae and diatom. These plants absorb all the organic matters and minerals (NO3, NH4, PO4, SO4, etc.) during photosynthesis. Significant amounts of CO2 is consumed, removing them from the air. Not only does this process removes CO2 from air, it does not emit any greenhouse gases. So, using natural sunlight, this method provides clean air and clean water. Growth of algae is considered the most efficient method of converting solar energy into organic matter. The biomass produced can be used directly as a solid fuel, or the oil extracted and refined into liquid oil or gasoline. The growth of the algae depends upon the removal of carbon from its environment. By applying this method to waste water treatment for human, animal and industrial wastes, significant amount of greenhouse gases will stop emit into air and removed from it. Therefore, it will remove more than what is and has already emitted in the air and reverse the global warming.

A new research that applies this method to auto gas emissisions is currently undergoing. The potential to remove greenhouse gases from the air is unlimited.

Please refer to our US Patents for more information:United States Patent 7297273

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <p> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <blockquote>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

Type the characters you see in this picture. (verify using audio)
Type the characters you see in the picture above; if you can't read them, submit the form and a new image will be generated. Not case sensitive.