Tag Archives: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)

Where Our Money Is Going

Posted on by

It would be really nice to have people in Congress who understand basic budgeting. If you have the money to buy something, it’s okay to buy it. If you don’t have the money to buy something, it isn’t okay to buy it. It’s called fiscal responsibility.

On August 5th, The Federalist posted an article detailing how some of our taxpayer money is being spent.

The article reports:

With its July 22 announcement that it is disbursing $4.3 billion in taxpayer-funded grants for an assortment of climate projects around the country, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) secured the loot for grateful recipients before President Joe Biden leaves office in January.

The money will go to 25 projects across 30 states (some will cross state borders) and will target greenhouse gas emissions from “transportation, electric power, commercial and residential buildings, industry, agriculture/natural and working lands, and waste and materials management,” the EPA said in a press release. Funds for the grants were provided from the Climate Pollution Reduction Grants Program anchored in the 2022 misnamed Inflation Reduction Act, the Biden administration’s landmark climate law.

That was the law that Joe Manchin said he would not vote for and was bribed to vote for with some concessions on fossil fuel exploration that were later reneged on.

The article lists some of the people receiving taxpayer dollars:

Among the projects receiving the federal largesse are statewide decarbonization initiatives in Pennsylvania targeting cement, asphalt, and other materials; $307 million for measures in Nebraska to promote “climate smart” practices ostensibly to reduce emissions from agriculture and waste; and an effort to install EV chargers for medium- and heavy-duty vehicles along a highway on the East Coast.

An air management district in Southern California will receive $500 million to help decarbonize the region’s transportation and freight sectors, including at the ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles. EPA’s grants to the region will provide funding for “electric charging equipment, zero-emission freight vehicles and conversion of cargo handling equipment to lower emissions.”

The article concludes:

The ruling class repeatedly claims to protect the masses from whatever “existential threat” suits their purposes. Time and again, their follies blow up — usually not in their faces, but in the faces of ordinary people who bear the brunt of their hubris. The billions EPA is spreading around will have no effect on the climate, but it will ensure more precious resources are wasted.

I agree.

Freedom’s Death Knell

Posted on by

Author: R. Alan Harrop, Ph.D

There is an old saying “Death by a thousand cuts,” which of course means slowly destroying something by small increments. Well, the Biden regime’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is at it again, diminishing your freedom one regulation at a time. They recently announced new, impossibly restrictive emission standards that will, they hope, force more people to buy electric vehicles (EVs). This, in spite of strong evidence, that less than 15% of the American people have any desire to buy an EV. Dictators do not care what you think.

What is worse, you are already paying for every EV sold in America through subsidies and other government programs and incentives. The Texas Public Policy Foundation reported that as much as $48,000 of the cost of an EV is paid by you the taxpayer spread over 10 years, not the owner. This amounts to $22 billion of your taxpayer money. This is similar to Biden’s student loan forgiveness program, which does not forgive anything; it merely passes the debt onto other taxpayers. That is how Marxism works, and how a regime stays in power, by using government actions to buy votes.

Who is buying these EVs you might ask? Well, it is primarily wealthy Democrats in blue states like California, Washington, New Jersey, etc. The ten states with the lowest EV ownership are red states. See a pattern here of the Democrats rewarding themselves?

The new unattainable emission standards are expected to result in one-third of all cars manufactured will be EVs by 2027 and two-thirds by 2032. Not only will this restrict your ability to find and purchase an internal combustion vehicle, but will dramatically raise the price due to lack of supply to meet the demand. The Biden regime is also extending these impossible emission standards to trucks, including long haul trucks. The American Trucking Association stated that the new EPA standards are “entirely unachievable.” Imagine driving across country in an 18 wheeler and having to stop every 200 miles, find a charging station, and wait several hours before you can start up again. Think what this will do to the cost of moving goods. By the way, the Biden regime’s EPA announced these new restrictions a few days after the Hertz rental company announced they were selling one-third of their Tesla EV fleet because no one wanted to rent them. They also fired the executive who was responsible for the shift to EVs.

So here is the bottom line. This country was founded on freedom and liberty. Conservatives want to preserve our county and its freedoms. Purchasing an EV should be a free choice–not a government mandate. We are in the era of “Big Government” that the Founding Fathers warned us about. Marxism is government control of all aspects of people’s lives. Restricting travel is taking away our freedom one piece at a time. It is past time for all conservatives to band together and insist that the size of the federal government be dramatically reduced. Start by eliminating the Environmental Protection Agency (Dictatorship), the Department of Education, and firing the new 85,000 IRS agents. It is now or never.

Biden Is Making You Poorer

Posted on by

Author: R. Alan Harrop, Ph.D

In a prior article I mentioned how federal government agencies are taking away your freedoms by unnecessary and tyrannical regulations. The situation is about to get much worse as revealed in a recent article in The Epoch Times, a national newspaper that I strongly recommend for truthful news.

The effort by the EPA, (Environmental Protection Agency) to outlaw gas stoves is being followed by similar proposed draconian regulations by the DOE (Department of Energy). This time it is your household appliances they are after. The regulations will require substantial increases in efficiency ratings by cutting energy and water consumption by one-third, which can only be met, according to manufacturers, by reducing the size of the units (e.g. washing machines/dryers) and adding technology that will increase the cost by an average of $200 per unit. Shortages and decreased reliability can also be expected. Like most government schemes, you pay more but get less. By the way, top loading units will no longer be available. Other items like micro-waves, water heaters, air conditioners, and etc. will be similarly impacted. Manufacturers estimate that the availability of lower cost appliances will be the most impacted.

The EPA and DOE are also teaming up to implement vehicle emission standards that gas powered vehicles will not be able to meet, resulting in increased reliance on expensive, unreliable electric vehicles. Which is, of course, exactly what the Biden administration and the environmental fanatics have always wanted. The average EV costs $20,000 more than a similarly sized gas powered vehicle without the weight carrying ability or the range. What the EV advocates who tell you that EVs can go up to 300 miles without a charge don’t tell you, is that this can only happen when there are no passengers, no luggage or air-conditioner running. Importantly, the value of an EV drops dramatically when the batteries approach the end of their life cycle since they are so expensive to replace. Get ready to have your freedom to travel greatly restricted; also where you can live.

Is this the direct result of the Biden administration? You bet it is. In December 2022, the White House bragged about creating 110 new regulations that would impact the appliance and vehicle manufacturing industries. The environmental fanatics are getting everything they want from the Biden administration, and you, the average citizen taxpayer are going to get everything you do not want. It is not enough for the Marxist Democrats to allow technology to advance and have people exercise their inherent freedom to choose what they decide to buy; they want to tell you what you shall be allowed to purchase since they know what is best. What ever happened to our property rights as guaranteed in the Constitution? Show me where the Constitution gives the federal government, control over what we purchase. They can’t, because it doesn’t.

There is a glimmer of hope. The Republican controlled U.S House of Representatives is reportedly working on a bill that would require federal agencies to have proposed regulations approved by the House prior to implementation. This is long overdue and is only likely to be enacted when Republicans control the Senate and the White House; making the elections in 2024 even more critical to our freedoms.

 

Further Attacks On Our Economy And On Our Freedom

Posted on by

On Friday, The Daily Caller reported that the California Air Resources Board (CARB) has finalized the Advanced Clean Fleet rule.

The article reports:

California regulators voted Friday morning to implement a ban on new combustion truck sales after 2036, and mandate all trucks be zero emission vehicles by 2042, significantly tightening the state’s already strict trucking emissions rules.

The California Air Resources Board (CARB) finalized the Advanced Clean Fleet rule, which would mandate that 50% of all state and local government vehicle fleet purchases be 50% zero-emissions by 2024, and 100% by 2027, and create a registry for drayage trucks. The rule — which comes one day after the board voted to implement the state’s first-ever rules to limit train emissions — would go even further than recent California rules approved by President Joe Biden’s Environmental Protection Agency, which would cut diesel truck sales in half by 2035.

The measure has received pushback from the trucking industry, which expressed concerns about electric vehicle charging infrastructure and widespread deployment, according to The Washington Post. Mike Tunnell, director of environmental affairs at the American Trucking association, told the outlet that industry actors “would rather see the technology be proven and work,” before any action was taken.

Most of us would like to see the technology proven before we move forward.

The article concludes with a reminder of past history:

Eight other states, which along with California represent 25% of the national trucking market, are poised to implement similar rules, according to the Post. Following the EPA’s approval of California’s previous rules, several experts told the Daily Caller News Foundation that California’s economic size would likely prompt truck electrification nationwide, because it would be uneconomical for truck manufacturers to manufacture two types of trucks for two different markets.

California previously implemented rules that would ban the sale of gas passenger cars in the state by 2035. One week after the rules were implemented in late August, the state warned electric vehicle owners not to charge their cars amid a significant heat wave to prevent the possibility of blackouts.

No wonder people are moving to Texas.

Keeping One Promise

Posted on by

On Wednesday, The Daily Caller reported that the Senate voted to overturn the Biden administration’s new rule on heavy-duty vehicle emissions, issued by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The vote was 50-49, with Senator Manchin voting to overturn. All other Democrats voted to keep the rule in place. (Can you tell that Senator Manchin faces a serious election challenge next year?)

The article reports:

By a vote of 50-49, the resolution to overturn the rule passed, with all Republicans and Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia voting in favor, while the remainder of Democrats and Independent Sen. Kyrsten Sinema of Arizona voted against. Its passage is a win for Senate Republicans, who were able to pass the bill largely on party lines despite Democratic control of the Senate.

Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California, 89, who is recovering from shingles in her home state and whose absence, amid her old age, has led several Democrats to call for her resignation, was not present. Had she voted “Yes,” the vote would have ended in a tie at 50-50, which could’ve been broken by Vice President Kamala Harris to prevent the resolution’s passage.

It should be noted that the bill now heads for the House of Representatives where it is likely to pass. The bill then goes to President Biden who will likely veto it. There will not be enough votes to override that veto, so essentially Senator Manchin’s vote means nothing. It this were a situation where the Democrats needed his vote (as in the Inflation Reduction Act), he would vote with the Democrats. That’s how the system works. Senator Manchin is facing a tough re-election battle, so whenever possible, he is allowed to vote as a moderate. However, when the chips are down, the Democrats can count on his vote.

The article concludes:

Manchin, who gave the GOP the single vote needed to pass the bill — which, under the Congressional Review Act to review regulations, is not subject to a Senate filibuster — said that he would be joining Republicans to “stop this government overreach,” he said in a written statement.

The resolution now heads to the House, where the Republican majority is expected to approve it. President Joe Biden is certain to veto the resolution, which would make it only the third veto of a Congressional bill during his presidency, and the rule remains in effect unless he signs the bill or it is repealed.

Learning Slowly

Posted on by

As you recall, Senator Manchin from West Virginia’s vote for the Inflation Reduction Act allowed the bill to pass. In return for his vote, Senator Manchin was promised that Biden administration would pursue energy security provisions within the legislation. Aside from the fact that it was a horrible bill, the Biden administration did not follow through on its promise (are you surprised?). Well, Senator Manchin is up for re-election in 2024 (although he has not confirmed that he is running) and he has a strong Republican opponent. We can expect to see Senator Manchin become very conservative in the next year. He will only vote with the Democrats when his vote is absolutely necessary. He will vote with Republicans when his vote doesn’t matter.

On Wednesday, Just the News reported the following:

West Virginia Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin announced Wednesday that he would lend his support to a Republican-backed effort to overturn a Biden administration rule limiting pollution from large trucks.

The Environmental Protection Agency posits that the regulations could prevent nearly 3,000 deaths through 2045 by reducing emissions of nitrogen oxides, according to The Hill. 

“The Biden Administration wants to burden the trucking industry with oppressive regulations that will increase prices by thousands of dollars and push truck drivers and small trucking companies out of business,” Manchin said, ahead of a vote on a resolution to eliminate the regulation. “When our country faces record-high inflation and vulnerable supply chains, we cannot let the EPA continue to seize unrestrained power and create regulations that devastate our economy.”

“I am proud to support this resolution to stop this government overreach,” he added.

The moderate lawmaker’s remarks follow a declaration earlier this week in which Manchin vowed to see the Inflation Reduction Act repealed if the Biden administration did not pursue energy security provisions within the legislation.

Expect more conservative words from Senator Manchin during the coming year. Don’t watch his actions too closely as they may not agree with the conservative words.

It Is Really About The Environment?

Posted on by

On Wednesday, The Daily Caller posted an article about the Biden administration’s push toward electric vehicles.

The article reports:

Chinese electric vehicle (EV) makers continue to grow faster than their European and U.S. competitors in 2023, even as the Biden administration pushes rules that could eventually end the sale of gas-powered vehicles, according to Semafor.

Chinese electric vehicle titan BYD has introduced its vehicles in Germany this year, while Chinese automakers outperformed foreign competitors in their domestic market, Semafor reported. While China continues to dominate both the supply chain for and sales of EVs, President Joe Biden’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) introduced its strictest ever proposed set of vehicle emissions rules on April 12, which the agency forecasts would lead to over two-thirds of all vehicles sold after 2032 being all-electric.

The new regulations would severely limit the sale of gas-powered vehicles, which critics allege is the administration’s first step toward a California-like ban on new gas-powered passenger cars, something that EPA Director Michael Regan denied in a statement. Myron Ebell, director of the Competitive Enterprise Institute’s Center for Energy and Environment, told the Daily Caller News Foundation at the time that the Biden administration is “trying to bend every federal rule they can find to force people into buying EVs.”Similarly, the Biden EPA previously approved a set of California regulations that experts say would effectively result in a nationwide ban on new diesel-powered truck sales by 2035, since automakers would be unlikely to sell different models in both California and nationwide markets. The California regulations would essentially act as a “backdoor … for California that sets standards for the U.S.,” Dan Kish, senior fellow at the Institute for Energy Research, told the DCNF at the time.

The article concludes:

China produced roughly 60% of rare earth minerals worldwide, and 60% of the world’s graphite supply, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA). In terms of refining, China processes 60% of all cobalt and lithium worldwide, in addition to 30% of global nickel and copper processing.

Domestically, Chinese firms gained significant ground against their foreign competitors in 2022, as Chinese consumers purchased more than 4 million all-electric vehicles in 2022, with BYD unseating German automaker Volkswagen as the nation’s top seller of EVs, according to The Wall Street Journal.

So why is the Biden administration pushing electric cars when the result of Americans buying electric cars would be to strengthen the Chinese economy and weaken the American economy? China not only has the manufacturing capability, it has the natural resources to make electric cars. Even it this is not a conscious effort to undermine the American economy, that will be the result of the administration’s push for all Americans to buy electric vehicles.

Sometimes The Contrast Is Amazing

Posted on by

On Wednesday, The Federalist noted:

According to the contemporary left, it’s “authoritarian” for local elected officials to curate school library collections but fine for a powerful centralized federal government to issue an edict compelling a major industry to produce a product and then force hundreds of millions of people to buy it.

Lately, the federal government seems to believe that it can control the tiniest details of the lives of Americans. Covid was a glaring example of this–you can’t work in certain places unless you have an untested vaccine, you can’t go to church, but you can go to a casino, children can’t attend school, etc. Well, the federal government got away with all those unconstitutional acts, so it’s going to try more. Hang on to your car–they are coming for it if it’s not electric.

The article reports:

President Biden is set to “transform” and “remake” the entire auto industry — “first with carrots, now with sticks”— notes the Washington Post, as if dictating the output of a major industry is within the governing purview of the executive branch. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing draconian emissions limits for vehicles, ensuring that 67 percent of all new passenger cars and trucks produced within nine years will be electric. This is state coercion. It is undemocratic. We are not governed; we are managed.

In fascist economies, a powerful centralized state — often led by a demagogue who plays on the nationalistic impulses of people — controls both manufacturing and commerce and dictates prices and wages for the “common good.” Any unpatriotic excessive profits are captured by the state. All economic activity must meet state approval. And crony, rent-seeking companies are willing participants. Now, I’m not saying we already live in a fascist economic state. I’m just saying the Democratic Party economic platform sounds like it wishes we were.

The article concludes:

“I want to let everybody know that this EPA is committed to protecting the health and well-being of every single person on this planet,” the EPA’s Michael Regan explained when announcing the edicts. No one is safer in an EV than a gas-powered vehicle. The authoritarian’s justification for economic control is almost always “safety.” But the entire “safety” claim is tethered to the perpetually disproven theory that our society can’t safely — and relatively cheaply — adapt to slight changes in climate. If the state can regulate “greenhouse gases” as an existential threat, it has the unfettered power to regulate virtually the entire economy. This is why politicians treat every hurricane, tornado, and flood as an apocalyptic event. But in almost every quantifiable way, the climate is less dangerous to mankind now than it has ever been. And the more they try to scare us, the less people care.

So let the Chinese communists worry about keeping their population “safe.” Let’s keep this one innovative, open, and free.

Elections matter, and the 2024 presidential election REALLY matters.

Moving Toward The Country The Founding Fathers Envisioned

Posted on by

On October 13th, CBN posted an article about an important Supreme Court decision that got lost in the chaos of the Supreme Court’s decision on abortion.

The article reports:

In the aftermath of the Supreme Court overturning Roe v Wade it was easy to miss, but the court’s ruling in West Virginia v. EPA delivered a major blow to the federal bureaucracy.

The case considered the Obama-era Clean Power Plan. President Obama couldn’t get his plan to drastically change the nation’s power grid known as “Cap and Trade” through Congress, so he famously acted on his own.

“I’ve got a pen and I’ve got a phone and I can use that pen to sign executive orders and take executive actions and administrative actions that move the ball forward,” the president said before a 2014 cabinet meeting and on a number of other occasions. 

Working through the EPA on executive authority he expanded the Clean Air Act, written in the 1960s, to reduce toxic emissions. Instead of addressing individual power plants as the law had been applied, Obama went after the entire fossil fuel industry in a way that would have transformed the U.S. power grid, and for that, the Supreme Court called a foul.

“The court said Congress has to say specifically what they want EPA to do if they’re going to do something that has such a monumental impact,” said Derrick Morgan, executive vice president of The Heritage Foundation.

He says the court’s action is significant as presidents increasingly wield their executive pens to get their agendas passed around Congress.

Essentially, this forces Congress, elected by the people, to make the laws and be held accountable for the laws they make. The President has the choice to sign or veto the laws and should also be held accountable. This may help deal with some of the garbage regulations coming out of Washington. This ruling may also serve to protect the free speech rights that many in Congress are trying to limit.

The article concludes:

Also, look for more guidance from the Supreme Court. Chad Squitieri, an expert in administrative law at The Catholic University of America, says the court seems primed to examine whether the administrative state has drifted too far from the separation of powers which is a bedrock of America’s Constitution.

“The Major Questions Doctrine which was applied in West Virginia v EPA is sort of, I like to say, scratching at the non-delegation itch. It’s not the full-fledged non-delegation doctrine, but I think it’s something of a halfway measure and I think these types of questions – looking at different ways courts may police how Congress delegates authority to the agencies – is going to be a recurring theme in the years to come,” he told CBN News.

“I think it’s because the current court is more prepared than courts in the past to enforce the original understanding of the Constitution – what we would call the original public meaning of the Constitution, particularly the separation of powers and federalism,” he continues.

It will be a relief to many Americans who want to be governed directly by the people they elect and are eager to rid themselves of what they see as a gross overreach by unelected bureaucrats.

Please follow the link to read the entire article. This is a really good decision.

Just What We Needed–Another Government Agency!

Posted on by

On Sunday, The Epoch Times reported the following:

The Biden administration on Saturday launched a new national office dubbed the “Office of Environmental Justice and External Civil Rights” charged with addressing what some officials say are the disproportionate harms inflicted on low-income areas and communities of color by pollution and climate change.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), an independent executive agency of the U.S. federal government, announced that the new office “will position the agency to better advance environmental justice, enforce civil rights laws in overburdened communities, and deliver new grants and technical assistance.”

The new office will oversee a portion of Democrats’ $60 billion investment in environmental justice initiatives created by the Inflation Reduction Act—specifically, the implementation and delivery of $3 billion in block grants to underserved communities affected by pollution.

The EPA said the new office will also “ensure EPA’s implementation of other funding programs provided by the Inflation Reduction Act [and] Bipartisan Infrastructure Law.”

Three existing EPA programs that oversee environmental justice, civil rights, and conflict prevention and resolution will be merged into the new senior-level office.

Wow! A whole agency saying that the climate is racist. Good grief!

I have a suggestion. If the summertime temperature is higher in black neighborhoods that white neighborhoods, plant trees. I am sure something could be worked out so that the city involved could afford to do that. We don’t need another government agency to do that.

Note that they are merging three current EPA programs into this new office. These programs oversee environmental justice, civil rights, conflict prevention and resolution. Let’s get something straight–if the earth burns up because of climate change (which is highly unlikely) all people will be equally impacted. The climate is not aware of anyone’s financial situation or political power. If those screaming the loudest about climate change really believed what they were saying, would they buy oceanfront estates and run around in private jets?

The article concludes:

The EPA’s definition of “environmental justice” is “the fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income, with respect to the development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and policies.”

There is no such thing as environmental justice–the government does NOT control the environment! This office will simply be a center for the redistribution of wealth, which is the ultimate goal of the Biden (Obama) administration.

Another Win For The Supreme Court

Posted on by

Does anyone remember this gem from 1975:

This is a kid-oriented explanation of how laws are supposed to be passed in America. Unfortunately, many of our laws are currently being passed by unelected bureaucrats in government agencies. These bureaucrats are not held accountable by the people because they never have to run for office. Well, on Thursday the Supreme Court took a small step to bring America back to the lawmaking procedure established by our Founding Fathers.

Red State posted an article on Thursday reporting the decision.

The article reports:

The Supreme Court sharply curtailed the power of the EPA to regulate greenhouse-gas emissions that cause climate change. In a 6-3 ruling written by Chief Justice John Roberts, the court sided with conservative states and fossil-fuel companies in adopting a narrow reading of the Clean Air Act.

The Court found that Congress had not authorized the EPA to induce a shift toward cleaner energy sources.

“Congress did not grant EPA…the authority to devise emissions caps based on the generation shifting approach the Agency took in the Clean Power Plan,” the majority wrote.
The ruling was spurred by an appeal to a decision last year that struck down a Trump-era power plant rule.

In appealing that decision, West Virginia asked the court to consider whether the EPA has the authority to try to push the entire system away from coal and reshape the country’s electric grid.

The article notes:

Justice Kagan in her dissent acted as though it was the Court’s responsibility to address climate change, rather than interpret the law and the Constitution.

Maybe she needs to go back and reread the Constitution.

If the Biden administration wants to change the source of America’s energy, they need to ask Congress to pass a bill to do that. Elected officials need to be held accountable for the laws they make. Bureaucrats are not elected and cannot be held accountable. That is why our laws are supposed to be made by Congress and not by bureaucrats.

Another Attack On The Middle Class

Posted on by

The Biden administration seems determined to wipe out the middle class in America. This may or not be on purpose, but it is definitely the result of their policies. Telling people who make $50,000 a year or less to go buy an electric car because gas is expensive is not a smart energy policy. Shutting down drilling and pipelines in America can only increase the price of gas and end our energy independence. The Biden administration energy policies are a tax on everyone and a true burden on the middle class. In an effort to improve things (or make things worse, depending on your point of view), the Biden administration has now raised the mandatory amount of biofuel, specifically ethanol, that must be blended within the U.S. gasoline supply. The 10 percent summer blend has now been raised to a year-round 15 percent.

On Monday, The Conservative Treehouse posted an article detailing some of the problems with this change. It should be noted that gas stations in areas with large boating populations sell gasoline without any ethanol. There is a reason for that–ethanol in gasoline destroys boat engines.

The article notes three issues with adding the additional ethanol:

♦ First issue. – The Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) is a government mandate, passed in 2005 and expanded in 2007, that requires growing volumes of biofuels to be blended into U.S. transportation fuels like gasoline and diesel every year.  Approximately 40 percent of corn grown in the U.S. is used for ethanol.  Raising the amount of ethanol required in gasoline will result in the need for more biofuel (corn).  With farming costs and outputs already under pressure this could be problematic.

♦ Second issue – The EPA enforces the biofuel standard by requiring refineries to submit purchase credits (known as Renewable Identification Numbers, or RINs) to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proving the purchases.  This enforcement requirement sets up a system where the RIN credits are bought and sold by small refineries who do not have the infrastructure to do the blending process.  They purchase second-hand RIN credits from parties that blended or imported biofuels directly. This sets up a secondary income stream, a trading market for the larger oil companies, refineries and importers.

♦ Third Issue – “Ethanol is a valuable source of octane in finished gasoline, but it is chemically different than petroleum gasoline and cannot be used in concentrations above 10 percent in small engines — like outboard boat motors, motorcycles, lawnmowers, generators or chain saws — or in any cars made before 2001. Complicating matters further, most cars on the road today still aren’t warrantied to run on gasoline with more than 10 percent ethanol. Retail stations also must have compatible infrastructure in order to sell gasoline with higher ethanol blends.”  This issue is known within the industry as “The Blend Wall.”

Please follow the link to the article for further details. This is not a good move for America’s middle class.

A Different Take On Electric Cars

Posted on by

On Tuesday, The Western Journal posted an article about some recent changes in electric cars to increase their range.

The article reports:

(Here at The Western Journal, we’re making sure consumers know that electric cars don’t just run on rainbows and dreams; there are serious environmental tradeoffs politicians and environmentalists haven’t fully publicized, or even considered, as they push these vehicles relentlessly on American car-buyers. We’ll keep bringing America the truth the establishment media won’t. You can help us by subscribing.)

According to a piece published Monday by the EV-centric outlet Green Car Reports, a British-based independent emissions testing firm found that particulate matter emissions from tires are 1,850 times greater under normal driving conditions than from a tailpipe of a gas-powered car.

According to the Environmental Protection Agency’s website, particulate emissions are “microscopic solids or liquid droplets that are so small that they can be inhaled and cause serious health problems.” It notes the particles “are also the main cause of reduced visibility (haze) in parts of the United States, including many of our treasured national parks and wilderness areas.”

The EPA defines particle pollution as “inhalable particles,” which are under 10 microns in diameter, and “fine inhalable particles,” 2.5 microns and smaller.

The firm that conducted the study, Emissions Analytics, had previously found in 2020 that particulate emissions from tires could be 1,000 times greater than those from tailpipes. That test was designed to capture worst-case emissions under legal driving, according to the report. But when researchers replicated the test “across a wider range of driving conditions,” they found the number was even higher.

As the cars are becoming more efficient and larger batteries added however, the tire emissions increase.

The article notes:

Furthermore, they found that adding half a metric ton (1,100 pounds) “of battery weight can result in tire emissions that are almost 400 more times greater than real-world tailpipe emissions, everything else being equal.”

The article concludes:

And then there’s the environmental damage caused by mining the minerals needed to build EV components. Or the fact that China controls most of the supply-chain access to said minerals. Or that EVs are considerably more expensive than gas-powered vehicles.

Pick your poison. Heaven knows there are plenty of them. We’ve found a new one in electric vehicles. It’s time the progressive left at least admits the truth: There is no such thing as a free lunch.

We are in search of the perpetual motion machine. At some point we may actually come close, but the laws of physics are definitely working against us.

Misusing Funds? Again?

Posted on by

On April 20th, Fox News reported that much of the money Congress appropriated to meet the Covid-19 crisis was actually spent on other things:

The article reports:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is accepting new applications for grants funded by President Biden’s $1.9 trillion COVID-19 relief package passed in 2021, but last year’s awards funded some projects that had virtually little to do with addressing the impact of the pandemic.

The EPA’s Environmental Justice Small Grants Program recently announced it is using $1.6 million of American Rescue Plan funds to award grants to “federally recognized tribal governments to establish or modify public participation programs where fair treatment and meaningful participation priorities have been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic.” 

Approximately 16 to 20 grants of up to $100,000 will be awarded for each project, the EPA announced March 21.

Last year under the same program, 99 organizations nationwide were selected to receive awards totaling approximately $7.4 million in grant funding, which included $5.25 million allocated from the American Rescue Plan and $2.15 million from what the EPA describes as its “baseline [Environmental Justice] appropriation.” Those grants were for up to $75,000 for each project that addressed “health outcome disparities from pollution and the COVID–19 pandemic,” the EPA said at the time.

A review of the 2021 awards, however, shows that the program funded grants for some projects that had virtually little to do with addressing COVID-19 or the effects of the pandemic.

Basically, business friends of the Biden’s got lots of money and average Americans got inflation.

The article lists some of the ways the funds were used:

Clean Air Carolina, based in Charlotte, North Carolina, received a grant for a project to install a public Level 2 EV charging station and to create an educational video as a way for “community members to get involved to mitigate air pollution.”

Roanoke Economic Development Inc, based in Rich Square, North Carolina, received a grant to “address air pollution and climate change through the development of a regional electric vehicle charger installation plan to promote EV use and accessibility by minority and low-income populations.”

An EPA spokesperson said in a statement provided to Fox News Digital that the American Rescue Plan funds provided for the program “allows communities to implement solutions that can improve conditions related to COVID-19 such as air quality issues.”

“These projects all went through a rigorous scoring and approval process to ensure project activities and goals align with our statutory authorities and the language and intent of ARP,” the spokesperson said.

The spokesperson said the 2022 call for grant applications from federally recognized tribes “is utilizing the EJ Small Grants Program to efficiently facilitate distribution of funds to federally recognized tribal governments in line with the ARP statutory requirements, but does not affect any past or upcoming funding opportunities for the program.”

The article concludes:

Daren Bakst, an energy expert at the Heritage Foundation, slammed the Biden administration for using taxpayer money to fund environmental “extremism.”

“COVID-19 relief money shouldn’t be some cover for the Biden administration to use taxpayer dollars to fund its far-left agenda and to indoctrinate people in environmental extremism,” Bakst told Fox News Digital. “But that appears to be happening at the EPA. Taking community tree walks, teaching people how to prevent future marine debris, and similar funded projects have nothing to do with the pandemic.”

“Americans are being crushed by inflation rates not seen in over 40 years, thanks in large part to out-of-control federal spending,” he added. “If the Biden administration is genuinely concerned about low-income communities, it would stop its excessive spending, war on energy, and general regulatory avalanche that is hitting Americans hard — especially low-income communities — through skyrocketing prices.”

Evidently excessive government spending on environmental issues has a positive impact on Covid. Who knew?

Sometimes You Just Have To Do The Practical Thing

Posted on by

On Wednesday, NewsMax reported that the United States Post Service (USPS) will be replacing its mail trucks with a large percentage of gasoline-powered mail trucks. The Biden administration had been pressuring the USPS to replace its aging fleet with electric trucks.

The article reports:

The U.S. Postal Service will start replacing its aging mail trucks with nearly all gasoline-powered vehicles built by Oshkosh Corp., despite pressure from the Biden administration to increase electric vehicle purchases.

The agency said Wednesday it cleared the final regulatory hurdle to placing orders for next-generation mail vehicles — and getting some of them on delivery routes next year — despite pushback from the Environmental Protection Agency.

The decision allows the Postal Service to proceed with placing the first order that will include at least 5,000 electric-powered vehicles, along with an undetermined number of gas-powered vehicles, Postal Service spokesperson Kim Frum said.

The article notes:

The USPS will get 165,000 new trucks over the next 10 years, with as much as 90% of the replacement vehicles powered by gasoline instead of electric-battery power.

Resisting pressure from Biden administration officials to increase electric vehicle purchases beyond its planned 10% baseline, the USPS rejected a bid from electric-vehicle manufacturer Workhorse Group Inc., and instead awarded the multibillion contract to Wisconsin military truck maker Oshkosh Corp.

“As we have reiterated throughout this process, our commitment to an electric fleet remains ambitious given the pressing vehicle and safety needs of our aging fleet as well as our fragile financial condition,” USPS Chief Executive Officer Louis DeJoy said in a statement. 

“As our financial position improves with the ongoing implementation of our 10-year plan, we will continue to pursue the acquisition of additional BEV [battery electric vehicles] as additional funding — from either internal or congressional sources — becomes available.”

The article concludes:

While the contract calls for at least 10% of the trucks to be electric vehicles, the agency has indicated its willingness to accelerate a transition to electric if it can be done in a way that is not “financially detrimental.”

Bloomberg reports that the USPS is unlikely to have the last word on the matter, however. Environmental groups are preparing to immediately challenge the move in federal court.

The Biden administration has limited authority over the Postal Service, but federal courts have determined that the USPS is still required to abide by the National Environmental Policy Act, which mandates analysis of major policy decisions. Government leases sold to private companies have previously been invalidated by federal courts in the absence of that analysis.

The USPS “is playing a very high-stakes game” by “going against what the law requires,” Adrian Martinez, an attorney with the environmental group Earthjustice, told Bloomberg prior to the announcement.

The lawsuits will simply force the financially struggling USPS to spend money defending itself. In the end, the financially struggling USPS will spend a large amount of money simply defending a practical decision.

Everyone Wants To Be Involved

Posted on by

Breitbart posted an article today about comments made by Erin Brockovich about one of the people who will be involved in the Biden administration if the Biden administration becomes a reality.

The article reports:

Environmental activist and media personality Erin Brockovich is slamming former Vice President Joe Biden’s pick of former DuPont official Michael McCabe to be on a transition team at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

Brockovich penned a commentary for the Guardian about Biden’s pick if he should become president, entitled “Dear Joe Biden: Are You Kidding Me?”

This is an excerpt from the commentary:

Michael McCabe, a former employee of Biden and a former deputy Environmental Protection Agency administrator, later jumped ship to work as a consultant on communication strategy for DuPont during a time when the chemical company was looking to fight regulations of their star chemical perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) also known as C8. The toxic manmade chemical is used in everything from waterproof clothes, stain-resistant textiles and food packaging to non-stick pans. The compound has been linked to lowered fertility, cancer and liver damage. The Guardian reported this week that Harvard school of public health professor Philippe Grandjean, who studies environmental health, warns that PFAS chemicals, of which PFOA is one, might reduce the efficacy of a Covid-19 [Chinese coronavirus] vaccine.

It should go without saying that someone who advised DuPont on how to avoid regulations is not someone we want advising this new administration.

McCabe started managing DuPont’s communications with the EPA about the toxic chemical in 2003, according to an article in the Intercept. This was the time in which DuPont faced a barrage of litigation after the company dumped 7,100 tons of PFOA-filled waste in West Virginia, which made its way into the drinking water of 100,000 people. Countless members of the community faced debilitating illnesses as a result. The legal battle with the company was turned into the film Dark Waters in 2019.

Those who voted for Joe Biden thinking he was not in the pocket of corporate interests or that he had enough mental acuity to avoid putting people who might bring special interests to the cabinet may discover that they made a serious error in judgement.

Undoing The Economic Damage Done By The Obama Administration

Posted on by

Yesterday Fox News posted an article detailing some of the damage the environmental policies of the Obama Administration did to rural America. The article reminds us that President Trump and Scott Pruitt have ended the Waters Of The United States (WOTUS)  which attempted to give the government control over any mud puddle that appeared in your yard during heavy rains.

The article reports:

The far left will stop at nothing in their efforts to derail the presidency of Donald Trump. Still bitter about the outcome of 2016, the left claims much of their outrage toward the president is driven by his unpredictable personality, but ideological opposition to his administration’s reform-minded agenda is the real root of their anger.

Nowhere is this more evident than the furor surrounding Scott Pruitt, the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).  Trump’s opponents have seized on a number of recent unflattering news stories involving Pruitt and his agency. While admittedly not the best public relations for Pruitt, his “real sin is that he is one of Mr. Trump’s most aggressive reformers,” as the Wall Street Journal editorialized last week. President Trump expressed a similar sentiment over the weekend when he tweeted praise for his EPA chief’s “bold actions” and “record clean Air & Water while saving USA Billions of Dollars.”

Since taking office last year, Pruitt has boldly carried out the president’s campaign promises. In October, he moved to repeal Obama’s Clean Power Plan regulations, ending the War On Coal and providing a shot in the arm for coal country that had been decimated.

The article points out the double standard in the attacks on Scott Pruitt:

Pruitt’s “scandals” are exaggerated for political expediency: never mind that the Obama EPA spent just as much, if not more, than Pruitt’s team, according to a recent Fox News report.  Or that Lisa Jackson, Obama’s EPA chief, was caught using the email alias “Richard Windsor” to communicate with people outside the government. Or that one Obama-era EPA employee was caught downloading and watching pornography on the job. These issues prompted no outrage from Hill offices, and one questions if Congressional inquiry could possibly be politically motivated, or if left-wing outrage is a one-way street.

The article concludes:

Our message to Administrator Pruitt: American energy workers who are going back to work thank you. The American economy thanks you. And please remember these wise words: if you want a friend in Washington, get a dog.

The political left has become something of a joke with their attacks on the Trump Administration. Meanwhile, President Trump has boosted the economy, put people back to work, and continues to accomplish good things. It would be nice to see those in Washington support America rather than their own political interests.