Skip to main content

View Diary: Huge: SCOTUS upholds EPA efforts to regulate greenhouse gases (131 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  SO2 vs CO2 (9+ / 0-)

    Whilst I certainly hope this bodes well for the ability of the EPA to regulate suicidal emissions like CO2, I would like to point out that SO2 is both a greenhouse gas and individually immediately toxic to humans.

    It might be a tougher sell to get the more scientifically illiterate members of the court to understand the greater long-term threat of less toxic CO2.

    •  Actually they already ruled on that (5+ / 0-)

      In Massachusetts v EPA.  Basically, the clean site act authorizes the EPA to regulate GHGs.  SO2 has been regulated under the CAA for years though

      Hay hombres que luchan un dia, y son buenos Hay otros que luchan un año, y son mejores Hay quienes luchan muchos años, y son muy buenos. Pero hay los que luchan toda la vida. Esos son los imprescendibles.

      by Mindful Nature on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 05:38:19 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  To be fair, those levels are very low (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      BoxNDox, eyesoars

      There are no measurable health effects of SO2 exposures at twice the NAAQS. As for the greenhouse gas effects, it's not entirely clear. Yes the ground-level ozone and particulate matter emissions are raising temperatures, but the sulfate particles  higher-level atmosphere is believed to be reflecting some sunlight and actually holding down temperatures below what would be expected given the warming potential of other greenhouse gases already in the atmosphere.

      Coming Soon -- to an Internet connection near you: Armisticeproject.org

      by FischFry on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 05:50:33 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  CO2 vs SO2 (0+ / 0-)

        Yes, there are more deadly things than SO2, but the highest NAAQS for SO2 is 0.5 PPM and the average CO2 concentration in all the air we breathe is about 400 PPM.

        You're right, SO2 is not a greenhouse gas, it's actually the opposite.  I don't know what I was thinking.  I thought I did my due-diligence, but apparently, I did not!

        The Reuters source article seems to be conflating acid rain and respiratory effects in SO2 with global warming effects in CO2.  Maybe they were just trying to indicate the court has found once more that the EPA has the power to regulate the air part of the environment... like that should be news...

    •  ASARCO backstory.... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Chrisfs

      #3: ensure network neutrality; #2: ensure electoral integrity; #1: ensure ecosystemic sustainability.

      by ivote2004 on Tue Jan 22, 2013 at 06:10:18 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site