Well, in case thre was any remaining doubt over Bush's stance on the
environment, this should clear things up pretty well.
But, hey, there's no difference between the Dems and Pubs, is there, so this
really doesn't make a difference, right? Bah!
- Jim
http://www.nytimes.com/2001/03/14/politics/14EMIT.html
WASHINGTON, March 13 — Under strong pressure from conservative Republicans
and industry groups, President Bush reversed a campaign pledge today and
said his administration would not seek to regulate power plants' emissions
of carbon dioxide, a gas that many scientists say is a key contributor to
global warming.
The decision left environmental groups and some Congressional Democrats
angered at what they called a major betrayal. But the White House said a
cabinet-level review had concluded that Mr. Bush's original promise had been
a mistake inconsistent with the broader goal of increasing domestic energy
production.
...
The burden of any plan to regulate carbon dioxide emissions would have
fallen most heavily on coal-burning power plants, which still account for
more than 50 percent of the electricity generated in the United States. Mr.
Bush said today that a recent Energy Department study had concluded that
regulating carbon dioxide emissions would have led to "significantly higher
electricity prices."
--------
For what the mainstream scientific community is saying, here is the latest
from the IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change):
http://www.ipcc.ch/
http://www.usgcrp.gov/ipcc/WG3SPM.PDF
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Apr 27 2001 - 23:14:10 PDT