On June 10 the EPA issued an advance notice of proposed rulemaking which targets the U.S. airline industry for more “climate change” regulatory madness. Citing a 2012 D.C. district court ruling that requires a final agency determination whether aircraft greenhouse gas emissions cause or contribute to endangerment of public health or welfare, their eagerness to oblige should be a no brainer.
As a matter of fact, EPA has already decided. In 2009 EPA determined that greenhouse gas “pollution” (essential CO2 plant food) from cars and light trucks threatens human health and welfare by leading to long-lasting climate changes.
Their new announcement states that: “Since then, the body of science on human-induced climate change has strengthened, supporting today’s proposed finding — under a different section of the Clean Air Act — that GHGs [greenhouse gasses] emitted from aircraft engines contribute to pollution [that dirty “P-word” again] that causes climate change endangering public health and welfare.”
Somewhat like Brer Rabbit pleading with Brer Fox not to be thrown into the briar patch, they suggest that their plan to establish new CO2 emission rule restrictions on the aviation industry merely responds to legal “endangerment” and “cause or contribute petitions” filed by others . . . claims based upon failed U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) computer climate model projections.
A big difference here, however, is that the Obama EPA rabbit and petitioner foxes have a common and coordinated agenda. The foxes in this case comprise a very powerful coalition.
Here, EPA reports that its rulemaking process is being undertaken in response to “domestic pressures from stakeholders and court proceedings.” Formal petitions have previously been filed by the attorneys general of California, Connecticut, New Jersey, New Mexico, and Pennsylvania; the District of Columbia and city of New York; and leadership of environmental activist groups such as Earth Justice, the Center for Biological Diversity, Friends of the Earth, and Oceana.
Yes, and these are also international foxes. As reported in an EPA statement: “For the past five years, ICAO [International Civil Aviation Organization] — a specialized body of the United Nations with 191 member states — has been working with the aviation industry and other stakeholders to develop coordinated, international CO2 emission standards for aircraft.” ICAO’s standards for CO2 reductions which are “equitable” across national boundaries are expected to be adopted by early next year.
While EPA states that this latest aircraft regulation action supports the goals of President Obama’s “Climate Action Plan,” the broader anti-carbon U.N./White House battle plan can readily be traced back to the collapse of a crusade to extend Kyoto protocol cap-and-trade agreements.
In January 2012 Brussels imposed a $135 per ton tax on airline carbon emissions exceeding established E.U. CO2 emission limits for all airlines flying to and from Europe.
According to that emissions trading scheme (ETS), each airline was to be allocated pollution permits slightly less than its average historical emissions record over their entire routes until they touched down in Europe. Carriers that exceeded their limit could buy permits from others that emitted less than allowed.
Those nations and airlines refusing to pay would be banned from European airfields altogether, and some did refuse.
Threatening a trade war, China and Russia warned they would cut Airbus purchases in retaliation, plus impose massive fuel taxes and territorial overflight charges on EU carriers.
India Finance Minister Pranab Mukheriee stated: “India believes that some of the measures like carbon export optimization tax . . . violate the principles of the Convention [United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change] as their incidence falls entirely on developing countries and these cannot be recognized as a source of new and additional finance for climate change.”
Even the U.N.’s ICAO of which India is a member unanimously adopted a “Delhi Declaration” opposing an ETS airline application as being “inconsistent with applicable international law," successfully urging the E.U. to refrain from imposing the tax. ICAO was then charged with responsibility to produce an acceptable global ETS alternative by 2016.
Apparently recognizing the improbability of reaching any agreement that other big CO2 emitters will accept, the Obama White House is counting on an old, reliable plan B. After all, why rely upon the U.N. to prevent climate calamity when the EPA can accomplish this by congressionally non-accountable regulatory fiat?
There is, however, still another big U.N. hitch to this strategy. Alas, despite ballyhooed rising atmospheric CO2 levels, satellites have recorded no global warming over the past 18 years. If a flat or cooling trend continues — as many prominent international scientists expect — perhaps the general public will eventually realize that alarmist U.N.
IPCC predictions used to sell anti-fossil Clean Power Plan and ETS agendas can’t be relied upon either. Until then, Brers Rabbit and Fox will continue to feast together on free meals, while the rest of us get stuck with the tabs.
Larry Bell is an endowed professor of space architecture at the University of Houston where he founded the Sasakawa International Center for Space Architecture (SICSA) and the graduate program in space architecture. He is the author of “Scared Witless: Prophets and Profits of Climate Doom”(2015) and “Climate of Corruption: Politics and Power Behind the Global Warming Hoax” (2012). Read more of his reports — Click Here Now.
© 2021 Newsmax. All rights reserved.