Socyberty » Environmental Protection Agency

The Myth of Carbon Dioxide Pollution

Sat, 15 Oct 2011 01:47:26 +0000

In 2011 the Environmental Protection Agency started regulating carbon dioxide as declared a dangerous pollutant. This action is the epitome of stupidity since the notion of carbon dioxide being an air pollutant I totally absurd.

Carbon dioxide is a naturally occurring atmospheric gas. It is exhaled by people and animals and used by plants. In fact plants thrive more when CO2 levels higher. Furthermore carbon dioxide is not dangerous; you breathe it in and out in every breath of your life.

Carbon dioxide is not only a naturally occurring gas in Earth’s atmosphere but it seems to be the must naturally occurring gas for terrestrial planetary atmospheres. The Solar system has three terrestrial planets with substantial atmospheres two of them Mars and Venus have predominately carbon dioxide atmosphere. Even Earth would have a nitrogen / carbon dioxide atmosphere if it were not for plants producing lots of free oxygen. So once again carbon idea of dioxide being a pollutant is absurd.

Your about to say well what about global warming or climate change or what ever the latest term may be. Well even if you ignore the fact that the computer models used to support man caused global warming make the thermodynamically impossible assumption that as the global temperature raises the amount of heat lost to space is reduced. If you also ignore the Climate Gate emails that show that climate data has been manipulated.

If you ignore all this and take global warming proponents at their word, they are only predicting rise in temperature comparable to that of the Medieval Warm Period. The Medieval Warm Period was actually beneficial allowing the Vikings to reach America and helping Europe recover from the black plaque and producing increased food production and prosperity. So once again carbon idea of dioxide being a pollutant is absurd.

So why has the EPA made this step. It has to do with Cap and Trade. President Obama tried to get congress to pass Cap and Trade; a scam that would enrich those behind the plan at the expense of the U.S. economy. After congress refused to pass Cap and Trade seeing as a job killer during a time of high unemployment President Obama used the EPA to do get it by way of regulation. The EPA ruling carbon dioxide as a dangerous pollutant is President Obama’s way of doing this.

References

Thermodynamics In Physics

Global Warming Fraud and Its Affect on Science

Science corrupted – YouTube

The Hockey Stick: A New Low in Climate Science

Climategate: Dr. Tim Ball on the hacked CRU emails – YouTube

Something New at The Gas Pumps

Thu, 14 Oct 2010 15:37:02 +0000

You can expect to find something new at the pump. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has announced that it has approved the use of gasoline blends with up to 15% ethanol (E15), compared to the current 10% limit (E10). The EPA announcement is a not a mandate for suppliers to provide E15 blends at the pump; it simply allows E15 to be available to consumers.
There are a few caveats to the EPA announcement on the use of E15 fuel blends. First, the E15 approval applies to only newer model vehicles built after 2007. Second, pending test results, the EPA may extend the use of E15 blends in 2001 to 2006 models. The approval to use E15 blends in vehicles built prior to 2001 will require further evaluation and testing.
Some groups, such as the National Corn Growers Association, have applauded the EPA announcement for the E15 blend decision. Other groups are not as enthusiastic about the EPA decision. Some automakers worried that some parts of newer cars could be susceptible to damage. Refiners lament on the cost and complexity of supplying different blends to gas stations. Ranchers worry if it will drive up costs as farmers shift away from growing corn for cattle feed.
Suppliers are now faced with a tremendous challenge of how to alert consumers at the pump that 15% blends are suitable for some vehicles, but not suitable for others. You can expect to see new labels at the pump similar to the following; “For use in 2007 or newer vehicles;” “Do not use in vehicles manufactured before 2007; “or “May cause damage to older vehicles built prior to 2007.”
As soon as test results are available, labels at the pump will need to be changed to read; “For use in 2001 or newer vehicles,” “Do not use in vehicles manufactured prior to 2001;“or “May cause damage to older vehicles built prior to 2001.” If the use of E15 blends is confusing now, just wait until for a couple of years when the EPA announces approval to use E20, E30, and E85 blends.

17.3 Acres of Wetlands Saved

Thu, 14 Oct 2010 15:16:55 +0000

Region One of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) takes great pride in its wetlands “compliance through outreach and education” program. As described on a Region One Webpage, “We work with businesses and individuals to ensure that they are aware of proper procedures such as those regarding environmentally safe practices and the obtaining of permits.”
Apparently, Region One’s outreach and education efforts didn’t reach at least one farmer in Whately, Massachusetts. The farmer is well-known in the local community for homegrown sweet corn, summer squash, zucchini, pickling cucumbers, green and yellow string beans, tomatoes, green peppers, winter squash and fresh cut flowers.
Since 1984, the Massachusetts farmer has either been systematically or unknowingly, altering and destroying what EPA describes as “17.3 acres of forested and scrub wetlands.” This amounts to about 0.6 acres a year of wetlands habitat.
While the Region One’s outreach and education program failed to work for 26 years; it’s informant program appears to be working well with “tips and complaints from citizens as well as referrals from local, state and other federal agencies.” The 17.3 acres of wetlands that have been destroyed in the last 26-years are not situated in one location; instead, they are located at a number of locations throughout 157 acres of farmland.
The farmer’s crime is simple; he failed to obtain a federal permit under the Clean Water Act (CWA) authorizing the discharge of dredged and fill material into the wetlands. Under the CWA, persons wishing to discharge dredged or fill material into wetlands must obtain a federal permit from the Army Corps of Engineers, including filling in ditches on farm fields.
The EPA has required the farmer to restore the 17.3 acres of wetlands to their original condition and to consult with the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) on irrigation practices to minimize impacts to the wetlands, such as lowering the water table. He is also prohibited from actions that might inhibit natural vegetative growth.
The farmer may need to hire an environmental consultant to stay up with the permitting and paperwork involved in his 17.3 acres of wetlands. This will allow him to focus on farming and growing homegrown sweet corn, summer squash, zucchini, cucumbers, green and yellow string beans, tomatoes, red & green peppers, winter squash and fresh cut flowers. A copy of an overview of the EPA wetland rules may be download from the following Website: http://lepcnews.squarespace.com/wetlands/.

General Duty to Conduct Safe Operations

Sun, 29 Aug 2010 17:28:23 +0000

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has taken action against a Danvers, Massachusetts company under provisions of a little known clause of the Clean Air Act (CAA) Section 112(r). Section 112 (r) of the CAA requires operators of facilities exceeding specified threshold amounts of certain hazardous materials to submit a Risk Management Plan (RMP) to EPA.
In the RMP, the facility owner / operator is required to “identify hazards which may result from releases using appropriate hazard assessment techniques, to design and maintain a safe facility taking such steps as are necessary to prevent releases, and to minimize the consequences of accidental releases which do occur”. The RMP is intended to reduce the likelihood of a Bhopal type tragedy in the U.S.
Information in the RMP must be certified in writing by the owner of the facility and updated when any changes occur in operations. Copies must be provided to local fire departments and Local Emergency Planning Committees (LEPC).
Owners of facilities that do not exceed the specified threshold amount are not required to submit an RMP to EPA. However, under Section 112 (r) (1) of the CAA, known as the General Duty Clause, facility owners have a duty “to identify hazards which may result from releases using appropriate hazard assessment techniques, to design and maintain a safe facility taking such steps as are necessary to prevent releases, and to minimize the consequences of accidental releases which do occur”. The only difference is that submission to EPA is not required.
The owners of the Danvers, Massachusetts facility were not required to submit an RMP to EPA since they were under the specified threshold amount. Under the General Duty Clause, owners of the facility had a duty to develop and maintain the same type of information. Investigations showed that improper storage and handling of 2-butanone (MEK), toluene, acetone and other hazardous materials at the facility resulted in a series of explosions and fires on November 22, 2006.
The fire destroyed a 12,000 square foot building and caused significant damage to surrounding commercial and residential properties. Approximately twenty-four homes and six businesses were severely damaged and subsequently demolished; another seventy homes were damaged. An estimated 300 residents within a half-mile radius of the facility had to be evacuated.
A civil action filed by EPA against of the facility seeks to recoup $2.7 million incurred by the United States in connection with clean-up of the site following the explosion. While owners of the facility were not required to submit an RMP, the EPA argues that owners had a “general duty” to operate in a safe manner.

Corn by The Road Causing Accidents

Sat, 14 Aug 2010 21:02:56 +0000

Environmental Protection Agency to restrict roadside plantations of crops like corn, peas and beans because they both obstruction and attract wild pigs.

- Hopefully, it would increase opportunities for motorists to see wild pigs and thus have greater opportunity to slow down and avoid accidents, “says Christer Pettersson, who is responsible for the management of wild boar Environmental Protection Agency.

Peter Borring, county chairman of the national federations of farmers’ Östergötland is mildly hostile to the Environmental Protection Agency’s proposal:

- It is pure hell in Swedish. It is trying to focus on other things than the real problem. We can always try to steer the pigs here and there, but we need to see to bring down wild boar population.

Profit or loss?
In addition, he says, it would affect farmers’ profits:

- Roads are often drawn where it is good farmland and the plan is not much left to grow on.

But Christer Pettersson looks rather that it would be more profitable for farmers, as attractive areas where crops are grown very wild boar helps that cause extensive damage to the crop:

- I see a win-win situation of trying to reduce the attractiveness of the crop and thus reduce the risk of accidents.

Air Pollution

Wed, 13 May 2009 08:49:46 +0000

Image via Wikipedia

Air is 99.9% nitrogen, oxygen, water, vapor and inert gases. Air pollution is biological chemicals and particulate matter that can either harm or cause discomfort human and other organisms. It also ruins the natural environment.

Air pollution can be identified as primary in which substances are directly emitted from a process, such as when a volcano erupts.

Another type of air pollution is secondary air pollution. In this type of pollution, the particulates are not emitted directly. They form when primary pollutantants interact or react. A secondary pollutant is ground level ozone which is just one pollutant that forms photchemical smog.

Some air pollution can be primary and secondary both formed from other pollutants and emitted directly.

Some other air pollutions are holes in the ozone layer, the greenhouse effect, smog and acid rain.

It can also be considered air pollution when we burn fuel for energy, it sends particles in the air. These particles are .0001 inches. Some call this black carbon pollution.

A big source of air pollution is burning fuels in caregulates how much pollution is in the air anywplace in hrs, homes and businesses.

Burning wood and charcoal in fireplaces and barbecues pollute air with soot.

The release of noxious gases, examples: Carbon monoxide, nitrous oxides, chemical vapors and sulfur dioxide can be considered air pollution because the gases take part in chemical reactions once in the atmosphere forming smog and acid rain.

With the clean air act, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) they regulate how mucch pollution is in the air anywhere in the USA. They also promote programs such as energy star which helps a person to save energy when they buy something with their sign on it.

I hope you know a little more about the types of air pollution.