Cheryl Seal
BUSH EPA Lies About Greenhouse Gas Reduction
Wed Nov 23, 2005 16:27

 
Bush's motto: "Ask not what you can do for your country - Ask what you can DO to screw it."

Bush EPA Lies about Greenhouse Gas Emissions

By Cheryl Seal
http://greenissues.cherylsealreports.com


Greenhouse gas (the stuff that helps drive global warming) levels have been rising steadily for years and are predicted to keep on rising unless serious efforts are made to curb the increase. Yet this week, the Bush EPA has released a gushing statement about how greenhouse emissions actually FELL between 2000-2003. How can this be?



Easy! The figures have been shaked, baked, and cooked! They are, in short, a bald-faced lie dressed up in a three-piece suit. The lie was dished up by James Connaughton, chairman of the White House’s Council on Environmental Quality - a corporate slickster who has taken lying for the White House to new creative heights. In 2004, he stated that to reduce greenhouse emissions, US industry leaders "are stepping up to the plate in a way they never have -- never did in the 1990s. That's a huge step." He was referring to a White House scheme in which industries would agree to voluntarily reduce greenhouse releases by 10% - a program grandiosely called "Climate Leaders." At the time Connaughton made his statement, only 50 companies out of thousands of candidates had signed on. And of these, only 14 even bothered to propose a plan for reductions. They just wanted to APPEAR to be doing something. Like Bush.



Now to the current bit of flimflam. Here's the deal: The figures used by the EPA include 2000-2003. The average CO2 emission figures in millions of metric tons (Mt) carbon equivalent weight for these three years was, in fact, lower than the total for 1999. HOWEVER, instead of 2000-2003 representing a period of decline in CO2 levels, 1999 represented an anomalous high. In reality, CO2 emissions increased steadily from 2000 on, climbing from 1562 million Mt to 1584, a trend that shows no change in the long-term trend of increase over the past two decades. 2005 greenhouse emissions are expected to top off at about 1694 million Mt - well above the 1999 level of 1617 million Mt.



So just to start, the EPA data is an obvious manipulation. But it gets worse. To make the picture look rosier, the Bush corporate suits have embraced a system based on "greenhouse gas intensity." This system isn't based on the actual physical amount of greenhouse gases pumped into the air - it is based on the ratio of tonnage to GDP (gross domestic product) DOLLARS. The GDP system is in and of itself misleading and open to gross manipulation (to be punny). By using this devious little GDP forumula, "points" can easily be knocked off the intensity score for various reasons, including the shipment of manufacturing overseas which, afterall, counts as an "export." In fact, the trend toward offshore manufacturing is the reason given by the EPA for the alleged decrease in emissions.



In the warped GDP system, war, natural disasters (the Exxon Valdez disaster actually increased the GDP!), and inflated oil costs add to the GDP, which, conversely, reduces the greenhouse intensity score even more. Voila! The EPA can record a decrease in the "intensity rating" from 189 in 1999 to 182 in 2003. And even though greenhouse gas emissions for all "listed" gases is predicted to rise from 1,839 million Mt in 1999 to 2,279 million Mt in 2012, the "intensity" score is shown as steadily decreasing, down to 158 by 2012. I also noticed that the EPA keeps tinkering around with the measurement system, too - from "equivalent carbon weight" to "carbon dioxide weight" (which changes the ratios quite a bit), etc.



Of course the big hole in the GDP system of greenhouse gas monitoring is that we don't BREATHE GDP scores (although the Bush admininstration certainly seems to inhale budget dollars). We breathe polluted air that is getting more polluted by the hour. Worse, CO2 does not go away - at least not for all intents and purposes in a normal lifespan. Once released, it persists in the atmosphere for TWO HUNDRED TO FOUR-HUNDRED FIFTY YEARS. So while Bush & Co. peddles its massaged figures, CO2 levels just keeps growing....and growing.



Perhaps the most comical aspect of the Bush EPA PR stunt (which was timed in part I'm sure to offset the embarrassing news that even North Korea has signed onto the Kyoto Protocol) is that the two most important greenhouse gases, CO2 and water vapor (yes, water vapor) are NOT even officially considered air pollutants by the EPA! Despite Bush's campaign promise in 2000 to impose regulations on CO2 emissions, the Bush administration refuses to regulate CO2 emissions. In fact, the EPA even fought a lawsuit brought by several environmental groups demanding CO2's regulation!



Another little fact that contradicts the new "reduced emissions" claim: The NUMBER one source of CO2 in the US is electrical generating plants. These facilities account for nearly 40% of all anthropogenic (human-caused) CO2 released into the atmosphere. The worst offenders are coal-fired power plants, which, in 2004, accounted for just over 50% of all US energy-generating plants. Since 2001, a skyrocketing number of new coal-fired power plants have been built or are under construction. Meanwhile, remissions regulations and enforcement of emissions regulations have been eased for the oldest, filthiest coal-fired plants. And, guess what? Reporting of emissions by plants to the EPA is on a voluntary basis! We all can guess how well that works! About as well as the voluntary "Climate Leaders" program!

These facts hardly jive with a real reduction in ACTUAL (not fantasy land ratios) reduction in greenhouse emissions! Last, it should be also noted that a 2004 study by the State's Technical Data and Analysis Subgroup points out that CO2 data is not available for electrical generating units with a capacity of 25 MW and under So even on a good day, the EPA's figures are woefully incomplete and misleading.



Finally, it should be observed that moving manufacturing offshore does NOT decrease net amount of US-generated greenhouse gases, it simply moves them into someone else's backyard.

 

Main Page - Sunday, 11/27/05

Message Board by American Patriot Friends Network [APFN]

APFN MESSAGEBOARD ARCHIVES

messageboard.gif (4314 bytes)