| Tweet |
これを教えてくれた仲間は、
こんなことを言われて信じる人がいるのだろうか。
ここまでバカにされて皆平気なのか。
と書いてきましたが、本当に。
この騒ぎの初期の段階で、英語のウィキペディアで「汚染物質」を見ましたが
そこにCO2（二酸化炭素）は入っていなかったんですよ。
それがゴアの大嘘映画のヒットで誰かが加えた。
9/11でも、同じこと。
ウィキペディアには偽の情報が満載で、こちらサイドが正しい事実を書き加えてもすぐに
誰かがやってきて元に戻してしまう。
＃ご苦労様に、専任の担当がいるんでしょうね。
とにかく“認定”するなら「健康脅かす」どころじゃなくて、何百万人と殺している戦争はどうよ！？
化学、放射能等々物質を撒き散らして環境にも非常に悪いし。
Alex Jonesも言っていたように、お次の悪玉はきっとH2O＝お水かもね。
================================================================
米、温室効果ガスは「健康脅かすもの」
12月8日10時10分配信 TBS
http://headlines.yahoo.co.jp/videonews/jnn/20091208/20091208-00000018-jnn-int.html
「環境保護局は、温室効果ガスが人間に危険を及ぼすものであると、本日ここに発表します」（アメリカ連邦環境保護局・ジャクソン長官）
アメリカ政府は７日、二酸化炭素など６つの温室効果ガスを「人間の健康と福祉を脅かし、危険にさらす物質」と正式に認定したと発表しました。
アメリカ連邦環境保護局のジャクソン長官は、害を及ぼす具体例として、熱波によって病弱な人や高齢者の健康が脅かされていることなどをあげました。
これにより、アメリカ政府は議会で温暖化防止法案が成立しない場合でも、政府独自に温室効果ガスの排出規制を行えることになります。
今回の認定には、来週、オバマ大統領が国連の気候変動に関する会議「ＣＯＰ１５」に出席する際に、アメリカの取り組みをアピールする狙いも込められています。（08日08:59）
最終更新:12月8日12時22分
TBS NEWSi
================================================================
元となる英文のニュースをひとつ、貼り付けておきます。
ここでもジョー･バートン下院議員等が例のリークを取り上げて問題にし、疑問の声を
あげて「ちゃんとした科学ではなく、広報が米国の温暖化問題の政策決定を動かしている」
と批判もしているのに、環境保護局のジャクソン長官は「リークは大した問題ではない」
とばかりに、みんなつるんでいる連中の“なんとかの”ひとつ覚えでもって、
「それらのメールには、今回の決定の元となった科学の土台を壊すようなものはない」
などとホザいて終わりです。
米国民も結構目覚めてきている今、勝手に法律でもなんでも作ってやってしまえ
というやり方がいつまで続けられるのでしょうか？
EPA plan to regulate greenhouse gases gets criticism, cheers in Texas
12:31 AM CST on Tuesday, December 8, 2009
By DAVE MICHAELS / The Dallas Morning News
dmichaels@dallasnews.com
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/nation/stories/120809dnbuseparule.428e4c7.html
WASHINGTON – The Environmental Protection Agency said Monday that greenhouse gases spewed by power plants, oil refineries and vehicles constitute a public health threat, a verdict that positions the government to set new limits on global-warming emissions.
Such rules would have a significant effect on Texas, which emits more heat-trapping gases than any other state.
The "endangerment finding" allows the EPA to pursue limits on carbon dioxide emissions from automobiles and to require power plants and manufacturers to install technology that reduces such emissions.
"This long-overdue finding cements 2009's place in history as the year when the United States government began seriously addressing the challenge of greenhouse gas pollution and seizing the opportunity of clean-energy reform," EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson said Monday.
The EPA says limits on carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases would benefit Texans, who suffer the health effects of increased pollution and more severe storms caused by global warming.
But many of the state's oil and gas producers, as well as its Republican political leaders, say regulations would cripple the fossil fuel sector and penalize Texans who depend on gasoline, natural gas and other fossil fuels for transportation, heating and cooling.
Rebuttal
Gov. Rick Perry filed a 38-page rebuttal of the EPA's proposal and said the ruling continues a pattern of "aggressive federal encroachment into every farm, business, church and household in America." The EPA and other researchers, however, have said greenhouse gas rules would exempt small businesses.
In a letter to Jackson in June, Perry assailed her proposal as "senseless regulation." The chairman of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, a Perry appointee, said the finding sets the stage for "extreme economic hardships" throughout Texas.
"It is unconscionable that unelected bureaucrats at the EPA have declared carbon dioxide a public danger despite a lack of scientific evidence to support their ruling," Perry said.
Jackson, most Democrats and many large businesses say there is ample scientific evidence that global warming is caused by man-made emissions.
But U.S. Rep. Joe Barton, R-Arlington, and other congressional Republicans had asked that Jackson abandon her finding in light of e-mails from climate researchers that questioned the scientific foundation of global-warming theories. The e-mails were found by a computer hacker who got them from a server at the University of East Anglia in Norwich, England.
"Today's EPA action mimics the e-mails in one respect – it demonstrates that public relations priorities rather than straightforward science are driving U.S. policymaking on global warming," Barton said.
Jackson said there was nothing in the e-mails "that undermines the science upon which this decision is based."
The EPA is moving forward with regulations as Congress wrestles with legislation that would impose economy-wide limits on greenhouse gas emissions. Jackson said Monday that she would prefer legislation over rules, partly because a climate-change law could not be undone by a future president.
The House passed such a bill in June, which sought to reduce carbon emissions to 83 percent below 2005 levels by 2050. But Senate Democrats have struggled to find the votes to pass their measure, while climate legislation has taken a back seat to the health care bill.
Environmental groups say the EPA's finding improves the chances that the U.S. and major polluters such as China will endorse new limits on greenhouse gas emissions at a conference in Copenhagen, which began Monday.
"This gives other countries another clear signal that the U.S. is very serious and reliable ... and ready to move under the existing Clean Air Act," said David Doniger, climate policy director of the National Resources Defense Council.
Fuel efficiency
The EPA can also now move toward limiting carbon emissions from automobiles, power plants and factories. The agency says it plans to complete a rule in the spring that would require a 40 percent increase in the fuel efficiency of cars and light-duty trucks.
Separately, the EPA has proposed that power plants and factories that emit over 25,000 metric tons of carbon-dioxide equivalent gases per year install what is called the "best available control technology" to limit emissions.
A study by Duke University found that large power plants, oil refineries, lime manufacturers and most paper mills would have to comply with the proposed rule. But farms, commercial buildings and most hospitals would fall outside its scope.
"What we've done is primarily deregulatory," Jackson said. "It's given assurances to small businesses and medium businesses that they would not be regulated, while giving a clear signal to larger emitters ... that regulations can come under the Clean Air Act."
他にもガーディアンの
US climate agency declares CO2 public danger
Environmental Protection Agency declaration allows it to impose emissions cuts without agreement of reluctant Senate
Suzanne Goldenberg, US environment correspondent
guardian.co.uk, Monday 7 December 2009 20.24 GMT
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/dec/07/us-climate-carbon-emissions-danger
など（上のリサ･ジャクソン長官の写真はそこから引っ張ってます）。
投稿コメント全ログ コメント即時配信 スレ建て依頼 削除コメント確認方法
題名には必ず「阿修羅さんへ」と記述してください。
掲示板,ＭＬを含むこのサイトすべての
一切の引用、転載、リンクを許可いたします。確認メールは不要です。
引用元リンクを表示してください。