6 ms·
US repeals EPA endangerment finding for greenhouse gases
- TrackerFF 8mo agoTrump has a couple of more years left on this planet. He'll never see the effects of his policies, but he'll do everything to please his donors. That's about it.
- malfist 8mo agoDonors? Most of these people are paying bribes, not donating.
- typedef_struct 8mo agoYou mean CO2 is not the same as CFCs?
- baq 8mo agoCFCs are bad because they make the government get cancer. CO2 is fine because it'll make your grandchildren die in a heatwave or drown in a flood, that won't happen in the next few election cycles.
- ArchieScrivener 8mo ago[flagged]
- robot_jesus 8mo agoCitation needed. (Because the other side of the argument has thousands of measurable, verifiable scientific studies)
- oblio 8mo agoPhew, you made me so afraid of EU propaganda that I almost forgot about the propaganda from major energy companies (with a combined worth of trillions of dollars). When your comments is worse than the official BP position on climate change, you know you're on the wrong side of history. https://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/business-sites/en/global/corporate/pdfs/sustainability/group-reports/bp-climate-policy-positions.pdf https://www.bp.com/content/dam/bp/business-sites/en/global/c...
- dboreham 8mo agoAccount created 17 days ago.
- MWParkerson 8mo agoThis is about as good as the US public education system can produce
- cucumber3732842 8mo agoThe joke in the refrigeration industry is that "it's not bad for the environment until DuPont's patent expires". Now obviously they were bad for the environment all along, but I don't think it's a coincidence that nothing was done about CFCs until the 3rd world got good at making them cheap. The joke is getting a little out of date though since the new stuff is hydrocarbons and CO2 (and you can't patent those).
- intexpress 8mo agoOne step closer to Spaceballs
- oulipo2 8mo agoShameful
- _heimdall 8mo agoThe argument that Congress should pass law to allow specific actions by the executive branch is quite reasonable. If only it wasn't being cherry picked to neuter the EPA while Border Patrol and ICE take it upon themselves to act as police forces on domestic soil.
- actionfromafar 8mo agoYep. Toilet schedules for every department should go through Congress, apparently. It's a deliberate design to flood an already very narrow zone, lawmaking.
- davidguetta 8mo agodemocracy . . .
- someguydave 8mo agoCongress has authorized ICE and Border Patrol to act as police forces on domestic soil
- _DeadFred_ 8mo agoNo they haven't. Police forces' power goes through actual Courts that enforce Constitutional rights above police authority. ICE/Border Patrol's authority comes through civil law and non-Article III 'immigration' court. Congress explicitly authorized ICE to be something else when they placed ICE in an alternative 'civil law'/immigration system hoping to make them not have to follow the burdens placed on Police/Justice/Judges/Courts by the Constitution.
- pandaman 8mo agoThe police enforces civil law just as same as criminal law. For example, most traffic infractions are civil and don't go "through actual Courts". 'Traffic' court is not an Article 3 court. The funny thing is that a short while ago the same people that demand criminal process for illegal aliens now could not stop themselves from mentioning that immigration infractions are civil, same as traffic violations. So it's not some obscure knowledge for the left...
- ozzymuppet 8mo agoI wish I could unsubscribe from all US related news. It's just so depressing these days.
- st_goliath 8mo agoDon't worry, this will probably be flagged to death and gone from the front page real soon. EDIT: and it's gone. From #1 on the front page to page 14 or so in about 35 minutes. To be honest, that took a lot longer than I expected.
- QuantumGood 8mo agoSome wishfully frame HN as science and tech, others as views from smart people on complex issues of topical importance, but regardless, political overlap with science or complexity causes flagging "because politics". Forces that degrade discussion are high on political topics, but ... sheesh. A forum with high ability to contribute to rational discourse on complex issues of importance is really hamstrung by this. /rant
- xphos 8mo agoI feel HN approaches politics the same the field economics does, they are not involved at all execpt bascically all things in the world heavily involve politics. Tech is no exception, not wanting to overriden but news though is not a crime but this is pretty impactful news even for the tech community.
- rcMgD2BwE72F 8mo agoThat US administration wishes you would unsubscribe too.
- saagarjha 8mo agoYeah, I'd love to cancel my subscription to the administration too.
- throwway262515 8mo ago
- sajithdilshan 8mo ago[flagged]
- AlecSchueler 8mo agoAre you sure it's not just media magnifying the extremes? In my own bubble and honestly most of what I see online most people seem to believe in a middle ground.
- afavour 8mo agoYou’re comparing an extreme minority on one side to the mainstream view on the other. Democrats are not banning everything related to fossil fuels, nor do they disrupt public life. They have simply applied subsidies to encourage environmental friendly choices. Which is exactly the middle ground you are asking for.
- soulofmischief 8mo agoI think the days of playing softball are over. Whatever administration comes after this one, the gloves will still be off, and the hand heavy.
- tcfhgj 8mo ago> and impose its ideology on others (e.g., Klima Klebers in Germany) what does "impose its ideology" mean? they were protesting for the government to uphold their own promises and use low hanging fruits which are even beneficial beyond reducing green house gases.
- Intermernet 8mo agoThe problem is that there isn't really a middle ground. The damage is done and no actions taken now will have a quick, politically measurable effect. The people arguing against action are relying on the delay between action and effect. If you can't see it now (despite actual measurable data being available for at least the last 2 decades) then it must be a lie. I'm still not sure what the climate change denialists see as the goal of "big climate". All of the money and profit is on the side of continuing to fuck the climate. All of the projects to alleviate the problem are expensive and have very little profit to be gained, but apparently it's a conspiracy of academics on minimum wage in various university research centers who are determined to take the money from our wonderful oil and mining benefactors (who have nothing but our best interests at heart). What's worse is they want to push technology that gives us energy for free! Must be a bunch of communists or something!
- pluc 8mo ago[flagged]
- sheikhnbake 8mo agoThe protests have been consistent since the regime took office. There's been two attempts on his life. Blue states are implementing measures to basically soft secede from the federal government. Republican candidates are losing in landslides and the regimes secret police are being confronted as soon as they're identified. Idk where you get 'complacent' from.
- pluc 8mo agoHow long as it been? How long will it last? How easily will those plans be foiled? How much damage will you allow?
- soulofmischief 8mo agoDid you have an actual question, or were all of these just a rhetorical attempt to prove some point that you haven't actually made yet?
- sheikhnbake 8mo agoIdk, man. The regime isn't asking my permission and my individual capacity to stop them is pretty limited. The best I can do is make sure my family and community are taken care of while the resistance builds momentum. There are 70 million white supremacists in this country and however this shakes out, it's going to get worse before it gets better.
- parrellel 8mo agoHe means it's not in his feed. "Random old woman gets kidnapped" is represented 100 times more strongly in the datastream then "1000 protestors organize immigrant protection system" or "US Citizen Mung families defend elderly Vietnam vets". ... at least "Random Old Woman" has got people looking askance at the internet connected security camera ecosystem, I guess.
- mrtksn 8mo agoWouldn't this increase US exposure to foreign intervention in the future? Although China is the worst offender, since a while now they are getting their stuff together. They suffered and later fixed some gross air pollutions in their cities. The rest of the world is also pretty much on board with this clean air and climate change stuff as it turns out people generally like clean air, so if this sticks at some point the only logical next step would be to compel US to stop polluting the world. If I understand correctly, this also removes EPA ability to regulate car emissions, arguing that it will allow for cheaper cars. Why would US public really wants newly made clunkers on their cities? Polluting cars are horrible city life quality downgrade that even the rich can't escape. Also, will this allow to put the banned due to the dieselgate VW vehicles back on the roads?
- kasey_junk 8mo agoOr to move your polluting industry there
- mrtksn 8mo agoThat ship sailed with the destruction of the global world order. The polluting industries probably don't have to be polluting when you take care of the pollutants.
- afavour 8mo agoI don’t know by what means foreign countries would intervene in the US. They’d just ignore whatever is requested of them. But it will increase US dependency on foreign countries in the long term. EVs are the future and if US manufacturers aren’t working on them then they’ll continue to lose market share to foreign companies.
- mrtksn 8mo agoUS is 350M people, let's say everyone is climate change sceptic and together with Russia, Australia and Saudi Arabia it totals to about 550M people. In the rest of the world the idea that you can just just pump as much as smoke you like and it will magically disappear isn't popular. Maybe because they all had some polluting industry around that made them miserable or maybe because they live in dirty overcrowded cities and noticed that smog isn't pleasant or maybe because they don't have much fossil energy sources, they are generally not skeptical of the idea that "not polluting is good". Just as with vaccines or abortion, climate change or simply the desire to live in a clean environment isn't a divisive topic in most of the world. So its going to be 8B people trying to compel 0.5B people to live in clean environments and take care of the output of their industries. I think the 8B will be able to do that one way or another.
- Madmallard 8mo agoHow exactly is this not just like a global policy thing rather than EPA? Surely our emissions affect other countries' qualities of life so the decision is not just up to us.
- apothegm 8mo agoThe US has refused to sign onto international climate agreements. Who’s going to enforce that policy against the US?
- ndsipa_pomu 8mo agoNature through climate catastrophes?
- y0ssar1an 8mo agoevery day the US strays further from the light :(
- blondie9x 8mo agoBeyond its role in climate change, elevated concentrations of CO₂ pose a direct physiological threat to human health, ranging from inflammation to respiratory stress. The Trump presidency is trying to protect coal and oil for some reason. Money, lobbying, bribery anyone? We need to look past the political noise and focus on the immediate data: CO₂ is a pollutant that harms human physiology. Regardless of where you stand on climate policy, we should all agree that breathing toxic air is unacceptable. We need to prioritize respiratory health and cognitive safety above partisan loyalty https://open.substack.com/pub/minimallysustained/p/beyond-the-greenhouse-the-direct?r=3ovda&utm_medium=ios&shareImageVariant=overlay https://open.substack.com/pub/minimallysustained/p/beyond-th...
- Intermernet 8mo agoThis is a bad take. CO2 will not harm your personal health in the short term, in the amounts measured in current atmospheric readings. You personally have a higher percentage of CO2 in your body every time you breathe. You currently breathe about 430 ppm of CO2. Toxic levels are above 5000 ppm (40000 is regarded as immediately dangerous). You're arguing the right side but you're using the wrong arguments. This is actually counter productive.
- GorbachevyChase 8mo ago[flagged]
- mapontosevenths 8mo agoMy first thought when seeing this was "OH! There must be new science." That does not seem to be the case. I'm going to need to adjust my understanding of how the world works. I suspect that the "Champion of Beautiful, Clean Coal" is just living up to his side of the contract.[0] [0] https://www.budget.senate.gov/chairman/newsroom/press/budget-finance-committees-launch-joint-investigation-into-donald-trumps-quid-pro-quo-offer-to-big-oil-#:~:text=As%20has%20been%20widely%20reported,oil%20and%20gas%20industry%20enjoys https://www.budget.senate.gov/chairman/newsroom/press/budget...
- cbg0 8mo agoSounds like healthcare costs are going up in the USA.
- padjo 8mo agoI think we should lock them all in a room filled with CO2 and methane and then ask them if they still think they're not harmful.
- ChrisArchitect 8mo ago[dupe] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46994006 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46994006
- 1attice 8mo agoWhy is this flagged? Is the climate no longer a science story?
- thrance 8mo agoOne step forward, two steps backwards. Anything good the Democrats may do (yes, it happens sometimes, rarely) will immediately get repelled by the death cult that are the Republicans. If for no other reasons that to "own the libs", they would destroy the whole world. If this country is to have any future, it must get rid of the Republican party, try all its officials for treason to the American people and ideals of the US Republic and constitution, then disenfranchise their alienated voter base until they get back to living in material reality.