Epa regulations

1 .EPA regulations
1. Costs of EPA regulations
David Kreutzer (Senior Policy Analyst in Energy Economics and Climate Change), Karen Campbell (Policy
Analyst, Macroecomomics), October 29th, 2008, "CO2-Emission Cuts: The Economic Costs of the EPA’s ANPR
Regulations," Heritage Foundation, <http://www.heritage.org/Research/Energyandenvironment/cda08-10.cfm>
Even assuming these unlikely goals are met, restricting CO2 emissions by 70 percent will damage the
U.S. economy severely:
1. Cumulative gross domestic product (GDP) losses are nearly $7 trillion by 2029 (in inflation-adjusted
2008 dollars), according to The Heritage Foundation/Global Insight model (described in Appendix A).
2. Single-year GDP losses exceed $600 billion (in inflation-adjusted 2008 dollars). 3. Annual job losses
exceed 800,000 for several years. 4. Some industries will see job losses that exceed 50 percent.

2. What is wrong with CO2?

David Kreutzer (Senior Policy Analyst in Energy Economics and Climate Change), May 7th, 2009, "The Economic
ImpactofCap-and-Trade,"Heritagefoundation,
<http://www.heritage.org/research/energyandenvironment/tst050709b.cfm>
Carbon dioxide is not a toxin, is not directly harmful to human health, and is not projected to become
so–even without legislative or regulatory action. CO2 is fundamental to all known forms of life. Indeed,
studies show that increased CO2 levels are beneficial for crop production.
Nevertheless, driven by concern that increasing levels of CO2 (and other greenhouse gasses) will lead to
a warmer world and cause environmental damage, there have been calls to significantly restrict
emissions of all greenhouse gasses, but especially CO2.

2. Quotes from within EPA

1. Don’t trust the EPA
EPA Scientists, quotes from a summer 2007 survey, "Interference at the EPA: Science and Politics at the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency Selected Quotes from EPA Scientists," UCSUSA (union of concerned scientists),
<http://www.ucsusa.org/assets/documents/scientific_integrity/selected-comments-from-scientists.pdf>
Do not trust the Environmental Protection Agency to protect your environment. Ask questions. Be
aware of political and economic motives. Become politically active. Elect officials with motives to
protect the environment and hold them accountable. -A scientist from the EPA regional offices

2. EPA needs more funding

EPA Scientists, quotes from a summer 2007 survey, "Interference at the EPA: Science and Politics at the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency Selected Quotes from EPA Scientists," UCSUSA (union of concerned scientists),
<http://www.ucsusa.org/assets/documents/scientific_integrity/selected-comments-from-scientists.pdf>
MORE FUNDING! We do NOT have the resources to meet our mission. My division has seen its
resources - in purchasing power- cut over 50% since 10 years ago. -A scientist from the Office of
Research and Development

Copyright ©Scott Swier. It is unlawful to own this information without permission. 1

 Epa regulations

3. EPA has politically driven agendas

EPA Scientists, quotes from a summer 2007 survey, "Interference at the EPA: Science and Politics at the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency Selected Quotes from EPA Scientists," UCSUSA (union of concerned scientists),
<http://www.ucsusa.org/assets/documents/scientific_integrity/selected-comments-from-scientists.pdf>
My opinion of EPA has changed since being here. Specifically, I had believed EPA was more scientific
in its approach. Now I realize that EPA has politically driven agendas that sometimes, not always,
affects decisions of scientific nature. -A scientist from the EPA regional offices

4. EPA only considers science if it supports its agenda

EPA Scientists, quotes from a summer 2007 survey, "Interference at the EPA: Science and Politics at the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency Selected Quotes from EPA Scientists," UCSUSA (union of concerned scientists),
<http://www.ucsusa.org/assets/documents/scientific_integrity/selected-comments-from-scientists.pdf>
There are still good scientists producing good science at USEPA. The main problem I see is an
administration that considers science only if it supports its agenda. As in other areas, science is used
only if it furthers preexisting policy; otherwise it is ignored, marginalized or suppressed (e.g. climate
change). -A scientist from the EPA regional offices

Copyright ©Scott Swier. It is unlawful to own this information without permission. 2