Tuesday, May 21, 2013
 

It's official - McCarthy nominated to run EPA

It's official. As has been widely reported (including here) for weeks, President Obama is nominating Connecticut's former top environmental official - Gina McCarthy - to run the Environmental Protection Agency.

It's just a bit further up I-95 for the president since McCarthy replaces Lisa Jackson, who was New Jersey's environmental chief. McCarthy has been serving as the assistant administrator for the Office of Air and Radiation at EPA, a position she took in 2009 directly from her tenure here.

McCarthy was appointed to run what was still called the Department of Environmental Protection here in 2005 by Gov. M. Jodi Rell, a Republican. Her bi-partisan service actually dates to her homes state of Massachusetts where she served as an environmental adviser to then Gov. Mitt Romney, also a Republican.

She was well-liked and respected here, even garnering a half-plea from then newly elected Gov. Dannel P. Malloy that she would be welcome back here.

For her diligence at EPA, McCarthy is being rewarded with the prize of stepping in at one of the agency's most volatile and contentious moments. EPA is getting a healthy share of sequestration cuts. Emission rules for new power plants - largely crafted by McCarthy - are due for release and likely to spark a partisan battle on Capitol Hill. And President Obama's commitment in his state of the union speech to enact more environmentally conscious regulations will keep EPA on the hot-seat.

McCarthy was one of the driving forces behind the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative - the Northeast compact on power plant emissions reductions, and a number of other programs in Connecticut that remain today.

Comments

Submitted by Art Vandelay on 03/04/2013 06:03 am

The EPA is a Federal Bureaucracy out of control. When Nixon signed the EPA into law, it's original intent was good. One couldn't breath the air in Northern New Jersey. The Hudson River could be lit on fire if one struck a match. A large yellow cloud hung over the city of Los Angles. It was the original intent of the Bureaucracy to clean up these messes. It did an excellent job.

Now we have to flush toilets two or three times, prey water comes out of our showers, can't find decent soap to clean our hands and keep our cloths clean. Refilling chain saws and lawn mowers is now an impossible task. The list goes on. Is it worth the cost for all these ridiculous regulations? I doubt it. The EPA is now doing more damage than it's worth.

Submitted by Kenny47 on 04/04/2013 10:04 am

Gina McCarthy is even worse than Lisa Jackson. She is more environmental extremist than rational administrator. The EPA is already out of control in its illegal circumventing of Congressional authority. Its cap and trade limitations on CO2 are a direct violation of Congressional intent. Congress, of course, rejected cap and trade in 2009, even though all of CT’s lame-brained members voted for it. McCarthy is just another of the global warming true believers.

The conduct of the EPA reflects an anti-intellectual and anti-scientific mindset. Global warming is, of course, a total fraud, which is why the environmental religious cult changed the name to "climate change." That was a tacit admission that the earth had stopped warming in 1997. Yet, it's amazing how many uninformed people persist in believing this nonsense despite the evidence and think that CO2 is a pollutant, rather than a beneficial nutrient for plant growth.

Over the 20th century, CO and globally averaged temperatures rose in tandem only from 1978-1997, and that was just coincidental. Over the other 80 years of the 20th century, either CO2 was not a factor (pre-1945) or temperatures declined while CO2 was up (1945-1978 and 1997-date). Since CO2 will continue to increase due to rising industrial activity, particularly from India and China, we will have periods when CO2 and globally averaged temperatures will appear to be linked, but it’s mostly coincidental. In fact, there is much research (from ice cores, etc.) that shows that CO2 rise is actually a 600-800 year lagging indicator of warming, not the other way around. Temperatures are currently about 1-2 degrees C lower than they were during the Medieval Warming Period (1000-1300 AD) when CO2 could not have been a factor. Clearly, the earth experiences natural climate cycles driven by natural forces beyond the control of man.

The global warming movement is a political movement that seeks to use climate and CO2 as a mechanism of control. Incidentally, even the U.N.'s IPCC only reports an increase of 0.74 degrees C over the course of the entire 20th century, and that following an abnormally cool period called the Little Ice Age that ended about 1850. And more accurate satellite measurements suggest that the increase is probably only half of that. As for sea level rise, the predictions of alarmists like Al Gore (20 feet by 2100) and former Senator Joe Lieberman (35 feet) are bereft of any scientific evidence. It’s that kind of alarmism that makes the global warming crisis believers look foolish. Even the IPCC, in its 2007 report, suggests only a increase of 8.5” – 18.5” by 2100, which is completely in line with rate of sea level rise since the end of the last ice age 12,500 years ago. The leading sea level scientist in the world, physicist Nils-Axel Mörner, argues that, at the current rate of increase, it will be about 7 inches higher by 2100.

We have spent nearly $80 billion in the last 20 years on studying a non-problem. That money could have been spent drilling wells to provide clean drinking water to millions of people around the globe, not trying to shut down or cripple modern industrial civilization for no reason.

Sadly, the Democrat Party, both in CT and nationally, mindlessly buys into the global warming nonsense to gain the votes of the environmental extremists and their mere followers. And it's just another example of how scientifically illiterate Barack Obama is. And we're all paying for it, both at the gas pump and whenever the home heating oil truck arrives.

Submitted by Kenny47 on 04/05/2013 05:04 am

Gina McCarthy is even worse than Lisa Jackson. She is more environmental extremist than rational administrator. The EPA is already out of control in its illegal circumventing of Congressional authority. Its cap and trade limitations on CO2 are a direct violation of Congressional intent. Congress, of course, rejected cap and trade in 2009, even though all of CT’s lame-brained members voted for it. McCarthy is just another of the global warming true believers.

The conduct of the EPA reflects an anti-intellectual and anti-scientific mindset.
The EPA web site is full of unscientific, unsubstantiated statements on “climate change.” Global warming is, of course, a total fraud, which is why the environmental religious cult changed the name to "climate change." That was a tacit admission that the earth had stopped warming in 1997. Yet, it's amazing how many uninformed people persist in believing this nonsense despite the evidence and think that CO2 is a pollutant, rather than a beneficial nutrient for plant growth.

Over the 20th century, CO and globally averaged temperatures rose in tandem only from 1978-1997, and that was just coincidental. Over the other 80 years of the 20th century, either CO2 was not a factor (pre-1945) or temperatures declined while CO2 was up (1945-1978 and 1997-date). Since CO2 will continue to increase due to rising industrial activity, particularly from India and China, we will have periods when CO2 and globally averaged temperatures will appear to be linked, but it’s mostly coincidental. In fact, there is much research (from ice cores, etc.) that shows that CO2 rise is actually a 600-800 year lagging indicator of warming, not the other way around. Temperatures are currently about 1-2 degrees C lower than they were during the Medieval Warming Period (1000-1300 AD) when CO2 could not have been a factor. Clearly, the earth experiences natural climate cycles driven by natural forces beyond the control of man.

The global warming movement is a political movement that seeks to use climate and CO2 as a mechanism of control. Incidentally, even the U.N.'s IPCC only reports an increase of 0.74 degrees C over the course of the entire 20th century, and that following an abnormally cool period called the Little Ice Age that ended about 1850. And more accurate satellite measurements suggest that the increase is probably only half of that. As for sea level rise, the predictions of alarmists like Al Gore (20 feet by 2100) and former Senator Joe Lieberman (35 feet) are bereft of any scientific evidence. It’s that kind of alarmism that makes the global warming crisis believers look foolish. Even the IPCC, in its 2007 report, suggests only a increase of 8.5” – 18.5” by 2100, which is completely in line with rate of sea level rise since the end of the last ice age 12,500 years ago. The leading sea level scientist in the world, physicist Nils-Axel Mörner, argues that, at the current rate of increase, it will be about 7 inches higher by 2100.

We have spent nearly $80 billion in the last 20 years on studying a non-problem. That money could have been spent drilling wells to provide clean drinking water to millions of people around the globe, not trying to shut down or cripple modern industrial civilization for no reason.

Sadly, the Democrat Party, both in CT and nationally, mindlessly buys into the global warming nonsense to gain the votes of the environmental extremists and their mere followers. And it's just another example of how scientifically illiterate Barack Obama is. And we're all paying for it, both at the gas pump and whenever the home heating oil truck arrives.