Wisconsin Safe Climate Act…

State Rep. Spencer Black can’t even get the facts correct in a 5 paragraph press release how can the people of Wisconsin even think that the 15 pages of “climate” legislation is worth the paper it is written on?

In the press release it states “carbon dioxide pollution, the main cause of global warming” had they done any research at all they would find that H2O, not CO2, is the “main cause” of global warming; CO2 only contributes about 2-10%.

Next he states that “We have an obligation to act before we see severe damage to our environment, our economy and our quality of life”

Really? A longer growing season here in Wisconsin would be bad? Fewer deaths due to cold weather would be bad? (BTW you do know that more people die due to cold weather than hot, right?) A longer tourist season would be bad for the economy of Wisconsin? What exactly would be wrong with a warmer Wisconsin…assuming we are getting warmer? Have they looked at any of the recent stats about the global climate over the past few years? We are down about 0.3 degrees…oh my!

Lastly, one must only read the first paragraph of the legislation to understand what is going on here. From AB 157:

The people of the state of Wisconsin, represented in senate and assembly, do enact as follows:

SECTION 1. 15.347 (5) of the statutes is created to read:

There is created in the department of natural resources a greenhouse gas management environmental justice council consisting of at least 3 members, appointed by the secretary of natural resources from nominations received from environmental justice organizations and community groups, representing communities that have the most significant exposure to air pollutants, including communities with minority populations and communities with low−income populations.

So that is what this is all about…more government bureaucracy and “help” for minority and low-income populations from the state DNR.

But it gets better…you see this bill isn’t as cut and dry as it would seem

286.23 Emission limits and reduction measures.
(b) Ensure that activities undertaken to comply with the rules will not have a disproportionate impact on communities with low−income populations.

So this means even though areas that are “run down” may have a higher out put of CO2…we can not force them to fix it to meet the state requirement under this bill but we would then be able to force other businesses and/or producers of “green house gases”* to further reduce their output in order to make up for these low-income areas.

* limited to carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexaflouride


No comments yet

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: