While not everyone agrees on the issue of climate change it is important to remember that we all want to have a healthy environment. Whether it raises the temperature or not burning fossil fuels creates pollutants that can make us sick when we breathe them in or drink them in our water, which is why the Inflation Reduction Act has value. It does have some flaws which is why we need to tell our leaders to improve the legislation. One of the problems in the act is that it’s only targeting the largest power plants that run for half a year. If the capacity limit was lowered to 100 MW and the capacity factor limit lowered to 50MW, 78% of the gas generated in 2035 would be covered instead of 23%. It would still provide environmental benefits whether or not you believe in climate change. Another issue is that new gas plants won’t be required to reduce their admissions until 2035 and plants that plan to retire before 2040 are not required to make any significant changes. Even the utility companies’ lobbyists suggested a retirement exemption only through 2028. The EPA is open to public comments about the act so if we spread the word and get a lot of people to tell them that we want changes they can happen. You can learn more here and make your public comments here or contact the EPA directly. Please take a moment and think about it.
Hate to tell you this about your first post, but none of this makes any sense. In the first place the Inflation Reduction Act was a spending bill with no legislative content. It had to be that since passing actual legislation still requires 60 votes in the Senate while spending bill ony require 51 thanks to Harry Reid. Second, the EPAs action is all about climate change and has nothing to do whatsoever with actual pollution. CO2 ("carbon" in activist doublespeak) is not and has never been a pollutant. It poses no threat of anything to anybody. And actually sacrificing consistent power generation for the very sketchy and unproven "climate change" baloney is simply cutting your nose off to spite your face. And having actually read and responded to docket comments when I worked for DOT I can assure you that signing your name to pre-written comments from activist groups like "Evergreen Action" pretty much ensures it'll simply be bundled with the other tranches 10,000 or 15,000 identical mailings and ignored since you're not really making a significant point. And finally, if Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo eliminates or substantially curtails the Chevron deference in the next Supreme Court term EPA will lose it's illegitimate ability to regulate CO2 anyways and your whole effort will be for naught. But I do genuinely support the idea of regular people getting involved in the mechanics of their government and I actually hope you rethink your ideas in light of what I've mentioned and even if you still disagree with me write it out and submit it. Good luck.
The Inflation Reduction Act is also about making sure clean air is available to communities through the monitoring of it's quality. This includes ozone and particulate matter. https://www.epa.gov/inflation-reduction-act/delivering-cleaner-air As I said, burning fossil fuels leads to health problems in people and a study by Harvard University in collaboration with the universities of Birmingham and Leicester, and University College London shows that more than 8 million people in 2018 died from fossil fuel pollution. https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/c-chan...tion-responsible-for-1-in-5-deaths-worldwide/ If you think that campaigns like Evergreen Action's are not effective then maybe people themselves should write straight to the EPA if they want something to be done about the issue of having clean air . https://www.epa.gov/inflation-reduction-act/forms/contact-us-about-inflation-reduction-act Thank you Pieces of Malarkey for your encouragement.
