American Environmental Coalition

Letter to Congress Urging NO New Energy Taxes

United States House of Representatives
U.S. Capitol
Washington, DC 20002

Dear Members of the U.S. House of Representatives:

We the undersigned members of American Environmental Coalition (AEC) write to urge you to reject legislation that imposes regulations on American energy usage through a so-called “cap-and-trade” provision in a vain attempt to change global average temperatures.

As you know, the U.S. House is considering H.R. 2454, the “American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009,” which will require a reduction in carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions in the United States. Not only is the underlying assumption of such legislation – that we are experiencing catastrophic, anthropogenic global warming -- highly questionable, but even under the assumptions of most such theories, the current offering of cap-and-trade measures would produce imperceptible climate change while doing grave harm to our economy, and the poor.

Rep. Barton: Even Democrats Divided on Climate Change

| Print |

E-mail

By: Ronald Kessler

As if running a marathon isn’t taxing enough, runners now have to worry about whether their breathing would violate Obama administration pollution standards and close down the New York and Boston marathons, Rep. Joe Barton of Texas tells Newsmax.

The ranking Republican on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Barton says that under the Clean Air Act, the Environmental Protection Agency can impose limits on any source of pollution emitting more than 250 tons a year. The EPA technically should not consider an emission a pollutant unless it is listed as such by the act, he says. But the U.S. Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision, has said that since the Clean Air Act didn’t specifically exclude carbon dioxide, the EPA potentially could regulate it.

Zogby: Only 30% of Americans support cap-and-trade scam

| Print |

E-mail

Q. President Obama wants to impose cap-and-trade laws that would limit the total carbon dioxide emissions allowed to be released into the environment. These laws would turn carbon dioxide into a commodity allowing those that pollute less to sell credits to those that pollute more. These credits would be traded on commodities markets. According to congressional testimony given by the Director of the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office, "decreasing emissions would also impose costs on the economy - much of those costs will be passed along to consumers in the form of higher prices for energy and energy intensive goods." Some have estimated these costs to be $800 to $1300 more per household by 2015. Knowing this, do you support or oppose cap-and-trade laws?

Support 30%

Oppose 57%

Not sure 13%

Churches find 'green' ways to cut utilities, save money

| Print |

E-mail

By Michael Foust

SPRINGDALE, Ark. (BP)--Some call it "going green," but churches big and small are discovering that examining utilities usage also can translate into significant savings.

More than a year ago, First Baptist Church in Springdale, Ark., which has about 6,000 attendees on Sunday mornings, began a partnership with the company Energy Education to cut into its electric, gas and water bills -- a significant endeavor because the church was spending roughly $1 million annually on its utility bills for its two campuses in Springdale and Rogers and its private school, Shiloh Christian.

Even Greater Disbelief of Alarmists

| Print |

E-mail

by Paul Chesser, Heartland Institute Correspondent

Rasmussen has done another poll of registered voters about their views on global warming, just three months after a surprise revelation that more believe that natural causes drive climate than humans. Here are the findings reported Friday:

    Climate change caused by planetary trends: 48%

    Climate changed caused by human activity: 34%

    Other reason: 7%

    Aren’t sure: 11%

More...

<< Start < Prev 1 2 Next > End >>

Results 1 - 55 of 80