Actually, the EPA may be the problem. The followi
Post# of 3601
(Total Views: 312)
Posted On: 02/01/2017 6:09:47 PM
Actually, the EPA may be the problem.
The following excerpt from Oct 8 , 2013 Washington Times, reveals there may well be a Machiavellian hand from the leftists in the recent government. In effect, there may be some rather sinister types at work trying to quell the efforts of GC because his CSRV may cure a large part of pollution by the IC Engine. The EPA does not answer to the US Congress, thereby making its own laws/"rules" (illegally). Take away pollution with a simple fix and their existence is threatened.......
"it is important to recognize that there is ample evidence that the agency is failing to conduct the supporting economic analysis necessary to assess the economic merit of proposed regulations. A look back at the rules issued by the office that Gina McCarthy headed before becoming the EPA’s new administrator shows that the agency did not make reasoned determinations that new rules are the best or most cost-effective way to protect public health.
One of the rules in question — the EPA’s recent Tier 3 proposal to reduce emissions from cars and light trucks — illustrates the problem. This rule would cost Americans about $3.4 billion annually, according to the agency, placing it among the administration’s most costly rules. The EPA, however, proposed the rule while estimating net benefits of only the proposed option. It did not identify, let alone evaluate, any alternatives. (COATES?)
Failure to analyze alternatives is first among the cardinal sins that tempt regulators. Without analysis of alternatives, they may claim that their preferred alternative is good — meaning better than doing nothing. They have no basis, however, for saying that their rule is cost-effective or best among plausible alternative approaches."
It is a scary idea but certainly not beyond the purview of the bloated regime under which the EPA was created (without congress' approval and without the will of the people).
Not even GC may be aware of such goings on. So, just another viewpoint that could explain why a few posters keep flailing at COTE. Stay long.
The following excerpt from Oct 8 , 2013 Washington Times, reveals there may well be a Machiavellian hand from the leftists in the recent government. In effect, there may be some rather sinister types at work trying to quell the efforts of GC because his CSRV may cure a large part of pollution by the IC Engine. The EPA does not answer to the US Congress, thereby making its own laws/"rules" (illegally). Take away pollution with a simple fix and their existence is threatened.......
"it is important to recognize that there is ample evidence that the agency is failing to conduct the supporting economic analysis necessary to assess the economic merit of proposed regulations. A look back at the rules issued by the office that Gina McCarthy headed before becoming the EPA’s new administrator shows that the agency did not make reasoned determinations that new rules are the best or most cost-effective way to protect public health.
One of the rules in question — the EPA’s recent Tier 3 proposal to reduce emissions from cars and light trucks — illustrates the problem. This rule would cost Americans about $3.4 billion annually, according to the agency, placing it among the administration’s most costly rules. The EPA, however, proposed the rule while estimating net benefits of only the proposed option. It did not identify, let alone evaluate, any alternatives. (COATES?)
Failure to analyze alternatives is first among the cardinal sins that tempt regulators. Without analysis of alternatives, they may claim that their preferred alternative is good — meaning better than doing nothing. They have no basis, however, for saying that their rule is cost-effective or best among plausible alternative approaches."
It is a scary idea but certainly not beyond the purview of the bloated regime under which the EPA was created (without congress' approval and without the will of the people).
Not even GC may be aware of such goings on. So, just another viewpoint that could explain why a few posters keep flailing at COTE. Stay long.
(3)
(0)Coates International (COTE) Stock Research Links
Scroll down for more posts ▼