James Hrynyshyn is a freelance science journalist and communications consultant based in western North Carolina, where he tries to put degrees in marine biology and journalism to good use.
The U.S. Supreme Court says the Environmental Protection Agency has offered "no reasoned explanation" why it shouldn't regulate carbon dioxide, just like every other pollutant spewing from tailpipes and smokestacks. You'd think that would be a no-brainer, but ...
The court's four most conservative members -- Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Samuel Alito, both appointees of President George W. Bush, and Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas -- dissented.
The implications are theoretically immense. Of course, Bush will probably just sign a piece of paper noting that he doesn't agree, and nothing will come of this until the next administration takes charge. Still, at least it's another victory for common sense. A squeaker of a victory, but close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades.
Comments
Carbon dioxide released by man near ground level is heavier than air and sinks in air rather than rising up to the upper atmosphere to become a so-called greenhouse gas. While sinking, it stratifies from air. After sinking and stratifying, it tends to remain close to the ground and may find its way down to low-lying water bodies or down to ocean level where it can mix and react with water to form weak carbonic acid. Carbon dioxide is also removed from the lower atmosphere by rainfall.
Posted by: David Wozney | April 2, 2007 1:37 PM
How do I put this politely? Hmmm.
David, you're wrong. And pointing to your own website only proves you can't be bothered to read genuine science.
Posted by: James Hrynyshyn | April 4, 2007 9:36 AM