The Colbert Report airs Monday through Thursday at 11:30/10:30c.
Tags: Barack Obama, CIA, EPA, LGBT, Marriage Equality, NASA, Science & Technology, Stephen Colbert, The Colbert Report, Video, William Shatner
During the Bush Administration, Congress created a new mandate under which oil companies were required to use a minimum amount of cellulosic ethanol, a scientific term for "payoff to Iowa Caucus-goers," in their annual fuel production.
Refiners had to blend 6.6 million gallons of cellulosic ethanol in 2011. Although precisely zero gallons of cellulosic ethanol were produced, the Environmental Protection Agency increased the quota to 8.65 million gallons. The idea was to create a domestic cellulosic ethanol industry, yet according to EPA data, no such fuel has been produced last year or this year.
Will this sad new get the oil companies off the hook?
The Environmental Protection Agency has slapped a $6.8 million penalty on oil refiners for not blending cellulosic ethanol into gasoline, jet fuel and other products…
"EPA's decision is arbitrary and capricious. We fail to understand how EPA can maintain a requirement to purchase a type of fuel that simply doesn't exist," said Charles Drevna, president of American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers, the Washington-based association representing the oil-refining industry.
Good job, Congress and EPA. One way to promote environmental sustainability is to tax carbon — or put a cap on carbon emissions — and allow all clean fuel companies and technologies to compete on a more even playing field.
Option B, you could have the government chose politically-connected industries (ethanol!) and companies (Solyndra!), to be subsided at taxpayer expense, have them fail to develop a usable product and then fine manufacturers for failing to blend their fuel with the aforementioned rainbows and unicorn sweat. Glad we made the right choice!
Tags: Energy & Oil, Environment, EPA, Science & Technology, Solyndra
Talking about Jesus is usually a surefire ways for Republican politicians to drum up support from the conservative base.
But, as one top Environmental Protection Agency official recently learned, using Jesus imagery can be helpful, unless you're a Democrat defending environmental regulation…
The Obama administration's top environmental official in the oil-rich South and Southwest region has resigned after Republicans targeted him over remarks made two years ago when he used the word "crucify" to describe how he would go after companies violating environmental laws.
In a letter to Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson sent Sunday, Al Armendariz says he regrets his words… A senior administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the subject, told The Associated Press that Armendariz has since received death threats…
Republicans in Congress had called for Armendariz' firing, after Oklahoma Sen. James Inhofe highlighted the May 2010 speech last week as proof of what he refers to as EPA's assault on energy, particularly the technique of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking.
OK, so Armendariz didn't talk about his personal relationship with Jesus, so much as his personal relationship with the Roman officials who ordered his death. Close.
It was very brave of Sen. Inhofe to bring this old speech into the public eye. He's such a mythbuster. First, he used the Bible to definitively prove that global warming is a hoax. And now, he's finally shown that the possibility of having an apolitical discussion about the environment is as real as a unicorn.
Tags: Christianity, Energy & Oil, Environment, EPA, James Inhofe, Religion
At his State of the Union address last night, President Obama made a clunker of a joke about the EPA "crying over spilled milk" by requiring dairy farmers to have milk-containment plans rather than focusing on hazardous substances like oil.
Well, it turns out that massive milk spills can be just as dangerous as leaky BP tankers. According to a report about an April 2000 milk spill in England…
Wildlife was put at risk when 3,000 litres of milk was spilled into Galmington stream in Trull, Taunton, on Wednesday afternoon.
Ben Woodhouse of the Environment Agency said: "The problem is that microbes in the water work on decomposing the milk, which takes the oxygen out of the water causing the fish to die."
Gawker's John Cook dug up several other examples of catastrophic milk spills that either threatened to kill thousands of fish or endangered the local water supply. Like this 2007 Washington spill…
Darigold [dairy farm] failed to follow proper operating, maintenance and notification procedures during a February 2007 milk spill that discharged polluted water to the city of Lynden. The spill caused the wastewater treatment plant to malfunction, resulting in the release of polluted, mostly untreated sewage to the Nooksack River.
You heard it here first. President Obama is soft on milk. The American people demand to know: Where does the President stand on other dairy products? Is Obama soft on soft cheese? Is he hard on cheddar? What about yogurt, or even Go-Gurt? And what about milk-related foods? All of these jokes about milk spills may be distracting us from the menace of chocolate chip cookies.
John Boehner and congressional Republicans should exploit this weakness and demand to know why Obama does not feel the need to cry over spilled milk. Because if anyone knows the value of crying about trivial things, it's John Boehner.
Photo by Jim Watson/AFP/Getty Images
Tags: Barack Obama, Energy & Oil, Environment, EPA, Food, State of the Union
It's a tough life being a member of Congress. Not only do you have to debate legislation that affects the real world – the payroll tax, the fate of the Keystone XL pipeline, the extension of unemployment benefits — under the current leadership, you also have to worry about invisible pink unicorns, Griffins, and fictional Environmental Protection Agency regulations…
The House on Thursday approved legislation Republicans said was aimed at ensuring the EPA cannot regulate so-called 'farm dust.' The Farm Dust Regulation Prevention Act, H.R. 1633, which would prevent the EPA from issuing any new rule over the next year that regulates coarse particulate matter, or 'nuisance dust,' passed in a 268-150 vote…
The bill is a reaction to the possibility that the EPA might issue a new rule that affects farmers. Republicans have cited that possibility all year as an example of overreach by the EPA. A statement from EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson earlier this year that the agency now has no plans to issue any such rule did not deter Republicans from pushing ahead with the bill, which they said would create certainty that no rule would come out.
It's true that the EPA has had particulate-dust pollution standards since 1987, even imposing some related regulations under the green-hippie aegis of the Bush administration. But although the Clean Air Act mandates periodic review of these rules, the EPA has sworn that it has no plans to promulgate more dust regulations.
Still, it's commendable for the House to think outside the box. Just think about all the other fake pressing issues deserving of congressional attention. I believe that for too long Leprechauns have used their shoemaking prowess to undermine the competiteveness of America's domestic textile manufacturing, all the while hoarding the world's gold supply and thereby destabilizing commodities markets. Now, this might not be literally "true," but passage of the Leprechaun Tariff of 2011 would create the certainty American business requires, so let's get to it.
Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images News/Getty Images
Tags: Agriculture, EPA, House of Representatives