It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

White House looks to regulate cow flatulence as part of climate agenda!

page: 12
28
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 29 2014 @ 06:22 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


There's a fairly basic question at the core of the current food-stamp debate in Congress. Why has the program grown so rapidly over the past few years — to the point where 47 million Americans, one-sixth of the country, now receive food stamps?
Yes. And the answer is that banking thing that was a result of relaxed regulation.



Yeah regulation like Nafta doesn't 'isn't' related to the topic.

Or those who act like the US is the only country in the world has nothing to do with it either.
What?




posted on Mar, 29 2014 @ 06:22 PM
link   
reply to post by ManBehindTheMask
 





And ive lived in farming and ranching communities my whole life..


Likewise the worse smells I have ever encountered come from hogs, and chickens.
edit on 29-3-2014 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 29 2014 @ 06:25 PM
link   

neo96
reply to post by ManBehindTheMask
 





And ive lived in farming and ranching communities my whole life..


Likewise the worse smells I have ever encountered come from hogs, and chickens.
edit on 29-3-2014 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



Nothing like the smell of fresh silage steaming on a hot summer day



posted on Mar, 29 2014 @ 06:27 PM
link   

ManBehindTheMask

neo96
reply to post by ManBehindTheMask
 





And ive lived in farming and ranching communities my whole life..


Likewise the worse smells I have ever encountered come from hogs, and chickens.
edit on 29-3-2014 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



Nothing like the smell of fresh silage steaming on a hot summer day


That takes me back to my aunts farm.

Geez.



posted on Mar, 29 2014 @ 06:28 PM
link   
reply to post by ManBehindTheMask
 


What if the regulation includes putting more crap into the already horrendous feeding habits of large scale beefing operations?
There is no regulation on the table.


And people are ok with letting the gov experiment and put MORE crap into the feed were giving these animals?
Are you talking about his topic? It has nothing to do with feed.

But there is this:

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is implementing a voluntary plan with industry to phase out the use of certain antibiotics for enhanced food production.

www.fda.gov...



posted on Mar, 29 2014 @ 06:28 PM
link   
reply to post by WhiteAlice
 



"Voluntary strategies" is not "clamping down on
the dairy industry".


Yet.

Just as with anything else, if enough farmers don't "volunteer", read - take bribes, what you explained as likened to "lotto tickets" (in other words, a gamble), the Feds will step in and force regulation. This has been pete and repeated many times before. Volunteer, or else.

But, as has been pointed out, it's either more medication in our already overmedicated cattle, or some piece of likely overpriced machinery. In all likelihood, you could probably trace back to the sales and manufacturing of said equipment, and find someone that's real friendly to the WH standing there. Or, perhaps even in the WH.

Or, perhaps, a friendly bundler.




posted on Mar, 29 2014 @ 06:29 PM
link   
Being "liberal" doesn't mean "loving bloated government" or "needing to be coddled from cradle to grave."

And, surprise surprise, legislation often uses the beginning of a calendar year (January 1) as an initiation point.



posted on Mar, 29 2014 @ 06:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


I believe this is what he is referring to:

www.trendhunter.com...


University of Hohenheim scientists have invented a pill that, when used in conjunction with a special diet, could help reduce the abominable emissions.



posted on Mar, 29 2014 @ 06:34 PM
link   

neo96
For the record this chart is not 'neat'.



It's a sad state of the union over 80,000 pages of regulations.


And look at how much our world has changed over that time. In the 19th century, primary means of transportation of goods was trains and ships. Most goods in a given area tended to rely on local sources. As trade between states continued to expand, it led to a whole lot of problems in these interstate exchanges as each state had its own set of rules in terms of trades, contracts (sales would be a contract), judicial jurisdiction, and more. It became such a problem by 1952 that The Uniform Commercial Code was born to basically regulate interstate trade and contracts. I had to take business law and learn not only the case history preceding it but the laws themselves. Boy was that a fun class and the book that was just an overview of some of the most pivotal points of the UCC was so big that, well, my dominant hand is now permanently disabled because of it. Not kidding, lol.

Information has also really increased over that same time period. We now have the ability to compile and examine extraordinary amounts of data at an unprecedented level thanks to the advent of computing. Back in the 19th century, it'd basically would've required archaeological guesswork to make an estimate of what a climate was like in a given area some 1000 years ago. These days, we have tons of technology. Like ice cores being used to determine even minute differences in atmospheric gases from thousands and thousands of years ago. We couldn't do that back in the day. Nor could we very accurately measure how much of what was in the air. Back in the days of the Industrial Revolution, uncontrolled soot wasn't considered a problem til everything started turning blackish.

Cause and effect. The more we expand, the more we learn, the more convoluted our law books are going to become. A good portion of those law books are almost always because somebody went ahead and took advantage of a legal loophole to do something that injured somebody else. All one has to do is look at tax code and tax court history to see why that's such a convoluted mess. Something as simple as "revenue"--well, it's really not that simple at all apparently.

We basically do it to ourselves.



posted on Mar, 29 2014 @ 06:40 PM
link   
Might I suggest going back to the original document released by the White House which was then butchered by the "wingnutty" Daily Caller in the article in the OP (as Phage suggested in their first post):

FACT SHEET: Climate Action to Limit Methane Emissions

Upon a review of the actual document, one finds that "cow flatulence" is only a small part of the plan (about 1%).

How surprising that the Daily Caller would blow this out of all proportion to reality!

Again, here's what the White House Fact Sheet ACTUALLY says on the subject:



Agriculture: In June, in partnership with the dairy industry, the USDA, EPA and DOE will jointly release a “Biogas Roadmap” outlining voluntary strategies to accelerate adoption of methane digesters and other cost-effective technologies to reduce U.S. dairy sector greenhouse gas emissions by 25 percent by 2020.



edit on 18Sat, 29 Mar 2014 18:45:12 -050014p062014366 by Gryphon66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 29 2014 @ 06:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Libertygal
 

Perhaps. But it has nothing to do with what the Action Plan is referring to.



posted on Mar, 29 2014 @ 06:47 PM
link   
reply to post by Gryphon66
 


And here is one response to that, because most people understand how, once the camels nose is under the tent, it's only a matter of time before the whole camel is in the tent.

mobile.nytimes.com...


Since cattle flatulence and manure are a
significant source of methane, farmers
have long been worried that a federal
methane control strategy could place a
burden on them. But Andrew Walmsley,
director of congressional relations for the
American Farm Bureau Federation, said
that his group was pleased that, for now,
the administration’s proposals to reduce
methane from cattle were voluntary.

“All indications are that it’s voluntary,” he
said, “but we do see increased potential for
scrutiny for us down the line, which would
cause concern.”


So, it isn't just the "Daily Wingnut Caller" that has concerns about government overreach. They do it with everything else they touch, why would this be any different?

Also, the very site you quoted also states the plan will be revealed in June, so until then, it is being called "voluntary", but until "The Plan" is actually revealed, we have to see it to know what's in it.

Funny how that works.


edit on 29-3-2014 by Libertygal because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 29 2014 @ 06:49 PM
link   

Phage
reply to post by Libertygal
 

Perhaps. But it has nothing to do with what the Action Plan is referring to.



You don't know that for certain, as the plan won't be fully revealed until, I believe it is June? 2014.

Until then, exactly what is in the plan, we have to wait and see, to find out what is in it.



posted on Mar, 29 2014 @ 06:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Libertygal
 

Seems the dairy industry (the target) is pretty happy about it though. They seem to take it as an opportunity rather than a threat and they are the ones that will be affected.

“This announcement validates the path the dairy industry is on – one focused on proactive incentives that can increase farm income, not punitive regulations that would add more costs,” said Jim Mulhern, president and chief executive officer of the National Milk Producers Federation, which develops and carries out policies that advance the well-being of dairy farmers and the cooperatives they own. “Because of our recent efforts and farmers’ long-standing environmental stewardship, the White House strategy for agriculture includes a commitment to cost-effective, voluntary actions to reduce methane emissions through partnerships and programs.”


“This is great news for America’s dairy farm families of all sizes across the country,” said Tom Gallagher, chief executive officer of the Innovation Center for U.S. Dairy, which brings together leaders of dairy farmer organizations, cooperatives, processors, manufacturers, and brands to foster innovation. “For decades, dairy farmers have demonstrated a commitment to environmental stewardship, and adopting new practices and technologies along the path to continuous improvement. Our work continues.”

feedstuffs.com...



"We're glad that it's carrots as opposed to sticks, and think this could help generate a more reliable revenue stream for farmers from manure," said Chris Galen, a spokesman for the National Milk Producers Federation, the largest trade group of dairy farmers.
online.wsj.com...
edit on 3/29/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 29 2014 @ 07:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 



... increase farm income...


Again, incentives also known as taxpayer increased subsidies. I would be excited too. The very government that has nearly overregulated them out of business (as I demonstrated in my previous post) is now offering them some "income" again, read subsidies - taxpayer money - to do this. As long as they have a chance to keep their farms, that's pretty exciting. It may even help offset the cost of feed, which is now a hot commodity on the stock exchange, especially since the Feds are considering raising the ethanol requirements from 10%-15% for all gasoline. The only thing stopping them is, most vehicle warranties will be voided by using the 15% mix. So, it's been a bit of a fight.

In the meantime, farmers are caught in the middle. Either grow their own corn for feed, if it doesn't get desroyed by drought, or, buy the corn at much increased prices.

Just how much will this "incentive" be? No one knows yet. But, as I stated, if enough farmers do not volunteer, it's merely a matter of time, oh, say some time before 2016, that it does become a regulation.

That is, if the Plan released in June, leaves it, as speculated, voluntary.

We won't know until it comes out. Many things said by this administration are not what comes out in their actions. In fact, it has been quite the opposite. People have every reason to be concerned about more regulations.


edit on 29-3-2014 by Libertygal because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 29 2014 @ 07:03 PM
link   
reply to post by WhiteAlice
 





And look at how much our world has changed over that time


The world hasn't changed one damn bit.

From the 30s right up until the 70s that chart looks like government knew it's place.

From the 70s to today looks like people are scared of their own shadow so they support government fascism.

REGULATING every thing they do,everything they own.



posted on Mar, 29 2014 @ 07:05 PM
link   
reply to post by Libertygal
 


Again, incentives also known as taxpayer increased subsidies.

Again, this is the income being discussed. Methane capture for fuel. Turning crap into money.

"We're glad that it's carrots as opposed to sticks, and think this could help generate a more reliable revenue stream for farmers from manure," said Chris Galen, a spokesman for the National Milk Producers Federation, the largest trade group of dairy farmers.
online.wsj.com...


edit on 3/29/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 29 2014 @ 07:14 PM
link   

Libertygal
reply to post by Gryphon66
 


And here is one response to that, because most people understand how, once the camels nose is under the tent, it's only a matter of time before the whole camel is in the tent.

mobile.nytimes.com...


Since cattle flatulence and manure are a
significant source of methane, farmers
have long been worried that a federal
methane control strategy could place a
burden on them. But Andrew Walmsley,
director of congressional relations for the
American Farm Bureau Federation, said
that his group was pleased that, for now,
the administration’s proposals to reduce
methane from cattle were voluntary.

“All indications are that it’s voluntary,” he
said, “but we do see increased potential for
scrutiny for us down the line, which would
cause concern.”


So, it isn't just the "Daily Wingnut Caller" that has concerns about government overreach. They do it with everything else they touch, why would this be any different?

Also, the very site you quoted also states the plan will be revealed in June, so until then, it is being called "voluntary", but until "The Plan" is actually revealed, we have to see it to know what's in it.

Funny how that works.


edit on 29-3-2014 by Libertygal because: (no reason given)


So, let's see what is offered in response to the facts about the White House publication :

1. A folksy but essentially meaningless and off-topic anecdotal parable; and then

2. A misrepresentation of a quote from another source as making a general comment about "government overreach" when a very specific one "increased potential for scrutiny" is actually stated; and then

3. A doom-porn prediction of worst case scenario that suits a particular right-wing political agenda not to mention, requires the gift of prophecy and prediction of the future ... we either don't know, or we do know, but one can't have it both ways.

Indeed, funny how that works ... but not "ha-ha" funny.
edit on 19Sat, 29 Mar 2014 19:17:22 -050014p072014366 by Gryphon66 because: Yep.



posted on Mar, 29 2014 @ 08:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Gryphon66
 


I see. After going back and reviewing the State of the Union address where this was first brought up, and reviewing Obama's history, I guess his track record with "Renewable Energy" doesn't matter.

finance.townhall.com...


failures of Obama’s
green-energy expenditures: projects that
have gone bankrupt (approximately 19),
those that are heading that way
(approximately 20), and the jobs he says he
has created (at an average cost of $6.7
million per job)—all while raising energy
costs, serving as a hidden tax on all
Americans.


greencorruption.blogspot.com...-6X


In our three-part series, two focused
directly on the failures, and our sums were
15 bankruptcies and 20 troubled (a total of
35 with over 65% having meaningful
Democrat political connections –– bundlers,
donors, supporters, etc). Yet, considering
the rapid speed of these "green"
bankruptcies and issues (about 10 that I
read about just last week), I'm compiling
new totals here, which will include a new
and updated list by the Heritage Foundation
dated October 18, 2012 –– President
Obama’s Taxpayer-Backed Green Energy
Failures –– with their total of 36 (updated
later with a number of 34). And most listed
at The Heritage and ours are very similar,
however, they have some we don't and vise
versa.

(snip)


UPDATE: New calculations as of
December 1, 2012: despite eliminating AES
Energy (which I am still not sure of) from
my list and adding ReVolt Technology, the
numbers remain the same: 23 bankrupt, 29
troubled, equals a new "Obama green-energy failure" list total of 52. While
billions of "green-energy taxpayer money is
gone, and we know that the majority of the
loans (90 percent) were funneled to Obama
and high-ranking Democrat cronies, the
"troubled list is a moving target." Thus there
is no way to give an exact dollar amount
what is still at risk, yet we do know that the
percentage of cronyism in the failed and
troubled list is hoovering around 56% (29 of
the 52), until I have time to dig further.


And this was from 2012. This isn't "Doom Porn", this is FACT. Cold, hard, painful, facts. And, it hurts us all.

And we want MORE OF THIS?

No wonder he had to once again sidestep Congress. It certainly isn't because of the bailout money being misspent, going to cronyism, and one failure after another, that Congress would put their collective feet down and put a stop to unihinged spending that seemed to profit a few lucky people, would it? Naw, that wouldn't be it.

m.csmonitor.com...


Obama sidesteps Congress to
curb methane emissions

The latest step in the White House's new Climate
Action Plan is a new plan to curb methane, a far
more potent trapper of heat than carbon dioxide.
The plan relies heavily on cooperation with oil,
gas, and dairy industries.


Cooperation you say? You mean through bribes? Promised subsidies? Guaranteed loans? Huge startup fees when we can't even pay our own bills without support from other countries? Who, by the way, are seeing the light at the end of THAT tunnel...

And don't let this little bit escape the previous conversation.


Also, the involvement of the dairy industry
highlights the ranching industry's absence from
the White House plan. While dairy cows are reared
and milked indoors, where their ruminant gases
can plausibly be gathered, beef cattle in outdoor
feedlots do not present the same methane-recycling opportunities.


So, in other words, this will only affect dairy farmers, not beef ranchers, who are still in the same financial dire straights I pointed out previously.


Before rolling out the federal methane reduction strategy, the White House had announced climate action progress in developing three other projects: renewable energy technologies, new fuel economy
standards, and informational "climate hubs" to
help farms and cities adapt to climate change.


See, Obama never does anything in isolation. One thing always connects back to another, which connects back to another, and it gets highly convoluted.

Yet and still, the very lobbyists he swore to eliminate are the ones who stand to profit, and, as I previously pointed out, bundlers, and personal friends.

While his left hand is busy signing executive orders bypassing the rule of law, it pays to dig deeper yet, and to most certainly pay attention to what the right hand is doing. He always has an underlying reason for what he does, and what he presents, and this is his modus operendi.

Obviously, it won't matter what proof or reasonable conversation is put forth, as Obama supporters still staunchly stand by him, regardless of his rate of failure and outright embarrassment and humiliation. But, I can point out that if you look around, you will notice your numbers are dwindling rapidly, and even his own party, again aside from the staunchest of supporters (read those that have something financially to gain) are the only ones left.

What I fail to understand is, with the vast majority of Democrats having woken up, why some have yet to. All that I can surmise is, they are the most progressive of the left, the ones who feel Obama has not done *enough*.

It should say something when you know that your still Democrat senate will likely not back you on extreme measures, so much so, that you feel you must bypass Congress and the rule of law, and use executive orders.

The amount of Democrats not only backing away from Obama, but getting caught up in corruption arrests in just the past two weeks speaks mountains.

But again, it is, and will continue, to fall on deaf ears.

That being said, if farmers wish to voluntarily make these moves, more power to them. But, when the government steps in and starts waving around "carbon credits" and other such nonsense as incentives, one must scrutinize it as heavily as they do BitCoin.

The expense of startup for one of these digesters can run from 350,000 to 500,000, or more, depending on the size of the dairy farm. As was proven, this does not in the least, affect beef cattle, who fart too. Perhaps this is where the pills will come in.

The payoff comes in approximately 4-5 years, and of course, the government is offering "loans" for startup. The incentives are twofold. The farm can run on self produced energy, and, may even be able to sell back to the power company.

However, one state has already ceased the carbon credit program, since 2010, for obvious reasons.

So, deeper in debt, and hope and pray you can survive the 4-5 years for it to start actually being a profit. Yep, that's a lottery ticket, alright.

Night boys and girls. Have fun.


edit on 29-3-2014 by Libertygal because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 29 2014 @ 09:13 PM
link   
reply to post by Libertygal
 

Ah. One of those "it's all a part of everything" rants. Got it.

BTW, I'm not an Obama supporter. Been a long time since I actually supported any politician.

edit on 3/29/2014 by Phage because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
28
<< 9  10  11    13  14  15 >>

log in

join