This throws innovation out the window, and it replaces it with a static list of winners who happen to submit applications by the end of 2011.
Henry Waxman
The Public Record
Henry Waxman is a former U.S. Representative from California, serving from 1975 to 2015. A member of the Democratic Party, he was known for his work on health care, environmental policy, and consumer protection. During his tenure, Waxman played a key role in the passage of the Affordable Care Act and was a prominent advocate for climate change legislation. He chaired the House Energy and Commerce Committee, where he focused on issues such as tobacco regulation and health care reform.
No, that is the reasons people have said, if you accept that there is a need to support innovation, it doesn't make much sense in my view to cut it off now when you might have a new innovative project that comes up tomorrow that is better…
Congress established the Renewable Fuels Program to reduce the country's dependence on petroleum-based fuels and cut greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector.
The statutory renewable fuels provisions allow petroleum refiners to meet their renewable fuel obligations by purchasing renewable fuel credits.
Unfortunately, a few bad actors selling fraudulent biodiesel fuel credits have created a crisis of confidence in the biodiesel fuels market that risks undermining the whole program.
I find it ironic to hear my Republican colleagues criticize a program that is run by the industry...
We cannot afford to ignore climate change in the development of our energy policies. The two are inextricably linked.
Progress will not be easy, but it is necessary. We need to continue our push toward alternative fuel vehicles.
It is what the Pentagon calls an accelerant of instability or a force multiplier of instability.
What we need are alternatives and market incentives to develop the technology that will allow us to use oil and coal.
This topic is important for the Nation's environmental and economic health, and our national security.
That is because the Tailoring Rule ensures that only the largest sources of greenhouse gases are currently subject to permitting requirements.
It is hard to escape the conclusion that the U.S. Congress has entered the intellectual wilderness.
The court found that the body of scientific evidence that EPA had marshalled to make its endangerment finding was substantial.
This willful blindness may enrich oil companies and other big polluters, but it is reckless, and it is dangerous.
EPA's interpretation of the governing Clean Air Act provisions is 'unambiguously correct.'
The question we should be asking is not what we can do to stop reasonable regulation but how we can help the families whose homes are being burned in Colorado Springs and flooded in St. Petersburg and how we can help the families who are…
There is no way to govern responsibly if you refuse to accept the findings of the National Academy of Sciences.
The House Republicans have made this the most anti-environment House in history.
For the past 18 months, we have heard repeated claims that EPA's actions on greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act were not authorized by law and would cause calamitous effects.
I would respectfully submit that if they are losing their jobs, it is not because of regulation.
At the hearing last week, we heard dire predictions about the effect of regulating carbon pollution under the Clean Air Act.





