With the article "The Lawnmower Men" Robert F.  Agostinelli in the Wall Street Journal, July 19, 2008 talking about the numerous, crazy and intense proposed restrictions that the EPA is laying before Congress, and will have to be faced by the next President.

At the heart of the bureaucracy's plan is a simple premise, that carbon dioxide ought to be regulated by the EPA like any other hazardous industrial material. But the implications of that are pretty far-reaching.

Just a few of the restrictions for carbon emissions include….

  • A farm with over 25 cows would exceed the EPA's proposed carbon limits. (PS – no family-sustaining farm in America can make money from 25 cows.)
  • Farmers with 500 acres of crops, due to harvesting and processing machinery are also seen as requiring regulation.
  • Farm tractor, and lawn/gardening equipment would also be regulated by the EPA.

Robert reports that the EPA wants to regulate buildings and having buildings obtain of EPA permits that proves that their carbon footprint is at the proper levels. This includes all manner of buildings including schools, hospitals, office buildings. Now the EPA realizes that this task will be enormous, saying "hundreds of thousands" of permits would have to be made and regulated for such an idea.  

My take on this personally is that since the EPA regulates the engines of automobiles, regulating garden machinery makes sense. But for requiring the regulation of farms with more than 25 cows on a farm? come on, that is ridiculous.  It is in my opinion almost communist the way they would regulate such things, limiting how much many cows a farmer can have or how much crops a farmer is limiting his potential profits and revenues which is a prime example of how the EPA is getting out of control with it's obsession with trying to regulate the carbon footprints of everything.

Let's make sense of carbon regulation, not nonsense.