Sometimes it’s difficult to determine the root cause of a problem. In other cases, it’s so obvious that it almost screams at you. With the environmental movement there are at least two polluted streams feeding into what should be objective scientific investigations.
One stream consists of a refusal to acknowledge that human life is more important than any other. Regarding the other stream, we have big government agencies with big budgets doing what they do best: regulate everything in sight. After all, if regulations were not needed, neither would be the relevant government bureaucracies. And that is a horror that would keep government regulators up at night.
There are times, however, when these bureaucrats push things so far that they just make themselves look ridiculous. Like banning the burning of wood in Alaska to keep warm. No, that is not the punch line of a joke. That’s your Environmental Protection Agency at work, pushing forward its agenda while making utterly absurd statements.
EPA reasoning goes like this: “’It’s all one thing — when you most need the heat is when you’re most apt to create a serious air pollution problem for yourself and the people in your community,’ said Tim Hamlin, the director of the office of air and waste at the E.P.A.’s Region 10, which includes Alaska.”
We didn’t know there was such a thing as an “office of air and waste.” It’s tough to figure how the two go together. However, we do know what air is, and we’ve got a good idea that we know waste when we see it. And we see it right here – in the form of tax dollars going down the drain funding such preposterous ideas and silly bureaucrats.
Mr. Hamlin then attacks the laws of economics, as though they are some sort of enemy: “Residents are also trapped, he said, by economics. Natural gas, a much cleaner fuel source, is not widely available in this part of Alaska, and heating oil can be very expensive. Oil also produces particulate pollution, though less than wood. A study for the borough last year said residents here spent, on average, almost four times the national average in annual heating costs.”
Note that it took a government study to determine that people who live in somewhat isolated locations in the far northern latitudes have to spend more to heat their homes.
Like so much of our government, the EPA is out of control. In its leadership’s desire to grow the agency and its budget, it must find or invent new crises that demand more regulations. So money is disbursed to find out if people in Alaska spend more on heat than those in Florida. And to protect the quality of the air, using wood to heat homes will be banned in Alaska, leaving people to freeze to death.
Maybe the EPA should just simplify the whole thing and ban humans from living in Alaska. On the other hand, forget that — let’s not give them any ideas.
Source: Louder with Crowder