<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
<channel>
	<title><![CDATA[Grist - Comment Feed for A common person&#8217;s guide to the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009]]></title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.grist.org/rss/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<description>Grist Comment Feed</description>
	<language>en</language>
    
		<item>
            <title>Comment #1 by Rmoen</title>
			<link>http://www.grist.org/article/2009-06-03-guide-to-waxman-markey-bill/</link>
			<pubDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2009 09:32:25 -0700</pubDate>
			<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.grist.org/article/2009-06-03-guide-to-waxman-markey-bill/1</guid>
			<description><![CDATA[
				<p>Mr. Glick-<p>Thanks for bringing some clarity to this camel (horse designed by committee).&nbsp; The whole thing sounds like a regulatory mess to me. Who's going to measure and regulate the overseas offsets?<p>My biggest concern, however, is the that the United States is basing this legislation on the IPCC reports which are tainted by politics and agenda.&nbsp; The reports don't pass the smell test -- see <a href="http://www.energyplanusa.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.energyplanusa.com . Plus, there's been a lot of new climate discoveries since the UN's Kyoto Protocol that are largely omitted from the reports.&nbsp;<p>America needs our own scientific assessment of global warming. I am a Democrat who for the past 20 years believed global warming was caused by CO2.&nbsp; But now after reading the UN reports I suspect the fix was in.&nbsp; The UN reports contain much good science, but the fact is the UN is a political organization where politics trump science.&nbsp; We need our own objective climate commission to think through global warming and determine whether it's driven by CO2.&nbsp; ...before we heavily burden our economy with CO2 taxes.</p></a></p></p></p>
			]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[
				<p>Mr. Glick-<p>Thanks for bringing some clarity to this camel (horse designed by committee).&nbsp; The whole thing sounds like a regulatory mess to me. Who's going to measure and regulate the overseas offsets?<p>My biggest concern, however, is the that the United States is basing this legislation on the IPCC reports which are tainted by politics and agenda.&nbsp; The reports don't pass the smell test -- see <a href="http://www.energyplanusa.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.energyplanusa.com . Plus, there's been a lot of new climate discoveries since the UN's Kyoto Protocol that are largely omitted from the reports.&nbsp;<p>America needs our own scientific assessment of global warming. I am a Democrat who for the past 20 years believed global warming was caused by CO2.&nbsp; But now after reading the UN reports I suspect the fix was in.&nbsp; The UN reports contain much good science, but the fact is the UN is a political organization where politics trump science.&nbsp; We need our own objective climate commission to think through global warming and determine whether it's driven by CO2.&nbsp; ...before we heavily burden our economy with CO2 taxes.</p></a></p></p></p>
			]]></content:encoded>
		</item>
    
 </channel>
</rss>