EPA Cancels Climate Leaders Program

Despite the fact that this is a crucial time in the fight against climate change, the Environmental Protection Agency has decided to discontinue the only federal voluntary support program for industries interested in reducing their greenhouse gas emissions.

Created in 2002, the Climate Leaders program is an industry-government partnership that works with companies to develop comprehensive climate change strategies.

In a letter (PDF) released to participating businesses on Wednesday, the EPA said it has determined that climate programs operated by the states and NGOs are now “robust enough” to service organizations that wish to continue to advance their climate leadership through comprehensive reporting (that exceed mandatory reporting requirements) and/or the establishment of facility or corporatelevel GHG reduction goals.

Despite its confidence in the strength of these non-governmental programs, the EPA declined to recommend any of these robust programs to program participants by name.

Many feel that this is the worst possible time to discontinue a centralized program so instrumental in teaching new and established businesses how to implement sustainable practices and achieve accounting transparency.

The Climate Registry, governed and supported by 41 U.S. states and DC, has stepped up to fill the gap left by EPA’s phase-out of its Climate Leaders program. The Registry says its voluntary GHG registry program is the only one in North America supported by state governments (Environmental Leader).

Like this story? Connect with Beth on Twitter or StumbleUpon!

63 comments

LMj Sunshine

Thank you for article.

LMj Sunshine

Thank you for article.

LMj Sunshine

Thank you for article.

LMj Sunshine

Thank you for article.

LMj Sunshine

Thank you for article.

Addie H.
Addie H.5 years ago

Despite its confidence

Paige G.
Paige G.5 years ago

Our government's ongoing refusal to do anything about climate change is just ridiculous.

Melissah Chadwick
Melissah C.5 years ago

thanks

Jeffrey Prystupa
Jeffrey Prystupa5 years ago

The whole Climate-change subject or field has been purposely obfuscated and politicized. Why? To keep the status quo of the energy cartel. "We got fuel to burn, We got roads to drive. Keep on rockin in the free world."
My independent research on this subject revealed that we are being poisoned more so than 'baked'. By that it is meant that we are being subjected to particulate pollution from coal-fired electricity plants that spew mercury and fluoride into the atmosphere that blocks the Sun from reaching the surface of the Earth. This is called Global Dimming. See the BBC documentary on this subject.
A serious approach to the conditions that require address would be to build houses that are near-zero and net-zero in energy usage and to move to electric cars.
Cleaning coal is likely to be as successful as removing the odor from excrement.
Einstein indicated that the solution to the problem will not be found within the context that created the problem.
Therefore to look to centralized or governmental or industrial solutions indicates insanity on our part.
We, as individuals, must exert ourselves in the marketplace and be the change we want to see. There is no incentive for 'them' to do anything for 'us'. We must do it ourselves. The same situation is now found in health and health care.
No one is coming to save us. We are on our own now - always have been.
http://liveordieblogs.blogspot.com/

Stephen A.
Past Member 5 years ago

Hi Alexandra,

I'm pretty sure the article you referred to cited the interpretation which had just been proven wrong, as explained in the Post article. I really wouldn't use it to try and counter anything now, especially the article that shows why it is wrong. It could be worth looking into the Antarctic East shelf, which may not have been accumulating ice as quickly as previously believed due to the same mistake.

Still, one thing I found interesting was that the Post article never actually claimed that Global Warming was not happening. It only demanded that the question be considered open rather than proven beyond doubt when major supporting data is still, evidently, questionable. Also, "Climate Change" is now used because the predictions are not of warming in all locations: There is a prediction of warming on average, but certain regions are expected to get cooler.

He's actually right about the lock-step behaviour. I'm fine with such behaviour when the evidence is unquestionable (the Earth is unquestionably round), but I have searched extensively and never found a single piece of evidence, with all relevant data available, that stood up to normal scrutiny. (For example, the simulations that predict disasters apparently tend to center around a massive change in the Atlantic ocean-currents due to temperature-change. I have been unable to find any details of their model or analysis to evaluate it.)