You may not have noticed that DoD is making climate change a priority. Are you really worried about enforcement?

Neither is mercury specified yet it is regulated. A substance only needs to be found dangerous to be regulated. That is how the Clean Air Act is written.

It is already in the regulations that came in to being as a result of a Supreme Court order. We are already delivering through CAFE standards, new point source regulations and the regulations that are available for public comment for existing point sources. There is nothing that congress needs to do. In fact, since Paris in 2015 will just be an update to the already ratified Framework Convention on Climate Change, there will be nothing to ratify for that either. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08...

The NYT is about three steps ahead of you. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08...

You've got that completely wrong. The court ordered the EPA to consider if carbon dioxide was dangerous. Patience had run out because the former administration was dragging its feet and not complying with the law.

Wow, you really don't know what Chinese motor vehicle efficiency standards are. You seem very uninformed. You don't even realize that refined products will be exported, not used here. http://tarsandsaction.org/spre... And, you seem to be completely baffled about our own CAFE standards, which are rising. The deal you want is already on the books. You are like a guy who has just won the Superbowl saying you want to get ready for the big game.

Actually, it was to the beat of a Supreme Court Order. You seem very uniformed on this topic.

Mitch McConnell cosponsored a resolution in 1997 demanding commitments from China. http://www.nationalcenter.org/... Now, when President Obama delivers the deal he asked for he backpedals. http://www.nytimes.com/politic... He was for commitments from China before he was against them for sure. Seems like he is a lot like Boehner who can't deliver on deals either.

Because President Obama failed to appoint and administrator for the Economic Regulatory Administration which has responsibility for this area. http://www.law.cornell.edu/usc... So, it ended up, stupidly, in the State Department's lap.

Review the EPA endangerment finding. You are mistaken.

Read the EPA endangerment finding. Carbon dioxide is indeed a pollutant now.

This in an accord to present a united position in Paris in 2015. Apparently, since the Framework Convention on Climate Change has already been ratified, this will just count as an update. http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08...

You seem very confused on this. Canada has gone rogue on emissions. There must be consequences.

Kyoto was and effort to keep carbon dioxide from becoming pollution. We've been surprised that climate damage has started sooner than expected. We used to think that 2 C warming was safe. Kyoto was to do the Montreal Protocol one better by getting in front of the problem rather than reacting after the fact. It was not going to work that way unless China had made a commitment at that time. So, really, it is China that has converted carbon dioxide into pollution by its lack of cooperation from that time.

There don't seem to be any concrete claims of that thus far. http://www.theguardian.com/wor...