The sound of Dick Cheney's head exploding.

So, take a look.

Is this Obama caving to international pressure, or trying to gain the cooperation of other reluctant nations like China and Russia?

Imo he certainly is not caving to lobbyists. Most of corporate America would be against this move.

From bloomberg.com

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency declared carbon dioxide a health hazard Monday, paving the way for new regulation of emissions from sources such as power plants, factories, cars and trucks.

The decision allows the agency to issue rules to govern heat-trapping pollution that many scientists say may lead to irreversible climate shifts. The EPA announced the decision in a statement that said the science "overwhelmingly" supports the finding.

The move, on the opening day of an international climate summit in Copenhagen, arms President Barack Obama with new regulatory powers that could help forge consensus in efforts to curb global warming. Mr. Obama gains standing when asking other nations to make commitments for a new global climate treaty, said Kevin Book, a Washington-based managing director for analysis firm ClearView Energy Partners LLC.

"It's exactly what you would want to have in your bag on the way to Copenhagen," Mr. Book said in an interview Monday. "You can't go and argue for other nations to make changes if you haven't made any yourself."

Mr. Obama plans to visit Copenhagen at the close of the talks on Dec. 18, when other world leaders will be there, rather than this week as originally planned.

The Washington-based America Petroleum Institute, which represents oil companies, said Monday the EPA rules will be "inefficient and excessively costly." The National Petrochemical and Refiners Association, also based in Washington, said the proposed new rules are based on "selective science."

"The implications of today's action by EPA are far-reaching, Charles Drevna, president of the refiners group, said in a statement. "This is yet another example of federal policy makers failing to consider the long-term consequences of a regulatory action."

The first regulations under a finding that carbon dioxide is dangerous will be made final on March 10, and will cover emissions from cars and trucks beginning with model year 2012, said David Doniger, policy director for the climate center of the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental group based in New York. Automakers signed on to that plan, announced in May.

After that, the EPA is expected to begin writing emissions rules for factories, power plants and other stationary pollution sources, Mr. Doniger said. The agency has said it would regulate only facilities that produce 25,000 tons of CO2 a year or more.

The rules are expected to require polluters to use the best available technology to limit emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gases, Mr. Doniger said. The agency can take months or years to complete regulations.

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs announced on Dec. 4 that Mr. Obama will show up for the conclusion of the talks in Copenhagen, when about 100 heads of government are going, and help guide decisions. Earlier Mr. Obama had planned to stop by on Dec. 9. "There is progress toward a meaningful Copenhagen accord," Gibbs said.

The U.S., the world's second biggest emitter of greenhouse gases, is in the spotlight at the talks in part because lawmakers haven't approved legislation to set a mandatory limit on carbon-dioxide gas that many scientists say could lead to dangerous climate shifts if left unchecked.

"To have this come out now is another concrete sign that the Obama administration is joining the fight on global warming," Mr. Doniger said of EPA rules.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the nation's biggest business-lobbying group, says EPA regulation of carbon would be "burdensome" to businesses and hurt the economy. Chamber President Tom Donohue has said the Washington-based agency, whose top administrator is chosen by the White House, was basing its proposed finding on "shaky, cherry-picked data."

The U.S. House passed legislation in June to cap carbon emissions and set up a market for the trading of pollution allowances. The Senate has yet to act.

Lack of guidance from the Senate, the only U.S. body authorized to ratify treaties, left Mr. Obama's negotiators in Denmark without firm guidelines on how to proceed.

The administration's use of the EPA to regulate greenhouse gases under existing law provides a "primary catalyst" for Congress to act, Mr. Book said.

"The administration's climate strategy has resembled a coordinated "good cop, bad cop' routine where Hill Democratic Party leaders (the ‘good cop') offer new law as a way to prevent EPA's ‘bad cop' from imposing economy-wide regulations on lawmakers' constituents," Mr. Book said in a research note.

After that, the EPA is expected to begin writing emissions rules for factories, power plants and other stationary pollution sources, Mr. Doniger said. The agency has said it would regulate only facilities that produce 25,000 tons of CO2 a year or more.Look for a major shift of these factories to south of the US border, where the wind can blow C02 right back into the US! What is the logic behind this, selective science, or the elimination of another 2-million US jobs?

I agree with all of the below.
The National Petrochemical and Refiners Association, also based in Washington, said the proposed new rules are based on "selective science".This is yet another example of federal policy makers failing to consider the long-term consequences of a regulatory action. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the nation's biggest business-lobbying group, says EPA regulation of carbon would be "burdensome" to businesses and hurt the economy.

Again, mismanagement by our government. Perhaps they should have regulated other pollutants first. The dangerous ones.

How about "Clean air credits"? Linkie. (http://www.planetizen.com/node/1816)

It's always pissed me off that a dirty factory can pay a clean factory and not have to meet the law as far as pollution goes. It's like me taking all the pollution controls off of my vehicle and paying my neighbor money for the privelege. {Yes, insert argument here that the cost of the clean air credits has gotten huge and it's cheaper to be in compliance}