If you’re still looking for a weapon of mass destruction, look no further than the U.S. Department of Environmental Protection.           No agreement was reached in Copenhagen this last week, but the EPA has vowed to institute its own plan to limit US production. Even if cap-and-trade, which limits the amount of CO2 emissions from production facilities, does not obtain the approval of the American people through their duly elected representatives, the EPA intends to in effect pass legislation that will accomplish what the meetings in Copenhagen and in the US Congress have failed to accomplish.           The EPA’s formal announcement came on December 7th, which is appropriately the same day that Japan destroyed the US Navel fleet in Pearl Harbor. The Clean Air Act (CAA) of 1970 last updated in 1990 with the help of five Justices of the U.S. Supreme Court [Massachusetts v. EPA] will allow the EPA to dictate to manufacturing facilities in the United States how much they will be allowed to produce.           The method used by this government to control the means of production has been and continues to be through the guise of protecting the environment and the planet. Many believe the government is relying upon manufactured opinions based upon faulty assumptions about why the global average temperature for the past few decades has increased slightly. Now that that trend has seemingly reversed itself, the new politically correct label is “climate change”.            Democrat and to a lesser extent Republican administrations have in the past caved into environmental extremists who are obviously willing to sacrifice production jobs for the sake of the environment. Bush the Second agreed to limit the exploration and production of Arctic oil to save the Polar Bear from extinction; meanwhile, the Polar Bear population had actually been increasing in number, a fact that apparently escaped recognition.           Lee Iacocca former Ford executive in 1970 warned that the EPA would shut down the entire American auto industry. His prognostication has proven to be all too accurate. The insanity of propping up EPA policy by saying that it has been a success because it has reduced air pollution more than government has reduced crime and poverty ignores the possibility that the increase in both of the latter two categories may be attributable to the fact that the EPA has put workers out on the streets and they have been left to their own devices in order to survive.           Cleaning up the air we breathe is a good thing, and if the cost of production is a consequence, than the trade off may be reasonable; however, the attempt by the EPA to unilaterally prevent global warming by limiting domestic production and access to domestic energy reserves is a totally separate issue. Objectors say that Global Warming is to nuclear war what air pollution is to gang violence. In other words, the consequences of unnecessary EPA regulations of CO2 to lower the earth’s temperature can be as disastrous to the US economy as detonating a high altitude atomic weapon over the continental United States.           Since at the present time there are no technologies to remove CO2 from fossil fuel combustion, essentially all production, much less auto production, is liable to be shut down by unelected bureaucrats.           Welcome to central planning American Style.