The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which spearheaded the proposal, said it will help "tackle wasteful methane emissions" from the oil and gas sector, encouraging facilities with the highest emissions levels to meet or exceed higher levels of performance. The proposed rules would create the so-called Waste Emissions Charge, which begins at $900 per metric ton of wasteful emissions in 2024, and increases to $1,200 for 2025 and $1,500 for 2026 and beyond.

In a statement, EPA Administrator Michael Regan said:

Under President Biden’s leadership, EPA is delivering on a comprehensive strategy to reduce wasteful methane emissions that endanger communities and fuel the climate crisis. Today’s proposal, when finalized, will support a complementary set of technology standards and historic resources from the Inflation Reduction Act, to incentivize industry innovation and prompt action.

We are laser-focused on working collectively with companies, states and communities to ensure that America leads in deploying technologies and innovations that aid in the development of a clean energy economy.

The Biden Administration does not exactly have a sterling record when it comes to choosing winners and losers in the energy sector.

See Related: Giant Offshore Wind Project Touted by Biden Admin Canceled for Not Being Commercially Viable

While (surprisingly), we haven't yet heard from the Swedish Doom Pixie, the usual suspects were quick to chime in.

The announcement was immediately applauded by green groups and Democratic congressional leaders, including Senate Environment and Public Works Committee Chairman Tom Carper, D-Del., who said the proposal would "slow climate change and protect our one and only planet."

Fred Krupp, the president of the Environmental Defense Fund, added that implementing a methane fee was a "common sense" move to cut emissions across the economy.

Democrat congressional leaders, sure, were quick to applaud, as they are quick to applaud any action by anyone with a "D" after his or her name; you have to hand it to the Democrats on that score--they definitely stick together, as surely as mammoths get stuck in tar pits.

See Related: GOLD: Josh Hawley Sets Biden's Climate Agenda on Fire During Hearing

So in the name of "climate change," the Biden Administration's EPA plans a punitive tax on gas and oil production. In the face of rising prices of gasoline and diesel fuel, in the face of the rising cost of warming our homes and businesses (and all I can say about that is we're very grateful for our wood stove on these cold Alaska nights). This move also comes in the face of those increased costs driving an increase in the price of everything that is delivered by air, road, or sea -- so, everything -- the EPA is proposing upping the ante.

Remind me, by the way, exactly where in the Constitution the EPA falls under an enumerated power of the federal government? We are dealing here, folks, with an outrageous, inflation-fueling act by a federal agency that, according to the Constitution, shouldn't even exist. But exist it does, a drag on the economy it is, and it has its supporters in the legacy media.

See Related: 'Stop Doom-Mongering': WaPo Climate Alarmist Ridiculously Claims House Plants Are Bad for the Planet

Earlier I described this as a punitive tax, and that's what it is, but it's important to note precisely on whom this tax will fall. Corporations do not, for the most part, pay taxes, so much as they collect taxes. Every such punitive tax, fee, or "contribution" the government at any level levies on corporations and private businesses falls directly on the consumer in the end; we the people pay these taxes, in the form of increased costs of everything at every part of the massive, complex, and -- yes -- fossil-fueled supply chain that makes up our comfortable, advanced, high-tech society.

That's what the Biden Administration, the EPA, and climate scolds are endangering in the name of preventing a few degrees of warming.

And aye, that's the rub. The alarmists like the EPA and the infamous Pippi Longschpieling are just plain wrong about this whole thing. Sure, the climate is changing; it always has. Through the majority of Earth’s 4.55-billion-year history, it’s been warmer than it is now. Solar activity and ocean currents are major factors, and yes, human activity has some effect – though, not enough to justify destroying the global economy. But that argument is lost on the climate activists, some of the most prominent of whom - yes, I'm looking at you, John Kerry - live very comfortable lives indeed, often very near the oceans they keep insisting are rising.

I'll say it again: I'll start believing there is a climate crisis when the people who keep telling me there is a climate crisis start acting like there is a climate crisis.