Again, if you want to download the House bill, to look at it yourself, then here is your link: http://is.gd/1omP8

The text of that over 14-hundred page bill will be a starting point for Senators, as they try to fashion a measure that can make it through the Senate, just one reason why I have been digging through it after it was approved in the House.

Some of you have been nice enough to plow through parts of the bill looking for various nuggets that might make you shake your head in disbelief.

Josh Fahey found provisions on "Watersense," in the bill that had caught my eye as well, basically an effort at water conservation.

Section 215 of the House passed bill would establish a new office in the Environmental Protection Agency, "to identify and promote water efficient products, buildings and landscapes."

That would be accomplished with, as Josh pointed out, labels (like the Energy Star label) that tell consumers which products get the thumbs up from the feds on water and energy conservation.

The bill authorizes $7.5 million to start the program, and then after a few years, envisions a steady $50 million a year funding level, which would be adjusted for inflation in the future.

Meanwhile, Adam noted Section 754, "Requirements for International Deforestation Reduction Program," worried that it will be "sending our borrowed money overseas."

I wondered that too, but after reading some really confusing legislative language in that section, it doesn't seem like the bill does anything more than offer moral support for existing programs to help developing nations avoid deforestation, as no money is diverted for such actions.

But there is a fund that would send some money overseas in another section, as Jerry found the "Stratospheric Ozone and Climate Protection Fund" on page 1005.

That allows for US contributions to multilateral funds that deal with global warming.

Now how about what is not in the bill.

Tom checked in by saying that there is $86 million for a new polar icebreaker. But my review of the bill doesn't show that. It's been talked about a lot, but you're going to have show me what page before I agree it's in there.

As for what else I have stumbled on in this bill, I decided to again look today for bureaucratic additions that are made by this legislation.

On page 776, Section 731 establishes the "Offsets Integrity Advisory Board," which will be an independent panel within the EPA, with the job of "ensuring the overall environmental integrity of the programs established pursuant to those regulations."

The board will have nine members, who have to be fairly well versed in the climate change field according to the bill.

But while I was trying to figure out the job of that board, I stumbled upon another part of the bill, Section 464, entitled "Advisory Board."

This section sets up another advisory panel between 10 and 20 members, whose job it is to "provide scientific and technical advice and recommendations" on how climate change impacts the US and the world.

Oddly enough, this advisory board would be appointed by the Secretary of Health and Human Services.

Then on p. 1328, I found another advisory board, also between 10 and 20 members, which would be appointed by the Secretaries of Commerce and Interior, to give advice on how climate change affects ocean acidification

Nowhere in any of those sections was it clear how much money could be spent on those "Advisory Boards," not even a "such sums" as may be necessary.

It's just more of the fine print already approved by the House, much of which may find its way into the Senate version of the Cap and Trade legislation.