The Supreme Court curbed the Environmental Protection Agency’s ability to broadly regulate carbon emissions from existing power plants, a major defeat for the Biden administration's attempts to slash emissions at a moment when scientists are sounding alarms about the accelerating pace of global warming.
Since passage of the Act 50 years ago, EPA has exercised this authority by setting performance standards based on measures that would reduce pollution by causing plants to operate more cleanly. In 2015, however, EPA issued a new rule concluding that the “best system of emission reduction” for existing coal-fired power plants included a requirement that such facilities reduce their own production of electric- ity, or subsidize increased generation by natural gas, wind, or solar sources.
The question before us is whether this broader conception of EPA’s authority is within the power granted to it by the Clean Air Act.
So basically, the EPA had authority over the reduction of pollution but now they're trying to curb emissions via lowering production. You can tell a power plant to not dump coal ash in a river but you can't tell them to turn down the generators in order to lower CO2 emissions.
Sounds like the key here would be to designate CO2 as a pollutant. Which rings a memory for me, didn't we just go through a little thing a month or so ago about classifying CO2 as pollution? So someone already had the tip that this was coming down the pipe and they front-loaded the discourse.
Of course they'll never accept the argument that CO2 is a pollutant. If they did, it would open up regulation on everything that produces it. The last thing the energy and meat sectors want is a path to regulation like that. Once you do CO2 then methane is next. Then there goes AOC green new deal hamburgers Stalin.
The ruling itself for anyone interested:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1530_n758.pdf
So basically, the EPA had authority over the reduction of pollution but now they're trying to curb emissions via lowering production. You can tell a power plant to not dump coal ash in a river but you can't tell them to turn down the generators in order to lower CO2 emissions.
Sounds like the key here would be to designate CO2 as a pollutant. Which rings a memory for me, didn't we just go through a little thing a month or so ago about classifying CO2 as pollution? So someone already had the tip that this was coming down the pipe and they front-loaded the discourse.
Of course they'll never accept the argument that CO2 is a pollutant. If they did, it would open up regulation on everything that produces it. The last thing the energy and meat sectors want is a path to regulation like that. Once you do CO2 then methane is next. Then there goes AOC green new deal hamburgers Stalin.