Federal Appeals Court Ruling Puts Climate Change into Election Debate:
So there is no question. The EPA can, in fact, regulate greenhouse gasses (GHGs).
It gives additional credibility to the science of GHGs=> Global Warming => Not good things for the future.
There are a couple things that this will do. It will elevate the EPA and its regulations in the election world.
It should escalate the attacks on the EPA.
And one would hope that at least COAL would start to lose favor.
It will be interesting to see how this plays forward.
Here's the AP take on the same court ruling in the San Francisco Chronicle.
'via Blog this'
This is a sustainability-oriented blog. Topics pertaining Energy Efficiency (EE), Telecommuting, Sustainable Health/Wellness, etc., but mainly focus on solutions to non-sustainable practices and trying to address means and methods for resolving them. Sustainability is something that we all have to do, sooner or later! (Low politico please!).
Wednesday, June 27, 2012
Federal Appeals Court Ruling Puts Climate Change into Election Debate
Labels: appeal, election, EPA, GHG, global warming, regulations, US Court
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
The Auto industry actually liked this ruling. They will now have a consistent standard to work with in the USA, not a different standard in each state (read California here).ReplyDelete
Note the three areas that were dealt with:
"We conclude," the judges ruled, that "1) the Endangerment Finding and Tailpipe Rule are neither arbitrary nor capricious; 2) EPA’s interpretation of the governing [Clean Air Act] provisions is unambiguously correct; and 3) no petitioner has standing to challenge the Timing and Tailoring Rules."
In their ruling, the three judges also concluded that EPA's initial endangerment finding was "consistent" with the high court's 2007 decision. It was enough to buoy the EPA's long-embattled administrator.