This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Critically, and as we’ll discuss in greater depth shortly, hydrogen combustion (as opposed to its use in fuel cells) also leads to greater emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx), a toxic group of pollutants regulated under the CleanAirAct. All this is not to say there is no place for hydrogen in a clean energy future.
The first pillar, “ Cut Carbon Pollution in America ,” describes policies aimed at combatting the causes of climate change, principally by cutting carbondioxide emissions. These facilities account for around 40% of all carbon pollution in the United States. The Climate Action Plan presents three policy “pillars.”
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) had failed to fulfill its non-discretionary obligation under Section 321(a) of the CleanAirAct to conduct evaluations of loss or shifts in employment that might result from implementation of the CleanAirAct. Murray Energy Corp. McCarthy , No. 5:14 -cv-39 (N.D.
Murray Energy Sought Supreme Court Review of Fourth Circuit’s Dismissal of CleanAirAct Jobs Study Case. Foster , No. 34-2016-CR-00187 (N.D. decision Sept. 29, 2017; verdict Oct. NEW CASES, MOTIONS, AND NOTICES. Both sets of intervenors also said the court should limit any abeyance period to 120 days.
The CleanAirAct provision at issue authorizes small refineries to petition EPA “for an extension of the exemption … for the reason of disproportionate economic hardship.” Hawai‘i Supreme Court Upheld Denial of Request to Re-Open Order Approving WindPower Purchase Agreement. Living Rivers v. Hoffman , No.
However, the world could avoid the more extreme scenarios in the report if governments sharply reduce carbondioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions. This division s responsible for criminal and civil cases to enforce environmental laws, including the CleanAirAct and the Clean Water Act.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 12,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content