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
First and foremost, despite some fossilfuel interests swinging for the fossilfuel-favored fences, the Supreme Court’s decision in West Virginia v. First and foremost, despite some fossilfuel interests swinging for the fossilfuel-favored fences, the Supreme Court’s decision in West Virginia v.
My last post argued that EPA should immediately repeal the Obama Administration’s Clean Power Plan. It attempted to move away from fossilfuels and toward zero-carbon sources like solar power to supply electricity. The Clean Power Plan was based on section 111(d) of the CleanAirAct.
EPA regulation of greenhouse gas emissions under the CleanAirAct (CAA) A. Rules relating to renewable and fossilfuel development on public lands and offshore. Litigation against carbon emitters and fossilfuel producers G. Standing based on climate impacts C. Social Cost of Carbon D.
The destruction we see today is a direct result of decades of dependence on fossilfuels, enabled by decades of deception and obstruction on the part of the fossilfuel industry, and prolonged by decades of inaction on the part of policymakers who have been in their thrall.
The majority 6–3 decision sharply curtails the EPA’s authority to set standards based on a broad range of flexible options to cut carbon emissions from the power sector—options such as replacing polluting fossilfuels with cheap and widely available wind and solar power coupled with battery storage.
Through the CleanAirAct , and as affirmed—and reaffirmed—through multiple legal sagas, EPA is statutorily obligated to address carbon pollution from fossilfuel-fired power plants. Section 111 of the CleanAirAct constrains how EPA sets standards—but gives states wide latitude in implementation.
For example, regulations under the CleanAirAct and the Clean Water Act, which often rely on broad and ambiguous statutory mandates, are now vulnerable to unfavorable rulings at the hand of activist judges. This could hinder efforts to implement climate policies at the federal level.
On March 24, the US Environmental Protection Agency posted information on how industries regulated under a variety of federal CleanAirAct programs could obtain Presidential Exemptions from those requirements.
California has a longstanding leadership role on transportation pollution, and the CleanAirAct grants the state the right to set strong vehicle emissions standards. While the waiver addresses California’s ability to enforce its rules, the CleanAirAct also allows other states the ability to adopt California’s policies.
Many of the claims are based at least in part on allegations of misrepresentations by the companies regarding climate science in order to promote their sales of fossilfuels. The other argument is that the CleanAirAct itself eliminates state lawsuits for interstate pollution.
Starting in 2017, cities, counties, and states across the United States have filed claims (see here and here ) in state courts against fossilfuel companies seeking redress for the climate harms their products have caused. By Korey Silverman-Roati. Background. Many of these cases asserted nuisance and other tort law claims.
The tax credit, passed as part of 2022’s Inflation Reduction Act, provides a generous incentive for the production of clean hydrogen. Today, hydrogen is overwhelmingly produced through a heavily polluting fossilfuel-based process. It is a climate problem, not a climate solution. Geographic deliverability. Time matching.
The bench trial took place last month in the state capitol, Helena, where 16 youth plaintiffs ages 5 to 22 made the case that Montana’s unwavering promotion of fossilfuels violates the state constitution’s guarantee to a “clean and healthful environment.” Whether Montana’s GHG emissions can be measured incrementally.
We know that burning fossilfuels is the main cause of anthropogenic climate change, and that climate change is the source of adverse impacts on communities and even regional and national economies. by Justin Gundlach. These points are largely undisputed. Peter Frumhoff led off, presenting two key points.
The decision focuses on EPA’s authority under a specific section of the CleanAirAct. But a closer read suggests more sweeping, longer-term implications for incentivizing the development of clean energy projects nationwide. What does this mean for clean energy projects? What is the case about? .
Over the last five years, cities, counties, and states across the country have sued fossilfuel companies alleging that the companies violated state law in marketing their products as safe. Second are cases that allege the fossilfuel company activities violate state consumer protection laws. On April 24, the U.S.
EPA has now formally restored its waiver under § 209(b) of the CleanAirAct that allows California’s greenhouse gas emissions standards and Zero Emission Vehicle mandate, notwithstanding the preemption of state vehicle emission standards contained in § 209(a) of the CAA. Time to get to work.
That’s a far cry from just six years ago, when EVs were considered a niche technology (and the fossilfuel baron Charles Koch and his minions wanted to keep it that way). Today, the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) projects that 50 percent of US passenger car sales could very well be electric by 2030.
CARB’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) seeks to incentivize the production and sale of alternative, lower emissions transportation fuels in order to displace conventional fossilfuels. To identify which fuels should be promoted, CARB calculates the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions from transportation fuels.
Upstream methane emissions are a potentially substantial share of the overall emissions rate of fossilfuel-based hydrogen production facilities. This is the starting point from which all of Treasury’s implementation decisions must follow.
Local actors seek climate change damages from the biggest fossilfuel companies through state law litigation. It also leaves untouched the litigation that has been bubbling up in state courts against the fossilfuel industry. In the wake of West Virginia v.
And so it is with the plethora of lawsuits by states, cities and counties against oil and gas producers claiming catastrophic damages from fossilfuels. Baltimore alleges oil company defendants violated state-laws and concealed dangers associated with their fossilfuel products. There are others. Suncor Energy .
This week, leaders from extractive industries are gathering in Pittsburgh to discuss how to perpetuate our reliance on fossilfuels. The EPA recently stated that the Clairton plant Title V permit violates the emission standards set by the CleanAirAct. One of the sponsors of this summit is U.S Steel (USS).
The statute points to section 211(o)(1)(H) of the CleanAirAct to define lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions—exactly as was done for the simultaneously passed section 45V Clean Hydrogen Production Credit. Clean must mean clean, meaning no polluter loopholes, and no polluter giveaways.
CT , the Supreme Court said this: We hold that the CleanAirAct and the EPA actions it authorizes displace any federal common law right to seek abatement of carbon-dioxide emissions from fossil-fuel fired power plants. In 2011, in AEP v.
Shapiro: What Labor, Industry, Environmental, Consumer Leaders Are Saying About The Lightning Energy Plan To Secure Pennsylvanias Energy Future -- Susquehanna River Basin Commission: Low Stream Flows Triggering Restrictions On 19 Shale Gas Water Withdrawals, 17 More Approaching Restrictions [PaEN] -- Susquehanna River Basin Commission Releases Natural (..)
Since 2019, more than seventy local and state jurisdictions have followed Berkeley’s lead in requiring or strongly incentivizing all-electric or fossil-fuel-free new buildings, with more considering similar approaches. can be fueled by natural gas), and must base these options on a defensible “one-for-one” basis.
In the first months of 2024, legislators in four states— Maryland , Massachusetts , New York , and Vermont —have pushed for legislation that would collectively require large fossilfuel producers and refiners to pay for hundreds of billions of dollars of state-level climate adaptation infrastructure.
s lawsuit “artfully pled” that it was based on a local consumer protection law, it was actually premised on the federal common law governing interstate air pollution. The companies acknowledged that Congress’ enactment of the CleanAirAct supplanted the federal common law on air pollution.
Amidst historically low oil prices and economic shutdowns, fossilfuel companies continue to defend against lawsuits brought by state and local governments claiming climate-change related damages. The court similarly rejected the energy companies’ assertion that the CleanAirAct completely preempts the state-law nuisance claims.
Although this is appropriate and in keeping with the structure of the CleanAirAct, each of the multi-state RTOs like PJM operate a single dispatch. Resource Links: -- EPA Finalizes Standards To Reduce Pollution From FossilFuel-Fired Power Plants -- Gov.
Despite the generous funding opportunities and holistic flexibilities baked into ACF, confusion around and misinformation about the rule may undermine this much-needed shift away from fossil-fueled trucks and buses.
Environmental Protection Agency is in the middle of adopting rulemakings under the federal CleanAirAct that will require natural gas infrastructure operators to more carefully monitor methane emissions and develop plans to meet new emission limits. Applegate noted the U.S. Read more here - supplemental EPA rule. “I
On December 1, Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ), Representative Jared Huffman (D-CA-02), Senator Jeff Merkley (D-OR), and Representative Alan Lowenthal (D-CA-47) introduced new legislation, the Protecting Communities from Plastic Act (S. Check out how we are fulfilling our commitment at OceanConservancy.org. [1]
a consolidated case in which Oakland and San Francisco claim that five fossilfuel companies’ production and promotion of fossilfuels constitutes a public nuisance under federal and California common law. BP P.L.C. , Three weeks later, on June 13, Judge John F.
Summary: Last week the Supreme Court handed down its second CleanAirAct case of the term, Utility Air Regulatory Group v. The case involved a challenge to EPA’s attempt to regulate greenhouse gases in the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) program of the CleanAirAct. Christopher D.
EPA ) addressing the scope of the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (“EPA”) authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from existing fossil-fuel powered power plaints. Click here to read the article (begins on p.
The Court held that Section 111(d) of the CleanAirAct did not provide the Environmental Protection Agency with authority to use a generation-shifting approach when regulating emissions from existing fossilfuel power plants.
The most prominent of the initiatives in the Climate Action Plan aims to use Section 111 of the CleanAirAct to limit greenhouse gas emissions from coal and other fossil-fueled power plants. These facilities account for around 40% of all carbon pollution in the United States.
The federal CleanAirAct defines an indirect source as any facility, building, structure, or installation, or combination thereof, which generates or attracts mobile source activity that results in emissions of any pollutant (or precursor) for which there is an air quality standard. [6]
EPA’s latest proposed rule targeting NOx emissions from fossil-fueled electric generating units (EGUs) is a classic study of diminishing returns. The downwind air quality benefits are minimal. Posted on June 29, 2022 by Eugene M. It marks the seventh round of NOx controls for the EGU sector since 1990.
Shell on behalf of all the companies responded that the Solicitor General had effectively reversed the governments position that the CleanAirAct preempts claims in these climate cases. 7401 et seq. The outgoing Biden Administration had also opposed an effort by GOP-led states to block the suits.
Energy Information Administration (EIA) and stream sulfate concentrations taken by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection’s Bureau of Clean Water. Reprinted from Penn State News ) Related Articles: -- Guest Essay: COP26 Shines A Light On The End Of FossilFuels - By Dr. Keith E.
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