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
The Supreme Court tends to get all the attention, but for every Supreme Court opinion on environmental law there are probably fifty opinions in the lower federal courts. Collectively, the lower courts have done fat least as much to shape the law than the Supreme Courts occasional interventions. Any top ten list is a bit arbitrary.
In choosing the top environmental laws, I wanted to focus on those with the largest impacts on the environment, not just those that are most important to environmental lawyers or best known. I included all laws passed in the U.S., not just federal regulatory laws, and some of my selections may not be what you expected.
Aviation is a significant and growing source of greenhouse gas emissions. Opponents will undoubtedly argue that such state-based initiatives conflict with federal law. But the federal government in the United States has failed to address it so far.
In preparing to teach a course on climate law, I was really struck by how broad and rich the field has become. Back in the day, it was nearly all international law, but nowadays there’s a huge amount of U.S. domestic law. and international law. and international law. climate policy. Here goes: I. Cross-cutting A.
The case concerns the scope of the United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from existing fossil fuel power plants under Section 111(d) of the CleanAirAct (CAA). Read the brief here.
If signed, the state would have to withdraw CleanAirAct waiver requests already in process with the Environmental Protection Agency. Moreover, even a delay in the implementation of the standards delays cleaning up our air and cutting greenhouse gasses.
The same is true in environmental law. Was it a fundamental paradigm shift, re-centering the law on new values? With all this in mind, here are the cases that I see as making up the canon and anti-canons of environmental law. The case involved the lynchpin of the CleanAirAct, EPA’s power to set national air quality standards.
To identify which fuels should be promoted, CARB calculates the life cycle greenhouse gas emissions from transportation fuels. In these “carbon intensity” calculations, CARB is not allowed to count reductions in greenhouse gas emissions that are already required by law. Agricultural operations are almost uniquely unregulated.
Under the CleanAirAct, California has the unique ability to set its own standards for tailpipe emissions from new vehicles, including greenhouse gases. The law also includes funding for offshore wind energy and electricity grid improvements, as well as incentives for electric vehicles and appliances.
Today, climate change is the central, though by no means the only, concern in environmental law. Westlaw searches for “global warming” and “greenhouse effect” pick up only a handful of citations before 1985. The most notable was by an administrative law professor at Harvard, one Stephen Breyer.
President Nixon signs the CleanAirAct of 1970 Richard Revesz recently posted a piece on climate change regulation, " Bostock and the End of the Climate Change Double Standard" , forthcoming in the Columbia Journal of Environmental Law.
EPA on Thursday, June 30, 2022, curbing the power of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from power plants across the country. The decision focuses on EPA’s authority under a specific section of the CleanAirAct. What does this mean for clean energy projects?
Hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) were developed to replace a type of chemical that impacted the ozone layer in our upper atmosphere, but these replacements are potent greenhouse gases. This is a major federal law that governs if a chemical will be regulated, limited, or even banned.
However, since major US environmental laws are enacted to protect the air, water, and land separately (i.e. the CleanAirAct, the Clean Water Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act), as a result, EPA programs are often implemented narrowly, not holistically.
In a case that could open the door to more citizen suits to enforce mobile source provisions of the CleanAirAct—a category of enforcement actions that has so far failed to gain much traction—the 10 th Circuit Court of Appeals recently issued an opinion broadly upholding a non-profit organization’s standing.
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 fossil fuels violates the state constitution’s guarantee to a “clean and healthful environment.” This is not supposed to be a town hall or a popularity contest,” he said.
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.
Most prominently, because the approach is changing from rewarding specific technologies to rewarding anything that meets the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions threshold of “clean”—hence the “tech-neutral” label—exactly how the government goes about determining whether or not something is actually eligible will be enormously important.
This rule was a clear opportunity to exercise the Agency’s authority under the CleanAirAct to promote the most advanced emissions reductions technology. The CleanAirAct is pretty clear on the question at hand, and the data is as clear as can be—California must get its waiver ASAP.
This would ensure that manufacturers are only compliant with the least protective regulation in any given year, including a provision that would actually allow manufacturers to simply buy their way out of compliance with the CleanAirAct, something that is explicitly disallowed under current law.
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. Connecticut , 564 U. 410 (2011). Post, at 20.
Furthermore, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) provided a strong and clear affirmation of the appropriateness of Treasury’s proposed approach in light of EPA’s long-standing interpretation and implementation of the referenced lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions definition.
Shapiro released the consensus recommendations by the Climate and Energy Work Group of organized labor, energy industry, consumer and environmental stakeholders to discuss Pennsylvania’s energy future, including the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative.
By Stephen Wiegand On December 15, 2009, EPA published in the Federal Register its final endangerment findings with respect to greenhouse gases. In its findings published on December 15, EPA concluded that six greenhouse gases taken in combination may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health and public welfare. See 74 Fed.
The Sabin Center for Climate Change Law and Environmental Defense Fund have just launched IRAtracker.org. Section 60103 creates a “Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund” (GGRF), which the EPA Administrator can use to make grants for the deployment of zero-emission technologies, and to carry out other greenhouse gas emission reduction activities.
EPA , the Supreme Court limited the authority of the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to reduce greenhouse gases by setting emission guidelines for existing power plants, characterizing the energy generation shifting strategy proposed in the Clean Power Plan (CPP) as an overreach of the agency’s power.
It is one thing for Congress to pass a law. It is entirely different thing for a federal agency to make a rule (in other words, regulations) in accordance with that law. For context, Safer Communities by Chemical Accident Prevention is a rule related to the RMP and issued by the EPA, in accordance with the CleanAirAct.
By Stephen Wiegand EPA recently announced its position regarding the timing of the regulation of greenhouse gases under the CleanAirAct’s Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) Program. In Massachusetts v. EPA, 549 U.S.
States and local air quality regulators have the legal authority to set particulate matter (PM), ozone, and nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions standards and adopt regulations for these pollutants when they are already in attainment of the national ambient air quality standards ( NAAQS ) set by the U.S.
July 18, 2024), the Pennsylvania Supreme Court reversed the denial of three nonprofit organizations’ application to intervene in the litigation challenging the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (PADEP) regulation implementing Pennsylvania’s participation in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (the RGGI Regulation).
This post is the third in a series of blogs that address specific legal features of the rule: Part One offered a summary of the final rule, and delved into the materiality threshold that was added throughout the rule, including for greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions disclosure.
Supreme Court restricted the Environmental Protection Agency’s ability to regulate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in its 6-3 decision for West Virginia v.
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. This article is an effort to hit the “reset” button on the frequently breathless commentary on the recently argued Supreme Court case (West Virginia et al v.
By Jillian Marullo House Bill 788, signed into law on June 14, 2013, authorizes the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (“TCEQ”) to regulate emissions of carbon dioxide and five other greenhouse gases (“GHG”) “[t]o the extent that greenhouse gas emissions require authorization under federal law.”
A highly potent greenhouse gas, methane makes a significant contribution to climate change, but has historically received relatively little attention in climate mitigation discussions. laws governing methane removal via atmospheric oxidation enhancement (AOE). It then discusses relevant international law and U.S.
2024), the Montana Supreme Court affirmed a trial court decision striking down state law provisions that barred state agencies from considering greenhouse gas (“GHG”) emissions in permitting decisions, finding the law violates the environmental rights guaranteed by the Montana Constitution.
What is Environmental Law? Humanity has been aware of its environment far longer than there have been laws to protect environments. However, the term “environmental law” does not just cover government legislation. These are not “laws” per se but act as such within a regulatory framework. Sponsored Content.
Summary: Last week the Supreme Court handed down its second CleanAirAct case of the term, Utility Air Regulatory Group v. Assistant Professor, Vermont Law School. A facility is subject to new source review if it has potential emissions of 100 or 250 tons per year of an air pollutant, depending on the source.
Those impacts—sometimes irksome, sometimes devastating—are increasingly obvious, and the causal mechanisms that connect them to the emission of greenhouse gases increasingly well understood. Lorenzen , an attorney at Crowell & Moring LLP who has led the coalition of petitioners challenging the Clean Power Plan before the D.C.
cities are seeking to limit the flow of vehicular traffic in designated areas as a means to reduce greenhouse gas and other emissions from cars and trucks and to help achieve their municipal climate goals. law questions that arise in connection with the creation of LTZs. CleanAirAct, the U.S.
A recent post by Dan Farber at Legal Planet discussed the issue of when climate awareness began to enter American law. The most notable was by an administrative law professor at Harvard, one Stephen Breyer. Third, there was so much else going on in environmental law. were in 1978 articles about nuclear energy.
The 2019 ACE Rule replaced the 2015 Clean Power Plan as a means of regulating greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from power plants. hinged on a fundamental misconstruction of Section 7411(d) of the CleanAirAct.” The Court held that, while U.S.
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.
On July 25, 2023, a Third Circuit panel rejected an environmental group’s challenge of federally approved changes to Pennsylvania’s State Implementation Plan (“SIP”), holding that the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) emissions-based analysis did not violate the CleanAirAct (“CAA”).
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