EPA to Planet: "Drop Dead! (You, too, Supreme Court!)

authordefault
on

The Environmental Protection Agency ruledย  that new power plants are not required to install technology to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, rejecting an argument from environmental groups. The ruling turns on a seemingly arcane regulatory question that could govern the future of new fossil fuel-burning buildings and power plants under the Clean Air Act.

During the Bush administration, the EPA has rejected the idea that greenhouse gases should be regulated like soot, smog precursors and other kinds of air pollution, despite an April 2007 Supreme Court ruling that said carbon dioxide fit the definition of a pollutant that could be regulated under the Clean Airย Act.


authordefault
Admin's short bio, lorem ipsum dolor sit amet consectetur adipisicing elit. Voluptate maxime officiis sed aliquam! Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet consectetur adipisicing elit.

Related Posts

on

Decision a blow to campaigners, who say the ads gave Saudi Aramco unearned climate credibility.

Decision a blow to campaigners, who say the ads gave Saudi Aramco unearned climate credibility.
on

UKโ€™s first parliamentary debate on the issue drew comparisons both with tobacco industry tactics and the industry's now widely accepted ad ban.

UKโ€™s first parliamentary debate on the issue drew comparisons both with tobacco industry tactics and the industry's now widely accepted ad ban.
on

Labour's Jacob Collier warns parliamentary debate of "coordinated strategy" by oil companies to delay climate action.

Labour's Jacob Collier warns parliamentary debate of "coordinated strategy" by oil companies to delay climate action.
on

Critics fear that Equinorโ€™s latest UK education deal is aimed at quelling opposition to North Sea drilling.

Critics fear that Equinorโ€™s latest UK education deal is aimed at quelling opposition to North Sea drilling.