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.


Related Posts

on

New controversy adds to scrutiny of party's finances.

New controversy adds to scrutiny of party's finances.
Analysis
on

The prime minister should consider the potential outcomes of siding with his Bay Street buddies and oil industry bigwigs over climate-beleaguered Canadians.

The prime minister should consider the potential outcomes of siding with his Bay Street buddies and oil industry bigwigs over climate-beleaguered Canadians.
on

As the company faces a landmark climate lawsuit, confidential documents show how British scientist James Lovelock warned executives of the risks of burning fossil fuels in the 1960s.

As the company faces a landmark climate lawsuit, confidential documents show how British scientist James Lovelock warned executives of the risks of burning fossil fuels in the 1960s.
Series: #ShellKnew
Series: #ShellKnew
on

Nigel Farageโ€™s donors include Mayfair club owners, fox hunt masters, and the landed gentry.

Nigel Farageโ€™s donors include Mayfair club owners, fox hunt masters, and the landed gentry.