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

Opinion
on

Indra Andan, founder of The Alternative Global, says new forms of masculinity are emerging to challenge the patriarchal models at the root of the ecological crisis.

Indra Andan, founder of The Alternative Global, says new forms of masculinity are emerging to challenge the patriarchal models at the root of the ecological crisis.
Analysis
on

Farageโ€™s party has shown over the last year that it will attempt to block and reverse clean energy initiatives in its new councils.

Farageโ€™s party has shown over the last year that it will attempt to block and reverse clean energy initiatives in its new councils.
on

Join a May 19 discussion on how advertising and PR professionals can help journalists hold the industry to account, featuring DeSmog investigative reporters.

Join a May 19 discussion on how advertising and PR professionals can help journalists hold the industry to account, featuring DeSmog investigative reporters.
on

The Alberta premier gave a biblical justification for oil expansion at a Christian conference featuring Conservative MPs and provincial cabinet ministers.

The Alberta premier gave a biblical justification for oil expansion at a Christian conference featuring Conservative MPs and provincial cabinet ministers.