Showing posts with label Climate change policy in the United States. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Climate change policy in the United States. Show all posts

Monday, October 9, 2017

EPA To Repeal Obama-Era "Clean Power Plan"

In another policy move that is sure to "trigger" liberals and climate-change advocates, the New York Times is reporting that EPA Chief Scott Pruitt will on Tuesday announce that the agency is taking formal steps to repeal an Obama-era policy meant to curb greenhouse gas emissions from power plants.


Pruitt justified dismantling the policy – known as the Clean Power Plan – by arguing that his predecessors had departed from regulatory norms in crafting the plan, which was finalized in 2015 and would have pushed states to move away from coal – an industry that President Trump has championed - in favor of sources of electricity that produce fewer carbon emissions.






“The war on coal is over,” Mr. Pruitt told the Times.



“Tomorrow in Washington D.C., I will be signing a proposed rule to roll back the Clean Power Plan. No better place to make that announcement than Hazard, Kentucky.”



The repeal proposal will be filed in the Federal Register Tuesday, fulfilling a promise that President Trump made to dismantle his predecessors’ efforts to curb fossil fuel emmissions.


Eliminating the CPP will make it effectively impossible for the US to meet its obligations under the Paris climate agreement. President Donald Trump unilaterally withdrew from the international accord earlier this year, prompting some US states and cities to launch their own efforts to reduce carbon emissions. Trump had said that he’d be opening to renegotiating America’s obligations under the agreement, an offer that was immediately shot down by other signatories.


A leaked draft of the repeal proposal claims the US will save $33 billion after jettisoning the regulations, rejecting the purported health benefits that the Obama Administration said would result from further restrictions on fossil fuels. When the plan was unveiled in 2015, it was expected to cut emmissions by 32% by 2030 compared with 2005 levels.


However, many states are already shifting away from coal for economic reasons like lower costs associated with using natural gas.


In a development that echos decisions by federal judges to oppose the Trump administration’s first two travel ban proposals, environmental groups and several states plan to challenge the repeal proposal in federal courts, arguing against repealing the Obama-era policy on scientific and economic grounds.


Industry groups back the decision, but have said they’d be open to replacing the Clean Power Plan with more modest power plant regulations in part to help circumvent a court challenge.


The EPA is still required to regulate greenhouse-gas emissions because of a 2009 legal opinion known as the endangerment finding.





“We have always believed that there is a better way to approach geenhosue gas emmissions reductions,” Karen A Harbert, the president of the Chamber of Commerce’s Global Energy Institut, said in a statement.



“We welcome the opportunity for business to be at the table with the EPA and other stakeholders to develop an approach that lowers emissions, preserves America’s energy advantage, and respects the boundaries of the Clean Air Act.



How will the Trump administration roll back the Clean Power Plan? Pruitt is proposing that the CPP be repealed because it was predicated on the view that states could lower emissions at power plants by taking external actions like replacing coal plants with wind farms elsewhere. Industry groups have challenged this move by arguing that the EPA can only enforce cleanup regulations that can be undertaken by individual plants. Pruitt is essentially repurposing this argument to throw out the plan.


How will the plan impact emissions? Well, it’s unclear. One study showed that as many as 21 states – including Texas, West Virginia and Georgia – would’ve needed to accelerate coal-plant closures to comply with the new rules. But many other states are actually closing coal plants more quickly than the regulations would require.


The Times notes that, while the CPP would’ve presumably prevented a resurgence in coal use in the event that natural gas prices soar, under current market conditions, coal plants will probably continue to close amid a broader shift toward renewables and natural gas.


Pruitt’s formal proposal to repeal the CPP will now go through a public comment period before being finalized, which could take months. There’s also expected to be a lot of time-consuming litigation as Democratic-leaning states challenge Pruitt in court.


But even challenger states are moving away from coal and toward renewables.  We now wait for states’ attorneys general to announce legal challenges to Pruitt’s decision, which will probably begin after Pruitt formally proposes killing the rule on Tuesday. The decision to roll back the CPP follows an executive order President Trump signed in March ordering federal agencies to review energy industry regulations, and throw out any that are deemed overly restrictive.

Thursday, March 30, 2017

Did The EPA Just Go Rogue Again

In late January, days after Donald Trump became president, various government workers employed by the EPA "defied" the president with what at the time appeared to be rogue twitter accounts emerging from the environemntal agency, most notably the Badlands National Park which slammed Trump"s climate change proposal.


  • “Today, the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere is higher than at any time in the last 650,000 years. #climate”

  • “Flipside of the atmosphere; ocean acidity has increased 30% since the Industrial  Revolution. ‘Ocean Acidification" #climate #carboncycle’”

  • "Burning one gallon of gasoline puts nearly 20lbs of carbon dioxide into our atmosphere. #climate"

It now appears that a new "rogue" employee may have emerged at the EPA"s pres office.


This morning, in a press release summarizing "What They Are Saying About President Trump"s Executive Order On Energy Independence", as the first quote picked by an unknown staffer at the agency, the EPA decided to showcase the thoughts of Dem. Senator Shelly Moore Capito whose quote was not exactly on message, as Bloomberg"s Patrick Ambrosio pointed out.


This is what she said:





With this Executive Order, President Trump has chosen to recklessly bury his head in the sand. Walking away from the Clean Power Plan and other climate initiatives, including critical resiliency projects is not just irresponsible — it"s irrational. Today"s executive order calls into question America"s credibility and our commitment to tackling the greatest environmental challenge of our lifetime. With the world watching, President Trump and Administrator Pruitt have chosen to shirk our responsibility, disregard clear science and undo the significant progress our country has made to ensure we leave a better, more sustainable planet for generations to come.




Today"s release comes after The House voted Wednesday to restrict the kind of scientific studies and data that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) can use to justify new regulations.The Honest and Open New EPA Science Treatment Act, or HONEST Act, passed 228-194. It would prohibit the EPA from writing any regulation that uses science that is not publicly available.


The bill would also require that any scientific studies be replicable, and allow anyone who signs a confidentiality agreement to view redacted personal or trade information in data.


It’s the latest push by House Republicans to clamp down on what they say has turned into an out-of-control administrative state that enforces expensive, unworkable regulations that are not scientifically sound.


But Democrats, environmentalists and health advocates say the HONEST Act is intended to handcuff the EPA. They say it would irresponsibly leave the EPA unable to write important regulatory protections, since the agency might not have the ability to release some parts of the scientific data underpinning them.


The HONEST Act is similar to the Secret Science Act, which leaders in the House Science Committee sponsored in previous congresses and got passed. “This legislation ensures that sound science is the basis for EPA decisions and regulatory actions,” Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), chairman of the Science Committee, said on the House floor Wednesday.


“The days of ‘trust-me’ science are over. In our modern information age, federal regulations should be based only on data that is available for every American to see and that can be subjected to independent review,” he said. “That’s called the scientific method.”


Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-Texas), the Science Committee’s top Democrat, slammed her GOP colleagues for what she called a “misguided” effort to stop sensible EPA regulations. She denied that the EPA is overly secretive with its science, saying it often doesn’t own the information and has no right to release it.


At least one EPA employee this morning seems to agree.