Comments on: Supreme Court Reverberations http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/04/09/sc_reverb/ Blogging the science and policy of global warming Thu, 18 Mar 2010 23:19:52 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Climate 411 » EPA Delivers Lump of Coal to America for Holidays - Blogs & Podcasts - Environmental Defense Fund http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/04/09/sc_reverb/comment-page-1/#comment-989 Climate 411 » EPA Delivers Lump of Coal to America for Holidays - Blogs & Podcasts - Environmental Defense Fund Wed, 02 Apr 2008 17:32:56 +0000 http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/04/09/sc_reverb/#comment-989 [...] Supreme Court ruled in April 2007 that EPA has the authority and the obligation to regulate global warming pollution. When automakers [...] [...] Supreme Court ruled in April 2007 that EPA has the authority and the obligation to regulate global warming pollution. When automakers [...]

]]> By: Climate 411 » Global Warming Policy 2007: Ten Victories - Blogs & Podcasts - Environmental Defense http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/04/09/sc_reverb/comment-page-1/#comment-709 Climate 411 » Global Warming Policy 2007: Ten Victories - Blogs & Podcasts - Environmental Defense Thu, 24 Jan 2008 01:21:56 +0000 http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/04/09/sc_reverb/#comment-709 [...] We won two Supreme Court cases in 2007, but the notable one from a climate change standpoint was Massachusetts versus EPA. It all started because EPA claimed it didn’t have authority to rule on California’s [...] [...] We won two Supreme Court cases in 2007, but the notable one from a climate change standpoint was Massachusetts versus EPA. It all started because EPA claimed it didn't have authority to rule on California's [...]

]]> By: Bill Chameides http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/04/09/sc_reverb/comment-page-1/#comment-141 Bill Chameides Thu, 12 Apr 2007 20:45:25 +0000 http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/04/09/sc_reverb/#comment-141 Hi Beth - I responded to your comment to the <a href="http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/index.php/2007/02/27/txu_buyout/">TXU post</a> about this. Hi Beth – I responded to your comment to the TXU post about this.

]]> By: Beth Wellington http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/04/09/sc_reverb/comment-page-1/#comment-140 Beth Wellington Tue, 10 Apr 2007 04:37:07 +0000 http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2007/04/09/sc_reverb/#comment-140 While ED bragged that it had stopped TXU from building coal plants, see what the Wall Street Journal said today: TXU Sheds Coal Plan, Charts Nuclear Path By Rebecca Smith TXU Corp. has scrapped plans to build a large fleet of coal-fired power plants in Texas but hasn't altogether abandoned its expansion efforts. Instead, it hopes to build the biggest nuclear-power plants in the U.S. TXU has shifted its focus to nuclear power at a time when three other organizations -- NRG Energy Inc., Exelon Corp. and Amarillo Power -- have said they, too, may build nuclear plants in Texas. If all the plans materialize, Texas could have more reactors than any other state in a decade's time, built in a deregulated market where missteps would be borne by shareholders ... While ED bragged that it had stopped TXU from building coal plants, see what the Wall Street Journal said today:

TXU Sheds Coal Plan, Charts Nuclear Path
By Rebecca Smith

TXU Corp. has scrapped plans to build a large fleet of coal-fired power plants in Texas but hasn't altogether abandoned its expansion efforts. Instead, it hopes to build the biggest nuclear-power plants in the U.S.

TXU has shifted its focus to nuclear power at a time when three other organizations — NRG Energy Inc., Exelon Corp. and Amarillo Power — have said they, too, may build nuclear plants in Texas. If all the plans materialize, Texas could have more reactors than any other state in a decade's time, built in a deregulated market where missteps would be borne by shareholders …

]]>