This post is by John Balbus, M.D., M.P.H., Chief Health Scientist at Environmental Defense Fund.

Despite EPA’s refusal to formally acknowledge the danger of greenhouse gases in its Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR), two recently released EPA reports detail the health dangers of greenhouse gases.

The first, a support document for the ANPR [PDF], summarizes the extensive body of science showing that global warming pollution presents a serious threat to human health and the environment. The document is labeled "draft" and stamped "do not circulate or cite", but is listed on the EPA Web site as one of the supporting documents for the released ANPR. From the Executive Summary:

Read more »

This post is by Sheryl Canter, an online writer and editorial manager at Environmental Defense Fund.

Check out Stephen Colbert on the EPA’s decision to delay regulation of greenhouse gas emissions. It’s hilarious.

This post is by Tom Olson, a consulting attorney for the Climate and Air Campaign at Environmental Defense Fund.

Last Friday, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) finally released its Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking – EPA’s answer to a 2007 Supreme Court ruling that greenhouse gases fall within the Clean Air Act’s definition of "pollutant".

There are a number of differences between the final document and the leaked May 30th draft. (See this post from a Georgetown Law professor praising the draft’s balance and expertise.) Most significantly, EPA chief Stephen Johnson prefaced the document with a series of denunciations by White House officials. And then, adopting the views of the White House, he disparaged the work of his own staff.

The final version also included some disturbing changes to the analysis itself.

Read more »

This post is by Vickie Patton, deputy general counsel at Environmental Defense Fund, and former attorney in EPA’s General Counsel’s office.

Yesterday, the D.C. Circuit denied the petition for writ of mandamus filed by a coalition of states and environmental organizations to enforce the Supreme Court’s landmark decision on global warming in Massachusetts v. EPA. The coalition asked the court to instruct EPA to carry out its duty, under the Supreme Court’s decision, to determine within 60 days whether global warming pollution endangers human health and welfare.

Read more »

This post is by Sheryl Canter, an online writer and editorial manager at Environmental Defense Fund.

Gas prices are sky high, as everybody knows, and the main reason is increased demand. But the solution is not to resume offshore drilling in the U.S., as the current administration suggests.

Environmental Defense Fund President Fred Krupp discussed this issue in a PBS interview last week with Charlie Rose, and again in a guest post on Grist. Here’s an excerpt from Grist:

Read more »

This post is by Miriam Horn, a writer at Environmental Defense Fund and co-author of the New York Times bestseller, Earth: The Sequel.

Who would have thought that algae (a.k.a. pond scum) – the microscopic plants whose "blooms" choke off life in lakes and estuaries – would emerge as the hottest new energy crop?

But sure enough, dozens of start-ups, backed by millions of dollars in venture capital, are racing to find the best way to turn algae into fuel, with exciting results.

Read more »

This post is by Mel Peffers, a project manager in the Living Cities program at Environmental Defense Fund.

Today is World Asthma Day. Since car exhaust can lead to asthma as well as global warming, we thought it would be a good day to highlight the importance of not idling your car or truck engine.

What makes idling especially bad for health is that drivers tend to idle in gathering places – by sidewalks, schools, playgrounds, homes, and offices. Breathing in pollution close to the source is more dangerous than farther away.

Take a look at the evidence.

Read more »

This post is by Robert Bonnie, Co-Director of the Land, Water and Wildlife Program at Environmental Defense Fund.

The New York Times recently reported that thousands of farmers are dropping out of the federal government’s Conservation Reserve Program. The prices for corn and other crops are so high that conservation subsidies can’t compete with what farmers can make by planting the land. One reason for the high prices is the ethanol mandate in the energy bill Congress passed last year.

Shifts in land use from diverting food-producing land to grow crops for energy – called "indirect land-use change" – can potentially negate the environmental benefits of corn ethanol. There is still much debate on how to measure it, but no question it’s important to consider. One recent study published in Science (Searchinger et. al.) found that using croplands for biofuels causes a significant increase in greenhouse gas emissions relative to gasoline when indirect land use change is taken into account.

Unintended consequences such as these highlight the danger of mandating a specific clean energy technology, and the importance of relying on performance standards instead.

Read more »

This post is by Andy Darrell, vice president of the Living Cities Program at Environmental Defense Fund.

Yesterday, the New York State Legislature failed to pass congestion pricing for New York City (see NY1 report), thus forgoing $354 million in federal funds.

Today more than ever, New York and America’s other big cities need solutions for clean air and better transit – our health, climate and economy depend on it. Over the past year, an extraordinary majority of New Yorkers came together to support congestion pricing, and of course today’s setback is very disappointing. But I believe that New York will continue to strive for innovative solutions, and Environmental Defense Fund is dedicated to working with leaders from across the state to help make those solutions real.

This post is by Vickie Patton, Deputy General Counsel at Environmental Defense Fund, and a former attorney in EPA’s General Counsel’s office.

One year ago, the Supreme Court rejected the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) claim that it lacked legal authority to regulate global warming pollution (for example, from vehicle tailpipes). EPA administrator Stephen Johnson promised a firm and prompt response to the high Court’s decision, but a year passed with no action.

Then on March 27, Johnson recanted his commitment.

So today, a broad coalition of 18 states, 3 cities, and 11 non-profit organizations (see full list*) took legal action to compel EPA to comply. The parties are led by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and include Environmental Defense Fund.

Read more »