Climate 411

An attack on hypothetical climate pollution safeguards lands at the Supreme Court. EDF will fight to protect climate action.

By Ashley Maiolatesi / Published: January 24, 2022

EPA’s authority to safeguard human health and the environment is longstanding and well-established. But now there’s a new case before the Supreme Court that threatens it.

The case was brought by coal companies and their allies, whose efforts to tightly constrict EPA’s ability are not only alarming but also should not even be before the Supreme Court. That’s why EDF is participating in the case (West Virginia et al. v. EPA) in support of the agency’s clear authority and obligation to reduce climate pollution under the Clean Air Act. We joined other leading environmental groups and trade associations to file our merits brief in the case. Almost two dozen states and several cities, the federal government, and power companies that provide power to 40 million people in 49 states also filed in support of EPA.

The arguments made by the petitioners in this case do not articulate an actual, redressable injury. The case before the Supreme Court necessarily lacks this essential ingredient necessary for court review because the rule petitioners take issue with is not currently in effect. In fact, the rule has never been in effect.

Put simply, no actual dispute exists.

Read More »

Posted in Clean Air Act, Clean Power Plan, EPA litgation, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, News, Policy / Comments are closed

Safeguarding EPA’s authority at the Supreme Court is a climate imperative

By Michael Panfil / Published: December 15, 2021

Coal companies and supporting states recently filed opening briefs in West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency, a case involving the Trump Administration’s repeal of, and weak replacement for, the 2015 Clean Power Plan regulating carbon dioxide emissions from power plants.

Although neither regulation is in effect – indeed, EPA has indicated that it plans to adopt a new rule working from a clean slate — Petitioners seek to use this case to effect sweeping changes in longstanding legal doctrine and well-established norms. Petitioners are not only asking the Court to do extraordinary damage to EPA authority, but also set forth their arguments expansively so as to apply to a wide range of vital services and laws – turning this case into one broadly relevant to the ability for expert agencies to protect human health, the environment, and other public values.

These concerns are not theoretical. Petitioners have filed papers with the Supreme Court that argue that tight constrictions should be put around EPA’s efforts to address climate change. What Petitioners seek stands in stark contrast to what this moment demands and ignores the fact that Congress intended EPA, through the Clean Air Act, to address big problems like nationwide air pollution coming from the country’s largest industries.

Read More »

Posted in Clean Power Plan, EPA litgation, News, Policy / Comments are closed

The Supreme Court will review a crucial case about climate pollution from power plants. Now what?

By Ashley Maiolatesi / Published: November 3, 2021

(This post was co-authored by EDF legal fellow Jesse Hevia)

The Supreme Court has agreed to review a D.C. Circuit decision that struck down the Trump administration’s rule weakening regulations of carbon pollution from power plants.

Here’s a look at what happened – and what might happen next.

Read More »

Posted in Clean Air Act, Clean Power Plan, EPA litgation, News, Policy / Comments are closed

Four Reasons Petitions for Supreme Court Review of Climate Pollution Standards for Power Plants Should Fail

By Ashley Maiolatesi / Published: September 24, 2021

This coming Monday, the Supreme Court will consider hundreds of petitions for review, which ask the Court to take up cases for full consideration during its new term. Among the petitions for review are four from coal companies and states asking the Court to review the D.C. Circuit decision overturning the Trump administration’s rule weakening regulations of carbon pollution from power plants. For multiple reasons the four petitions lack merit.

The Clean Power Plan, adopted in 2015, established the first-ever national limits on climate pollution from existing power plants. In 2019, the Trump administration adopted regulations to repeal the Clean Power Plan and replace it with the “ACE” rule – which did virtually nothing to limit pollution.

This January the D.C. Circuit struck down this attempt, issuing a narrow opinion that explained how ACE misinterpreted specific language in section 111 of the Clean Air Act.

In the months since the D.C. Circuit’s decision, neither the Clean Power Plan nor the Trump administration’s weak replacement rule has been in effect, meaning that no power plants or operators have experienced harm under either rule. Additionally, EPA has been working from a clean slate on new safeguards that will reflect current information about our rapidly changing power sector. Despite this, and the fact that no one is subject to any compliance obligations under the Clean Power Plan or ACE, coal companies and 21 states are asking the Supreme Court to reverse the D.C. Circuit opinion and issue a statutory interpretation that limits EPA’s ability under the Clean Air Act to protect the public from climate pollution.

Effectively, they are asking the Court for an “advisory” opinion — a free-floating legal opinion untethered to any current dispute but intended to constrain future behavior. EDF is part of a coalition of environmental organizations that – along with almost two dozen states and cities, power companies and business associations – opposes this challenge.

Rather than take up this case in order to consider legal theories in the abstract, the appropriate course would be for the Court to allow EPA to complete its new rulemaking, which will be subject to judicial review once finalized. At that time, reviewing courts will be able to assess EPA’s actual application of its Clean Air Act authority in the context of real compliance obligations and a factual record that reflects current realities.

Here are four key reasons that the petitioners’ pleas for Supreme Court review should fail:

Read More »

Posted in Clean Air Act, Clean Power Plan, Energy, EPA litgation, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, News, Partners for Change, Policy / Comments are closed

Rhetoric to reality: U.S. states must turn climate commitments into policies that deliver

By Pam Kiely / Published: December 8, 2020

With an incoming Biden-Harris administration, many Americans are hopeful for a complete reversal of the Trump administration’s assault on climate and environmental progress at the federal level. While that change in federal leadership will be game-changing for the U.S., we cannot forget about the progress that state leaders have made on climate these last four years. It is imperative — for our health, economies and ecosystems — that we continue to hold them to it.

To curb the most catastrophic impacts of climate change — from species collapse to financial breakdown — we must meet an incredibly ambitious timeline for reducing emissions. According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), reducing global emissions to around 45% below what they were in 2010 by 2030 and continuing to reduce emissions dramatically through 2050 is consistent with a path that can avert devastating impacts of climate change.

Meeting those targets will require strong action at every level of government and from every sector of the economy.

A new report by Environmental Defense Fund using emission projections data from Rhodium Group’s U.S. Climate Service shows that, collectively, states that have made climate commitments are not on track to bring their emissions down consistent with science-based trajectories for 2030. They are also off track for achieving the original U.S. commitment under the Paris Agreement for 2025. This report also reveals key insights about these states’ progress, as well as recommendations for turning goals into policies that can get the job done.

Read More »

Posted in Cities and states, Greenhouse Gas Emissions / Read 2 Responses

Power company commitments to cut carbon pollution are an important step for our climate and health. Here’s what we need next.

By Taylor Bacon / Published: May 5, 2020

Arizona’s largest utility, Arizona Public Service, has joined over a dozen other power companies across the U.S. that have committed to delivering 100% carbon-free electricity by 2050. These commitments, which add to momentum for ambitious climate action and would significantly reduce health-harming pollutants that contribute to soot and smog, are a key step in addressing one of our nation’s leading sources of climate pollution. They also highlight the types of action that will be required across all sectors of the U.S. economy to reach net-zero economy-wide carbon pollution by mid-century, a target guided by science and supported in recent bills introduced in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives.

Not only do these commitments show strong federal policy is feasible, they underscore that the Trump administration’s efforts to dismantle limits on carbon pollution from existing power plants ignore the most effective strategies for reducing pollution from the power sector. In fact, nine of the nation’s leading power companies recently submitted a brief in court opposing the Trump administration’s rollback for this very reason.

At the same time, these commitments by themselves are not enough. Due to the cost-effective pollution reduction opportunities in the power sector and the urgent need to reduce climate pollution by electrifying other sectors, even more ambitious near-term targets from power companies will be needed to achieve net-zero emissions economy-wide by 2050. In addition, commitments alone from power companies must be followed up with concrete actions that will achieve real reductions in carbon pollution – and reduce other harmful pollutants associated with premature death and respiratory illnesses.

Read More »

Posted in News / Comments are closed