A group of eight states and conservation groups ("Plaintiffs") have been pushing a massive federal nuisance claim against utilities. The Plaintiffs claim that major emitters of carbon dioxide in twenty states have created, contributed to, or maintained a common-law public nuisance by contributing to global warming thereby injuring States and landowners feeling the impacts of climate change. (See
US EPA Attempts to Ease Transition to Greenhouse Gas Regulation for Large Sources
On August 12th, the U.S .EPA released two proposed rules to address the potential gap that exists while States adopt rules to regulate greenhouse gases (GHGs) from large stationary sources. What U.S. EPA is really doing is making sure all fifty states will be regulating GHGs beginning January 2011.
On May 12, 2010, U.S. EPA finalized its controversial
Showdown in the Senate over EPA Climate Change Authority
As reported in the New York Times, Senator Murkowski announced that the Senate will vote June 10th on her resolution to block EPA from implementing climate change regulation under the Clean Air Act. The proposal was announced this past December and the vote follows finalization of EPA regulations that will initiate regulation of
Phasing in Greenhouse Gas Permitting- EPA’s “Tailoring Rule”
.jpg)
Greenhouse Gas Regulation Commences January 2, 2011 without Legislation
On May 13, 2010, EPA finalized its regulatory approach for control greenhouse gases (GHGs) from large stationary sources. As discussed in prior posts, the statutory thresholds for triggering EPA’s New Source Review program (NSR) are 100/250 tons per year of a regulated Clean Air Act pollutant.
As
Two Roads for Addressing Climate Change
Last week, two distinct paths clearly emerged for addressing climate change. The first, legislation that would put in place a market mechanism to reduce emission over time- the Kerry-Lieberman Bill. The second, EPA’s use of its existing regulatory authority under the Clean Air Act to reduce greenhouse (GHGs) emissions (EPA Tailoring Rule)
EPA
Expansive Pre-emption in Climate Bill is Right Focus
Last week, Senator Voinovich drew attention and criticism for proposing a significant expansion of the preemption language in the forthcoming bi-partisan climate bill to be introduced by Senators Kerry, Lieberman and Graham. Failure to carefully consider the preemption language and possible additional limits on other regulatory authority would be short-sighted.
One of the main reasons for Congress
EPA to Expand Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule
On October 30, 2009 U.S. EPA finalized the first mandatory rule related to climate change- Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Mandatory Reporting Rule. Beginning this year 31 industries must track and report their emissions. Overall, the original GHG mandatory reporting rule required reporting for an estimated 85 percent of the total GHG emissions in the U.S.
Only a
President Tries to Jump Start Climate Legislation as Public Support Dwindles
The President called together key Senators and members of his cabinet in hopes of re-invigorating stalled discussions in the Senate over climate change legislation. This summer the House of Representatives passed a bill that would require greenhouse gas reductions of 17 percent by 2020 compared with 2005 levels. Since legislative debate moved to the Senate, a viable
EPA Provides Quick and Detailed Response to Senators on Climate Regulations
.jpg)
On February 19th, eight Democrat Senator’s wrote a letter to EPA regarding its plans for issuance of greenhouse gas regulations for vehicles, factories and power plants. This from the Wall Street Journal:
The lawmakers, including prominent Senators Max Baucus, (D., Mont.), Carl Levin, (D., Mich.) and John Rockefeller, (D., W.V), warned EPA chief Lisa Jackson
Climate Update: SEC Guidance, EPA and Cap & Trade
The twists and turns in the saga of regulation greenhouse gases (GHGs) continue. After the State of the Union and release of the President’s budget, there is speculation that President Obama has abandoned Cap & Trade legislation.
Meanwhile, businesses face greater risk as a result of new and impending regulatory action. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has issued guidance telling companies