Clean Air Act

  • November 18, 2011

    by Jonathan Arogeti

    “Cap and trade is not going to happen next year, or the year after that, … or the year after that,” recalled the former staff director and chief counsel for the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, paraphrasing President Obama’s forecast for climate change legislation following the 2010 midterm election.

    Gerard J. Waldron, now a partner at Covington & Burling, opened a recent ACS panel discussion, “Global Warming and Political Cooling,” with a reflection on the Obama administration’s efforts to combat this problem. In June 2009, the House passed the American Clean Energy and Security Act, which according to The New York Times was the first time either the House or the Senate had approved legislation “meant to curb the heat-trapping gases scientists have linked to climate change.” That summer’s apex of optimism only gave way to the “great failure” that was the 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference. And by the following summer, the Senate still had not taken up the bill.

    Against this backdrop, environmental groups are looking to new local, state and regional legislative efforts along with enforcement of national legislation already on the books to combat climate change.

    Environment America, one such group, released a report on restoring “momentum in the fight against global warming.” According to its estimates, the United States could reduce emissions standards by as much as 20 percent by 2020 and 34 percent by 2030 by adopting clean energy policies that include increased CAFE standards.

    “Wherever we can get emissions reductions, wherever we can get them quickly, wherever the public support exists, we’re working to do that,” said Anna Aurilio, director of Environment America’s Washington, D.C. office. “We’re going to have to actually enact comprehensive climate legislation, but there is a ton of stuff we can do to reduce tons.”

    She points to these “incremental steps” that will bend the emissions curve downwards and ultimately allow this country to wean itself off of oil. “We’d like to live in communities where people’s houses use no net energy except for the energy that they produce themselves on site, where they can get to work or school or play through alternatives other than driving, and if they have to drive, that their car can plug into the solar panel on the roof.”

  • May 21, 2010
    Guest Post

    By KJ Meyer, a Colorado attorney specializing in energy and climate law. Meyer sits on the ACS Denver Lawyer Chapter board and maintains the online publication climatelaws.org
    The following is the first in a series of posts examining the current scope of EPA oversight under the Clean Air Act with respect to climate change. It will also examine the impact and proposed modifications by both the House (Waxman-Markey) and Senate (American Power Act) climate change bills. This initial posting will serve as an overview while in-depth examinations at some of the specific provisions regarding emissions monitoring and new source review standards will be examined in later pieces.

    Current Clean Air Act Authority

    Since its passage in 1963 the Clean Air Act (CAA) has served as the seminal piece of federal legislation regulating chemicals emitted into the air from both industrial and transportation sources. Under the act, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is charged with developing controls for major sources of toxic pollutants including carcinogens such as benzene, arsenic, and asbestos among others. In addition, EPA sets national standards for major new sources of pollution including automobiles, trucks and electric power plants. The CAA also requires EPA to set national health-based air quality standards to protect against common criteria air pollutants emitted from these sources including ozone (smog), carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, lead, and particulate soot.

    With the 2007 decision in Massachusetts v. EPA the Supreme Court brought greenhouse gases (GHGs) into the fold of regulated criteria air pollutants. The Court determined these compounds must be regulated where, "[u]nder the clear terms of the Clean Air Act, EPA can avoid taking further action only if it determines that greenhouse gases do not contribute to climate change or if it provides some reasonable explanation as to why it cannot or will not exercise its discretion to determine whether they do."

    Since that time the EPA has been slowly turning the regulatory wheels towards enforcement. To date, the agency has issued several findings and regulations starting with an Endangerment Finding "that the current and projected concentrations of the six key well-mixed greenhouse gases--carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6)--in the atmosphere threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations." In addition a Cause or Contribute Finding that the "combined emissions of these well-mixed greenhouse gases from new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle engines contribute to the greenhouse gas pollution which threatens public health and welfare." These findings have been followed by the issuance of a mandatory report rule, with proposals in place to expand the rule to include oil and gas facilities as well as natural gas.

  • December 8, 2009
    The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced yesterday that greenhouse gases are, in fact, harmful to human health and the environment. The EPA's ruling is the most direct government-backed pronouncement of the harmful effects of greenhouse gases. The EPA released the findings as part of a study ordered by the Supreme Court in 2007. At the time, the high court ruled that despite objections by the EPA it did have the authority to regulate greenhouse gases pursuant to the Clean Air Act. The EPA's findings announced this week clear the way for it to develop and implement regulations that will curb greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S.

    The EPA's announcement stirred familiar debate on the matter. The National Association of Manufactures again claimed that combating pollutants will harm business production, claiming that new regulations would "come at a huge cost to the economy."

    Many climate change experts, however, lauded the EPA's findings as reflective of the Obama administration's commitment to addressing greenhouse gas emissions and clean energy. "'The stage is now set for E.P.A. to hold the biggest global-warming polluters accountable," said Emily Figdor, federal global-warming program director for Environment America. The EPA's report coincides with the start of the UN climate change conference in Copenhagen, which began this week. It is expected President Obama will reference the findings at the conference as evidence that the U.S. is taking the lead in addressing climate change. 

    [image via James Durkee]