Back in 1999, Massachusetts and a group of renewable energy companies petitioned the EPA to declare four GHGs (carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and hydrofluorocarbons) a pollutant under the Clean Air Act (CAA).
EPA declined to do so, saying, among other things, that the CAA was not a suitable mechanism for GHGs, and it was satisfied with the then-current voluntary [!] standards. The petitioners appealed the decision, and the case finally made its way to the Supreme Court in 2006, when the Court found in favor of the the petitioners (that the CAA was indeed suitable for regulating GHGs.
Meanwhile , it is still getting hotter, according to the indicators kept b67y the National Oceanic and Atnospheric Administration (NOAA) climate indicators show it is getting hot (air and water temperatures are rising, and sea level is too).[http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/bams-state-of-the-climate/2009-time-series/?ts=mat ]
To address these changes, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has promulgated regulations under the Clean Air Act for the emissions of light and heavy vehicles. [http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/indicators/pdfs/ClimateIndicators_full.pdf ]Then last winter Virginia's attorney general Challenged tho E.P.A. authority to regulate GHGs, Ken Cuccinelli, filed a petition Tuesday asking the Environmental Protection Agency to reconsider its finding that global warming poses a threat to people. [http://green.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/18/virginia-files-challenge-to-e-p-a-greenhouse-gas-regulation/ ]
Texas followed suit in an Aug. 2 letter to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, The Texas Atty Gen and Texas EPA say they don't have the authority to regulate greenhouse gases as demanded by the EPA [http://www.scribd.com/doc/35298358/Texas2EPA-Letter-Aug-2-2010#fullscreen:on
No comments:
Post a Comment