The following guest post is from Climate Feedback, a global network of scientists who analyze and critique articles about climate change in the mainstream media, holding publications accountable for accurately reporting on the issue. Last year was the hottest year in human history, and last week we learned that the Great Barrier Reef is already [...]
Last week, more than 50 state and county governments, representing 28 states, along with global tech leaders like Apple, Google, Amazon and Microsoft, joined the list of groups filing briefs in support of the Environmental Protection Agency’s Clean Power Plan.
As reported in a previous blog, our nation’s best hope at reigning in dangerous carbon pollution from our energy sector was put on pause when the Supreme Court made a recent, unprecedented ruling. This speed bump, however, has not caused supporters of the Clean Power Plan to abandon ship. Instead, advocate groups, major companies and city and county governments have joined the legal battle to help bolster EPA as it fights industry and coal dependent states in the courts.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator, Gina McCarthy, joined moms in Atlanta last night to talk about air pollution and ways we can work together to provide cleaner air for our kids. The theme of her remarks was clear: “Keep talking.” She urged us to “keep making the case that the march to clean power [...]
If climate change deniers see it as a threat to their efforts to stymie climate action, then you know it’s a powerful tool. Clean Air Act Section 115 is the latest EPA statute targeted by those working to keep America from becoming a true leader in the global effort to reduce carbon emissions and stave off some of the worst impacts of climate change.
In early February 2016, Rep. Scott Perry (R-Pa) introduced legislation that would repeal Section 115, but provides no basis, at least in the text of the bill, for why the Section is improper. In his accompanying statement, Rep. Perry makes the worn-out argument of EPA overreach as well as the seemingly baseless claim that any action under Section 115 would “threaten the reliability and viability of our nation’s energy sector.”
Section 115, previously enacted by Congress as part of the larger statute, gives the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) the authority to compel states to reduce air emissions that “contribute to health or welfare problems in other countries” as long as those countries are also enacting regulations to limit said air emissions.
The hosts of this week’s presidential debates in Miami did a service to the people of Florida by listening to the call of the 21 Florida mayors who requested the moderators to ask the candidates how they would respond to climate change and sea level rise. In the Democratic debate on Wednesday night, Bernie Sanders [...]
Sea level rise is contributing to increasingly costly flooding and the contamination of drinking water supplies with salt water for communities along the East Coast, but nowhere are these impacts of global warming more pronounced than in South Florida. To avoid the worst impacts for millions of Americans, the next presidential administration will need to double down on responding climate change, which is why the mayors of 21 Florida cities, led by Pinecrest Mayor Cindy Lerner, have asked the TV networks hosting Republican and Democratic presidential debates this week (CNN, The Washington Post, Univision) to ask the candidates about climate change.
The Clean Power Plan and the transition to the clean energy economy more broadly are creating immense opportunities for community engagement in helping shape our states’ energy futures. Environmental justice champion, Reverend Leo Woodberry, who we profiled in our Black History Month blog series last year, is therefore focusing on bringing people together to find common ground in acting on climate change.
America’s first regulation aimed at reigning in carbon pollution from our nation’s power sector may avoid some of the increasing politicization of our legal system in part due to the sudden and unexpected death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. A staunch conservative who sided more often with industry plaintiffs than with environmental advocates, Justice Scalia left a lasting legacy in environmental cases by offering strict interpretations for what constitutes “legal standing” and “harm.”
On Tuesday, February 9th, a 5-4 majority of the Supreme Court unexpectedly issued a “stay” blocking the Clean Power Plan – the centerpiece of U.S. action on climate change – until litigation over its legality is finished. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit will hear the case in June, and decide the merits most likely in late summer or the fall. Appeals to the Supreme Court will surely follow. What does the stay order tell us about the Clean Power Plan’s prospects?
In today’s world of heightened political theatre, it’s hard to be surprised anymore. Yesterday, however, the Supreme Court surprised many by agreeing to stay implementation of the Clean Power Plan before the review by the federal appeals court on the merits of the case.
The Supreme Court’s decision comes after a January 21st decision by the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals to deny the request for a stay by the coal industry and coal-dependent states. What’s most surprising is that the Supreme Court has never before halted implementation and compliance efforts for a regulation that is still awaiting review by a federal appeals court. Ultimately, the movement towards creating a cleaner electric generating sector will continue as utilities respond to market realities and customer demand for cheaper, cleaner energy sources.