Washington – The Supreme Court on Wednesday At least in the short term, it has allowed the Biden administration to implement its latest efforts to reduce climate-damaging carbon emissions from coal- and gas-fired power plants. Climate change.
The court, which has a 6-3 conservative majority, rejected emergency requests from Republican states led by West Virginia and several industry groups to block the regulation.
D Summary Judicial Order Note that conservative Justice Clarence Thomas would have granted the petition, while fellow conservative Justice Samuel Alito did not.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh, joined by Justice Neil Gorsuch, wrote a brief stating that the petitioners “have demonstrated a strong likelihood of success on the merits in at least some of their challenges.” But he added that there is no need for legal action at this stage, as the first consent period only begins in June.
The case will now go to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. After the court's ruling, the matter can be referred to the justices again.
Under the proposed rule, the Environmental Protection Agency requires “carbon capture,” a technique that uses solvents to remove carbon dioxide from a power plant's emissions.
Carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas that helps drive climate change when emitted, is then transported through gas pipelines and stored underground.
If Donald Trump wins the election, his administration could withdraw the plan.
The move marks the Biden administration's latest attempt to limit such emissions. The Supreme Court's 2022 ruling blocks the EPA's authority to regulate them under a provision of the Clean Air Act called Section 111.
The court said at the time that the provision only allowed the EPA to regulate individual plants and could not be used for larger changes to renewable energy. In doing so, the court invoked the “principal issue” doctrine, as it has done in other recent cases, concluding that the EPA was unable to find authority for such a broad rulemaking in a section of the Clean Air Act that did not specifically address the issue. . .
Those challenging the new process are making the same claim.
In July, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit refused to block the regulation, saying the main issue doctrine did not apply in this case. The new rule focuses on setting emission limits for individual plants, “a practice that falls well within the scope of the EPA,” the court concluded.
In court documents, challengers sought to portray the new regulation as too similar to the Supreme Court's rejection.
“Once again, EPA Section 111 justifies imposing large, sweeping changes to the nation’s energy markets,” wrote West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrissey. He questioned whether carbon capture could be implemented quickly or without high costs.
Carbon capture is an “important emerging technology… but it is not viable at the scale or timeline of the regulations,” he said.
Attorney General Elizabeth Preloger defended the administration's action in her response, saying the agency has clear authority to issue regulations. The administration has the support of Democratic-leaning states and some large energy companies.
“EPA acted reasonably in concluding, based on hundreds of pages of scientific and technical analysis, that the carbon capture system has been adequately demonstrated and that performance standards based on that system are achievable,” Prelogger wrote.
Prelogger also noted that affected trees would not have to comply until at least 2030.
The Biden administration has made carbon capture a key part of its efforts to combat climate change. The Reducing Inflation Act of 2022 includes a major expansion to make a carbon capture tax credit mechanism more economically viable.
