To resolve the question, the D.C. Circuit Court will begin hearing oral arguments on the EPA’s Clean Power Plan in June.
Advertisement
The Clean Power Plan would require states to lower carbon dioxide emissions from electricity production. The opposition against President Obama was fronted by 27 states across the United States, and vested interest which included large energy conglomerates.
Once implemented, under the Clean Power Plan renewables will account for 28% of United States capacity by 2030, while cutting emissions from fossil fuel-fired power plants – which account for nearly one-third of the country’s greenhouse gas emissions. In a split decision, the US’s highest court issued a stay while lawsuits against the plan proceed. At that time in 2007, New Jersey was among the states backing that authority, but switched its position during the Christie administration. “The Court’s decision, and the special interests working to undermine this plan, threatens our environment, public health and economy”. The ruling is a setback for the Obama Administration’s efforts to address climate change. Climate change now joins immigration atop the list of top Obama priorities delayed indefinitely by the courts.
Barnes says other less coal-dependent states are moving to make more use of wind and solar power. But, in the end, he said this week’s setback from the Supreme Court is just a “temporary, procedural determination”. “On its blog, the pro-business group said that USA officials should have known better” before making such a commitment.
The Clean Power Plan, which helped inspire China’s recent actions on climate change and the 190-nation climate agreement in Paris, should move forward because it has the facts, law and science on its side.
The White House, though, remained optimistic and said in a statement that it would “continue to take aggressive steps to make forward progress to reduce carbon emissions”. In May of 2015, Senator Capito introduced the Affordable Reliable Energy Now Act, also known as ARENA, which included a provision to extend the clean power plan’s compliance dates pending final judicial review, including the submission of state plans. He said Thursday that “science” is on his side and he’s confident that his administration’s rule is on legally the right path. More than 25 states have challenged the administration’s rules arguing they would be burdensome on the coal industry.
Bluhm said that New Jersey has the most stringent carbon-emission limits of any state in the PJM regional power grid, which encompasses 13 states and the District of Columbia.
Advertisement
“The Paris agreement is resilient and will withstand this little legal bump as the world inevitably shifts to safer cleaner future”. But even these opponents of the rule said they will keep diversifying their power supply.
