US CO2 Action to Take Years Despite Court Ruling
Date: 05-Apr-07
Country: US
Author: Timothy Gardner
"It will take time for the point of law that has been clarified by the Supreme Court to translate into a new federal regulatory framework," said climate expert Steve Knell at political and economic researchers Global Insight in London.
The top US court ruled on Monday that the Environmental Protection Agency has the authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gases from vehicles.
The United States is the world's top emitter of heat-trapping gases scientists say could lead to catastrophic storms, flooding and heat waves, and the government faces mounting pressure to cut emissions. Half of US electricity comes from coal, the biggest greenhouse gas emitter.
President George W. Bush is opposed to mandatory limits on emissions, saying they would harm the economy.
Since the 1990s, the EPA has regulated pollutants that cause acid rain and smog under the Clean Air Act, harnessing market mechanisms to reward companies for cutting output of pollutants and punish ones that don't by making them buy allowances for the right to pollute.
But extending the law to greenhouse gases could be tricky.
"This is well beyond anything EPA has tackled before," Pat Parenteau, a professor of environmental law at Vermont Law School, said in an interview. Regulating greenhouse gases could be so difficult -- and potentially litigious -- that it could require laws comparable to a new Clean Air Act, he said.
"Regulating greenhouse gases under that act may or may not make good sound policy," said Ray Kopp, a climate expert at Washington-based nonprofit Resources for the Future. "It may very well be the case that a different regulatory structure ... may be the way to go."
The sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides the EPA regulates under the act are mainly localized pollutants from coal-burning plants. They can be reduced through simple but sometimes expensive measures, such as putting scrubbers on smokestacks or burning cleaner fuels.
But carbon dioxide is far more ubiquitous and has many more sources of emissions including vehicles, farms and heavy industry. It also is just one of six greenhouse gases scientists link to global warming.
INCHING CLOSER
To be sure, the ruling was an important step in inching closer to climate laws in the United States.
Brokers wait eagerly for a day in which US greenhouse gas trade could graduate from occasional voluntary deals between a few businesses concerned about the future of regulation to a brisk greenhouse market created by mandatory regulations.
"The court decision is clear indication that national regulations are coming," said Josh Margolis, a greenhouse gas emissions broker for Cantor Fitzgerald in San Francisco. "It's like springtime for carbon markets."
It also could speed similar rulings on federal and state emissions cases on broader sources of greenhouse gases. In one case awaiting trial in the Supreme Court, 10 states are suing power companies to cut emissions. In another, California is suing auto companies to act on carbon emissions.
"Since the Supreme Court case is about cars, it certainly adds weight to the California suit," said Kopp.
But any new laws could take years and involve haggling between federal agencies beyond the EPA, including the Departments of Energy, Transportation, and Agriculture.
Several bills in Congress would reduce emissions through cap-and-trade markets, or a tax on high carbon fuels, but they may not be passed soon. Speaker Nancy Pelosi originally wanted the House to act by July 4 on legislation that would halve US emissions by 2050, but this month she backed away from that schedule.
