EPA, Greenhouse gases and Climate Change: A follow-up

By David Watkins

A quick follow-up to a post I wrote last October (here): The EPA has determined that greenhouse gases "pose a threat to human health and welfare" and as such should to be regulated by the EPA, according to the Clean Air Act. As readers of my post will recall, the EPA had been ordered to do this by federal courts over two years ago. What changed? It's no secret that the leaders of the EPA under Bush didn't want to take this step, and that they dragged their feet on complying with the judicial order. Under Obama, EPA officials serve a president who has pledged to make climate change a priority. (For more, see Kate Sheppard and the EPA press release for more)

But what does this mean? At this point, it's hard to say. After a 60 day public comment period, the EPA is legally required to regulate CO2 and other greenhouse gas emissions. But the extent, nature and timing of those regulations are at the discretion of EPA officials. (more details here) It's far from clear what those EPA regulations will look like. In terms of politics, this ruling puts the ball on climate change policy squarely in the court of congress. As we've seen with the stimulus and other bills recently, the overwhelmingly Democratic congress is not always inclined to give Obama precisely what he wants in legislation. For a variety or reasons, members of Congress with to have real input and leave their mark on public policy. Now, if Congress drags their collective feet on climate change, the Obama administration can simply begin to construct major components of a climate change policy without them, through the administrative process of the EPA as outlined by the Clean Air Act. Obama still probably won't get precisely what he wants out of any future legislation, but the EPA's mandate to regulate greenhouse gases slightly shifts the balance of power away from congress and towards the executive branch.

Still, it remains to be seen whether any new greenhouse-gas specific bill will have much of a chance of passing the Senate, where the opposition party still holds some power through the filibuster and many Senate Democrats have long been wary of enacting climate change policy. The EPA decision does raise the stakes on congressional inaction. The time frame? The House of Representatives is planning to work on a climate change bill this summer, when the new EPA regulations, whatever they may be, might begin. There's an international meeting on CLimate Change in Copenhagen in December, and Obama would surely like to have something to demonstrate to the international community that the US is now serious about climate change--if not legislation, new EPA regulations will have to do.

Comments

[supra shoes]

Children are falling through the fall and then, gradually grow up

[Scotty]

Thanks for the update.
Scotty
solar cells sun power and clean energy