Remove Carbon Dioxide Remove Carbon Emissions Remove Climate Scientist Remove Regulations
article thumbnail

Roe v. Wade Draft Bodes Ill for Air, Wetlands and EPA

Union of Concerned Scientists

Climate Change on the Docket. At issue in this case is whether and how the EPA can set standards for carbon emissions at power plants. The coal industry and conservative states want the high court to limit EPA’s powers solely to the regulation of individual power plants. Carbon dioxide is not a pollutant.

article thumbnail

Identifying the Means to an End: The Role of the Social Cost of Carbon

Arnold Porter

The SCC is a metric that seeks to capture all of the costs that emitting a ton of carbon dioxide (or equivalent amounts of other greenhouse gases such as methane) imposes on society by contributing to climate change over the hundreds of years it remains in the atmosphere.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

Senate Committees Hear Familiar Pro/Con Comments On Economic, Environmental Impacts Of EQB’s Final Carbon Pollution Reduction Program Covering Power Plants - RGGI

PA Environment Daily

Republicans said the final regulations will increase the cost of electricity for individuals and businesses, have a negative impact on jobs and will not significantly reduce carbon pollution. It needs to be an informed decision with equal input from climate scientists and economists.

article thumbnail

Climate Litigation Chart Updates – November 2016

Law Columbia

The plan must specifically address how EPA will consider the effects of Clean Air Act regulation on the coal industry. Opponents of EPA Carbon Standards for New Coal-Fired Power Plants Filed Initial Briefs. Circuit to Consolidate Methane Standards Challenge with Other Challenges to Emissions Standards in Oil and Gas Sector.

2016 40
article thumbnail

May 2020 Updates to the Climate Case Charts

Columbia Climate Law

The plaintiffs alleged among other things that the defendants the two projects’ cumulative impacts on carbon emissions. The court also said it was “far from clear” that the states had demonstrated that the repeal would cause particularized harm.) Association of Irritated Residents v. F078460 (Cal.

2020 40