Court nixes regulating greenhouse gases

[Judi Lynn]

Court nixes regulating greenhouse gases
By John Heilprin, Associated Press Writer | July 15, 2005

WASHINGTON --An effort by a dozen states and several cities to make the Environmental Protection Agency regulate heat-trapping greenhouse gases as air pollutants was rejected Friday by a federal appeals court.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals said EPA had the discretion to take policy judgments in addition to scientific evidence into account in rejecting a petition asking it to order reductions in carbon dioxide and other automobile pollutants blamed for global warming.

Contrary to the states' arguments, it is "not accurate to say ... that the EPA administrator's refusal to regulate rested entirely on scientific uncertainty," Judge A. Raymond Randolph wrote for the three-judge panel.

The court also rejected EPA's claim that it didn't have the authority to order reductions because Congress hadn't specifically ordered it to address greenhouse gases in the Clean Air Act.
(snip/...)

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2005/07/15/court_nixes_regulating_greenhouse_gases/

[shoelace414]

1. the REAL problem with RW judges.

[redqueen]

2. And to think... Nixon set up the EPA...

Easy to see why the chief Nixon appointed to the agency voted for Kerry.

[rfkrfk]

3. these states should regulate, these states have jurisdiction, now

You have to start somewhere.
Most, if not all states keep greenhouse gas numbers.
These states should show they are serious about
controlling greenhouse gasses, by implimenting
the needed controls.
When the controls start working, other states will become interested.
The states that want this, should lead by example.

One of my dislikes of the Kyoto treaty is that the treaty
was negotiated in late 1997, I think,, but that the
commitment period is 2008 - 2012, of course, lately,
2008 thru 2011 seems to have been forgotten, and
nothing concrete has been enacted to enforce compliance
even in 2012.
Suggestion for states, control greenhouse gasses in 2006.

[AlGore-08.com]

8. Many already do more than the Federal government - - and some local govs

Also have stricter laws. There is a movement among mayors to work against global warming at the local level - - Gore is heavily involved in it.

The problem ends up being one of jurisdiction. I can be the mayor of Moorhead, Minnesota, and set up stringent pollution laws, which are backed by Minnesota state laws. My efforts can significantly reduce the greenhouse gasses produced by Moorhead and it's residents. But right across the Red River - - a few minutes walk across a bridge - - is my sister city of Fargo, North Dakota. If the mayor of Fargo and the State of North Dakota decide that spewing greenhouse gasses into the air at 10 times the rate that Moorhead was spewing them is the thing to do, I can't stop them. I can try to embarrass them in the media, and I can sue them in federal court, but if the Federal Government won't stop them, I can't.

That's why the state and local initiatives are extremely important, but they're not enough.

[Whoa_Nelly]

4. Well, let's just take look at the air quality of the states

http://creativemethods.com/airquality/maps/

[Mari333]

5. I live in the COUNTRY in Michigan

and my air quality is shite!

[Whoa_Nelly]

7. Yes, Mari...a lovely, lovely US map.

Alaska is the best overall.

[AlGore-08.com]

9. I checked about 10 states and the only "A" quality I saw

Was in the Aleutian islands?

We are so oompah-loompah-doompity screwed.

[Whoa_Nelly]

6. According to this link/info, Randolph app't'd by Bush I in 1990

and was on the Exxon payroll.

http://www.legitgov.org/news_cheney_task_force_judge_051005.html
(scroll down a little to the blog report that also has links)

Yup. RW politics working to make our world a better place! :sarcasm: