*NEWS*U.S. STATES SUE BUSH & THE EPA OVER GLOBAL WARMING

[Anonymous]

States Sue EPA Over Global Warming
BOSTON
(April 08) – Officials of 18 states are taking the EPA back to court to
try to force it to comply with a Supreme Court ruling that rebuked the
Bush administration for inaction on global warming.A record amount of
Greenland’s ice sheet melted this summer — 19 billion tons more than
the previous high mark. And for the first time on record, the Northwest
Passage was open to navigation.In a petition filed Wednesday, the
plaintiffs said last April’s 5-4 ruling required the Environmental
Protection Agency to decide whether to regulate greenhouse gas
emissions, including carbon dioxide, from motor vehicles.

The EPA has instead done nothing, they said.
“The
EPA’s failure to act in the face of these incontestable dangers is a
shameful dereliction of duty,” said Massachusetts Attorney General
Martha Coakley, one of 17 state attorneys general involved Wednesday’s
court action. The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection
is also involved.

The petition asks the U.S. Court of Appeals
for the District of Columbia Circuit to require the EPA to act within
60 days.In last year’s decision, the Supreme Court ruled the EPA has
the authority to regulate emissions from new cars and trucks under the
Clean Air Act, and said the reasons the EPA gave for declining to do so
were insufficient.EPA spokesman Jonathan Shradar said the Supreme Court
required the agency to evaluate how it would regulate greenhouse gas
emissions from cars and other vehicles but set no deadline.The EPA
plans to include the evaluation in a formal rule-making the agency
announced last week, which will look at how to best regulate all
greenhouse gas emissions, not just those from vehicles, he said.
Otherwise, a mash of laws and regulations could emerge rather than the
“holistic” approach the administration favors.”We want to set a good
foundation to build a strong climate policy of potential regulation and
laws we can work toward and actually see some success,” Shradar said.

David
Brookbinder of the Sierra Club, one of 11 environmental groups in the
suit, said the EPA has been talking about a “holistic” approach to
climate change for years. “In fact, they have done absolutely nothing
except stand in the way of everybody’s else’s efforts,” he said.Last
week’s EPA announcement of the formal rule-making procedure signaled it
wanted to put greenhouse gas regulation “on indefinite hold,” which
isn’t acceptable, said Jim Milkey, chief of environmental protection at
the Coakley’s office, who argued the case before the Supreme
Court.”Every day that goes by without a solution, the window of
opportunity to fix the problem closes a bit more,” he said.

The
plaintiffs contend the EPA has already completed the work needed to
start regulating carbon dioxide.”On this issue, the U.S. EPA has failed
to lead, it has failed to follow the states’ lead and we are prepared
to force it out of the way in order to protect the environment,” said
California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger.The Supreme Court ruling requires
the EPA to regulate CO2 if it determines it’s a danger to public health
and welfare. Senior EPA employees have told House investigators about a
tentative finding from early December that CO2 posed a danger because
of its climate impact.They also said a draft regulation had been
circulated internally, then abandoned. EPA administrator Stephen
Johnson has said the issue had to be re-examined because of tougher
automobile mileage requirements enacted in December.The plaintiffs in
the petition want the finding about the dangers of CO2 released within
60 days, so the process for regulating vehicle emissions can begin.
They said any final rules wouldn’t be ready until the next
administration.In a related development Wednesday, the House Select
Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming voted 12-0
Wednesday to issue a subpoena for all the draft EPA documents on the
issue.”EPA has made no effort to accommodate the committee’s request,”
said Rep. Edward Markey, D-Mass., the committee’s chairman.Shrader
declined to say whether the agency would produce the documents the
subpoena will request. “We will review this new petition and respond
appropriately,” he said.

[Author]

April 3, 2008 at 2:41 PM