Requirements by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for states to reduce power plant emissions have been put on hold by the Supreme Court:
The Supreme Court on Tuesday temporarily blocked the Obama administration's effort to combat climate change by regulating emissions from coal-fired power plants. The brief order was not the last word on the case, which is most likely to return to the Supreme Court after an appeals court considers an expedited challenge from 29 states and dozens of corporations and industry groups.
But the Supreme Court's willingness to issue a stay while the case proceeds was an early hint that the program could face a skeptical reception from the justices. The vote was 5 to 4.
The challenged regulation, which was issued last summer by the Environmental Protection Agency, requires states to make major cuts to greenhouse gas pollution created by electric power plants, the nation's largest source of such emissions. The plan could transform the nation's electricity system, cutting emissions from existing power plants by a third by 2030, from a 2005 baseline, by closing hundreds of heavily polluting coal-fired plants and increasing production of wind and solar power. [...] The regulation calls for states to submit plans to comply with the regulation by September, though they may seek a two-year extension. The first deadline for power plants to reduce their emissions is in 2022, with full compliance not required until 2030.
Also at NPR, Nature, Bloomberg, BBC.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Francis on Wednesday February 10 2016, @04:15PM
That's ridiculous. So, we should just let climate change happen because most of the damage was done previously?
This isn't a sunk cost sort of a thing, they continue to damage the environment and we don't even need them, we have better options now and have for decades.
(Score: 0, Disagree) by khallow on Wednesday February 10 2016, @04:19PM
So, we should just let climate change happen because most of the damage was done previously?
Um, yes. That would be a good reason.
This isn't a sunk cost sort of a thing, they continue to damage the environment and we don't even need them, we have better options now and have for decades.
Sure, we do.