This was a funny ruling onthe subject also wasn't it. Funny that the EPA and dozens of Democratic politicians sued the government to regulate carbon emissions - to what, drive up costs for the American consumers?
Justices Say E.P.A. Has Power to Act on Harmful Gases
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/03/washington/03scotus.html
Here is the key "out":
The court further ruled that the agency could not sidestep its authority to regulate the greenhouse gases that contribute to global climate change unless it could provide a scientific basis for its refusal.
...
Writing for the majority, Justice John Paul Stevens said the only way the agency could “avoid taking further action” now was “if it determines that greenhouse gases do not contribute to climate change” or provides a good explanation why it cannot or will not find out whether they do.
If they cannot provide scientific fact that it DOES contribute to climate change, are they then required to not act? So far the IPCC and the UN are not looking good on making a real argument for global warming any more - leastwise not as a result of man.
Texas sues EPA over limits on carbon dioxide emissions
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2010/02/16/85421/texas-sues-epa-over-limits-on.html
Can Lawsuits Stop The EPA's Carbon Rules?
http://www.tnr.com/blog/the-vine/can-lawsuits-stop-the-epas-carbon-rules
Now, that doesn't mean the EPA's greenhouse gas rules won't bump up against more significant legal challenges down the road. Industry groups almost certainly won't be able to challenge climate science in courts, but they can still challenge the specific rules that the agency devises. For instance, as I mentioned in my piece, the EPA wants certain rules to apply only to polluters that emit more than 25,000 tons of carbon-dioxide per year—but this "tailoring rule" may be vulnerable to a legal challenge. So this isn't the last lawsuit we're likely to see.
Meanwhile, there's another entity that's working to stop the EPA—namely, Congress. Late on Friday night, eight coal-state Democrats, led by West Virginia's Jay Rockefeller, sent a letter to EPA head Lisa Jackson asking her to suspend regulations for coal-fired utilities and industrial facilities until Congress passes its own climate legislation. This is in addition to the 39 senators who are supporting Lisa Murkowski's bill to strip the EPA of its authority over greenhouse gases. That's not enough votes to stop the agency (especially since Murkowski's bill would likely have to overcome an Obama veto), but the push to stop the EPA does seem to be gaining momentum.
If you can’t model the past, where you know the answer pretty well, how can you model the future? - William Happer Cyrus Fogg Brackett Professor of Physics Princeton University
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/06/2010 12:54PM by Registered Voter.