Is the Clean Power Plan Losing Power?
On February 9, 2016, with a 5-to-4 vote, the Supreme Court issued a stay on the implementation of the Clean Power Plan. The EPA and the Obama administration weren’t too happy about it.
Let’s back up. Who is the EPA and what is the Clean Power Plan?
On August 3, 2015, Obama and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), whose mission is to protect human health and the environment, announced the Clean Power Plan (CPP), which is set to address climate change by reducing carbon pollution from power plants.
According to the EPA, fossil fuel power plants are the number one source of carbon pollution, contributing to one third of total carbon emissions.
To combat this problem, the CPP requires individual states to set specific goals to reduce carbon emissions. States have the freedom to decide how they would like to do so. For example, they can switch from coal to natural gas, boost renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar, or join regional Cap and Trade programs to limit their emissions. Regardless of their methods, states must submit their emissions reduction plans by September 2016, or, with an extension approval, by September 2018. If a state does not submit a plan by then, the EPA will impose its own plan on that state. States must have taken action towards their emissions goals by 2022 and are expected to meet their final goals in 2030.
Before the CPP, there were no national limits for carbon pollution. With the implementation of the CPP, by 2030, the country will reduce its carbon emissions by 32% below 2005 levels. It will prevent and reduce related health problems such as asthma attacks and hospitalizations. The transition to cleaner sources of energy will also protect Americans from other harmful air pollution.
Obama has called the CPP “the single most important step that America has ever made in the fight against global climate change.”
U.S. Power Plants are the country’s largest source of greenhouse gases.
However, with the Supreme Court’s decision to postpone the implementation of the CPP, the EPA must halt enforcement of the CPP until the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit makes a ruling in June 2016.
Now, states are adjusting their plans. According to E&E Publishing, out of the 47 states affected by the rule, 18 states (mostly conservative) have suspended their planning work for the CPP; 9 states are still accessing their plans, and 20 (mostly liberal) states are planning to advance with their plans, even though the EPA can no longer legally require them to do so.
Challengers of the CPP include coal-mining states such as Wyoming, West Virginia and Kentucky, whose governors fear that the emission regulations would cause lay-offs and economic decline. Patrick Morrisey, Attorney General of West Virginia, the nation’s second-largest coal producing state, called the CPP “a blatant and unprecedented attack on coal,” and that his state was “thrilled that the Supreme Court realized the rule’s immediate impact and froze its implementation, protecting workers and saving countless dollars as our fight against its legality continues.”
Meanwhile, Environmental organizations remain firm supporters of the CPP. “The battle to defend the Clean Power Plan is far from over,” says Howard Fox of Earthjustice. “Today’s Supreme Court ruling did not rule on the validity of the plan, but instead left that for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit to decide. We are confident that the DC Circuit will uphold the plan, which rests on a solid legal and factual foundation.”
With conservative Justice Antonin Scalia’s recent death, the fate of the CPP will depend on the next Supreme Court Justice and the next President that will be elected at the end of the year. For the wellbeing of the citizens and the earth, I sincerely hope that the next POTUS and Supreme Court Justice will continue to advocate for the CPP, which has the potential to drastically reduce carbon emissions from power plants and improve the lives of millions of Americans.