EPA denies Calif. greenhouse gas waiver

Cthippo · 20 Dec 2007

Associated Press said:

WASHINGTON - The Environmental Protection Agency on Wednesday slapped down California's bid for first-in-the-nation greenhouse gas limits on cars, trucks and SUVs, refusing the state a waiver that would have allowed those restrictions to take effect.

"The Bush administration is moving forward with a clear national solution — not a confusing patchwork of state rules," EPA Administrator Stephen L. Johnson told reporters on a conference call. "I believe this is a better approach than if individual states were to act alone."

The long-awaited decision amounted to a serious setback for California and at least 16 other states seeking the new car regulations to achieve their anti-global warming goals. It was a victory for automakers, who contended they would have been forced to reduce their selection of vehicles in the states that adopted California's standards.

The tailpipe standards California adopted in 2004 would have forced automakers to cut greenhouse gas emissions by 30 percent in new cars and light trucks by 2016, with the cutbacks beginning in the 2009 model year.

Under the Clean Air Act, the state needed a federal waiver to implement the rules.

"It is disappointing that the federal government is standing in our way and ignoring the will of tens of millions of people across the nation," said Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. "California sued to compel the agency to act on our waiver, and now we will sue to overturn today's decision and allow Californians to protect our environment."

Twelve other states — Connecticut, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington — have adopted the California emissions standards, and the governors of Arizona, Colorado, Florida and Utah have said they also plan to adopt them. The rules were also under consideration in Iowa.

With Wednesday's denial, those other states are also prevented from moving forward.

In explaining his decision, Johnson cited energy legislation approved by Congress and signed into law Wednesday by President Bush. The law requires automakers to achieve an industrywide average fuel efficiency for cars, SUVs and small trucks of 35 miles per gallon by 2020.

Johnson said Congress' approach would be better than a "partial state-by-state approach." He said California's law would have yielded a 33.8 mpg standard, but California Air Resources Board chair Mary Nichols said Johnson's math was "just wrong."

She said the California regulations would have resulted in a 36.8 miles per gallon average and would have taken effect sooner than the federal standards.

"EPA is now trying to hide behind the passage of (fuel economy) legislation," Nichols said. "This is really unconscionable."

Environmentalists and Democratic lawmakers also denounced the decision. Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., who chairs the Senate's environment committee, said she'd question Johnson at a hearing. Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., chairman of the government oversight and reform committee in the House, vowed to investigate, alleging the decision was dictated by politics — something Johnson denied.

"This federal agency blunder is bad policy and worse law," Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal said. "We will take the EPA to court if necessary and once again demonstrate that no one is above the law. If the EPA won't obey the law or take the lead, at least it should get out of the way so states can protect our environment."

Automakers applauded the outcome.

General Motors Corp. said in a statement that "by removing the disproportionate burden of complying with a patchwork of state-specific regulations that would divert our resources, automakers can concentrate on developing and implementing the advanced technologies in ways that will meet America's driving needs."

Wednesday's decision was further confirmation of the Bush administration's adamant opposition to mandatory limits on greenhouse gas emissions, even after a string of court decisions affirming the right of states and the federal government to regulate carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.

It was the first time the EPA had fully denied California a Clean Air Act waiver since Congress gave California the right to obtain such waivers in 1967.

The auto regulations were to have been a major part of California's first-in-the-nation global warming law which aims to reduce greenhouse gases economy-wide by 25 percent — to 1990 levels — by 2020. The auto emission reductions would have accounted for about 17 percent of the state's proposed reductions.

Nichols said California expects to win on appeal and does not plan to shift its strategy to meeting greenhouse gas reduction goals.

Despite the Bush administration's opposition to mandatory greenhouse gas limits, some congressional Democrats hope to craft a federal law. Earlier this month Boxer's committee passed a bill with mandatory caps on greenhouse gases although approval by the full Senate next year is far from certain and there are no immediate plans for the House to act.

California had been waiting for Wednesday's decision for two years. EPA put it off while a Supreme Court case was pending on whether the agency could regulate greenhouse gases. In April, the Supreme Court said it could.

In the wake of that ruling, President Bush directed federal agencies to craft regulations to cut greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles. Johnson said Wednesday he would review the newly signed energy bill to see what additional steps might need to be taken.
Click to expand...

Original story

Maybe we should give up and admit that nothing good is going to happen until the shrub is exterminated next year.

Amon · 20 Dec 2007

Just finished watching a brief documentary on Discovery Civilization Channel: "Thomas L. Friedman Reporting: Addicted to Oil". The level of federal resistance to research and implementation of energy alternatives is absolutely incredible... The documentary concludes that the nation already has renewable alternatives readily available and cites states such as Brazil, Germany, and (believe it or not) mainland China being generations well ahead of the United States in renewable energies.

Reducing greenhouse gases isn't easy, but there's no sense in denying it either when 14% of Germany's power grid is generated by emission-free wind farms.

steveo_mcg · 20 Dec 2007

China is expecting to have a fleet of hydrogen powered cars and a network of H2 filling stations by the time the Olympics rolls around. China may be the largest total polluter (though not a patch per capita) but at least when the glare of the world is on them they take action (or at least pay lip service to) not put up road blocks.

Cthippo · 22 Dec 2007

US environment chief ignored advice on Cal. emissions: report

LOS ANGELES (AFP) - The head of the US environmental protection body ignored advice from staff in rejecting California's bid to set tough new vehicle emissions standards, it was reported on Friday.

On Wednesday Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) administrator Stephen Johnson denied California's request because the state did not meet certain legal requirements for being permitted its own emissions limits.

But Friday The Los Angeles Times cited several sources inside and outside the agency as saying that EPA staff who had studied the issue for months had advised Johnson that the opposite was true.

"California met every criteria ... on the merits. The same criteria we have used for the last 40 years on all the other waivers," one EPA staff member told the Times. "We told him (Johnson) that. All the briefings we have given him laid out the facts."

California Air Resources Board Chairwoman Mary Nichols told the Times she had learned from EPA staff that they were over-ruled by Johnson.

Nichols said the decision showed that President George W. Bush's administration "ignores the science and ignores the law to reach the politically convenient conclusion."

A spokeswoman for the EPA responded Friday by noting that as a 26-year veteran Johnson "values the technical and legal expertise of his staff.

"The Clean Air Act states the authority to decide waiver requests rests with him. He stands behind his decision," the spokeswoman said in a statement emailed to AFP.

California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger has said he plans to sue the Bush administration in an attempt to overturn the EPA ruling, describing the decision as "legally indefensible."

California passed legislation in 2002 requiring automakers to reduce vehicle emissions 30 percent by 2016. Sixteen states had indicated they would adopt California's emissions levels if they were greenlighted by the EPA.

The Times quoted unidentified EPA staff as revealing that an internal briefing document had advised Johnson that even if he rejected California's request, the state would be likely to mount a successful legal challenge.

They advised Johnson to grant the waiver outright or to give California a temporary one for three years.

Instead, three sources told the Times, Johnson broke off consultation with his technical staff in the past month before making his ruling.

The Times reported that EPA staff believed Johnson made his decision after meetings between auto industry executives and Vice President Dick Cheney, and after a Chrysler executive sent a letter to the White House arguing why neither California nor the EPA should be allowed to regulate greenhouse gases.

"Clearly the White House said, 'We're going to get EPA out of the way and get California out of the way. If you give us this energy bill, then we're done, the deal is done,'" said one staffer.

The EPA has said legislation signed by President George W. Bush this week regarding fuel economy standards on vehicles was a step towards a "clear national solution" towards curbing greenhouse gas emissions rather than a "confusing patchwork of state rules."

However Nichols said in a separate interview quoted in Time Magazine on Friday that the two issues -- fuel economy levels and limits on greenhouse gases -- should not be confused.

"The [Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE)] legislation which is part of the Energy Bill [passed by Congress] is not a greenhouse gas emission standard," Nichols said.

"It's a totally different thing. The argument that somehow because we now have a CAFE standard that means we shouldn't be regulating greenhouse gases, it just doesn't hold water, it makes no sense."
Click to expand...

I really hope that the lessons of how NOT to run a country are being learned by our future leaders. What we are seeing now is what happens when everything becomes political. If everything is a partisan battle then there is no middle ground on which to forge concensus.

C-Sniper · 22 Dec 2007

Well. you can't get much worse than this. i mean even President Harding wasn't this bad!

Log in or Sign up

EPA denies Calif. greenhouse gas waiver

Cthippo Can't mod my way out of a paper bag

Amon inch-perfect

steveo_mcg What's a Dremel?

Cthippo Can't mod my way out of a paper bag

C-Sniper Stop Trolling this space Ądmins!

Share This Page

Log in or Sign up

EPA denies Calif. greenhouse gas waiver

Cthippo Can't mod my way out of a paper bag

Amon inch-perfect

steveo_mcg What's a Dremel?

Cthippo Can't mod my way out of a paper bag

C-Sniper Stop Trolling this space Ądmins!

Share This Page

Useful Searches