Slashdot Mirror


States Set to Sue the U.S. Over Greenhouse Gases

dnormant writes to tell us The New York Times is reporting that more than a dozen states are gearing up to sue the Bush administration for holding up efforts to regulate automobile emissions. "The move comes as New York and other Northeastern states are stepping up their push for tougher regulation of greenhouse gases as part of their continuing opposition to President Bush's policies. On Wednesday, Gov. Eliot Spitzer's administration is to issue regulations requiring power plants to pay for their greenhouse gas emissions, part of a broader plan among 10 Northeastern states, known as the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, to move beyond federal regulators in Washington and regulate such emissions on their own."

3 of 440 comments (clear)

  1. It's usually the other way around... by Dzimas · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The telling thing is that the various northeastern states are pushing the Bush administration for tighter emission regulations. Usually, it's the other way around - local politicians seek to fend off draconian federal policies that might cripple local industry. The amazing thing is that they're suing the EPA itself, and my professional experience is that many scientists associated with the EPA are incredibly concerned about the impact of greenhouse gases on the environment. They're forced to keep quiet and follow the mandate passed down by a perplexingly out-of-touch executive team in the White House.

  2. Re:One problem with this plan by geminidomino · · Score: 3, Interesting

    With any luck, requiring power companies to pay for the costs of the pollution they create (and presumably pass that cost on to their consumers) will motivate both the power companies and the consumers to switch to cleaner (and hence cheaper) methods of power generation... which is of course exactly what we want to have happen. Luck has nothing to do with it. That's the same sort of naive thinking that comes up with ideas like this. As long as the power company can recoup most/all of the added expense from the customer, they won't have any impetus to switch anything at all.
  3. Re:A major problem I haven't seen mentioned yet by tfoss · · Score: 4, Interesting

    One of the purposes of the Attorney General's office is to protect the rights of the consumer. I think the rights of citizens are supposed to come before rights of consumers.

    The federal government sets the national standard, and now you don't have the purchasing power of 4 million Oregonians determining that the rest of us have to pay a premium for a super-efficient hybrid car we can't afford. Yup, but the federal government hasn't changed CAFE standards substantially in more than two decades. And as noted in TFA: If implemented, the measure would first affect 2009 models; automakers have said it would make it harder to sell the largest and least fuel-efficient sport utility vehicles and pickup trucks in states that adopt the rules. So the 8 mpg H2s would take a sales hit in New York and California. Bummer.

    Residents of these states who support this: the proper way to get the EPA to change its guidelines is to have your federal legislators introduce legislation to change those guidelines. Actually the Supreme Court said the EPA is *supposed* to regulate greenhouse gases, and the states in question are trying to get the EPA to allow them to enact greenhouse gas standards. The EPA has been dragging its feet since the ruling 6 months ago, so the lawsuit is to try and force the EPA to do, or allow states to do, what the Supreme Court said the EPA should do.

    -Ted
    --
    -=-=- Quantum physics - the dreams stuff are made of.