The China Mail - US Supreme Court hears climate case as UN issues stark warning

USD -
AED 3.672499
AFN 63.000213
ALL 83.045552
AMD 377.608336
ANG 1.790083
AOA 916.99993
ARS 1391.475899
AUD 1.436555
AWG 1.8025
AZN 1.702097
BAM 1.692703
BBD 2.017085
BDT 122.889314
BGN 1.709309
BHD 0.377678
BIF 2964.437482
BMD 1
BND 1.280822
BOB 6.920277
BRL 5.343438
BSD 1.001532
BTN 93.628346
BWP 13.656801
BYN 3.038457
BYR 19600
BZD 2.014228
CAD 1.37385
CDF 2274.999924
CHF 0.791335
CLF 0.023505
CLP 928.093911
CNY 6.886396
CNH 6.91253
COP 3696.54
CRC 467.791212
CUC 1
CUP 26.5
CVE 95.432004
CZK 21.28799
DJF 178.340531
DKK 6.48348
DOP 59.449729
DZD 132.432632
EGP 52.233671
ERN 15
ETB 157.836062
EUR 0.86771
FJD 2.227199
FKP 0.749521
GBP 0.751565
GEL 2.714963
GGP 0.749521
GHS 10.917148
GIP 0.749521
GMD 73.497588
GNF 8778.549977
GTQ 7.671603
GYD 209.529662
HKD 7.828115
HNL 26.509205
HRK 6.533006
HTG 131.388314
HUF 342.017982
IDR 16993
ILS 3.139598
IMP 0.749521
INR 93.938501
IQD 1311.97909
IRR 1315625.000003
ISK 124.779797
JEP 0.749521
JMD 157.346743
JOD 0.708989
JPY 159.455972
KES 129.598158
KGS 87.4479
KHR 4001.973291
KMF 427.000057
KPW 900.003974
KRW 1512.965024
KWD 0.30679
KYD 0.834581
KZT 481.491739
LAK 21506.092917
LBP 89692.06536
LKR 312.41778
LRD 183.27376
LSL 16.894603
LTL 2.95274
LVL 0.60489
LYD 6.411466
MAD 9.358386
MDL 17.440975
MGA 4176.061001
MKD 53.425388
MMK 2099.452431
MNT 3566.950214
MOP 8.084003
MRU 40.089837
MUR 46.570151
MVR 15.46035
MWK 1736.722073
MXN 18.02175
MYR 3.939504
MZN 63.899678
NAD 16.894749
NGN 1362.960126
NIO 36.852081
NOK 9.669101
NPR 149.804404
NZD 1.726235
OMR 0.384479
PAB 1.001519
PEN 3.46252
PGK 4.323066
PHP 60.289868
PKR 279.628351
PLN 3.71807
PYG 6541.287659
QAR 3.662273
RON 4.422399
RSD 101.958019
RUB 82.166009
RWF 1457.231632
SAR 3.754935
SBD 8.05166
SCR 13.925407
SDG 600.999925
SEK 9.43335
SGD 1.28433
SHP 0.750259
SLE 24.574953
SLL 20969.510825
SOS 572.35094
SRD 37.487497
STD 20697.981008
STN 21.204227
SVC 8.762971
SYP 110.564047
SZL 16.900787
THB 32.947502
TJS 9.619362
TMT 3.51
TND 2.95786
TOP 2.40776
TRY 44.330501
TTD 6.794814
TWD 32.098502
TZS 2594.999914
UAH 43.875212
UGX 3785.603628
UYU 40.356396
UZS 12210.172836
VES 454.69063
VND 26341
VUV 119.226095
WST 2.727792
XAF 567.726608
XAG 0.015629
XAU 0.000235
XCD 2.70255
XCG 1.80494
XDR 0.706079
XOF 567.716781
XPF 103.216984
YER 238.601849
ZAR 17.185098
ZMK 9001.201832
ZMW 19.554625
ZWL 321.999592
  • CMSC

    -0.2000

    22.65

    -0.88%

  • CMSD

    -0.2420

    22.658

    -1.07%

  • GSK

    -0.5300

    51.84

    -1.02%

  • RIO

    -2.5000

    83.15

    -3.01%

  • NGG

    -3.5400

    81.99

    -4.32%

  • AZN

    -5.3300

    183.6

    -2.9%

  • BP

    -1.0800

    44.78

    -2.41%

  • RBGPF

    -13.5000

    69

    -19.57%

  • BCC

    -1.5600

    68.3

    -2.28%

  • BCE

    0.0600

    25.79

    +0.23%

  • BTI

    -1.3500

    57.37

    -2.35%

  • RYCEF

    -1.2600

    15.34

    -8.21%

  • JRI

    -0.3900

    11.77

    -3.31%

  • VOD

    -0.0900

    14.33

    -0.63%

  • RELX

    -0.4600

    33.36

    -1.38%

US Supreme Court hears climate case as UN issues stark warning
US Supreme Court hears climate case as UN issues stark warning

US Supreme Court hears climate case as UN issues stark warning

A divided US Supreme Court heard arguments on Monday in an environmental regulation case with potentially far-reaching implications for the Biden administration's fight against climate change.

Text size:

The case concerns the authority of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from coal-fired power plants, which produce nearly 20 percent of the electricity in the United States.

As the Supreme Court was hearing arguments, the United Nations issued a landmark report containing dire warnings over climate change.

While the three liberal justices on the nine-member Supreme Court appeared largely to support arguments that the EPA was operating within its brief, several of the conservative justices appeared skeptical.

"This agency is doing greenhouse gas regulation," said Justice Sonia Sotomayor, one of the liberal members of the court. "This is in, you know, exactly in its wheelhouse."

Jacob Roth, arguing for The North America Coal Corp., said the EPA is going beyond its remit.

"The agency is asking questions like: Should we phase out the coal industry? Should we build more solar farms in this country? Should we restrict how consumers use electricity in order to bring down emissions?

"Those are not the types of questions we expect the agency to be answering," Roth said.

In 2007, the Supreme Court, by a narrow majority, ruled that the EPA has the power to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from power plants under the Clean Air Act of 1970.

In 2015, Democratic president Barack Obama unveiled his Clean Power Plan, which was intended to combat global warming by reducing carbon dioxide emissions from coal- and gas-burning plants and shifting energy production to clean sources such as solar and wind power.

The Clean Power Plan was blocked in the Supreme Court in 2016 and repealed by former Republican president Donald Trump, who replaced it with his own industry-friendly Affordable Clean Energy (ACE) rule.

Trump, a climate change skeptic hostile to government regulation of industry, also nominated three justices to the Supreme Court, giving conservatives a 6-3 majority.

- 'Constrain EPA authority' -

The US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia threw out Trump's ACE rule on the last day of his presidency, setting the stage for the case currently before the Supreme Court: West Virginia vs EPA.

West Virginia and several other coal-producing states asked the Supreme Court to intervene and define the powers of the EPA. The case has also been embraced by opponents of strong government regulatory authority.

Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, arguing before the court for the Biden administration, said the justices should just wait until the EPA publishes its new rules.

"The DC Circuit's judgment leaves no EPA rule in effect," Prelogar said. "No federal regulation will occur until EPA completes its upcoming rulemaking.

"Petitioners aren't harmed by the status quo," she said. "Instead, what they seek from this court is a decision to constrain EPA authority in the upcoming rulemaking."

In its brief to the court, West Virginia accused the EPA of acting like "the country's central energy planning authority."

Justice Samuel Alito, one of the more conservative members of the court, questioned how far the EPA could go in regulating emissions.

"Is there any reason EPA couldn't force the adoption of a system for single family homes that is similar to what it has done, what it is claiming it can do, with respect to existing power plants?" Alito asked.

Prelogar, the solicitor general, replied that the EPA "has never listed homes as a source category and couldn't do so because they are far too diverse and differentiated."

UN experts, in the report issued Monday on the global impacts of climate change, said humanity is perilously close to missing its chance to secure a "liveable" future.

"The cumulative scientific evidence is unequivocal: Climate change is a threat to human wellbeing and planetary health," the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said.

Any further delay in global action to cut carbon pollution and prepare for impacts already in the pipeline "will miss a brief and rapidly closing window of opportunity to secure a liveable and sustainable future for all," the 195-nation IPCC warned.

The Supreme Court is expected to issue its decision in West Virginia vs EPA before June.

W.Tam--ThChM