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

USD -
AED 3.67305
AFN 63.502642
ALL 82.257093
AMD 368.06994
ANG 1.790403
AOA 917.999742
ARS 1461.519193
AUD 1.428194
AWG 1.8
AZN 1.695732
BAM 1.707839
BBD 2.014862
BDT 122.896637
BGN 1.69088
BHD 0.37695
BIF 2985
BMD 1
BND 1.293759
BOB 6.91239
BRL 5.157899
BSD 1.000358
BTN 94.655909
BWP 13.576786
BYN 2.799012
BYR 19600
BZD 2.011981
CAD 1.41612
CDF 2265.000306
CHF 0.80895
CLF 0.023033
CLP 906.530329
CNY 6.769596
CNH 6.77754
COP 3446.13
CRC 453.811158
CUC 1
CUP 26.5
CVE 96.285333
CZK 21.169006
DJF 177.720283
DKK 6.53933
DOP 58.479379
DZD 133.523192
EGP 49.7701
ERN 15
ETB 161.283979
EUR 0.87491
FJD 2.24775
FKP 0.755695
GBP 0.755005
GEL 2.650427
GGP 0.755695
GHS 11.229578
GIP 0.755695
GMD 73.495715
GNF 8765.357714
GTQ 7.628428
GYD 209.275317
HKD 7.83985
HNL 26.762371
HRK 6.591987
HTG 130.677006
HUF 308.224498
IDR 17843
ILS 2.97135
IMP 0.755695
INR 94.58075
IQD 1310.524891
IRR 1374999.999926
ISK 125.989821
JEP 0.755695
JMD 158.06984
JOD 0.708999
JPY 161.517022
KES 129.439758
KGS 87.449795
KHR 4016.800706
KMF 429.499605
KPW 900.00035
KRW 1537.02501
KWD 0.30866
KYD 0.833661
KZT 487.587213
LAK 22093.277098
LBP 89584.959701
LKR 334.503445
LRD 182.07459
LSL 16.436923
LTL 2.952741
LVL 0.60489
LYD 6.386739
MAD 9.325876
MDL 17.591841
MGA 4219.387176
MKD 53.934521
MMK 2099.917974
MNT 3579.231668
MOP 8.077961
MRU 40.000349
MUR 47.809814
MVR 15.459635
MWK 1736.000081
MXN 17.35533
MYR 4.149699
MZN 63.899865
NAD 16.436923
NGN 1366.730165
NIO 36.814852
NOK 9.695201
NPR 151.449105
NZD 1.75035
OMR 0.384503
PAB 1.000358
PEN 3.385028
PGK 4.456902
PHP 61.1365
PKR 278.233656
PLN 3.74035
PYG 6098.551332
QAR 3.646906
RON 4.582895
RSD 102.696018
RUB 74.250968
RWF 1465.171718
SAR 3.753791
SBD 8.061424
SCR 13.674406
SDG 600.500641
SEK 9.61687
SGD 1.29338
SHP 0.746601
SLE 24.749989
SLL 20969.503664
SOS 571.695527
SRD 37.430496
STD 20697.981008
STN 21.39383
SVC 8.753133
SYP 110.532098
SZL 16.433081
THB 32.939705
TJS 9.278635
TMT 3.5
TND 2.957937
TOP 2.40776
TRY 46.4577
TTD 6.784027
TWD 31.642501
TZS 2628.232027
UAH 44.991835
UGX 3651.795772
UYU 40.002096
UZS 11989.276889
VES 606.63266
VND 26320
VUV 118.352303
WST 2.751796
XAF 572.793161
XAG 0.015293
XAU 0.000239
XCD 2.70255
XCG 1.802932
XDR 0.71169
XOF 571.999786
XPF 104.139924
YER 238.60233
ZAR 16.394101
ZMK 9001.201015
ZMW 17.731555
ZWL 321.999592
  • RBGPF

    0.3600

    61.5

    +0.59%

  • RYCEF

    0.1900

    18.45

    +1.03%

  • CMSC

    -0.1600

    22.21

    -0.72%

  • JRI

    0.0300

    12.7

    +0.24%

  • BCC

    -1.3800

    73.28

    -1.88%

  • BCE

    -0.4250

    22.855

    -1.86%

  • RELX

    -0.3900

    30.79

    -1.27%

  • RIO

    -0.7600

    99.32

    -0.77%

  • NGG

    1.8000

    81.24

    +2.22%

  • GSK

    0.2750

    50.945

    +0.54%

  • VOD

    -0.1400

    14.16

    -0.99%

  • CMSD

    -0.2700

    22.02

    -1.23%

  • AZN

    1.9950

    176.925

    +1.13%

  • BTI

    0.1320

    59.042

    +0.22%

  • BP

    0.6400

    39.74

    +1.61%

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