The US Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case—Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency—determining whether the Bush administration is required to regulate carbon dioxide in order to address global warming. Currently the administration requires voluntary compliance with federal clean air laws. The case was brought by a coalition of cities, states, and environmental groups.
The Associated Press quotes Sierra Club attorney David Bookbinder: “This is the whole ball of wax. This will determine whether the Environmental Protection Agency is to regulate greenhouse gases from cars and whether EPA can regulate carbon dioxide from power plants.”
John Felmy, chief economist of the American Petroleum Institute told the Associated Press, “fundamentally we don’t think carbon dioxide is a pollutant, and so we don’t think these attempts (to require reductions) are a good idea.” The Bush administration and the Environmental Protection Agency agree, although President Bush campaigned on regulating carbon dioxide. Bush later reversed his position, saying regulation would be too expensive for corporations.
The plaintiffs in the case argue that carbon dioxide—because it is the primary greenhouse gas causing global warming—is indeed a pollutant.
Neither Minnesota, Minneapolis, nor Saint Paul are involved.
0 responses. Comments closed for this article.