Sentences with phrase «ghgs as pollutants»

Makes sense, especially since it was the courts who told the EPA that the clean air act required them to regulate carbon dioxide and other GHGs as pollutants.

Not exact matches

Furthermore, the relatively quick process of converting coal - fired plants to biomass - fired generation is an attractive benefit for power generators whose generation assets are no longer viable as coal plants due to the expiration of operating permits or the introduction of taxes or other restrictions on fossil fuel usage or emissions of GHGs and other pollutants.

From where you stand, does allowing the EPA to have the authority to regulate GHG emissions as dangerous pollutants constitute «moral absolutism?»

kevin (162), «allowing the EPA to have the authority to regulate GHG emissions as dangerous pollutants constitute [s] «moral absolutism?»

And I think there is some flexibility in implementation in the CAA such that a) the EPA can start with big sources and move down (they've done that for other pollutants), and b) an expedited approval process could potentially be developed for «small» sources, so even GHG regulation under the CAA (which it was admittedly not designed for) might not be as bad as some fear.

Furthermore (although I have no idea of whether Spencer was aware of it at the time of writing) Barack Obama has said that absent meaningful legislation on emissions within the first 18 months of inauguration, should he win he will allow the EPA to have the authority to regulate GHG emissions as dangerous pollutants.

But rather than ask for an equitable distribution of the pain that goes with substantial across - the - board reductions in carbon emissions, what the Obama Administration did instead was to bundle GHG reductions with reductions in other kinds of pollutants such as mercury and sulfur into a single plan targeted mostly at the coal industry — thus guaranteeing that their plan would be highly vulnerable to lawsuits of the kind that Lawrence Tribe is now leading.

Prohibits a GHG from being listed as a criteria pollutant under the CAA on the basis of its effect on global climate change.

California environmental goals include reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 40 % from 1990 levels by 2030 and by 80 % by 2050, as well as reducing nitrogen oxides (NOx) and other health - harming pollutants in areas of the state with the highest levels of air pollution by 2032.

I agree that refering to solar and wind as free is not necessarily helpful, as one could say that coal in the ground is free and the costs only involve getting at it, getting it out, preparing it for burning, building and maintaining the power plant, scrubbing the pollutants that are presently required, ideally paying / paying for mining accident victims, ash spill and contaminant victims, mercury, GHGs, property damage, etc, etc, etc..

Because some Congressional advocates for C&T seem willing to trade away existing authority retained by EPA and the various states to restrict GHG emissions as pollutants under the Clean Air Act, the stakes are enormously high.

Given its role as the most significant global warming pollutant, this shouldn't exactly come as much of a surprise; what is unusual, however, is that relatively little has been said about some of the other GHG offenders.

However, air pollutant reduction measures do not always reduce GHG emissions, as many require the use of additional energy (STAPPA / ALAPCO, 1999).