Sentences with phrase «gas endangerment»

half of the lobbyist groups mentioned are legally challenging the threat of manmade climate change, with court petitions against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's greenhouse gas endangerment finding:

On Tuesday, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled in favor of the Environmental Protection Agency — and against a legion of state Attorneys General and industry groups — on the EPA's greenhouse gas Endangerment Finding.

The suggestion that the scientifically based assessments carried out by the IPCC and the U.S. Global Change Research Program, which EPA used in reaching its greenhouse gas Endangerment Finding, should be set aside shows immense ignorance of the relationship between research, assessment of the state of scientific knowledge, and decision - making.

One very unfortunate possibility is that EPA may take no action on reconsidering and revoking the Greenhouse Gas Endangerment Finding (EF) until the CPP legal issues are resolved by the courts.

Not exact matches

The EPA's stance, however, was struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court in April 2007, and one of the first actions of Lisa Jackson, the new EPA administrator under the Obama administration, was to declare CO2 and other greenhouse gases a threat to public health and welfare and release a proposed endangerment finding largely built on the earlier ignored analysis.

Last year the agency finalized an official «endangerment finding» declaring that greenhouse gasses endanger public health or welfare.

Judges David Tatel and Patricia Millett noted in one paragraph that EPA in 2009 issued an «endangerment finding» determining that greenhouse gases threaten public health and welfare.

The EPA's endangerment finding kicks off a process to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from the aviation industry, the latest sector to be regulated under the Clean Air Act after cars, trucks and large stationary sources like power plants.

challenged the science of the Endangerment Finding, the legal finding allowing the EPA to regulate greenhouse gases.

Harry MacDougald helped the Competitive Enterprise Institute challenged the science of the Endangerment Finding, the legal finding allowing the EPA to regulate greenhouse gases.

MacDougald and Francis Menton of New York filed on a petition for reconsideration of the Endangerment Finding for greenhouse gases on behalf of the climate denying group Concerned Household Electricity Consumers Council (CHECC).

S.J.Res.26 would overturn the EPA's endangerment finding, a December 2009 rulemaking in which the agency concluded that greenhouse gas emissions endanger public health and welfare.

After all, EPA attributes endangerment to the «elevated concentration» of greenhouse gases, so the agency has already satisfied the substantive criteria for initiating a NAAQS rulemaking laid out in Section 108 of the Clean Air Act.

I know that you serve (d) as a federal expert reviewer of the EPA's «Technical Support Document for Endangerment Analysis for Greenhouse Gas Emissions under the Clean Air Act,» but it was my impression (actually, it is a fact) that the Public Comment period is still wide open on the Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking of Regulating Greenhouse Gases under the Clean Air Act.

«-RRB-, are all a-twitter over an apparently «suppressed» document that supposedly undermines the EPA Endangerment finding about human emissions of carbon dioxide and a basket of other greenhouse gases.

I for one (among many) are very actively engaged in providing comments on the DRAFT of the «Technical Support Document for Endangerment Analysis for Greenhouse Gas Emissions under the Clean Air Act.»

What's more, rescinding the plan does nothing to address its underlying basis: the 2009 EPA Endangerment Finding that requires the agency to take action under the Clean Air Act to curb emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.

But to meet the Supremes» criteria for regulation, EPA first had to find that the emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases were an «endangerment» to public health and welfare.

The Coalition for Responsible Regulation filed a lawsuit against the Environmental Protection Agency in 2009 to challenge the latter's endangerment finding over Greenhouse gases [2].

The EPA argues that it need not undertake a new endangerment finding to adopt the proposed standard, because the agency already determined in December 2009 that «air pollution» related to greenhouse gas emissions «may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health and welfare.»

THE US Environment Protection Agency (EPA) yesterday issued its much anticipated «Endangerment Finding» which makes six gases — carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons and sulfur hexafluoride — officially recognised as a danger to the public.

Comments on Draft Technical Support Document for Endangerment Analysis for Greenhouse Gas Emissions under the Clean Air Act, unpublished report prepared for the US Environmental Protection Agency but not representing the Agency's views, final version dated March 16, 2009.

In his two years as attorney general, Cuccinelli petitioned the Environmental Protection Agency to reconsider its «endangerment finding» that greenhouse gases pose a threat to human health.

Several organizations are petitioning Obama's EPA to reconsider its December 2009 endangerment finding regarding greenhouse gases.

[3] U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, «Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases under the Clean Air Act,» in Federal Register, Vol.

«The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit will hear two days of oral argument to review four of EPA's greenhouse gas emissions rules: the «timing» rule, the «tailoring» rule, the «endangerment» rule, and the «tailpipe» rule.

The model legislation opposes «EPA's endangerment finding and any regulation of greenhouse gases, citing the massive economic burden that would result and the global nature of climate emissions.»

But possibly because Trump never made any promises related to revoking the USEPA Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Endangerment Finding (EF), there has been no public announcement of any proposed EPA action on this, the most critical step needed to bring sanity back to climate policy.

Whitfield is a co-sponsor of the Energy Tax Prevention Act, which would overturn the legal force and effect of EPA's Endangerment Rule, Tailoring Rule, and other rules imposing greenhouse gas permitting requirements on state governments and stationary sources.

EPA adds insult to injury with its endangerment finding for greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act.

A senior energy official at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce recently warned that there will be «hell to pay» if the Trump administration tries to rescind the EPA's science - based endangerment finding for greenhouse gas emissions.

But even with the «environmental» groups» strong influence, the Obama Administration may not have trusted the SAB to render the invalid scientific conclusions on climate alarmism they wanted in their Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Endangerment Finding and failed to submit their GHG Endangerment Finding to the SAB for review despite the clear need for it to do so on such an important and influential issue.

Guith's comments belie the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's official policy priorities for 2017, which include plans to, «Oppose EPA efforts to regulate greenhouse gases under the existing Clean Air Act, including the endangerment finding.»

Update January 10, 2018: The U.S. Chamber of Commerce confirmed today it is no longer trying to overturn the EPA's endangerment finding for greenhouse gas emissions, but top U.S. Chamber officials still continued to mislead on climate science and align with...

, which include plans to, «Oppose EPA efforts to regulate greenhouse gases under the existing Clean Air Act, including the endangerment finding.»

Cato Institute scholars Patrick Michaels and Chip Knappenberger have produced a layman - friendly yet thoroughly referenced draft report summarizing «the important science that is missing from Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States,» a U.S. Government document underpinning the EPA's December 2009 endangerment rule, the foundation of all of the agency's greenhouse gas (GHG) regulations.

One of the problems with the EPA's Endangerment TSD is the nearly complete disregard of observed trends in a wide array of measures which by and large show that despite decades of increasing anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions the U.S. population does not seem to have been adversely affected by any vulnerabilities, risks, and impacts that may have arisen (to the extent that any at all have actually occurred as the result of any human - induced climate changes).

http://www.climatesciencewatch.org/index.php/csw/details/phil-jones-and-ben-santer-comment-on-cei/ Prof. Phil Jones, Director of the Climatic Research Unit at the University of East Anglia in the UK and Ben Santer at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory comment in response to a petition to EPA by the Competitive Enterprise Institute and Pat Michaels, which misleadingly seeks to obstruct EPA's process in making an «endangerment» finding on greenhouse gases.

If carbon dioxide is indeed a pollutant when present in excessive concentrations in the atmosphere — which the EPA's 2009 Endangerment Finding for carbon says that it is — then by law and by past precedent the Clean Air Act is the appropriate means for controlling all of America's own greenhouse gas emissions, regardless of their source.

Markey further pressed Boyce on Peabody Energy's petition for reconsideration of the EPA Endangerment Finding for greenhouse gases, asking for a straight answer on the validity of the science.

He questioned the science underpinning EPA's Endangerment Finding for greenhouse gases, and alleged inappropriate usage of the Clean Water Act to restrict surface mining.

Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases under the Clean Air Act (284 pages,.

I responded «Chris (# 50), from your reference: «Endangerment Finding: The Administrator finds that the current and projected concentrations of the six key well - mixed greenhouse gases — carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6)-- in the atmosphere threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations.

In the case of this and related articles, the «Endangerment Finding» is the EPA's finding that a combination of six greenhouse gases in particular qualify as an air pollutant as defined by the Clean Air Act.

questioned the process used to evaluate the scientific basis for EPAâ $ ™ s proposed endangerment finding for greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act.

EPA issued its endangerment finding because the U.S. Supreme Court ruled three years ago that greenhouse gas emissions constitute air pollution and that EPA therefore must determine whether that pollution threatens the health and welfare of Americans.

«Petition of the Competitive Enterprise Institute and the Science and Environmental Policy Project for Rulemaking on the Subject of Greenhouse Gases and Their Impact on Public Health and Welfare, in Connection with EPA's 2009 Endangerment Finding, 74 FR 66,496 (Dec. 15, 2009)» (PDF), Competitive Enterprise Institute, February 17, 2017.

The Court found that the Endangerment Finding was well supported by the scientific facts and that the Clean Air Act compelled the EPA to regulate motor vehicle and stationary source emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs).

The 2009 EPA endangerment findings took into account the public health implications of a warming climate caused by an increase in greenhouse gas emissions, which include more deaths from heat - related illnesses, more serious (and potentially fatal) respiratory illnesses, and more people at risk from catastrophic flooding.

Tagged as: 350.Org, American Electric Power v Connecticut, Best Available Control Technology Standards, cap and trade, carbon capture and storage, Carbon Pollution Standard, center for biological diversity, Congressional Review Act, Copenhagen Climate Treaty, Cross State Air Pollution Rule, Endangerment Rule, epa, H.R. 910, hydraulic fracturing, James inhofe, Lisa Murkowski, Massachusetts v. EPA, natural gas combined cycle, new source performance standards, Robert W. Howarth, S.J.Res.26, skinning the cat, Spruce Mine, unconventional oil, war on coal, Waxman Markey