Sentences with phrase «gas endangerment finding»

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 greenhouseFinding, the legal finding allowing the EPA to regulate greenhousefinding 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 greenhouseFinding, the legal finding allowing the EPA to regulate greenhousefinding 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.

«-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.

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.

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 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.

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.»

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 AFinding» is the EPA's finding that a combination of six greenhouse gases in particular qualify as an air pollutant as defined by the Clean Afinding 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.

In Mass. v. EPA, the Court based its decision partly on the view that an endangerment finding would not lead to «extreme measures,» such as an outright ban on motor vehicle greenhouse gas emissions.76 However, requiring tens of thousands of small sources to obtain PSD permits and 6.1 million to obtain Title V permits annually would be an extreme case.

Moreover, once EPA made an endangerment finding under section 202 and began regulating stationary sources under PSD, it was predictable that EPA would sooner rather than later develop greenhouse gas performance standards for industrial source categories under section 111, also a Title I authority.78 Title I and Title II may be «separate» but they are not «entirely separate»; they are linked.

Moreover, EPA's Title II endangerment finding arguably creates a compelling precedent for NAAQS regulation of greenhouse gases.

Disapproves the rule submitted by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on December 15, 2009, relating to the endangerment finding and the cause or contribute findings for greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act.

Why didn't EPA's counsel argue that the chain of causality from endangerment finding to absurd results is evidence Congress did not design or intend for the Clean Air Act to be a framework for greenhouse gas regulation?

Comprehensive climate change legislation was under consideration in the Senate after having passed the House, the Copenhagen Accords had been signed the previous month, the Environmental Protection Agency had announced its Endangerment Finding on greenhouse gases, and the climate science community was under vitriolic attack by the denial machine.

These practices are clearly laid bare in several recent Petitions to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)-- petitions asking the EPA to reconsider its «Endangerment Finding» that anthropogenic greenhouse gases endanger our public health and welfare.

In 2009, the EPA issued its Endangerment Finding, demonstrating (based on intensive research and documentation) that greenhouse gases are in fact a danger to public health.

As the federal government's most comprehensive assessment of the harmful impacts of climate change on human health and public welfare in the United States, this report, years in the making, should have been used in developing EPA's required «endangerment» finding as a step toward regulating greenhouse gases, instead of keeping the work of the Climate Change Science Program disconnected from this decision support role.