EPA To Make Push On New Regulations

[Obama 2012 1,714]

I agree with the part I have put in bold. Set standards for newer facilities and upgrades.

However, older facilities need to be left alone OR they need to allow for the building of new refineries with tax incentives to do so to meet current regulations.

My problem with this is that it's the EPA doing this on its own and not actual regulations. Government entities aren't supposed to have this much power on their own. The power of the government is granted in the constitution to congress, not to government arms. The EPA and other government arms should only be there to enforce the law, nothing more and nothing less. They should not be setting actual policy. This takes away from our Democratic Republic.

I have no problem with clean standards (eventhough some of the reasoning is absurd). I only have a problem with the way it's done.

-------------------

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1210/46697.html

The Obama administration is expected to roll out a major greenhouse gas policy for power plants and refineries as soon as Wednesday, signaling it won’t back off its push to fight climate change in the face of mounting opposition on Capitol Hill.

The Environmental Protection Agency has agreed to a schedule for setting greenhouse gas emission limits, known as “performance standards,” for the nation’s two biggest carbon-emitting industries, POLITICO has learned.

Under the schedule agreed to by EPA, states and environmental groups, the agency will issue a draft greenhouse gas performance standard for power plants by July 2011 and a final rule by May 2012. The agreement – which comes after states and environmentalists challenged the George W. Bush administration’s failure to set the standards – requires EPA to issue a draft limit for refineries by Dec. 2011 and a final rule by Nov. 2012.

The White House Office of Management and Budget has signed off on the schedule, according to a litigant in the legal fight.

The standards are part of a series of climate rules from the Obama administration that have faced fierce opposition from industry groups and lawmakers on both sides of the aisle. And while the policies won’t go final for more than a year, the political ramifications will come immediately.

They will come as welcome news to environmentalists who want the administration to flex its regulatory muscle following the death of climate legislation this year, but EPA can expect its foes on the right to blast the move as another example of regulatory overreach.

GOP lawmakers slated to claim the gavels of powerful House committees next year have already vowed to launch probes into a host of EPA regulations – including the administration’s suite of climate change rules – arguing that the regulations will further damage the already ailing economy.

Starting Jan. 2, EPA will begin regulating large stationary sources of the heat-trapping emissions, but those requirements only apply to new and upgraded facilities and will be determined on a case-by-case basis, so it’s unclear how deeply they will slash emissions. The forthcoming standards would set industry-specific standards and could require some of the oldest, dirtiest facilities to clamp down on carbon dioxide.

The agreement doesn’t specify what type of requirements EPA will impose on the industries, but environmentalists say the rules have the potential to require substantial emission reductions in existing facilities while offering industry the type of regulatory certainty it’s been calling for.

EPA’s schedule could also likely impact a high-profile climate lawsuit pending before the U.S. Supreme Court. In the case American Electric Power v. Connecticut, power companies are challenging a lower court ruling that allowed states and environmental groups to move ahead with a public nuisance lawsuit seeking to force the utilities to slash their greenhouse gas emissions.

Obama administration attorneys asked the court in August to vacate the appeals court's judgment, arguing that in part that EPA was already moving forward with efforts to cut greenhouse gas emissions, which undercut the need for nuisance lawsuits. The attorneys said EPA was “evaluating” whether to include greenhouse gases in performance standards.

States and environmental groups involved in the case argued that EPA’s evaluation wasn’t good enough because the agency hasn’t formally taken action to limit emissions from existing sources. However, they said their claims for relief under nuisance lawsuits would be displaced if such rules were finalized.

It’s unclear how EPA’s announced schedule will affect the Supreme Court case, which is expected to be argued before the rules go final.

EPA spokeswoman Adora Andy said, "We have nothing to announce at this time. But as we have made clear any regulatory decisions will be guided by sound science and stakeholder input, and encourage deployment of clean technology, while cutting greenhouse gas pollution and providing certainty to key industries in this country."

[JohnSmith2007 353]

This will drag on for years without a final rule. When the final rule is made it will be ignored or industry will ask for and be granted wavers. In the end CO2 regulation will be nothing more than paper pushing. If the EPA tried to push it you can bet that congress will defund that aspect of the EPA so fast they won't know what hit them.