States Set to Sue the U.S. Over Greenhouse Gases

By Guest Column —— Bio and Archives October 24, 2007

Comments | Print This | Subscribe | Email Us

From the web: New York Times New York is one of more than a dozen states, led by California, preparing to sue the Bush administration for holding up efforts to regulate emissions from cars and trucks, several people involved in the lawsuit said on Tuesday.

The move comes as New York and other Northeastern states are stepping up their push for tougher regulation of greenhouse gases as part of their continuing opposition to President Bush's policies. On Wednesday, Gov. Eliot Spitzer's administration is to issue regulations requiring power plants to pay for their greenhouse gas emissions, part of a broader plan among 10 Northeastern states, known as the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, to move beyond federal regulators in Washington and regulate such emissions on their own. "I believe that states have to step into a void created by a failure of federal action," Mr. Spitzer said in an interview on Tuesday. "The global warming issue is one where the current administration has first denied the scientific evidence and only recently begun to discuss the matter in a serious way." Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo, in a statement on Tuesday, said, "New York State is moving forward on all cylinders to take aggressive action to curb global warming from both power plants and cars." "I stand with the governor to support these policies, and I will take vigorous action both to defend these important initiatives from any challenge and to sue the Bush administration if the federal government tries to block us," he added. The legal move by the states to sue the Environmental Protection Agency is aimed at prodding the Bush administration to remove obstacles to more than a dozen states seeking to regulate global warming emissions from cars and trucks. In 2005, California sought a waiver from the E.P.A. that would allow it to implement the first regulation in the United States requiring reductions of greenhouse gas emissions from cars. The E.P.A. has not yet granted the waiver, keeping the regulation from taking effect. New York, Massachusetts and a number of other states have since moved to adopt California's measure. They cannot proceed until the E.P.A. moves on the waiver. If implemented, the measure would first affect 2009 models; automakers have said it would make it harder to sell the largest and least fuel-efficient sport utility vehicles and pickup trucks in states that adopt the rules. The lawsuit against the E.P.A. was expected to be filed on Wednesday, but will be delayed until next week as California continues to deal with wildfires, aides to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger of California said Tuesday. The states have won several key court challenges in recent months. In September, a federal court in Vermont rejected attempts by automakers to block the regulation. And in April, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the Environmental Protection Agency has the authority to regulate heat-trapping gases like carbon dioxide. After the April ruling, the agency's administrator, Stephen L. Johnson, made a commitment to deciding on the waiver issue by the end of the year. "We're interested in a good decision, not a good headline," said Jennifer Wood, a spokeswoman for the agency. "The agency moved expeditiously after the Supreme Court decision." States will argue in the forthcoming suit that the E.P.A. has violated legal requirements that federal agencies act on such requests within a reasonable time. But environmentalists said they were more concerned with what the decision would be. "The administration has promised an answer by the end of the year," said David Doniger, a top lawyer at the Natural Resources Defense Council. "This is an insurance policy to keep them honest." "The real issue is, will he block the states or let the states go forward?" he added. By contrast, the move to regulate power plants in the Northeast is set to take effect next year. The regulations will seek to cut global warming emissions from power plants 16 percent by 2015, but that reduction is based on 1990 emissions levels. The regulations will favor alternative energy approaches, like wind power, and will not be favorable for coal producers. The plan will both cap the amount of emissions permitted and force producers to purchase allowances for their carbon emissions, encouraging them to lower their emissions. The multistate effort was begun during the Pataki administration and involves nine other states in principle, though Massachusetts is the only other state to have put forward a similar regulation. "Of course, the renewable energy companies love this," said Judith Enck, a top energy policy adviser to Governor Spitzer. "If you're wind, you don't have to pay anything. If you're natural gas, you don't have to pay a whole lot." "Anyone who operates coal plants is going to hate it," she added. National Grid, the largest investor-owned power generator in New York, supports the plan, and does not operate coal plants in the state. "There's not only a business case for it, but increasing public support for it," said David Manning, an executive vice president at National Grid. "We're certainly being fully consulted by the state as we go along, and that's the only way it's going to fly." But the Independent Power Producers of New York, a trade group whose members include coal plant operators, favors a national approach. "We don't want to put more burden on the rate payers of New York, and the last thing I would think this governor wants to do is send the message that investment should go in other states," said Gavin J. Donohue, the group's chief executive. "You can build plants in other states and send the electricity back into New York."