CleanTechnica is the #1 cleantech-focused
website
 in the world. Subscribe today!


Fossil Fuels wooden gavel

Published on July 3rd, 2012 | by Zachary Shahan

30

Is Coal a Dead Man Walking & Is Über-Extreme GOP Leadership on the Ropes from Court Ruling on EPA Greenhouse Gas Emissions Regulation? (4 Key Notes)

Share on Google+Share on RedditShare on StumbleUponTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on FacebookPin on PinterestDigg thisShare on TumblrBuffer this pageEmail this to someone

July 3rd, 2012 by Zachary Shahan 

As you’ve probably read, a United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia last week upheld the EPA’s right to regulate greenhouse gas emissions in the US. There are several big things to note about this ruling that you may not have caught, however.

1. The three-judge panel unanimously shot down every single challenge to the EPA’s relatively new authority. Politico notes, “several observers said the appellate court would at the very least ask the agency to tweak its approach.” But it didn’t. “Instead, it upheld them all.”

“In court, opponents attacked EPA’s entire chain of decisions – and got no support at all from the judges. In an 82-page decision, the judges rejected every argument brought by the petitioners, including states,” Aol Energy writes.

“EPA’s interpretation of the governing (Clean Air Act) provisions is unambiguously correct,” the judges wrote.

2. The chief judge in this decision was a very conservative judge, Reagan-appointed David Sentelle. “And not just any Reagan appointee,” Legal Planet notes. “Sentelle is probably the most right-wing judge on the circuit.  A former associate of Jesse Helms, he pulled the strings to extend the Whitewater investigation and get Ken Starr appointed as independent counsel.

“Memo to state and industry petitioners, who have hired some of the best legal minds in the country: if you’ve lost David Sentelle, you’d better reconsider your legal strategy.”

Gone over the edge? It seems so, even according to some very conservative and powerful people.

3. The judges (including über conservative Sentelle) mocked the ridiculousness of some of the challenges. US politics has become… well,… not what it was meant to be. The off-the-edge GOP leadership (note: I’m not saying all or even most GOP voters fall into this box) is even getting mocked by its own these days. Concerning the idea that the EPA shouldn’t base its regulations or decision on Nobel-prize-winning IPCC research supported by every national science academy in the world, the ruling stated that building on past scientific research “is how science works. EPA is not required to re-prove the existence of the atom every time it approaches a scientific question.” That last line wasn’t needed, of course, but it drives home an obvious point that some people don’t want to accept.

4. Coal may really be a “dead man walking.” “Industry analysts say the GHG rules proposed so far effectively bar any new coal plants in the US, at the same time that other EPA rules, especially the Mercury and Air Toxics Standard, may be the last straw forcing many older coal plants to shut,” Aol Energy states.

Very notably, however, “EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson has said the GHG rules are following the market, not leading it.” New coal just simply isn’t competitive anymore. In the US, the market is showing that.

Big decision? Yes. Obviously correct decision? Yes. Are obviously correct decisions generally what our country leadership implements? Certainly not. So, I’d say this is a huge win… especially given points #2 and 4 above.

Thanks to Peter Sinclair for putting together the roundup that led to this post.

Image Credit: wooden gavel via Shutterstock

Keep up to date with all the hottest cleantech news by subscribing to our (free) cleantech newsletter, or keep an eye on sector-specific news by getting our (also free) solar energy newsletter, electric vehicle newsletter, or wind energy newsletter.



Share on Google+Share on RedditShare on StumbleUponTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedInShare on FacebookPin on PinterestDigg thisShare on TumblrBuffer this pageEmail this to someone

Tags: , , , , , , ,


About the Author

spends most of his time here on CleanTechnica as the director/chief editor. Otherwise, he's probably enthusiastically fulfilling his duties as the director/editor of Solar Love, EV Obsession, Planetsave, or Bikocity. Zach is recognized globally as a solar energy, electric car, and wind energy expert. If you would like him to speak at a related conference or event, connect with him via social media. You can connect with Zach on any popular social networking site you like. Links to all of his main social media profiles are on ZacharyShahan.com.



  • JMin2020

    Hello Zach. This is good. I believe that the only sensible way to use coal  in to gasify it and use the syngas. The process of gasification  should be a clean method employed as well. CSP is being employed to this end and I am working with a group that has a patented Thermo Chemical Method of doing so as well. These approaches  if used properly can significantly reduce GHGs and other emmissions  to zero if employed properly. Something Big Coal has been reluctant to do. I suppose they are paying the price for their previous actions and inactions now. I thin this battle of profit vs envitonment has gone on for some time an will in all likelihood continue for some time. Laws enacted are the environmental protection the environment has against the pursuit of profit by some groups and individuals.

    • Bob_Wallace

      The only sensible way to use coal is for supporting the Earth’s crust and holding up the tops of mountains.

      Leave the damned stuff underneath where it belongs.

      Our children, grandchildren and generations to follow are going to be struggling with how to get that carbon out of the atmosphere where it will be making their lives miserable.

      • JMin2020

        That wouldn’t bother me either Bob.

    • Hephaestus42

      Do you know how much ash is left behind by gasification? So lets say we gasify it, what do we do with the mercury rich ash? 

      One of the huge expenses of coal gasification is the waste disposal.  Right now coal is less cost competitive than natural gas, add in disposal the cost doubles. Financially coal has become a failed business model. 

      • JMin2020

        That depends upon the method employed. Our system renders such inert. It also gasifies coad ash piles. Ihis is not your typical gaisication method and process I also will not bother to educate you into what it is.

        • Hephaestus42

          So that is why you are here, trying to sell us on clean coal. Please explain to me how this miracle system works. What do you do with the carbon dioxide, the mercury, the other heavy metals, and the sulfur. Rendering to output inert is great. I would love to have a sample of the output to test. 

    • Ross

      The bottom line is if it adds a gram of CO2 to the atmosphere from a fossil source it’s in our cross-hairs and is going down.

      • JMin2020

        So feel free to quit breathing. Your breathing is adding CO2 to the atmosphere. I just know how to use coal cleanly without adding emmissions to the amosphere. I own no stock in coal and am hot here to promote the so called clean coal; because no on is doing so except a group in Austrailia. Your rage is manifest; but this is not the place to vent it. Seek help.

        • Ross

          Nasty. I don’t eat coal. I eat plants. Non-fossil fuel source. 

        • Bob_Wallace

          Explain to us JMin – what’s the route from underneath the Earth’s surface to back under the Earth’s surface for that carbon in coal?

          How do we use the stored energy in coal without letting it get into the carbon cycle?(I’m not sure you understand the carbon cycle.  If you did you wouldn’t post something silly like “feel free to quit breathing…”.)

        • http://www.facebook.com/chris.fields.50 Chris Fields

          Isn’t that what the EPA want? Everyone to stop breathing?? or to pay a tax for breathing.. thats what this is all about. NEW 
          WORLD ORDER

          • Bob_Wallace

            Silly, silly post.

            Did someone put out a call for silly posters?

          • http://cleantechnica.com/ Zachary Shahan

            Apparently.

          • http://cleantechnica.com/ Zachary Shahan

            Yes, that’s right — the EPA works to protect our clean air so that we can breathe safely, which must also mean that it wants us to stop breathing. You seem to be a bit lost…

            The EPA has one rather clear designated goal — protect the natural resources humans rely on to live and live healthily (i.e. don’t let us drive ourselves to extinction).

        • http://cleantechnica.com/ Zachary Shahan

          even if you removed the global warming effect of burning coal, there is nothing clean about this energy source: 
          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_impact_of_the_coal_industry

          • http://cleantechnica.com/ Zachary Shahan

            i’m sorry if you are in the industry and your job is threatened from humanity getting smarter — i’d advise you to look into other options sooner than later.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/John-Davis/100001223663849 John Davis

    Great line Zachary !
    “Uber-Extremist GOP…” Yeah man, I get it. Uber is German, like hitler and the NAZIS. YEAH MAN !
    So GOP EQUALS THE NAZI S ! RIGHT ON !
    Did you graduate from the Goebbels Institute for Media Integrity?
    Anyone who does not remotely share your naive infantile view of the world is the NAZI enemy who must be destroyed.
    Keep up the your great journalism. GROOOVEY BABY !

    • RobS

      Wow, talk about deranged, über is a pretty typical loan word in English usage, saying that using the word über is akin to calling someone a NAZI is pretty paranoid.

      • Ross

        The German’s probably wouldn’t appreciate the automatic association of a German word (derived from Latin and Greek) being equated with Nazis either.

        • http://cleantechnica.com/ Zachary Shahan

          Seriously. I was simply shocked to read that comment. And I’d probably be offended if I were German.

          • http://www.facebook.com/people/John-Davis/100001223663849 John Davis

             Seriously, I am simply offended that you read that comment and I’d probably be shocked if you were German.

          • http://soltesza.wordpress.com/ sola

            Just stop this silly nonsense, will you?

          • http://cleantechnica.com/ Zachary Shahan

            Say what? Lay off the drugs, dude.

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Shecky-Vegas/1380703171 Shecky Vegas

          I’m sure the Nazi’s also wouldn’t appreciate being associated with the GOP.

    • http://cleantechnica.com/ Zachary Shahan

      To be honest, this had nothing to do with Nazis. Uber is commonly used — or, at least, i’ve heard it many times — and I’ve never associated it with Nazis. That’s totally your projection.

  • Steeple

    Remember that Sentelle threw out the SOx and NOx regs back in 2008; this was the cornerstone of EPA assault on coal.

    I still for the life of me can’t see how the Clean Air Act passed in 1970 has any application to regulating greenhouse gas emissions. No way was that the intention of those who crafted that law.

    • Bob_Wallace

      Remember how “equal rights for all” didn’t apply to women and slaves back when our forefathers wrote that?

      Sometimes we just get lucky with the way laws are written….

      • RobS

        Or gays, but as with greenhouse gasses some fights are still being fought.

    • Ross

      Sentelle noted that the US Supreme Court have ruled that GHGs are a pollutant and the Clean Air Act requires the EPA to regulate any air pollutant.

      • http://cleantechnica.com/ Zachary Shahan

        exactly. so, Steeple, don’t get caught up in the simple title of a law (i.e. Clean Air Act), but focus on its intent.

Back to Top ↑