Energy

EPA car emission limits usher in new regulatory era

Jonathan Strong Jonathan Strong, 27, is a reporter for the Daily Caller covering Congress. Previously, he was a reporter for Inside EPA where he wrote about environmental regulation in great detail, and before that a staffer for Rep. Dan Lungren (R-CA). Strong graduated from Wheaton College (IL) with a degree in political science in 2006. He is a huge fan of and season ticket holder to the Washington Capitals hockey team. Strong and his wife reside in Arlington.
Font Size:

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) says that if it loses a near-inevitable court battle, it could be forced to oversee 6 million facilities instead of the 15,000 it does now – a 40,594 percent increase.

Included in that 6 million? Four million single-family homes (including, almost certainly, Al Gore’s), which the agency would have to monitor the same way it does industrial facilities like factories and power plants. Almost all commercial buildings, such as hospitals, churches and convenience stores, require enough energy to meet the new limits, as would large private houses.

EPA’s problem is that the language of the Clean Air Act requires it to regulate air pollutants at levels that are unrealistically low for greenhouse gases. The Clean Air Act says that once a pollutant is “under regulation” — as greenhouse gases are now — EPA must regulate any facility emitting more than 250 tons of the substance per year, which for most air pollutants would indicate a large industrial facility. Greenhouse gas pollutants are far more plentiful, however, so much smaller facilities would trigger the limit.

The wide disparity between what the law says and what EPA is proposing — a factor of 100 — is behind the controversy and the reason businesses face potential calamity if a court were to disagree with EPA.

The agency says it could not possibly follow the law’s lower threshold and oversee so many facilities. Such a scenario “would immediately and completely overwhelm” government bureaucrats, EPA says. The agency has proposed a legal solution, but the debate over the issue is likely to end up in court.

The court battle has not yet started and is months or even years away. But EPA is making the decisions now that will drive that legal fight — one that most say is all but inevitable.

Many legal experts also say EPA is heading into that court battle with a weak defense, making it likely the agency will lose. But Administrator Lisa Jackson says the agency’s rationale – EPA argues it must ignore the clear language of the Clean Air Act out of “administrative necessity” and to avoid “absurd results” – is sound.

Virtually every major trade association representing American businesses has registered its concern over the strength of EPA’s legal position in comments to its proposal.

While most of the major environmentalist groups have supported EPA in its push, one prominent group has made legal arguments for why the higher threshold is unlawful. Those arguments could foreshadow a lawsuit to force the lower limits found in the law.

That group is the Center for Biological Diversity. The group’s top lawyer, Bill Snape, says the EPA’s position is dubious. “It probably violates the Clean Air Act,” Snape says, “It clearly is different from the numeric standard that is on the plain face of the statute. … we question the legality pretty strongly, yes.” The group has also said EPA is overstating the consequences of regulating a much higher number of facilities.

However, the group hasn’t yet decided whether they will sue to force the lower limits once EPA issues its final rule. “We have unequivocally not made a final decision and I don’t think we will make a final decision until we see a final rule,” Snape says.

Others have suggested businesses themselves may sue EPA over the issue to ensure the regulations are entirely unworkable. No business group has confirmed this publicly.

Either way, it only takes one environmental group or trade association to press the issue in a lawsuit, forcing the issue in court where it could easily be struck down.

Already, one judge has told EPA it is on thin ice. In October, Judge David Tatel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit warned EPA his court is willing to strike down laws that abuse the law – shortly after EPA proposed sparing all but the largest facilities.

The issue is heating up now because Friday the Obama administration pushed the first bureaucratic domino over, setting greenhouse gas emissions for cars, that will legally require a slew of other climate change-related regulations the EPA is sprinting to issue.

Meanwhile, the push to enact cap-and-trade legislation in Congress and those EPA regulations may provide environmentalists their only route to action on global warming. On cue, proponents of aggressive action who once said unwieldy EPA rules would pressure Congress to pass a bill have shifted tactics to defending the EPA regulations on their own.

Contact Jonathan by e-mail here.

PREMIUM ARTICLE: Subscribe To Keep Reading

Sign up

By subscribing you agree to our Terms of Use

You're signed up!

Sign up

By subscribing you agree to our Terms of Use

You're signed up!
Sign up

By subscribing you agree to our Terms of Use

You're signed up!

Sign up

By subscribing you agree to our Terms of Use

You're signed up!
Sign up

By subscribing you agree to our Terms of Use

You're signed up!

Sign Up

By subscribing you agree to our Terms of Use

You're signed up!
Sign up

By subscribing you agree to our Terms of Use

You're signed up!
Sign up

By subscribing you agree to our Terms of Use

You're signed up!
BENEFITS READERS PASS PATRIOTS FOUNDERS
Daily and Breaking Newsletters
Daily Caller Shows
Ad Free Experience
Exclusive Articles
Custom Newsletters
Editor Daily Rundown
Behind The Scenes Coverage
Award Winning Documentaries
Patriot War Room
Patriot Live Chat
Exclusive Events
Gold Membership Card
Tucker Mug

What does Founders Club include?

Tucker Mug and Membership Card
Founders

Readers,

Instead of sucking up to the political and corporate powers that dominate America, The Daily Caller is fighting for you — our readers. We humbly ask you to consider joining us in this fight.

Now that millions of readers are rejecting the increasingly biased and even corrupt corporate media and joining us daily, there are powerful forces lined up to stop us: the old guard of the news media hopes to marginalize us; the big corporate ad agencies want to deprive us of revenue and put us out of business; senators threaten to have our reporters arrested for asking simple questions; the big tech platforms want to limit our ability to communicate with you; and the political party establishments feel threatened by our independence.

We don't complain -- we can't stand complainers -- but we do call it how we see it. We have a fight on our hands, and it's intense. We need your help to smash through the big tech, big media and big government blockade.

We're the insurgent outsiders for a reason: our deep-dive investigations hold the powerful to account. Our original videos undermine their narratives on a daily basis. Even our insistence on having fun infuriates them -- because we won’t bend the knee to political correctness.

One reason we stand apart is because we are not afraid to say we love America. We love her with every fiber of our being, and we think she's worth saving from today’s craziness.

Help us save her.

A second reason we stand out is the sheer number of honest responsible reporters we have helped train. We have trained so many solid reporters that they now hold prominent positions at publications across the political spectrum. Hear a rare reasonable voice at a place like CNN? There’s a good chance they were trained at Daily Caller. Same goes for the numerous Daily Caller alumni dominating the news coverage at outlets such as Fox News, Newsmax, Daily Wire and many others.

Simply put, America needs solid reporters fighting to tell the truth or we will never have honest elections or a fair system. We are working tirelessly to make that happen and we are making a difference.

Since 2010, The Daily Caller has grown immensely. We're in the halls of Congress. We're in the Oval Office. And we're in up to 20 million homes every single month. That's 20 million Americans like you who are impossible to ignore.

We can overcome the forces lined up against all of us. This is an important mission but we can’t do it unless you — the everyday Americans forgotten by the establishment — have our back.

Please consider becoming a Daily Caller Patriot today, and help us keep doing work that holds politicians, corporations and other leaders accountable. Help us thumb our noses at political correctness. Help us train a new generation of news reporters who will actually tell the truth. And help us remind Americans everywhere that there are millions of us who remain clear-eyed about our country's greatness.

In return for membership, Daily Caller Patriots will be able to read The Daily Caller without any of the ads that we have long used to support our mission. We know the ads drive you crazy. They drive us crazy too. But we need revenue to keep the fight going. If you join us, we will cut out the ads for you and put every Lincoln-headed cent we earn into amplifying our voice, training even more solid reporters, and giving you the ad-free experience and lightning fast website you deserve.

Patriots will also be eligible for Patriots Only content, newsletters, chats and live events with our reporters and editors. It's simple: welcome us into your lives, and we'll welcome you into ours.

We can save America together.

Become a Daily Caller Patriot today.

Signature

Neil Patel