The Trump administration has taken a significant step in its efforts to reshape environmental policy by formally repealing the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) endangerment finding.This 2009 rule established that greenhouse gas emissions could endanger public health and welfare, forming the legal backbone for a range of climate regulations under the Clean Air Act.
Source:
grist.orgEPA Administrator Lee Zeldin asserted that this repeal would benefit US industries and eliminate what he described as $1 trillion in hidden taxes.
Source:
eenews.netHowever, analysts and legal experts caution that this decision may provoke a backlash, potentially exposing industries to increased litigation and empowering states to implement stricter climate laws.
Source:
eenews.netThe endangerment finding has served as a critical legal justification for regulating pollutants like carbon dioxide and methane, which are significant contributors to climate change.
Source:
eenews.netWithout this foundation, the EPA would be free from obligations to enforce existing regulations, making it more challenging for future administrations to impose climate controls without new Congressional action.
Source:
eenews.netLegal experts believe that repealing the endangerment finding could backfire, especially for industries dependent on fossil fuels.If the federal government steps back from regulating greenhouse gases, states may feel empowered to enact their own regulations without needing federal approval.
Source:
eenews.netThis opens the door for states like California to impose stricter emissions standards, potentially creating a patchwork of regulations across the country that could complicate compliance for businesses.
Source:
eenews.netFurthermore, the repeal could lead to a surge in lawsuits against high-emitting industries.The Supreme Court’s 2011 ruling in American Electric Power v.Connecticut established that the Clean Air Act preempted federal common law claims regarding climate-related damages.However, if the endangerment finding is removed, this legal protection could disappear, allowing individuals and states to pursue claims for damages caused by climate change.
Source:
eenews.netThis could result in broader liability for companies and lead to more aggressive climate litigation.
Source:
eenews.netZeldin's announcement highlighted a belief that the scientific basis for the endangerment finding was unfounded, asserting that agencies like the EPA should not create regulations without explicit Congressional authorization.
Source:
eenews.netHowever, opponents argue that the scientific consensus demonstrates the clear dangers posed by greenhouse gases, making regulatory action necessary to protect public health.
Source:
grist.orgMoreover, the proposed elimination of the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP), which requires companies to report their emissions, would further hinder accountability.This program has been instrumental in tracking emissions trends and informing policy decisions.
Source:
blog.ucs.orgWithout such reporting, companies may struggle to communicate their environmental impacts to investors and the public, potentially damaging their reputations and market positions.
Source:
blog.ucs.orgIndustry reactions have been mixed.While some sectors may initially welcome the deregulation, there are growing concerns about the long-term implications of increased litigation and state-level regulations.The Edison Electric Institute, representing investor-owned utilities, has previously expressed fears that removing federal oversight could undermine existing protections under the Clean Air Act.
Source:
eenews.netThe Trump administration's approach to climate policy is seen by many as a risk-laden strategy that could lead to unforeseen regulatory chaos.By dismantling established federal regulations, the administration may inadvertently pave the way for a more fragmented and aggressive regulatory environment at the state level.
Source:
eenews.netIn conclusion, while the Trump administration seeks to ease regulatory burdens on industries, the decision to repeal the EPA's endangerment finding could unleash a wave of legal challenges and empower states to create their own emissions regulations.Such developments may ultimately complicate compliance and increase liabilities for companies, counteracting the administration's intended benefits.
