WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court On Friday, the Biden administration’s rules aimed at curbing methane emissions, a major contributor to climate change, remained in place.
In a separate move, the court also rejected a bid to block a separate regulation aimed at curbing emissions of mercury and other toxic pollutants from coal-fired power plants.
In both cases, the court denied the emergency appeals without comment or dissent. Claims will be continued in lower courts.
A separate emergency petition seeking to block Biden’s rules on greenhouse gas emissions from coal and gas-fired power plants is still pending.
The court’s decision in the methane case means that an Environmental Protection Agency rule finalized in March designed to reduce methane emissions Up to 80 percent will remain in force for the next 14 years.
Methane is a greenhouse gas that is 80 times more powerful than carbon dioxide at trapping heat once released into the atmosphere, thus contributing to global warming.
The regulation was opposed by Republican states led by Oklahoma and various oil and gas industry groups.
Opponents describe the regulation in harsh terms, with industry groups calling it “an authoritarian national command of the EPA” in court filings. They say the regulation goes further than allowed by the Clean Air Act, which gives states a role in enforcing it. emission reduction programs.
States have similarly argued in court filings that the administration is using provisions of the Clean Air Act that were never intended to address climate change to “shut down power plants in favor of other sources of generation.”
Elizabeth Prelogar, a senior attorney representing the Biden administration, dismissed those concerns, saying in her filing that the agency does not trample states when issuing emissions guidelines.
“Like all EPA emissions regulations under this provision, these guidelines allow states to decide which specific regulations to adopt,” he said. The new presumptive standards released by the EPA “simply give states a model they can rely on if they choose,” he said.
According to the EPA, the mercury regulation has less far-reaching effects.
In that case, the court rejected the emergency request of the conservative states and industrial groups Those who want to block the EPA regulation released this year.
Under that provision of the Clean Air Act, the EPA is required to curb hazardous pollutants on a cost basis.
The regulation tightens existing rules on mercury and other metals such as arsenic and chromium.
In promulgating the rule, EPA said in April The regulation, introduced by the Obama administration in early 2012, “led to dramatic reductions in toxic air pollutants.” The new regulation would further limit emissions of mercury and other pollutants, providing $300 million in health benefits by reducing exposure to carcinogens.