Berliner Boersenzeitung - US Supreme Court hears climate case as UN issues stark warning

EUR -
AED 4.232438
AFN 81.7399
ALL 97.895927
AMD 444.690649
ANG 2.06248
AOA 1056.812299
ARS 1342.051944
AUD 1.776305
AWG 2.07444
AZN 1.963769
BAM 1.955319
BBD 2.326228
BDT 140.905351
BGN 1.955319
BHD 0.434593
BIF 3431.056288
BMD 1.152467
BND 1.480136
BOB 7.961042
BRL 6.353668
BSD 1.152117
BTN 99.741473
BWP 15.528182
BYN 3.770473
BYR 22588.345428
BZD 2.314331
CAD 1.581934
CDF 3315.646835
CHF 0.93869
CLF 0.028263
CLP 1084.563727
CNY 8.284511
CNH 8.272986
COP 4705.142985
CRC 581.656968
CUC 1.152467
CUP 30.540365
CVE 110.237892
CZK 24.820447
DJF 205.169548
DKK 7.460613
DOP 68.323199
DZD 150.345929
EGP 58.324658
ERN 17.286999
ETB 158.433541
FJD 2.603941
FKP 0.858115
GBP 0.852889
GEL 3.135159
GGP 0.858115
GHS 11.867082
GIP 0.858115
GMD 82.4058
GNF 9982.545249
GTQ 8.854823
GYD 241.040727
HKD 9.046696
HNL 30.090601
HRK 7.536214
HTG 151.212816
HUF 402.706852
IDR 18944.591768
ILS 4.02004
IMP 0.858115
INR 99.781139
IQD 1509.328849
IRR 48547.656077
ISK 143.033075
JEP 0.858115
JMD 183.664836
JOD 0.817144
JPY 168.352902
KES 148.913382
KGS 100.783647
KHR 4617.864447
KMF 492.683845
KPW 1037.173976
KRW 1582.544532
KWD 0.35307
KYD 0.960164
KZT 602.06195
LAK 24856.887583
LBP 103230.815094
LKR 346.214864
LRD 230.423338
LSL 20.801885
LTL 3.402935
LVL 0.697116
LYD 6.280456
MAD 10.515714
MDL 19.811128
MGA 5148.733904
MKD 61.519872
MMK 2419.399045
MNT 4130.017729
MOP 9.315509
MRU 45.542801
MUR 52.575963
MVR 17.753793
MWK 1997.80873
MXN 22.112036
MYR 4.900869
MZN 73.712199
NAD 20.801885
NGN 1786.450441
NIO 42.399574
NOK 11.650198
NPR 159.586757
NZD 1.931967
OMR 0.443128
PAB 1.152117
PEN 4.137283
PGK 4.816816
PHP 65.888865
PKR 326.91661
PLN 4.268679
PYG 9195.738728
QAR 4.202067
RON 5.030175
RSD 117.20118
RUB 90.2778
RWF 1663.690891
SAR 4.323762
SBD 9.612065
SCR 16.999311
SDG 692.060432
SEK 11.146611
SGD 1.482116
SHP 0.905658
SLE 25.873303
SLL 24166.652664
SOS 658.438087
SRD 44.773754
STD 23853.731871
SVC 10.081521
SYP 14984.149536
SZL 20.797886
THB 37.818235
TJS 11.377302
TMT 4.033633
TND 3.410561
TOP 2.699196
TRY 45.723145
TTD 7.830075
TWD 34.101261
TZS 3058.947791
UAH 48.287326
UGX 4152.978764
USD 1.152467
UYU 47.108416
UZS 14469.441901
VES 118.193176
VND 30112.223648
VUV 138.369509
WST 3.170451
XAF 655.795737
XAG 0.032013
XAU 0.000342
XCD 3.114599
XDR 0.815599
XOF 655.795737
XPF 119.331742
YER 279.707783
ZAR 20.740485
ZMK 10373.586524
ZMW 26.643448
ZWL 371.093776
  • CMSC

    0.0900

    22.314

    +0.4%

  • CMSD

    0.0250

    22.285

    +0.11%

  • RBGPF

    0.0000

    69.04

    0%

  • SCS

    0.0400

    10.74

    +0.37%

  • RELX

    0.0300

    53

    +0.06%

  • RIO

    -0.1400

    59.33

    -0.24%

  • GSK

    0.1300

    41.45

    +0.31%

  • NGG

    0.2700

    71.48

    +0.38%

  • BP

    0.1750

    30.4

    +0.58%

  • BTI

    0.7150

    48.215

    +1.48%

  • BCC

    0.7900

    91.02

    +0.87%

  • JRI

    0.0200

    13.13

    +0.15%

  • VOD

    0.0100

    9.85

    +0.1%

  • BCE

    -0.0600

    22.445

    -0.27%

  • RYCEF

    0.1000

    12

    +0.83%

  • AZN

    -0.1200

    73.71

    -0.16%

US Supreme Court hears climate case as UN issues stark warning
US Supreme Court hears climate case as UN issues stark warning

US Supreme Court hears climate case as UN issues stark warning

A divided US Supreme Court heard arguments on Monday in an environmental regulation case with potentially far-reaching implications for the Biden administration's fight against climate change.

Text size:

The case concerns the authority of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from coal-fired power plants, which produce nearly 20 percent of the electricity in the United States.

As the Supreme Court was hearing arguments, the United Nations issued a landmark report containing dire warnings over climate change.

While the three liberal justices on the nine-member Supreme Court appeared largely to support arguments that the EPA was operating within its brief, several of the conservative justices appeared skeptical.

"This agency is doing greenhouse gas regulation," said Justice Sonia Sotomayor, one of the liberal members of the court. "This is in, you know, exactly in its wheelhouse."

Jacob Roth, arguing for The North America Coal Corp., said the EPA is going beyond its remit.

"The agency is asking questions like: Should we phase out the coal industry? Should we build more solar farms in this country? Should we restrict how consumers use electricity in order to bring down emissions?

"Those are not the types of questions we expect the agency to be answering," Roth said.

In 2007, the Supreme Court, by a narrow majority, ruled that the EPA has the power to regulate carbon dioxide emissions from power plants under the Clean Air Act of 1970.

In 2015, Democratic president Barack Obama unveiled his Clean Power Plan, which was intended to combat global warming by reducing carbon dioxide emissions from coal- and gas-burning plants and shifting energy production to clean sources such as solar and wind power.

The Clean Power Plan was blocked in the Supreme Court in 2016 and repealed by former Republican president Donald Trump, who replaced it with his own industry-friendly Affordable Clean Energy (ACE) rule.

Trump, a climate change skeptic hostile to government regulation of industry, also nominated three justices to the Supreme Court, giving conservatives a 6-3 majority.

- 'Constrain EPA authority' -

The US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia threw out Trump's ACE rule on the last day of his presidency, setting the stage for the case currently before the Supreme Court: West Virginia vs EPA.

West Virginia and several other coal-producing states asked the Supreme Court to intervene and define the powers of the EPA. The case has also been embraced by opponents of strong government regulatory authority.

Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, arguing before the court for the Biden administration, said the justices should just wait until the EPA publishes its new rules.

"The DC Circuit's judgment leaves no EPA rule in effect," Prelogar said. "No federal regulation will occur until EPA completes its upcoming rulemaking.

"Petitioners aren't harmed by the status quo," she said. "Instead, what they seek from this court is a decision to constrain EPA authority in the upcoming rulemaking."

In its brief to the court, West Virginia accused the EPA of acting like "the country's central energy planning authority."

Justice Samuel Alito, one of the more conservative members of the court, questioned how far the EPA could go in regulating emissions.

"Is there any reason EPA couldn't force the adoption of a system for single family homes that is similar to what it has done, what it is claiming it can do, with respect to existing power plants?" Alito asked.

Prelogar, the solicitor general, replied that the EPA "has never listed homes as a source category and couldn't do so because they are far too diverse and differentiated."

UN experts, in the report issued Monday on the global impacts of climate change, said humanity is perilously close to missing its chance to secure a "liveable" future.

"The cumulative scientific evidence is unequivocal: Climate change is a threat to human wellbeing and planetary health," the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) said.

Any further delay in global action to cut carbon pollution and prepare for impacts already in the pipeline "will miss a brief and rapidly closing window of opportunity to secure a liveable and sustainable future for all," the 195-nation IPCC warned.

The Supreme Court is expected to issue its decision in West Virginia vs EPA before June.

(H.Schneide--BBZ)