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

EUR -
AED 4.179278
AFN 74.537554
ALL 93.555728
AMD 416.115961
AOA 1043.539341
ARS 1706.700655
AUD 1.639535
AWG 2.048388
AZN 1.942865
BAM 1.954432
BBD 2.291516
BDT 140.45166
BHD 0.429101
BIF 3399.005182
BMD 1.137993
BND 1.47029
BOB 12.942166
BRL 5.827433
BSD 1.137713
BTN 108.765324
BWP 15.652247
BYN 3.320419
BYR 22304.666923
BZD 2.288218
CAD 1.60502
CDF 2588.934431
CHF 0.933149
CLF 0.027026
CLP 1063.685539
CNY 7.705636
CNH 7.703122
COP 3652.525768
CRC 517.742042
CUC 1.137993
CUP 30.15682
CVE 110.188333
CZK 24.189924
DJF 202.610808
DKK 7.474925
DOP 66.003786
DZD 151.764091
EGP 57.731764
ERN 17.069898
ETB 183.638229
FJD 2.542502
FKP 0.855103
GBP 0.85638
GEL 2.987273
GGP 0.855103
GHS 13.305859
GIP 0.855103
GMD 83.642027
GNF 9988.050543
GTQ 8.680884
GYD 237.996499
HKD 8.924882
HNL 30.482657
HRK 7.532494
HTG 148.755845
HUF 362.144718
IDR 20564.675304
ILS 3.484171
IMP 0.855103
INR 108.867771
IQD 1490.456426
IRR 1564882.913665
ISK 142.593106
JEP 0.855103
JMD 179.834085
JOD 0.806836
JPY 186.266326
KES 147.313545
KGS 99.517433
KHR 4599.839957
KMF 492.751328
KRW 1652.912603
KWD 0.353572
KYD 0.948149
KZT 542.83231
LAK 25799.162886
LBP 101886.452713
LKR 382.222379
LRD 205.939427
LSL 19.077742
LTL 3.360198
LVL 0.688361
LYD 7.294924
MAD 10.674573
MDL 20.132169
MGA 4917.600053
MKD 61.477226
MMK 2389.061563
MNT 4093.171941
MOP 9.191326
MRU 45.487151
MUR 53.918088
MVR 17.582019
MWK 1972.844676
MXN 19.884827
MYR 4.65382
MZN 72.710067
NAD 19.077742
NGN 1553.656122
NIO 41.870867
NOK 10.998584
NPR 174.026446
NZD 1.970634
OMR 0.437545
PAB 1.137708
PEN 3.862596
PGK 5.092457
PHP 69.883752
PKR 315.979061
PLN 4.327048
PYG 6833.215582
QAR 4.148196
RON 5.235109
RSD 117.364583
RUB 90.471633
RWF 1674.749464
SAR 4.275857
SBD 9.196243
SCR 15.337763
SDG 682.79594
SEK 11.052224
SGD 1.471021
SLE 27.567877
SOS 650.253283
SRD 43.07475
STD 23554.161855
STN 24.483073
SVC 9.955073
SZL 19.072562
THB 38.151254
TJS 10.501486
TMT 3.982976
TND 3.372539
TRY 53.93813
TTD 7.728657
TWD 36.910015
TZS 2998.645793
UAH 51.010008
UGX 4249.043613
USD 1.137993
UYU 45.758163
UZS 13695.410873
VES 845.865918
VND 29954.82628
VUV 135.672436
WST 3.13413
XAF 655.506674
XAG 0.019733
XAU 0.000282
XCD 3.075483
XCG 2.050473
XDR 0.815007
XOF 655.500917
XPF 119.331742
YER 271.126434
ZAR 19.057887
ZMK 10243.30542
ZMW 21.247497
ZWL 366.433349
  • RBGPF

    0.0000

    66

    0%

  • CMSC

    0.0000

    21.8101

    0%

  • VOD

    -0.2850

    16.105

    -1.77%

  • RELX

    0.6650

    38.425

    +1.73%

  • RIO

    1.2000

    92.84

    +1.29%

  • NGG

    -1.0700

    79.79

    -1.34%

  • GSK

    -0.7200

    52.99

    -1.36%

  • BCE

    0.1650

    21.975

    +0.75%

  • CMSD

    -0.0890

    22.031

    -0.4%

  • BTI

    0.8000

    63.1

    +1.27%

  • RYCEF

    0.0500

    18.75

    +0.27%

  • AZN

    2.3250

    174.805

    +1.33%

  • JRI

    0.0600

    12.97

    +0.46%

  • BCC

    -1.8850

    78.495

    -2.4%

  • BP

    1.5700

    43.24

    +3.63%

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)