Obama climate plan’s broad scope to face skeptical Supreme Court

The reason for this defiance by a number of states is that their economic growth depends a lot on this fossil and coal fuel industry.

The EPA past year proposed a regulation tackling releases of methane from new oil and gas wells, but conservationists say it doesn’t go far enough and want to see mandates imposed on existing operations. “Not implementing the Clean Power Plan”, she said in an email, “would set the US emissions to rise until 2025 (and 2030) and hence in the opposite direction of where they need to be heading”.

While compliance with the new rules isn’t required until 2022, states must submit their plans to the Environmental Protection Administration by September or seek an extension.

The U.S.is already cutting its carbon emissions.

Almost all of West Virginia’s elected officials, including the governor and members of Congress, say they agree with the court’s decision.

“Pennsylvania will continue planning and engagement with stakeholders on the Clean Power Plan, pending final decision of this issue by the Supreme Court”, Sheridan wrote in an email to StateImpact. “We will continue to challenge these regulations as the litigations continue in court”.

North Dakota state Senator, Erin Oban says she is pleased with the Supreme Court decision and that coal power should stay in the picture for years to come.

But the high court ruling seemed to rattle some diplomats. A federal appeals court will ultimately decide whether the rules are legal, and that could take a while.

The Supreme Court voted five to four to block the rule’s enforcement. The divided court put implementation on hold until the pending legal challenges play out. At the very least, the move delays progress toward emissions cuts across the country and undermines USA credibility with the Paris climate agreement still unsigned by world leaders.

“This gives us a chance now if we can find the technology”, said Democratic Senator Joe Manchin, . There are more and more rules to comply with on the one hand, and on the other, coal has walloped by the low price of natural gas, which also produced less carbon emissions. The states argue the EPA exceeded its authority by forcing states to fundamentally shift energy portfolios. “There’s no question there’s an imperative to show quick gains as well as the long-term commitments”.