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

EUR -
AED 3.82663
AFN 70.961809
ALL 98.138672
AMD 405.653176
ANG 1.877183
AOA 951.190967
ARS 1044.167695
AUD 1.599646
AWG 1.877898
AZN 1.768925
BAM 1.955574
BBD 2.102957
BDT 124.465633
BGN 1.955296
BHD 0.392555
BIF 3076.644867
BMD 1.04183
BND 1.403838
BOB 7.197169
BRL 6.043616
BSD 1.04158
BTN 87.914552
BWP 14.229358
BYN 3.408607
BYR 20419.862965
BZD 2.099458
CAD 1.456197
CDF 2991.093261
CHF 0.930624
CLF 0.036923
CLP 1018.831698
CNY 7.545955
CNH 7.559141
COP 4573.372102
CRC 530.538761
CUC 1.04183
CUP 27.608488
CVE 110.252274
CZK 25.306722
DJF 185.47859
DKK 7.457725
DOP 62.772754
DZD 139.835859
EGP 51.650195
ERN 15.627446
ETB 127.508482
FJD 2.371152
FKP 0.822334
GBP 0.831137
GEL 2.854575
GGP 0.822334
GHS 16.4561
GIP 0.822334
GMD 73.969495
GNF 8977.963687
GTQ 8.040072
GYD 217.904848
HKD 8.10981
HNL 26.320962
HRK 7.431641
HTG 136.724218
HUF 410.920048
IDR 16610.464601
ILS 3.856615
IMP 0.822334
INR 87.968197
IQD 1364.442504
IRR 43834.985936
ISK 145.522363
JEP 0.822334
JMD 165.930847
JOD 0.738756
JPY 161.24407
KES 134.88443
KGS 90.11281
KHR 4193.515949
KMF 492.261294
KPW 937.646374
KRW 1463.260366
KWD 0.320727
KYD 0.868
KZT 520.05997
LAK 22878.359185
LBP 93271.23384
LKR 303.145008
LRD 187.9983
LSL 18.79533
LTL 3.076253
LVL 0.630192
LYD 5.086413
MAD 10.478091
MDL 18.997807
MGA 4861.438851
MKD 61.522899
MMK 3383.822366
MNT 3540.137411
MOP 8.350936
MRU 41.443216
MUR 48.810137
MVR 16.1068
MWK 1806.091526
MXN 21.300719
MYR 4.654898
MZN 66.582998
NAD 18.79533
NGN 1767.669283
NIO 38.325576
NOK 11.541432
NPR 140.663763
NZD 1.785677
OMR 0.400944
PAB 1.04158
PEN 3.949544
PGK 4.193516
PHP 61.40439
PKR 289.239713
PLN 4.332887
PYG 8131.061444
QAR 3.798562
RON 4.980248
RSD 116.991496
RUB 108.510536
RWF 1421.83588
SAR 3.911475
SBD 8.734237
SCR 14.271984
SDG 626.658476
SEK 11.49581
SGD 1.402926
SHP 0.822334
SLE 23.680862
SLL 21846.653733
SOS 595.231293
SRD 36.978666
STD 21563.772237
SVC 9.113948
SYP 2617.628337
SZL 18.788831
THB 36.0395
TJS 11.09252
TMT 3.646404
TND 3.309018
TOP 2.440069
TRY 35.958741
TTD 7.074183
TWD 33.946456
TZS 2770.580196
UAH 43.090026
UGX 3848.555767
USD 1.04183
UYU 44.294887
UZS 13362.457591
VES 48.506696
VND 26482.270241
VUV 123.688121
WST 2.908362
XAF 655.881293
XAG 0.033274
XAU 0.000384
XCD 2.815597
XDR 0.792309
XOF 655.881293
XPF 119.331742
YER 260.379266
ZAR 18.844783
ZMK 9377.714007
ZMW 28.772679
ZWL 335.468752
  • BCC

    3.4200

    143.78

    +2.38%

  • RIO

    -0.2200

    62.35

    -0.35%

  • BCE

    0.0900

    26.77

    +0.34%

  • CMSD

    0.0150

    24.46

    +0.06%

  • NGG

    1.0296

    63.11

    +1.63%

  • SCS

    0.2300

    13.27

    +1.73%

  • CMSC

    0.0320

    24.672

    +0.13%

  • GSK

    0.2600

    33.96

    +0.77%

  • JRI

    -0.0200

    13.21

    -0.15%

  • BTI

    0.4000

    37.38

    +1.07%

  • RBGPF

    59.2400

    59.24

    +100%

  • RELX

    0.9900

    46.75

    +2.12%

  • AZN

    1.3700

    65.63

    +2.09%

  • RYCEF

    -0.0100

    6.79

    -0.15%

  • VOD

    0.1323

    8.73

    +1.52%

  • BP

    0.2000

    29.72

    +0.67%

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)