The headquarters of the US Environmental Protection Agency in Washington, D.C. | File photo
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court has refused to block Environmental Protection Agency regulations that would have curbed methane emissions at oil and gas facilities.
In a second ruling on October 4, the court also declined to block another EPA regulation aimed at limiting emissions of mercury and other pollutants from coal-fired power plants.
Republican-led states and industry groups challenged the EPA regulations, but the court rejected the emergency requests without comment. That means the lawsuit against the EPA will resume in lower courts, while a third emergency motion seeking to block other EPA regulations on greenhouse gas emissions from coal and gas plants is still pending.
Morrissey | File photo
“Our argument remains the same: This rule places an undue burden on the oil and gas industry,” said West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey West Virginia record. “This rule would completely exhaust the energy industry, causing hundreds of thousands of job losses and skyrocketing energy costs for consumers.
“Consumers are already struggling with some of the highest heating bills in years due to skyrocketing energy prices, recent international tensions and market conditions. This rule does not appear to take these important conditions into account at all.”
The methane ruling means the EPA regulation finalized in March will remain in effect. This rule aims to reduce methane emissions by as much as 80%. over the next 14 years.
Industry opponents call the EPA regulations in the lawsuit “EPA’s authoritarian national order” and say the rule goes further than allowed under the Clean Air Act, which is intended to give states a role in implementing emissions reduction programs.
In other court filings, GOP-led states claim the Biden administration is using parts of the Clean Air Act that were never intended to address climate change and “closing power plants in favor of other generation sources.”
A spokesman for Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond, who led the challenge to the methane regulations, expressed disappointment with the decision. “But we respect the court’s decision,” he added.
The methane rule limits flaring, which is the burning of excess methane during oil and gas extraction. It also requires oil companies to monitor leaks from wells and compressor stations. In addition, a program was also created to detect and report gigantic methane releases from the so-called “super emitters”.
According to the EPA, the mercury regulation doesn’t have that much of an impact.
Under the terms of the Clean Air Act, the EPA must reduce pollutants such as mercury and other metals such as arsenic and chromium while taking into account costs.
Contestants filed multiple lawsuits with the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. In July and August, the court rejected requests to suspend the application of the regulations until they were reviewed.
The Supreme Court, with its 6-3 conservative majority, has confined some of the EPA’s powers in recent years in some key rulings, including West Virginia v. EPAwhich challenged EPA regulations on carbon dioxide emissions from power plants.
In that ruling, the court found that EPA had exceeded its authority under the Clean Air Act by using a generation-shifting approach that would have required states to shift power production from coal-fired power plants to lower-emission sources. The Court found that the EPA could only regulate emissions at individual power plants, not across the energy sector.
In June, the Supreme Court struck down the EPA’s “good neighbor” rule, which was intended to limit ozone emissions that could worsen air pollution in neighboring states.
