'Endangerment' Decision Upheld

The Environmental Protection Agency denied last week 10 petitions submitted by states, trade associations, conservative organizations and one individual, seeking to block the federal government from regulating greenhouse gas emissions.

The petitions were the latest salvo by a mix of businesses, utilities, and others to stop the EPA from regulating carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act. In this instance, the 10 petitioners challenged the science that led EPA to conclude that climate change is real and is occurring due to greenhouse gas emissions from human activities and as such is a threat to human health and the environment.

EPA's so-called "endangerment" finding, made last December, set the agency on a path to regulate CO₂ and five other greenhouse gases emitted by vehicles, utilities, chemical companies, and other sources (C&EN, Online, Dec. 8).

Specifically, the petitioners said EPA's Clean Air Act decision was flawed because it was based on faulty science. They pointed to internal emails from climate change scientists that, they said, showed the scientists had manipulated their findings. They also cited recently discovered errors in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report as well as recently conducted scientific studies that, they said, refuted evidence of climate change, upon which EPA's endangerment decision was based.

EPA strongly disagreed in denying all the petitions.

"The endangerment finding is based on years of science from the U.S. and around the world," said EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson in a statement. The petitions, she continued, were based on "selectively edited, out-of-context data and a manufactured controversy and provide no evidence to undermine our determination."

She chided the petitioners for their opposition, urging that they join "the vast majority of the American people who want to see more green jobs, more clean energy innovation, and an end to the oil addiction that pollutes our planet and jeopardizes our national security."

Jackson singled out recent reports by the National Academy of Sciences and National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration to support EPA's view of climate change as a man-made health threat.

Several of the petitioners announced immediately their decision to appeal EPA's ruling to the courts. More than 20 suits have been filed opposing EPA's regulation of greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act.

Petitioners included the states of Texas and Virginia, the Coalition for Responsible Regulation, Competitive Enterprise Institute, Ohio Coal Association, Pacific Legal Foundation, Peabody Energy Company, Southeastern Legal Foundation, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, and one private citizen.