EPA Tells Congress: Cap Carbon, Or We'll Do It For You

After Congress in 1990 gave the EPA the authority to regulate air pollution, after the Supreme Court in 2007 told Bush's EPA they couldn't ignore greenhouse gas pollution that causes global warming, and after a full review of the scientific evidence, the EPA announced that greenhouse gases "threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations," [1] which means the EPA is obligated to act.

As Sierra Club's Bruce Milles said on HuffPost: [2] "Now there is no longer a question of if -- or even when -- the U.S. will act on global warming."

The EPA will not immediately issue any regulation, let alone a comprehensive strategy to avert a climate crisis. But it's a clear message to obstructionists in Congress: if you don't cap carbon, the EPA will.

Perhaps looking to generate momentum out of the EPA's move, Rep. Ed Markey quickly announced that the first hearing will be Wednesday [3] on his proposed clean energy/climate protection legislation, co-sponsored with Rep. Henry Waxman.

Solve Climate's Stacy Morford laid out the stark choice before potential obstructionists: [4] "If they oppose the bill, EPA will get to work with regulations, starting with automobiles but extending through formal processes to coal plants and heavy industry. If Congress succeeds in passing Waxman-Markey, it will pre-empt EPA action and buy time for polluters to adjust to emissions reductions more gradually and predictably."

How fast the EPA moves -- or in other words, how tight it turns the screws -- from this point is unclear.

Grist's Kate Sheppard lays out the next steps, noting the EPA will only regulate big entities, not small families: [5]

There will be a 60-day public comment period on the EPA finding itself, after which it will be entered in the Federal Register, the government’s official publication for rules and regulations. The agency would then be legally required to start regulating CO2 emissions, though the EPA can decide the timing, sequence, and scope of any regulations.

The EPA could regulate a wide range of polluting entities, but the agency is likely to focus first on two main sources of pollution: cars and stationary pollution points like power plants and major industrial sources, including chemical and cement manufacturers...

...Environmental experts working in the field ... expect that the EPA will go after automobiles first, since they’re perceived as the lower-hanging fruit ... others representing the industry side suggest that regulation through this system will inevitably lead to regulation of every emission source imaginable ... [EPA Administration Lisa] Jackson rejected this idea recently, noting, “It’s a myth that we’re at a horrible fork in the road, where the EPA is going to regulate cows, Dunkin’ Donuts, Pizza Huts, and baby bottles.”

So it will not be easy for corporate lobbyists to stoke a public backlash and prevent anything from moving. Something will happen to cap carbon, either in Congress or over time by the EPA.

The EPA and The White House are making it very clear they want a comprehensive climate strategy accomplished with fresh legislation, not by regulation based on the earlier Clean Air Act. The ball is now in Congress' court.

You can bet the lobbyists will be there, looking to poke any legislation full of loopholes. And if you want strong legislation to successfully transition to a clean energy economy and avert a climate crisis, you better be too.