GWPF | 25 June 2015
Germany To Scrap Climate Change Levy On Coal Plants
The House of Representatives voted Wednesday to delay the Environmental Protection Agency’s climate rule for power plants and let state governors opt out of complying. The bill, passed 247-180, is a major blow to the main pillar of President Obama’s effort to reduce the greenhouse gases that cause climate change, although the White House has promised a veto to protect his legacy. The regulation’s enforcement would also be delayed until all court challenges are resolved. The GOP believes that the rule will not withstand judicial review, so the delay is designed to ensure that the regulation never takes effect. –Timothy Cama and Cristina Marcos, The Hill, 25 June 2015
Indiana will not comply with President Barack Obama’s plan to battle climate change by requiring reductions in emissions from coal-fired power plants, Republican Gov. Mike Pence said Wednesday. The proposal as currently written, known as the Clean Power Plan, will make Indiana electricity more expensive and less reliable and hurt economic growth in Indiana and across the nation, Pence wrote in a letter to Obama. Indiana is not the only state to defy the president on the issue. Oklahoma’s Republican Gov. Mary Fallin issued an executive order in April prohibiting her state from developing a plan to reduce its carbon dioxide emission from power plants. —Associated Press, 24 June 2015
The Obama administration’s plan for U.N. climate change talks encountered swift opposition after its release Tuesday, with Republican leaders warning other countries to “proceed with caution” in negotiations with Washington because any deal could be later undone. –Valerie Volcovici, Reuters, 31 March 2015
1) US Lawmakers Vote To Block Obama’s Climate Policy – The Hill, 25 June 2015
2) US States To Defy Obama’s Climate Plans – Associated Press, 24 June 2015
3) Germany To Scrap Climate Change Levy On Coal Plants – Financial Times, 25 June 2015
4) EU Plans To Drop Methane Emissions Limits – International Business Times, 23 June 2015
5) Dutch Government Climate Policy Ruled Illegal Under Human Rights Law – Guardian Sustainable Business, 24th June 2015
6) Dutch Government To Appeal Court’s Climate Ruling – De Telegraph, 25 June 2015
Germany will scrap plans to raise emissions charges for older coal-fired power stations, bowing to pressure from the power sector which warned that the levy would result in the closure of mines and power plants. The move illustrates the challenge Berlin faces as it attempts to meet its ambitious targets to combat climate change while safeguarding jobs. Despite a shift towards renewable energy, Germany still generates 44 per cent of its electricity from coal. –Jeevan Vasagar, Financial Times, 25 June 2015
Expecting opposition from the agri-food sector, the European Union is dropping its plan to put a limit on methane emissions, Irish Times reported. EU countries earlier wanted to include methane, sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, volatile organic compounds, and ammonia as four air pollutants whose emission limits should be implemented. However a “working paper” is no longer including methane and ammonia due to “concerns about possible overlaps with commitments related to greenhouse gas emission reduction targets”. –Vittorio Hernandez, International Business Times, 23 June 2015
A court in the Hague has declared the Dutch government’s climate policy illegal and ordered it to cut its emissions by at least 25 per cent within five years, in a landmark ruling. In the first climate change liability suit brought under human rights and tort law, Judge Hans Hofhuis said that the threat posed by global warming was severe and acknowledged by the Dutch government in international treaties. To cheers from climate campaigners in the court, three judges ruled that government plans to cut emissions by just 14-17 per cent compared to 1990 levels by 2020 were illegal. –Arthur Nelsen, Guardian Sustainable Business, 24th June 2015
The Dutch Government will appeal a far-reaching climate change ruling by the court in The Hague according to cabinet sources. The court ruled yesterday that the government should ensure that CO2 emissions by 2020 is reduced further than the government had planned. The environment secretary yesterday said in an official reaction that the government will study the ruling. However, insiders report that the verdict will be challenged by the government. —De Telegraph, 25 June 2015
1) US Lawmakers Vote To Block Obama’s Climate Policy
The Hill, 25 June 2015
Timothy Cama and Cristina Marcos
The House of Representatives voted Wednesday to delay the Environmental Protection Agency’s climate rule for power plants and let state governors opt out of complying.
The bill, passed 247-180, is a major blow to the main pillar of President Obama’s effort to reduce the greenhouse gases that cause climate change, although the White House has promised a veto to protect his legacy.
Rep. Ed Whitfield (R-Ky.), chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s power subpanel, sponsored the legislation as House Republicans’ principal response to the EPA’s climate rule. The rule has become the most controversial aspect of the Obama administration’s environmental policy, and one of its most controversial regulations.
Under the bill, state governors could opt out of adopting state plans for the EPA’s regulation if such a plan would harm electricity rates, reliability or important economic sectors in the states.
The regulation’s enforcement would also be delayed until all court challenges are resolved.
The GOP believes that the rule will not withstand judicial review, so the delay is designed to ensure that the regulation never takes effect.
“They’ve picked up a shotgun and pointed it at the heart of the American economy, our power generation,” Rep. Pete Olson (R-Texas) said of the EPA.
But Democrats warned it would ultimately gut the regulation intended to help mitigate the effects of climate change.
“This ‘just say no’ bill would effectively give governors the power to sabotage EPA’s proposed clean power plan by allowing them to opt out of the federal requirements of the plan based on arbitrary and ambiguous determinations,” said Rep. Bobby Rush (D-Ill.).
The EPA proposed the regulation last June, and plans to make it final this August. It seeks a 30 percent cut in the carbon emissions of the nation’s power plants by 2030, with specific targets assigned to each state.
Regulators will give states 13 months to draft plans to hit their targets. If they don’t, the EPA will write its own plans and impose them — something the GOP is trying to prevent.
“Earlier we heard the gentleman from Illinois say that this was a ‘just say no’ bill,” Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-Va.) said in response to Rush. “You bet it is. That’s exactly what it is. It’s a ‘just say no’ bill. No to a weaker electric grid. No to fewer jobs, particularly in manufacturing and also in the coal and energy industries.”
The White House sees the bill as a threat to the centerpiece of Obama’s climate legacy, and it has threatened a veto.
“The bill would give governors unprecedented and broad discretion to avoid compliance with the [CAA, Clean Air Act], thereby delaying the delivery of important public health benefits,” the White House wrote to lawmakers Tuesday.
“The bill’s effects would be felt hardest by those most at risk from the impacts of air pollution and climate change, such as the elderly, the infirm, children, native and tribal groups, and low-income populations,” it said, calling the bill “premature and unnecessary” and saying that Obama’s advisors would urge a veto if it gets to his desk.
The White House added that it “is not aware of any instance when Congress has enacted legislation to stay implementation of a CAA standard during judicial review.”
Senate Republicans have put their efforts into a similar bill that would go even further in its attempts to weaken the rule and impair the EPA’s ability to set carbon rules for power plants.
Their bill, led by Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), would give governors even more reasons they could cite in rejecting compliance, including if doing so would hamper economic growth, competitiveness or jobs.
2) US States To Defy Obama’s Climate Plans
Indiana will not comply with President Barack Obama’s plan to battle climate change by requiring reductions in emissions from coal-fired power plants, Republican Gov. Mike Pence said Wednesday.
The proposal as currently written, known as the Clean Power Plan, will make Indiana electricity more expensive and less reliable and hurt economic growth in Indiana and across the nation, Pence wrote in a letter to Obama.
The plan targets pollution from the coal-fired power plants that Indiana relies on. Pence said the Indiana coal industry employs more than 26,000 people.
“If your administration proceeds to finalize the Clean Power Plan, and the final rule has not demonstrably and significantly improved from the proposed rule, Indiana will not comply. Our state will also reserve the right to use any legal means available to block the rule from being implemented,” Pence wrote.
Indiana is not the only state to defy the president on the issue. Oklahoma’s Republican Gov. Mary Fallin issued an executive order in April prohibiting her state from developing a plan to reduce its carbon dioxide emission from power plants.
The Environmental Protection Agency is expected to release the final rule in August. As proposed by the EPA last year, the plan would require Indiana to reduce its 2005 level of carbon emissions by 20 percent by 2030. Each state is responsible for drawing up an effective plan to meet its goal.
“Our nation needs an ‘all of the above’ energy strategy that relies on a variety of different energy sources,” Pence wrote to Obama. “Energy policy should promote the safe, environmentally responsible stewardship of our natural resources with the goal of reliable, affordable energy. Your approach to energy policy places environmental concerns above all others.”
By not complying with the rule, Indiana would refuse to file a state plan to meet its carbon emissions goal. As a result, the EPA would impose a federal plan on Indiana, which the state then would likely challenge in court.
3) Germany To Scrap Climate Change Levy On Coal Plants
Financial Times, 25 June 2015
Jeevan Vasagar
Germany will scrap plans to raise emissions charges for older coal-fired power stations, bowing to pressure from the power sector which warned that the levy would result in the closure of mines and power plants.
The levy was proposed in March as a way of pushing power producers into make deeper cuts in carbon emissions. Germany wants to cut CO2 emissions by 40 per cent from 1990 levels by 2020, including 22m tonnes in emissions from the power sector.
However, the plan to impose penalties on the oldest and most polluting power plants has been dropped, according to two people with knowledge of the discussions.
The move illustrates the challenge Berlin faces as it attempts to meet its ambitious targets to combat climate change while safeguarding jobs. Despite a shift towards renewable energy, Germany still generates 44 per cent of its electricity from coal.
The government’s retreat, first reported by state broadcaster ARD, helped lift shares in RWE, Germany’s second biggest utility which is heavily dependent on coal for power generation.
RWE had said it would be forced to close two of its three lignite mines and 17 of 20 lignite-fired power plants if the levy was introduced. It shares rose more than 2 per cent to €20.30 on Wednesday.
4) EU Plans To Drop Methane Emissions Limits
International Business Times, 23 June 2015
Vittorio Hernandez
Expecting opposition from the agri-food sector, the European Union is dropping its plan to put a limit on methane emissions, Irish Times reported. Studies have shown that methane is much worse than carbon dioxide, but the EU is scrapping it from the set of air pollutants that are considered to be contributing to greenhouse gas emissions. […]
EU countries earlier wanted to include methane, sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, volatile organic compounds, and ammonia as four air pollutants whose emission limits should be implemented. However, as reported by EurActiv, a “working paper” is no longer including methane and ammonia due to “concerns about possible overlaps with commitments related to greenhouse gas emission reduction targets”.
5) Dutch Government Climate Policy Ruled Illegal Under Human Rights Law
Guardian Sustainable Business, 24th June 2015
Arthur Nelsen
A court in the Hague has declared the Dutch government’s climate policy illegal and ordered it to cut its emissions by at least 25 per cent within five years, in a landmark ruling.
To cheers from climate campaigners in the court, three judges ruled that government plans to cut emissions by just 14-17 per cent compared to 1990 levels by 2020 were illegal.
In the first climate change liability suit brought under human rights and tort law, Judge Hans Hofhuis said that the threat posed by global warming was severe and acknowledged by the Dutch government in international treaties.
“The state should not hide behind the argument that the solution to the global climate problem does not depend solely on Dutch efforts,” the judges’ ruling said. “Any reduction of emissions contributes to the prevention of dangerous climate change and as a developed country the Netherlands should take the lead in this.”
Some 886 plaintiffs organised by the Urgenda movement had accused the Dutch government of negligence for “knowingly contributing” to a breach of the 2C maximum target for global warming. The first hearing was held in April.
Professor Pier Vellinga, Urgenda’s chairman and the originator of the 2C target in 1989 said that the ruling was a breakthrough and would have a massive impact on similar cases being heard in countries such as Belgium.
“This ruling is of enormous significance, and beyond our expectations,” he told the Guardian. “We had thought the legal system would not want to interfere in the political debate. But the scientific case is so strong, and the dangers so high that the court has ruled that the state is failing to adequately protect its citizens from the effects of climate change.”
The judges ordered the Dutch government to pay all of Urgenda’s costs.
6) Dutch Government To Appeal Court’s Climate Ruling
De Telegraph, 25 June 2015
The Dutch Government will appeal a far-reaching climate change ruling by the court in The Hague according to cabinet sources.
The court ruled yesterday that the government should ensure that CO2 emissions by 2020 is reduced further than the government had planned. Compared to 1990, emissions should be reduced by a quarter by 2020. The government had decided for a reduction of up to 17 percent.
The environment secretary yesterday said in an official reaction that the government will study the ruling. However, insiders report that the verdict will be challenged by the government. The government expresses doubt about whether the court is to judge climate policy. There is also fear of a precedent, and that the court, in future, will interfere with political decisions.
