Supreme Court Upholds Two Environmental Regulations from Biden’s Administration

WASHINGTON — On Friday,​ the ⁣Supreme Court ‌upheld two environmental regulations introduced ‌by the‍ Biden administration. These regulations are designed ‌to reduce the ⁤emissions of methane and mercury, both of​ which are harmful to the⁤ planet,​ from industries.

The justices did not provide a detailed explanation for their decisions, which were made ​in response to a series of emergency ‌applications from industry groups‍ and states with a​ Republican⁢ majority. These⁤ applications‍ sought to block the implementation of‍ the regulations. Notably, there were no recorded dissents.

The Supreme Court is still deliberating on⁢ challenges to ​a third regulation, which ⁢is aimed at‍ reducing pollution from coal-fired power plants that contributes ‌to global⁣ warming.

The ⁢regulations​ are‌ part of a larger initiative by ⁤the Biden administration to combat ​climate change. ⁤This initiative​ includes⁢ financial incentives‌ for the purchase of electric vehicles⁤ and the upgrading of infrastructure.

Industry ⁣groups and ⁢states have argued that ‌the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has exceeded its authority and set unrealistic standards with⁤ these new regulations. However, the EPA maintains that the rules ⁤fall within its legal mandate and are‌ necessary for public⁤ protection.

In recent years, the Supreme Court ⁢has⁣ rejected other ⁢environmental regulations, including a significant decision in 2022 that restricted the EPA’s power to regulate ‍carbon ⁢dioxide emissions from power plants. ⁢Another decision put⁤ a stop to the EPA’s “good neighbor” rule, which‌ was designed ‌to ⁢combat air ​pollution.

The methane⁢ regulation imposes new requirements ⁣on the oil and gas industry, which ⁣is the largest emitter⁢ of this gas.‍ Methane is ​a significant ⁢contributor to⁤ climate change. A‌ lower court had previously declined to ⁤suspend the regulation.

Methane, the primary component of natural gas, is far more⁤ potent than carbon dioxide in​ the short term. Therefore, ​reducing methane emissions ​is a ‍global priority ⁤in the fight against climate change.

The methane regulation targets emissions from ​existing oil and gas wells across the country, rather​ than just⁢ new​ wells. It also regulates smaller wells, ‌which​ will be required to identify and seal​ methane leaks.

Research has shown that while smaller wells produce only 6% of the nation’s oil and gas, ‌they​ are responsible for up to half of the⁤ methane emissions from well sites. The‌ regulation also includes a phased requirement for energy companies to‍ stop routine flaring, or burning, of natural gas produced by new oil wells.

The‌ states challenging the regulation have described the new standards as “impossible to meet” and have characterized them as an “attack” on the industry.

The mercury⁤ regulation was introduced following a ⁢reversal of a policy by the Trump administration. It updates regulations‍ that are over a decade‍ old for emissions of ⁤mercury and other harmful pollutants ⁢that‍ can affect ​the nervous system, kidneys, and fetal development.

Industry groups and states‍ with a⁤ conservative leaning argued that emissions were already‍ low ⁣enough and ⁢that ⁢the new ​standards could lead to the closure of​ coal-fired power plants.

The ⁣EPA has argued that the updates are necessary to protect public health.

David Doniger, a ​senior attorney at the Natural Resources Defense‌ Council, praised the decision to uphold ​the two⁢ regulations, describing them as ⁣critical safeguards. He⁣ also expressed hope for a favorable decision on the challenges to⁤ the power plant regulation.

“The court should⁣ do the ​same with the ‌effort to block EPA’s power plant carbon pollution standards, which comply with the very directions ⁣the court gave it in 2022,” Doniger said.