What's left in Biden's climate toolbox?

Presented by Chevron: Your guide to the political forces shaping the energy transformation

Jun 30, 2022 View in browser   By Arianna Skibell Presented by Chevron U.S. Supreme Court. | Francis Chung/E&E News Today's Supreme Court decision restricting EPA's role in slashing carbon pollution from power plants supercharged one of the most consequential questions of our time: How will the world stop catastrophic climate change? But the ruling — which President Joe Biden called "devastating" — still left his administration with some climate tools at its disposal, including EPA's remaining regulatory powers. "The EPA still has a number of pathways to do its job to protect public health and the environment," said Dena Adler, a research scholar at New York University School of Law, noting that "Congress wrote the Clean Air Act to broadly protect public health." Where Biden lost: The high court ruled that former President Barack Obama's EPA had overstepped its authority when it took a sweeping approach to regulating greenhouse emissions from the electricity sector. Obama's Clean Power Plan, which never took effect, required coal-burning utilities to make way for low-carbon power or use a market-based system of emissions trading. Today's decision limits Biden's options. The justices prohibited the agency from proposing similarly broad changes to the entire power system. And that dramatically blunts one of the Biden administration's main tools for slashing heat-trapping emissions, given that Congress has so far failed to pass climate legislation. What's still standing: The court didn't touch EPA's authority or legal obligation under the landmark 2007 case Massachusetts v. EPA to regulate carbon dioxide, including from power plants. The stakes are high. Scientists agree that without swift and deep carbon cuts, large swaths of the planet will become uninhabitable. Millions of people will die from extreme heat, natural disasters and disease. So what now?  Much of the action on climate could fall to the states, where there's a red-blue political divide. In response to today's ruling, 24 governors reaffirmed their commitments to wring carbon from the power sector. Jennifer Danis, a senior attorney at the Niskanen Center, also emphasized that other regulators and agencies, including the nation's grid operators, are working to clean up the power system. As for the ruling, "it's really a question of how much does this harm the pace of that transition that's already underway?" she said. In the past 30 years, greenhouse gas emissions from the power sector have decreased by 21 percent, according to EPA data, largely due to a market shift toward low-carbon sources and advances in renewable technology. Yet the United States remains a huge polluter. The transportation sector is the nation's single largest source of heat-trapping pollution, and it is only projected to grow. Read our coverage of today's decision, as well as the reaction from supporters, critics and the president. Tomorrow we'll tackle the implications of the court's "major question" doctrine. Stay tuned!   It's Thursday — thank you for tuning into POLITICO's Power Switch. I'm your host, Arianna Skibell. Power Switch is brought to you by the journalists behind  E&E News and POLITICO Energy. Send your tips, comments, questions to askibell@eenews.net.   A message from Chevron: At Chevron, we believe the fuels of the future can help power a brighter future. Find out how we're working to increase our hydrogen fuel production to help make heavy-duty transport lower carbon.   gif of the day Picture this: 800,000 years of Earth's CO2 history in 30 seconds. It's hard to imagine. But now you can actually see it thanks to Kristopher Karnauskas, a climate scientist who leads the Oceans and Climate Lab at the University of Colorado, Boulder. Kristopher Karnauskas Power Centers Alaska Gasline Development Corporation Green LNG? The Energy Department has determined that a new liquefied natural gas project in Alaska would not raise greenhouse gas emissions. But environmentalists say the project is still a bad idea, writes Carlos Anchondo. "Nothing in this analysis changes the fact that this massive fossil fuel project is a massively terrible idea," said Kristen Monsell, a senior attorney with the Center for Biological Diversity. Read more here. Carbon capture controversy California has determined that carbon capture will be necessary to meet the state's climate goals, in an assertion that's stoking controversy, writes Anne C. Mulkern. The state plan estimates that about one-third of the needed emissions reductions in 2045 would come from greenhouse gas removal techniques. Here's the story. Bait and switch The U.K. is taking money it had earmarked for poor countries to cope with climate change and giving it to Ukraine as part of a £1 billion military aid drive, writes Karl Mathiesen. The move has rankled climate finance experts and others who say it's "obscene" to use the war in Ukraine as a shield against criticism on the funding diversion. Read the story here.   A message from Chevron:   Subscriber Zone A showcase of some of our best subscriber content. Aragonne wind facilities in New Mexico. | Business Wire The country's largest wind project finds a home in New Mexico in the the largest lease deal for renewable energy development in state history. President Joe Biden said he will not directly ask Saudi Arabia's leaders to increase oil production when he visits the kingdom next month. A broad coalition of environmental groups is challenging the Interior Department's first oil and gas lease sale on public lands under the Biden administration. In Other News Mouse in the house: Rising temperatures and milder winters have increased the population of the white-footed mouse, offering job growth for pest control experts. Today in the POLITICO Energy podcast: Debra Kahn explains the political battle over plastic that's unfolding in California, where a ballot initiative to tax plastic, ban Styrofoam and set recycling targets has scared industry enough to get them to negotiate a compromise bill. Rich boys in space: Turns out all that joyriding in space by the likes of Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos is not so good for the climate. The more rockets that get launched, the more black soot and other pollutants get injected into the atmosphere. Question Corner The science, policy and politics driving the energy transition can feel miles away. But we're all affected on an individual and communal level — from hotter days and higher gas prices to home insurance rates and food supply. Want to know more? Send me your questions with "Question Corner " in the subject line. We'll pick a handful to answer each week in the newsletter. That's it for today, folks! Thanks for tuning in.   A message from Chevron: Energy demand is growing. At Chevron, we believe that demand for lower carbon hydrogen fuel could more than triple by 2050. That's why we're working to grow our hydrogen production to 150,000 tonnes per year by 2030 to help make heavy-duty transport lower carbon. Because we believe the future of energy is lower carbon. And it's only human to reach for it.     Follow us on Twitter Arianna Skibell @ariannaskibell   Follow us

To change your alert settings, please log in at https://www.politico.com/_login?base=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.politico.com/settings This email was sent to rouf@idiot.cloudns.cc by: POLITICO, LLC 1000 Wilson Blvd. Arlington, VA, 22209, USA Please click here and follow the steps to unsubscribe.