Events Calendar
In This Section
Most Read Stories
Akron police investigate teen mob attack on family
Woman, 75, charged with beating fawn to death
Akron woman found dead at Brimfield Township store
Man shot in back near Akron park
Man shot outside his Akron home during robbery attempt
Man admits repeatedly biting 2-year-old
Tragic day puts man on path to be Pinnacle owner
Blogs:
Pets:
Dogs' Bark: Not fair! Study shows pups get jealous
The Heldenfiles:
Who Will Get the Michael Media Treatment Next?
Patrick McManamon:
More on Varejao
Akron Zips:
Opponent outlook: Kent State
Browns Bulletin:
Quick thought on Browns rookies
Tribe Matters:
Wedge challenges relievers
Cleveland Browns:
Stallworth test showed marijuana
Kent State Sports:
Men's Basketball Scheduling update
Cleveland Cavaliers:
Andy’s Signed According to ESPN
All Da King's Men:
Does Medicare Have Lower Administrative Costs ?
Blog of Mass Destruction:
CIA Did Mislead Congress
Akron Law Café:
Breaking Story: CIA Lied to Congress about Secret Program
Varsity Letters:
East basketball update
See Jane Style:
Oh Baby!
Car Chase:
Where do We Go from Here?
Let's Talk Real Estate:
Closings….Not the Good Kind!
Ohio Travels with Betty:
Margy inquires-when is a Taste of Hudson?
Sound Check:
LeVert II live performance Saturday night — "Dedication" album due July 13,
HRLite House:
DDI One of Best Places to Work
Akron Gamer:
First 24 'Guitar Hero 5' songs announced
A federal appeals court says the Bush White House is too green.
Now Congress must ensure states have the tools to curb air pollution
POSTED: 01:41 a.m. EDT, Jul 29, 2008
Chris Korleski, the director of the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, appears today before a U.S. Senate subcommittee to discuss the state's challenge in meeting federal requirements to reduce air pollution. A federal appeals court recently made compliance substantially more difficult. The panel rejected the Clean Air Interstate Rule, a set of regulations long in the making, the product of an intelligent compromise pushed by the Bush administration and embraced by environmental groups.
The hope is that Korleski will argue strongly that the federal EPA revamp the regulations to meet court approval, or that Congress act to clear the way for implementation of the rule.
For years, the many players, from the White House and power companies to states and environmentalists, tangled over the question of how to curb air pollution when emissions travel across state boundaries. In 2005, the federal EPA unveiled its answer, reflecting the varied input and political struggles. The Clean Air Interstate Rule covered Ohio and 27 other states in the eastern half of the country. It called for a roughly 70 percent reduction in sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions (leading contributors to smog) by the 2020s. The EPA estimated that the rule would generate almost $100 billion in annual health benefits, preventing 17,000 premature deaths nationwide (1,743 in Ohio).
A projected yearly benefit of $2 billion would be achieved for national parks in the East, including the Great Smoky Mountains and the Shenandoah.
To achieve these advances, the Clean Air Interstate Rule established a ''cap and trade'' arrangement, the EPA setting emission limits, polluting companies buying and selling allowances, leaving room for market incentives and flexibility in meeting the goal. Companies challenged the rule in court largely because of their unhappiness with the way the allowances would be distributed.
Unfortunately, the appeals court traveled far beyond that argument, siding with the contention that Congress hadn't given the EPA sufficient authority to assert itself as it did. Actually, the Clean Air Act invites aggressive action to meet its defining objective — protecting public health.
More dismaying: The rule is the product of what is expected of the political world, checks and balances in motion, the interested parties giving and taking, all leading to a beneficial result. The president has more environmental achievements than his critics suggest (curbing diesel pollution, for instance). At the same time, this isn't a green White House. Hard to believe the administration would so exceed its authority in setting environmental regulations.
Of the things the president would like to achieve before his tenure ends in five months, a replacement for the Clear Air Interstate Rule should reside near the top of the list. Best of all, the objective is realistic. Those with a stake already have agreed on the merits. Now it is a matter of getting past the courts.
Chris Korleski, the director of the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, appears today before a U.S. Senate subcommittee to discuss the state's challenge in meeting federal requirements to reduce air pollution. A federal appeals court recently made compliance substantially more difficult. The panel rejected the Clean Air Interstate Rule, a set of regulations long in the making, the product of an intelligent compromise pushed by the Bush administration and embraced by environmental groups.
The hope is that Korleski will argue strongly that the federal EPA revamp the regulations to meet court approval, or that Congress act to clear the way for implementation of the rule.
For years, the many players, from the White House and power companies to states and environmentalists, tangled over the question of how to curb air pollution when emissions travel across state boundaries. In 2005, the federal EPA unveiled its answer, reflecting the varied input and political struggles. The Clean Air Interstate Rule covered Ohio and 27 other states in the eastern half of the country. It called for a roughly 70 percent reduction in sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions (leading contributors to smog) by the 2020s. The EPA estimated that the rule would generate almost $100 billion in annual health benefits, preventing 17,000 premature deaths nationwide (1,743 in Ohio).
A projected yearly benefit of $2 billion would be achieved for national parks in the East, including the Great Smoky Mountains and the Shenandoah.
To achieve these advances, the Clean Air Interstate Rule established a ''cap and trade'' arrangement, the EPA setting emission limits, polluting companies buying and selling allowances, leaving room for market incentives and flexibility in meeting the goal. Companies challenged the rule in court largely because of their unhappiness with the way the allowances would be distributed.
Unfortunately, the appeals court traveled far beyond that argument, siding with the contention that Congress hadn't given the EPA sufficient authority to assert itself as it did. Actually, the Clean Air Act invites aggressive action to meet its defining objective — protecting public health.
More dismaying: The rule is the product of what is expected of the political world, checks and balances in motion, the interested parties giving and taking, all leading to a beneficial result. The president has more environmental achievements than his critics suggest (curbing diesel pollution, for instance). At the same time, this isn't a green White House. Hard to believe the administration would so exceed its authority in setting environmental regulations.
Of the things the president would like to achieve before his tenure ends in five months, a replacement for the Clear Air Interstate Rule should reside near the top of the list. Best of all, the objective is realistic. Those with a stake already have agreed on the merits. Now it is a matter of getting past the courts.
Comments
Click here to post your comments
