Transcript Environment: “Think Globally, Act Locally”

Legal Response to Climate
Change
Maxine Lipeles
Association of Women Faculty
February 22, 2008
Prologue: Need for Legal Action

IPCC Findings:
Dramatic reductions in greenhouse gas
(GHG) emissions required over next several
decades
 Technically feasible to achieve
 The sooner we act, the less difficult the
challenge

Prologue: US Resistance

US emissions increasing (EPA 2007)
Total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions
increased >16% 1990-2005
 Carbon dioxide emissions increased > 21%
1990-2005
 US emissions 23% of worldwide emissions

US not party to Kyoto Protocol
 No US regulation of carbon dioxide
emissions

Overview of Legal Activities
International
 Federal
 Regional
 State
 Local
 Private market

International Agreements

1992: UN Framework Convention on Climate Change




Goal: “Stabilization of GWG concentrations in the atmosphere
at a level that would prevent dangerous interference with the
climate system.”
Agreement to agree. No emission restrictions.
US is party
1997: Kyoto Protocol

Binding emission reductions 2008-2012 – overall 5.2%



Example reductions required by 2012 from 1990 levels: EU: 8%;
Japan 6%; US would have been 7%
Took effect Feb 2005
US not party
International Agreements #2

Post-2012
Parties began negotiations Bali Dec 2007
 “Bali Roadmap”

Notes urgency of IPCC 2007 report
 Aiming for new treaty by 2009
 “Common but differentiated responsibilities” –
developed v. developing nations
 Potential roles of US, China, India uncertain

Federal Law
No law or regulation focused on reducing
GHG emissions or achieving climate
change goals
 Existing laws re energy policy

Various subsidies – fossil fuels; biofuels
 Motor vehicle fuel economy standards



2007: Updated; first time since 1970s for cars
Attempts to use existing environmental
laws to address climate change
Federal Law – Clean Air Act
Key Supreme Court decision April 2007:
Massachusetts v. EPA
Context: Petition urging EPA to set GHG
emission standards for new motor vehicles
under Clean Air Act
 EPA denied petition
 Supreme Court (5-4) rejected EPA’s
arguments

Clean Air Act #2

Supreme Court decision:
GHG emissions are “air pollutants” that can
be regulated under Clean Air Act
 EPA’s reasons for denying petition unlawful

EPA may be working on GHG emission
standards for motor vehicles
 Dec 2007: EPA denied California’s
requested waiver for its GHG motor
vehicle emission standards

Clean Air Act #3

California waiver issue

Two-tiered auto emission standards







Federal
California, if EPA waiver; other states may adopt
CA adopted GHG emission standards law 2002
Approx. 12 states adopted CA standards
EPA has not denied in full CA waiver request since
program established 1967
CA and other states sued EPA
Numerous petitions pending before EPA to
regulate GHG emissions under other CAA
sections, addressing other emission sources
Endangered Species Act

Jan 2007: US Dept of Interior proposed
to list polar bear as threatened species

“The primary threat to polar bears is the
decrease of sea ice coverage due to climate
change.” http://www.fws.gov/
Endangered Species Act #2

US Geological Survey Study:

“Projected changes in future sea ice
conditions, if realized, will result in loss
of approximately 2/3 of the world’s
current polar bear population by the mid
21st century.”
Final decision overdue
 Potential consequences of listing

Proposed Federal Legislation

Comprehensive approach to climate
change regulation
“Cap and trade” for large emission sources
 Efficiency incentives
 Targets; deadlines
 Bipartisan Senate bill passed committee
Dec 2007
 Prospects?

Regional (Multi-State) Agreements

Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative
10 Northeast and Mid-Atlantic states
 Power plant CO2 reductions: 10% by 2019
 Model regulations; each state to adopt


Other agreements, less specific
Western
 Mid-Western
 Southwest
 Plains

State Laws

California
2002: Auto emission standards
 2006: Comprehensive law enacted

Cap GHG emissions at 1990 levels by 2020
 Voluntary, followed by mandatory (2012)
reductions
 Mandatory emissions reporting


Many states requiring utilities to generate
X% of energy from renewable sources
Local Government Actions

“Cool Cities” Campaign – U.S. Mayors
Climate Protection Agreement
Cities try to achieve 7% CO2 reduction (US
Kyoto quota)
 Several hundred mayors signed
 Local vehicles, lights, buildings, etc.
 Widespread grassroots support
 Limited funding

Private Market
Securities disclosure
 Chicago Climate Exchange
 Wall Street’s Carbon Principles
 Insurance industry concerns

Looking Ahead
Regional, state programs as policy
laboratories
 Growing support for federal legislation

Time lag until rules in place
 Initial goals, deadlines may be weak
 Role of existing state, regional programs
 Role of existing federal laws


Participation in post-Kyoto international
agreement