There's a Premcor. It's recent decision to limit the authority of
the Environmental Protection Agency has many worried about whether
the Biden ministrations can reach its climate goals.
The president had pledged that by 2030, the country would reduce
its greenhouse gas emissions by 50% from 2000 and five levels now
seems even more unlikely. Avaaz has more
That's right. Judy. The court ruled 6 to 3 that the Clean Air Act
does not give the EPA blanket regulations against power plants. Many
environmentalists see the ruling as a serious setback in the fight
to address the climate crisis and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
I'm joined now by Michael Oppenheimer. He's a professor of geosciences
and international affairs at Princeton University.
He's one of the six scientists who filed an amicus brief in the Supreme
Court case. And Mustafa Santiago Ali, who formerly worked in the
EPA's office of Environmental Justice, and is now with the National
Wildlife Federation. Gentlemen, Welcome to you both. Thank you for
joining us. Michael Oppenheimer, the ruling
Clearly leaves the administration with far fewer tools to fight the
climate crisis. But the EPA administrator and other administration
officials insist they can still meet their goals. It will just take
a little longer Do you buy that?
That's a very optimistic view. And even under an optimistic view,
this decision is going to seriously slow U. S progress in reducing
emissions of the greenhouse gasses and avoiding a dangerous climate
change.
What I mean by dangerous is more much more of the kinds of whether
we've already started to see record heat, record drought, sea level
rise, flooding coastal areas and really intense rainstorms, in some
cases, drowning people in their own bedrooms.
So
what? What was the government going to do about that? Well, Congress
number one could act and number two, the administration could develop
regulations in the absence of congressional action because Congress
has been so deadlocked by polarization. The administration in fact,
administrations going back to the Obama administration started developing
regulations.
That whole process was slowed by and disrupted by the Trump administration.
The Biden administration had a very good plan that looked like it
might get us on the track to avoiding dangerous climate change. I'm
afraid that this decision will disrupt that possibility for the U.
S. And for the world to Ali, Let me ask you about the danger that
Michael Oppenheimer just mentioned there. The consequences.
Of this ruling when you're talking about the stakes when you're talking
about the communities who are worst impacted most directly impacted
by things like rulings like this. Who are we talking about?
We're talking about African American communities. We're talking about
Latin X communities, Asian and Pacific Islanders, indigenous brothers
and sisters and also lower wealth white communities who because of
previous policy of often been placed in sacrifice zones, and when
we look at where these coal fire power plants are located there,
usually located close to our most vulnerable communities.
Thereby impacting their health, extracting wealth from those communities,
and at the same time, we know that our communities are hit first
and worst. So we have to deal with all of the climate crisis that
were just mentioned to you. Actually, you grew up in West Virginia.
Not too far from a coal power plant. What did you see? Growing up
that informs your view today?
Right across the river. We had an old coal fired power plant and
when the winds would shift, the emissions would blow into our community,
which was up higher than the community across the river, and we had
cancers. My family has had multiple cancers. My best friend's mother
and grandmother died of cancer throughout our community. We had multiple
cancers, really a cancer cluster, if you will.
We never had an analysis done because we didn't have the language.
Um or the you know the things that were necessary at that time, But
others across the country have found these direct correlations between
the burning of fossil fuels are both things like sulfur dioxide,
nitrogen oxides, Mercury's and PM 2.5 particularly matter all of
these things having huge impacts in our country, and we should pay
attention.
Because we have over 200,000 people who are dying Friedman surely
right now from air pollution in our country, So when the Supreme
Court makes this decision, it is also adding the burden onto these
communities. And we know we've got 24 Million people with asthma
and seven million kids and disproportionately is African American
and Latin Children. Who are the ones who are going to the emergency
rooms, the ones who are losing their lives. That's the reason we
have to act now, Michael when it comes to that action
You mentioned you don't see much hope in Congress acting, though
they do retain the authority to do something
when it comes to the administration. This ruling doesn't say that
the EPA can't regulate Edmund the emissions. It just says they have
to find a different set of tools to do so. Right. So what could the
administration be doing right now?
I think anything the administration tries to do. They will be right
back in court
in the case will have to work work its way up to the same Supreme
Court, which has shown itself to be antithetical to the idea of dealing
with climate change. So what, Really the possibilities are at the
state level where a lot of states have moved forward. The trouble
with that route is
Some of it is also dependent on Clean Air Act Authority and the same
instead, the same fossil fuel interests and others that don't want
to see this problem solved are going to be going in suing the states.
Beyond that, there is the possibility of industry itself. Taking
the lead voluntary action. For instance, the auto industry may say
we're going to move ahead with electrification of motor vehicles
anyway.
The solar energy industry may up its investments. But that isn't
going to be enough. You need either tough laws from Congress or tough
regulations from the administration to be able to get this done quickly
enough, and I'm afraid things are just going to be slowed down until
there's a different view among not just the Congress but did judiciary
as well.
Michael, Do you believe this makes it harder for the US to actually
push other nations, other major emitters like India and China to
act.
Some countries like China, I think are going to go ahead and do what
they were going to do anyway, more or less, regardless of what we're
doing Europe if it doesn't get if it's whole energy system isn't
thrown into disarray by the war in Ukraine may in the end, be able
to continue the road. It was on towards deeply cutting emissions,
for instance of carbon dioxide, the major human made greenhouse gas
countries.
Like India, for instance, that haven't decided which way they're
going to go. I think those countries may be seriously affected by
the U. S lack of inertia in the right direction on this issue, and
so we'll have to see. But I'm very worried about it right now.
I'll give you the last word here in the few seconds we have left.
I don't hear much hope there from Michael Oppenheimer. What about
you?
Do you think that there's hope ahead for meaningful action to address
this climate crisis here?
I do. My grandmother says you have power unless you give it away,
so we should be raising our voice. There's $550 billion that's sitting
right now. On Capitol Hill. We need Senator Manchin and Senator Cinema
and the Biden administration and all the Republican Brothers and
sisters have come together and do the right thing and make sure that
we are actually
Have a just transition that we are making the investments that are
necessary around the clean economy and that we are lowering emissions.
So if we can get those dollars in place, we can help the states and
counties and cities have been doing incredible work to have what
they need for this long journey that we have in front of us to address
the climate crisis, and then we can also make sure that we utilize
our vote and make sure that we are voting in those who care about
our communities and those who want to see a brighter and more sustainable
future.
That is Mustafa Santiago Ali and Michael Oppenheimer. Joining us
tonight. My thanks to you both.