Sens. Kerry, Lieberman, and Graham are set to unveil their proposed climate legislation as early as next week. Action on the Hill—whether in the form of that bill or something else—is far and away the best way to address climate change. But observers hoped (and many assumed) that Congress would have acted last year after years of national debate on climate. When it comes to climate, it’s hard to underestimate congressional inertia.
Enter the EPA. As we at RFF and others have discussed, the EPA has broad authority under the existing Clean Air Act (CAA). The Supreme Court has held this authority extends to greenhouse gases (GHGs). Indeed, the EPA has already moved to substantially regulate some GHGs. It released an “endangerment finding” late last year that laid the groundwork for —would be impossible with the NSPS.
These emissions reductions from coal aren’t massive, but they aren’t trivial either. Taken together, they could reduce overall U.S. GHG emissions by 3 percent. This is a good chunk of President Obama’s stated goal of 17 percent emissions reductions by 2020—and it is from coal alone. Add in EPA regulation of other sectors with NSPS, and EPA’s already-announced vehicle efficiency standards—and GHG reductions from the CAA look significant. It’s unlikely that the CAA by itself could be used to reach the President’s goal, and it’s certain that new legislation creating a national carbon price could do so at lower cost. However the CAA is the tool we have and our paper suggests it’s a useful one.
