TITLE

A MISSING MARKET: THE FUTURE OF INTERSTATE EMISSIONS TRADING PROGRAMS AFTER NORTH CAROLINA v. EPA

AUTHOR(S)
Kiefer, Kati
PUB. DATE
January 2010
SOURCE
St. Louis University Law Journal;Winter2010, Vol. 54 Issue 2, p635
SOURCE TYPE
Academic Journal
DOC. TYPE
Article
ABSTRACT
The article examines the government efforts in regulating interstate air pollution transport and resolving issues on the use of cap-and-trade programs as means of facilitating emissions control. It applies to the decision in the case "North Carolina v. EPA," in which the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has been refrained from creating interstate emission trading programs without additional statutory authority. Moreover, its lays the foundation of Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR).
ACCESSION #
55466319

 

Related Articles

  • EEI urges EPA to drop interim targets in power plant carbon regulation. HOLLY, CHRIS // Energy Daily;12/2/2014, Issue 230, p1 

    The article reports on the call of the Edison Electric Institute (EEI) on December 1, 2014 for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to dispose of interim compliance targets in the agency's proposed Clean Power Plan (CPP). Topics discussed include CPP's proposal to set a limit to carbon...

  • Groups to sue EPA for missing deadline.  // Waste News;7/21/2003, Vol. 9 Issue 6, p5 

    Two environmental groups plan to sue the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for missing a July 1, 2003 deadline for proposing regulations that would reduce emissions of toxic chemicals from cars, trucks and buses. The U.S. Public Interest Group and the Sierra Club filed a 60-day notice...

  • 16 states attempt to block mercury rule. Truini, Joe // Waste News;7/3/2006, Vol. 12 Issue 5, p21 

    The article reports that 16 states in the United States has filed a petition in a federal appeals court challenging the Clean Air Mercury Rule of the U.S. federal government. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's rule would cap and reduce mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants by 70...

  • Restoring Webster's Definition of "Best" under the Clean Air Act. Raftery, Christopher // Ecology Law Quarterly;2010, Vol. 37 Issue 2, p595 

    Two recent cases, Vigil v. Leavitt and Latino Issues Forum v. EPA, demonstrate that the Environmental Protection Agency and the courts have failed to mandate the adoption of best available control measures as required by the Clean Air Act. San Joaquin Valley, California, and Phoenix, Arizona,...

  • EPA proposal may end Iowa's love of coal. DeWitte, Dave // Corridor Business Journal;6/9/2014, Vol. 10 Issue 46, p8 

    The article reports on the impact of the proposed regulation of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to curb climate change by slashing U.S. carbon emissions 30% on coal industry and electric consumers in Iowa.

  • NRDF Sues EPA over Mercury "Cap-and-Trade" Plan.  // Heating/Piping/Air Conditioning Engineering;Jun2004 Supplement, Vol. 76, p10 

    Reports on a lawsuit filed by the National Resources Defense Fund (NRDF) against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) concerning a plan outlined by the EPA that limits mercury emissions in the U.S. Facts of the case; Impact of an advisory issued by the EPA regarding mercury...

  • Climate for EPA changing.  // Waste News;4/16/2007, Vol. 12 Issue 25, p8 

    The article comments on the judgment of U.S. Supreme Court that the Environmental Protection Agency has the authority to regulate emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. The Supreme Court ruled that the EPA can do that and should be guided by science alone, not politics. The EPA...

  • Navistar sues EPA again. CULLEN, DAVID // Fleet Owner;Aug2011, Vol. 106 Issue 8, p49 

    The article reports that Navistar Inc. has again sued U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for unlawfully and preferentially helping selective catalytic reduction (SCR) engine manufacturers. The judgment found EPA guilty for making easier for SCR engine manufacturers to compete with other...

  • Supreme Court rules EPA can regulate carbon emissions.  // Mining Engineering;May2007, Vol. 59 Issue 5, p6 

    The article reports on the decision of the U.S. Supreme Court to give the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) the authority to regulate carbon emissions in motor vehicles. The Court claims that the decision was based on the Clean Air Act (CAA). It emphasized that EPA has no reasoned...

Share

Read the Article

Courtesy of THE LIBRARY OF VIRGINIA

Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics