Air Quality
You May Have Forgotten About Climate Change. But It Hasn’t Forgotten About You
Denial is a great coping mechanism. Until reality turns around and bites you.
Climate change is, apparently, passé. Democratic politicians are avoiding the topic and dialing back ambitious plans to reduce emissions. The President apparently doesn’t think it exists, and the government’s official position is that its effects are too uncertain to worry about. Denial isn’t the world’s best coping mechanism, but it works, at least temporarily. The problem is that, while sometimes that lump you were worried about does go away, sometimes it keep growing and getting harder to treat. In the end, reality doesn’t much care whether you believe in it.
CONTINUE READINGInterpreting the Clean Air Act After Chevron’s Demise
A recent Ninth Circuit case requires states to do more to achieve clean air goals.
Last week, the Ninth Circuit decided Committee for a Better Arvin v. EPA, which is both a significant air pollution case and an interesting case study in how the Supreme Court has changed judicial review of agency actions. Applying what it considered to be the best interpretation of an ambiguous statute, the Court required tougher air pollution controls for the San Joaquin Valley. The dissent argued that the decision would be a disaster in terms of policy. But is that even relevant under the Loper Bright ruling?
The Sting in the Tail of the Clean Air Act
Weakening restrictions on polluters can trigger different restrictions.
Some of Trump’s most important anti-environmental moves involve unleashing air polluters. There’s a problem with this strategy, however. Doing so raises air pollution levels, which can bring states into collision with other Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements. Thus, the effect could be much tighter restrictions on other sources to compensate for looser standards on some. Worse, this effect isn’t limited to the most directly affected states. They may turn around and demand that upwind states reduce their own emissions to help the downstream states meet federal standards. Even when this isn’t true, and where the state that suffers may be Democratic-leaning and thus of no concern to Trump, there could be economic repercussions in other states.
Two notable examples of this problem involve coal generators and vehicle regulation. The first example involves coal. Trump has exempted coal-fired power plants from pollution limits to allow them to remain open longer. According to E&E News, “Air pollution from coal-fired power plants spiked in 2025, a striking reversal of long-term progress in air quality as the Trump administration boosted coal use. The emission increases were among the largest in at least a quarter-century, on a percentage basis, as the bulk of about 210 power plants registered increased sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions,” Power plant sulfur-dioxide emissions were up 18% and nitrogen oxides were up 12%. This is contrary to a strong long-term declining trend.
The second example involves vehicle emissions. Under the CAA, state laws regulating vehicle emissions are generally preempted, but California can apply for a preemption waiver if it needs stricter regulations, and other states can piggyback on California’s standards. California’s ability to seek a waiver has been more limited since, at Trump’s instigation, Congress overturned EPA’s approval of several California waiver requests. The Trump Administration has independently taken the view that California can’t require manufacturers to sell more EVs as a way to meet standards. Although Republicans were mostly targeting California’s standards for greenhouse gases, they have also hampered California’s ability to get waivers for smog and particulates.
The problem arises because stopping a state from regulating some polluters may legally require it to tighten other regulations. Under CAA section 110, states must have state implementation plans that will achieve national air quality standards set by EPA. If one type of source pollutes more, other sources must offset the increased pollution by polluting less. Other CAA provisions put the screws on states that exceed the national standards. As a result, if the Feds exempt one source of nitrogen oxides (perhaps by repealing California waiver), states that had adopted the California standard will need to tighten regulations of other sources. Thus, exempting nitrogen oxides from trucks or cars, or from coal power plants, might require stricter controls on other sources such as natural gas power plants. Moreover, if a state is unable to achieve the national air quality standard, the so-called “Good Neighbor” provision allows it to demand emission reductions from upwind states.
In other words, exempting some sources increases the regulatory burden on others. The exemption may even increase the total regulatory burden, if pollution from those other sources is more expensive to control than pollution from the exempted sources. Here’s why.
CONTINUE READINGCanada in Flames
What’s causing the fires? What harm do they do? What should we do?
One of the world’s great disasters is unfolding, as fires have covered millions of acres in Canada, destroying pristine ecosystems and poisoning the air for millions of people. Something like seven million acres have already burned. The U.S. government’s response is to threaten Canada with tariffs, apparently as punishment for allegedly having poorly managed its forests. Instead, we should be partnering with Canada on forest management, and we should cut the greenhouse gas emissions that are ramping up the fire risk.
CONTINUE READINGNinth Circuit Upholds South Coast Zero-NOx Emission Standard for Appliances
The Ninth Circuit limiting EPCA preemption is a huge and important win for clean air.
Last fall I wrote about a strangely important case about boilers, in which the Ninth Circuit would decide whether a challenged zero-NOx air emission standard adopted by LA’s air regulator was lawful. The case is important because it had the potential to significantly constrain the ability of air pollution regulators to do their jobs and …
Continue reading “Ninth Circuit Upholds South Coast Zero-NOx Emission Standard for Appliances”
CONTINUE READINGA Trump Rollback Hits a Roadblock
A Trump gambit to undo a key air pollution limit turned out to be a flop.
The Administration has moved more slowly, however, on actually wiping Biden’s regulations off the books. On Friday, the D.C. Circuit decisively rejected one important effort by the Trump EPA. In doing so, it saved (at least for now) a crucial protection for public health. While it’s not impossible to imagine that the Supreme Court might intervene, doing so would probably require it to hear oral argument, given the importance and complexity of the case. That’s unlikely to happen quickly and may not happen at all,
CONTINUE READINGProject 2025 Was Awful. Trump Has Been Worse.
Trump disowned Project 2025. In retrospect, it seems like he considered it too moderate.
When the Heritage Foundation released Project 2025, there was a big hullabaloo, and Trump quickly disowned it. Bad as it was, however, it appears Project 2025 apparently failed to anticipate the full sweep of Trump’s second term. Many of Trump’s actions mirror Project 2025 recommendations, but in some key areas he’s gone much further. Here …
Continue reading “Project 2025 Was Awful. Trump Has Been Worse.”
CONTINUE READINGHow, Exactly, Has Trump Gone After EVs?
A close look at the Administration’s wreckage, in six steps
The second Trump Administration has brought a flood of obstacles to the national effort to transition away from petroleum-powered vehicles to electric vehicles (EVs). These challenges have come in many forms across multiple levels of government; they are in most cases completely unprecedented, and in many cases legally dubious (to put it mildly). The push …
Continue reading “How, Exactly, Has Trump Gone After EVs?”
CONTINUE READINGPolicy Implications of Accelerating Warming
If warming is coming more quickly, we need to pick up the pace on policy responses.
There seems to be an emerging scientific consensus that the rate of global warming is rising. After screening out the effects of natural factors like El Niño, scientists have concluded that the pace of warming has roughly doubled since the 1970s. What does this tell us about policy? Some of the implications are more obvious than others, and at least one implication may be unsettling for some climate advocates. Most obviously, we need to accelerate our efforts to carbon emissions. We will be closing in on possible tipping points faster than expected. Climate impacts that we might have expected twenty years from now could hit in half that time.
CONTINUE READINGThe Scent of Spring vs the Stench of Black Rain
Why the war on Iran is an environmental justice crisis we cannot ignore
Here in the Bay Area, the air quality is pristine today. The sky is a clear, uninterrupted blue, and the sweet scent of blooming jasmine catches on the breeze. It’s a picture of absolute peace. Yet, the country I live in is currently orchestrating a devastating war on the other side of the world, a …
Continue reading “The Scent of Spring vs the Stench of Black Rain”
CONTINUE READINGJoin Our Mailing List
Climate policy is changing rapidly. Stay in the loop with expert analysis via email Monday - Friday.
