EPA Reverses Course on Ozone Rule (nytimes.com) 53
The Trump administration said late Wednesday that it would not delay an Obama-era regulation on smog-forming pollutants from smokestacks and tailpipes (Editor's note: the link could be paywalled; alternative source), a move that environmental groups hailed as a victory. From a report: The Environmental Protection Agency decision came a day after 16 state attorneys general, all Democrats, filed a lawsuit challenging the delay with the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. It reversed a decision that Scott Pruitt, the E.P.A. administrator, made in June to put off an Oct. 1 deadline for designating which areas of the country met new ozone standards. In announcing the ozone policy change, the agency appeared to leave the door open to extending the deadline again. But, officials said, the agency will work with states to help them deliver the needed information.
Almost correct (Score:5, Insightful)
The Trump administration said late Wednesday that it would not delay an Obama-era regulation on smog-forming pollutants from smokestacks and tailpipes
That's a typo. It should say could not. They damn well tried.
Re: (Score:2)
The states can indeed get a court to compel Trump to act in accord with the law and require "Best technology" to abate a danger, as spelled out in the clean air act.
Like all fascisti, all you can see is the power of the gun. It's a pity all the nukes are designed and built in Blue California, isn't it?
Re: (Score:2)
Wrong.
A State can't just use any court to compel a specific desired action from the Executive branch.
They'd have to take it up with a federal court, and it would ultimately be decided by the Supreme Court, and all they still can't compel Trump to do anything specifically. They'd declare what Trump's administration did or didn't do to be legal or not, and it would be up to Congress to create new laws, the EPA to act within those laws and their charter, and/or Trump's administration to do something else (or
Re: (Score:2)
You are seriously asserting that the only remedy to an Administration not obeying the law is more laws? I think you may be confused, perhaps from chasing your own tail too much.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, first of all, Federal Courts exist precisely to give people remedy when the Government won't enforce existing laws, so he's wrong on that front. And even if he was right, if an Administration refuses to enforce one set of laws, how precisely does passing even more laws remedy the situation? So he's just being absurd on that point.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
meanwhile, where are the people who know how to shut down a launch remotely?
Right her on the left coast.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
According to the wikipedia entry [wikipedia.org]:
People's Voice Awards in 2000 in both of the categories for which it was nominated (Best Community Site and Best News Site).[86] It was also voted as one of Newsweek's favorite technology Web sites and rated in Yahoo!'s Top 100 Web sites as the "Best Geek Hangout" (2001)
But that was nearly twenty years ago, so the new strategy is working.
trump is in trouble (Score:1)
his hair products are about to be declared an illegal threat to the ozone layer.
Not surprising (Score:2)
Someone must have told them that courts, unlike the general population, tend not to let slide the wink-and-nod BS of "ohhhh, we're not not doing it, we're just, y'know, delaying it. For reasons."
Re: (Score:2)
Gas cars are on their way out (Score:1)
The next generation of cars will solve this problem. Heard Musk is working on the prototype for a coal powered car as well. Clean American coal will provide the power for electric and coal fired vehicles, solving the pollution problems caused by petroleum.
Do editors actually edit? (Score:2, Funny)
What is with that title? "EPA. Reversed Course on Ozone Rule"? Why is there a period after "EPA"?
Re: (Score:2)
It looks like that was corrected. The article had three dots - E.P.A. so that was a botched edit job by msmash.
Pay walled links? (Score:2)
(Editor's note: the link could be paywalled; alternative source),
Why include the pay-walled link if an alturnative exists? Is there money involved?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Democrats are America's only conservative party (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
Sure, if you think of Conservatism as being fiscally conservative or environmentally conservative (which 'Conservatives' used to espouse).
These days, Conservative has been taken to mean 'Advance Corporate Profits at ALL COSTS', which means that any attempt to reduce pollution is an attempt to increase costs on corporations, so they are BAAAAAD
Well. That's nice (Score:2)
No one likes smokestacks or tailpipes. I bet if there were a fan club for smokestacks and tailpipes, it would have very few members. And only a few mothers ever say to themselves "I hope my son grows up to be a smokestack or a tailpipe."
In short, I think most people are okay with these regulations.
Re: (Score:2)
Good luck getting Amazon deliveries when we take the tailpipes off all the delivery trucks.
Re: (Score:1)
Shipping companies are generally pretty keen on green/fuel efficient vehicles (less for environmental considerations and more for financial ones of course). UPS, Fedex & USPS currently have thousands of various hybrid/electric vehicles on the roads with plans for MANY more in the next few years.
Re: (Score:1)
Long haul trucking isn't feasible with such vehicles at this time.
Re: (Score:2)
They do lots of last-mile delivery, you know.
Re: (Score:2)
The electric/hybrid trucks would be empty.
Re: (Score:2)
Why? You only took the tailpipes off the delivery trucks, not the long haul trucks.
Re: (Score:2)
Zing!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
E.P.A. rules must pass through committee, take public comment, submit for technical accuracy and adhere to the charter written By Congress granting administrative powers.
no "Executive order" involved
Re: (Score:2)
great, when will get elected?
Why? (Score:1)
a move that environmental groups hailed as a victory
Why do stories have to have headlines for everything like it's a military battle or sporting event? It's no wonder so many have become combative in recent times. I'm sure it's always been this way to some extent, it just seems so over the top and never ending these days.
At this rate I expect the headline for a story like this in ten years to be "Environmental groups declared this a hard fought bloody victory against those who torture and maim baby fur seals and puppies"
Of course on the other side th