From our collaborating partner “Living on Earth,” public radio’s environmental news magazine, an interview by host and executive producer Steve Curwood with Richard Lazarus, the Charles Stebbins Fairchild Professor of Law at Harvard Law School.
The northern hemisphere experienced record summer heat, with temperatures soaring from Japan and China to Europe and North America. The U.S. faced intense heat waves breaking records from Minneapolis to Boston with “dangerous” heat index levels.
As greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise, climate change accelerates. However, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency under the Trump administration proposed removing regulations limiting emissions from power plants, which contribute about a quarter of U.S. greenhouse gases.
Richard Lazarus, Harvard Law Professor and author of The Rule of Five: Making Climate History at the Supreme Court, discusses these changes. This interview has been edited for clarity.
CURWOOD: Professor, what was your initial reaction to the EPA’s proposal to roll back rules for CO2-emitting power plants?
LAZARUS: It’s devastating, but not surprising. The administration campaigned on this and expressed intentions to disrupt climate change efforts. We expected it, yet it remains disheartening as climate change persists, and every day lost hinders progress.
CURWOOD: This decision contradicts the EPA’s endangerment finding, based on the Massachusetts v. EPA Supreme Court case. Could you provide an overview?
LAZARUS: The Supreme Court, for the first time, ruled that greenhouse gases are air pollutants under the Clean Air Act. Previously, the Bush administration had not regulated them. The Court’s decision required the EPA to reconsider their stance on greenhouse gases’ impact on public health.
In 2009, the Obama administration formally found greenhouse gas emissions could endanger public health, activating the Clean Air Act’s climate change regulations.
CURWOOD: What would it mean if the EPA succeeded in reversing such a historic decision?
LAZARUS: If successful, it would halt greenhouse gas regulation under the Clean Air Act, eliminating federal oversight on emissions from various sources, including power plants, vehicles, and industrial operations.
CURWOOD: How likely is the Trump administration’s EPA to succeed in this reversal?
LAZARUS: Initially, I thought the challenge was unlikely to succeed. However, recent concerns arise that the administration might find technical reasons to challenge the endangerment finding, despite scientific consensus on the threat of greenhouse gases.
Currently, they are challenging the regulation of power plant emissions, attempting to redefine “significant contribution” within the law to weaken regulations. This strategy could undermine the scientific argument if the Supreme Court rules in favor of the administration.
CURWOOD: Does this reflect a broader agenda to weaken environmental regulations?
LAZARUS: Regrettably, yes. The administration targets climate regulations broadly, aiming to dismantle not only policies but also the expertise within the EPA. This strategy risks long-term damage to environmental governance.
CURWOOD: They argue these regulations hinder economic growth. Is there merit to this claim?
LAZARUS: Historically, stringent environmental laws have coexisted with economic growth in the U.S. The pollution control industry and property values benefit from these regulations. Weakening them risks economic and environmental setbacks.
CURWOOD: How does the proposal affect the Biden Administration’s focus on environmental justice?
LAZARUS: It’s concerning, as environmental justice initiatives aim to direct resources to the most impacted areas. The current administration’s cuts threaten this progress, perpetuating harm in marginalized communities.
CURWOOD: What do you advise your students facing these challenges?
LAZARUS: I encourage students to remain resilient and proactive. They are essential for future environmental advocacy. Despite setbacks, they have the opportunity to drive meaningful change in environmental law.
Original Story at insideclimatenews.org