Court: EPA must rewrite utility mercury rule
Environmental
In a victory for environmentalists and a setback for big U.S. coal-burning utilities, a federal court ruled on Friday that the Environmental Protection Agency must fundamentally rework its mercury rules for utilities.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled that the EPA violated the Clean Air Act in 2005 when it exempted coal plants from the strictest emission controls for mercury and other toxic substances like arsenic, lead and nickel.
The EPA's "Clean Air Mercury Rule" would have created a "cap-and-trade" program to allow utilities to swap rights to emit mercury to comply with overall limits that would reduce nationwide emissions by 70 percent by 2018.
Some 14 states, including New York and California, sued the EPA over the rules, along with environmental and public health groups.
The court ruling means that big coal-burning utilities like Atlanta-based Southern Co and American Electric Power of Columbus, Ohio, will have to install expensive mercury-reduction equipment at more of their power plants rather than rely on a fleet-wide trading program.
The ruling adds to the U.S. backlash against building coal-fired power plants, which are also a major source of heat-trapping carbon dioxide emissions.
Wall Street banks including Citigroup Inc, JP Morgan Chase & Co and Morgan Stanley this week issued standards that weigh carbon dioxide and mercury emissions when determining whether to lend money for new power plants.
"This adds to the momentum against building new coal-fired power plants," said John Walke, attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council, which participated in the lawsuit. "This immediately changes the landscape and adds to the argument against new pulverized coal plants."
Related listings
-
Judge rejects Bush decision over Navy sonar use
Environmental 02/06/2008A Los Angeles judge has rejected a decision by President George W. Bush allowing the Navy to use sonar equipment accused of endangering marine life, stating there was no emergency to justify over-riding existing environmental laws, court documents sh...
-
EPA looking at a full plate this year
Environmental 01/28/2008The Environmental Protection Agency has a busy calendar in 2008 with possible rulemakings and proposed regulations on airborne lead, underground carbon dioxide storage and fuel standards in the works. But as the agency deals with these and other envi...
-
Climate change conference aims for pact by 2009
Environmental 12/15/2007World leaders overcame bitter divisions on Saturday over how to fight global warming and agreed to reach a new deal by 2009.The contentious, two-week U.N. climate conference on the resort island of Bali ended with the United States, facing angry crit...
Grounds for Divorce in Ohio - Sylkatis Law, LLC
A divorce in Ohio is filed when there is typically “fault” by one of the parties and party not at “fault” seeks to end the marriage. A court in Ohio may grant a divorce for the following reasons:
• Willful absence of the adverse party for one year
• Adultery
• Extreme cruelty
• Fraudulent contract
• Any gross neglect of duty
• Habitual drunkenness
• Imprisonment in a correctional institution at the time of filing the complaint
• Procurement of a divorce outside this state by the other party
Additionally, there are two “no-fault” basis for which a court may grant a divorce:
• When the parties have, without interruption for one year, lived separate and apart without cohabitation
• Incompatibility, unless denied by either party
However, whether or not the the court grants the divorce for “fault” or not, in Ohio the party not at “fault” will not get a bigger slice of the marital property.