WASHINGTON — The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to block Environmental Protection Agency regulations that would have curbed methane emissions at oil and gas facilities.
In a second October 4 ruling, the court also refused a move to block another EPA regulation to curb emissions of mercury and other pollutants from coal-fired power plants.
Republican-led states and industry groups had challenged the EPA regulations, but the court rejected emergency applications without comment. That means the litigation against the EPA will resume in lower courts, while a third emergency application aimed to block other EPA regulations about carbon emissions from coal- and gas-fired power plants still is pending.
Morrisey
| File photo
"Our argument remains the same: this rule puts an undue burden on the oil and natural gas industries," West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey told The West Virginia Record. "This rule would drain the energy industry dry, resulting in the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs and skyrocketing energy cost for consumers.
"Consumers are already facing some of their highest heating bills in years because of spiking energy prices, recent international tensions and market conditions. This rule does not appear to acknowledge these relevant conditions at all.”
The methane ruling means an EPA regulation finalized in March will remain in effect. The rule is meant to cut methane emissions up to 80 percent over the next 14 years.
The industry challengers call the EPA regulations “authoritarian national command from the EPA” in a court filing, and they also say the rule goes further than is allowed under the Clean Air Act, which is meant to give states a role in implementing emissions reduction programs.
In other court filings, the GOP-led states say the Biden administration is using parts of the Clean Air Act that never were meant to address climate change and “shut down power plants in favor of other sources of generation.”
A spokesman for Oklahoma Attorney General Gentner Drummond, who led the challenge to the methane regulation, expressed disappointment in the decision. "But we respect the court's decision," he added.
The methane rule restricts flaring, or the burning of excess methane during oil and gas production. It also requires oil companies to monitor for leaks from well sites and compressor stations. In addition, it also created a program for detecting and reporting large methane releases from so-called “super emitters.”
The mercury regulation doesn’t have as much of an impact, according to the EPA.
Under that Clean Air Act provision, the EPA must limit pollutants such as mercury and other metals such as arsenic and chromium while taking costs into account.
The challengers filed multiple lawsuits in U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. In July and August, that court denied requests to pause the regulations pending its review.
With its 6-3 conservative majority, the Supreme Court in recent years has restricted some powers of the EPA in some key rulings, including West Virginia v. EPA, which challenged the EPA regulation of carbon dioxide emissions from power plants.
In that ruling, the court said the EPA exceeded its authority under the Clean Air Act by using a generation shifting approach that would require states to shift their energy production from coal-fired plants to lower-emitting sources. The court said the EPA only could regulate emissions at individual power plants, not the entire energy sector.
And in June, the Supreme Court halted the EPA's "Good Neighbor" rule that was meant to reduce ozone emissions that could worsen air pollution in neighboring states.