[an error occurred while processing this directive]
BBC News
watch One-Minute World News
Last Updated: Wednesday, 29 November 2006, 23:02 GMT
US court considers CO2 limit case
Congestion on a US freeway (Image: Getty)
CO2 is harmful and should be regulated, campaigners say
The US Supreme Court is considering whether carbon dioxide (CO2) should be defined as a pollutant and therefore subject to a law regulating emissions.

Twelve states and 13 campaign groups have brought the case against the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

They say the US government has a legal duty, under the Clean Air Act, to restrict greenhouse gas emissions.

The EPA says the 1970 Act does not give it the powers to impose limits because CO2 is not deemed to be a pollutant.

Definition dispute

The dispute, which dates back to 1999, is centred on whether greenhouse gases meet the Clean Air Act's definition of a pollutant.

The key clause, 202(a)(1), states: "The Administrator shall by regulation prescribe... standards applicable to the emission of any air pollutant from any class or classes of new motor vehicles or new motor vehicle engines, which in his judgment cause, or contribute to, air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare."

The plaintiffs say the evidence that climate change endangers the health and welfare of US citizens is clear.

Commenting on the Supreme Court hearing oral evidence on Wednesday, John Stanton, vice president of the National Environmental Trust (NET), said: "It finally appears that the curtain is about to drop on the Bush administration's stubborn refusal to acknowledge the existence of global warming pollution.

But the EPA, as well as 10 states, four motor trade associations and two coalitions of utility companies, says that it does not have the authority to control greenhouse gas emissions.

In 2002, responding to a petition asking for it to curb emissions, the agency said: "Congress has not granted EPA authority under the Clean Air Act to regulate CO2 and other greenhouse gases for climate change purposes."

Industry groups back this view, and argue that CO2 is a naturally occurring gas, thereby falling outside the law's definition of a pollutant.

The Supreme Court is expected to rule on the case, known as Massachusetts verses EPA, in June 2007.




SEE ALSO
US government 'must restrict CO2'
09 Apr 05 |  Science/Nature

RELATED INTERNET LINKS
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites



FEATURES, VIEWS, ANALYSIS
Has China's housing bubble burst?
How the world's oldest clove tree defied an empire
Why Royal Ballet principal Sergei Polunin quit

PRODUCTS & SERVICES

Americas Africa Europe Middle East South Asia Asia Pacific