For now, the Environmental Protection Agency can move forward with plans to establish new, federal carbon pollution standards for power plants.
A group representing businesses in the Great Lakes region said the rule change is needed and hopes for more legal victories. This week, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected a request from opponents of the EPA's plan to put the tougher standards on hold while their legal challenge works its way through the courts.
Ashley Rudzinski, co-director of the Great Lakes Business Network, which has roughly 200 members, said even a temporary pause would have been a setback because of the urgency in addressing climate change.
"This is not a looming crisis in the future. This is something that is here already," Rudzinski asserted. "We're having much more impactful storms that are causing power outages across our states."
Rudzinski pointed out the EPA rule already gives power plants a long time to adjust and further delays through litigation only worsen the situation. She added it complements more aggressive carbon-free policies seen in some states. But some utilities and industry groups said without a pause in the federal rulemaking, power companies will have to make irreversible decisions about plant closures.
Opponents also contend more immediate shutdowns of facilities like coal-fired power plants hinder their ability to provide reliable electricity. Rudzisnki countered businesses around the Great Lakes region are already dealing with too much uncertainty because of changing weather patterns linked to these emissions.
"We know that extreme weather strains on our already unstable at times power grid are going to continue," Rudzisnki contended. "We need climate action now to ensure that our economy can be planned, can move forward in a way that's good for business, that's good for communities, that's good for our families."
The EPA rule, finalized back in the spring, calls for more aggressive standards for certain types of plants. For example, coal facilities hoping to operate past the year 2039 must reduce their emissions by 90% over the next eight years.
In their initial challenge to the rule, opponents argued the EPA is overstepping its authority, and is pushing unproven and expensive technology in requiring these changes.
