Pennsylvania Republican representatives applaud Trump administration's strategy to rescind Biden-era environmental regulations on climate change.
*Ready to Talk Climate Change in Your Neighborhood? Let Us Know! **
From the heart of the Poconos to the bustling Jersey Shore, we're eager to hear about your concerns regarding climate change and the impacts on your area. Drop us a line!
In a surprising turn of events, Republican lawmakers in Pennsylvania are hailing two Trump administration proposals that critics contend will disrupt Biden administration rules aimed at minimizing climate-altering emissions and toxic air pollutants from power plants, posing potential harm to public health.
According to reports, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin announced on Wednesday these proposals are designed to bolster President Donald Trump's goal of restoring American energy dominance. Critics charge that the EPA's new rules will strangulate the power industry and stifle the economy to safeguard the environment.
Zeldin lashed out against the Biden administration, claiming they were stifling various industries, including coal, and aiming to regulate them into oblivion. He contended that the EPA's proposed new rules would save the energy sector over a billion dollars yearly, resulting in lower electricity bills for rate payers.
"[The Biden administration sought] to make countless industries, including coal and more, disappear - regulate them out of existence," Zeldin argued. "We will use coal for power generation, to mine for critical minerals, and to export to our allies. Today, we are taking a significant step towards putting America back on track."
The first proposal aims to repeal a Biden-era regulation meant to phase out greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from fossil fuel plants. The proposal challenges what is commonly referred to as the "endangerment finding," which forms the scientific basis for the agency's authority to regulate GHG emissions. This announcement marks the latest attempt to roll back former President Joe Biden's efforts to combat climate change.
The second proposal aims to amend the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS), which became more stringent under the Biden administration. Known as MATS, these regulations demand power plants to reduce emissions of toxic pollutants like mercury, which is linked to neurological damage in children. Zeldin argues that the proposal will revert the rules to their 2012 standards, which were effective in reducing mercury emissions.
Republican U.S. Representative Dan Meuser, who serves north central Pennsylvania's 9th District, asserts that these Biden-era regulations will strengthen energy production in the state, enabling numerous businesses to continue operating, expanding, and providing support for the nation to regain its energy dominance.
Relevant Facts
- Climate change and its related impacts pose significant threats to human health, ecosystems, and infrastructure[2][3][6].
- Coal-fired power plants are among the largest contributors to GHG emissions and are also sources of toxic air pollutants like mercury, arsenic, and particulate matter[3][4].
- The Clean Air Act grants the EPA authority to regulate air pollutants, including GHG emissions from power plants, to protect public health and the environment[5].
The proposed changes are still subject to public comment before finalization and are likely to face legal challenges[4]. An investigation by the Associated Press found that the Trump administration's proposals could save an estimated 30,000 lives, while environmental organizations like the Natural Resources Defense Council threaten legal action if the EPA finalizes the rollbacks, citing negative impacts on human health and worsening climate change[1][4].
Contact Us:
Powered by Hearken Terms of Service Privacy Policy Facebook Twitter Email
Support our fact-based, in-depth journalism and information. Give today.
[1] Associated Press. (2023, February 1). Trump admin's plans to roll back climate, power plant rules could save 30,000 lives. Available: https://apnews.com/article/climate-change-government-environment-business-energy-biden-elections-ae6f8332f5ecf393988dd75b1c88d234
[2] United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2023, May). Climate Change Indicators: Climate Change Impacts in the United States. Available: https://www.epa.gov/climate-indicators/climate-change-impacts-united-states
[3] United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2023, June). Mercury and Air Toxics Standards. Available: https://www.epa.gov/mats
[4] National Resources Defense Council. (2023, February 2). EPA Proposes to Roll Back Clean Air Standards for Power Plants – Threatens Public Health and Disproportionately Harms Low-Income Communities and Communities of Color. Available: https://www.nrdc.org/news/epa-proposes-roll-back-clean-air-standards-power-plants-threatens-public-health-and
[5] United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2023, April 1). Clean Air Act. Available: https://www.epa.gov/clean-air-act-overview
[6] Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. (2022, August 9). Climate Change 2022: Impacts, Vulnerability and Adaptation. Available: https://www.ipcc.ch/2022/08/09/climate-change-2022-impacts-vulnerability-and-adaptation-summary-for-policymakers-approved-at-56th-session-of-ipcc-plenary-held-on-28-october-2022
- Despite ongoing concerns about climate change's effects on human health, environmental science, and general news, the Trump administration's EPA proposed changes to regulations, aiming to weaken GHG emission limits and the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards, which are critical in protecting public health.
- The proposed changes in policy-and-legislation, if finalized, could lead to a rise in climate-altering emissions and toxic air pollutants from power plants, potentially causing significant harm to the environment, as well as to the health of those living in affected areas.
- These political decisions have sparked debates between politicians, with the current EPA Administrator arguing that the proposed rollbacks will save the energy sector over a billion dollars yearly, while environmental organizations argue that they may have negative impacts on human health and worsen climate change.
