thus, Massachusetts effectively requires the imposition of carbon-dioxide controls on new cars and trucks.
I don't think the ruling does this. It gives authority to, but the EPA could say "Manmade CO2, while a portion of greenhouse gases, has no measurable effect, and therefore the ceiling of its regulation is so high as to be negligible."
Obamites are NOT going to say this, but a different administration could and be within the ruling.
It's still bad news, but by authorizing, not mandating.
You are correct, they could say that, but they would likely lose in court based on the language of the Clean Air Act.
Once grouped in with SOX, NOX, Ozone, etc., a few things happen automatically. The biggest of which are noted in the article above, and the most immediate of which is making CO2 a pollutant regulated under the new source review provisions of the CAA.
That provision makes any source which emits >250 tons per year of any such regulated pollutant a major stationary source. That forces a lot of pain in the ass provisions including BACT, additional impacts analysis (flora and fauna), growth, etc.
EPA could come out and "say" it doesn't apply to CO2, but that would also be against the language in the CAA - if they want to hammer power plants and industries with the definition - they'll get stuck hammering schools and large buildings, and whatnot.
My opinion is - let them do it, let them try to exempt some types of facilities (say the New York Times Office Building), and then let the industries that are the intended targets of this crap hammer them with lawsuits to force Congress to change the CAA.
The whole process is broken, and I am actually looking forward to seeing what happens when the whacko environmentalists get what they wish for. With any luck it will be a substantial backlash...
“I don’t buy that “authority to” equals “must regulate CO2..” or any particular molecules.”
You don’t have to. It’s like arguing that the Congress cant pass campaign finance reform because it violates the 1st amendment. Since when did actual law get in the way? The eco-extremists are eager to usurp our liberties any way they can and wont hesitate to use any tool at their disposal.
The article is basically telling us the EPA can claim authority to regulate CO2 and no court will stop them.
How can they when the SCOTUS already granted that authority?