Jump to content

Clear Skies Act of 2003

Edit links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Gjking (talk | contribs) at 20:53, 10 May 2005 (spelling). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

The Clear Skies Act of 2003 is a proposed federal law of the United States. The official title as introduced is "a bill to amend the Clean Air Act to reduce air pollution through expansion of cap and trade programs, to provide an alternative regulatory classification for units subject to the cap and trade program, and for other purposes."

The bill's Senate version (S. 485) was sponsored by James Inhofe of Oklahoma and George Voinovich of Ohio; the House version (H.R. 999) was sponsored by Joe Barton of Texas and Billy Tauzin of Louisiana. Both versions were introduced on February 27, 2003; all of the sponsors of the bill were Republicans.

Upon introduction of the bill, Inhofe said, "Moving beyond the confusing, command-and-control mandates of the past, Clear Skies cap-and-trade system harnesses the power of technology and innovation to bring about significant reductions in harmful pollutants." The Clear Skies Act came about as the result of President Bush's Clear Skies Initiative.

In early March 2005, the bill did not move out of committee when the committee members deadlocked 9-9. 7 democrats, James Jeffords of Vermont and Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island voted against the bill; 9 republicans supported it. Within days, the Bush Administration moved to implement key measures, such as the NOx, (SO2) and mercury trading provisions of the bill administratively through EPA. It remains to be seen how resistant these changes will be to court challenges.

Criticisms of the Clear Skies Act

The law repeals or reduces air pollution controls, including those environmental protections of the Clean Air Act, including caps on toxins in the air and budget cuts for enforcement. The Act is opposed by conservationist groups such as the Sierra Club with Henry A. Waxman, a Democratic congressman of California, describing its title as "clear propaganda."

Among other things, the Clear Skies Act:

  • Weakens controls mercury pollution levels compared to what would be achieved by enforcing the Clean Air Act stringently.
  • Weakens the current cap on nitrogen oxide pollution levels from 1.25 million tons to 2.1 million tons, allowing 68 % more NOx pollution.
  • Delays the improvement of sulfur dioxide (SO2) pollution levels compared to the Clean Air Act requirements.
  • Delays enforcement of smog-and-soot pollution standards until 2015.
  • Exempts major stationary emissions sources from installing modern pollution control as required under New Source Review when making major capacity upgrades or renovations.

By 2018, the Clear Skies Act would allow 450,000 more tons of NOx, one million more tons of SO2, and 9.5 more tons of mercury than what would be allowed by enforcement of the Clean Air Act.

In August 2001, the EPA proposed a version of the Clear Skies Act that contained short timetables and lower emissions caps[1]. It is unknown why this proposal was withdrawn and replaced with the more industry-friendly Bush Administration proposal. It is also unclear whether or not the original EPA proposal would have made it out of committee.

Arguments for the Clear Skies Act

The reductions will be significant, about a 70% decline in (SO2), nitrogen oxide, and mercury compared to 2000 levels.

Proponents for the CSA argue that the Clean Air Act sets unachievable goals, especially for ozone and nitrogen oxide pollution. Having a clearly defined cap will benefit both industry and the general population because the goals are visible to everyone and industry benefits from cost-certainty. For example, the claim that simply enforcing the Clean Air Act will result in less pollution than the Clear Skies Act assumes that strict measures will be taken in heavily polluting areas, such as Los Angeles and other municipalities. Draconian measures, such as transportation control were taken in the 1970s but were withdrawn amid widespread public protest. Proponents of reform argue that a more likely result of following the current Clean Air Act is the continued 'muddling along' approach to environmental legislation, with most important decisions made in courts on a case by case basis after many years of litigation .

Pro Clear Skies Act sources

Anti Clear Skies Act sources

Sources

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Clear_Skies_Act_of_2003&oldid=13699131"