* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download Amicus Brief Summary - Town of Chapel Hill
2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference wikipedia , lookup
Climate governance wikipedia , lookup
Media coverage of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Climate change and agriculture wikipedia , lookup
Climate engineering wikipedia , lookup
Low-carbon economy wikipedia , lookup
Attribution of recent climate change wikipedia , lookup
Climate change mitigation wikipedia , lookup
Global warming wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in Tuvalu wikipedia , lookup
Economics of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Scientific opinion on climate change wikipedia , lookup
Economics of climate change mitigation wikipedia , lookup
Citizens' Climate Lobby wikipedia , lookup
Solar radiation management wikipedia , lookup
Climate change feedback wikipedia , lookup
Surveys of scientists' views on climate change wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming on humans wikipedia , lookup
Politics of global warming wikipedia , lookup
Mitigation of global warming in Australia wikipedia , lookup
Climate change adaptation wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in Canada wikipedia , lookup
Climate change, industry and society wikipedia , lookup
Climate change and poverty wikipedia , lookup
Public opinion on global warming wikipedia , lookup
German Climate Action Plan 2050 wikipedia , lookup
Effects of global warming on Australia wikipedia , lookup
Climate change in the United States wikipedia , lookup
Clean Air Act (United States) wikipedia , lookup
Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme wikipedia , lookup
Amicus Brief Summary Description of signatories 51 city and county governments, representing diverse geographies, politics, economies and demographics have joined in defense of the EPA’s Clean Power Plan. These local governments come from 28 states and represent approximately 18 million Americans. Twenty-three of the 51 local government signatories are in states that are suing to overturn the Clean Power Plan. Why cities matter to the debate about the Clean Power Plan With over 80 percent of Americans living urban areas, and even more working there, cities and counties are responsible for understanding the risks to and planning for the wellbeing of the great majority of Americans. Because cities’ legal authority generally extends only as far as their state governments allow, cities’ climate change adaptation and mitigation efforts are highly sensitive to national policies like the Clean Power Plan, which shape national markets, steer state action, and have the largest impact on nationwide emissions. Cities have little ability to regulate the circumstances imposed on them by the wider world. They rely on national policies Clean Power Plan. Without the CPP and other nationwide clean air standards, cities are ill equipped to mitigate the very real costs of climate change. A world where the federal government further delays regulating greenhouse gases from the nation’s largest source of emissions is one where the climate changes faster and to a greater degree, and thus one where adaptation for cities costs more. How climate change is already impacting cities Rising sea levels and warming global temperatures – as well as increasingly common and severe extreme weather events – do costly damage to water, transportation, and electricity infrastructure, as well as to human lives. The cost of coastal storm damage is expected to climb from $3 billion to as high as $35 billion by the 2030s. Flooding, propelled by rising sea levels, is swallowing cities like Miami Beach and infiltrating supplies of potable water at alarming rates. Rising seas likewise put Miami at risk for “losing insurability.” Climate change exacerbates heat waves – making related deaths and hospitalizations a tragic annual event in cities like in Baltimore, Dallas, Evanston, and Minneapolis – and fuels wildfires – affecting cities in the West like Boulder County, Eugene and Portland. According to a peer-reviewed study called Climate Change in the United States, if the U.S. can maintain a global warming average of 2 degrees Celsius—a goal of the CPP—cities will face 57,000 fewer domestic deaths due to poor air quality; 12,000 fewer domestic deaths per year from extreme heat and cold; an estimated $50 million to $6.4 billion in avoided annual adaptation costs from severe precipitation; an estimated $3.1 billion in avoided annual damages and adaptation costs from sea level rise and storm surge; and an estimated $32 million to $2.5 billion in avoided damages from inland flooding. The legal argument for the Clean Power Plan Based on the agency’s authority under Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act, the EPA’s Clean Power Plan regulates power plants’ carbon dioxide pollution, the nation’s single largest source of carbon pollution. The U.S. Supreme Court has already ruled that EPA has the authority to limit carbon pollution from power plants under the Clean Air Act. (Massachusetts v. EPA, 549 U.S. 497, 2007) The intent of Congress in enacting the Clean Air Act was “to speed up, expand, and intensify the war against pollution”— not to slow down, narrow and weaken it. Interpreting the “best system of emission reduction” in the manner proposed by petitioners would prevent EPA from requiring anything close to the emissions reductions achievable from these sources, essentially erasing the word “best” from the statute.