News Analysis

Deck: 
The lawyers debated over ozone and soot, but the markets saw NO<sub>x</sub> as the "smoking gun."
Fortnightly Magazine - January 1 2001
This full article is only accessible by current license holders. Please login to view the full content.
Don't have a license yet? Click here to sign up for Public Utilities Fortnightly, and gain access to the entire Fortnightly article database online.

 

News Analysis

 



 

The lawyers debated over ozone and soot, but the markets saw NOx as the "smoking gun."

November 2000 may be remembered for ambiguous election results that went straight to the U.S. Supreme Court, but it was also a banner month for debate in the realm of air quality regulation, a dispute that ended up in the very same place.

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments on Nov. 7 in two companion cases involving national ambient air quality standards, and the scope of authority at the Environmental Protection Agency to regulate without considering the price of its actions. To its credit, the EPA had regrouped following unfavorable rulings from the lower courts, moving full-steam ahead with its previous, less-stringent standard. But the high court's ruling, once declared, will have ramifications sure to be felt across the country.

How Many Parts per Million? At What Cost?

At stake in one of the cases is whether the EPA overstepped its authority in tightening its standards for both ozone (from a maximum 0.12 parts per million over one hour to 0.08 ppm over eight hours) and for particulate matter, or soot (from an acceptable size of 10 micrometers to 2.5 micrometers in diameter).

This full article is only accessible by current license holders. Please login to view the full content.
Don't have a license yet? Click here to sign up for Public Utilities Fortnightly, and gain access to the entire Fortnightly article database online.