The Alabama attorney general is suing the Environmental Protection Agency for its December ruling in which the agency concluded greenhouse gas emissions are a threat to human health.
Attorney General Troy King has challenged the EPA's ruling by filing a petition in federal appeals court. Attempts to reach King for comment were unsuccessful.
Texas and Virginia have also asked the court to review the ruling, as well as the National Association of Manufacturers.
A ruling handed down by the Supreme Court three years ago found greenhouse gas emissions, which contain carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide, contribute to air pollution.
"EPA set out to determine whether pollution threatens the health and welfare of Americans," said Lisa Jackson, EPA administrator. "In doing so, EPA undertook a comprehensive and transparent view of the soundest available science."
Jackson said the EPA sought expert opinions both domestically and internationally while also taking into consideration the comments of citizens before coming to a decision. "The scientific evidence of climate change is overwhelming and greenhouse gases pose a real threat to American people," Jackson said.
Regulations on greenhouse gas emissions for big businesses will begin in 2011. Regulations for smaller facilities won't be in place until 2016.
However, some people still fail to see the connection between greenhouse gas emissions and climate change, and the evidence is scarce, according to one University professor.
"I would have to say there is still no conclusive proof that carbon dioxide emissions are causing global climate change," said David Bransby, professor in agronomy, who specializes in energy crops and bioenergy.
Bransby said, while almost everyone agrees both global temperatures and greenhouse emissions are increasing dramatically on average, this debate is centered on whether the emissions are causing the increase in global temperature.
"Regardless of many situations like this, it is easy to identify a relationship between two variables, but to unequivocally establish cause and effect is often very difficult," Bransby said. "This is one of those cases."
While the evidence isn't conclusive, Bransby said he supports the EPA's decision for several reasons. He said one is the introduction of alternative fuel sources.
Bransby said the decision will encourage the development of cellulosic biofuels, which are made from material like wood, which he believes are needed to replace imported oil.
"We import about 60 percent of the oil we use and half of this comes from unstable parts of the world," Bransby said. "In addition, imported oil is responsible for a huge proportion of (the country's) negative balance of payments, which contributed strongly to our current economic crisis."
Bransby admitted that the EPA's decision might increase the cost of electricity, but he said he thinks the ruling will bring more positives than negatives.
"I feel the benefits from the ruling--indirectly increasing jobs and stimulating the local economy-- will outweigh the negative impact of slightly higher energy prices," Bransby said.
With Democrats currently holding the majority in the Alabama State Legislature, Bransby said he believes it will be tough for King to be successful with his challenge.
"Even though this issue is being addressed from a legal standpoint, I believe that politics might weigh heavily on the outcome," Bransby said. "In this regard, the Democratic party supports the EPA ruling."
However, Bransby said King may have a chance to sway the legislature if he can provide the appropriate expert witnesses.
Jackson said she is sure the ruling will stand despite the legal pressures from states and businesses and moving on will allow the agency to protect citizens from significant dangers caused by greenhouse gas emissions.
"The question of science is settled," Jackson said. "The debate that should be taking place now is how to address this challenge and take advantage of the opportunity it offers."
Do you like this story? The Plainsman doesn't accept money from tuition or student fees, and we don't charge a subscription fee. But you can donate to support The Plainsman.
