Court protects Clean Air Act from big polluters

Last Friday, the Clean Air Act triumphed in the District of Columbia court of appeals. An oil industry effort to block the EPA act that would regulate greenhouse gases was unanimously thrown out by a panel of three judges -- but will the decision last long enough to even take a victory lap?

Climate hawks need to celebrate this win -- any win -- for greenhouse gas regulations. Reasons to celebrate in 2010 have been few and far between; the Senate climate bill fell off the table in July. Of the GOP freshman class in the House, half are climate change deniers. Of those who aren't denying, 36% still oppose climate change legislation. The last climate "win" we saw in the U.S.'s corner was for an award going to the most obstructionist country at the U.N. climate talks. We need to celebrate. However, this nod towards progress does not dilute past disappointments, but reinforces the vulnerability they've created.

Texas oil companies wanted to block greenhouse gases regulation, citing possible economic damages to their industry. In these delicate economic times, they argued, the harm could be monstrous. Because there would not be enough time for a full trial to officially block the EPA resolution before the regulations would go into effect in January 2011, attorneys requested a stay to delay any action before a court decision could be made.

Delicate is the key word. The delicate economic times has spurned delicate politics. While the judges denied the barricade on regulation because the oil industry's proposed wounds were "speculative" rather than actual or "certain," this wasn't their first try -- and it won't be the last. While Sen. Lisa Murkowski's resolution to block EPA regulation was defeated in June, Politico reports the upcoming 112th Congress will have at least 56 Senators of Murkowski's persuasion in January . Climate Science Watch points out that,

Swing-state Democrats up for reelection in 2012 could make the difference, and may be especially susceptible to arguments that regulation would increase economic pain. The Obama administration would very likely veto such a stand-alone resolution, but the situation may be more complicated if it is included in a larger bill.

In the same vein, Politico spoke with an environment advocate who believes that, while Obama may care for the issue, political pressure could endanger the Clean Air Act.

If it's part of a bigger piece of legislation where the president doesn't have to wuss out in such grand explicitness, I think they'd let it go."

For climate hawks, the true victory comes in the follow through. While we celebrate passing through this barricade, we must be vigilant for countless others ahead. The Clean Air Act cannot fall by the wayside.