How will EPA-SCOTUS ruling impact PA?

CENTRE CO., Pa. (WJAC) — Pennsylvania's a major energy-exporting state, which raises the question of how Thursday morning's Supreme Court's Environmental Protection Agency ruling will impact us.

The court said that the Clean Air Act does not give the EPA broad authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from power plants that contribute to global warming, in the West Virginia v. EPA case.

While Thursday's headlines may have alarmed some folks and pleased others, a pair of Penn State University professors told 6 News there's more to the court's ruling.

"I think today's ruling is definitely a blow to the Biden administration in terms of how it might want to approach regulating greenhouse gas emissions from the electricity sector," said Seth Blumsack, a professor of energy policy and economics at the Department of Energy and Mineral Engineering.

The U.S. Energy Information Administration reported Pennsylvania in 2020 producing 43% of its electricity from natural gas, 40% from nuclear, and 13% from coal. The rest comes from renewables and almost 0% from oil.

Blumsack told 6 News that the ruling limits certain ways the EPA can reduce greenhouse emissions, but that it "does not eliminate the authority of the EPA to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, at least as far as we can tell."

"It's gonna take some time to see how the impacts of this ruling play out in, not just the regulation of greenhouse gases, but the regulation of other environmental issues," he added.

One thing on everybody's mind: energy prices. Could this ruling result in lower energy bills, down the line?

"Given that the case surrounded a policy that nobody was really pursuing anymore, I don't necessarily see the ruling having an immediate effect on energy prices in Pennsylvania or elsewhere."

"There are other things that are, you know, are going to play out over the next couple of years. Including Pennsylvania joining the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative that are more likely to have an impact on energy prices in Pennsylvania."

Jeremy Gernand, an associate professor of industrial health and safety from the same Penn State department, told 6 News, "Now, if you look at 10 years down the road, there could be, there could be some impact there where it may become more plausible or feasible for Pennsylvania to retain some coal power longer than it would have under the under the proposed [Obama administration] rule."

But will Mother Nature feel any sting from this ruling?

"I wanna clarify, most of all, that none of the EPA regulations on hazardous air pollutants have been affected by this court case."

"When you look at long-term environmental impacts, it's possible that because of this, the distant future may have slightly more carbon emissions than they would've had, had this rule been allowed to go into effect. And there is some research that shows that carbon emissions do have some indirect effects on human health."

And for those looking to cut carbon emissions from certain plants, Gernand said the U.S. states are a solution.

"This [ruling] doesn't prevent any states from regulating carbon emissions," he explained. "State legislatures and governors can still choose to implement laws that would limit carbon emissions from their states."

As Blumsack told us, what happens next is up to how the EPA adjusts.