It follows from a 2007 Supreme Court decision which appointed greenhouse gases as “air pollutants”, giving the EPA the mandate to regulate them under the Clean Air Act.
Critics of the rule indicate that the Clean Act has been shaped to manage localized emissions, not those responsible for global climate change.
A decline would automatically weaken the greenhouse gas emissions for cars and heavy vehicles. Manufacturers such as Daimler and Volvo Cars previously opposed EPA efforts to tighten issues, while organized working groups such as American Trucking Association said they “put the truck industry on the path of economic ruin”.
However, Katherine García, director of the Clean Transportation for Allra Club campaign, said that the decision would be “disastrous to slow down toxic truck pollution, especially in front -line communities in a disproportionate manner disproportionate by the diesel exhaust”.
Energy experts have said that this decision could also stall progress in the development of clean energy sources such as nuclear energy.
“Bipartite nuclear support is largely based on the fact that he has no carbon emissions,” said Ken Irvin, a partner in the world energy and infrastructure of Sidley Austin. “If carbon ceases to be considered as in danger of human well-being, it could eliminate the momentum from nuclear.”
The proposed rule of EPA will go through a period of comments from the public and an internestitutions review. It is likely to deal with legal challenges of environmental activists.
© 2025 The Financial Times Ltd. All rights reserved. Do not be redistributed, copied or modified in any way.
