Energy-Water Nexus, the Clean Power Plan, and Integration of Water Resource Concerns into Energy Decision-Making

Sarah Ladin
{"title":"Energy-Water Nexus, the Clean Power Plan, and Integration of Water Resource Concerns into Energy Decision-Making","authors":"Sarah Ladin","doi":"10.36640/mjeal.7.1.energy-water","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Energy regulation in the United States is now at a crossroads. The EPA has begun the process to officially repeal the Clean Power Plan and currently has no plan to replace it with new rulemaking to regulate carbon emissions from the U.S. energy sector. Even though the Clean Power Plan is more or less at its end, its regulatory structure stands as a model of the way decision-makers in the United States regulate the energy sector and the environment. Since the beginning of the modern environmental legal system, decision-makers have chosen to silo the system. Statutes and agencies focus on just one media or one issue. Tackling the climate crisis will inevitably require an integrationist model of lawmaking. The Clean Power Plan took the same problematic route as past regulation. While the Clean Power Plan rightfully addressed rising carbon levels, it failed to account for another growing problem associated with climate change: quickly depleting water resources. Although the consequences of the energy-water nexus are clear, U.S. decision-makers continue to ignore the need to integrate energy and water decision-making. Continuing to compartmentalize environmental problems, rather than addressing climate change impacts in a holistic manner, will not bring about the results that are desperately needed.\n\nThe tools needed to integrate decision-making exist throughout the three branches of government. Congress can and should step in to pass a new statute, which establishes a legal mandate on agencies to fully consider the implications of energy policy and energy regulation on water resources. The federal courts can read a legal requirement into the Clean Air Act or the Administrative Procedure Act that would require federal action in the energy sphere to account for impacts on water resources. Finally, the President can use his power to force federal agencies to consider water resources more thoroughly than in the past. While some of these mechanisms may be hard to envision given the current political atmosphere, implementation is necessary to ensure water and energy security in the face of a growing climate crisis.","PeriodicalId":401480,"journal":{"name":"Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law","volume":"296 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1900-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Michigan Journal of Environmental & Administrative Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.36640/mjeal.7.1.energy-water","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Energy regulation in the United States is now at a crossroads. The EPA has begun the process to officially repeal the Clean Power Plan and currently has no plan to replace it with new rulemaking to regulate carbon emissions from the U.S. energy sector. Even though the Clean Power Plan is more or less at its end, its regulatory structure stands as a model of the way decision-makers in the United States regulate the energy sector and the environment. Since the beginning of the modern environmental legal system, decision-makers have chosen to silo the system. Statutes and agencies focus on just one media or one issue. Tackling the climate crisis will inevitably require an integrationist model of lawmaking. The Clean Power Plan took the same problematic route as past regulation. While the Clean Power Plan rightfully addressed rising carbon levels, it failed to account for another growing problem associated with climate change: quickly depleting water resources. Although the consequences of the energy-water nexus are clear, U.S. decision-makers continue to ignore the need to integrate energy and water decision-making. Continuing to compartmentalize environmental problems, rather than addressing climate change impacts in a holistic manner, will not bring about the results that are desperately needed. The tools needed to integrate decision-making exist throughout the three branches of government. Congress can and should step in to pass a new statute, which establishes a legal mandate on agencies to fully consider the implications of energy policy and energy regulation on water resources. The federal courts can read a legal requirement into the Clean Air Act or the Administrative Procedure Act that would require federal action in the energy sphere to account for impacts on water resources. Finally, the President can use his power to force federal agencies to consider water resources more thoroughly than in the past. While some of these mechanisms may be hard to envision given the current political atmosphere, implementation is necessary to ensure water and energy security in the face of a growing climate crisis.
能源-水关系,清洁能源计划,以及水资源问题与能源决策的整合
美国的能源监管现在正处于十字路口。环保署已经开始正式废除《清洁能源计划》,目前还没有计划用新的规则来取代它,以规范美国能源部门的碳排放。尽管清洁能源计划或多或少已接近尾声,但其监管结构仍是美国决策者监管能源部门和环境的典范。从现代环境法律制度开始,决策者就选择了“筒仓”制度。法规和机构只关注一种媒体或一个问题。应对气候危机将不可避免地需要一种整合主义的立法模式。《清洁能源计划》和过去的法规走的是同样有问题的路线。虽然《清洁能源计划》正确地解决了不断上升的碳水平,但它未能解决与气候变化相关的另一个日益严重的问题:水资源的迅速枯竭。尽管能源-水关系的后果是显而易见的,但美国的决策者们仍然忽视了能源和水决策整合的必要性。继续划分环境问题,而不是以整体的方式解决气候变化的影响,不会带来迫切需要的结果。政府的三个部门都有整合决策所需的工具。国会可以而且应该介入,通过一项新的法规,规定各机构充分考虑能源政策和能源监管对水资源的影响的法律授权。联邦法院可以在《清洁空气法》或《行政程序法》中解读法律要求,要求联邦政府在能源领域采取行动,考虑对水资源的影响。最后,总统可以利用他的权力迫使联邦机构比过去更彻底地考虑水资源问题。虽然在当前的政治氛围下,其中一些机制可能难以设想,但在日益严重的气候危机面前,实施这些机制对于确保水和能源安全是必要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信