(Bloomberg) -- The US Supreme Court refused for now to halt a Biden administration crackdown on planet-warming methane emissions from oil wells, tanks and pipelines.
The order is a setback for oil and gas producers and Republican-led states that say the new mandates exceed the authority of the Environmental Protection Agency. The challengers were seeking to put the rules on hold while a legal fight goes forward.
The court rejected the request without explanation and without indicating that any justices dissented. The court separately refused to block a rule limiting mercury and other toxic air pollution from coal power plants, rejecting arguments from states and rural electric cooperatives.
The justices have been deliberating for months on an even bigger EPA case — a bid by businesses and Republican-run states to halt stringent new carbon emissions limits for power plants. The administration says the rules are vital for stemming climate change, while the opponents contend the compliance costs will be too steep.
Human-caused methane emissions are responsible for a third of the global warming attributable to greenhouse gases, according to the EPA. Methane is more than 80 times more powerful than carbon dioxide at trapping climate-warming heat. The oil and gas industry is the country’s biggest industrial emitter of methane.
The EPA rule, finalized last December, would force oil companies to replace leak-prone equipment and regularly search for methane escaping from valves, compressors and other equipment. It would also for the first time empower private citizens to essentially police wells and pipelines for methane leaks.
Oil and gas producers led by Continental Resources Inc. asked the Supreme Court to block the mandates, as did officials in two dozen states in a separate case. The challengers said the rule will impose steep costs that couldn’t be justified by the environmental benefits and would hinder the rights of states to take the lead in regulating emissions.
The Biden administration said neither set of opponents had shown the type of “irreparable harm” needed to get emergency Supreme Court intervention. The administration said the requirements under the rule are based on cost-effective technologies that in many cases are already deployed in the industry.
A three-judge panel on the appeals court — a trio that included two Donald Trump appointees — had previously refused to block the rule.
The methane cases are Oklahoma v. Environmental Protection Agency, 24A213, and Continental Resources v. Environmental Protection Agency, 24A215.
--With assistance from Jennifer A. Dlouhy.
(Updates with action on mercury rule, pendency of carbon case in third and fourth paragraphs.)
©2024 Bloomberg L.P.