Now Reading
Gray Wolf Protections Reinstated by Judge Overnight Energy & Environment
[vc_row thb_full_width=”true” thb_row_padding=”true” thb_column_padding=”true” css=”.vc_custom_1608290870297{background-color: #ffffff !important;}”][vc_column][vc_row_inner][vc_column_inner][vc_empty_space height=”20px”][thb_postcarousel style=”style3″ navigation=”true” infinite=”” source=”size:6|post_type:post”][vc_empty_space height=”20px”][/vc_column_inner][/vc_row_inner][/vc_column][/vc_row]

Gray Wolf Protections Reinstated by Judge Overnight Energy & Environment

Overnight Energy & Environment Judge reinstates gray wolf protections

Welcome to Thursday’s Overnight Energy & Environment,Your source for the most recent news on energy, the environment, and beyond. Subscribe here thehill.com/newsletter-signup.

Today’s story will focus on a federal court’s decision to reverse a Trump-era decision to remove protections for graywolves. Senator Joe Manchin (D.W.Va.), who kept climate action in the discussion in a recent interview, as well as the latest move of the Biden administration towards an electric vehicle charging system.

Rachel Frazin, Zack Budryk and I are The Hill’s editors. Send us your tips: [email protected]And [email protected]. Follow us on Twitter: @RachelFrazinAnd @BudrykZack.

Let’s get going.

Trump’s Trump-era protections for gray wolves are restored by a Court

A federal court in California has restored endangered species protections to the gray wolf, which were lost during the Trump administration.

George W. Bush appointee Judge Jeffrey White ruled that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service didn’t adequately consider threats for the wolves other than two major populations.

White stated that he was not happy with Trump’s move and listed other reasons. This included his assessment that West Coast wolves were being analyzed together with Northern Rocky Mountain.

Trump administration in 2020 removed endangered species protections that were in place for wolves for more than forty-five years. They claimed they had exceeded recovery targets.

Many animal and environmental advocacy groups disagree with this statement, stating that they still need protections.

Last February, the Biden administration supported its predecessor’s decision and stated that it was made “using only the most scientific and commercially relevant data.”

However, it indicated a possible reversal by saying in September that it would examine the endangered status of the wolf.

It is not clear if the Biden administration will appeal Thursday’s ruling. Vanessa Kauffman, spokesperson at Fish and Wildlife Service, replied via email that she was reviewing the decision.

Thursday’s ruling doesn’t apply to wolves in Montana and Idaho where they were already removed from the list before Trump’s action.

Learn more about the court’s decision here.

CLIMATE ACTION IS KEPT ON THE TABLE BY MANCHIN

Although he claimed that the Build back Better bill, which represents President Biden’s climate- and spending agenda, is “dead”, Sen. Joe Manchin (D.W.Va.), maintained climate action in a new interview.

In Interview with a local news agencyHe stated that he would like a tax bill that puts him on a path towards financial solvency.

He stated that he would like a 25% corporate tax rate.

Later in the interview, he said that he was open and willing to take on climate change. However, he didn’t offer any specifics.

“I’m open to doing a lot of good things about climate, too.” We can all work together, but we can’t let our caution go to the wind.

Biden seeks equity in push for EV network

New guidance from the Biden administration asks states to consider equity when disbursing funds to states for electric vehicle charging networks..

According to the guidance document, Thursday’s guidance document states that state plans submitted to federal government for funding the charging network “should describe how the State will deliver projects… [that]Target at least 40% of the benefits to disadvantaged communities.”

This would allow them to align with Justice40, a White House Initiative that seeks to provide at least 40% of the benefits of federal investments into climate and clean energy to disadvantaged areas.

The report states that the equity push does NOT necessarily mean that 40 per cent of the chargers should be located within disadvantaged communities, if they can also benefit from other ways.

The bipartisan infrastructure law includes the guidance. The Biden administration has claimed that it is its signature Build Back Better climate bill and the spending bill remains stalled at Congress.

Wednesday’s rollout coincides with the $5 billion program for states that will build a nationwide electric vehicle charging system. Over a five-year time frame, the funds for the program will be distributed to states.

You can read more about the push here.

REPUBLICANS ARE CONCERNED ABOUT BIDEN SKILL ADVISER

House Republicans have sent a new letter to raise concerns about a top White House climate scientist adviser following the publication of a paper that was retracted last January.

Reps. Frank Lucas (Okla.), Stephanie Bice, and Jay Obernolte ask President Biden “consider whether Dr. [Jane]Public confidence in future policies is undermined by Lubchenco’s leading role in the administration’s scientific integrity effort.”

“We encourage you to think about whether Dr. Lubchenco should remain involved in the development a framework for improving agency scientific integrity practices and policies,” they said. “If the executive branch fails or refuses to uphold the practices and principles of scientific integrity, then Congress must take a greater role as an oversight body.”

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Editor-in-Chief May Berenbaum stated in the RetractionLubchenco “recently published an article with the article’s author and has a personal relationship to one of the authors. Both of these relationships are disallowed under the PNAS editorial policies.”

The White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, (OSTP), declined to comment specifically on the Republican letter.

Instead, it directed The Hill toward a prior statement from an officer, which stated that Jane had “agreed there was a contradiction and the paper should not be retracted”, and that it was “a matter of public record at this time,” referring back to January when The Scientific Integrity Task Force’s report was released.

WHAT WE ARE READING

  • White House regulates delayed air pollution reg for monthsE&E News)

  • How Billions of Infrastructure Funding Could Worsen Global WarmingThe New York Times

  • Major breakthrough in nuclear fusion energyBBC)

  • Gina McCarthy vows to run “faster and quicker” to address climate changePolitico)

This is it for today. Thanks for reading. Check out The Hill. Energy & Environment PageFor the most recent news and coverage. We’ll be there Friday.

View Comments (0)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.