The Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE) has rejected an air permit for proposed power plants due to the threat of the resulting greenhouse gas emissions. The decision makes Kansas the latest state to take proactive steps to stem greenhouse gas emissions while federal agencies and Congress delay action and White House officials continue to question climate science.

On Oct. 18, KDHE denied a permit for the Sunflower Electric Power Corporation to build two large coal-fired power plants near Holcomb, KS. The plants would have combined to emit 11 million tons of greenhouse gas emissions annually, according to KDHE.

In a statement announcing the decision, KDHE Secretary Rod Bremby said, "I believe it would be irresponsible to ignore emerging information about the contribution of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases to climate change and the potential harm to our environment and health if we do nothing." Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius (D), who has been described as a conservative Democrat, has expressed her support for the decision to reject the permit.

The controversy over whether KDHE should grant the permit had become a watershed moment for environmental policy in Kansas. While Sunflower Electric lobbied vigorously for its permit, the idea of two more major sources of greenhouse gas emissions raised the ire of many Kansans.

Now, KDHE's decision is being framed as a watershed moment for American environmental policy. The decision by KDHE to deny an air permit on the grounds that greenhouse gas emissions pose a serious danger to public health and welfare is the first of its kind.

Other states are also using regulatory strategies to attempt to control greenhouse gas emissions. California has approved a program that would allow the state to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from vehicle tailpipes. In December 2005, California petitioned the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for permission to enact its program, as the state is required to do under the Clean Air Act.

However, EPA has yet to issue a decision on the California petition. California is expected to file suit against EPA the week of Oct. 29 in an attempt to force EPA to grant its request, The Los Angeles Times reported. If EPA grants California's request, at least 11 other states could begin implementing similar greenhouse gas emission programs.

States are pushing hard for greenhouse gas emission regulation now more than ever, partially in response to an April U.S. Supreme Court decision in which the court found greenhouse gas emissions could be considered an air pollutant under the Clean Air Act, an assertion previously rejected by the Bush administration.

Although more than six months have passed since the high court's decision, EPA has yet to announce its plans to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act. An EPA official has reportedly indicated the agency will pursue a regulatory scheme similar to that of California and the other states, wherein the agency would set targets to reduce emissions over time, according to BNA news service (subscription). More information on EPA's plans may surface when the agency releases its annual Regulatory Plan later in 2007.

Congress has only recently begun to make progress on greenhouse gas emission legislation despite the issue being a major tenet of the Democrats' campaign during their sweeping 2006 election victory. For example, on Oct. 18, Sens. Joseph Lieberman (I-CT) and John Warner (R-VA) introduced the America's Climate Security Act (S. 2191). The legislation would establish a cap-and-trade system in which greenhouse gas emitters could buy, sell and trade emission credits. The total level of emissions allowed under the system would decrease over time. The proposed legislation received mixed reviews from environmental advocates. A subcommittee of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee is scheduled to begin considering the legislation on Oct. 24.

Meanwhile, White House officials continue to make attempts at slowing greenhouse gas emission policies by questioning the underlying science. Many climate scientists, including those on the Nobel Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, have endorsed the notion of preventing warming of the earth by two degrees Celsius or 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit. President Bush's top science advisor, White House Office of Science and Technology Policy Director John Marburger III, said the goal "is going to be a very difficult one to achieve and is not actually linked to regional events that affect people's lives," according to The Washington Post.