There are less than three months, Biden will leave the White House.There are two issues that he is most concerned about at the moment. One is whether the deputy Harris can defeat Trump as the first American female president, and the other is his policy heritage.

In addition to uniting the NATO allies in diplomacy and supporting the important policy heritage of Ukraine to fight against Russia, another policy heritage that Biden is most cherished is the climate policy.The US Supreme Court issued a temporary ruling on October 16, allowing the Environmental Protection Agency to continue to promote plans to restrict pollutant emissions of power plants. Will it weaken or strengthen the climate policy heritage of Biden?

A government's climate response policy is nothing more than two main ways: a large amount of new energy subsidies through industrial policy to achieve the purpose of rapid deployment and alternative stone energy;Air pollution and water pollution control standards, accelerate the speed of fossil energy exit energy systems.

If the two methods are implemented at the same time, the effect is obviously more ideal.However, in the actual policy game, the government's actions often take care of them, and it is difficult to make both beauty.As far as the United States is concerned, Bayeng before the mid -2022 election, while the Democratic Party controlled the simple majority advantages of the House of Representatives and the Senate, through the most important climatic bill in the history of the American history, the inflation method was reduced.The prelude to the large -scale subsidy of the low -carbon industry in the United States.Although the effects of greenhouse gas emission reduction brought by the two years are not obvious, and the implementation efficiency, or whether the government subsidy funds are used properly and efficient, are often criticized by the Republican Party, but this decree is the bestImportant climate policy heritage is rarely controversial.Even if Trump became the next president, Bayeng's basic direction and momentum established by supporting the low -carbon energy industry policy through this bill will not be shaken.

In order to reshape the leadership role of the United States' weakened global climate during the Trump period, Bayeng has hoped to use administrative laws (the regulatory power of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency) since he took office to promote fossil energy (especiallyIt is more stringent environmental supervision of coal -fired power stations.However, a ruling of a Supreme Court in June 2022 cracked down on the ambition of the Biden government.The Supreme Court believes that the Environmental Protection Agency does not have the power and uses a clean air method to control the carbon emissions of the power plant.From the perspective of the Supreme Court, the carbon emissions ruling of the power plant should come from the legislature, not the administrative department.After a lapse of two months, in August 2022, Biden signed the inflation method passed in the two hospitals.Obviously, he lost a point in controlling the carbon emissions of the power plant, but in terms of legislation to ensure subsidies for the development of the low -carbon industry, he won a key battle.

The meaning of the latest temporary judgment

Is the temporary ruling of the Supreme Court of the United States on October 16 Is it a good good for determining the Biden Climate Policy Heritage?

The temporary ruling of the

Supreme Law was made by a regulatory instruction issued by the Environmental Protection Agency in April this year.The Environmental Protection Agency requested that the coal power plant reduced the greenhouse gas emissions by 90%by 2039, otherwise it must be closed.This administrative instruction obviously encountered strong resistance in the local area, and more than 20 states have passed the lawsuit to challenge the administrative instructions.Regarding the administrative instructions of the State Government to challenge the Environmental Protection Agency, there are many related case trials at lower levels.One of the most watched is a lawsuit in the Court of Appeals in the Columbia SAR.In July of this year, a group of three judges of the Circuit Court of Appeal rejected the request of the indictment request that the instructions of the Environmental Protection Agency could not take effect during the trial.This directly leads to the intervention of the Supreme Court.Obviously, the temporary ruling of the Supreme Court is consistent with the opinions of the court of appeal.This temporary ruling issued by the Supreme Court was made for emergency applications, so it was not given a detailed judgment in a temporary decision.

The temporary ruling of the Supreme Court, considering that the two parties have sufficient court debate time during the trial, there seems to be no need to prevent the planning of the Environmental Protection Agency at this stage.First of all, the earliest time for the administrative instructions of the Environmental Protection Agency was June 2025, and the deadline for compliance was 2039 after 15 years.Secondly, one of the focus of the trial is that the two parties have different opinions on the emission reduction path and cost effectiveness.The Environmental Protection Agency believes that with the help of carbon capture technology, the target of emission reduction can be achieved costly, and there are still more than ten years, the cost of emission reduction technology will continue to decline quickly and continuously; challengers believe that regulators "Disclosure "coal power, and the regulatory authorities have not fully proved that the cost of carbon capture and burial technology for thermal power plants is valid, and whether this technology can finally meet the setting of the environmental protection agency, and by 2039, the coal power plant will decrease by 90%of the greenhouse of the greenhouse by 90%.The goal of gas emissions still has great uncertainty.

Bynden's iconic climate policy heritage reduction in inflation will continue to promote the decarburization process of US energy systems in the future.Regardless of Harris or Trump's entry into the White House, in view of the considerations of energy security and geographical strategy, the oil and gas industries in the United States will not be too affected in the next five to 10 years.The coal -electricity industry, which has only 16%of the power generation in 2023, will continue to exert a huge political influence, but the entire coal and power industry has been in a fast channel replaced by natural gas power generation.Perhaps the final ruling of the Supreme Court is still restricting the power of the Environmental Protection Agency, but the long -term carbon emission reduction target expected by the environmental deployment is finally realized due to the natural changes in technology and market.

The author is international energy and strategic observer