4 ms·

It's consistent leadership. Malevolent and stupid, but consistent.

claytongulick 1mo ago
Are you sure you're aiming your ire in the right direction in this case? The EPA provided guidance that the CAA (Clean Air Act) itself was written to not apply in these cases. Shouldn't you be angry at the authors of the law?
- pkilgore 1mo ago
  Well the one thing I know about lawyers: Utterly impossible to get them to write a dishonest guidance document interpreting the law in a way that benefits them somehow. You got me. Check mate. No counterarguments here.
  - claytongulick 1mo ago
    The law was specifically written to exclude things like independent power sources and backup generators etc... From 42 U.S.C. § 7651a(17)(A) [1] which defines the power generation units that are covered by the law: "(17) (A)The term “utility unit” means— (i)a unit that serves a generator in any State that produces electricity for sale, or (ii)a unit that, during 1985, served a generator in any State that produced electricity for sale." The key phrasing there is "for sale". The clarification from the EPA simply restated that these units don't fall under the regulatory authority because under a plain reading of the law, they are not generating power for sale. [2] The EPA certainly cites Trump's power agenda several times, but that doesn't make the plain text interpretation of the law wrong. [1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/7411 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/7411 [2] https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-issues-permitting-guidance-further-president-trumps-agenda-promoting-data-centers https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-issues-permitting-guida...
- inigyou 1mo ago
  The EPA is currently run by MAGA people.
- dalyons 1mo ago
  You think the guidance was written as a good faith interpretation of the law? Cmon.
- insane_dreamer 1mo ago
  > Are you sure you're aiming your ire in the right direction in this case? yes

Are you sure you're aiming your ire in the right direction in this case? The EPA provided guidance that the CAA (Clean Air Act) itself was written to not apply in these cases. Shouldn't you be angry at the authors of the law?

pkilgore 1mo ago
Well the one thing I know about lawyers: Utterly impossible to get them to write a dishonest guidance document interpreting the law in a way that benefits them somehow. You got me. Check mate. No counterarguments here.
- claytongulick 1mo ago
  The law was specifically written to exclude things like independent power sources and backup generators etc... From 42 U.S.C. § 7651a(17)(A) [1] which defines the power generation units that are covered by the law: "(17) (A)The term “utility unit” means— (i)a unit that serves a generator in any State that produces electricity for sale, or (ii)a unit that, during 1985, served a generator in any State that produced electricity for sale." The key phrasing there is "for sale". The clarification from the EPA simply restated that these units don't fall under the regulatory authority because under a plain reading of the law, they are not generating power for sale. [2] The EPA certainly cites Trump's power agenda several times, but that doesn't make the plain text interpretation of the law wrong. [1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/7411 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/7411 [2] https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-issues-permitting-guidance-further-president-trumps-agenda-promoting-data-centers https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-issues-permitting-guida...
inigyou 1mo ago
The EPA is currently run by MAGA people.
dalyons 1mo ago
You think the guidance was written as a good faith interpretation of the law? Cmon.
insane_dreamer 1mo ago
> Are you sure you're aiming your ire in the right direction in this case? yes