Grandoni, D., & Phillips, A. (2022, April 19). Biden restores climate safeguards in key environmental law, reversing Trump. The Washington Post. Retrieved July 17, 2022, from https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2022/04/19/biden-nepa-climate-trump/
The new Biden Administration in early April of 2022 decided to more strictly ensure certain climate reviews, specifically regarding infrastructure. This decision contrasts the Trump’s administration’s 2020 exemption of reviewing certain projects in order to quicken construction time. Citing the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) that, “required the government to assess the environmental consequences of federal actions.” Biden argued that it is crucial that the federal government take the extra effort to regulate and even halt infrastructure projects, such as pipelines or roads, if it means having a less drastic environmental impact.
The oversaturation and value of fast infrastructure development quite literally trumped environmental preservation under the Trump administration. Biden’s plan to more strictly enforce NEPA will allow certain projects, like invasive pipelines, to not be developed at all and in turn ensure the preservation of wildlife, cleaner air, and even local neighborhoods. Encouraging the enforcement of NEPA has already led to further Congressional involvement in more climate control policies, such as prompting historical SCOTUS decisions like West Virginia v. EPA. While the stricter enforcement does mean less public forms of infrastructure, the absence of invasive pipelines and roads are worth the cleaner air.
This is a well written abstract, Jackie. And a great first sentence to your follow up paragraph. It’s the classic push and pull between env. caution and development. Of course it gets really interesting when its green infrastructure that gets slowed down. For example, as we develop the grid to allow for more alt energy, that could be what gets slowed. Interesting thing to think about. But I’m with you- slow the roll on development into neighborhoods and habitat. Question- could you see a possible project that although it would negatively affect habitat or even people that would be justified for the greater good of the env and society?
Thank you Mr. Powell! I think that certain projects are necessary to fund and build for the purpose of improving the environment; such as hydroelectric power stations. Even though it may be inconvenient to build in certain areas, it is necessary to implement in order to create sustainable energy.