The Verge Article Rating

The Supreme Court just took away an EPA tool to fight climate change -- what happens next?

Jul 01, 2022 View Original Article
  • Bias Rating

    -12% Somewhat Liberal

  • Reliability

    N/AN/A

  • Policy Leaning

    22% Somewhat Conservative

  • Politician Portrayal

    -60% Negative

Bias Score Analysis

The A.I. bias rating includes policy and politician portrayal leanings based on the author’s tone found in the article using machine learning. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral.

Sentiments

Overall Sentiment

N/A

  •   Liberal
  •   Conservative
SentenceSentimentBias
Unlock this feature by upgrading to the Pro plan.

Bias Meter

Extremely
Liberal

Very
Liberal

Moderately
Liberal

Somewhat Liberal

Center

Somewhat Conservative

Moderately
Conservative

Very
Conservative

Extremely
Conservative

-100%
Liberal

100%
Conservative

Bias Meter

Contributing sentiments towards policy:

56% : With today's decision, any hopes of cleaning up the nation's power grid are even more dependent on Congress passing legislation to promote clean energy.
54% : The bill's climate provisions largely centered on efforts to clean up the nation's power grid -- which were watered down over months of negotiations from a plan that would have penalized utilities for sticking with fossil fuels to a newer iteration that relies primarily on tax incentives for clean energy.
54% : And plans to decarbonize other heavily polluting sectors, including transportation and buildings, also rely on a clean grid so that things like electric vehicles and stoves can run on renewable energy instead of fossil fuels.
52% : Since the 1970 Clean Air Act wasn't written to grapple with climate change, and since Congress hasn't passed legislation to get the grid running on clean energy, the EPA isn't left with a whole lot of options in the wake of this court decision.
52% : The agency could potentially require that those technologies be installed on power plants that burn coal or gas.
46% : "EPA absolutely anticipated this decision," Shenkman says, and is likely already thinking about what it can still do to limit power plants' climate pollution in a way that can't be construed as an attempt to overhaul the nation's entire energy system.
46% : That kind of technology, however, has drawn sharp criticisms from environmentalists worried that it further entrenches the nation's reliance on fossil fuels -- which release pollutants other than CO2 that clean energy advocates also want to see eliminated.
43% : Essentially, it argues that if Congress hasn't passed legislation that explicitly details how to address an issue of major national significance, then a federal agency doesn't have the leeway to craft regulation based on its own interpretation.
40% : Its decision today on West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency essentially says that the EPA shouldn't be allowed to determine whether the US gets its electricity from clean or dirty sources of energy.

*Our bias meter rating uses data science including sentiment analysis, machine learning and our proprietary algorithm for determining biases in news articles. Bias scores are on a scale of -100% to 100% with higher negative scores being more liberal and higher positive scores being more conservative, and 0% being neutral. The rating is an independent analysis and is not affiliated nor sponsored by the news source or any other organization.

Copy link