This group covered a range of policies and projects, taking a deeper look at policies to make a final decision on which course of action was morally right in each case.
Camila Galeano focused on the proposed rollback of the Clean Power Plan. In October of 2017, new EPA chief Scott Pruitt announced he had begun taking steps to dismantle the plan proposed in 2015, which according to the Obama administration would have reduced greenhouse-gas emissions from the power sector 32 percent by 2030. In this project I explore the factual claims made by the supporters as well as the opposition, and analyzed them in terms of moral arguments.
Wesley Hargis focused on the controversy surrounding the Dakota Access Pipeline, by taking in depth investigation on the impacts of the rights of the Sioux Tribe as well as the potential effects to the environment and economy. Furthermore, he looked at the moral influences behind each argument and evaluated them.
Zach Massenat focused around President Trump’s plan to remove regulations on fracking put in place by President Obama. By comparing economic gains with environmental damages, an assessment was made as to whether or not deregulating fracking was the morally right thing to do.
In addition, working with the National Monuments group, Gregory Melsby worked on the EPA’s proposal to stop reimbursing the Department of Justice for legal work regarding Superfund sites.