A federal appeals court on Friday rejected pleas from Texas, some other states and industry allies to block nationwide rules on greenhouse gas emissions slated to start next month.

The states, industry groups and free-market groups are suing the Environmental Protection Agency over its first attempt to regulate carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases from automobiles and large industrial sources.

The rules, they argue, would harm the economy.

But the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia denied the request to freeze the new regulations while the lawsuit is pending, ruling that the challengers failed to show that the harms they allege are certain, rather than speculative.

The decision of the three-judge panel clears the way for the rules to take effect Jan. 2, as planned. The federal rules require new controls on emissions from vehicles and industrial sources, such as power plants and refineries.

Such rules would have a profound impact on Texas, which pumps more carbon dioxide into the air than any other state because of its scores of coal-fired power plants, refineries and other industrial facilities.

With three weeks left until the rules kick in, Texas is the only state that has refused to include new limits on heat-trapping gases in permits for the largest industrial plants, as the new rules require.

In challenging the EPA, Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott has argued that the underpinnings of the new rules — that the gases blamed for global warming threaten public health — are based on faulty data. The new rules also will hurt business, he told the court.

But the Texas lawsuit had a "see-through problem," said David Doniger, director of climate policy for the Natural Resources Defense Council, which supports the new rules.

More for you News Texas asks court to stop EPA takeover of permits rules

"You can say anything you want in a press release or a two-page lobbying letter to Congress," Doniger said. "But when you go to court, you have to prove your case, and they didn't. These cases were brought to dress up a political argument."

Al Armendariz, the EPA's regional administrator based in Dallas, called the decision "a victory for science, clean air and Louisiana's wetlands," which are vulnerable to rising sea levels due in part to global warming.

'Misguided policies'

Texas officials expressed disappointment but said they are confident in their case as it proceeds through the court.

"Texas will do everything in its power to defeat the threat these misguided policies impose upon our state's energy industry and the thousands of jobs it sustains, not to mention the cost they will inflict on Texas families," said Catherine Frazier, deputy press secretary for Gov. Rick Perry. "Ultimately, we believe Texas will prevail."

Scott Segal, a lobbyist at Bracewell & Giuliani, which represents utilities, refiners and manufacturers, said the court ruling is "unfortunate" because regulators will not be ready in time to impose the new permit requirements.

"The court may have ensured an effective construction moratorium for industrial and power projects," Segal said. "Given the state of the economy, the decision is certainly not a welcome holiday present."

Segal also said the denial is "hardly an endorsement" of the EPA's position.

Still, the court's decision is "an important rebuke to big polluters who want to avoid complying with standards put in place to protect people and the American economy," said Michael Brune, the Sierra Club's executive director.

matthew.tresaugue@chron.com