PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Committee on Environment and Public Works. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 113-796.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Sep 18, 2014
Super Pollutants Act of 2014 - Establishes requirements for agencies to evaluate, mitigate, reduce, and report on the following short-lived climate pollutant emissions (non-carbon dioxide pollutants that contribute to global warming even though they stay in the atmosphere for only a short time): black carbon (soot emissions that absorb sunlight, reduce the reflectivity of snow and ice when deposited on them, and generate heat), methane, and high global warming potential hydrofluorocarbons (high-GWP HFC).
Requires the President to establish the Interagency Task Force on Short-Lived Climate Pollutant Mitigation to address these pollutants through an action plan.
Directs the Department of State to develop a comprehensive plan to reduce black carbon emissions from international shipping.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) to prioritize black carbon mitigation activities as part of aid distribution activities.
Requires the Department of Energy (DOE) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to evaluate the availability of high-GWP HFC alternatives.
Amends the Clean Air Act to prohibit the manufacture of any uncharged hydrochlorofluorocarbon-22 air-conditioning condensing equipment for residential use. Requires the EPA to determine whether the sale of R-134a automotive air-conditioning recharge kits to consumers represents an environmentally significant source of high-GWP HFC emissions.
Requires the State Department, the DOE, the EPA, and the Department of Commerce to provide other countries with technical guidance on containing emissions from gas drilling, landfills, coal mining, and agriculture.
Directs the EPA to establish an inspection and maintenance program for equipment that has high leak rates of methane gas.
People & committees
Sen. Murphy, Christopher [D-CT] · D–CT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Committee on Environment and Public Works. Hearings held. Hearings printed: S.Hrg. 113-796.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works.
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.2911 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.2911 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.2911 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.2911 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.