Obama Administration Issues Landmark Cuts to Power Plant Carbon Emissions

What's This?

Steam from the Jeffrey Energy Center coal-fired power plant is silhouetted against the setting sun near St. Marys, Kansas.

Image: Charlie Riedel/Associated Press

By Andrew Freedman2014-06-02 14:36:56 UTC

The Obama administration issued draft regulations on Monday that would seek to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from power plants by 30% below 2005 levels by 2020.

The regulations largely confirmed details contained in news reports on Sunday night. The proposed rules, dubbed the "Clean Power Plan," is based on the White House's executive powers under the Clean Air Act.

They are the biggest step ever taken by any U.S. president to reduce the U.S. contribution to global warming, which is largely due to manmade emissions of greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide.

See also: Obama Administration Proposes 30% Cuts to Power Plant Carbon Emissions

The proposed rules will only apply to the electricity sector and mainly to about 600 coal-fired power plants, since coal accounts for the majority of the sector's emissions. Power plants account for roughly one-third of all domestic greenhouse gas emissions in the United States.

Coal-fired power plants comprise 37% of all electric power generation capacity in the U.S., just behind natural gas. But they also account for the vast majority of the electricity sector's greenhouse gas emissions, according to the Energy Information Administration.

The new regulations, if implemented following expected legal challenges, will lead to the closing of many coal-fired plants and a likely shift to less polluting technologies. States would be given wide latitude to determine the most economically efficient way of meeting their emissions targets, from investing in renewable energy technologies to improving energy efficiency or joining regional cap-and-trade systems. Two such systems currently exist in the U.S., one in the Northeast and another more ambitious plan in California.

Experts in cap-and-trade systems and other market-based pollution reduction programs praised the proposal.

"From first impressions, it appears EPA is trying to strike the right balance — a rule that’s strong enough to drive real action, yet flexible enough for states and utilities to meet it at a reasonable cost," said Eileen Claussen, president of the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, in a statement.

The Obama administration is framing the regulations as a way to improve public health, in addition to addressing manmade global warming. The president is scheduled to participate in a conference call about the new policy with the American Lung Association on Monday afternoon.

The EPA added that the regulations would prevent up to 6,600 premature deaths, about 150,000 asthma attacks in children and provide up to $93 billion in climate and public health benefits.

"Climate change, fueled by carbon pollution, supercharges risks to our health, our economy, and our way of life. EPA is delivering on a vital piece of President Obama's Climate Action Plan by proposing a Clean Power Plan that will cut harmful carbon pollution from our largest source — power plants," said EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy in a statement. "By leveraging cleaner energy sources and cutting energy waste, this plan will clean the air we breathe while helping slow climate change so we can leave a safe and healthy future for our kids. We don't have to choose between a healthy economy and a healthy environment — our action will sharpen America’s competitive edge, spur innovation, and create jobs."

The EPA says the emissions cuts as mandated in the regulations would cut carbon emissions from the power sector by an amount equal to the emissions from powering more than half of all the homes in the U.S. for one year.

The administration says the regulations would shrink electricity bills roughly 8% by increasing energy efficiency and reducing demand in the electricity system. On the other hand, critics of the proposal say it would raise electricity prices considerably, especially in states that are dependent on coal-fired power plants. Republican lawmakers have denounced the proposal as an example of the administration's "War on Coal."

“The EPA’s crackdown on coal is going to cost us all real money and in return we’ll get very little noticeable gain,” four Republican senators wrote in a letter to the EPA on May 24.

The EPA aims to finalize the regulations by June 2015, and states would have until June 2016 to submit their plans to the agency.

Using 2005 as the base year for the new rules is a more lenient target than some environmental groups had been lobbying for. This is because U.S. greenhouse gas emissions fell nearly 10% from 2005 to 2012, making it somewhat easier for industry to achieve the goals, and making them slightly less ambitious than if the base year had been set to a later date. Nevertheless, environmental groups praised the proposal.

“The EPA's proposal to limit carbon pollution from power plants for the first time ever is a giant leap forward in protecting the health of all Americans and future generations," Frances Beinecke, president of the Natural Resources Defense Council, said in a statement. Beinecke's group had proposed a plan that would have used 2012 as the base year for measuring emissions reductions against.

The U.S. has already committed to a goal of reducing nationwide greenhouse gas emissions by 17% below 2005 levels by 2020, and the new regulations are viewed as a key component of the administration's plan to meet that commitment.

The new rules would also help President Obama attain his goal, as expressed in a recent speech at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, to lead global efforts to establish a new climate framework agreement at negotiations in Paris next year.

Have something to add to this story? Share it in the comments.

Topics: carbon, Climate, coal, epa, Politics, power plant, U.S., US & World