Abby L. Harvey
GHG Monitor
9/19/2014
The Environmental Protection Agency is extending by 45 days the public comment period for its proposed carbon emissions standards for existing coal-fired power plants. The public comment period was initially set to run for 120 days, to Oct. 16, but now will end on Dec. 1, acting EPA Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation Janet McCabe announced this week, adding that the EPA still expects to finalize the new regulation by next June. More than 750,000 comments have been received by the EPA at this point, McCabe told members of the press during a media call this week. “While we’ve heard quite a bit so far, we know that there are many individuals and groups continuing to work to formulate their input,” McCabe said. “We believe that public input is one of the most important parts of the rule making process and the more we listen and gauge, the more perspectives we hear, the better the Clean Power Plan—and all of our work—will be. … We hope this additional time will give those entities wishing to submit comments the time they need to engage with us, ask questions and ultimately provide input that will help ensure in the end this plan is practical, flexible and achievable.”
The move comes just a week after a group of 53 senators led by Sens. Deb Fischer, (R-Neb.), and Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.) sent the EPA a letter requesting a 60-day extension. The bipartisan group cited the length, complexity and importance of the proposed regulation as reason to extend the comment period. “It’s good for all sides that the EPA listened to the bipartisan group of Senators that Senator Fischer and I led by providing more time to review these complex new rules so states, utilities and others potentially impacted by the proposed rule have ample time to review and comment on them,” Heitkamp said in a written statement this week. “We need real, workable solutions for implementing rules that reduce emissions, but do not hinder job growth or the reliability of our electrical system and that recognize the important role of coal-fired power in our generating mix for the foreseeable future. To accomplish that, everyone impacted by the rules should be able to have a say, and this extension helps allow that to happen.”
Regs Come Under Fire at House Hearing
The EPA’s proposal, which sets carbon emission reduction targets for each state and requires the states to develop action plans to meet those targets, continued to come under criticism this week, this time by members of the House Committee on Science, Space and Technology, who expressed doubt over the feasiability of the agency’s proposal. “This plan places a heavy burden on the states. Many state legislatures will need to approve enabling statutes to implement the rule,” Rep. Larry Bucshon, (R-Ind.) said. “Further, states will need to consider legislation to implement energy efficiency measures to meet the goals under the plan and the grant additional authority to state public utilities commissions on such matters as stranded investment and cost allocations. It’s quite possible that certain states for whatever reason will be unable to make these steps in which case the state plans will be inadequate under the proposal thus mandating the EPA to issue federal implementation plans.”
Many Republican members of the committee questioned what global impact the regulations would have. “The EPA says that its regulations will reduce carbon dioxide emissions by about 555 million tons a year in 2030. That same year, Department of Energy is projecting that China alone will emit about 14 billion tons of carbon dioxide every year. That means that after this costly, and in my view burdensome, rule is implemented, it will offset only 13 days of Chinese carbon dioxide emissions and of course much less of the total world’s emissions,” Committee Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) said.
John Holdren, Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy for the Executive Office of the President defended the rule during the hearing, stating that if the United States does not take a leadership role, nothing at all will be accomplished to fight climate change. “The limitation on the carbon emissions in the United States is a very important first step for us to take on a longer trajectory to meet the president’s goals of a 17 percent reduction from 2005 by 2020 and ultimately an 80 plus reduction by 2050. If the United States does not take that sort of action it is unlikely that other major emitters in the world, China, India, Russia, Europe, Japan, will do so either. The fact is, all of us need to reduce our carbon emissions if we are to avoid unmanageable degrees of climate change,” Holdren said.
GAO Finds Coal Plants Retiring Faster Than Anticipated
Also this week, the Government Accountability Office released a report that found more power companies are planning to retire coal-fired power plants than had been previously estimated. The update comes two years after the GAO reported that due to increased federal regulations, low gas prices and other factors, 2-12 percent of the nation’s coal capacity would be retired by 2025. The updated report finds that roughly 13 percent of the nation’s coal generating capacity has either been retired since the initial report or is scheduled to be retired by 2025. While the report notes the EPAs proposed carbon emissions standards, it does not attribute the retirements to those regulations. The report says that “the units that power companies have retired or plan to retire are generally older, smaller, more polluting and not used extensively, with some exceptions. For example, some larger generating units are also planned for retirement. In addition, the capacity is geographically concentrated in four states: Ohio (14 percent), Pennsylvania (11 percent), Kentucky (7 percent), and West Virginia (6 percent).”
The GAO report says that many of the retirements would have occurred without additional regulations. “Stakeholders we interviewed said that some of these projected retirements may have occurred without the environmental regulations. Specifically, these stakeholders noted that several industry trends may be contributing to the retirement of coal-fueled generating units, including relatively low natural gas prices, increasing prices for coal, and low expected growth in demand for electricity. In addition, in June 2012, we reported that operators of some coal-fueled generating units had entered into agreements with EPA to retire or retrofit units to settle EPA enforcement actions,” the GAO report says, going on to note that other stakeholders reported that “the new environmental regulations may accelerate retirements because power companies may not want to invest in retrofitting units with environmental controls for those units they expect to retire soon for other reasons.”
EPA spokeswoman Liz Purchia said this week that the retirements have little to do with the EPA’s regulations. “EPA’s analysis focuses on the amount of capacity that may retire in response to our actions, it is a reflection of what we think is caused by the regulation itself, and not intended to be an estimate for the broader trends in the industry. There are a number of contributing factors that have led to recent announcements of retirements,” she said in a written response. “For example, average natural gas prices delivered to the electric power sector hit a 14 year low in 2012, while average coal prices hit a 25 year high (according EIA). At the same time, electric demand has been flat, and new renewables and NGCCs were brought online. The final MATS was released at the end of 2011, just as this transition was occurring. All these factors contributed to economic decisions to retire some plants, who could no longer compete as they once had,” Purchia said.
