He recommended that, in developing the final rule, the EPA give Virginia more credit for recent investments in zero-carbon generation, offer Virginia more flexibility for adjusting its implementation plan if necessary, treat energy efficiency investments more equitably compared to clean energy generation investments, and help promote cooperation among neighboring states.
Advertisement
Wisconsin has joined 20 other states suing the federal government over the requirement to reduce carbon dioxide emissions at power plants by an average 32 percent before 2030. “The rule incorporates successful strategies New York and other states have used to cut climate change pollution from power plants while maintaining electricity reliability, holding the line on utility bills, and growing our economies”. “The rule is firmly grounded in science and the law”. He said the state could achieve the goal by relying more on renewable energy, more natural gas or “shutting down dirty coal plants”.
Twenty-five states and municipalities are joining together in support of a move towards cleaner energy. The fact is, the Clean Power Plan creates winners and losers in the marketplace – and any big increase in electricity costs will pressure manufacturers to cut costs, starting in many cases, with employees.
“Of course, it’s very, very complex”, Deck said. “These emissions must be reduced to protect our economy and the environment”.
That’s because of cheaper alternatives and already-imposed environmental regulations that make coal uncompetitive, Patton said. West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey, who is leading the challenge, said the agency overstepped the regulatory authority granted to it under the Clean Air Act, a landmark clean air package passed first in 1970 and updated in 1990.
The Attorney General’s action can also ensure that the states like Illinois are able to formulate their own approaches to meet the goals of the Clean Power Plan. Despite that uncertainty, however, many states (even those that are challenging the rule in the D.C. Circuit) are moving ahead and beginning the process of vetting compliance options with stakeholders. If a state does not submit a plan to comply with the CPP, the EPA can promulgate a federal plan for that state.
“Being able to use that diversity to keep costs down seems like something we ought to be working on as a MISO community”, Moeller said. They also say the plan will spur new clean-energy jobs.
There are plenty of pressing problems facing our state that the attorney general should be taking on, but fighting against cleaner air and cleaner water is not one of them. The problem, she said, is the EPA. Decisions made in these forums will have significant ramifications, not just for affected sources of carbon emissions, but also for wholesale and retail electric markets, energy infrastructure operators and developers, and consumers.
Byrd said the EPA is essentially trying to take the place of states’ public service commissions and state-level regulators.
DeVore served as a California lawmaker from 2004 to 2010, is a vice president with the Texas Public Policy Foundation and is a lieutenant colonel in the U.S. Army Retired Reserve. “It’s always been in the state’s purview to determine what’s the best resource mix for each individual state”.
An advanced coal power plant, with carbon capture and storage to lower emissions, costs almost twice as much, at $144 per megawatt hour, Patton said.
Advertisement
“It’s prudent to have a backup plan, but only if it’s needed”, Evans said.
