Opponents say the Clean Power Plan is an example of federal government overreach, but supporters say the goal of reducing carbon emissions from coal-fired power plants by 30 percent by 2030 is an important step toward addressing climate change.
Advertisement
“We continue to believe that any delay in implementation will be positive for coal-dominant utilities and power generators”, the press release stated.
State Attorney General Ken Paxton is hailing the Supreme Court’s stay of the Obama Administration’s Clean Power Plan. It is created to sharply cut emissions from power plants while increasing renewable energy production, it raises the still controversial issue of climate change, and it pits economic interests against each other that will now have to be hashed out by the legal process. “Today’s Supreme Court ruling did not rule on the validity of the plan”.
Oral arguments on the case for regulating carbon dioxide through the plan will be heard in June.
Announced in its final form last August, the Clean Power Plan aims to reduce heat-trapping carbon pollution from power plants, which the EPA says generate 32 percent of total carbon emissions.
U.S. Sen. Mitch McConnell issued a statement saying the court’s decision “is the latest sign” the EPA rules may not be legal.
Advertisement
Florida is one of 27 mostly Republican-led states who filed suit to stop the proposed regulations. “Even while the litigation proceeds, (the Environmental Protection Agency) has indicated it will work with states that choose to continue plan development and will prepare the tools those states will need”. The states say those requirements are too hard to meet and will be bad for industry and jobs. “Governor Wolf’s spokesman Jeff Sheridan says the Supreme Court’s decision will not impact the state’s ongoing efforts to comply with the CPP”. “We have wind and solar coming on the grid at record levels, and all of this has happened before the Clean Power Plan went into effect”, Hitt said.
