Coal accounted for 43 percent of electricity in Illinois in 2013, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, second only to the 48 percent produced by nuclear plants.
Advertisement
Indeed, the most significant changes in the final draft give states even more flexibility in pursuing the reduction targets.
The President wants coal-fired power plants to reduce their emissions by 32 per cent over the next 15 years, with renewables such as solar and wind satisfying more of the country’s energy demand.
Sixteen states will have tougher carbon dioxide reduction targets than they originally planned now that President Barack Obama has presented his final plan to cut emissions from U.S. power plants.
Politicians and analysts said Obama’s Clean Power Plan, which faces fierce opposition from Republican quarters, should spur the global effort to pin down a climate-rescue pact by year-end. This is the biggest step the U.S. has ever taken to combat climate change.
Now that the EPA has released its rules, the issue of reducing carbon emissions-and, indeed, whether politicians are willing to say they accept the science of climate change in the first place-will likely become an issue in the 2016 presidential election.
While utilities and industry may have to change their practices, Masuca said a cut in greenhouse emissions could raise the profile of the city and increase its appeal to new businesses looking to locate to Birmingham.
The reason for that support is simple: Climate change is a dire threat not just to the planet, but the global economy.
Congressional Republicans and the coal industry oppose the President’s plan, backed up by conservative think-tanks.
“In West Virginia, we know that the cost of electricity will go up”.
The president attempted to show that smart planning when it comes to energy could lead to a cleaner earth and a more robust economy. “In the final rule, we have opened it up so we could look at capacity for renewables and natural gas across the region”. The National Mining Association yesterday asked the Environmental Protection Agency to put the rule on hold while legal challenges play out.
Advertisement
“With these rules, the EPA is trying to stretch its authority beyond recognition and to double down on its attempt to impose an unprecedented takeover of our energy system”, the agency said. “At the very minimum, the States and their citizens should not be forced to suffer these serious harms until the courts have had an opportunity to review the Rule’s legality”.
