New EPA Rules on Power Plant CO2 Emissions


On September 20, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued new proposed rules limiting the carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions of new coal- and natural gas-based power plants. The proposed rule sets stringent limits on CO2 emissions from coal plants in particular, essentially requiring the use “carbon capture and sequestration” technology or eliminating coal as a potential fuel source for future plants.


Since CCS is not commercially viable, the Adminis- tration has abandoned its “all-of-the above” energy strategy and embraced an “all-but-one” approach that effectively prevents construction of new coal- based generation. Electric cooperatives strongly oppose this shift and believe the proposed rule should be with- drawn. Co- ops support using a diverse fuel mix including renewables, natural gas, nuclear, and coal to generate electricity, and support using demand response and energy efficiency to use that energy wisely and keep costs affordable. Co-ops also con- tinue to deploy new technologies and are research- ing even more cutting edge technologies to meet the energy needs of the future.


Abandoning the All-of-the-Above Strategy The Administration has repeatedly indicated it is in favor of an “all of the above” energy strategy since 2009. A cursory search for “all-of-the-above” at


www.whitehouse.gov pulls up dozens of articles, speeches, fact sheets, etc. As recently as June 25, 2013, President Obama reiterated his support for an all-of-the above energy strategy (http://1.usa.gov/1dblY8P). In that same speech, he directed the EPA to enforce limits on CO2 emissions from coal plants.


CCS Technology not Commercially Viable,


Estimated to be Prohibitively Expensive Electric utilities and others have been researching technologies to reduce or capture CO2 emissions from coal-based power plants for years, and have experimented with CCS technology specifically in the lab and at low-level pilot projects. However, the technology has never been used at a commercial scale at a power plant, over a prolonged period to demonstrate its viability or cost. According to a 2012 Congressional Budget Office report, engineers have estimated that CCS technology would increase the cost of producing electricity from coal-based plants by 75 percent. Already worried about making ends meet, many Americans cannot afford to pay for the significant increases in their electric bills.


Coal: A Plentiful, Domestic Energy Source The Administration’s switch to an all-but-one energy approach would limit Americans access to a plentiful and affordable resource, mortgaging future genera- tions and unnecessarily constraining the American economy. According to the U.S. Energy Information Agency (EIA), the United States has 236 years remain- ing of recoverable coal reserves (http://1.usa. gov/13XA0Iv). Coal is also the most used energy source in the U.S., accounting for 37% of all electric- ity generated in 2012, according to EIA.


70% of electric co-op members in the U.S. rely on electricity


that is generated using coal. As mandated by the Clean Air Act, coal-fired plants must reduce coal emmissions by 50% by 2015. Electric utilities contend that compliance with this mandate is impossible without significant and costly advances in technology. the necessary technology hasn’t been developed, much less tested. Electric co-ops advocate a balanced mix of generating fuels that includes natural gas, hydro power, renewables, and coal. This reasoning prevents dependence on one fuel source and helps ensure the most afford- able prices for their membership.


Visit Action.coop to learn how to fight against costly EPA regulations that could raise your electric rates.


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150  |  Page 151  |  Page 152  |  Page 153  |  Page 154