This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
My last post argued that EPA should immediately repeal the Obama Administration’s CleanPower Plan. It attempted to move away from fossilfuels and toward zero-carbon sources like solarpower to supply electricity. Here are the options going forward for regulating existing power plants.
The majority 6–3 decision sharply curtails the EPA’s authority to set standards based on a broad range of flexible options to cut carbon emissions from the power sector—options such as replacing polluting fossilfuels with cheap and widely available wind and solarpower coupled with battery storage.
Multiple lines of analysis make clear that regardless of how cheap wind and solarpower get, without directly addressing pollution from coal and gas plants, the country’s clean energy transition will not happen fast enough. One critical tool for forcing that reckoning comes from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
The statute points to section 211(o)(1)(H) of the CleanAirAct to define lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions—exactly as was done for the simultaneously passed section 45V Clean Hydrogen Production Credit. Clean must mean clean, meaning no polluter loopholes, and no polluter giveaways.
The most prominent of the initiatives in the Climate Action Plan aims to use Section 111 of the CleanAirAct to limit greenhouse gas emissions from coal and other fossil-fueledpower plants. These facilities account for around 40% of all carbon pollution in the United States.
The Ninth Circuit further concluded that even if the first prong was satisfied, the plaintiffs did not “surmount the remaining hurdle” of establishing that the relief they sought was within the power of Article III courts. The Ninth Circuit found, however, that the plaintiffs had not established the redressability requirement for standing.
Given the EPA has the responsibility and the obligation to address carbon pollution, these standards—the first to limit carbon emissions from existing coal- and gas-fired power plants—are long overdue. Those currently operating fossilfuel plants generate 25 percent of U.S. Last year, wind generated 10.2 percent , and the 19.8
A renewed emphasis on fossilfuels is expected under another Trump administration, though coal will likely remain moribund thanks to poor economic fundamentals and constrained access to capital. Renewable Energy Vs. FossilFuels Renewables or fossilfuels?
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 12,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content