Climate Change News - August 10, 2015 | Newsletter

"No challenge poses a greater threat to our future and future generations than a changing climate," said President Obama as he unveiled the Clean Power Plan on August 3 (photo courtesy of the White House).

White House Releases Clean Power Plan Final Rule

On August 3, President Barack Obama announced the release of the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) finalized Clean Power Plan (CPP), a regulation establishing the country’s first ever limits on carbon emissions from power plants. The final rule comes 14 months after the release of the proposed rule, which received 4.6 million public comments last fall. Notably, the final CPP calls for more aggressive reductions than the proposed rule: a 32 percent cut (increased from 30 percent) in U.S. power sector carbon emissions from 2005 levels by 2030. Additionally, the finalized rule places a greater emphasis on accelerating the shift towards clean and renewable energy sources than the proposed rule. In announcing the rule, President Obama remarked, "We're the first generation to feel the impact of climate change and we're the last generation that can do something about it. We only get one home. We only get one planet. There's no plan B."

For more information see:

Reuters, Environment and Energy Publishing, Washington Post, White House Fact Sheet

States React to New Clean Power Plan Emissions Targets

Following the release of the finalized Clean Power Plan (CPP), state leaders from across the country weighed in, largely along party lines. Most states received a new emissions reductions target, which was the focus of many of the reactions. Some welcomed the EPA regulation. California Gov. Jerry Brown (D) deemed it a "bold and absolutely necessary carbon reduction plan." Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe (D) stated, "I look forward to working with stakeholders to accomplish the objectives of reducing carbon emissions . . . and building the new Virginia economy." Others were dismayed by their new, tougher emissions reduction goal. Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback (R) remarked, "The final rule released today is twice as bad for Kansas as the proposed rule released last summer." Montana Gov. Steve Bullock (D) said that "it looks as though the Obama administration has moved the goal post on us. I am extremely disappointed by this.” In total, the final CPP increased emissions reduction targets for 16 states. Arkansas Gov. Asa Hutchinson (R), whose state target was reduced, expressed a mixed view by saying, "While we will continue to fight the final rule, we will also work with our industries and consumers to determine a lowest cost option to compliance." Under the final rule, states have until September 2018 to submit their CPP implementation plans. Those that do not will be subject to the federal implementation plan, which was released in draft form on August 3.

For more information see:

New York Times, Bloomberg BNA, Environment and Energy Publishing, Los Angeles Times, Daily Press

Finalized Clean Power Plan Emphasizes Renewables and Efficiency

There are a number of changes in the finalized Clean Power Plan (CPP) from the proposed regulation, including the elimination of energy efficiency as one of the four “building blocks” that the EPA used to develop each state’s emissions reduction goal. Some believe that the EPA removed the energy efficiency building block in order to increase the likelihood of the rule withstanding a legal challenge, noting that the agency has limited authority to regulate a state’s energy economy beyond power plants. Despite its removal as a building block, energy efficiency will likely remain a key strategy for states as they develop compliance plans. To incentivize CPP compliance through energy efficiency and clean energy, the EPA created the Clean Energy Incentive Program, which will grant emissions credits to states that invest in solar or wind power or that develop energy efficiency projects for low-income communities. This increased emphasis on clean energy and energy efficiency is driven by what EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy described as the country’s “accelerating trend toward clean power, and the growing success of energy efficiency efforts,” causing the “clean energy transition [to happen] faster than anyone anticipated — even as of last year when we proposed this rule.”

For more information see:

Washington Post, InsideClimate News, The Hill, Energy Manager Today, Utility Dive

Political and Industry Leaders React to Clean Power Plan

Global and domestic leaders provided strong reactions to the finalized Clean Power Plan (CPP). United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon applauded the United States saying, “This is hugely important and visionary leadership. The U.S. can and will be able to change the world in addressing a climate phenomenon.” In his comments, Ban Ki-moon shared his hopes that President Obama could continue to show leadership in climate issues going in to the UN climate conference at the end of the year. French President Francois Hollande added that the CPP would be a “major contribution to the success” of the Paris conference. In opposition, U.S. Republican leaders in Congress voiced their strong opposition to the new regulation. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) said the CPP would lead to “fewer jobs, shuttered power plants, and higher electricity costs for families and businesses.” House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) called the CPP an “energy tax”, adding that it is an “expensive, arrogant insult to Americans who are struggling to make ends meet."

Several power sector leaders struck a more constructive tone. Edison Electric Institute President Tom Kuhn said that “the final guidelines appear to contain a range of tools to maintain reliability and better reflect how the interconnected power system operates.” Duke Energy President and CEO Lynn Good added, "We will also continue to work constructively with states to identify customer solutions that preserve the reliability and affordability that our communities expect.”

For more information see:

Reuters, The Guardian, The Hill, McClatchy, Duke Energy Statement, EEI Statement