Archive for November, 2011

The Truth About EPA Regulations and Coal Plant Retirements

In the ongoing discussion about proposed EPA regulations on power plants, there are some who claim that these regulations won’t directly require the shutting down of any specific plants.  Some also claim that the agency’s role of setting rules and standards on emissions is separate from businesses having to make decisions about whether or not to invest in existing power plants.

While the EPA might not target individual power plants for closure, the facts show that new proposed EPA regulations will dramatically decrease an important source of our baseload power by increasing retirements of coal-fueled power plants. According to a recent study from the National Economic Research Associates that we commissioned, under four proposed EPA regulations, there would be 42.2 gigawatts of coal-fueled power plants that would be retired from 2012 to 2020, compared to just 3.1 gigawatts of retirements without those four new rules. Those 39.1 gigawatts of additional retirements represent about 12 percent of the 2010 U.S. coal-fueled electricity generating capacity.

While it’s important to have a balanced energy portfolio that takes advantage of all forms of energy, policies shouldn’t force electricity providers to switch off of this country’s most affordable and abundant energy source, which could lead to increased energy costs for American families and job creators. According to the NERA study, EPA regulations that decrease coal-fueled electricity and increase natural gas-fueled electricity would increase natural gas prices by 10 percent from 2012 to 2020, leading to $8 billion in additional costs annually for residential, commercial and industrial consumers.

What’s most troubling is that the EPA has admitted to not analyzing all the negative economic impacts of their proposed regulations, including Utility MACT, the most expensive rule the EPA has ever written for coal-fueled power plants.

Share this post with friends and family on Twitter and Facebook using the buttons above. It’s important to spread the word about the consequences of these rules on the American economy.

21 November 2011, 2:11 pm | Posted in Energy Independence, Jobs, Policy and Legislation, Reliability | No comments »

Frequently Asked Questions About Proposed EPA Regulations

On the presidential campaign trail, throughout Capitol Hill, and in your neighborhoods there’s been a lot of discussion and debate on how America should move forward with energy policy.  Currently, a lot of those discussions center around whether or not proposed EPA regulations would affect our economic and energy security.

Within that discussion and debate, there have been a lot of myths tossed around about proposed EPA regulations. We want to lay out the facts about how these potential rules would affect Americans.

Question #1: Won’t EPA regulations create jobs?

No. When looking at how EPA regulations affect employment, it’s important to look at the cumulative effects of those rules. When NERA conducted the analysis of four proposed EPA regulations, they took into account sectors that would gain jobs or lose jobs:

[S]ectors that would gain jobs account for about 55,000 added jobs per year on average, and sectors that would lose jobs account for about 238,000 fewer jobs per year on average.

In total, these proposed rules would lead to a net employment loss of 1.65 million jobs from 2012 to 2020.

Question #2: Could these proposed EPA regulations really increase the likelihood of blackouts?

Yes. In addition to lost jobs and higher energy prices, a large number of premature retirements of coal-fueled power plants due to these proposed rules could increase the risk of blackouts. The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board pointed out earlier this week that the EPA could be ignoring the threats proposed regulations have on the reliability of our electricity:

Congressional and industry investigators … uncovered one 934-page EPA draft that was circulated within the Administration sometime before the utility rule was formally proposed. In a “What are the energy impacts?” section, the EPA concedes that it “is aware that concerns have been expressed by some, even in advance of this proposed rule, that this regulation may detrimentally impact the reliability of the electric grid.” … But here’s the kicker: This reliability section was gone when the EPA released its utility rule proposal in May 2011.

Utility commissioners and attorneys general from several states, as well as former and current elected officials from both parties, have all said that some of these proposed EPA regulations could decrease power capacity while limiting energy provider’s ability to fulfill increased demand times.

Question #3: Don’t we need these proposed EPA regulations to switch from coal to newer, cleaner sources of energy?

No. First, coal-fueled power plants have already invested almost $100 billion to significantly reduce emissions without new EPA rules, and will invest $125 million through 2015 to reduce emissions further. Over the past four decades, investments in advanced coal technologies have reduced emissions of three major air pollutants by 84 percent per unit of electricity generated, even though America’s population, economy and energy use have all grown significantly.

Second, these proposed regulations would prematurely shut down more than 39,000 megawatts of coal-fueled power plants, increasing electricity costs by double digits in many regions of the U.S. and increasing natural gas costs by $8 billion per year for residential, commercial and industrial consumers.

So take a stand on these EPA regulations and write your elected official today.

16 November 2011, 1:52 pm | Posted in Affordability, Jobs, Policy and Legislation, Statistics | No comments »

Coal Brings Economic Growth in Louisiana, Arkansas

The Mobile Classroom recently wrapped up a trip to Arkansas and Louisiana, ending with a few days at the Louisiana State Fair in Shreveport. Coal is important to Louisiana and Arkansas by providing a lift to the economy, while helping to keep electricity rates low.

After visiting the classroom at the fair, Louisiana resident Justin Waldrup said, “Economic growth is definitely needed around these parts.  If it comes with the added bonus of using coal, then I’ll take that!”

Residents aren’t the only ones who note the importance of coal in these states. Louisiana’s Natchitoches Parish Commissioner Tony Davis visited the classroom, where he noted the importance of coal. “Most people do not know just how much coal affects our economic climate in Louisiana,” said Davis.

That’s why the John W. Turk, Jr. Plant will be such an asset to this area: jobs and affordable electricity. When it’s complete in 2012, the plant will use state-of-the-art technology to be one of the cleanest, most efficient coal-fueled plants in the United States. By the time it is completed, the plant will have supported at least 1,500 construction jobs, and when it’s up and running, it will provide stable electricity to more than 500,000 residents.

Keep up-to-date with the Turk Plant’s progress here.

15 November 2011, 12:14 pm | Posted in Affordability, Clean Coal Technology and Research, In the States, Jobs, Reliability | No comments »

< Newer Posts \\ | Page 2 out of 5 | // Older Posts >