WASHINGTON, DC - Building on its previous work examining the EPA’s new cap and trade rules, the Subcommittee on Energy and Power, chaired by Rep. Ed Whitfield (R-KY), will hold a hearing on Thursday, Oct. 22, 2015, examining the legal issues relating to the EPA’s carbon dioxide (CO2) regulations for new and existing power plants.
The EPA’s regulations, including two final rules and third proposed rule to regulate CO2 emissions, seek to change the way we generate, distribute, and consume electricity in the United States and pose a threat to grid reliability and ratepayers across the country. The Subcommittee on Energy and Power held a hearing earlier this month with Janet McCabe, Acting Assistant Administrator for Air and Radiation at EPA, where members raised a host of concerns related to EPA’s final and proposed regulations.
Environment and the Economy Subcommittee Chairman John Shimkus (R-IL) asked EPA to explain why the agency substantially reduced its baseline estimates for coal generation and also questioned whether the agency is under-reporting the full impact of its rule for existing plants, stating, “When EPA proposed its rule on June [2014], it projected a base case that said there would be an estimated 244 gigawatts of coal generation in 2020 under existing regulatory and economic conditions. … Today, EPA says that the base case shows an estimated 208 gigawatts of coal generation capacity by 2020. My understanding is there have been no significant regulations or economic changes since your first estimate, so can you explain why EPA would eliminate 36 gigawatts of coal generation from its baseline? … Would you agree that if EPA is underestimating coal power capacity in the baseline of this rule, the agency is significantly under-reporting the impacts of its rule on coal generation?"
Rep. Bill Johnson (R-OH) addressed the consequences these rules could have on jobs and families in Ohio, stating, “Tell me what you’re going to do in Beallsville, Ohio, when you shut down that coal mining operation… Tell me what you’re going to do to establish a new industry there and create economic growth. … A conversation is not going to put food on the table, clothes on the kids, pay for school supplies. A conversation is not going to solve this problem."
Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-VA) highlighted how the rules effectively impose regulatory cap and trade requirements, stating that they are, “pushing on the states a trading plan similar to cap and trade, if not cap and trade heavy, it’s cap and trade of some form." He also raised concerns relating to the rulemaking process, stating, “You disenfranchised the people of Appalachia because you didn’t come to talk to any of the coal producing areas… you refused to come and have a hearing there… you wouldn’t do it. … That’s why your comments are going to support what you got because you went out and found the people that agree with you."
Additional information on Thursday’s hearing can be found online here.
