A Senate bill introduced this week to roll back Obama administration power plant rules to save the coal industry and protect electric reliability faces growing opposition from environmentalists who say the low cost of natural gas, not regulations, is forcing coal plants to retire.
The argument that market dynamics, not a growing avalanche of Environmental Protection Agency regulations, are retiring coal plants, has been used by the administration in recent years to defend itself from accusations it is engaged in a “war on coal” and is purposefully seeking the retire the nation’s coal fleet.
It’s an argument that hasn’t won many converts in coal country, but it is one that will likely guide the administration in reviewing the emission rules, known as the Clean Power Plan, before they are made final this summer.
That review will hear from both sides of the argument, those for and against the regulations.
Laura Sheehan, with the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity says the industry isn’t optimistic that the administration “will be anything more than a rubber stamp for the EPA’s flawed plan” when it makes its way through the final review process at the White House this summer. She argues that it’s the administration’s inability to see the impact of the rules on coal jobs and reliability that is driving the need for legislation.
But a policy official with the environmental group Earthjustice says the Senate bill does little to address the real causes of the “decline of coal,” which is “not because of environmental safeguards, but because of decreased demand for coal and low natural gas prices that are outcompeting it.”
Marty Hayden, Earthjustice’s head of legislative and policy affairs, says the investment sector also sees “the writing on the wall in terms of coal’s future in the face of climate change,” and is putting more money into low-emitting resources and clean energy, and backing away from fossil fuels.
Natural gas prices are hovering around $2.50 per million British thermal units, a record low. The cheap prices are attracting companies in coal-heavy states such as Ohio to build new natural gas-fired power plants, which will come online beginning in the next year.
A broad array of industry officials and economists have recognized the effects of low prices, which has put pressure on a variety of electric generators, not just coal.
Hayden argues that bills such as the one introduced Wednesday by Republican Sen. Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia are a delaying tactic to put off a more serious conversation on the merits of addressing climate change.
The Natural Resources Defense Council also came out against the bill, calling it a “polluters’ wish list.” David Doniger, a policy official with the group, says it not only rolls back the Clean Power Plan, but would “eviscerate key parts of the Clean Air Act” — the “most successful public health laws in the history of country.”
The Senate bill, nicknamed ARENA — the Affordable Reliable Energy Now Act — was introduced May 13 by a bipartisan group of six senators led by Capito to “ensure reliable and affordable energy, put jobs and our economy first, and curb federal overreach.”
The bill is the companion to a similar measure, the Ratepayer Protection Act, passed recently by the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Both bills give states the ability to opt out of compliance with the emission rules if they say it will threaten reliability or raise the cost of electricity.
The bills also would allow states to put off compliance with the rules until the courts have had their say.
The bills are an effort from coal-state lawmakers to roll back the EPA rule because of it would hurt coal plants. Capito is from the coal-heavy state of West Virginia, and Ed Whitfield, who shuttled the House bill through committee, is a Republican from coal-dependent Kentucky.
Both see the EPA rules as a gross overreach, agreeing with a group of states that EPA does not have the authority to implement the rules.
West Virginia is leading a lawsuit with Kentucky and a dozen other states in federal appeals court against the Clean Power Plan. The states argue that EPA does not have the authority to impose the regulations under the Clean Air Act.
The rules are unprecedented because, rather than establishing emission limits for individual power plants, the EPA sets state-specific emission limits requiring an entire state to comply.
Proponents of the rules, such as Sen. Barbara Boxer of California, the ranking Democrat on the Environment and Public Works Committee, says the Clean Power Plan is an opportunity to spur new economic development through clean energy technologies.
Boxer said earlier this year that she didn’t understand why states have such a problem with the EPA rules, arguing that they should see it as an opportunity.
The Capito bill falls under the jurisdiction of the environment committee, where Boxer will likely oppose the bill. Sen. Jim Inhofe of Oklahoma, the GOP chairman of the committee, supports the measure.
