The Obama administration’s climate change rules for power plants could threaten the nation’s energy security, according to a new business analysis.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce issued its annual index of energy security risks for 2015 on Wednesday, underscoring those posed by the greenhouse gas emission rules for power plants.
Although the index from the nation’s largest business lobby shows significant improvements in energy security due to hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, spawning an oil and gas revolution in the U.S., it also says new Environmental Protection Agency rules for the power grid could offset some of those gains.
“While the news has been very good over the last several years, there are still some risk factors that remain between now and 2040,” said Stephen Eule, climate and technology vice president for the group’s Institute for 21st Century Energy. He said “unprecedented levels of regulation” placed on the electric power sector “could lead to decreased generation diversity, which is why we’re projecting an increased risk in that area.”
“To increase energy security, policymakers should place an emphasis on maintaining the viability of all sources of energy,” he said.
Republican lawmakers continue to rail against the climate regulations, which include the Clean Power Plan, the centerpiece of President Obama’s climate change agenda. The Republican leadership on Capitol Hill argues that the rules will raise energy prices for consumers, while making the electricity grid less stable.
The Chamber of Commerce’s index underscores those concerns by pointing out that a less diverse mix of power plants, such as a grid that no longer supports coal, could make the U.S. more vulnerable to supply disruptions and power outages.
Grid experts have warned of the scenario for years, especially as more coal plants have closed due to other EPA regulations for air pollutants and mercury. Coal plants also have been shuttered due to the low cost of natural gas and a growing shift to gas-fired power plants.
The sharp cold snap of the 2013-14 winter raised fears that increased reliance on natural gas to heat homes and fuel power plants could pose significant risks for keeping the lights going. Gas plants were stretched dangerously thin during the “polar vortex” that winter, experts say.
There are also risks from increasing the nation’s dependence on renewable energy sources, which do not provide electricity 24 hours a day, seven days a week like a coal or nuclear power plant does. Without enough conventional power plants, wind and solar won’t have the necessary back-up to maintain a constant stream of power.
The Clean Power Plan has been criticized for picking energy winners and losers in a bid to support renewables over fossil fuels and other more conventional generation.
Industry groups, in addition to the Chamber, have used Congress’ return from its Christmas break to underscore that point. American Petroleum Institute CEO Jack Gerard said Tuesday that the Clean Power Plan was unnecessary because natural gas has already worked to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Many scientists blame manmade greenhouse gases from the burning of fossil fuels for causing the Earth’s temperature to rise, resulting in more droughts and severe weather.
The “Clean Power Plan … picks winners and losers,” Gerard said in a policy speech Tuesday. He said the climate rule is not based on sound economics and current market trends, which shows natural gas is already lowering emissions “with or without the Clean Power Plan.”
The White House says the “rush to natural gas is eliminated” in the final Clean Power Plan, in a bid to boost renewables, Gerard said. He added that natural gas is needed to back up intermittant solar and wind energy.
