Implementation of Clean Power Plan easier said than done
April 9, 2015 | By
Jaclyn Brandt
The Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) Clean Power Plan (CPP) has a goal of cutting 30 percent of carbon emissions by 2030 (from 2005 levels) -- but how will this be implemented?
The Environmental and Energy Study Institute (EESI) explained these answers in a briefing in Washington, D.C. on Wednesday. Each state has a customized goal for meeting the CPP, each with interim targets every year between 2020 and 2030. The four building blocks each state need to implement include: improving the efficiency of fossil fuel power plants; switching to plants that emit less carbon, such as natural gas-combined cycle plants; installing zero-emission plants powered by renewable or nuclear energy; and increasing end-use energy efficiency. The CPP requires a 30 percent carbon emissions from 2005, and 34 percent of utilities said they believe the EPA should hold to current emissions reduction targets. Twenty-eight percent said these targets should be more aggressive. Ken Colburn, senior associate with the Regulatory Assistance Project (RAP), said the easiest part of the plan to implement will be the elimination of coal-fired generation. Citing UBS, Colburn explained that, current gas prices will "virtually [ensure] limited run times on coal plants," leading to the retirement of those plants. Colburn said that many aspects of the plan will be implemented naturally because many utilities are already looking toward the future -- with 53 percent saying power storage should be an area their utility is involved in, and 71 percent saying that energy efficiency and demand response is something their utility should be involved in. But he also explained how regional -- rather than state -- implementation might lead to more successful implementation results. Colburn said that larger "market" areas would create a lower cost for implementation, especially if they align with electricity control areas. In the 1970s, the Clean Air Act (CAA) statute ran into numerous problems with implementation. The long journey the EPA and states have been on with CAA is an example of the long process they are about to go through with the CPP. According to Michael Burger, executive director, Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, a lot can be learned from that example. Some of the issues they found were: planning addressed only local or regional problems, rather than global problems; numerical thresholds were much too low; and they were a poor fit with international mechanisms. It was also written for the purpose of pollution sources, not alternatives or consumption. In 2010, the EPA's "Tailoring Rule" phased in CAA-permitting requirements for stationary sources of greenhouse gases (GHG). As far as implementing the CPP plan, the EPA is in mostly unchartered waters. States are given the chance to implement the plan, and only if they fail will the EPA intercede to impose the federal plan. According to Colburn no one knows exactly what the federal plan will look like, but until relinquished, states have a "first crack" at their right to implement the CPP. For more: © 2015 FierceMarkets, a division of Questex Media Group LLC. All rights reserved. http://www.fierceenergy.com/story/implementation-clean-power-plan-easier-said-done/2015-04-09 |