The Environmental Protection Agency is seeking to shore up high-profile carbon-emissions rules for coal-fired power plants against GOP claims that they violate a major 2005 energy law.
EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy said Thursday that her agency is preparing to release detailed information that will provide more “clarity” on the topic.
“We are going to address that issue specifically,” she told the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee of EPA’s planned “notice of data availability.” McCarthy said EPA has sent the notice to the White House Office of Management and Budget for review.
Here’s what the fight is about:
EPA proposed regulations in September requiring that future coal-fired power plants use technology that traps a substantial amount of their carbon emissions.
The agency has repeatedly pointed to a few Energy Department-backed power projects, including a Southern Co. coal plant under construction in Mississippi, when arguing that the technology is ready for commercial deployment at coal plants.
But Republicans say that EPA’s reliance on these projects to justify the rule violates provisions in the massive 2005 energy law that support low-emissions coal projects.
The law says that no technology can form the basis for certain EPA rules “solely” because it’s employed at facilities funded under the Energy Department’s “Clean Coal Power Initiative” or receive “clean” coal tax credits.
“This is very concerning because this is a direct legal conflict,” Sen. David Vitter of Louisiana, the Senate Environment panel’s top Republican, told McCarthy at a committee hearing Thursday.
House Republicans and the state of Nebraska (which filed a lawsuit Wednesday) have raised the same allegations about the carbon-emissions rules for power plants proposed last year. “I think this concern is underscored by the fact that litigation has now been filed over this direct legal conflict,” Vitter said.
Republicans, disputing EPA, say the carbon rules are based on technology that’s nowhere near ready for widespread deployment, and they argue that the rule will hurt the coal industry and cost jobs.
But McCarthy told lawmakers that the coal-plant standards are based on evidence about the feasibility of the carbon-trapping technology that’s more extensive than just the few projects covered under the 2005 law’s restriction. On Thursday, she said that the basis for the carbon-emissions rules proposed last year goes “well beyond” those projects and that “we are very comfortable with the standard that we have proposed.”
“There is nothing in the law that precludes us from considering those [projects] in the context of a larger, more robust data set,” she said.
EPA is vowing to provide details about why the rule doesn’t collide with the 2005 law.
“EPA is making additional information available on the proposed Carbon Pollution Standards. Specifically, EPA will issue a notice of data availability that will provide analysis and information related to the Energy Policy Act of 2005,” the agency said Thursday.
What We're Following See More »
Foreign Policy takes a look at the future of mining the estimated "100,000 near-Earth objects—including asteroids and comets—in the neighborhood of our planet. Some of these NEOs, as they’re called, are small. Others are substantial and potentially packed full of water and various important minerals, such as nickel, cobalt, and iron. One day, advocates believe, those objects will be tapped by variations on the equipment used in the coal mines of Kentucky or in the diamond mines of Africa. And for immense gain: According to industry experts, the contents of a single asteroid could be worth trillions of dollars." But the technology to get us there is only the first step. Experts say "a multinational body might emerge" to manage rights to NEOs, as well as a body of law, including an international court.
Not to be outdone by Jeffrey Goldberg's recent piece in The Atlantic about President Obama's foreign policy, the New York Times Magazine checks in with a longread on the president's economic legacy. In it, Obama is cognizant that the economic reality--73 straight months of growth--isn't matched by public perceptions. Some of that, he says, is due to a constant drumbeat from the right that "that denies any progress." But he also accepts some blame himself. “I mean, the truth of the matter is that if we had been able to more effectively communicate all the steps we had taken to the swing voter,” he said, “then we might have maintained a majority in the House or the Senate.”
Ronald Reagan's children and political allies took to the media and Twitter this week to chide funnyman Will Ferrell for his plans to play a dementia-addled Reagan in his second term in a new comedy entitled Reagan. In an open letter, Reagan's daughter Patti Davis tells Ferrell, who's also a producer on the movie, “Perhaps for your comedy you would like to visit some dementia facilities. I have—I didn’t find anything comedic there, and my hope would be that if you’re a decent human being, you wouldn’t either.” Michael Reagan, the president's son, tweeted, "What an Outrag....Alzheimers is not joke...It kills..You should be ashamed all of you." And former Rep. Joe Walsh called it an example of "Hollywood taking a shot at conservatives again."
In a sign that she’s ready to put a longer-than-expected primary battle behind her, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (D) is no longer going on the air in upcoming primary states. “Team Clinton hasn’t spent a single cent in … California, Indiana, Kentucky, Oregon and West Virginia, while” Sen. Bernie Sanders’ (I-VT) “campaign has spent a little more than $1 million in those same states.” Meanwhile, Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-OR), Sanders’ "lone backer in the Senate, said the candidate should end his presidential campaign if he’s losing to Hillary Clinton after the primary season concludes in June, breaking sharply with the candidate who is vowing to take his insurgent bid to the party convention in Philadelphia.”
The team behind the bestselling "Clinton Cash"—author Peter Schweizer and Breitbart's Stephen Bannon—is turning the book into a movie that will have its U.S. premiere just before the Democratic National Convention this summer. The film will get its global debut "next month in Cannes, France, during the Cannes Film Festival. (The movie is not a part of the festival, but will be shown at a screening arranged for distributors)." Bloomberg has a trailer up, pointing out that it's "less Ken Burns than Jerry Bruckheimer, featuring blood-drenched money, radical madrassas, and ominous footage of the Clintons."