The Clean Power Plan: Protecting Public Health While Safeguarding Affordable, Reliable Electricity
Since the day EPA began working on the Clean Power Plan, we have committed to cutting the carbon pollution causing climate change, while ensuring grid reliability. Misleading claims from a few special-interest critics may try to convince folks otherwise, but we know reliability is a top issue for states, utilities, and energy regulators. And that means it’s a top issue for EPA. As always, we are committed to working with stakeholders to make sure reliability is never threatened.
Last week, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) held the first in a series of technical conferences on electricity reliability to discuss this issue. We appreciated the chance to take part.
As our Acting Assistant Administrator for Air Janet McCabe said, “Over EPA’s long history of developing Clean Air Act pollution standards for the electric power sector, including the proposed Clean Power Plan, the agency has consistently treated electric system reliability as absolutely critical. Because of this attention, at no time in the more than 40 years that EPA has been implementing the Clean Air Act has compliance with air pollution standards resulted in reliability problems.”
We’re going to continue the constructive dialogue we’ve had with states, utilities, energy regulators, and the public as we finalize our proposal this summer to cut carbon pollution from the power sector 30 percent below 2005 levels by 2030. We worked carefully to make our proposal flexible, offering states and electric generators a wide variety of approaches to meet their pollution reduction goals.
As researchers and experts from industry and government have reviewed our plan, they agree EPA regulations are unlikely to threaten grid reliability in the future.
- This month, a new Department of Energy report predicts the power sector would maintain reliability under the Clean Power Plan with only modest changes to natural gas pipeline infrastructure – changes well within the range of investments utilities have made in the past.
- The Brattle Group said in a recent report, “We find that compliance with the Clean Power Plan is unlikely to materially affect reliability.” Authors of the report concluded that the plan’s critics haven’t fully addressed the options that utilities and grid operators have to achieve EPA’s carbon emissions reduction goals without causing blackouts.
- And Boston’s Analysis Group said in a new report, “As proposed by EPA, the Clean Power Plan provides states and power plant owners a wide range of compliance options and operational discretion [. . .] that can prevent reliability issues while also reducing carbon pollution and cost.” As long as EPA and states plan appropriately, cutting carbon pollution and assuring reliability are compatible goals.
As with anything EPA does, a handful of special-interest critics are automatically opposed. They claim the Clean Power Plan will threaten reliability because they benefit from maintaining the status quo. In fact, failing to take steps to modernize our electric grid is the costliest thing we could do.
As we’ve said before, EPA is committed to protecting reliability as we incorporate the comments we’ve received, and we’ll work with FERC, the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners, states, and our industry partners to implement the final rule.
The power sector is undergoing significant market-driven changes independent of regulation, and the Clean Power Plan advances those industry trends—to protect our health, our economy, and our power grid for generations to come.
Feb 25, 2015 @ 20:41:25
I suppose the state of Arizona is a special interest group, then? Or were you not listening last week when the FERC panelist from Arizona, Susan Bitter-Smith repeatedly stated that Arizona could not possibly comply with the regulation as-written? Honestly, the suggestion that states, RTO/ISO organizations and utilities are the enemy or “special interests” rather than the ones who are really on the hook for keeping the lights on is indefensible and not constructive. EPA is in over its head, and if you want to regulate the power markets you need to put on your big-kid pants and stop blaming a straw man for backlash when you get it wrong.
Feb 27, 2015 @ 20:42:08
I agree with comments from the state of Arizona (kmb). Missouri utilities have invested wisely and provides reliable service at a fair cost. The economics and modernization for power markets and consumers can be reasonable over a longer period of time. Political agendas is not why I rely on our EPA. Truly working together with the majority of states, RTO/ISO organizations and utilites is a benefit to all.
Mar 02, 2015 @ 20:42:53
Speaking about Arizona I’m also absolutely agree with the comments.Modernization of power market is 100% reasonable over a longer period of time. If the working process will be optimized. it becomes benefit.
Mar 04, 2015 @ 20:43:32
Until modernization can be accomplished efficiently and affordably we should not diminish our fossil fuel plants. Has the EPA considered the economic loss in jobs and other related commerce. Don’t continue to destroy our wonderful nation on the order of your socialist boss.
May 14, 2015 @ 02:08:41
The affordability aspect is very important. For many people, a big issue when trying to support green energy is cost rather than lack of desire, but once all electricity costs the same many more people should decide to go green.
Oct 21, 2016 @ 08:12:37
Home air quality is more important today because pollutants in the home are trapped in because of the way the homes are insulated. Have the windows open all the time is not practical so you need something to offset this problem.