Protective Relay Training - Basic
Our customized live online or in‑person group training can be delivered to your staff at your location.
- Live Online
- 12 hours Instructor-led
- Group Training Available
EPA Utility Rule faces scrutiny over mercury standards, coal plant closures, electric grid reliability, power prices, and public comment transparency, as internal drafts and lawmakers warn of potential localized outages and higher consumer costs.
Understanding the Story
An EPA proposal to curb mercury emissions, with disputed effects on coal closures, grid reliability, and power prices.
- Targets mercury and air toxics from power plants
- Critics say it forces coal plant retirements
- Omitted analysis on reliability and consumer costs
- Internal draft warned of localized grid risks
- Lawmakers cite blackout and price hike concerns
As the Wall Street Journal noted in an editorial earlier this week, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency "continues to claim that its regulatory agenda won't degrade U.S. electric reliability.
"The reality is that the EPA's own staffers are - or used to be worried, and their political superiors have erased the warning."
The EPA, the newspaper said, "is trying to rush out a new utility rule on emission standards that on paper will reduce mercury and other emissions but is really designed to close coal-fired power plants."
Apparently, without concern for the public.
The agency released its utility rule proposal on new pollution limits in May.
It contained no expressions of concern about what the rule would do to the price or reliability of coal-fired power amid the clean air vs cheap electricity debate, or to the consumers, businesses and jobs that depend on it.
And because the proposal includes no reference to such concerns, the Journal said, "as a technical and legal matter, issues that are excluded from the Federal Register mean that the public is denied the opportunity to meaningfully comment on them."
But some staffers expressed concern about reliability even before the utility rule was formally proposed.
As the Wall Street Journal noted in an editorial earlier this week, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency "continues to claim that its regulatory agenda won't degrade U.S. electric reliability. "The reality is that the EPA's own staffers are - or used to be worried, and their political superiors have erased the warning."
The EPA, the newspaper said, "is trying to rush out a new utility rule that on paper will reduce mercury and other emissions through a mercury plan framework but is really designed to close coal-fired power plants."
Apparently, without concern for the public.
The agency released its utility rule proposal in May.
It contained no expressions of concern about what the rule would do to the price or reliability of coal-fired power, or to the consumers, businesses and jobs that depend on it.
And because the proposal includes no reference to such concerns, the Journal said, "as a technical and legal matter, issues that are excluded from the Federal Register mean that the public is denied the opportunity to meaningfully comment on them."
But some staffers expressed concern about reliability even before the utility rule was formally proposed.
Investigators plowing through hundreds of thousands of pages of the agency's electronic documents found a 934-page draft that said the EPA "is aware that concerns have been expressed by some, even in advance of this proposed rule, that this regulation may detrimentally impact the reliability of the electric grid."
The draft says "sources integral to reliable operation" - federalese for coal-fired power plants - could be forced to shut down, as AEP warned in similar cases, and that this "could result in localized reliability problems."
The draft "strongly encourages" transmission operators and state regulators facing regulatory clarity challenges to begin planning "as soon as possible" for "potential retired units." It recommended "transmission upgrades, targeted demand-side management strategies and construction of new generation."
The EPA contends it needs no more time to consider the impact of its rule - the most expensive in agency history - and could impose the rule by mid-December.
The Tulsa World reported Tuesday that, as 25 states urged a court delay that week, Sens. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, and James Inhofe, R-Oklahoma, "accused a federal agency on Monday of ignoring concerns that its sweeping proposal on power plants could cause blackouts."
Small wonder. Unreliable electricity, higher power bills and more job loss in these economic times?
West Virginians could be forgiven for wondering why Republicans were alone in expressing such concerns.
Related News
Related News
Coronavirus impacts dismantling of Germany's Philippsburg nuclear plant
BC Hydro Takes Ranchers to Court Over Hydro Line
Latvia eyes electricity from Belarus nuclear plant
Ontario's electric debacle: Liberal leadership candidates on how they'd fix power
Scientists generate 'electricity from thin air.' Humidity could be a boundless source of energy.
How Alberta’s lithium-laced oil fields can fuel the electric vehicle revolution
Sign Up for Electricity Forum’s Newsletter
Stay informed with our FREE Newsletter — get the latest news, breakthrough technologies, and expert insights, delivered straight to your inbox.
Electricity Today T&D Magazine Subscribe for FREE
- Timely insights from industry experts
- Practical solutions T&D engineers
- Free access to every issue