Electricity generation within the U.S. is rapidly shifting away from fossil fuels toward cleaner, lower-carbon sources. The fundamental reasons for this are government clean energy goals and dramatic declines in the associated fee of renewable electricity.
But Fossil fuel power plants still produce 60% the US electricity supply, causing air, water and soil pollutants in addition to greenhouse gases. To reduce these impacts, the Environmental Protection Agency announced a algorithm on April 25, 2024. They focus totally on coal-fired power plants, the country's most polluting source of electricity.
As Environmental lawyer I imagine that this curbing of power plant pollution is long overdue. The recent rules close loopholes in existing laws which have allowed coal-fired power plants to pollute the country's air and water for a long time. And they require utilities to dramatically reduce greenhouse gas emissions from these facilities or close them.
opponents, including Industry groups and Republican attorneys general have expressed concerns, and a few have done so vowed to sue. They argue that the EPA has overstepped its legal authority and is imposing crippling costs on the coal industry. While these arguments may appeal to conservative judges, I imagine the EPA's fastidiously crafted rules are on solid legal ground and have a very good likelihood of being upheld.
Mercury, sewage and coal ash
The first rule updates the Clean Air Act of 2012 Mercury and air toxics standards. Mercury, which is released into the air when coal is burned, is a neurotoxin causes developmental damage in children and has contaminated fisheries across the United States
The recent regulation excludes the so-called “Brown coal loophole“As a result, plants that burn lignite – the bottom grade of coal – can emit greater than 3 times as much mercury as other coal-fired power plants. There is just ONE Handful of brown coal power plants still operates within the US and is targeted on Texas and North Dakota. The recent rule reduces the mercury emissions standard from these plants by 70%.
A second rule tightens the standards for Wastewater from coal-fired power plants under the Clean Water Act. These systems use plenty of water for cooling, steam generation and industrial processes. The wastewater they discharge into rivers, lakes and streams comprises toxic pollutants comparable to mercury and arsenic that threaten drinking water supplies and fisheries.
The EPA estimates that the brand new rule will reduce these pollutants by about £670 million a 12 months. Coal-fired power plant owners have until 2029 to comply unless they conform to permanently stop burning coal by 2034.
Burning coal also produces tens of millions of tons of ash, which comprises toxic heavy metals comparable to: Mercury, arsenic and cadmium. The third recent rule deals with “Legacy Sites” – inactive coal-fired power plants – that collectively store 500 million tons of coal ash in unlined, unmonitored waste pits and catch basins.
Coal ash spills have polluted rivers in Tennessee, North Carolina and elsewhere. Over 160 unlined lagoons remain. Most older web sites are situated in low-income communities and communities of color.
AP Photo/Gerry Broome
The recent rule responds to a Judgment from 2015 from the US Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. The EPA had adopted a rule that regulated the storage of coal ash at energetic power plants but not at inactive power plants – an approach the court found illegal. The recent regulation requires secure disposal of coal ash at previously unregulated sites.
Carbon Pollution Standards
Potentially probably the most controversial provision in the brand new package concerns greenhouse gas emissions from existing coal-fired power plants and recent gas-fired power plants. Section 111 of the Clean Air Act Directs EPA to define the “best emissions reduction system” for air pollutants, including greenhouse gas emissions, from power plants. States must then submit plans to the EPA to implement these systems. If a state refuses, the agency takes over implementation.
The EPA has determined that carbon capture and sequestration is one of the best emissions reduction system for each existing coal-fired power plants and recent gas-fired power plants. The agency originally proposed regulating emissions from existing gas plants, but is postponing that step.
The rule takes over a tiered approach to compliance This promotes early retirement within the country aging coal fleet. Plants which might be shut down before 2032 are usually not covered by the regulation. Facilities scheduled to shut by 2039 would have to scale back their emissions by 16% by 2030. Plants scheduled to be operational beyond 2039 must reduce their greenhouse gas emissions by 90% by 2032.
To give utilities some flexibility, the rule allows sources to “green hydrogen” – produced by splitting water using renewable energy – into their fuel mix and take part in it Emissions trading programs.
Next stop: court
In my opinion, regulation coping with greenhouse gas emissions from coal-fired power plants faces the best legal challenge. The mercury and coal ash regulations merely fill gaps in existing regulations, and the wastewater regulation is an issue long overdue update of technology standards to manage toxic discharges. All three rules rest squarely inside EPA's regulatory board and are based on explicit statutory authority.
The path to the climate rule might be made tougher by the Supreme Court's 2022 ruling West Virginia v. United States. EPA Ruling that invalidated the Obama administration's Clean Power Plan and applied a brand new approach to interpreting laws often called “Main query of teaching.” This concept essentially states that in cases where a brand new regulation would have “significant economic and political significance,” Congress must expressly entrust the agency with authority over the difficulty and the court must exercise its authority no matter political considerations or expertise the authority won’t bow to the authority's interpretation.
The fate of the climate rule could rely on how courts answer these three questions:
– Does the fundamental query doctrine apply?
The EPA has gone to great lengths to differentiate this rule from the ill-fated Clean Power Plan and to follow the Supreme Court's direction to remain in line. The recent rule follows a standard, proven approach to setting emissions limits based on pollution controls available to individual facilities.
Indeed, carbon capture and sequestration is the case analogous to scrubbers – Equipment that the EPA has needed for a long time to remove pollutants like particulate matter, sulfur dioxide and mercury from power plant smokestacks. And the brand new rule doesn’t require utilities to modify from coal or natural gas to renewable fuels, which was what most concerned the court within the West Virginia case.
– Is carbon capture and sequestration ready for prime time?
The Clean Air Act requires that an optimal emissions reduction system “shall be.”sufficiently proven.” Courts have interpreted this phrase to incorporate options which might be forward-looking and “technology-driving”—meaning that the standards is probably not achievable today, but information available now shows that they might be achievable in the long run.
The D.C. Circuit Court has repeatedly affirmed that the EPA “has the authority to hold industry to a standard of improved design and operational advances, if so required.” substantial evidence that such improvements are feasible and can provide the improved performance required to satisfy the usual.”
– Will the rule impact the reliability of the ability grid?
Too abrupt a shift to recent fuels and technologies could make it difficult for utilities to generate enough electricity to satisfy demand. However, the EPA consulted with state and federal agencies and electric utilities and conducted an in depth evaluation that concluded that the ability plant regulation applies wouldn’t have a significant impact on reliability.
The rule gives owners until 2032 to include carbon capture and sequestration and allows states to maintain power plants online for an extra 12 months in the event that they can reveal that shutting them down threatens grid reliability. Other provisions give utilities additional flexibility.
As of April 2024, there are roughly 200 coal-fired power plants still operating within the United States, accounting for 1 / 4 of this capability expected to be closed by 2029 for economic reasons independent of the regulations.
These recent rules will definitely make coal-fired power plants dearer to operate. This will reflect the worth of electricity from coal the true cost to society more accurate. Given the impact of coal energy on our nation's air, water, land and climate, in addition to on public health, I view this motion as fully inside EPA's mission.
image credit : theconversation.com