XPost: talk.politics.misc, talk.politics.guns, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh.tv-show XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.global-warming, soc.retirement
XPost: alt.survival

Trump’s administration on Tuesday unveiled its plan to dramatically
weaken pollution limits on coal-fired power plants by shifting most of the regulatory burden to states in a further assault on the Obama climate
legacy.
The Environmental Protection Agency’s "Affordable Clean Energy" proposal
would replace the Obama-era Clean Power Plan’s sweeping changes in the
U.S. electricity mix with more modest emissions curbs at individual power plants. It would set pollution guidelines based on assumptions about what improvements could be eked out through efficiency upgrades at the
facilities, then give states the latitude to design their own plans for
paring carbon dioxide emissions at the sites.
EPA Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler said the proposal “would restore
the rule of law and empower states to reduce greenhouse gas emissions”
while providing “modern, reliable, and affordable energy for all
Americans.”
“Today’s proposal provides the states and regulated community the
certainty they need to continue environmental progress while fulfilling President Trump’s goal of energy dominance,” Wheeler said in a news
release.
The move represents the latest bid by Trump to fulfill campaign promises
to revive the coal industry and restore mining jobs. Although it is
unlikely to dramatically alter the U.S. power mix -- or give a big boost
to domestic coal demand, which has flagged amid competition from cheap
natural gas and renewables -- industry advocates hailed the effort as
curbing federal government overreach and leveling the playing field.

“The policy put forward by the previous administration was an illegal
attempt to impose a political agenda on the country’s power system,” Hal
Quinn, president of the National Mining Association said in an emailed statement. “The replacement rule respects the infrastructure and economic realities that are unique to each state, allowing for state-driven
solutions, as intended by the Clean Air Act, rather than top down
mandates.”
Trump is set to hold back-to-back campaign events Tuesday in West
Virginia, the No. 2 coal-producing state, where in 2016 he pledged to “get those mines open” and told miners to “get ready, because you’re going to
be working your asses off.”
Environmental advocates and the architects of former President Barack
Obama’s ambitious plan derided the Trump administration’s proposed
replacement as political pandering and said it represented a U.S. retreat
from the global fight against climate change. The move dovetails with a separate administration proposal to relax Obama-era greenhouse gas
emission limits on vehicles and coming efforts to ease limits on the
amount of methane that can escape from oil wells.
“Trump’s EPA is abandoning any attempt to curb the carbon pollution that’s driving damaging climate change,” said Lissa Lynch, a staff attorney at
the Natural Resources Defense Council. “This proposal violates the law and cooks the books on science and economics, all to prop up coal power plants
that can’t compete with cleaner energy.”
The Trump proposal may open a small window for a revival of coal even as
it prolongs uncertainty over the U.S. electricity mix and casts doubt on investments by utilities making decades-long choices about new plants and upgrades.
Administration officials are on track to finalize the new regulation next
year, following a public comment period on Tuesday’s proposal, but critics
have already vowed to battle the effort in federal court and the legal
disputes could take years to resolve. As it stands, Obama’s Clean Power
Plan never went into effect; amid legal challenges from opponents who said
it overstepped the EPA’s authority under federal law, the U.S. Supreme
Court put the initiative on hold in February 2016.
The EPA estimates its proposal could pare carbon dioxide emissions 0.7 per
cent to 1.5 per cent from projected levels without the Obama plan in
place, while cutting emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and other pollutants. According to the agency, once the plan is fully implemented,
power sector emissions could fall 33 to 34 per cent below 2005 levels -- roughly mirroring the same target as Obama’s initiative, which sought to
cut those greenhouse gas emissions 32 per cent relative to 2005.
The approach shows the Trump administration abandoning its predecessor’s expansive view of what constitutes the “best system of emission
reductions” for a more narrow, facility-focused interpretation that conservatives say is within the bounds of the Clean Air Act that provides
the framework for air pollution regulations.
“The announcement of a replacement rule may largely represent a political milestone for a president who promised to end his predecessor’s ‘war on
coal,’ but we also view it as a significant policy action that could to
make it difficult for a differently oriented successor to establish
greenhouse gas limits on any stationary sector via executive discretion,” ClearView Energy Partners managing director Kevin Book said in a research
note to clients.
Under the Trump plan, the EPA would establish broad guidelines on the technologies that can be used to pare carbon dioxide emissions and then
give states three years to develop their own plans for paring that
pollution.
It also would overhaul the triggers that prompt new permit reviews -- and potentially expensive new pollution controls -- that have been criticized
as onerous by owners of power plants, refineries and other industrial
sites.
But that still might not be enough to dramatically alter the landscape for
U.S. coal, which is still losing U.S. customers as utilities increasingly
turn to natural gas and renewable power to generate electricity.
Since 2010, power plant owners have either retired or announced plans to
retire 630 coal-fired facilities in 43 states -- nearly 40 per cent of the
U.S. coal fleet, according to data by the American Coalition for Clean
Coal Electricity, a trade group representing utilities such as Southern
Co. and producers such as Peabody Energy Corp.
The EPA is not altering its landmark 2009 conclusion that greenhouse gases threaten health and human welfare -- a finding underpinning the power
plant regulation and compelling the Trump’s move Tuesday. Conservatives
have filed a half dozen petitions challenging the endangerment finding,
though Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler has signaled he is not eager to reconsider the issue.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: talk.politics.misc, talk.politics.guns, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh.tv-show XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.global-warming, soc.retirement
XPost: alt.survival

Trump’s administration on Tuesday unveiled its plan to dramatically
weaken pollution limits on coal-fired power plants by shifting most of the regulatory burden to states in a further assault on the Obama climate
legacy.
The Environmental Protection Agency’s "Affordable Clean Energy" proposal
would replace the Obama-era Clean Power Plan’s sweeping changes in the
U.S. electricity mix with more modest emissions curbs at individual power plants. It would set pollution guidelines based on assumptions about what improvements could be eked out through efficiency upgrades at the
facilities, then give states the latitude to design their own plans for
paring carbon dioxide emissions at the sites.
EPA Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler said the proposal “would restore
the rule of law and empower states to reduce greenhouse gas emissions”
while providing “modern, reliable, and affordable energy for all
Americans.”
“Today’s proposal provides the states and regulated community the
certainty they need to continue environmental progress while fulfilling President Trump’s goal of energy dominance,” Wheeler said in a news
release.
The move represents the latest bid by Trump to fulfill campaign promises
to revive the coal industry and restore mining jobs. Although it is
unlikely to dramatically alter the U.S. power mix -- or give a big boost
to domestic coal demand, which has flagged amid competition from cheap
natural gas and renewables -- industry advocates hailed the effort as
curbing federal government overreach and leveling the playing field.

“The policy put forward by the previous administration was an illegal
attempt to impose a political agenda on the country’s power system,” Hal
Quinn, president of the National Mining Association said in an emailed statement. “The replacement rule respects the infrastructure and economic realities that are unique to each state, allowing for state-driven
solutions, as intended by the Clean Air Act, rather than top down
mandates.”
Trump is set to hold back-to-back campaign events Tuesday in West
Virginia, the No. 2 coal-producing state, where in 2016 he pledged to “get those mines open” and told miners to “get ready, because you’re going to
be working your asses off.”
Environmental advocates and the architects of former President Barack
Obama’s ambitious plan derided the Trump administration’s proposed
replacement as political pandering and said it represented a U.S. retreat
from the global fight against climate change. The move dovetails with a separate administration proposal to relax Obama-era greenhouse gas
emission limits on vehicles and coming efforts to ease limits on the
amount of methane that can escape from oil wells.
“Trump’s EPA is abandoning any attempt to curb the carbon pollution that’s driving damaging climate change,” said Lissa Lynch, a staff attorney at
the Natural Resources Defense Council. “This proposal violates the law and cooks the books on science and economics, all to prop up coal power plants
that can’t compete with cleaner energy.”
The Trump proposal may open a small window for a revival of coal even as
it prolongs uncertainty over the U.S. electricity mix and casts doubt on investments by utilities making decades-long choices about new plants and upgrades.
Administration officials are on track to finalize the new regulation next
year, following a public comment period on Tuesday’s proposal, but critics
have already vowed to battle the effort in federal court and the legal
disputes could take years to resolve. As it stands, Obama’s Clean Power
Plan never went into effect; amid legal challenges from opponents who said
it overstepped the EPA’s authority under federal law, the U.S. Supreme
Court put the initiative on hold in February 2016.
The EPA estimates its proposal could pare carbon dioxide emissions 0.7 per
cent to 1.5 per cent from projected levels without the Obama plan in
place, while cutting emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and other pollutants. According to the agency, once the plan is fully implemented,
power sector emissions could fall 33 to 34 per cent below 2005 levels -- roughly mirroring the same target as Obama’s initiative, which sought to
cut those greenhouse gas emissions 32 per cent relative to 2005.
The approach shows the Trump administration abandoning its predecessor’s expansive view of what constitutes the “best system of emission
reductions” for a more narrow, facility-focused interpretation that conservatives say is within the bounds of the Clean Air Act that provides
the framework for air pollution regulations.
“The announcement of a replacement rule may largely represent a political milestone for a president who promised to end his predecessor’s ‘war on
coal,’ but we also view it as a significant policy action that could to
make it difficult for a differently oriented successor to establish
greenhouse gas limits on any stationary sector via executive discretion,” ClearView Energy Partners managing director Kevin Book said in a research
note to clients.
Under the Trump plan, the EPA would establish broad guidelines on the technologies that can be used to pare carbon dioxide emissions and then
give states three years to develop their own plans for paring that
pollution.
It also would overhaul the triggers that prompt new permit reviews -- and potentially expensive new pollution controls -- that have been criticized
as onerous by owners of power plants, refineries and other industrial
sites.
But that still might not be enough to dramatically alter the landscape for
U.S. coal, which is still losing U.S. customers as utilities increasingly
turn to natural gas and renewable power to generate electricity.
Since 2010, power plant owners have either retired or announced plans to
retire 630 coal-fired facilities in 43 states -- nearly 40 per cent of the
U.S. coal fleet, according to data by the American Coalition for Clean
Coal Electricity, a trade group representing utilities such as Southern
Co. and producers such as Peabody Energy Corp.
The EPA is not altering its landmark 2009 conclusion that greenhouse gases threaten health and human welfare -- a finding underpinning the power
plant regulation and compelling the Trump’s move Tuesday. Conservatives
have filed a half dozen petitions challenging the endangerment finding,
though Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler has signaled he is not eager to reconsider the issue.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: talk.politics.misc, talk.politics.guns, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh.tv-show XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.global-warming, soc.retirement
XPost: alt.survival

Trump’s administration on Tuesday unveiled its plan to dramatically
weaken pollution limits on coal-fired power plants by shifting most of the regulatory burden to states in a further assault on the Obama climate
legacy.
The Environmental Protection Agency’s "Affordable Clean Energy" proposal
would replace the Obama-era Clean Power Plan’s sweeping changes in the
U.S. electricity mix with more modest emissions curbs at individual power plants. It would set pollution guidelines based on assumptions about what improvements could be eked out through efficiency upgrades at the
facilities, then give states the latitude to design their own plans for
paring carbon dioxide emissions at the sites.
EPA Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler said the proposal “would restore
the rule of law and empower states to reduce greenhouse gas emissions”
while providing “modern, reliable, and affordable energy for all
Americans.”
“Today’s proposal provides the states and regulated community the
certainty they need to continue environmental progress while fulfilling President Trump’s goal of energy dominance,” Wheeler said in a news
release.
The move represents the latest bid by Trump to fulfill campaign promises
to revive the coal industry and restore mining jobs. Although it is
unlikely to dramatically alter the U.S. power mix -- or give a big boost
to domestic coal demand, which has flagged amid competition from cheap
natural gas and renewables -- industry advocates hailed the effort as
curbing federal government overreach and leveling the playing field.

“The policy put forward by the previous administration was an illegal
attempt to impose a political agenda on the country’s power system,” Hal
Quinn, president of the National Mining Association said in an emailed statement. “The replacement rule respects the infrastructure and economic realities that are unique to each state, allowing for state-driven
solutions, as intended by the Clean Air Act, rather than top down
mandates.”
Trump is set to hold back-to-back campaign events Tuesday in West
Virginia, the No. 2 coal-producing state, where in 2016 he pledged to “get those mines open” and told miners to “get ready, because you’re going to
be working your asses off.”
Environmental advocates and the architects of former President Barack
Obama’s ambitious plan derided the Trump administration’s proposed
replacement as political pandering and said it represented a U.S. retreat
from the global fight against climate change. The move dovetails with a separate administration proposal to relax Obama-era greenhouse gas
emission limits on vehicles and coming efforts to ease limits on the
amount of methane that can escape from oil wells.
“Trump’s EPA is abandoning any attempt to curb the carbon pollution that’s driving damaging climate change,” said Lissa Lynch, a staff attorney at
the Natural Resources Defense Council. “This proposal violates the law and cooks the books on science and economics, all to prop up coal power plants
that can’t compete with cleaner energy.”
The Trump proposal may open a small window for a revival of coal even as
it prolongs uncertainty over the U.S. electricity mix and casts doubt on investments by utilities making decades-long choices about new plants and upgrades.
Administration officials are on track to finalize the new regulation next
year, following a public comment period on Tuesday’s proposal, but critics
have already vowed to battle the effort in federal court and the legal
disputes could take years to resolve. As it stands, Obama’s Clean Power
Plan never went into effect; amid legal challenges from opponents who said
it overstepped the EPA’s authority under federal law, the U.S. Supreme
Court put the initiative on hold in February 2016.
The EPA estimates its proposal could pare carbon dioxide emissions 0.7 per
cent to 1.5 per cent from projected levels without the Obama plan in
place, while cutting emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and other pollutants. According to the agency, once the plan is fully implemented,
power sector emissions could fall 33 to 34 per cent below 2005 levels -- roughly mirroring the same target as Obama’s initiative, which sought to
cut those greenhouse gas emissions 32 per cent relative to 2005.
The approach shows the Trump administration abandoning its predecessor’s expansive view of what constitutes the “best system of emission
reductions” for a more narrow, facility-focused interpretation that conservatives say is within the bounds of the Clean Air Act that provides
the framework for air pollution regulations.
“The announcement of a replacement rule may largely represent a political milestone for a president who promised to end his predecessor’s ‘war on
coal,’ but we also view it as a significant policy action that could to
make it difficult for a differently oriented successor to establish
greenhouse gas limits on any stationary sector via executive discretion,” ClearView Energy Partners managing director Kevin Book said in a research
note to clients.
Under the Trump plan, the EPA would establish broad guidelines on the technologies that can be used to pare carbon dioxide emissions and then
give states three years to develop their own plans for paring that
pollution.
It also would overhaul the triggers that prompt new permit reviews -- and potentially expensive new pollution controls -- that have been criticized
as onerous by owners of power plants, refineries and other industrial
sites.
But that still might not be enough to dramatically alter the landscape for
U.S. coal, which is still losing U.S. customers as utilities increasingly
turn to natural gas and renewable power to generate electricity.
Since 2010, power plant owners have either retired or announced plans to
retire 630 coal-fired facilities in 43 states -- nearly 40 per cent of the
U.S. coal fleet, according to data by the American Coalition for Clean
Coal Electricity, a trade group representing utilities such as Southern
Co. and producers such as Peabody Energy Corp.
The EPA is not altering its landmark 2009 conclusion that greenhouse gases threaten health and human welfare -- a finding underpinning the power
plant regulation and compelling the Trump’s move Tuesday. Conservatives
have filed a half dozen petitions challenging the endangerment finding,
though Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler has signaled he is not eager to reconsider the issue.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: talk.politics.misc, talk.politics.guns, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh.tv-show XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.global-warming, soc.retirement
XPost: alt.survival

Trump’s administration on Tuesday unveiled its plan to dramatically
weaken pollution limits on coal-fired power plants by shifting most of the regulatory burden to states in a further assault on the Obama climate
legacy.
The Environmental Protection Agency’s "Affordable Clean Energy" proposal
would replace the Obama-era Clean Power Plan’s sweeping changes in the
U.S. electricity mix with more modest emissions curbs at individual power plants. It would set pollution guidelines based on assumptions about what improvements could be eked out through efficiency upgrades at the
facilities, then give states the latitude to design their own plans for
paring carbon dioxide emissions at the sites.
EPA Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler said the proposal “would restore
the rule of law and empower states to reduce greenhouse gas emissions”
while providing “modern, reliable, and affordable energy for all
Americans.”
“Today’s proposal provides the states and regulated community the
certainty they need to continue environmental progress while fulfilling President Trump’s goal of energy dominance,” Wheeler said in a news
release.
The move represents the latest bid by Trump to fulfill campaign promises
to revive the coal industry and restore mining jobs. Although it is
unlikely to dramatically alter the U.S. power mix -- or give a big boost
to domestic coal demand, which has flagged amid competition from cheap
natural gas and renewables -- industry advocates hailed the effort as
curbing federal government overreach and leveling the playing field.

“The policy put forward by the previous administration was an illegal
attempt to impose a political agenda on the country’s power system,” Hal
Quinn, president of the National Mining Association said in an emailed statement. “The replacement rule respects the infrastructure and economic realities that are unique to each state, allowing for state-driven
solutions, as intended by the Clean Air Act, rather than top down
mandates.”
Trump is set to hold back-to-back campaign events Tuesday in West
Virginia, the No. 2 coal-producing state, where in 2016 he pledged to “get those mines open” and told miners to “get ready, because you’re going to
be working your asses off.”
Environmental advocates and the architects of former President Barack
Obama’s ambitious plan derided the Trump administration’s proposed
replacement as political pandering and said it represented a U.S. retreat
from the global fight against climate change. The move dovetails with a separate administration proposal to relax Obama-era greenhouse gas
emission limits on vehicles and coming efforts to ease limits on the
amount of methane that can escape from oil wells.
“Trump’s EPA is abandoning any attempt to curb the carbon pollution that’s driving damaging climate change,” said Lissa Lynch, a staff attorney at
the Natural Resources Defense Council. “This proposal violates the law and cooks the books on science and economics, all to prop up coal power plants
that can’t compete with cleaner energy.”
The Trump proposal may open a small window for a revival of coal even as
it prolongs uncertainty over the U.S. electricity mix and casts doubt on investments by utilities making decades-long choices about new plants and upgrades.
Administration officials are on track to finalize the new regulation next
year, following a public comment period on Tuesday’s proposal, but critics
have already vowed to battle the effort in federal court and the legal
disputes could take years to resolve. As it stands, Obama’s Clean Power
Plan never went into effect; amid legal challenges from opponents who said
it overstepped the EPA’s authority under federal law, the U.S. Supreme
Court put the initiative on hold in February 2016.
The EPA estimates its proposal could pare carbon dioxide emissions 0.7 per
cent to 1.5 per cent from projected levels without the Obama plan in
place, while cutting emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and other pollutants. According to the agency, once the plan is fully implemented,
power sector emissions could fall 33 to 34 per cent below 2005 levels -- roughly mirroring the same target as Obama’s initiative, which sought to
cut those greenhouse gas emissions 32 per cent relative to 2005.
The approach shows the Trump administration abandoning its predecessor’s expansive view of what constitutes the “best system of emission
reductions” for a more narrow, facility-focused interpretation that conservatives say is within the bounds of the Clean Air Act that provides
the framework for air pollution regulations.
“The announcement of a replacement rule may largely represent a political milestone for a president who promised to end his predecessor’s ‘war on
coal,’ but we also view it as a significant policy action that could to
make it difficult for a differently oriented successor to establish
greenhouse gas limits on any stationary sector via executive discretion,” ClearView Energy Partners managing director Kevin Book said in a research
note to clients.
Under the Trump plan, the EPA would establish broad guidelines on the technologies that can be used to pare carbon dioxide emissions and then
give states three years to develop their own plans for paring that
pollution.
It also would overhaul the triggers that prompt new permit reviews -- and potentially expensive new pollution controls -- that have been criticized
as onerous by owners of power plants, refineries and other industrial
sites.
But that still might not be enough to dramatically alter the landscape for
U.S. coal, which is still losing U.S. customers as utilities increasingly
turn to natural gas and renewable power to generate electricity.
Since 2010, power plant owners have either retired or announced plans to
retire 630 coal-fired facilities in 43 states -- nearly 40 per cent of the
U.S. coal fleet, according to data by the American Coalition for Clean
Coal Electricity, a trade group representing utilities such as Southern
Co. and producers such as Peabody Energy Corp.
The EPA is not altering its landmark 2009 conclusion that greenhouse gases threaten health and human welfare -- a finding underpinning the power
plant regulation and compelling the Trump’s move Tuesday. Conservatives
have filed a half dozen petitions challenging the endangerment finding,
though Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler has signaled he is not eager to reconsider the issue.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: talk.politics.misc, talk.politics.guns, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh.tv-show XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.global-warming, soc.retirement
XPost: alt.survival

Trump’s administration on Tuesday unveiled its plan to dramatically
weaken pollution limits on coal-fired power plants by shifting most of the regulatory burden to states in a further assault on the Obama climate
legacy.
The Environmental Protection Agency’s "Affordable Clean Energy" proposal
would replace the Obama-era Clean Power Plan’s sweeping changes in the
U.S. electricity mix with more modest emissions curbs at individual power plants. It would set pollution guidelines based on assumptions about what improvements could be eked out through efficiency upgrades at the
facilities, then give states the latitude to design their own plans for
paring carbon dioxide emissions at the sites.
EPA Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler said the proposal “would restore
the rule of law and empower states to reduce greenhouse gas emissions”
while providing “modern, reliable, and affordable energy for all
Americans.”
“Today’s proposal provides the states and regulated community the
certainty they need to continue environmental progress while fulfilling President Trump’s goal of energy dominance,” Wheeler said in a news
release.
The move represents the latest bid by Trump to fulfill campaign promises
to revive the coal industry and restore mining jobs. Although it is
unlikely to dramatically alter the U.S. power mix -- or give a big boost
to domestic coal demand, which has flagged amid competition from cheap
natural gas and renewables -- industry advocates hailed the effort as
curbing federal government overreach and leveling the playing field.

“The policy put forward by the previous administration was an illegal
attempt to impose a political agenda on the country’s power system,” Hal
Quinn, president of the National Mining Association said in an emailed statement. “The replacement rule respects the infrastructure and economic realities that are unique to each state, allowing for state-driven
solutions, as intended by the Clean Air Act, rather than top down
mandates.”
Trump is set to hold back-to-back campaign events Tuesday in West
Virginia, the No. 2 coal-producing state, where in 2016 he pledged to “get those mines open” and told miners to “get ready, because you’re going to
be working your asses off.”
Environmental advocates and the architects of former President Barack
Obama’s ambitious plan derided the Trump administration’s proposed
replacement as political pandering and said it represented a U.S. retreat
from the global fight against climate change. The move dovetails with a separate administration proposal to relax Obama-era greenhouse gas
emission limits on vehicles and coming efforts to ease limits on the
amount of methane that can escape from oil wells.
“Trump’s EPA is abandoning any attempt to curb the carbon pollution that’s driving damaging climate change,” said Lissa Lynch, a staff attorney at
the Natural Resources Defense Council. “This proposal violates the law and cooks the books on science and economics, all to prop up coal power plants
that can’t compete with cleaner energy.”
The Trump proposal may open a small window for a revival of coal even as
it prolongs uncertainty over the U.S. electricity mix and casts doubt on investments by utilities making decades-long choices about new plants and upgrades.
Administration officials are on track to finalize the new regulation next
year, following a public comment period on Tuesday’s proposal, but critics
have already vowed to battle the effort in federal court and the legal
disputes could take years to resolve. As it stands, Obama’s Clean Power
Plan never went into effect; amid legal challenges from opponents who said
it overstepped the EPA’s authority under federal law, the U.S. Supreme
Court put the initiative on hold in February 2016.
The EPA estimates its proposal could pare carbon dioxide emissions 0.7 per
cent to 1.5 per cent from projected levels without the Obama plan in
place, while cutting emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and other pollutants. According to the agency, once the plan is fully implemented,
power sector emissions could fall 33 to 34 per cent below 2005 levels -- roughly mirroring the same target as Obama’s initiative, which sought to
cut those greenhouse gas emissions 32 per cent relative to 2005.
The approach shows the Trump administration abandoning its predecessor’s expansive view of what constitutes the “best system of emission
reductions” for a more narrow, facility-focused interpretation that conservatives say is within the bounds of the Clean Air Act that provides
the framework for air pollution regulations.
“The announcement of a replacement rule may largely represent a political milestone for a president who promised to end his predecessor’s ‘war on
coal,’ but we also view it as a significant policy action that could to
make it difficult for a differently oriented successor to establish
greenhouse gas limits on any stationary sector via executive discretion,” ClearView Energy Partners managing director Kevin Book said in a research
note to clients.
Under the Trump plan, the EPA would establish broad guidelines on the technologies that can be used to pare carbon dioxide emissions and then
give states three years to develop their own plans for paring that
pollution.
It also would overhaul the triggers that prompt new permit reviews -- and potentially expensive new pollution controls -- that have been criticized
as onerous by owners of power plants, refineries and other industrial
sites.
But that still might not be enough to dramatically alter the landscape for
U.S. coal, which is still losing U.S. customers as utilities increasingly
turn to natural gas and renewable power to generate electricity.
Since 2010, power plant owners have either retired or announced plans to
retire 630 coal-fired facilities in 43 states -- nearly 40 per cent of the
U.S. coal fleet, according to data by the American Coalition for Clean
Coal Electricity, a trade group representing utilities such as Southern
Co. and producers such as Peabody Energy Corp.
The EPA is not altering its landmark 2009 conclusion that greenhouse gases threaten health and human welfare -- a finding underpinning the power
plant regulation and compelling the Trump’s move Tuesday. Conservatives
have filed a half dozen petitions challenging the endangerment finding,
though Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler has signaled he is not eager to reconsider the issue.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: talk.politics.misc, talk.politics.guns, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh.tv-show XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.global-warming, soc.retirement
XPost: alt.survival

Trump’s administration on Tuesday unveiled its plan to dramatically
weaken pollution limits on coal-fired power plants by shifting most of the regulatory burden to states in a further assault on the Obama climate
legacy.
The Environmental Protection Agency’s "Affordable Clean Energy" proposal
would replace the Obama-era Clean Power Plan’s sweeping changes in the
U.S. electricity mix with more modest emissions curbs at individual power plants. It would set pollution guidelines based on assumptions about what improvements could be eked out through efficiency upgrades at the
facilities, then give states the latitude to design their own plans for
paring carbon dioxide emissions at the sites.
EPA Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler said the proposal “would restore
the rule of law and empower states to reduce greenhouse gas emissions”
while providing “modern, reliable, and affordable energy for all
Americans.”
“Today’s proposal provides the states and regulated community the
certainty they need to continue environmental progress while fulfilling President Trump’s goal of energy dominance,” Wheeler said in a news
release.
The move represents the latest bid by Trump to fulfill campaign promises
to revive the coal industry and restore mining jobs. Although it is
unlikely to dramatically alter the U.S. power mix -- or give a big boost
to domestic coal demand, which has flagged amid competition from cheap
natural gas and renewables -- industry advocates hailed the effort as
curbing federal government overreach and leveling the playing field.

“The policy put forward by the previous administration was an illegal
attempt to impose a political agenda on the country’s power system,” Hal
Quinn, president of the National Mining Association said in an emailed statement. “The replacement rule respects the infrastructure and economic realities that are unique to each state, allowing for state-driven
solutions, as intended by the Clean Air Act, rather than top down
mandates.”
Trump is set to hold back-to-back campaign events Tuesday in West
Virginia, the No. 2 coal-producing state, where in 2016 he pledged to “get those mines open” and told miners to “get ready, because you’re going to
be working your asses off.”
Environmental advocates and the architects of former President Barack
Obama’s ambitious plan derided the Trump administration’s proposed
replacement as political pandering and said it represented a U.S. retreat
from the global fight against climate change. The move dovetails with a separate administration proposal to relax Obama-era greenhouse gas
emission limits on vehicles and coming efforts to ease limits on the
amount of methane that can escape from oil wells.
“Trump’s EPA is abandoning any attempt to curb the carbon pollution that’s driving damaging climate change,” said Lissa Lynch, a staff attorney at
the Natural Resources Defense Council. “This proposal violates the law and cooks the books on science and economics, all to prop up coal power plants
that can’t compete with cleaner energy.”
The Trump proposal may open a small window for a revival of coal even as
it prolongs uncertainty over the U.S. electricity mix and casts doubt on investments by utilities making decades-long choices about new plants and upgrades.
Administration officials are on track to finalize the new regulation next
year, following a public comment period on Tuesday’s proposal, but critics
have already vowed to battle the effort in federal court and the legal
disputes could take years to resolve. As it stands, Obama’s Clean Power
Plan never went into effect; amid legal challenges from opponents who said
it overstepped the EPA’s authority under federal law, the U.S. Supreme
Court put the initiative on hold in February 2016.
The EPA estimates its proposal could pare carbon dioxide emissions 0.7 per
cent to 1.5 per cent from projected levels without the Obama plan in
place, while cutting emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and other pollutants. According to the agency, once the plan is fully implemented,
power sector emissions could fall 33 to 34 per cent below 2005 levels -- roughly mirroring the same target as Obama’s initiative, which sought to
cut those greenhouse gas emissions 32 per cent relative to 2005.
The approach shows the Trump administration abandoning its predecessor’s expansive view of what constitutes the “best system of emission
reductions” for a more narrow, facility-focused interpretation that conservatives say is within the bounds of the Clean Air Act that provides
the framework for air pollution regulations.
“The announcement of a replacement rule may largely represent a political milestone for a president who promised to end his predecessor’s ‘war on
coal,’ but we also view it as a significant policy action that could to
make it difficult for a differently oriented successor to establish
greenhouse gas limits on any stationary sector via executive discretion,” ClearView Energy Partners managing director Kevin Book said in a research
note to clients.
Under the Trump plan, the EPA would establish broad guidelines on the technologies that can be used to pare carbon dioxide emissions and then
give states three years to develop their own plans for paring that
pollution.
It also would overhaul the triggers that prompt new permit reviews -- and potentially expensive new pollution controls -- that have been criticized
as onerous by owners of power plants, refineries and other industrial
sites.
But that still might not be enough to dramatically alter the landscape for
U.S. coal, which is still losing U.S. customers as utilities increasingly
turn to natural gas and renewable power to generate electricity.
Since 2010, power plant owners have either retired or announced plans to
retire 630 coal-fired facilities in 43 states -- nearly 40 per cent of the
U.S. coal fleet, according to data by the American Coalition for Clean
Coal Electricity, a trade group representing utilities such as Southern
Co. and producers such as Peabody Energy Corp.
The EPA is not altering its landmark 2009 conclusion that greenhouse gases threaten health and human welfare -- a finding underpinning the power
plant regulation and compelling the Trump’s move Tuesday. Conservatives
have filed a half dozen petitions challenging the endangerment finding,
though Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler has signaled he is not eager to reconsider the issue.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: talk.politics.misc, talk.politics.guns, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh.tv-show XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.global-warming, soc.retirement
XPost: alt.survival

Trump’s administration on Tuesday unveiled its plan to dramatically
weaken pollution limits on coal-fired power plants by shifting most of the regulatory burden to states in a further assault on the Obama climate
legacy.
The Environmental Protection Agency’s "Affordable Clean Energy" proposal
would replace the Obama-era Clean Power Plan’s sweeping changes in the
U.S. electricity mix with more modest emissions curbs at individual power plants. It would set pollution guidelines based on assumptions about what improvements could be eked out through efficiency upgrades at the
facilities, then give states the latitude to design their own plans for
paring carbon dioxide emissions at the sites.
EPA Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler said the proposal “would restore
the rule of law and empower states to reduce greenhouse gas emissions”
while providing “modern, reliable, and affordable energy for all
Americans.”
“Today’s proposal provides the states and regulated community the
certainty they need to continue environmental progress while fulfilling President Trump’s goal of energy dominance,” Wheeler said in a news
release.
The move represents the latest bid by Trump to fulfill campaign promises
to revive the coal industry and restore mining jobs. Although it is
unlikely to dramatically alter the U.S. power mix -- or give a big boost
to domestic coal demand, which has flagged amid competition from cheap
natural gas and renewables -- industry advocates hailed the effort as
curbing federal government overreach and leveling the playing field.

“The policy put forward by the previous administration was an illegal
attempt to impose a political agenda on the country’s power system,” Hal
Quinn, president of the National Mining Association said in an emailed statement. “The replacement rule respects the infrastructure and economic realities that are unique to each state, allowing for state-driven
solutions, as intended by the Clean Air Act, rather than top down
mandates.”
Trump is set to hold back-to-back campaign events Tuesday in West
Virginia, the No. 2 coal-producing state, where in 2016 he pledged to “get those mines open” and told miners to “get ready, because you’re going to
be working your asses off.”
Environmental advocates and the architects of former President Barack
Obama’s ambitious plan derided the Trump administration’s proposed
replacement as political pandering and said it represented a U.S. retreat
from the global fight against climate change. The move dovetails with a separate administration proposal to relax Obama-era greenhouse gas
emission limits on vehicles and coming efforts to ease limits on the
amount of methane that can escape from oil wells.
“Trump’s EPA is abandoning any attempt to curb the carbon pollution that’s driving damaging climate change,” said Lissa Lynch, a staff attorney at
the Natural Resources Defense Council. “This proposal violates the law and cooks the books on science and economics, all to prop up coal power plants
that can’t compete with cleaner energy.”
The Trump proposal may open a small window for a revival of coal even as
it prolongs uncertainty over the U.S. electricity mix and casts doubt on investments by utilities making decades-long choices about new plants and upgrades.
Administration officials are on track to finalize the new regulation next
year, following a public comment period on Tuesday’s proposal, but critics
have already vowed to battle the effort in federal court and the legal
disputes could take years to resolve. As it stands, Obama’s Clean Power
Plan never went into effect; amid legal challenges from opponents who said
it overstepped the EPA’s authority under federal law, the U.S. Supreme
Court put the initiative on hold in February 2016.
The EPA estimates its proposal could pare carbon dioxide emissions 0.7 per
cent to 1.5 per cent from projected levels without the Obama plan in
place, while cutting emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and other pollutants. According to the agency, once the plan is fully implemented,
power sector emissions could fall 33 to 34 per cent below 2005 levels -- roughly mirroring the same target as Obama’s initiative, which sought to
cut those greenhouse gas emissions 32 per cent relative to 2005.
The approach shows the Trump administration abandoning its predecessor’s expansive view of what constitutes the “best system of emission
reductions” for a more narrow, facility-focused interpretation that conservatives say is within the bounds of the Clean Air Act that provides
the framework for air pollution regulations.
“The announcement of a replacement rule may largely represent a political milestone for a president who promised to end his predecessor’s ‘war on
coal,’ but we also view it as a significant policy action that could to
make it difficult for a differently oriented successor to establish
greenhouse gas limits on any stationary sector via executive discretion,” ClearView Energy Partners managing director Kevin Book said in a research
note to clients.
Under the Trump plan, the EPA would establish broad guidelines on the technologies that can be used to pare carbon dioxide emissions and then
give states three years to develop their own plans for paring that
pollution.
It also would overhaul the triggers that prompt new permit reviews -- and potentially expensive new pollution controls -- that have been criticized
as onerous by owners of power plants, refineries and other industrial
sites.
But that still might not be enough to dramatically alter the landscape for
U.S. coal, which is still losing U.S. customers as utilities increasingly
turn to natural gas and renewable power to generate electricity.
Since 2010, power plant owners have either retired or announced plans to
retire 630 coal-fired facilities in 43 states -- nearly 40 per cent of the
U.S. coal fleet, according to data by the American Coalition for Clean
Coal Electricity, a trade group representing utilities such as Southern
Co. and producers such as Peabody Energy Corp.
The EPA is not altering its landmark 2009 conclusion that greenhouse gases threaten health and human welfare -- a finding underpinning the power
plant regulation and compelling the Trump’s move Tuesday. Conservatives
have filed a half dozen petitions challenging the endangerment finding,
though Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler has signaled he is not eager to reconsider the issue.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: talk.politics.misc, talk.politics.guns, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh.tv-show XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.global-warming, soc.retirement
XPost: alt.survival

Trump’s administration on Tuesday unveiled its plan to dramatically
weaken pollution limits on coal-fired power plants by shifting most of the regulatory burden to states in a further assault on the Obama climate
legacy.
The Environmental Protection Agency’s "Affordable Clean Energy" proposal
would replace the Obama-era Clean Power Plan’s sweeping changes in the
U.S. electricity mix with more modest emissions curbs at individual power plants. It would set pollution guidelines based on assumptions about what improvements could be eked out through efficiency upgrades at the
facilities, then give states the latitude to design their own plans for
paring carbon dioxide emissions at the sites.
EPA Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler said the proposal “would restore
the rule of law and empower states to reduce greenhouse gas emissions”
while providing “modern, reliable, and affordable energy for all
Americans.”
“Today’s proposal provides the states and regulated community the
certainty they need to continue environmental progress while fulfilling President Trump’s goal of energy dominance,” Wheeler said in a news
release.
The move represents the latest bid by Trump to fulfill campaign promises
to revive the coal industry and restore mining jobs. Although it is
unlikely to dramatically alter the U.S. power mix -- or give a big boost
to domestic coal demand, which has flagged amid competition from cheap
natural gas and renewables -- industry advocates hailed the effort as
curbing federal government overreach and leveling the playing field.

“The policy put forward by the previous administration was an illegal
attempt to impose a political agenda on the country’s power system,” Hal
Quinn, president of the National Mining Association said in an emailed statement. “The replacement rule respects the infrastructure and economic realities that are unique to each state, allowing for state-driven
solutions, as intended by the Clean Air Act, rather than top down
mandates.”
Trump is set to hold back-to-back campaign events Tuesday in West
Virginia, the No. 2 coal-producing state, where in 2016 he pledged to “get those mines open” and told miners to “get ready, because you’re going to
be working your asses off.”
Environmental advocates and the architects of former President Barack
Obama’s ambitious plan derided the Trump administration’s proposed
replacement as political pandering and said it represented a U.S. retreat
from the global fight against climate change. The move dovetails with a separate administration proposal to relax Obama-era greenhouse gas
emission limits on vehicles and coming efforts to ease limits on the
amount of methane that can escape from oil wells.
“Trump’s EPA is abandoning any attempt to curb the carbon pollution that’s driving damaging climate change,” said Lissa Lynch, a staff attorney at
the Natural Resources Defense Council. “This proposal violates the law and cooks the books on science and economics, all to prop up coal power plants
that can’t compete with cleaner energy.”
The Trump proposal may open a small window for a revival of coal even as
it prolongs uncertainty over the U.S. electricity mix and casts doubt on investments by utilities making decades-long choices about new plants and upgrades.
Administration officials are on track to finalize the new regulation next
year, following a public comment period on Tuesday’s proposal, but critics
have already vowed to battle the effort in federal court and the legal
disputes could take years to resolve. As it stands, Obama’s Clean Power
Plan never went into effect; amid legal challenges from opponents who said
it overstepped the EPA’s authority under federal law, the U.S. Supreme
Court put the initiative on hold in February 2016.
The EPA estimates its proposal could pare carbon dioxide emissions 0.7 per
cent to 1.5 per cent from projected levels without the Obama plan in
place, while cutting emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and other pollutants. According to the agency, once the plan is fully implemented,
power sector emissions could fall 33 to 34 per cent below 2005 levels -- roughly mirroring the same target as Obama’s initiative, which sought to
cut those greenhouse gas emissions 32 per cent relative to 2005.
The approach shows the Trump administration abandoning its predecessor’s expansive view of what constitutes the “best system of emission
reductions” for a more narrow, facility-focused interpretation that conservatives say is within the bounds of the Clean Air Act that provides
the framework for air pollution regulations.
“The announcement of a replacement rule may largely represent a political milestone for a president who promised to end his predecessor’s ‘war on
coal,’ but we also view it as a significant policy action that could to
make it difficult for a differently oriented successor to establish
greenhouse gas limits on any stationary sector via executive discretion,” ClearView Energy Partners managing director Kevin Book said in a research
note to clients.
Under the Trump plan, the EPA would establish broad guidelines on the technologies that can be used to pare carbon dioxide emissions and then
give states three years to develop their own plans for paring that
pollution.
It also would overhaul the triggers that prompt new permit reviews -- and potentially expensive new pollution controls -- that have been criticized
as onerous by owners of power plants, refineries and other industrial
sites.
But that still might not be enough to dramatically alter the landscape for
U.S. coal, which is still losing U.S. customers as utilities increasingly
turn to natural gas and renewable power to generate electricity.
Since 2010, power plant owners have either retired or announced plans to
retire 630 coal-fired facilities in 43 states -- nearly 40 per cent of the
U.S. coal fleet, according to data by the American Coalition for Clean
Coal Electricity, a trade group representing utilities such as Southern
Co. and producers such as Peabody Energy Corp.
The EPA is not altering its landmark 2009 conclusion that greenhouse gases threaten health and human welfare -- a finding underpinning the power
plant regulation and compelling the Trump’s move Tuesday. Conservatives
have filed a half dozen petitions challenging the endangerment finding,
though Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler has signaled he is not eager to reconsider the issue.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: talk.politics.misc, talk.politics.guns, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh.tv-show XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.global-warming, soc.retirement
XPost: alt.survival

Trump’s administration on Tuesday unveiled its plan to dramatically
weaken pollution limits on coal-fired power plants by shifting most of the regulatory burden to states in a further assault on the Obama climate
legacy.
The Environmental Protection Agency’s "Affordable Clean Energy" proposal
would replace the Obama-era Clean Power Plan’s sweeping changes in the
U.S. electricity mix with more modest emissions curbs at individual power plants. It would set pollution guidelines based on assumptions about what improvements could be eked out through efficiency upgrades at the
facilities, then give states the latitude to design their own plans for
paring carbon dioxide emissions at the sites.
EPA Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler said the proposal “would restore
the rule of law and empower states to reduce greenhouse gas emissions”
while providing “modern, reliable, and affordable energy for all
Americans.”
“Today’s proposal provides the states and regulated community the
certainty they need to continue environmental progress while fulfilling President Trump’s goal of energy dominance,” Wheeler said in a news
release.
The move represents the latest bid by Trump to fulfill campaign promises
to revive the coal industry and restore mining jobs. Although it is
unlikely to dramatically alter the U.S. power mix -- or give a big boost
to domestic coal demand, which has flagged amid competition from cheap
natural gas and renewables -- industry advocates hailed the effort as
curbing federal government overreach and leveling the playing field.

“The policy put forward by the previous administration was an illegal
attempt to impose a political agenda on the country’s power system,” Hal
Quinn, president of the National Mining Association said in an emailed statement. “The replacement rule respects the infrastructure and economic realities that are unique to each state, allowing for state-driven
solutions, as intended by the Clean Air Act, rather than top down
mandates.”
Trump is set to hold back-to-back campaign events Tuesday in West
Virginia, the No. 2 coal-producing state, where in 2016 he pledged to “get those mines open” and told miners to “get ready, because you’re going to
be working your asses off.”
Environmental advocates and the architects of former President Barack
Obama’s ambitious plan derided the Trump administration’s proposed
replacement as political pandering and said it represented a U.S. retreat
from the global fight against climate change. The move dovetails with a separate administration proposal to relax Obama-era greenhouse gas
emission limits on vehicles and coming efforts to ease limits on the
amount of methane that can escape from oil wells.
“Trump’s EPA is abandoning any attempt to curb the carbon pollution that’s driving damaging climate change,” said Lissa Lynch, a staff attorney at
the Natural Resources Defense Council. “This proposal violates the law and cooks the books on science and economics, all to prop up coal power plants
that can’t compete with cleaner energy.”
The Trump proposal may open a small window for a revival of coal even as
it prolongs uncertainty over the U.S. electricity mix and casts doubt on investments by utilities making decades-long choices about new plants and upgrades.
Administration officials are on track to finalize the new regulation next
year, following a public comment period on Tuesday’s proposal, but critics
have already vowed to battle the effort in federal court and the legal
disputes could take years to resolve. As it stands, Obama’s Clean Power
Plan never went into effect; amid legal challenges from opponents who said
it overstepped the EPA’s authority under federal law, the U.S. Supreme
Court put the initiative on hold in February 2016.
The EPA estimates its proposal could pare carbon dioxide emissions 0.7 per
cent to 1.5 per cent from projected levels without the Obama plan in
place, while cutting emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and other pollutants. According to the agency, once the plan is fully implemented,
power sector emissions could fall 33 to 34 per cent below 2005 levels -- roughly mirroring the same target as Obama’s initiative, which sought to
cut those greenhouse gas emissions 32 per cent relative to 2005.
The approach shows the Trump administration abandoning its predecessor’s expansive view of what constitutes the “best system of emission
reductions” for a more narrow, facility-focused interpretation that conservatives say is within the bounds of the Clean Air Act that provides
the framework for air pollution regulations.
“The announcement of a replacement rule may largely represent a political milestone for a president who promised to end his predecessor’s ‘war on
coal,’ but we also view it as a significant policy action that could to
make it difficult for a differently oriented successor to establish
greenhouse gas limits on any stationary sector via executive discretion,” ClearView Energy Partners managing director Kevin Book said in a research
note to clients.
Under the Trump plan, the EPA would establish broad guidelines on the technologies that can be used to pare carbon dioxide emissions and then
give states three years to develop their own plans for paring that
pollution.
It also would overhaul the triggers that prompt new permit reviews -- and potentially expensive new pollution controls -- that have been criticized
as onerous by owners of power plants, refineries and other industrial
sites.
But that still might not be enough to dramatically alter the landscape for
U.S. coal, which is still losing U.S. customers as utilities increasingly
turn to natural gas and renewable power to generate electricity.
Since 2010, power plant owners have either retired or announced plans to
retire 630 coal-fired facilities in 43 states -- nearly 40 per cent of the
U.S. coal fleet, according to data by the American Coalition for Clean
Coal Electricity, a trade group representing utilities such as Southern
Co. and producers such as Peabody Energy Corp.
The EPA is not altering its landmark 2009 conclusion that greenhouse gases threaten health and human welfare -- a finding underpinning the power
plant regulation and compelling the Trump’s move Tuesday. Conservatives
have filed a half dozen petitions challenging the endangerment finding,
though Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler has signaled he is not eager to reconsider the issue.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: talk.politics.misc, talk.politics.guns, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh.tv-show XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.global-warming, soc.retirement
XPost: alt.survival

Trump’s administration on Tuesday unveiled its plan to dramatically
weaken pollution limits on coal-fired power plants by shifting most of the regulatory burden to states in a further assault on the Obama climate
legacy.
The Environmental Protection Agency’s "Affordable Clean Energy" proposal
would replace the Obama-era Clean Power Plan’s sweeping changes in the
U.S. electricity mix with more modest emissions curbs at individual power plants. It would set pollution guidelines based on assumptions about what improvements could be eked out through efficiency upgrades at the
facilities, then give states the latitude to design their own plans for
paring carbon dioxide emissions at the sites.
EPA Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler said the proposal “would restore
the rule of law and empower states to reduce greenhouse gas emissions”
while providing “modern, reliable, and affordable energy for all
Americans.”
“Today’s proposal provides the states and regulated community the
certainty they need to continue environmental progress while fulfilling President Trump’s goal of energy dominance,” Wheeler said in a news
release.
The move represents the latest bid by Trump to fulfill campaign promises
to revive the coal industry and restore mining jobs. Although it is
unlikely to dramatically alter the U.S. power mix -- or give a big boost
to domestic coal demand, which has flagged amid competition from cheap
natural gas and renewables -- industry advocates hailed the effort as
curbing federal government overreach and leveling the playing field.

“The policy put forward by the previous administration was an illegal
attempt to impose a political agenda on the country’s power system,” Hal
Quinn, president of the National Mining Association said in an emailed statement. “The replacement rule respects the infrastructure and economic realities that are unique to each state, allowing for state-driven
solutions, as intended by the Clean Air Act, rather than top down
mandates.”
Trump is set to hold back-to-back campaign events Tuesday in West
Virginia, the No. 2 coal-producing state, where in 2016 he pledged to “get those mines open” and told miners to “get ready, because you’re going to
be working your asses off.”
Environmental advocates and the architects of former President Barack
Obama’s ambitious plan derided the Trump administration’s proposed
replacement as political pandering and said it represented a U.S. retreat
from the global fight against climate change. The move dovetails with a separate administration proposal to relax Obama-era greenhouse gas
emission limits on vehicles and coming efforts to ease limits on the
amount of methane that can escape from oil wells.
“Trump’s EPA is abandoning any attempt to curb the carbon pollution that’s driving damaging climate change,” said Lissa Lynch, a staff attorney at
the Natural Resources Defense Council. “This proposal violates the law and cooks the books on science and economics, all to prop up coal power plants
that can’t compete with cleaner energy.”
The Trump proposal may open a small window for a revival of coal even as
it prolongs uncertainty over the U.S. electricity mix and casts doubt on investments by utilities making decades-long choices about new plants and upgrades.
Administration officials are on track to finalize the new regulation next
year, following a public comment period on Tuesday’s proposal, but critics
have already vowed to battle the effort in federal court and the legal
disputes could take years to resolve. As it stands, Obama’s Clean Power
Plan never went into effect; amid legal challenges from opponents who said
it overstepped the EPA’s authority under federal law, the U.S. Supreme
Court put the initiative on hold in February 2016.
The EPA estimates its proposal could pare carbon dioxide emissions 0.7 per
cent to 1.5 per cent from projected levels without the Obama plan in
place, while cutting emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and other pollutants. According to the agency, once the plan is fully implemented,
power sector emissions could fall 33 to 34 per cent below 2005 levels -- roughly mirroring the same target as Obama’s initiative, which sought to
cut those greenhouse gas emissions 32 per cent relative to 2005.
The approach shows the Trump administration abandoning its predecessor’s expansive view of what constitutes the “best system of emission
reductions” for a more narrow, facility-focused interpretation that conservatives say is within the bounds of the Clean Air Act that provides
the framework for air pollution regulations.
“The announcement of a replacement rule may largely represent a political milestone for a president who promised to end his predecessor’s ‘war on
coal,’ but we also view it as a significant policy action that could to
make it difficult for a differently oriented successor to establish
greenhouse gas limits on any stationary sector via executive discretion,” ClearView Energy Partners managing director Kevin Book said in a research
note to clients.
Under the Trump plan, the EPA would establish broad guidelines on the technologies that can be used to pare carbon dioxide emissions and then
give states three years to develop their own plans for paring that
pollution.
It also would overhaul the triggers that prompt new permit reviews -- and potentially expensive new pollution controls -- that have been criticized
as onerous by owners of power plants, refineries and other industrial
sites.
But that still might not be enough to dramatically alter the landscape for
U.S. coal, which is still losing U.S. customers as utilities increasingly
turn to natural gas and renewable power to generate electricity.
Since 2010, power plant owners have either retired or announced plans to
retire 630 coal-fired facilities in 43 states -- nearly 40 per cent of the
U.S. coal fleet, according to data by the American Coalition for Clean
Coal Electricity, a trade group representing utilities such as Southern
Co. and producers such as Peabody Energy Corp.
The EPA is not altering its landmark 2009 conclusion that greenhouse gases threaten health and human welfare -- a finding underpinning the power
plant regulation and compelling the Trump’s move Tuesday. Conservatives
have filed a half dozen petitions challenging the endangerment finding,
though Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler has signaled he is not eager to reconsider the issue.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: talk.politics.misc, talk.politics.guns, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh.tv-show XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.global-warming, soc.retirement
XPost: alt.survival

Trump’s administration on Tuesday unveiled its plan to dramatically
weaken pollution limits on coal-fired power plants by shifting most of the regulatory burden to states in a further assault on the Obama climate
legacy.
The Environmental Protection Agency’s "Affordable Clean Energy" proposal
would replace the Obama-era Clean Power Plan’s sweeping changes in the
U.S. electricity mix with more modest emissions curbs at individual power plants. It would set pollution guidelines based on assumptions about what improvements could be eked out through efficiency upgrades at the
facilities, then give states the latitude to design their own plans for
paring carbon dioxide emissions at the sites.
EPA Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler said the proposal “would restore
the rule of law and empower states to reduce greenhouse gas emissions”
while providing “modern, reliable, and affordable energy for all
Americans.”
“Today’s proposal provides the states and regulated community the
certainty they need to continue environmental progress while fulfilling President Trump’s goal of energy dominance,” Wheeler said in a news
release.
The move represents the latest bid by Trump to fulfill campaign promises
to revive the coal industry and restore mining jobs. Although it is
unlikely to dramatically alter the U.S. power mix -- or give a big boost
to domestic coal demand, which has flagged amid competition from cheap
natural gas and renewables -- industry advocates hailed the effort as
curbing federal government overreach and leveling the playing field.

“The policy put forward by the previous administration was an illegal
attempt to impose a political agenda on the country’s power system,” Hal
Quinn, president of the National Mining Association said in an emailed statement. “The replacement rule respects the infrastructure and economic realities that are unique to each state, allowing for state-driven
solutions, as intended by the Clean Air Act, rather than top down
mandates.”
Trump is set to hold back-to-back campaign events Tuesday in West
Virginia, the No. 2 coal-producing state, where in 2016 he pledged to “get those mines open” and told miners to “get ready, because you’re going to
be working your asses off.”
Environmental advocates and the architects of former President Barack
Obama’s ambitious plan derided the Trump administration’s proposed
replacement as political pandering and said it represented a U.S. retreat
from the global fight against climate change. The move dovetails with a separate administration proposal to relax Obama-era greenhouse gas
emission limits on vehicles and coming efforts to ease limits on the
amount of methane that can escape from oil wells.
“Trump’s EPA is abandoning any attempt to curb the carbon pollution that’s driving damaging climate change,” said Lissa Lynch, a staff attorney at
the Natural Resources Defense Council. “This proposal violates the law and cooks the books on science and economics, all to prop up coal power plants
that can’t compete with cleaner energy.”
The Trump proposal may open a small window for a revival of coal even as
it prolongs uncertainty over the U.S. electricity mix and casts doubt on investments by utilities making decades-long choices about new plants and upgrades.
Administration officials are on track to finalize the new regulation next
year, following a public comment period on Tuesday’s proposal, but critics
have already vowed to battle the effort in federal court and the legal
disputes could take years to resolve. As it stands, Obama’s Clean Power
Plan never went into effect; amid legal challenges from opponents who said
it overstepped the EPA’s authority under federal law, the U.S. Supreme
Court put the initiative on hold in February 2016.
The EPA estimates its proposal could pare carbon dioxide emissions 0.7 per
cent to 1.5 per cent from projected levels without the Obama plan in
place, while cutting emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and other pollutants. According to the agency, once the plan is fully implemented,
power sector emissions could fall 33 to 34 per cent below 2005 levels -- roughly mirroring the same target as Obama’s initiative, which sought to
cut those greenhouse gas emissions 32 per cent relative to 2005.
The approach shows the Trump administration abandoning its predecessor’s expansive view of what constitutes the “best system of emission
reductions” for a more narrow, facility-focused interpretation that conservatives say is within the bounds of the Clean Air Act that provides
the framework for air pollution regulations.
“The announcement of a replacement rule may largely represent a political milestone for a president who promised to end his predecessor’s ‘war on
coal,’ but we also view it as a significant policy action that could to
make it difficult for a differently oriented successor to establish
greenhouse gas limits on any stationary sector via executive discretion,” ClearView Energy Partners managing director Kevin Book said in a research
note to clients.
Under the Trump plan, the EPA would establish broad guidelines on the technologies that can be used to pare carbon dioxide emissions and then
give states three years to develop their own plans for paring that
pollution.
It also would overhaul the triggers that prompt new permit reviews -- and potentially expensive new pollution controls -- that have been criticized
as onerous by owners of power plants, refineries and other industrial
sites.
But that still might not be enough to dramatically alter the landscape for
U.S. coal, which is still losing U.S. customers as utilities increasingly
turn to natural gas and renewable power to generate electricity.
Since 2010, power plant owners have either retired or announced plans to
retire 630 coal-fired facilities in 43 states -- nearly 40 per cent of the
U.S. coal fleet, according to data by the American Coalition for Clean
Coal Electricity, a trade group representing utilities such as Southern
Co. and producers such as Peabody Energy Corp.
The EPA is not altering its landmark 2009 conclusion that greenhouse gases threaten health and human welfare -- a finding underpinning the power
plant regulation and compelling the Trump’s move Tuesday. Conservatives
have filed a half dozen petitions challenging the endangerment finding,
though Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler has signaled he is not eager to reconsider the issue.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: talk.politics.misc, talk.politics.guns, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh.tv-show XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.global-warming, soc.retirement
XPost: alt.survival

Trump’s administration on Tuesday unveiled its plan to dramatically
weaken pollution limits on coal-fired power plants by shifting most of the regulatory burden to states in a further assault on the Obama climate
legacy.
The Environmental Protection Agency’s "Affordable Clean Energy" proposal
would replace the Obama-era Clean Power Plan’s sweeping changes in the
U.S. electricity mix with more modest emissions curbs at individual power plants. It would set pollution guidelines based on assumptions about what improvements could be eked out through efficiency upgrades at the
facilities, then give states the latitude to design their own plans for
paring carbon dioxide emissions at the sites.
EPA Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler said the proposal “would restore
the rule of law and empower states to reduce greenhouse gas emissions”
while providing “modern, reliable, and affordable energy for all
Americans.”
“Today’s proposal provides the states and regulated community the
certainty they need to continue environmental progress while fulfilling President Trump’s goal of energy dominance,” Wheeler said in a news
release.
The move represents the latest bid by Trump to fulfill campaign promises
to revive the coal industry and restore mining jobs. Although it is
unlikely to dramatically alter the U.S. power mix -- or give a big boost
to domestic coal demand, which has flagged amid competition from cheap
natural gas and renewables -- industry advocates hailed the effort as
curbing federal government overreach and leveling the playing field.

“The policy put forward by the previous administration was an illegal
attempt to impose a political agenda on the country’s power system,” Hal
Quinn, president of the National Mining Association said in an emailed statement. “The replacement rule respects the infrastructure and economic realities that are unique to each state, allowing for state-driven
solutions, as intended by the Clean Air Act, rather than top down
mandates.”
Trump is set to hold back-to-back campaign events Tuesday in West
Virginia, the No. 2 coal-producing state, where in 2016 he pledged to “get those mines open” and told miners to “get ready, because you’re going to
be working your asses off.”
Environmental advocates and the architects of former President Barack
Obama’s ambitious plan derided the Trump administration’s proposed
replacement as political pandering and said it represented a U.S. retreat
from the global fight against climate change. The move dovetails with a separate administration proposal to relax Obama-era greenhouse gas
emission limits on vehicles and coming efforts to ease limits on the
amount of methane that can escape from oil wells.
“Trump’s EPA is abandoning any attempt to curb the carbon pollution that’s driving damaging climate change,” said Lissa Lynch, a staff attorney at
the Natural Resources Defense Council. “This proposal violates the law and cooks the books on science and economics, all to prop up coal power plants
that can’t compete with cleaner energy.”
The Trump proposal may open a small window for a revival of coal even as
it prolongs uncertainty over the U.S. electricity mix and casts doubt on investments by utilities making decades-long choices about new plants and upgrades.
Administration officials are on track to finalize the new regulation next
year, following a public comment period on Tuesday’s proposal, but critics
have already vowed to battle the effort in federal court and the legal
disputes could take years to resolve. As it stands, Obama’s Clean Power
Plan never went into effect; amid legal challenges from opponents who said
it overstepped the EPA’s authority under federal law, the U.S. Supreme
Court put the initiative on hold in February 2016.
The EPA estimates its proposal could pare carbon dioxide emissions 0.7 per
cent to 1.5 per cent from projected levels without the Obama plan in
place, while cutting emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and other pollutants. According to the agency, once the plan is fully implemented,
power sector emissions could fall 33 to 34 per cent below 2005 levels -- roughly mirroring the same target as Obama’s initiative, which sought to
cut those greenhouse gas emissions 32 per cent relative to 2005.
The approach shows the Trump administration abandoning its predecessor’s expansive view of what constitutes the “best system of emission
reductions” for a more narrow, facility-focused interpretation that conservatives say is within the bounds of the Clean Air Act that provides
the framework for air pollution regulations.
“The announcement of a replacement rule may largely represent a political milestone for a president who promised to end his predecessor’s ‘war on
coal,’ but we also view it as a significant policy action that could to
make it difficult for a differently oriented successor to establish
greenhouse gas limits on any stationary sector via executive discretion,” ClearView Energy Partners managing director Kevin Book said in a research
note to clients.
Under the Trump plan, the EPA would establish broad guidelines on the technologies that can be used to pare carbon dioxide emissions and then
give states three years to develop their own plans for paring that
pollution.
It also would overhaul the triggers that prompt new permit reviews -- and potentially expensive new pollution controls -- that have been criticized
as onerous by owners of power plants, refineries and other industrial
sites.
But that still might not be enough to dramatically alter the landscape for
U.S. coal, which is still losing U.S. customers as utilities increasingly
turn to natural gas and renewable power to generate electricity.
Since 2010, power plant owners have either retired or announced plans to
retire 630 coal-fired facilities in 43 states -- nearly 40 per cent of the
U.S. coal fleet, according to data by the American Coalition for Clean
Coal Electricity, a trade group representing utilities such as Southern
Co. and producers such as Peabody Energy Corp.
The EPA is not altering its landmark 2009 conclusion that greenhouse gases threaten health and human welfare -- a finding underpinning the power
plant regulation and compelling the Trump’s move Tuesday. Conservatives
have filed a half dozen petitions challenging the endangerment finding,
though Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler has signaled he is not eager to reconsider the issue.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: talk.politics.misc, talk.politics.guns, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh.tv-show XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.global-warming, soc.retirement
XPost: alt.survival

Trump’s administration on Tuesday unveiled its plan to dramatically
weaken pollution limits on coal-fired power plants by shifting most of the regulatory burden to states in a further assault on the Obama climate
legacy.
The Environmental Protection Agency’s "Affordable Clean Energy" proposal
would replace the Obama-era Clean Power Plan’s sweeping changes in the
U.S. electricity mix with more modest emissions curbs at individual power plants. It would set pollution guidelines based on assumptions about what improvements could be eked out through efficiency upgrades at the
facilities, then give states the latitude to design their own plans for
paring carbon dioxide emissions at the sites.
EPA Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler said the proposal “would restore
the rule of law and empower states to reduce greenhouse gas emissions”
while providing “modern, reliable, and affordable energy for all
Americans.”
“Today’s proposal provides the states and regulated community the
certainty they need to continue environmental progress while fulfilling President Trump’s goal of energy dominance,” Wheeler said in a news
release.
The move represents the latest bid by Trump to fulfill campaign promises
to revive the coal industry and restore mining jobs. Although it is
unlikely to dramatically alter the U.S. power mix -- or give a big boost
to domestic coal demand, which has flagged amid competition from cheap
natural gas and renewables -- industry advocates hailed the effort as
curbing federal government overreach and leveling the playing field.

“The policy put forward by the previous administration was an illegal
attempt to impose a political agenda on the country’s power system,” Hal
Quinn, president of the National Mining Association said in an emailed statement. “The replacement rule respects the infrastructure and economic realities that are unique to each state, allowing for state-driven
solutions, as intended by the Clean Air Act, rather than top down
mandates.”
Trump is set to hold back-to-back campaign events Tuesday in West
Virginia, the No. 2 coal-producing state, where in 2016 he pledged to “get those mines open” and told miners to “get ready, because you’re going to
be working your asses off.”
Environmental advocates and the architects of former President Barack
Obama’s ambitious plan derided the Trump administration’s proposed
replacement as political pandering and said it represented a U.S. retreat
from the global fight against climate change. The move dovetails with a separate administration proposal to relax Obama-era greenhouse gas
emission limits on vehicles and coming efforts to ease limits on the
amount of methane that can escape from oil wells.
“Trump’s EPA is abandoning any attempt to curb the carbon pollution that’s driving damaging climate change,” said Lissa Lynch, a staff attorney at
the Natural Resources Defense Council. “This proposal violates the law and cooks the books on science and economics, all to prop up coal power plants
that can’t compete with cleaner energy.”
The Trump proposal may open a small window for a revival of coal even as
it prolongs uncertainty over the U.S. electricity mix and casts doubt on investments by utilities making decades-long choices about new plants and upgrades.
Administration officials are on track to finalize the new regulation next
year, following a public comment period on Tuesday’s proposal, but critics
have already vowed to battle the effort in federal court and the legal
disputes could take years to resolve. As it stands, Obama’s Clean Power
Plan never went into effect; amid legal challenges from opponents who said
it overstepped the EPA’s authority under federal law, the U.S. Supreme
Court put the initiative on hold in February 2016.
The EPA estimates its proposal could pare carbon dioxide emissions 0.7 per
cent to 1.5 per cent from projected levels without the Obama plan in
place, while cutting emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and other pollutants. According to the agency, once the plan is fully implemented,
power sector emissions could fall 33 to 34 per cent below 2005 levels -- roughly mirroring the same target as Obama’s initiative, which sought to
cut those greenhouse gas emissions 32 per cent relative to 2005.
The approach shows the Trump administration abandoning its predecessor’s expansive view of what constitutes the “best system of emission
reductions” for a more narrow, facility-focused interpretation that conservatives say is within the bounds of the Clean Air Act that provides
the framework for air pollution regulations.
“The announcement of a replacement rule may largely represent a political milestone for a president who promised to end his predecessor’s ‘war on
coal,’ but we also view it as a significant policy action that could to
make it difficult for a differently oriented successor to establish
greenhouse gas limits on any stationary sector via executive discretion,” ClearView Energy Partners managing director Kevin Book said in a research
note to clients.
Under the Trump plan, the EPA would establish broad guidelines on the technologies that can be used to pare carbon dioxide emissions and then
give states three years to develop their own plans for paring that
pollution.
It also would overhaul the triggers that prompt new permit reviews -- and potentially expensive new pollution controls -- that have been criticized
as onerous by owners of power plants, refineries and other industrial
sites.
But that still might not be enough to dramatically alter the landscape for
U.S. coal, which is still losing U.S. customers as utilities increasingly
turn to natural gas and renewable power to generate electricity.
Since 2010, power plant owners have either retired or announced plans to
retire 630 coal-fired facilities in 43 states -- nearly 40 per cent of the
U.S. coal fleet, according to data by the American Coalition for Clean
Coal Electricity, a trade group representing utilities such as Southern
Co. and producers such as Peabody Energy Corp.
The EPA is not altering its landmark 2009 conclusion that greenhouse gases threaten health and human welfare -- a finding underpinning the power
plant regulation and compelling the Trump’s move Tuesday. Conservatives
have filed a half dozen petitions challenging the endangerment finding,
though Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler has signaled he is not eager to reconsider the issue.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: talk.politics.misc, talk.politics.guns, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh.tv-show XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.global-warming, soc.retirement
XPost: alt.survival

Trump’s administration on Tuesday unveiled its plan to dramatically
weaken pollution limits on coal-fired power plants by shifting most of the regulatory burden to states in a further assault on the Obama climate
legacy.
The Environmental Protection Agency’s "Affordable Clean Energy" proposal
would replace the Obama-era Clean Power Plan’s sweeping changes in the
U.S. electricity mix with more modest emissions curbs at individual power plants. It would set pollution guidelines based on assumptions about what improvements could be eked out through efficiency upgrades at the
facilities, then give states the latitude to design their own plans for
paring carbon dioxide emissions at the sites.
EPA Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler said the proposal “would restore
the rule of law and empower states to reduce greenhouse gas emissions”
while providing “modern, reliable, and affordable energy for all
Americans.”
“Today’s proposal provides the states and regulated community the
certainty they need to continue environmental progress while fulfilling President Trump’s goal of energy dominance,” Wheeler said in a news
release.
The move represents the latest bid by Trump to fulfill campaign promises
to revive the coal industry and restore mining jobs. Although it is
unlikely to dramatically alter the U.S. power mix -- or give a big boost
to domestic coal demand, which has flagged amid competition from cheap
natural gas and renewables -- industry advocates hailed the effort as
curbing federal government overreach and leveling the playing field.

“The policy put forward by the previous administration was an illegal
attempt to impose a political agenda on the country’s power system,” Hal
Quinn, president of the National Mining Association said in an emailed statement. “The replacement rule respects the infrastructure and economic realities that are unique to each state, allowing for state-driven
solutions, as intended by the Clean Air Act, rather than top down
mandates.”
Trump is set to hold back-to-back campaign events Tuesday in West
Virginia, the No. 2 coal-producing state, where in 2016 he pledged to “get those mines open” and told miners to “get ready, because you’re going to
be working your asses off.”
Environmental advocates and the architects of former President Barack
Obama’s ambitious plan derided the Trump administration’s proposed
replacement as political pandering and said it represented a U.S. retreat
from the global fight against climate change. The move dovetails with a separate administration proposal to relax Obama-era greenhouse gas
emission limits on vehicles and coming efforts to ease limits on the
amount of methane that can escape from oil wells.
“Trump’s EPA is abandoning any attempt to curb the carbon pollution that’s driving damaging climate change,” said Lissa Lynch, a staff attorney at
the Natural Resources Defense Council. “This proposal violates the law and cooks the books on science and economics, all to prop up coal power plants
that can’t compete with cleaner energy.”
The Trump proposal may open a small window for a revival of coal even as
it prolongs uncertainty over the U.S. electricity mix and casts doubt on investments by utilities making decades-long choices about new plants and upgrades.
Administration officials are on track to finalize the new regulation next
year, following a public comment period on Tuesday’s proposal, but critics
have already vowed to battle the effort in federal court and the legal
disputes could take years to resolve. As it stands, Obama’s Clean Power
Plan never went into effect; amid legal challenges from opponents who said
it overstepped the EPA’s authority under federal law, the U.S. Supreme
Court put the initiative on hold in February 2016.
The EPA estimates its proposal could pare carbon dioxide emissions 0.7 per
cent to 1.5 per cent from projected levels without the Obama plan in
place, while cutting emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and other pollutants. According to the agency, once the plan is fully implemented,
power sector emissions could fall 33 to 34 per cent below 2005 levels -- roughly mirroring the same target as Obama’s initiative, which sought to
cut those greenhouse gas emissions 32 per cent relative to 2005.
The approach shows the Trump administration abandoning its predecessor’s expansive view of what constitutes the “best system of emission
reductions” for a more narrow, facility-focused interpretation that conservatives say is within the bounds of the Clean Air Act that provides
the framework for air pollution regulations.
“The announcement of a replacement rule may largely represent a political milestone for a president who promised to end his predecessor’s ‘war on
coal,’ but we also view it as a significant policy action that could to
make it difficult for a differently oriented successor to establish
greenhouse gas limits on any stationary sector via executive discretion,” ClearView Energy Partners managing director Kevin Book said in a research
note to clients.
Under the Trump plan, the EPA would establish broad guidelines on the technologies that can be used to pare carbon dioxide emissions and then
give states three years to develop their own plans for paring that
pollution.
It also would overhaul the triggers that prompt new permit reviews -- and potentially expensive new pollution controls -- that have been criticized
as onerous by owners of power plants, refineries and other industrial
sites.
But that still might not be enough to dramatically alter the landscape for
U.S. coal, which is still losing U.S. customers as utilities increasingly
turn to natural gas and renewable power to generate electricity.
Since 2010, power plant owners have either retired or announced plans to
retire 630 coal-fired facilities in 43 states -- nearly 40 per cent of the
U.S. coal fleet, according to data by the American Coalition for Clean
Coal Electricity, a trade group representing utilities such as Southern
Co. and producers such as Peabody Energy Corp.
The EPA is not altering its landmark 2009 conclusion that greenhouse gases threaten health and human welfare -- a finding underpinning the power
plant regulation and compelling the Trump’s move Tuesday. Conservatives
have filed a half dozen petitions challenging the endangerment finding,
though Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler has signaled he is not eager to reconsider the issue.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

XPost: talk.politics.misc, talk.politics.guns, alt.fan.rush-limbaugh.tv-show XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, alt.global-warming, soc.retirement
XPost: alt.survival

Trump’s administration on Tuesday unveiled its plan to dramatically
weaken pollution limits on coal-fired power plants by shifting most of the regulatory burden to states in a further assault on the Obama climate
legacy.
The Environmental Protection Agency’s "Affordable Clean Energy" proposal
would replace the Obama-era Clean Power Plan’s sweeping changes in the
U.S. electricity mix with more modest emissions curbs at individual power plants. It would set pollution guidelines based on assumptions about what improvements could be eked out through efficiency upgrades at the
facilities, then give states the latitude to design their own plans for
paring carbon dioxide emissions at the sites.
EPA Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler said the proposal “would restore
the rule of law and empower states to reduce greenhouse gas emissions”
while providing “modern, reliable, and affordable energy for all
Americans.”
“Today’s proposal provides the states and regulated community the
certainty they need to continue environmental progress while fulfilling President Trump’s goal of energy dominance,” Wheeler said in a news
release.
The move represents the latest bid by Trump to fulfill campaign promises
to revive the coal industry and restore mining jobs. Although it is
unlikely to dramatically alter the U.S. power mix -- or give a big boost
to domestic coal demand, which has flagged amid competition from cheap
natural gas and renewables -- industry advocates hailed the effort as
curbing federal government overreach and leveling the playing field.

“The policy put forward by the previous administration was an illegal
attempt to impose a political agenda on the country’s power system,” Hal
Quinn, president of the National Mining Association said in an emailed statement. “The replacement rule respects the infrastructure and economic realities that are unique to each state, allowing for state-driven
solutions, as intended by the Clean Air Act, rather than top down
mandates.”
Trump is set to hold back-to-back campaign events Tuesday in West
Virginia, the No. 2 coal-producing state, where in 2016 he pledged to “get those mines open” and told miners to “get ready, because you’re going to
be working your asses off.”
Environmental advocates and the architects of former President Barack
Obama’s ambitious plan derided the Trump administration’s proposed
replacement as political pandering and said it represented a U.S. retreat
from the global fight against climate change. The move dovetails with a separate administration proposal to relax Obama-era greenhouse gas
emission limits on vehicles and coming efforts to ease limits on the
amount of methane that can escape from oil wells.
“Trump’s EPA is abandoning any attempt to curb the carbon pollution that’s driving damaging climate change,” said Lissa Lynch, a staff attorney at
the Natural Resources Defense Council. “This proposal violates the law and cooks the books on science and economics, all to prop up coal power plants
that can’t compete with cleaner energy.”
The Trump proposal may open a small window for a revival of coal even as
it prolongs uncertainty over the U.S. electricity mix and casts doubt on investments by utilities making decades-long choices about new plants and upgrades.
Administration officials are on track to finalize the new regulation next
year, following a public comment period on Tuesday’s proposal, but critics
have already vowed to battle the effort in federal court and the legal
disputes could take years to resolve. As it stands, Obama’s Clean Power
Plan never went into effect; amid legal challenges from opponents who said
it overstepped the EPA’s authority under federal law, the U.S. Supreme
Court put the initiative on hold in February 2016.
The EPA estimates its proposal could pare carbon dioxide emissions 0.7 per
cent to 1.5 per cent from projected levels without the Obama plan in
place, while cutting emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and other pollutants. According to the agency, once the plan is fully implemented,
power sector emissions could fall 33 to 34 per cent below 2005 levels -- roughly mirroring the same target as Obama’s initiative, which sought to
cut those greenhouse gas emissions 32 per cent relative to 2005.
The approach shows the Trump administration abandoning its predecessor’s expansive view of what constitutes the “best system of emission
reductions” for a more narrow, facility-focused interpretation that conservatives say is within the bounds of the Clean Air Act that provides
the framework for air pollution regulations.
“The announcement of a replacement rule may largely represent a political milestone for a president who promised to end his predecessor’s ‘war on
coal,’ but we also view it as a significant policy action that could to
make it difficult for a differently oriented successor to establish
greenhouse gas limits on any stationary sector via executive discretion,” ClearView Energy Partners managing director Kevin Book said in a research
note to clients.
Under the Trump plan, the EPA would establish broad guidelines on the technologies that can be used to pare carbon dioxide emissions and then
give states three years to develop their own plans for paring that
pollution.
It also would overhaul the triggers that prompt new permit reviews -- and potentially expensive new pollution controls -- that have been criticized
as onerous by owners of power plants, refineries and other industrial
sites.
But that still might not be enough to dramatically alter the landscape for
U.S. coal, which is still losing U.S. customers as utilities increasingly
turn to natural gas and renewable power to generate electricity.
Since 2010, power plant owners have either retired or announced plans to
retire 630 coal-fired facilities in 43 states -- nearly 40 per cent of the
U.S. coal fleet, according to data by the American Coalition for Clean
Coal Electricity, a trade group representing utilities such as Southern
Co. and producers such as Peabody Energy Corp.
The EPA is not altering its landmark 2009 conclusion that greenhouse gases threaten health and human welfare -- a finding underpinning the power
plant regulation and compelling the Trump’s move Tuesday. Conservatives
have filed a half dozen petitions challenging the endangerment finding,
though Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler has signaled he is not eager to reconsider the issue.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)