Trump's Plan for Coal Emissions: Let Coal States Regulate Them

[herding cats]

Source: NYT

WASHINGTON — The Trump administration next week plans to formally propose a vast overhaul of climate change regulations that would allow individual states to decide how, or even whether, to curb carbon dioxide emissions from coal plants, according to a summary of the plan and details provided by three people who have seen the full proposal.

The plan would also relax pollution rules for power plants that need upgrades. That, combined with allowing states to set their own rules, creates a serious risk that emissions, which had been falling, could start to rise again, according to environmentalists.

The proposal, which President Trump is expected to highlight Tuesday at a rally in West Virginia, amounts to the administration’s strongest and broadest effort yet to address what the president has long described as a regulatory “war on coal.” It would considerably weaken what is known as the Clean Power Plan, former President Barack Obama’s signature regulation for cutting planet-warming emissions at coal-fired plants.

That rule, crafted as the United States prepared to enter into the 2015 Paris Agreement on global warming, was the first federal carbon-pollution restriction for power plants. In 2016, the Supreme Court temporarily blocked the regulation from taking effect while a federal court heard arguments from a coalition of coal states that sued to block the rule. It remains suspended.

Read more: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/17/climate/trump-clean-power-rollback.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

[LastLiberal in PalmSprings]

1. Because global warming only affects certain states, the feds don't need to step in.

I'd hate for my state to be downwind from a coal state. Shades of acid rain!

[Rhiannon12866]

2. Terrible idea, a cop out - and yet another decision that fails to curb pollution

The plan would also relax pollution rules for power plants that need upgrades. That, combined with allowing states to set their own rules, creates a serious risk that emissions, which had been falling, could start to rise again, according to environmentalists.

[Maxheader]

7. Can't get it done at the federal level...

so it passes it to the states...

[safeinOhio]

3. Would that allow states to shut down coal plants

that violates their own new laws?

[Vinca]

4. Because everyone knows West Virginia's air stays over West Virginia.

[keithbvadu2]

11. Pollution stops at the border and falls down, just piling up... Trump's wall?

Pollution stops at the border and falls down, just piling up.

That should work just fine to build Trump's wall.

Just build big fans to direct the pollution in that direction.

[bucolic_frolic]

5. Trump is Satan

He obviously thinks he'll be dictator for life with his sons succeeding him ... because he has no concern for what will fly, or what might be repealed when he slips from power.

We are in the Danger Zone. Buckle up.

[Deb]

6. Driving wedges between States

Watch for more of this.

[sinkingfeeling]

8. Then can states wanting clean air and power sue dirty coal states?

[modrepub]

10. Yes

They can file 126 petitions under the Clean Air Act Amendments. But then you might get stuck with a Trump appointed judge. It's a long process that hasn't generally worked (only one was granted that I know of). Best defense, in my mind, is to deregulate the electricity market. Most of the coal plants are more expensive to operate than the newer natural gas combined cycle plants. This is hat has driven most of the coal plant closures in the last five years.

[modrepub]

9. Economics Is What's Shutting Down Coal Plants

A combined cycle gas plant is almost twice as efficient at producing electricity as the most efficient critical boiler coal plant. Smaller combined cycle plants at institutions can reach 80% efficiency. The last big style coal plants were built in the 1960s and 70s. Plants such as these are nearing the end of their life span anyway. I've seen estimates for building new coal plants and their over six times as expensive as a natural gas combined cycle plant and almost on par with large wind farm costs. I've also heard that groups like the Sierra Club have shut down plants when they've appeared before utility boards and argued rate payers would have to pay higher bills to keep the old coal plants running.

The BEST defense against these dirty coal plants is deregulating the electricity markets. This seems to shut them down very quickly as the have a hard time meeting the base-load auctions (at least on the PJM grid). A side benefit is electricity cost are usually reduced and market competition weeds out inefficiencies. While we're still adding CO2 we're at least reducing our footprint overall and hopefully moving towards more sustainable forms of electricity production.

[MurrayDelph]

12. And yet

he wants to prevent California from having its own clean air standards.

[elleng]

13. Doesn't get time zones, doesn't get wind power, doesn't get interstate commerce,

doesn't get global warming.

[Grins]

14. So a state can sue a state if that state is polluted/damaged from the emnissions of another state?

Once again he proves he is Constitutionally illiterate.

They can't. It's why we have the "Commerce Clause".

Article I, Section 8, Clause 3:[3]

[The Congress shall have Power] To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes;

[roamer65]

15. That means non-coal states can ban the importation of coal.

Nullification can be used to protect the air.

Seriously, how are the feds gonna stop it? Lol

[sakabatou]

16. *facepalm*