The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has confirmed that it is drafting a plan aimed at eliminating greenhouse gas emissions limits for coal- and natural gas-fired power plants across the country.
An EPA spokesperson told The Epoch Times that the agency has been reviewing the Biden administration’s power plant emissions regulations, commonly referred to as the “Clean Power Plan 2.0,” since March.
The Biden-era Clean Power Plan is the EPA’s third major attempt to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from power plants. It follows the Obama administration’s original Clean Power Plan, which required power plants to switch to lower-carbon electricity sources.
“Many have expressed concern that the previous administration’s replacement of this rule is similarly overreaching and an attempt to shut down affordable and reliable electricity generation in the United States, raising prices for American families and increasing the nation’s dependence on foreign energy sources,” an EPA spokesperson said.
“As part of this reassessment, EPA is developing a proposed rule.”
The spokesperson did not provide further information about the draft but said it would be released after interagency review and signature by EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin.
“President [Donald] Trump promised to execute the Clean Power Plan in his first term, and we will continue to build on its progress today,” the spokesperson quoted Zeldin as saying.
“We strive to ensure that the agency adheres to the rule of law while providing all Americans with access to reliable and affordable energy.”
The Affordable Clean Energy (ACE) rule of the first Trump administration officially repealed and replaced the Obama-era regulation.
The DC District Court struck down the ACE rule in January 2021, the last full day of Trump’s first term. That decision was overturned in 2022 when the Supreme Court ruled that the EPA lacked the authority under the Clean Air Act to implement Obama’s Clean Power Plan as originally intended.
The Biden-era regulation that Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) now wants to replace, formerly known as Reg. 2060-AV09, was finalized in early 2024. It requires existing coal-fired power plants to reduce carbon emissions by 90 percent if they plan to continue operating beyond 2039, while imposing even stricter restrictions on newly built natural gas-fired power plants.
The only currently known technology that can achieve such a reduction is carbon capture and sequestration, which has not yet been deployed on such a scale.
The rule was quickly challenged by a Republican-led coalition of states, utilities and coal industry stakeholders. Critics argued that carbon capture was neither economically viable nor technologically mature enough to be used at the nation’s roughly 200 coal-fired power plants. They also pointed to logistical challenges, such as the extensive infrastructure needed to transport the captured carbon dioxide via pipelines to underground storage sites hundreds of miles from the power plants.
“By creating a rule that gives power plant operators the choice of using technologies that do not yet exist on a commercial and affordable scale or closing plants, the EPA has seized control of our nation’s energy policy without the legal authority or expertise to do so, and all at a time when electricity demand is projected to double,” said Rich Nolan, president and CEO of the National Association of Mineworkers, at the time. “If this rule remains in effect, the consequences for the American people and the American economy will be catastrophic.”
Despite opposition, Biden’s power plant rule was allowed to go into effect after the District of Columbia Court of Appeals refused to stay it pending litigation. The U.S. Supreme Court also rejected emergency requests to block the rule, although Justice Clarence Thomas indicated he would have granted a stay.
Justice Brett Kavanaugh, along with Justice Neil Gorsuch, wrote in an opinion that he believes the challengers have “a strong chance of success on at least some of their challenges.” But he said that because the rule requires them to begin compliance work before June 2025, they are unlikely to suffer irreparable harm before the D.C. Circuit makes a final decision.
“Therefore, this Court understandably denies the requests for a stay at this time,” Kavanaugh wrote, adding that if the challengers lose at this level, they can seek relief from the Supreme Court again on appeal.
The DC District Court has not yet ruled on the merits of the case.
