The Trump administration is expected on Thursday to roll back an Obama-era rule that requires new coal plants to capture their carbon emissions, a move that could crack open the door in coming years for new plants fired by the fossil fuel.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will make an “energy policy announcement” at 1:30 p.m. EST (1830 GMT) on Thursday. Andrew Wheeler, EPA’s acting administrator, will speak alongside Harry Alford, president of the National Black Chamber of Commerce, a long-time opponent of former President Barack Obama’s limits on carbon emissions.
The EPA is expected to propose allowing new coal plants to emit up to 1,900 pounds (862 kg) of carbon dioxide per megawatt-hour of electricity, according to a New York Times report citing unnamed sources.
The Trump proposal, which is sure to be challenged by lawsuits from environmental groups, would replace an Obama-era standard allowing only 1,400 pounds of carbon per megawatt-hour. That Obama rule would have forced new plants to install carbon capture equipment that is not yet commercially available.
No company has plans to build a new U.S. coal plant due to competition from plentiful and less-expensive natural gas. That could change as President Donald Trump rolls back rules meant to curb emissions linked to global warming.
“I’m not giving up on building a new generation of coal-fired power plants in this country,” said Myron Ebell, who led Trump’s EPA transition team last year. Ebell said Trump’s policies could allow new coal plants to be build in the next five, 10 or 15 years.
The administration says coal plants can be made to burn coal far more efficiently. But high costs have made them uneconomic. The regulatory roll back comes ahead of the annual U.N. climate talks in Poland next week, where White House officials plan a panel on coal technology.
It was unclear whether the proposal can withstand lawsuits. Jay Duffy, a legal associate at Clean Air Task Force, said the weaker carbon emissions level would not satisfy federal clean air law requirements for the best available emissions technology.
While the carbon capture equipment the Obama rule would have required is technologically feasible, it is expensive.
But Duffy said Obama’s rule would drive down costs.
“If Trump is really interested in supporting coal miners, what he should be looking at is supporting and advancing carbon capture,” said Duffy. “That’s the only way coal survives,” in a future where rules on carbon constraints are likely, he said.
Reporting by Timothy Gardner; Editing by David Gregorio
Trump-loving GOP candidate faces more trouble as his Ukraine ranting provokes a defamation suit
A pro-Trump aspiring politician who was named in documents released by an indicted associate of Rudy Giuliani is being sued by a Dutch Trump supporter for defamation, the Hartford Courant reports.
Robert F. Hyde reportedly made the alleged defamatory comments during an interview with a local news station, where he discussed the documents alleging he was involved in some sort of surveillance operation of Marie Yovanovitch, the former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine. WhatsApp messages appeared to show that Hyde was sending updates on Yovanovitch's whereabouts to Lev Parnas, a former associate of Giuliani who is now under indictment for campaign finance violations.
BUSTED: These 10 GOP senators said Ukraine quid pro quo was a red line before Bolton bombshell
The Washington Post's Philip Bump has tracked down statements from ten different Republican senators who in the past indicated that impeachment charges against President Donald Trump would be far more serious if it could be proven there was a quid-pro-quo agreement that involved exchanging the release of foreign aid to Ukraine for the investigation of former Vice President Joe Biden.
All of the statements flagged by Bump came before this week's bombshell revelation that former national security adviser John Bolton's upcoming book will reportedly say the president directly linked Ukraine aid to the Biden investigation.
Law professor slams Trump team’s ‘distortions of facts’ as they try to shoot down congressional subpoenas
Writing for The Atlantic, University of Missouri Law professor Frank Bowman excoriated the White House legal team for their rationale against honoring congressional subpoenas in the impeachment inquiry.
"On Saturday, Trump’s lawyer Pat Philbin tried to extinguish any flickers of enlightened self-interest among Republicans by arguing that Trump was entitled to stonewall the House because the House hadn’t properly authorized its own subpoenas," wrote Bowman. "Like so many contentions of the president’s defenders, this is malarkey thinly draped with plausible-sounding distortions of facts, rules, court opinions, and the Constitution itself."