The Environmental Protection Agency today introduced new rules to crack down on pollution from power plants. It forces existing coal-fired power plants and newly built gas-fired power plants to capture almost all of their planet-heating carbon dioxide emissions. The agency also set new limits on mercury emissions, water pollution and coal ash from power plants.
But environmental and health advocates are still waiting for the EPA to finalize rules for existing gas-fired power plants, which are the largest source of electricity in the United States. The edge spoke with Regan about what’s next, from the upcoming presidential election to the technologies that could be used to rehabilitate the power grid and how to get communities more involved in the process.
“We all understand the sense of urgency”
This interview has been lightly edited for clarity and length.
The United States generates more electricity from gas than any other energy source. However, the EPA’s new rules for power plant emissions do not apply to existing gas-fired power plants.
The EPA says it is delaying its decision to tighten those rules, but that risks potentially leaving the policy to another Trump administration. What is so important that it’s worth slowing down and taking the risk?
I think it’s a universal view that is shared not only by the EPA, but also by the environmental justice community, the environmental community and industry. The environmental justice community has asked us to address not only reducing carbon emissions, but also reducing toxic pollution.
We wanted to listen to our stakeholders and recognized that we all understand the sense of urgency. But also to hold on to the fact that we can do better. We can be more inclusive. We can ensure that control technologies other than carbon capture and storage have been considered, as the environmental justice community has asked us to do. And we also thought that this was a more strategic and impactful way to look at the existing gas universe in its entirety. Therefore, we believe that despite the urgency, there is an opportunity to further reduce pollution from existing gas wells.
How might you achieve this additional pollution reduction? How might the new rule for existing gas facilities differ from what the EPA originally proposed last year?
We are in the process of evaluating various combinations of control technologies. Considering the dependency on renewable energy and battery storage? We review and evaluate the best management practices to reduce environmental pollution. Listen, the bottom line is that many of these existing gas-fired power plants are located in close proximity to communities that have been disproportionately impacted for far too long. Therefore, they want a more thoughtful and inclusive process on different approaches to reducing climate pollutants and toxic pollution. And they also want to better understand CCS technology – how all of these things will directly impact their communities as well. So with this extended timeframe, we are taking the opportunity to be transparent, to take a closer look at all available options to reduce not only carbon emissions but also pollution, and to explain to communities the decisions we are making the overall impact it will have on their communities.
The Supreme Court’s decision on West Virginia v. United States. EPA Last June, he essentially said the EPA couldn’t regulate greenhouse gas emissions in a way that determines what energy sources the U.S. uses. How difficult was this ruling for combating climate change and the health effects of power plant pollution?
Let me just say that I firmly believe that we follow the science and the law. We literally measured twice and cut once. We recognize that the Supreme Court has commented on previous cases. The fact is that we have learned from the results of previous court cases and will apply this knowledge in the future. The four separate standards we are issuing today will be implemented in a very strategic manner that is consistent with the law and consistent with the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act and all of our cleanup laws.
“I firmly believe that we follow the science and the law.”
Today we are establishing this set of standards so that the industry has enough time to prepare for investment and strategic planning to comply with these rules in a very cost-effective manner. We know from our analysis and evaluation that this does not compromise reliability or drive up prices, and that is why we feel very comfortable. We took our time and today is a really big day for the Biden administration.
Last night I spoke to a woman from Newark, New Jersey. She lives in a neighborhood with three power plants within four square miles. She says they’re counting on you and that real lives are at stake.
Your name is Maria Lopez-Nuñez. She wants the EPA to think about it cumulative Impacts of multiple industrial facilities and multiple pollutants – not just carbon dioxide – impacting the community. Will you do that with this new power plant rule?
This is something we do. If you look at these four rules, we will fight climate pollution. We ensure that the wastewater discharged from the various facilities in our neighborhood is not allowed to enter the rivers and streams. We ensure that the mercury from this coal does not accumulate in the fish that people in the neighborhood may want to use for recreational purposes. We are putting an end to coal ash that has been stored in these unlined pits in their communities and is saturating the groundwater and drinking water. Today we’re directly addressing the concerns we’ve heard from her and other members in communities across the country. This is a very comprehensive approach. It is an approach to combat pollution from our energy sector. And again, it’s a smart approach that doesn’t compromise reliability or cost.
And what about the upcoming regulation for existing power plants?
One of the reasons we’re taking more time is because as we address existing gas plants, we’re paying attention to carbon, nitrogen oxides and some of the toxins that come from those plants. So yes, we’re looking at several pollutants that we can control by taking a little more time, as the community – the environmental justice community and the environmental community – has asked us to do.
Maria and other advocates I spoke with are also concerned about carbon capture. This will not eliminate other forms of pollution and will prolong dependence on fossil fuels, they say. Do you think the new regulation for existing gas power plants should continue to be based on CO2 capture?
We listen to Maria and others and therefore take this second step. That’s why we go through a very transparent process. We listen to the public. And we will embark on this journey together to ensure that the range of options we consider viable for existing sources addresses the concerns raised by the environmental and environmental justice community. We listen, and we hear Mary and her companions loud and clear.
So far, the EPA has only opened one non-regulatory acts to gather input on a new emissions rule for existing gas plants, which sounds like that isn’t the case bound to a specific set of rules. Can you explain why this is a non-regulatory matter and what next steps are needed to achieve final regulation for existing power plants? Is there any chance this rule will be implemented before the election?
“For far too long, low-income communities of color and tribal communities have been disproportionately affected by pollution from the energy sector.”
The process is ongoing and I wouldn’t read too much into the first step. There are several steps that are part of any rulemaking process, and I can assure you that the actions we take to curb carbon pollution and toxic pollution from existing gas wells will go through the appropriate process that will withstand legal challenges, but also Follow the science and obey the law.
I’ve heard you speak very passionately over the years about environmental justice and ending the legacy of fossil fuels that disproportionately pollute communities of color and low-income neighborhoods. How can this be reconciled when the US is still producing record amounts of oil and gas?
I think it’s fair to say that President Biden has set the agenda. Leadership starts at the top, and he is the president who said at least twice in his State of the Union address that environmental justice is a top priority for all of us. It goes without saying that for far too long, low-income communities of color and tribal communities have been disproportionately affected by pollution from the energy and chemical sectors. We are committed to applying our rules equally under the law to protect everyone in this country, especially those who are disproportionately affected or most at risk.
I took this Journey to Justice tour all over the country, starting in the southeastern United States. When you spend time with families who have been touched by cancer for multiple generations, and when you see how close some of these homes are to chemical plants and coal ash dumps, you quickly realize that there are things we can do and must do that the President is asking us to do asked. That’s exactly what this EPA is doing.