According to internal documents obtained by the House Oversight and Accountability Committee, multiple Biden administration officials have warned the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) about the agency's aggressive efforts to significantly reduce power plant emissions. The regulation was found to have significant substantive and legal flaws.
EPA's proposal would require existing coal-fired power plants to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 90% by 2040, and new and existing natural gas power plants would also have to reduce greenhouse gas emissions based on their size and usage. It effectively stipulates that effective gas emissions will be significantly reduced. Mandating expensive and generally unproven technologies such as carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) and blended hydrogen. During the White House's interagency review process, several commenters highlighted significant logistical and technical flaws in this proposal. according to Documents and communications obtained by the House Oversight and Accountability Committee.
The Clean Air Act regulates certain pollutants from stationary sources, such as power plants, provided that the Environmental Protection Agency regulates them using “adequately demonstrated” and “best emissions reduction systems.” It gives authority to the EPA. according to in the text of the statute. EPA's proposal claims CCS and hydrogen blending is “adequately demonstrated” and poised to drive major changes in U.S. natural gas power generation capacity, but comments on the interagency review document , indicating a lack of consensus on the efficiency or reliability of these technologies within the broader Biden administration. (Related: 'Extremely Harmful': Here are the strongest restrictions Biden's EPA will impose on Americans in 2023)
Biden EPA announces strict air pollution regulations that could cripple American industry https://t.co/hBADDnjPHm
— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) February 8, 2024
Critics say the EPA's proposal is an unrealistic, de facto final plan to achieve nearly the same results as those envisioned in the Obama administration's Clean Power Plan, which was rejected by the Supreme Court in 2022. It is said that it is. The Supreme Court held in West Virginia v. EPA: The EPA exceeded its agency mandate in promulgating the Clean Power Plan, overturning the regulations nearly eight years after the Obama EPA announced it in 2014.
Some comments raised serious questions about the regulation's plans to build natural gas power plants. Approximately 40% offer In 2022, the largest proportion of U.S. utility-scale power generation will rely on blended hydrogen. If finalized and implemented, this proposal, if finalized and implemented, would almost certainly result in widespread rolling blackouts in the American heartland served by Midwest Independent Operators (MISO), according to an analysis by the American Experiment Center. It will be.
“Hydrogen combustion has not been adequately demonstrated nationally for utility-scale power generation,” one commenter wrote in an internal review document. A huge jump in hydrogen combustion would result in a “significant increase” in nitrogen oxide emissions, “which would offset some of the benefits” of carbon emissions reductions that the policy is designed to deliver. the same commenter pointed out.
“There are questions regarding the integrity of the hydrogen supply and whether a consistent and reliable hydrogen market will emerge,” the commenter wrote. Additionally, commenters took issue with EPA's proposed timeline for power plants to comply with certain provisions of the regulation and noted that blended hydrogen is currently energy inefficient.
The commenter's concerns were not limited to mixed hydrogen. Some officials and experts have also made it clear that they do not believe CCS technology and related infrastructure are anywhere near ready to meet EPA's goals for technology deployment in natural gas generation facilities.
One commenter stated that the agency has only approved two permits for underground carbon sequestration wells to date, and that the entire permitting process can take up to six years.
“Currently, 31 permit applications are pending approval,” the commenter wrote. “This long lead time for permit approval is one of the factors limiting the availability of storage capacity, until storage areas and pipelines for transporting captured carbon are developed on an industrial scale. Regulations requiring CCS have become unworkable.”
Another comment stated that CCS “consumes 20 to 25 percent of the power produced by the equipment, resulting in less power available to the grid” and “negatively impacts the available reserve margin, resulting in up to 5% “Diverting a fraction of that would worsen grid reliability projections.” “Electric power” Energy output to CCS related equipment. Additionally, commenters said CCS is “prohibitively expensive” despite being cushioned by subsidies allocated by President Joe Biden's signature climate bill, the Inflation Control Act. It added that it was “not well-proven” as the best means of reducing emissions required by the government. Law.
The EPA is seeking to reshape the nation's power generation system by imposing new technology requirements that some in the administration do not believe are ready to meet its ambitious goals, but the Biden administration The agency and other departments are promoting electric vehicles and home appliances. For example, it would ostensibly cause a significant increase in electricity demand.
“The documents uncovered show that the EPA and the current administration are trying to determine the cost and legality of proposed emissions regulations that would jeopardize the U.S. power grid, raise energy costs, and strengthen the priorities of the Green New Deal. It shows willful disregard,” said House Oversight and Accountability Chairman James Comer. statement. “The American people expect strict oversight from Congress, and the committee will continue to work to ensure that EPA and other administration officials are held accountable.”
The EPA did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
All content produced by the Daily Caller News Foundation, an independent, nonpartisan news distribution service, is available free of charge to legitimate news publishers with large audiences. All republished articles must include our logo, reporter byline, and DCNF affiliation. If you have any questions about our guidelines or partnering with us, please contact us at licensing@dailycallernewsfoundation.org.
