EPA To Roll Back Carbon Rule On New Coal Plants

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 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.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good for coal, bad for all others...

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to EIA, US coal consumption was the lowest it has been since 1979. "Only one, relatively small, new coal-fired generator with a capacity of 17 megawatts is expected to come online by the end of 2019," the EIA wrote.  So, the coal is in free fall...  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Clean Coal"  Does it mean that they are going to wash the coal before burning it... 😂

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Money, money and money - pretty polluted. Key question: What future are we leaving our children if we dont protect the very environment that we depend on for our survival?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Expected move. Andrew Wheeler (EPA) is a former lobbyist for the coal industry and I'm pretty sure that he doesn't believe in climate change....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, 50 shades of black said:

According to EIA, US coal consumption was the lowest it has been since 1979. "Only one, relatively small, new coal-fired generator with a capacity of 17 megawatts is expected to come online by the end of 2019," the EIA wrote.  So, the coal is in free fall...  

The problem is that so many have been conditioned to blame the EPA and "regulations" for the woes of the coal industry. The real cause of their decline is the boom in natural gas.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Pavel said:

..... The real cause of their decline is the boom in natural gas.

And automation, from pick through plant, and solar, and...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Term "clean coal" is opposite from term clean watter and clean air... they haven't "enough" place in same sentence

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, ThunderBlade said:

Expected move. Andrew Wheeler (EPA) is a former lobbyist for the coal industry and I'm pretty sure that he doesn't believe in climate change....

Lobbying is a job .... not a disqualification. But, other thing is when you need to separate your last job from the present function ... Then we can talk about conflict of interest

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let those companies spend their money where they want, the US is a free country. However, it will be lost, because it can't compete with solar. But capitalism is as much about bankruptcy as it is about success...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Only a complete moron would invest in coal powered generation especially in the USA. To start planning to build a new plant now to completion and then to pay back it's costs has to be over ten years. Are the far right republicans going to have control that long? Or is another administration going to come in with a bit more sense when it comes to science and economics? Is the risk worth the potential returns?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DA? said:

Only a complete moron would invest in coal powered generation especially in the USA. To start planning to build a new plant now to completion and then to pay back it's costs has to be over ten years. Are the far right republicans going to have control that long? Or is another administration going to come in with a bit more sense when it comes to science and economics? Is the risk worth the potential returns?

If renewables are emerging as quickly and becoming as economical as you’ve told us the market will bear it out.  Coupled with the ability of the dems to ride the blue wave of the midterms into the next general election, nothing to fear greener days are ahead......

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 12/6/2018 at 9:25 PM, pinto said:

"Clean Coal"  Does it mean that they are going to wash the coal before burning it... 😂

What? With a cloth or something? 

; )

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 12/6/2018 at 2:25 PM, pinto said:

"Clean Coal"  Does it mean that they are going to wash the coal before burning it... 😂

 

image.png.7c3857a82d656e451fd5768ce748d3ec.png

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I asked a coal executive about this.  He suggested that this won't lead to more coal plants because there's still too much political risk.  There isn't enough time between now and the next election to get permits locked in. 

If politics swing strongly conservative and the economics work out, we might see more coal. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites