Apples and Oranges: Assessing the Stringency of EPA's Clean Power Plan

Date01 December 2014
Author
12-2014 NEWS & ANALYSIS 44 ELR 11079
Apples and
Oranges:
Assessing the
Stringency of
EPA’s Clean
Power Plan
by Jeremy M. Tarr and David Hoppock
Jeremy M. Tarr is a Policy Analyst and David Hoppock
is Senior Policy Analyst, both at Duke University’s
Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions.
Summary
An accurate assessment of the stringency of state
emission goals under EPA’s proposed Clean Power
Plan compares state emission goals to adjusted state
emission rates that incorporate known and reasonably
foreseeable measures that will aect CO2 emissions
from existing power plants. ese adjusted emission
rates may include projections of actual generation and
emissions, which may dier from the building block
assumptions used in EPA’s Clean Power Plan. In addi-
tion, projections in performance levels can reect the
emission and generation impacts that compliance
measures will have on the electricity system. Consid-
eration of these impacts can lead to a more accurate
comparison of a state’s projected CO2 performance
level to its nal emission goal under the Clean Power
Plan and result in state plans that are optimized for
the degree of required emission reduction.
I. Introduction
On June 18, 2014, the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) proposed the Clean Power Plan1 to regu-
late carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from existing power
plants. e A gency’s proposal, made under §111(d) of the
Clean Air Act (CAA),2 generates unique CO2 emission
goals for each state using a formula that includes assump-
tions about various emission control strategies.
While the proposal provides clear emission goals for
each state, understanding the stringency of those goals is
less straightforward. e form of state §111(d) emission
goals is an emission rate (pounds of CO2 emissions per
megawatt hour (MW h)) that is adjusted to incorporate,
among other things, the eects of zero-emission electricity
generation and cumulative demand-side energy eciency.
ough tempting, comparison of a state’s §111(d) emis-
sion goal to the current average emission rate of the state’s
eet of fossil fuel-red power plants is an apples-to-oranges
comparison that provides an inaccurate picture of the rule’s
stringency. A more meaningful comparison would evaluate
a state’s §111(d) emission goal against a projected adjusted
emission rate for the state that reects transitions in the
power sector t hat are already underway, such a s increases
in generation from natural gas and renewable energy facili-
ties. Using a more apples-to-apples comparison can better
estimate the degree of improvement in power plant perfor-
mance levels that the Clean Power Plan requires and equip
a state to identify compliance strategies that achieve low-
cost emission reductions. is A rticle oers a framework
for assessing the stringency of the Clean Power Plan and
identies key concepts useful for generating an apples-to-
apples comparison.
II. The Clean Power Plan’s Building Blocks
and State Emission Goals
A. The Building Blocks
e CAA requires that §111(d) performance standards
“reect the degree of emission limitation achievable
through the application of the best system of emission
reduction [BSER] which . . . the Administrator deter-
mines has been adequately demonstrated.”3 EPA developed
an interim and nal emission goa l for each state using
what t he A gency considers the BSER for CO2 emissions
1. Carbon Pollution Emission Guidelines for Existing Stationary Sources:
Electric Utility Generating Units, 79 Fed. Reg. 34830 (June 18, 2014)
[hereinafter Proposed Clean Power Plan].
2. Clean Air Act (CAA), 42 U.S.C. §§7401-7671q, ELR S. CAA
§§101-618.
3. 42 U.S.C. §7411(a)(1) (2012).
Copyright © 2014 Environmental Law Institute®, Washington, DC. Reprinted with permission from ELR®, http://www.eli.org, 1-800-433-5120.

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT