IMPLICATIONS AND STRATEGIES  CLEAN POWER PLAN IMPLICATIONS AND STRATEGIES

A brief history of the Clean Power Plan (2007) Massachusetts v. EPA: CO2 determined to be “air pollution” that “endanger[s] public health or welfare” (2013) Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA: EPA may regulate GHGs, but only from sources already regulated under CAA (2014) Draft CPP released, 4.3M comments submitted (August 2015) Obama announces final CPP, litigation ensues (February 2016) Supreme Court orders EPA to halt enforcement of the CPP until Court review (September 2016) US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit hears arguments on CPP

The CPP bridges an awkward gap The EPA regulates emissions sources, requiring the “best system of emissions reductions”… but it is most efficient to regulate CO2 across the entire system. EPA’s Solution: The best system of emissions reductions for CO2 has three components: Improve the efficiency of coal power plants. Replace coal power with natural gas generation. Deploy renewable energy to reduce coal and natural gas consumption.

Clean Power Plan Requirements Plant-level assessments were consolidated to state-by-state requirements for emissions reduction from the power sector by 2030 Overall US power sector CO2 emissions reduction would be about 30% from 2015-2030 States are allowed to choose their own implementation strategies to meet one of three metrics: A total CO2 mass limit by 2030 An emissions rate (kg / MWh) limit by 2030 Other in-state or inter-state plans that would result in equivalent levels of reduction, as approved by EPA