BISMARCK, N.D. – The public can now comment on the Trump administration's proposal to replace the Clean Power Plan, an Obama-era rule aimed at drastically cutting carbon emissions from coal power plants.

Under what's being called the Affordable Clean Energy Rule, states would come up with their own reduction goals and submit their plans within three years to the Environmental Protection Agency.

Wayde Schafer, a conservation organizer with the Sierra Club Dacotah Chapter, says the Clean Power Plan had specific goals for reducing greenhouse gas emissions in each state, but this new proposal does away with that.

"Coal producing states like North Dakota are obviously going to not have as stringent safeguards as states that don't,” he points out. “You really need a balanced plan, and this certainly isn't a balanced plan."

Schafer maintains a nationwide plan makes more sense because air doesn't stop at state borders.

North Dakota has seven coal fired power plants and ranked ninth in coal production in 2016. The 2015 Clean Power Plan was put on hold by the U.S. Supreme Court and has not yet taken effect.

Janet McCabe, a senior law fellow at the Environmental Law and Policy Center, is a former EPA assistant administrator who worked on the Clean Power Plan.

She's concerned the new proposal would delay implementing meaningful air quality improvements in a number of ways, including changing the way an older coal plant's remaining life is factored into how it should be handled.

"The proposal gives the states, really, ultimate discretion to require nothing at all,” she points out. “What this rule would allow is for a state to say, 'Well, given the remaining useful life of this plant, it doesn't make sense to require it to do anything.'"

McCabe notes the Affordable Clean Energy plan would cut emissions, at most, to 1.5 percent below 2005 levels by 2030. The Clean Power Plan was projected to cut emissions by 19 percent.

McCabe notes public comments, which will be accepted through Oct. 30, are important to the rule making process.

"When I was at EPA, every single rule I worked on got better between proposal and final because of comments that we got,” she points out. “And those are important expressions from taxpayers in this country about what they feel their government should do, to protect them or to stay out of the way."


get more stories like this via email

Next week, the Kentucky Public Service Commission takes public comments in person on a long-term plan by the state's major utilities.

The hearing is set for July 12 at 9 a.m. in Frankfort.

Rachel Norton, energy specialist for the Mountain Association, explained utilities' Integrated Resource Plan is a look ahead at the types and amount of power they expect to generate in the decades to come, based on population-size estimates and other factors. The Mountain Association is among the groups arguing the plan ignores energy efficiency and continues to rely on coal.

Norton said some people may be unaware of how the state commission works to keep energy rates reasonable.

"We are really trying to educate folks about the fact that we have a Public Service Commission," Norton pointed out. "The fact that they are essentially protection between us and the utility companies, from the utility companies just raising rates as much as their shareholders might want."

People can fill out a short online form to sign up to speak at the hearing at k4ed.org. The utilities have told the commission their plan includes generating 18% of power from solar energy beginning in 2034, and reducing carbon emission by 26% from 2021 levels.

Deborah Gerth, a retired college instructor in Lexington, said she lives on a fixed income and is worried the utilities' plan does not include enough renewable energy, a trend she believes will end up costing customers more down the road.

"The lack of planning isn't just that it's not helping to address climate change," Gerth noted. "It's also a financial burden that needs to be, I think, put in front of people, as they're thinking about the utility companies."

Norton emphasized as Kentuckians navigate increasing heat waves, flooding, and ice storms from climate change, investing in solar could help ensure utilities are generating clean power. She thinks the shift to solar could also boost local economies.

"So, I see a huge opportunity to really invest in energy efficiency in our homes and businesses," Norton contended. "And being able to pay local people to do that work."

She added continuing to rely heavily on coal also puts people's health at risk. A 2019 report revealed toxic chemicals found in coal ash pollution have compromised Kentucky's drinking water.

Local elected officials are calling on Gov. Gavin Newsom to halt all permitting for future oil and gas projects, in light of recent progress with offshore wind.

The feds are getting ready to hold a lease auction in August or September for sites off Morro Bay to build floating wind turbines.

Andy Pease, a member of the San Luis Obispo city council, said the potential for offshore wind on the Central Coast and for Humboldt County is huge; enough to power 1.6 million homes.

"There's no reason to be having new gas extraction permits or any fossil fuels," Pease contended. "We need to leave those in the ground. We've got the capability. Let's make it happen."

Newsom has already pledged to cease all fracking permits by 2024. Groups fighting climate change would like him to take the next step and also block any expansion of oil drilling. Opponents want oil and gas to remain part of the energy mix and say jobs in the field are at risk.

John Headding, mayor of Morro Bay, said the floating offshore turbines will take at least six years to come to fruition, because the state would need to build a deep-water port nearby.

"This new renewable industry is a significant step in our efforts to help address the climate crisis," Headding asserted. "And help California reach its goal of achieving 100% renewable and carbon-free electricity by 2045."

Habib Joseph Dagher, professor of civil and structural engineering at the University of Maine, has designed and deployed a prototype, which successfully fed into the New England electric grid as part of a project called Aqua Ventus.

"The advantages of floating is that you can put them beyond the horizon," Dagher pointed out. "So people don't see them from land, you can also have a lot more places you can put them that would minimize impact on the environment, minimize impact on wildlife, and also minimize impacts on other users, such as fishing and so forth."

The turbines would be about 20 miles offshore and would feed electricity into the grid at night.

The Minnesota Public Utilities Commission (PUC) announced it will soon accept public comments on drafting rules to regulate underground carbon-dioxide pipelines. The emerging technology is touted as a climate change solution, but environmental groups are skeptical.

The PUC recently declared it has regulatory authority over such pipelines, after it was initially believed only county governments in Minnesota had a say.

Maggie Schuppert, campaigns director for Clean Up the River Environment (CURE), said they are happy the state is getting involved, and think the projects are being rushed without enough public engagement.

"We haven't seen anything like these before, these kinds of pipelines and what they'll be carrying through them," Schuppert pointed out. "And so, there's just a huge amount of unknown risks and concerns, and that requires -- in some sense, we think -- an even stronger vetting and oversight process."

Companies like Summit Carbon Solutions want to capture carbon dioxide from ethanol plants and route it through pipelines in multiple states for underground storage.

Summit contends the PUC does not have authority in this case, prompting an unnecessary review. But the Commission said it's acting within its scope. It expects the public comment period to begin later in June or early July.

The Commission suggested there might be stronger demand for such projects in the future, and drafting rules makes sense. Schuppert acknowledged if permits are eventually filed, they might win approval. But CURE feels there should at least be a system in place for anyone to speak up.

"We think it's the bare minimum for them to give the public, give impacted people from communities, a process to which they can have input into," Schuppert contended. "And then also, you know, the really important role that they play in terms of requiring the companies to provide certain information."

The Summit project would cover portions of western Minnesota. Concerns voiced by environmental groups and tribal governments include pipelines rupturing and the potential impact on water sources. Summit said it is committed to working with the state. It said its project is safe and would be an economic boost to the region.