Posted on 03/07/2015 12:13:46 PM PST by E. Pluribus Unum
Federal utility regulators plan to raise questions later this month that could push the debate over the administration's climate rules to a fever pitch.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) this week listed the questions it seeks to answer at a March 31 technical conference in St. Louis, Mo., to assess the impacts of EPA's proposed climate rules on utilities in the Central United States. Specifically, the commission will be asking how plans to take coal production offline will impact customers who rely on that energy.
The March 31 meeting will be the commission's fourth and final conference on the compliance challenges posed by the Clean Power Plan, which seeks to limit carbon output from existing power plants. The meeting will include industry experts, state regulators, and others with a stake in the Midwest power market.
Compared to previous meeting notices, this one underscores a key industry concern: How the climate rules, along with previously enacted pollution standards, could create a situation in which areas served by midwestern power plants experience rolling power outages.
Industry sources said ahead of the first technical conferences last month that they feared the commission would not address how previous air toxics rules, which go into effect in April, would combine with the proposed climate regs. Power producers have long warned that heavy regulation would ultimately lead to reduced output.
On the other hand, environmentalists have expressed concern that FERC would pay too much attention to how closing coal plants will affect Americans who rely on the energy they produce. They say the commission should focus on helping states comply with the rules rather than focusing on potential negative consequences — which they consider overstated.
Many coal utilities have announced thousands of megawatts of power-plant retirements, slated to begin in the spring. Republicans and some Democratic lawmakers have raised this concern when addressing the negative consequences of moving forward with EPA's climate agenda.
FERC wants to know what happens if concerns about losing reliable energy sources mean the coal plants can't be retired on schedule.
"Given the possibility that a large amount of coal-fired generation in the Central region could be retired as a result of both [EPA's] Mercury and Air Toxics Standards and the Clean Power Plan, what issues may arise if many of these units are required to stay online as Reliability Must Run units or System Support Resources?" the March 3 FERC agenda reads.
The agenda continues: "If transmission upgrades must be built to allow Reliability Must Run units or System Support Resources to retire, how will that affect the timing of compliance with the Clean Power Plan?"
Reliability issues came up during two recent meetings, held in Washington, D.C., and Colorado. But the coal plant retirement question was not posed so directly by FERC itself ahead of either meeting. A third meeting, slated for March 11 in D.C., focuses primarily on market fixes needed for compliance.
The commission has tried to tamp down discussions that would "validate" one set of issues over another, such as the utility sector's fears over being able to keep the lights on and the environmentalists' climate change advocacy.
FERC Chairman Cheryl LaFleur has said she wants the commission to be an "honest broker" in these meetings, not to play up one side of the debate over the other.
But Republican Commissioner Philip Moeller continues to press concerns over the effects of other pollution standards, already in place, that would hurt states' ability to comply with the Clean Power Plan while potentially harming reliability.
The commission is comprised of five members, generally with two spots held by each party and the White House holding sway over the chairmanship.
Moeller at the Denver meeting raised the impacts of EPA's national air quality rules on climate compliance. He said existing air quality rules to control ozone levels impose restrictions on industry, making it nearly impossible for Arizona and other Western states to build new gas plants to comply with the proposed Clean Power Plan.
The commission is comprised of five members, generally with two spots held by each party and the White House holding sway over the chairmanship.
Funny how that works eh.
Since republicans control both houses, maybe it should
be four republicans and the white house???
Well, I’m sorry, perhaps control isn’t the right word,
majority is probably better as it seems the democrats
are not letting minority mean any thing to them.
Baaaaah.
Obama pulls stimulus funds for 0% emission coal plant , wonder why
Our forefathers would be shooting by now, and those citizens in "Coal Country" are well armed. Just sayin'.
I guess when this:
http://www.laissez-fairerepublic.com/indocoal.htm
and this:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/724170/posts
didn’t work the wanna-be communist agenda “democrats” decided to dream up insane regulations that demand less-than-background levels of naturally occuring substances in “air quality rules,” then point fingers at American industry.
Lock down the pipelines, let em freeze and sweat.
.
While the feds do have the Commerce Clause (1.8.3) power to stick their big noses into utilities traded across state borders, and also noting that we do need to protect the environment, it remains that the states have never delegated to the feds, expressly via the Constitution, the specific power to regulate environmental / climate issues.
But also consider that ignorance of the law is no excuse. And sometimes I think that constitutionally ignorant citizens DESERVE to have unconstitutionally big, corrupt federal government walk all over them.
Cut all the power to DC.
He wants the surfs in the dark and cold, that way they can’t complain or rise up.
Rolling black outs are what number on the descent into 3rd world status?
Ohio, Michigan, Illinois, Wisconsin, and Iowa proudly voted for Obama. Perhaps we will have an extraordinarily cold winter so these voters can appreciate that global warming is a hoax and there are consequences to shutting down coal fired power plants has consequences.
Hey Pennsylvania and other unionized coal miners and workers: Thanks for helping to elect obama twice. Sucks to be you. So sorry, my give-a-damn meter is not even hitting 0.00001.
If you are not making plans for an alternative power system then by all means do so.
(those are not likely going to run your AC, but can keeps the reefs and freezers cold.)
Whoever is running a power company could put a stop to this nonsense real quick.
When they get to the point that they can’t produce enough power...shut off urban areas on a rotating basis around the states.
Liberals live in the big cities, they believe the Gorebull warming BS, and they elected O’bastard. Well, let them live in the world they created, cities shiver in the dark and the burbs and rural areas get the juice!
Yeh you can kiss AC good bye. Ceiling fans if you are lucky. You need a wood stove for the winter and solar to run the lights, well pump and a fridge or freezer. Put most everything on propane.
The good news is, that any government is three meals away from a revolution. And, in more modern terms, things get “interesting” in cities when there’s a blackout.
I thought wood stoves were declared illegal
Wood stoves are used by millions of people for heat. The EPA is just trying to up the efficiency factor. It likely will make them more expensive.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.