Posted on 09/21/2026 6:43:07 AM PDT by MtnClimber
In what may be a world record for turnaround time, the litigation has already begun over the recent rescission by EPA of its carbon emission standards for fossil-fuel fired power plants.
As reported here on September 17, on that date the EPA finalized its rescission of what were called its “Carbon Pollution Standards” for electric power plants. (EPA’s September 17 action did not rescind all of the Carbon Pollution Standards for power plants, but only those for existing power plants and major overhauls of existing plants; the standards for new plants remain in effect for now, although in its rescission action EPA gave strong hints that those will also soon be ended.). By the end of that very day, September 17, a Petition had been filed in the DC Circuit seeking review of the regulatory action. Here is a copy of the Petition. The Petitioners are the American Lung Association, American Public Health Association, Clean Air Council, Clean Wisconsin, the Environmental Defense Fund, and the Natural Resources Defense Council.
The Petition is a short two-page document that simply asks for “review” of EPA’s action, and does not say anything about the grounds for the request. To learn the basis for the request, we must look to the press releases issued by the various petitioning organizations. Those contain statements from representatives of the Petitioners, mostly about imaginary threats to “health” from this thing they call “climate pollution.” But one thing that none of the Petitioners’ representatives do in their statements is address the grounds set forth by EPA for the rescission.
Here is a copy of the Press Release issued on September 17 by the Environmental Defense Fund. It contains quotations from representatives of EDF, of the Natural Resources Defense Council, of the American Public Health Association, of the American Lung Association and of Clean Wisconsin about the supposed importance of keeping the rules in place. For example, we have this from Georges Benjamin of the APHA:
“Clean air is a basic human right. Power plant pollution threatens the health of millions of Americans and fuels climate change, worsening extreme heat, poor air quality and other serious health risks. . . .”
Or this from Harold Wimmer of the American Lung Association:
“Emissions from power plants drive climate change, and climate change is a health emergency. . . .”
But OK guys, the issue raised by EPA’s rescission is that the proposed technological fix in the Biden-era rule, namely 90% carbon capture and sequestration (CCS), “has not been adequately demonstrated, the costs of 90 percent CCS are not reasonable, and the associated degree of emission limitation is not achievable.” None of the Petitioners address any of those questions in their statements.
Compared to other environmental litigations that involve highly abstract or theoretical questions, this one looks to turn on easily available concrete evidence. Is there a functioning, economical power plant with CCS that can be easily replicated throughout the electrical system? If so, the Petitioners can just point to it. Even better, they could offer to build such plants wherever needed.
However, that may not be so easy. When the Biden EPA proposed its “Carbon Pollution Standards” as a regulation in 2023, many commenters pointed out the infeasibility and high cost of the CCS approach. Two of the most thorough and sophisticated comments were submitted by groups of red states led by Ohio and West Virginia. This is from the Ohio comment at page 4:
A study of 263 carbon-capture-and-sequestration projects undertaken between 1995 and 2018 found that the majority failed and 78% of the largest projects were cancelled or put on hold. After the study was published in May 2021, the only other coal plant with a carbon-capture-and-sequestration attachment in the world, Petra Nova, shuttered after facing 367 outages in its three years of operation.
The West Virginia comment went into great technical detail about the problems and feasibility issues with CCS. Among other things, West Virginia (at pages 24-25) cited a study that concluded that because a CCS system uses a substantial fraction of the energy output of a plant, it will inherently cause a dramatic reduction in the plant’s efficiency:
Take efficiency to start. CCS units run on power, too. An owner can get that power from the plant itself. But this approach makes the plant less efficient by increasing its “parasitic load”—and CCS more than triples combustion turbines’ normal parasitic load. . . . This is the cause the Wyoming study analyzed that showed installing CCS technology would devastate plants’ heat rates and lower net plant efficiency by 36%.
And when you must burn dramatically more fuel to get the same amount of usable electricity, you inherently increase the emissions of all other pollutants that come from burning fuel (from West Virginia comment, page 27):
Nearly a decade ago, the European Union’s European Environmental Agency released a study finding that CCS would increase “direct emissions of NOx and PM” by nearly a half and a third, respectively, because of additional fuel burned, and increase “direct NH3 emissions” “significantly” because of “the assumed degradation of the amine-based solvent.”
And how about the chemicals that are used to remove the CO2 from the emissions stream? Again, from the West Virginia comment on the Biden rules (page 27):
The Proposed Rule would force utilities to adopt and communities to accept all aspects of CCS technology without fully understanding the ramifications. For example, the environmental and health effects of CANSOLV—the leading amine-based and EPA-recommended CCS solvent, 88 Fed. Reg. at 33,291—appear unknown; leading CANSOLV studies over the past decade don’t discuss its impact.
The questions of feasibility and cost of CCS systems for fossil fuel power plants are things where expert testimony is inherently unsatisfactory. If this technology is feasible and economical, then build it and prove it.
Unfortunately, the Petitioners in this case have little to no interest in maintaining a functioning electricity system.
Dear FRiends,
We need your continuing support to keep FR funded. Your donations are our sole source of funding. No sugar daddies, no advertisers, no paid memberships, no commercial sales, no gimmicks, no tax subsidies. No spam, no pop-ups, no ad trackers.
If you enjoy using FR and agree it's a worthwhile endeavor, please consider making a contribution today:
Click here: to donate by Credit Card
Or here: to donate by PayPal
Or by mail to: Free Republic, LLC - PO Box 9771 - Fresno, CA 93794
Thank you very much and God bless you,
Jim
Manhattan Contrarian ping
We are progressives we don’t need no stinkin’ facts. We run on emotion. Hard data is for suckers. Don’t try to confuse me with the real-world truth.
These are all lawyer-heavy organizations ...
Thought experiment. The government says, we won’t allow the building of any additional coal plants. Instead, we’ll switch to all new nuclear plants.
What would you expect the response be? I’m guessing the same group would go into hysterics and file lawsuits.
What they want is power coming out of the wall that costs them nothing and makes zero output of anything they deem harmful. In other words, they want magic to work. They are people with adult bodies and immature minds.
In other words, they’re IDIOTS!
Exactly. Reminds me of the folks at the local gym when I flip their television from ESPN/DraftKings to Fox News. They say “all we watch are sports”. LIE.
They run on emotion when we are hard data folks. We see things, they only look at feelings.
I have no doubt they’ll get some Leftist political activist in black robes on the district court level to rule that the current president is bound by an executive order of a past president. That will then get appealed and slapped down just like all the other rulings in the ongoing judicial insurrection have been.
The answer is simple::
In an effort to mitigate costs brought on by this lawsuit, we are SHUTTING DOWN THESE PLANTS while we are litigating this case. Enjoy darkness
Cons never give up the con. The RATs will stick by their Carbon scam no matter what evidence contradicts their narrative. They are not interested in truth, they are only interested in control.
“In other words, they’re IDIOTS!”
Calling them idiots dismisses the effect they have on the nation’s plans and infrastructure. They can generate political campaigns, organize/provide funding, and file lawsuits. They can delay, effectively stop, new infrastructure and they therefore need to be neutralized though education and a well-funded counter information campaign.
So, who are they? Probably wannabe communist revolutionaries, foreign funded campaigns to slow down America’s growth, and low information hippie types who, despite driving a Mercedes and living in the best school district want everyone else to live in a commune. The last group has their Starbucks lattes delivered by UberEATS.
The designation of nonprofit entities as tax free organizations had a purpose when a Protestant denomination or a Catholic monastic order funded hospitals or when a wealthy person established a foundation to provide an endowment for his alma mater. However, we are now dealing with leftist billionaires and third generation descendants of the Robber Barons funding the subversion of America. It is time to abolish the tax free status of nonprofits forever. Such abolition will hurt legitimate charities, but it will slow down the pace of political and cultural destruction.
Congress needs to change the law.
Any Democratic opposition should be a campaign issue.
Dear Voter,
The issue is not me vs. Mr. Democrat, it’s whether your electric bill will double.
I favor not having your electric bill double.
Republican candidate
Nothing these foundations do is as important as the education of America’s young people.
The foundations should be wound up by taxation and the revenues used to assist student loan repayment.
There are operating charities such as universities, museums, animal shelters, food banks, orchestras, etc.
Organizations that mainly give grants to entities should be wound up. Within one year after enactment, foundation assets go to American operating charities or to the IRS.
If it weren’t already obvious, the last ten years has shown that not nearly everything should be subject to judicial control.
At the very least this instant stop is insane. Only those situations where immediate and fatal harm is at play — oh, like “oops criminals are about to cheat their way into the Presidency” … the very cases now slow-walked until moot — ought to even allow for a judge to rapidly intervene.
Nonetheless the people who can fix this are the ones who are benefiting from the lawfare and who would be out if not in jail without it, so not expecting much here…
These idiots should not be allowed to dictate policy or be allowed anywhere near the levers of power of govt. or anything else for that matter.
These clowns have hurt this country beyond measure. The time has come for them to become “outcasts”.
You can also rest assured that states like California, Illinois, and New York are finding ways of sending funds to these organizations
/
Speaking of California Controller,,, apparently they don’t even know what their job per California constitution is much less do it while turning a blind eye to it and facilitating the financial shenanigans, like the train to nowhere and the money given to ngo’s, according to this interesting vid.
californiaglobe.com › fl › okeefe-undercover-expose-california-controller-official-admits-audits-not-getting-done-confirms-fraud-is-rampant
O’Keefe Undercover Exposé: California Controller Official Admits Audits ‘Not Getting Done,’ Confirms Fraud Is Rampant
– California Globe
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rnae0FtMMMc
California Controller’s Top Communications Official Admits Audits “Are Not Getting Done” & Acknowledges “100 Percent” Fraud Exists in the State
https://twitter.com/i/status/2041651752659759352
Run time 14 m
...
Eight state legislators wrote the Controller asking where the audits are. The teachers union sued over $6 billion. A congressman wrote Karen Bass about $1 billion in homelessness money and she wrote back to say she wasn’t available....
Run time 1h 54m
The state controller of California is a constitutional office in the executive branch of the government of the U.S. state of California.
Audits public funds spent by state agencies. The state controller is the internal auditor for the state of California and its agencies, examining the internal controls of state agencies.
.
.
> These are all lawyer-heavy organizations <
A deep dive into their funding would be telling. I wonder how many yuan flow into their shell organizations.
EC
“These clowns have hurt this country beyond measure. The time has come for them to become “outcasts”.”
I agree. But I have no idea how to mechanize making them outcasts. All I can think is that we need a Madison Av education approach that could educate the public. It has to be orders of magnitude more sophisticated than “Just say no.” I see no such effort. It would require the “media” to be on our side. Presently, the media is not.
Unfortunately, this is both the strength and weakness of living in a free society.
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.