Federal Environmental Protection
Agency Administrator Gina McCarthy told members of the U.S. Senate Committee on
Environment and Public Works Wednesday coal will still play a sizeable role in
the nation’s power generation capacity even if newly proposed emission
regulations for existing power plants are enacted.
McCarthy defended Obama
Administration proposals aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions. She
insisted the only regulation set in stone is the lowering of the emission
standard, any other part of the proposal was only suggested ways for states to
achieve the new standards. She claimed before the committee the plan
offered broad flexibility to each state on how to achieve the goal of reducing
emissions in power generation.
McCarthy suggested the rules would
prompt more research and technology development for fossil fuels to burn more
cleanly and more efficiently.
McCarthy’s remarks were warmly
embraced by Democrat members of the panel, including Chair Barbara Boxer
(D-CA). However, the Republicans were less inclined to buy the administrator’s
defense. Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS) raised the argument recently leveled in a
lawsuit by West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey that the EPA cannot
enforce the proposed rules since power plants are already regulated in another
section of the EPA regulations.
“Does EPA impose regulations on
existing coal fired power plants under section 112?” Wicker asked.
“We certainly do,” McCarthy
responded.
“Based on that, the Attorney
General of West Virginia says having been regulated under section 112, the EPA
lacks the authority to further regulate these under EPA Section 1-d.” added
Wicker.
“I don’t think the legal argument
is properly framed,” McCarty said.
McCarthy suggested the agency went
out of its way to include the comments and input of all stakeholders into the
proposed rules. McCarthy told lawmakers the science on global warming is no
longer debatable in the face of mounting evidence. In response to one question
McCarthy said catastrophic storms are already the product of global warming.
“When people ask me about the polar
vortex, some pose it as a reason not to take action,” McCarthy said. “It is
exactly the reason we have to take action.”
Senators also raised issues with
the cost benefit analysis of the proposed rules. McCarthy said the impact they
studied were global and national analysis and there had been no state-by-state
analysis done. She defended the lack of the state-by-state data and said the
impact will depend greatly on what decisions individual states make to reach
the emission reduction requirements by the deadline.
