CLEAN POWER PLAN PROPOSALReducing Carbon Pollution FromExisting Power PlantsDeborah Jordan, DirectorAir Division, US EPA, Region 9California LegislatureSeptember 12, 2014This Proposal Deals With the LargestSource of GHG Emissions in the U.S.2This proposal will:•Reduce carbon pollution from existing power plants,for which there arecurrently no national limits.•Maintain an affordable, reliable energy system.•By 2030, reduce nationwide carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, from the powersector by approximately 30% from 2005 levels.•Significant reductions begin by 2020.•Cut hundreds of thousands of tons of harmful particle pollution, sulfurdioxide and nitrogen oxides as a co-benefit.•Provide important health protections to the most vulnerable, such aschildren and older Americans.•Lead to health and climate benefits worth an estimated $55 billion to $93billion in 2030.•From soot and smog reductions alone, for every dollar invested through theClean Power Plan – American families will see up to$7 in health benefits.3Summary•Build on actions states, cities and businesses acrossthe country arealready taking to address the risks of climate change.•Spur investment in cleaner and more efficient technologies, creating jobsand driving innovation.•Require a reasonable emission reduction glidepath starting in 2020.•Provide a flexible timeline—up to 15 years from guideline issuance—forall emission reduction measures to be fully implemented in 2030.•Recognizing that investments in infrastructure can take time to put inplace and•Avoiding stranded assets.•Provide an array of tools states can use to formulate approvable plans.Summary (Cont’d)4States and Communities withPrograms That Reduce Carbon PollutionState programs that reduce carbon include carboncap and trade programs and energy efficiency andrenewable energy standards or goals.5EPA Establishes a Goal for Every State•EPA analyzed the practical and affordable strategies that states and utilities arealready using to lower carbon pollution from the power sector.•Proposed goals are based on a consistent national formula, calculated with stateand regional specific information.•The result of the equation is the state goal.•Each state goal is a rate – a statewide number for the future carbon intensity ofcovered existing fossil-fuel-fired power plants ina state.•Encompasses the dynamic variables that ultimately determine how much carbon pollution isemitted by fossil fuel power plants.•Accommodates the fact that CO2emissions from fossil fuel-fired power plants are influencedby how efficiently they operate and by how much they operate.•The state goal rate is calculated to account for the mix of power sources in eachstate and the application of the “building blocks”that make up the best system ofemission reduction.•States will need to meet an interim goal and a final goal.6Building Block Strategy EPA Used toCalculate the State GoalMaximum Flexibility:Examples of StateCompliance Measures1. Make fossil fuel-firedpower plants moreefficientEfficiency Improvements Efficiency improvements atplantsCo-firing or switching to naturalgasCoal retirementsRetrofit CCS2. Use lower-emitting powersources moreDispatch changes toexisting natural gascombined cycle (CC)Dispatch changes to existingnatural gas CC3. Build more zero/lowemitting energy sourcesRenewable EnergyCertain NuclearNew NGCCRenewablesNuclear (new and up-rates)New coal with CCS4. Use electricity moreefficientlyDemand-side energyefficiency programsDemand-side energy efficiencyprogramsTransmission efficiencyimprovementsEnergy storage7Flexibilities Available to States•Timing–Compliance begins 2020; final compliance 2030–Two or three years to develop plans•Form of goal: States can use either arate-basedormass-basedgoal.•Although goals were set based on fourcomponents, States can use any mix of measuresto meet the goal.•Single-state ormulti-stateplans8Next Steps•Proposed rule and supporting documentsavailable online at:http://www.epa.gov/cleanpowerplan•120-day public comment period closesOctober 16, 2014.•Final Action June 20159Closing Thoughts•Proposal uses consistent methodology toestablish CO2 goals across the U.S.•Goals are tailored to each state’s fuel mix andopportunities for renewable energy andenergy efficiency investments.•States can develop multi-state plans – there isadditional time to do so•California has flexibility to pursue path thatmakes sense for California.10