Mitigating GHG Emissions

An EPA Perspective

Georgia Institute of Technology

March 4, 2015

Ken Mitchell, Ph.D.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Atlanta, GA
• The Clean Air Act: 

A 40K foot view

• Some Key EPA Actions on 

Climate Change Mitigation

• Mobile Sources

• EPA’s Clean Power Plan

• Oil and Gas

• Voluntary Programs

Outline

www.epa.gov/climatechange and www.epa.gov/cleanpowerplan
The Clean Air Act – A 40K Foot View

• The 1990 Clean Air Act (CAA) Amendments are the most recent version of 

a law first passed in 1970 to clean up air pollution

• Some CAA Accomplishments since 1970 

• Six common air pollutants have decreased by more than 50%

• Toxic air pollution from large industrial sources, such as chemical 

plants, petroleum refineries, and paper mills have 

been reduced by nearly 70%

• New cars are more than 90% cleaner and 

will be even cleaner in the future, and

• Most ozone-depleting chemical production 

has ceased

• At the same time... 

• U.S. gross domestic product has tripled

• Energy consumption has increased by 50 percent, and

• Vehicle use has increased by almost 200 percent

3
4

Some Key Efforts Under the CAA

• Cleaning Up Outdoor Air

• NAAQS pollutants (e.g., 

Ozone, PM), Regional Haze, 

air toxics, acid rain

• Cleaner vehicles, 

engines, and the fuels 

that power them

• Addressing Climate change

• Protecting the stratospheric

ozone layer 

• Indoor air is also a focus of OAR

efforts, but not explicitly addressed 

in the CAA

Courtesy of Sustaining the Environment and Resources for Canadians
CAA Chemicals of Focus

5

CAA

Six Common 

Pollutants

(Criteria or NAAQS 

Pollutants)

O3, PM, CO, SO2, 

NO2, Pb

Hazardous Air 

Pollutants from 

Industry

188 Chemicals 

and Compounds

Greenhouse 

Gases

CO2, CH4, N2O, 

Fluorinated 

Gases

Emissions from 

Cars, Trucks, and 

Nonroad 

Equipment

Diesel Exhaust, 

Toxic Pollutants, 

Greenhouse Gases

Stratospheric 

O3 Depleting 

Chemicals

Indoor Air 

Pollutants*

*Indoor air pollutants are not formally regulated under the CAA

Our Focus for Today
U.S. GHG Pollution

6
7

Early Outreach Informed This Proposal The U.S. Energy System – It’s Complicated!
EPA Actions to Reduce Carbon Pollution

• Building a 21st century transportation 

sector

• Cutting energy waste in homes, 

businesses, and factories

• Reducing methane and HFCs

• Preparing the U.S. for the impacts of 

climate change

• Helping lead international efforts to 

address global climate change

• Reducing carbon pollution from power 

plants (e.g., EPA’s “Clean Power Plan”)

8
Mobile Sources

Increasing fuel efficiency, reducing GHG emissions....

• EPA and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) are 

taking coordinated steps to enable the production of a new generation of 

clean vehicles, through reduced greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and 

improved fuel use from on-road vehicles and engines, from the smallest cars 

to the largest trucks; for example....

• Final rule (issued 8/28/2012) – Extends passenger vehicle program to model year 2017 

through 2025 (average 163 grams CO2 per mile, 54.5 mpg in model year 2025)

• Energy Independence and Security Act 

requires a significant increase in 

renewable fuels to displace petroleum 

consumption 

• 36 billion gallons by 2022

• Requires GHG lifecycle analysis

21

http://www.epa.gov/otaq
Addressing Methane

• January 14, 2015 -- As part of the Obama Administration’s commitment to 

addressing climate change, EPA outlined a series of steps it plans to take to 

address methane and smog-forming VOC emissions from the oil and gas 

industry, in order to ensure continued, safe and responsible growth in U.S. oil 

and natural gas production

• The agency’s commonsense strategy 

will:

o Reduce methane pollution from new 

sources in this rapidly growing industry

o Reduce ozone-forming pollutants from 

existing sources in areas that do not 

meet federal ozone health standards

o Build on work that states and industry 

are doing to address emissions from 

existing sources elsewhere

http://www.epa.gov/airquality/oilandgas/
Mitigation – Multiple Voluntary/Partnership Programs

11
• Our climate is changing, and we’re feeling the dangerous and costly 

effects right now

o Average temperatures have risen in most states since 1901, with seven of the top 10 

warmest years on record occurring since 1998

o Climate and weather disasters in 2012 cost the American economy more than $100 

billion

• Although there are limits at 

power plants for other 

pollutants like arsenic and 

mercury, there are currently 

no national limits on carbon 

o Children, the elderly, and the

poor are most vulnerable to a 

range of climate-related health 

effects, including those related 

to heat stress, air pollution, 

extreme weather events, and others

GHG NSPS Requirements for Fossil Fuel-Fired Power Plants

http://www.epa.gov/cleanpowerplan

15
EPA is working to develop carbon pollution standards, regulations or 

guidelines, as appropriate, for:

1. New power plants

• Proposed January 8, 2014

• Final Summer 2015

2. Modified and reconstructed

power plants

• Proposed June 2014

• Final Summer 2015

3. Existing power plants

• Proposed Guidelines June 2014

• Final Guidelines Summer 2015

• State Plans due Summer 2016

• Proposed Federal Plan summer 

2015 (final ready summer 2016)

GHG NSPS Requirements for Fossil Fuel-Fired Power Plants

http://www.epa.gov/cleanpowerplan

15
• EPA conducted a robust pre-proposal stakeholder engagement process

oParticipated in meetings with over 300 utility, consumer, labor 

and environmental groups since June 2013

oHeld 11 public listening sessions around the country

3,300 people attended

More than 1,600 people offered oral statements

• Reached out to all 50 states

o Some states noted their programs to address 

carbon evolved because of:

The need to address carbon pollution

Electric system that is dynamic, and in 

the midst of market changes

Modernizing the power sector is good 

for the economy

• Common themes included reliability, flexibility, affordability, time for 

plans and implementation

14

Early Outreach Informed This Proposal
This Clean Power Plan (CPP) proposal will: 

• Reduce carbon pollution from existing power plants, for which there are currently no 

national limits

• Maintain an affordable, reliable energy system and will help move us toward a cleaner, 

more stable environment for future generations

• By 2030, reduce nationwide carbon dioxide emissions, from the power sector by 

approximately 30% from 2005 levels, with significant reductions to begin by 2020

• Cut hundreds of thousands of tons of harmful particle pollution, sulfur dioxide and 

nitrogen oxides as a co-benefit

• Proposal will avoid an estimated 2,700 to 6,600 premature deaths and 140,000 to 150,000 asthma 

attacks in 2030

• Provide important health protections to the most vulnerable, such as children and older 

Americans

• Lead to health and climate benefits worth an estimated $55 billion to $93 billion in 

2030

• From soot and smog reductions alone, for every dollar invested through the Clean 

Power Plan - - American families will see up to $7 in health benefits 

15

Summary - 111(d) Existing Power Plant Proposal
• Build on actions states, cities and businesses across the country are already 

taking to address the risks of climate change

• Spur investment in cleaner and more efficient technologies, creating jobs and 

driving innovation

• Require a reasonable emission reduction glidepath starting in 2020

• Provide a flexible timeline—up to 15 years from guideline issuance—for all 

emission reduction measures to be fully implemented in 2030

o Recognizing that investments in infrastructure can take time to put in place and 

o Avoiding stranded assets

• Provide an array of tools states can use to formulate approvable plans.

Summary - 111(d) Existing Power Plant Proposal

16

http://www.epa.gov/cleanpowerplan
Other Benefits

17

Electricity bills down 

8% in 2030

$0

$20

$40

$60

$80

$100

$120

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

Monthly Residential Electricity Bills (2011$)

Historical - Converted to 2011$ Base Case Clean Power Plan
After Proposal, Coal & Natural Gas Remain Leading Sources 

of Electricity Generation

18

Each more than 30% of projected generation in 2030

Coal

31%

Natural Gas

32%

Other Fuel

37%
Background: Clean Air Act Section 111(d)

Best System of Emission Reduction

19

• Previous EPA rules under this section of the Clean Air Act 

have considered “add-on” control technologies – like 

scrubbers -- that are technically feasible to deploy at 

virtually any facility

• In contrast, there are a wide variety of ways to reduce

carbon pollution that are commercially available, 

technically feasible, and cost effective

• The opportunities vary from state to state, depending on how electricity is 

generated, energy infrastructure, and other factors

• In this proposal, EPA took an approach that viewed the Clean Air Act factors in 

determining Best System of Emission Reduction (BSER) in light of the 

interconnected nature of power generation

http://www.epa.gov/cleanpowerplan

BSER factors

Costs

Size of reductions 

Technology

Feasibility
EPA Establishes a Goal for Every State

• EPA analyzed the practical and affordable strategies that states and utilities are already 

using to lower carbon pollution from the power sector 

• Proposed goals are based on a consistent national formula, calculated with state and 

regional specific information 

• Each state goal is expressed as a rate (pounds of CO2 per MWh) – a statewide number 

for the future carbon intensity of covered existing fossil-fuel-fired power plants in a 

state

• The state rate goal is calculated to account for 

the mix of power sources in each state and the 

application of four “building blocks” that make 

up the best system of emission reduction

• States will need to meet an interim goal and 

a final goal

20
Building Block Strategy EPA Used to 

Calculate the State Goal

Maximum Flexibility:

Examples of State 

Compliance Measures

1. Make fossil fuel-fired

power plants more 

efficient

Efficiency Improvements • Efficiency improvements

• Co-firing or switching to 

natural gas

• Coal retirements

• Retrofit carbon capture and 

sequestration (CCS)

2. Use lower-emitting power 

sources more

Dispatch changes to 

existing natural gas 

combined cycle (CC)

• Dispatch changes to existing 

natural gas CC

3. Build more zero/lowemitting energy sourcesRenewable Energy

Certain Nuclear

• New NGCC

• Renewables

• Nuclear (new and up rate)

• New coal with CCS

4. Use electricity more 

efficiently

Demand-side energy 

efficiency programs

• Demand-side energy 

efficiency programs

• Transmission efficiency 

improvements

• Energy storage

21
Flexibilities Available To States

• Timing

o Up to 15-year window in which to plan for and achieve reductions in carbon pollution 

o Up to two or three years to submit final plans 

• Form of goal

o States can use either a rate-based or mass-based goal

• Single or multi-state plans

o States can collaborate and develop plans on a multi-state basis

• Selection of measures 

o States will choose how to meet the goal through whatever

collection of measures reflects its particular circumstances 

and policy objectives

o State measures may impact and, in fact may be explicitly 

designed to reduce, CO2 emissions from utilities on a regional 

basis

o EPA would support building off existing reduction programs 

22

http://www.epa.gov/cleanpowerplan
States Have Flexibility

Basis for state goal –

Potential emissions 

pathway reflecting 

EPA’s analysis

 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029

 

A state can choose any trajectory 

of emission improvement as long 

as the interim performance goal is 

met on average over 10 years, and 

the final goal is met by 2030

23

Carbon emissions from affected power 

plants in an example state

As an example, states could do less in the early years, and more in the later 

years, as long as on average it meets the goal

Timing of Power Plant Emission Reductions
When States Plan, They Can...

• Look broadly across the power sector for strategies that get reductions

• Choose to rely to varying degrees on measures that EPA used to calculate the goal, 

or on other measures that were not part of the state goal-setting analysis

• Invest in existing energy efficiency programs or create new ones

• Consider market trends toward improved energy efficiency and a greater reliance on 

lower carbon energy

• Tap into investments already being made to upgrade aging infrastructure

• Expand renewable energy capacity

• Integrate their plans into existing power sector planning processes

• Design plans that use innovative, cost-effective regulatory strategies

• Develop a state-only plan or collaborate with each other to develop plans on a multistate basis

• Decide how to treat plants nearing the end of their useful life and how to help plants 

avoid “stranded investments”

24
25

By June 30, 2016

State submits initial multistate plan and request for 2-

year extension

EPA reviews initial plan 

and determines if 

extension is warranted

by June 30, 2017

State submits progress 

report of plan

by June 30, 2018

States submits multistate plan

State submits Negative Declaration

State submits complete implementation Plan by June 30, 2016

State submits initial Plan by June 30, 2016 and request 1-year extension

State submits initial multi-state Plan by June 30, 2016 and request 2-year extension

Emission 

Guideline 

Promulgation

June 1, 2015

by June 30, 2016

State submits negative 

declaration

EPA publishes FR notice

by June 30, 2016

State submits plan

by June 30, 2016

State submits initial plan 

and request for 1-year 

extension

EPA reviews initial plan and 

determines if extension is 

warranted

by June 30, 2017

State submits complete plan

2015 2019

Proposed Implementation Timeline*

Compliance 

period begins

2020

2020

EPA reviews plan and 

publishes final decision 

within 12 months on 

approval/disapproval

EPA reviews plan and 

publishes final decision 

within 12 months on 

approval/disapproval

EPA reviews plan and 

publishes final decision 

within 12 months on 

approval/disapproval

2016 2017 2018

*See Update: http://www2.epa.gov/carbon-pollution-standards/fact-sheet-clean-power-plan-carbon-pollution-standards-key-dates
Actions since the proposal

• October 28, 2014 - EPA issued a supplemental proposal to its 

proposed CPP that sets area-specific goals for Indian country and 

territories

• October 28, 2014 - EPA issued a Notice of Data Availability (NODA)

related to the proposed CPP

• November 6, 2014 – EPA issued a Technical Support Document 

(TSD) on converting rate-to-mass

• November 19, 2014 – EPA issued second draft 

of Framework for Assessing Biogenic Carbon Dioxide

for Stationary Sources and associated memo from Janet McCabe

26
During the comment period....

• The proposed rule and supporting technical information, are 

available online at: http://www.epa.gov/cleanpowerplan

• EPA held 4 public hearings the week of July 28th in Denver, 

Atlanta, Pittsburgh and Washington, D.C. – over 2,700 people 

attended

• Comments on the CPP proposed rule and NODA closed

December 1, 2014; almost 4 million comments received

• Comments on the proposal are identified by Docket ID Number: 

EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0602

27
Questions?

mitchell.ken@epa.gov

28