# pace

OFFICIAL STATEMENT Lance Brown, Executive Director Partnership forAffordable Clean Energy (PACE) July29th, 2014 Atlanta, Georgia Representatives of EPA, I am here today representing more than twenty partners acrossthe Southeast. Manyofthese are involved in manufacturing and trade. Others in farming and agribusiness. Still others are small businesses making their way in atough economy. Some are simplyfamilies who wantto keepthe lights on at an affordable price.
The common bond among all ofthe organizationsthat are part of our coalition isthat each will be affected negatively bythe new carbon dioxide regulation proposed by EPA. The rule will raise the price of electricity. The rule will make our nation's energy portfolio less diverse and, by definition, diminish the strong foundation of stabilitywe have built. The rule will make the price of electricity more volatile byforcing utilitiesto use more natural gas. These arethe thingsthe rule will do, and we believe that a careful examination ofthe available data, as opposed to biased hope or belief, will lead reasonable thinkersto the same troubling conclusions.
There are things, however, thatthe rule will not do. Although EPA has sold its regulation ofcarbon dioxide totheAmerican public as a climate change measure, the truth isthat the agency's mandate of reducing C02from the power sector by30% bythe year 2030 is about political posturing, not real climate results. The agency's chief, Gina McCarthy, even admitted this fact in testimonytothe House of Representatives in Septemberof2013. When asked if EPA's regulation of carbon dioxide would cause any measurable change in the agency's 26 indicators of climate change, Administrator

I-- ------------------- ---

McCarthysaid theywould not. Rather, she explained, a carbon rule only works if other nations adoptthe same policies. She rationalized thatthe administration's carbon dioxide regulation "positionsthe U.S. for leadership." In short, this rule is only leverage.
This is notthe message EPA has sent to theAmerican public. IfAmericans truly realized that their government was trading affordable power prices and a strong and stable electricity portfolio onlyfor political leverage, they would not supportthis rule. In fact, they would be angry, and disappointed, and wondering whythe executive branch has made such a terrible bargain.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has estimated that this rule will raise the price of electricity as much as 40% and cost more than 200,000jobs. Just as important, the rule will speed the closure of coal-fired power plants in the U.S., forcing another 114 gigawatts ofgeneration offthe grid. Philip Moeller of FERC puts it in the simplest possible terms: "If you take enough supply out of the system, the price is going to increase."
The agency's MATS rule is already taking sixty gigawatts of generation off the grid next year. Mr. Moeller says that these rapid shocks to our energy supply could cause brownouts or even blackouts. Meanwhile, the rest of the world will use U.S. coal to produce more than six additional tons of carbon for every one ton we reduce underthis rule.
The bottom line isthat the earth's temperature will not change because of this rule, but power bills will. On behalf ofour partners, we askthe EPAto abandon this irrational approach to addressing climate change and focus instead on more reasonable measuresthat deliver real results.

2