# CLEAN POWER PLAN Reducing Carbon Pollution From 

# Existing Power Plants

Proposal

# President’s Climate Action Plan

• On June 25, 2013, the President introduced a Climate 

## Action Plan. • The Plan: • Reduces carbon pollution 

## • Builds 21 st 

## century transportation sector • Cuts energy waste • Reduces methane and HFCs 

## • Prepares the U.S. for climate change • Puts U.S. in lead internationally

2

# The Power Sector is the Largest Source of GHG Emissions in the U.S.

3

# Reducing Carbon Pollution From Power Plants The EPA’s Role: 

# Develop carbon pollution standards for: 1. New power plants • Proposed: January 8, 2014 • Comment Period Closed: March 10, 2014 • Final : January 2015 

## 2. Modified and reconstructed power plants • Proposal: June 2, 2014 • Comment Period Closes: October 16, 2014 • Final : June 2015 

## 3. Existing power plants (Clean Power Plan) • Proposed Guidelines: June 2, 2014 • Comment Period Closes: December 1, 2014 • Final Guidelines: June 2015 • State Plans due: June 2016
4

# Clean Power Plan Proposed Rule

• Early Outreach • Summary of Proposal 

## • Best System of Emission Reduction • EPA Establishes a Goal for Every State • States Develop Plans to Meet Goals 

## • How to provide input

5

### Engaging Stakeholders 

### • Participated in meetings with over 300 utility, consumer, labor and environmental groups since June 2013. • Held 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. 

### • 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; and • Modernizing the power sector is good for the economy. • Common themes included reliability, flexibility, 

### affordability, time for plans and implementation. 6



# Early Outreach

### The Clean Power Plan proposal will: • Reduce carbon pollution from existing power plants for first time ever. • Maintain an affordable, reliable energy system. • By 2030, reduce nationwide carbon dioxide (CO 2 

### ) emissions from power 

### plants by approximately 30% from 2005 levels. • Significant reductions begin by 2020. • Cut hundreds of thousands of tons of harmful particle pollution, sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides as a co - benefit. • 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. • Lead to health and climate benefits worth an estimated $55 billion to $93 billion in 2030. • A supplemental focusing on existing power plants located in U.S. territories and in areas of Indian Country is scheduled to be released this fall (2014). 7



# Summary of Proposal

# Best System of Emission Reduction

8 

### • Reducing carbon pollution is commercially available, technically feasible, and cost effective.


### • Varies from state to state, depending on how electricity is generated , energy infrastructure, and other factors.
• I n this proposal, EPA used “Best System of Emission Reduction,” 

### which recognizes the interconnected nature of power generation. • BSER factors • Costs • Size of reductions • Technology • Feasibility

# EPA Establishes a Goal for Every State

• Practical and affordable strategies that states and utilities are already using. • The goals are based on a consistent national formula, calculated with state 

### and regional specific information. • Each state goal is a rate – a statewide number for the future carbon intensity of covered existing fossil -fuel -fired power plants in a state. • E ncompasses the dynamic variables that ultimately determine how much carbon pollution is emitted by fossil fuel power plants. • Accommodates the fact that CO 2 emissions from fossil fuel -fired power plants are influenced by how efficiently they operate and by how much they operate. 

### • Goals account for the mix of power sources in each state and the application of the “building blocks” that make up the best system of emission reduction . • States will need to meet an interim goal (beginning in 2020) and a final goal (2030). 9

# Best System of Emission Reduction

Building Blocks

10 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 storage (CCS) 2. Use lower-emitting power sources more Dispatch changes to existing natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) Dispatch changes to existing NGCC 3. Build more zero/lowemitting energy sources Renewable Energy Certain Nuclear New NGCC Renewables Nuclear (new and up - rates) New coal with CCS 4. Use electricity more efficiently Demand -side energy efficiency programs Demand -side energy efficiency programs Transmission efficiency improvements Energy storage

# 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. • 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 multi -state basis. • Decide how to treat plants nearing the end of their useful life and how to help plants avoid “stranded investments.”

11

# Flexibilities Available To States

• Timing: • Up to 15 -year window in which to plan for and achieve reductions in carbon pollution. • U p to two or three years to submit final plans. • Form of goal: States can use either a rate - based or mass - based goal. • Single or multi -state plans: States can collaborate and develop plans on a multi -state basis. • Selection of measures : • States will choose how to meet the goal through whatever collection of measures reflects its particular circumstances and policy objectives. • State measures may impact and, in fact may be explicitly designed to reduce, CO 2 emissions from utilities on a regional basis. • EPA would support building off existing reduction programs such as the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI ).

12

# States Choose How to Meet the Goals

• Demand -side energy efficiency programs. * • Generating electricity from low/zero -emitting facilities. * • Expanding use of existing NGCC units. * • Transmission efficiency improvements. • Energy storage technology. • Working with utilities to consider retiring units that are high emitting. • Energy conservation programs. • Retrofitting units to capture carbon. • Use of certain biomass. • Efficiency improvements at higheremitting plants. * • Market- based trading programs. • Building new renewables. • Dispatch changes. • Co-firing or switching to natural gas. • Building new natural gas combined cycle units.

* M easures EPA used in calculating the state goals

13

# State Plans

• EPA will provide a list of components that will need to be included in an approvable plan. • Measures to meet the state’s interim goal and final goal. • Interim goal -- meet on average over a 10-year period from 2020- 2029 ; • Final goal -- meet in 2030 and thereafter . • Individual and multi -state plans due June 30, 2016. • Proposed timing of extensions to submit a complete plan, if justified and supported: • Submit initial plan by June 30, 2016; 

## • Individual state plans: a one -year extension (June 30, 2017 ); and • Multi -state plans: a two-year extension (June 30, 2018 ).
14

# After Proposal, Coal & Natural Gas Remain Leading Sources of Electricity Generation

15 Each more than 30% of projected generation in 2030 

## Coal 

## 31% Natural Gas 32% Other Fuel 37%16 By June 30, 2016 State submits initial multi state 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 multi state 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 m ulti -state P lan by June 30, 2016 and request 2 -year extension Emission Guideline Promulgation June 1, 2015 by June 30, 2016

State submits n egative 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 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

# Providing Input

• The proposed rule, as well as information about how to comment and 

### supporting technical information, are available online at: http://www.epa.gov/cleanpowerplan

• The comment period for the proposal ends December 1, 2014.

• Comments on the proposal should be identified by Docket ID No. EPA- HQ- OAR- 2013 -0602 .
• States will be required to have a public hearing on their respective state plans.

17