1

From: Emily Johnston [enjohnston@gmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 11:04 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards for Existing Sources (brief expansion of brief comment 

at listening session)

Dear EPA Staffers,

In his article "Gambling with Civilization" in the New York Review of Books two weeks ago, 

the Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman joked that he might lose his "economist 

card" if he didn't support a carbon tax, because efforts to reduce emissions need to take 

place on so many levels (all of which are effectively reached by a carbon tax). However, 

he also pointed out that a single effort--that of greatly reducing emissions from coal-fired 

electric plants--would, by itself, accomplish the great bulk of the work of a carbon tax.

I was at the Seattle listening session tonight, and I know that you're all very clear what the 

stakes are: without hyperbole, climate change is far and away the biggest threat humanity 

has ever faced--an existential threat to civilization, and to uncountable numbers of our 

sibling species.

I support conservation measures with all of my heart (and my attention, and my wallet), 

but coal-fired electrical plants render individual choices dishearteningly meaningless by 

comparison. I heard tonight that 100 of our existing coal-fired plants produce as much 

carbon pollution as every car on the road in the US today. How many light bulbs, exactly, 

would each of us have to change, to make up for those plants being allowed to keep 

spewing carbon? How much carpooling would we need to do? 

How can we ask every American to do her part and conserve--and we must ask this--if 

these plants are not regulated as stringently as is humanly possible?

As I mentioned tonight, this week an eight year old girl died in China of lung 

cancer attributed to coal pollution. Thanks to the Clean Air Act, tragedies of this extreme 

nature don't happen in the US. If we'd left it to industry to regulate themselves, though, we 

all know that there would be no Clean Air Act; our air would be like China's, and acid rain 

would still be devastating New England waterways; they have fought, and will continue to 

fight, every step of the way. We must take the clear dangers of GHG emissions--carbon 

AND methane, at the plant AND at the wells/mines/extraction sites--at least as seriously 

as the more visible threats of particulates.

Please do everything you can to make the regulations as stringent as the threat is 

profound; this is the most important thing you will ever do.

Many thanks.

Emily Johnston
2
3

From: Anthony Marinelli [threemm4me@aol.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 11:02 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Establish strong carbon pollution standards for power plants

Dear EPA, 

Thank you for conducting "listening sessions" across the country to allow people like me to 

share our thoughts on the upcoming carbon pollution standards. Though I was not able to 

attend a session in person I wanted to make my concerns known. 

Large coal-fired power plants remain a threat to lung health. The Midwest still has a large 

concentration of old, dirty coal power plants that produce far too much air pollution that 

both worsens climate change and affects our lung health. Smog and soot pollution created by 

these facilities already increases the number of asthma attacks, respiratory emergency room 

visits and hospitalizations and premature deaths. But emissions that drive climate change 

will only worsen the risk to vulnerable people in the Midwest. More extreme heat waves will 

put people living with lung disease at increased risk of illness or death; Hotter, longer 

summers will also worsen smog and soot pollution. Exposure to mold from extreme flooding and 

increased exposure to wildfire smoke driven by stronger droughts are other unacceptable lung 

health threats that are being increasingly driven by climate change. 

Carbon pollution is hurting our health and scientists say the threat is only growing larger 

with time, making action now critical to preserving our health and protecting the air we will 

leave future generations. For these reasons I urge the EPA to design and implement STRONG 

standards to curb carbon pollution from power plants that will make a significant difference 

in addressing climate change and in preserving human health. 

Sincerely, 

Anthony Marinelli 

2320 Mohawk Lane 

Glenview, IL 60026 
4

From: pamasunshine@aol.com

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 10:46 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Contact Us Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Dear EPA and Gina McCarthy, 

Re: Climate Disruption 

The time is NOW for renewable energy - solar, wind and geothermal. 

Nuclear, shale gas and "clean" coal should no longer be a part of America's energy policy. 

Nuclear has left thousands of square miles of Earth poisoned, toxic and radioactive - Japan, 

Ukraine, Kazakhstan and even in South Carolina, Colorado, Nevada, Washington state and Idaho 

to name just a few areas. 

Fossil fuels create greenhouse gas emissions from CO2, NOX(nitrous oxide), VOC's (volatile 

organic compounds), HAP's (hazardous air pollutants), sulphur dioxide, particulates and 

methane. 

Mountaintop removal for coal is heinously devastating to natural systems. Particulate 

matter, sulphur, arsenic and mercury are additional byproducts of the burning of coal. 

Hydraulic fracturing for shale gas is destructive to our forests, farmland and towns, as well 

as to our valuable clean water. The fracking process despoils millions of gallons of water 

per well. Flowback is a toxic soup filled with carcinogens and endocrine disruptors. 

Compressor stations, transportation and distribution of shale gas release fugitive methane, a 

more potent greenhouse gas than CO2. Radioactivity is a component of shale gas with 

insufficient data or studies on radon content. It is time for a moratorium on fracking! 

Greenhouse gas emissions are causing unprecedented warming of Earth's atmosphere. Arctic ice 

is melting, sea level is rising and the oceans are acidifying - threatening our fragile 

marine ecosystem. As the ocean warms, methane hydrates are released creating a runaway 

scenario for global warming. 

We have already passed the tipping point in my opinion. It is imperative to act quickly to 

curb CO2, methane and All GHG's for life to continue on our planet as we know it. 

It is one year since the devastating effects of SuperStorm Sandy and today a gigantic typhoon 

is headed for the Philippines. The west has suffered with wildfires; drought in the south. 

Bizarre weather events are becoming commonplace. We need to stop adding to climate change by 

burning fossil fuels. 

Renewable energy is the answer. The technology is there. Germany uses 25% and Sweden uses 

47% renewables - proof that we can do it too! 

We need strong regulations and a heavy fee on all greenhouse gas emissions to protect the 

environment. 

In order for ecosystems, wildlife and humans, as well, to be healthy and flourish, 

conservation and severe reduction of GHG emissions is necessary. 
5

PLEASE help our nation and the world to move forward to a sustainable energy future. The 

health and welfare of Earth is depending on you. 

Thank you for encouraging comment. We are all in this together. 

Sincerely, 

Pam Steckler 

127 Hoy Street 

State College, PA 16801 

(814) 237- 4029 

Sent from my iPhone 
6

From: Evangelina Mayol [evangelina_mayol@yahoo.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 10:42 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Establish strong carbon pollution standards for power plants

Dear EPA, 

Thank you for conducting "listening sessions" across the country to allow people like me to 

share our thoughts on the upcoming carbon pollution standards. Though I was not able to 

attend a session in person I wanted to make my concerns known. 

Large coal-fired power plants remain a threat to lung health. The Midwest still has a large 

concentration of old, dirty coal power plants that produce far too much air pollution that 

both worsens climate change and affects our lung health. Smog and soot pollution created by 

these facilities already increases the number of asthma attacks, respiratory emergency room 

visits and hospitalizations and premature deaths. But emissions that drive climate change 

will only worsen the risk to vulnerable people in the Midwest. More extreme heat waves will 

put people living with lung disease at increased risk of illness or death; Hotter, longer 

summers will also worsen smog and soot pollution. Exposure to mold from extreme flooding and 

increased exposure to wildfire smoke driven by stronger droughts are other unacceptable lung 

health threats that are being increasingly driven by climate change. 

Carbon pollution is hurting our health and scientists say the threat is only growing larger 

with time, making action now critical to preserving our health and protecting the air we will 

leave future generations. For these reasons I urge the EPA to design and implement STRONG 

standards to curb carbon pollution from power plants that will make a significant difference 

in addressing climate change and in preserving human health. 

Sincerely, 

Evangelina Mayol 

300 N State Street 

Chicago, IL 60654 
7

From: David Rubin [davidirubin@gmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 10:21 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Establish strong carbon pollution standards for power plants

Dear EPA, 

Thank you for conducting "listening sessions" across the country to allow people like me to 

share our thoughts on the upcoming carbon pollution standards. Though I was not able to 

attend a session in person I wanted to make my concerns known. 

Large coal-fired power plants remain a threat to lung health. The Midwest still has a large 

concentration of old, dirty coal power plants that produce far too much air pollution that 

both worsens climate change and affects our lung health. Smog and soot pollution created by 

these facilities already increases the number of asthma attacks, respiratory emergency room 

visits and hospitalizations and premature deaths. But emissions that drive climate change 

will only worsen the risk to vulnerable people in the Midwest. More extreme heat waves will 

put people living with lung disease at increased risk of illness or death; Hotter, longer 

summers will also worsen smog and soot pollution. Exposure to mold from extreme flooding and 

increased exposure to wildfire smoke driven by stronger droughts are other unacceptable lung 

health threats that are being increasingly driven by climate change. 

Carbon pollution is hurting our health and scientists say the threat is only growing larger 

with time, making action now critical to preserving our health and protecting the air we will 

leave future generations. For these reasons I urge the EPA to design and implement STRONG 

standards to curb carbon pollution from power plants that will make a significant difference 

in addressing climate change and in preserving human health. 

Sincerely, 

David Rubin 

423 Addison Road 

Riverside, IL 60546 
8

From: Wendy Pollock [wendy.pollock@gmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 10:19 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Comment on reducing carbon from existing power plants

Dear Administrator McCarthy: 

The United States must move aggressively to cut carbon pollution from all sources. This includes power plants 

already in use. Our lives, and the lives of those to come, depend on our acting aggressively and without further 

delay. 

The facts are indisputable. Only those motivated by short-sighted financial self-interest continue to deny them. 

The implications are clear. Even the conservative IPCC forecasts a bleak future unless we take dramatic action, 

now. 

My great-grandfather came to this country to work in a coal mine. My grandfather was born in Oil City, 

Pennsylvania. Like many others, my family has benefited from the use of fossil fuels. But we are no longer 

living in the past, and the future is already upon us. 

My daughter - now of child-bearing age - tells me that that she cannot imagine bringing children into this world, 

knowing what very likely lies ahead. Could anything be more heart breaking? 

How could we, their elders, pass on to our children a world that will be barely habitable, a world in which the 

consequences of our foolish and repeated failure to act are visited on those least able to defend themselves? 

In the memory of all of those ancestors who made life possible for those of us living now, and bearing in mind 

those generations that will inherit this earth, I plead with you: Be bold. Have courage. Do not be cowed by the 

forces that continue to fly in the face of reason and evidence. 

We are counting on you. 

Sincerely, 

Wendy Pollock 

_________________________ 

Wendy Pollock 

1410 Oak Avenue 

Evanston, Illinois 60201 
9

From: Solve The Climate Crisis [mail@changemail.org]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 10:05 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: New petition to you: EPA: Limit CO2 Emissions From Existing Power Plants

Dear EPA, 

Solve The Climate Crisis started a petition "EPA: Limit CO2 Emissions From Existing Power Plants" targeting 

you on Change.org that's starting to pick up steam. 

Change.org is the world's largest petition platform that gives anyone, anywhere the tools they need to start, join 

and win campaigns for change. Change.org never starts petitions on our own -- petitions on the website, like 

"EPA: Limit CO2 Emissions From Existing Power Plants", are started by users. 

While "EPA: Limit CO2 Emissions From Existing Power Plants" is active, you'll receive an email each time a 

signer leaves a comment explaining why he or she is signing. You'll also receive periodic updates about the 

petition's status. 

Here's what you can do right now to resolve the petition: 

• Review the petition. Here's a link: 

o <="" a="">http://www.change.org/petitions/epa-limit-co2-emissions-from-existing-power-plants

• See the 5 signers and their reasons for signing on the petition page. 

• Respond to the petition creator by sending a message here: 

o http://www.change.org/petitions/epa-limit-co2-emissions-from-existing-powerplants/responses/new?response=1e2ea64ba3d0 

Sincerely, 

Change.org 

There are now 5 signatures on this petition. Read reasons why people are signing, and respond to Solve The 

Climate Crisis by clicking here: 

http://www.change.org/petitions/epa-limit-co2-emissions-from-existing-powerplants/responses/new?response=1e2ea64ba3d0 

Right-click 

here to 

download 

pictures. To 

help protect 

your privacy, 

Outlo ok 

prevented 

auto matic 

download of 

this picture 

from the 

Internet.
10

From: Deak, Veronica G [Veronica.Deak@Honeywell.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 9:34 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards for Existing Sources

I am unable to attend the Public Listening Session in Chicago on 11/8/13, but I would like to register my opinion in 

writing. 

I am extremely concerned about climate change. The UN's recent report on climate change should be a strong impetus for 

the United States to reduce our greenhouse gas pollution. Even if all American households drastically reduced our driving 

and lowered our thermostats, which my family and millions of others already have done, it won't be enough to curb global 

warming. 

We need corporations and utility companies to do more. And as we've seen over the past 2 decades, as the calls to slow 

global warming went largely ignored, these companies are not motivated to make changes on their own. The new EPA 

rules could and should be a powerful way to drastically reduce climate pollution in the coming years. 

Americans like me and my family are counting on the EPA to create and enforce tough rules that will curb greenhouse 

emissions, and eliminate coal-fired power plants, which are the dirtiest and most harmful for the planet. 

We absolutely need to transition from coal to clean energy as soon as possible. These EPA rules can help make that 

transition happen. The coal industry is blowing off mountain tops to mine coal, creating terrible environmental 

repercussions for those ecosystems. And, coal-fired power plant emissions poison the air, creating high rates of respiratory 

diseases and cancers. Coal is bad for our health, bad for our communities, and bad for the climate. 

How can this be justified? It's 2013, and we are using technology that's been in place for more than 150 years! 

In addition, climate change will have huge effects on our GDP, our economy, coastal cities (anyone remember Hurricane 

Sandy?) and inland areas alike (the drought in Illinois a few years back caused crops to fail and put stress on farmers). 

How much money and productivity has been lost by unpredictable weather and extreme storms over the last decade? And 

that will only continue. 

The coal companies and their supporters will counter that they create jobs and cheap energy. But we can create so many 

more jobs and equally if not cheaper energy sources if we develop new, sustainable energy sources--without all the costs 

that come with environmental devastation. 

I want our country to build a robust green energy infrastructure. Let's stop supporting coal and replace it with solar, wind 

and other sources of renewable, clean energy. My family is counting on us to do this, for the good of the planet and the 

next generation. We can't do this soon enough. 

Sincerely, 

Veronica Deak 

2338 N. Southport Ave 

Chicago, IL 60614 
11

From: Ray Spitzer [r.spitzer@cox.net]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 9:33 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Docket ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0495 & RE: EPA-R09-OAR-2013-0009

Air and Radiation Docket and Information Center, 

Environmental Protection Agency, 

Mail Code: 2822T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, 

Washington, DC, 20460 

Docket ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0495 & RE: EPA-R09-OAR-2013-0009 

Dear EPA, 

We, Raymond and Christine Spitzer, have lived in Arizona since 1994. We are concerned about the EPA’s proposed 

rules regarding carbon regulations in areas surrounding the Navajo Generating Station in northern Arizona, and other coal 

fired power plants in Arizona. 

The Clean Air Act gives both EPA and states a role in reducing air pollution from power plants that are already in 

operation. The law directs EPA to establish guidelines, which states use to design their own programs to reduce 

emissions. 

We object to the Carbon regulation proposed for existing coal fired power plant that does not take into account the costs 

involved in different geographies. 

AZ has no oil wells to pump CO2 into which makes it unfeasible in the state. 

AZ has no natural gas supplies and new carbon regulations that force the replacement of coal with Natural Gas plants 

only work in states that have Natural Gas. AZ has no such option. 

The States implementation plan is the best solution for long term transition to less carbon, and the 10th Amendment 

requires the EPA to use the State Plan in these regulations. 

We are opposed to the stacking of regulations on power plants that force them to close, switch to Natural Gas or join a 

Carbon CAP and TAX marketplace like the one in California or REGI. 

Because the EPA's proposed rules are unworkable on several levels at NGS, we urge the EPA to adopt the TWG BART 

Proposal as the final rule for NGS. We also urge the EPA to give exclusions to the rules that damage tribal and state 

economies. We have no Gas no Oil no choice in AZ. 

Sincerely, 

Raymond and Christine Spitzer 

Taxpayers of ARizona

 
12

From: James Arneberg [jamesarneberg@gmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 9:19 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Carbon Pollution Standards for Existing Power Plants Public Listening Session

According to a 2010 Harvard University study, Full cost accounting for the life cycle of coal, published 

in the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, the yearly and cumulative costs stemming from 

coal pollutants associated with the mining, processing, transport, and combustion of coal add as 

much as 27 cents to the cost of a kilowatt-hour of energy produced by coal, costing the United States 

over half-a-trillion dollars a year, far in excess of the amount that coal contributes to the economy. So 

a ton of coal from the Powder River Basin that costs 2.58 cents per kilowatt-hour actually costs 

almost 30 cents per kilowatt-hour to society. A 2011 study, Environmental accounting for pollution in 

the United States economy, in the American Economic Review states that the external costs of 

burning coal are 2.2 times more costly to the U.S. economy than any economic benefits derived from 

coal. And these are just two examples of an overwhelming amount of evidence that burning coal is 

much more expensive to the United States than any other form of energy. And the former study 

reports that in 2005, 25,000 premature deaths were caused by coal. In 2010 it was 34,000. Averaging 

25,000 coal-related deaths per year means that more people died from coal in the last 25 years than 

from combat deaths in all of America’s wars.

Coal is a 19th century source of energy and may have been appropriate when the population of the 

United States was 40 million; but now with a population of 312 million, using coal for 40% of our 

energy is economically unfeasible merely in terms of its affect on health and environmental 

degradation, let alone climate change. The only reason that coal is still in use is because it’s cheap 

for energy companies and it’s profitable for coal producers. It’s also profitable for politicians because 

the corporations who run the energy companies and the rich guys who produce the coal bribe our 

politicians through campaign contributions and money to political action committees (PACs). 

Politicians in turn, subsidize coal with taxpayer money. So taxpayers pay for coal twice. Coal wouldn’t 

be economically viable to the energy companies or the coal producers without subsidies provided by 

politicians. And even with subsidies, coal’s external costs in the form of health care costs and lost 

work and school is appalling.

Coal needs to be taxed like cigarettes, at a rate that will discourage the use of coal. And we shouldn’t 

tax coal emissions but coal extraction. You dig up a ton of coal; you pay a tax – an onerous tax. That 

will prevent coal exports to other coal-burning countries.

Now you’re going to hear testimony from slick lawyers and charlatan scientists from the fossil fuel 

companies and groups like the Heartland Institute and the Cato Institute who are going to try and 

dissuade you from doing the right thing. Don’t let their lies distract you because that is what they are 

peddling – lies. Their concerns are only with lining their pockets with taxpayer money. Instead do the 

right thing by those 25,000 people who die prematurely every year. Stop the mining and burning of 

coal.
13

-- 

Jim Arneberg 

jamesarneberg@gmail.com
14

From: drupal_admin@epa.gov on behalf of James Arneberg [jamesarneberg@gmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 9:09 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Webform Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Submitted on Thu, 11/07/2013 - 21:08 

Submitted values are: 

Name: James Arneberg 

Email: jamesarneberg@gmail.com

Comments: 

According to a 2010 Harvard University study, Full cost accounting for the life cycle of 

coal, published in the Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, the yearly and cumulative 

costs stemming from coal pollutants associated with the mining, processing, transport, and 

combustion of coal add as much as 27 cents to the cost of a kilowatt-hour of energy produced 

by coal, costing the United States over half-a-trillion dollars a year, far in excess of the 

amount that coal contributes to the economy. So a ton of coal from the Powder River Basin 

that costs 2.58 cents per kilowatt-hour actually costs almost 30 cents per kilowatt-hour to 

society. A 2011 study, Environmental accounting for pollution in the United States economy, 

in the American Economic Review states that the external costs of burning coal are 

2.2 times more costly to the U.S. economy than any economic benefits derived from coal. And 

these are just two examples of an overwhelming amount of evidence that burning coal is much 

more expensive to the United States than any other form of energy. And the former study 

reports that in 2005, 25,000 premature deaths were caused by coal. In 2010 it was 34,000. 

Averaging 25,000 coal-related deaths per year means that more people died from coal in the 

last 25 years than from combat death in all of America’s wars. 

Coal is a 19th century source of energy and may have been appropriate when the population of 

the United States was 40 million; but now with a population of 312 million, using coal for 

40% of our energy is economically unfeasible merely in terms of its affect on health and 

environmental degradation, let alone climate change. The only reason that coal is still in 

use is because it’s cheap for energy companies and it’s profitable for coal producers. 

It’s also profitable for politicians because the corporations who run the energy companies 

and the rich guys who produce the coal bribe our politicians through campaign contributions 

and money to political action committees (PACs). Politicians in turn, subsidize coal with 

taxpayer money. So taxpayers pay for coal twice. Coal wouldn’t be economically viable to the 

energy companies or the coal producers without subsidies provided by politicians. 

And even with subsidies, coal’s external costs in the form of health care costs and lost work 

and school is appalling. 

Coal needs to be taxed like cigarettes, at a rate that will discourage the use of coal. And 

we shouldn’t tax coal emissions but coal extraction. You dig up a ton of coal; you pay a tax 

– an onerous tax. That will prevent coal exports to other coal-burning countries. 

Now you’re going to hear testimony from slick lawyers and charlatan scientists from the 

fossil fuel companies and groups like the Heartland Institute and the Cato Institute who are 

going to try and dissuade you from doing the right thing. Don’t let their lies distract you 

because that is what they are peddling – lies. Their concerns are only with lining their 

pockets with taxpayer money. Instead do the right thing by those 25,000 people who die 

prematurely every year. Stop the mining and burning of coal. 

Web Area: Carbon Pollution Standards 
15

From: Solve The Climate Crisis [mail@changemail.org]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 9:07 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: New petition to you: EPA: Limit CO2 Emissions From Existing Power Plants

Dear EPA, 

Solve The Climate Crisis started a petition "EPA: Limit CO2 Emissions From Existing Power Plants" targeting 

you on Change.org that's starting to pick up steam. 

Change.org is the world's largest petition platform that gives anyone, anywhere the tools they need to start, join 

and win campaigns for change. Change.org never starts petitions on our own -- petitions on the website, like 

"EPA: Limit CO2 Emissions From Existing Power Plants", are started by users. 

While "EPA: Limit CO2 Emissions From Existing Power Plants" is active, you'll receive an email each time a 

signer leaves a comment explaining why he or she is signing. You'll also receive periodic updates about the 

petition's status. 

Here's what you can do right now to resolve the petition: 

• Review the petition. Here's a link: 

o <="" a="">http://www.change.org/petitions/epa-limit-co2-emissions-from-existing-power-plants

• See the 5 signers and their reasons for signing on the petition page. 

• Respond to the petition creator by sending a message here: 

o http://www.change.org/petitions/epa-limit-co2-emissions-from-existing-powerplants/responses/new?response=1e2ea64ba3d0 

Sincerely, 

Change.org 

There are now 5 signatures on this petition. Read reasons why people are signing, and respond to Solve The 

Climate Crisis by clicking here: 

http://www.change.org/petitions/epa-limit-co2-emissions-from-existing-powerplants/responses/new?response=1e2ea64ba3d0 

Right-click 

here to 

download 

pictures. To 

help protect 

your privacy, 

Outlo ok 

prevented 

auto matic 

download of 

this picture 

from the 

Internet.
16

From: Tracy DeMarco [silveryfir@yahoo.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 9:06 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Establish strong carbon pollution standards for power plants

Dear EPA, 

Thank you for conducting "listening sessions" across the country to allow people like me to 

share our thoughts on the upcoming carbon pollution standards. Though I was not able to 

attend a session in person I wanted to make my concerns known. 

Large coal-fired power plants remain a threat to lung health. The Midwest still has a large 

concentration of old, dirty coal power plants that produce far too much air pollution that 

both worsens climate change and affects our lung health. Smog and soot pollution created by 

these facilities already increases the number of asthma attacks, respiratory emergency room 

visits and hospitalizations and premature deaths. But emissions that drive climate change 

will only worsen the risk to vulnerable people in the Midwest. More extreme heat waves will 

put people living with lung disease at increased risk of illness or death; Hotter, longer 

summers will also worsen smog and soot pollution. Exposure to mold from extreme flooding and 

increased exposure to wildfire smoke driven by stronger droughts are other unacceptable lung 

health threats that are being increasingly driven by climate change. 

Carbon pollution is hurting our health and scientists say the threat is only growing larger 

with time, making action now critical to preserving our health and protecting the air we will 

leave future generations. For these reasons I urge the EPA to design and implement STRONG 

standards to curb carbon pollution from power plants that will make a significant difference 

in addressing climate change and in preserving human health. 

Sincerely, 

Tracy DeMarco 

7620 N Eastlake Terrace 

Chicago, IL 60626 
17

From: Kirk Miller [kirkmiller@juno.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 8:49 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Cc: kirkmiller@juno.com

Subject: Re: Docket ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0495, Proposed Carbon Pollution Standards for New 

Power Plants

Comments on the proposed Carbon Pollution Standards for New Power Plants must reference Docket ID: 

EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0495 

Re: Docket ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0495, Proposed Carbon Pollution Standards for New Power Plants 

I am concerned about the air pollution that has poured over us like toxic soup for many years. My mother died 

from respiratory problems, and some of my family members suffer from respiratory problems. 

For a long time, we have known that carbon pollution harms our health, and power plants are the top source of 

this pollution. Every year, emissions from power plants cause tens of thousands of deaths, and hundreds of 

thousands of heart attacks, asthma attacks, emergency room visits, hospitalizations, and lost workdays. 

Pollution in 2010 from just one source -- coal fired power plants -- caused more than 13,000 deaths, 20,000 

heart attacks, almost 10,000 hospitalizations, costing more than $100 billion. 

It is time to clean up the air. We need to do something, or else we will have more deaths, more heart attacks, 

more asthma attacks, more chronic breathing problems. 

Estimates made by the EPA show that we could prevent thousands of deaths every year, and also reduce many 

health problems, by reducing air pollution. We have the knowledge and the means to address these problems. 

Choosing not to reduce carbon pollution is unconscionable. 

Coal fired power plants pollute a lot, and so do natural gas fired power plants. Please set standards to reduce 

pollution from natural gas fired power plants in addition to coal fired power plants. 

I want to thank the EPA for working to clean up the air. And I urge the EPA to take strong action to protect our 

citizens from dangerous air pollution that causes deaths and myriad respiratory problems. You can't get much 

more basic than the need to breathe clean air. 

Kirk Miller 

517 Cap Rock Drive 

Richardson, Texas 75080 
18

From: Barbara Harrison [twobara@sbcglobal.net]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 8:38 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Establish strong carbon pollution standards for power plants

Dear EPA, 

Thank you for conducting "listening sessions" across the country to allow people like me to 

share our thoughts on the upcoming carbon pollution standards. Though I was not able to 

attend a session in person I wanted to make my concerns known. 

Large coal-fired power plants remain a threat to lung health. The Midwest still has a large 

concentration of old, dirty coal power plants that produce far too much air pollution that 

both worsens climate change and affects our lung health. Smog and soot pollution created by 

these facilities already increases the number of asthma attacks, respiratory emergency room 

visits and hospitalizations and premature deaths. But emissions that drive climate change 

will only worsen the risk to vulnerable people in the Midwest. More extreme heat waves will 

put people living with lung disease at increased risk of illness or death; Hotter, longer 

summers will also worsen smog and soot pollution. Exposure to mold from extreme flooding and 

increased exposure to wildfire smoke driven by stronger droughts are other unacceptable lung 

health threats that are being increasingly driven by climate change. 

Carbon pollution is hurting our health and scientists say the threat is only growing larger 

with time, making action now critical to preserving our health and protecting the air we will 

leave future generations. For these reasons I urge the EPA to design and implement STRONG 

standards to curb carbon pollution from power plants that will make a significant difference 

in addressing climate change and in preserving human health. 

Sincerely, 

Barbara Harrison 

5550 South Shore Drive 

Chicago, IL 60637 
19

From: Milt Clark [mclark-59@comcast.net]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 8:10 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards for Existing Sources

U.S. EPA's proposals on existing sources, as well as future sources, are inadequate to 

achieve the carbon reductions necessary to protect public health and the environment. U.S. 

EPA should develop a phased strategy that reduces carbon pollution from existing sources by 

90% or more by 2050. 

The science is very clear that human induced climate change has been occurring since the 

1980s. To maintain a livable, but impacted plant, a 80%-95% reduction in carbon emissions is 

needed by 2050. Even under this scenario there will be sustained impacts for hundreds of 

years until atmospheric carbon levels begin to decline. Future generations will be subjected 

to a degraded planet and will have to cope with the consequences of rising oceans, drought, 

floods, fires, and reduced agricultural yields. In a decade or two, the economic impacts of 

climate change will exceed the costs of conversion to a non-carbon based energy systems. 

There is limited time to act before climate change becomes irreversible (IPCC, 2013). Given 

our knowledge of climate change, our failure to aggressively act now, could only be viewed as 

unethical. 

All existing coal fired power plants should be phased out within 10 years, unless they can 

achieve a 50% or more reduction in emissions by conversion to natural gas, biofuels or carbon 

sequestration. By 2035 all fossil fuel plants should be required to achieve a 75% reduction 

in carbon emissions and a 90% reduction by 2050. The U.S., as the largest historical 

contributor to carbon emissions but with only 4% of the world/s population, must demonstrate 

significant leadership if carbon pollution is to managed world wide, particularly from large 

sources such as China and India. Current U.S. EPA proposals are simply not sufficient to 

demonstrate meaningful leadership on climate change mitigation. 

Milton Clark, Ph.D. 

Associate Professor of 

 Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences University of Illinois School of Public 

Health 
20

From: bobby cummings [www.cyruszeus123@yahoo.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 8:09 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Dear Sirs, 

My name is Bobby Joe Cummings. I first wish to apologize for waiting so close to the deadline. I'm 

interested in the clean air act, and for the past 30 years I have been working on a technique which I 

call " O Technology". This technology consists of zero emissions. This technology would bring a 

quick change industrially, residentially, and reduce our carbon emissions. 

 

I am very interested in helping protect our environment and resolving the problem that face us 

environmentally. I will be looking forward to hear from you or being invited to a session. Please find 

below all of my information. 

 

Bobby Joe Cummings 

1244 Oregon Road 

Green Pond, SC 29446 

Email: www.cyruszeus123@yahoo.com

 

Respectfully, 

 

Bobby Joe Cummings 
21

From: Bill Copeland [wcopeland916@gmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 7:39 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Contact Us Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Please stay the course and regulate carbon pollution as stringently as possible. 

H. William Copeland, MD 
22

From: Dolores Pino [dcpino@yahoo.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 7:26 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Establish strong carbon pollution standards for power plants

Dear EPA, 

Thank you for conducting "listening sessions" across the country to allow people like me to 

share our thoughts on the upcoming carbon pollution standards. Though I was not able to 

attend a session in person I wanted to make my concerns known. 

Large coal-fired power plants remain a threat to lung health. The Midwest still has a large 

concentration of old, dirty coal power plants that produce far too much air pollution that 

both worsens climate change and affects our lung health. Smog and soot pollution created by 

these facilities already increases the number of asthma attacks, respiratory emergency room 

visits and hospitalizations and premature deaths. But emissions that drive climate change 

will only worsen the risk to vulnerable people in the Midwest. More extreme heat waves will 

put people living with lung disease at increased risk of illness or death; Hotter, longer 

summers will also worsen smog and soot pollution. Exposure to mold from extreme flooding and 

increased exposure to wildfire smoke driven by stronger droughts are other unacceptable lung 

health threats that are being increasingly driven by climate change. 

Carbon pollution is hurting our health and scientists say the threat is only growing larger 

with time, making action now critical to preserving our health and protecting the air we will 

leave future generations. For these reasons I urge the EPA to design and implement STRONG 

standards to curb carbon pollution from power plants that will make a significant difference 

in addressing climate change and in preserving human health. 

Sincerely, 

Dolores Pino 

7200 Wilson Ter 

Morton Grove, IL 60053 
23

From: Sandra Bykowski [smbykowski@gmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 7:06 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Carbon pollution standards

I'm writing to voice my concern that the EPA enact strict pollution standards to existing power plants. While it's 

laudable that the EPA can ensure that any new plants adhere to clean air and pollution standards, the bulk of the 

power plants in this country are aging facilities that are contributing enormously to greenhouse gas emissions. 

It's imperative that these plants meet 21st century standards. 

CO2 emissions are rising higher than ever, and are already well above the recommended standard of 350ppm. 

We need to do everything we can to reverse this trend, and pushing strict limits on our power plants is an 

important place to start. If the plant owners decry that such regulations would be cost prohibitive, ask how 

costly are these measures compared to the cost of superstorm cleanups, healthcare costs due to the rising rates 

of asthma, cancers and other pollution-related illnesses? The costs of increased floods and droughts due to 

climate change? We need to place the burden of those costs on the shoulders of those who have created them. 

Thank you for including my opinions in your consideration. 

Regards, 

Sandra Bykowski 

773.419.6110 
24

From: Donald Zeigler [zeiglerdw@aol.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 6:40 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Establish strong carbon pollution standards for power plants

Dear EPA, 

Thank you for conducting "listening sessions" across the country to allow people like me to 

share our thoughts on the upcoming carbon pollution standards. Though I was not able to 

attend a session in person I wanted to make my concerns known. 

Large coal-fired power plants remain a threat to lung health. The Midwest still has a large 

concentration of old, dirty coal power plants that produce far too much air pollution that 

both worsens climate change and affects our lung health. Smog and soot pollution created by 

these facilities already increases the number of asthma attacks, respiratory emergency room 

visits and hospitalizations and premature deaths. But emissions that drive climate change 

will only worsen the risk to vulnerable people in the Midwest. More extreme heat waves will 

put people living with lung disease at increased risk of illness or death; Hotter, longer 

summers will also worsen smog and soot pollution. Exposure to mold from extreme flooding and 

increased exposure to wildfire smoke driven by stronger droughts are other unacceptable lung 

health threats that are being increasingly driven by climate change. 

Carbon pollution is hurting our health and scientists say the threat is only growing larger 

with time, making action now critical to preserving our health and protecting the air we will 

leave future generations. For these reasons I urge the EPA to design and implement STRONG 

standards to curb carbon pollution from power plants that will make a significant difference 

in addressing climate change and in preserving human health. 

Sincerely, 

Donald Zeigler 

1430 Elmwood Avenue 

Evanston, IL 60201 
25

From: Mary Shesgreen [marysedrop@att.net]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 6:23 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Our statement on carbon pollution for the EPA Listening Tour

Our planet is becoming a perilous environment for humans and other living things. It 

is becoming toxic. Our air, water, land, food, and animals are being contaminated 

daily: toxic water from fracking, overflowing landfills, the destruction of the earth 

through coal removal and processing, depleted topsoil through monoculture crops, 

methane about to be released from the thawing of the permafrost in the Arctic, 

overfishing of our oceans, GMOs in our food, bees dying from pesticide use. The list 

goes on. Most urgent is global climate change caused by our use of fossil fuels.

 

We must change our economy and our culture. We must disengage from the current 

economic model which requires constant growth and which stimulates artificial "needs" 

while not fulfilling genuine human needs. We must move away from our consumerism 

and materialism. We must stop rewarding greed and extraction. We must build 

community by doing such things as encouraging local self-reliance in food 

production. It will all end soon if we don't. 

Some of these goals are beyond the direct purview of the EPA. But the EPA can 

influence the administration and Congress and other government agencies in ways 

that we citizens cannot. We thank the EPA for labeling carbon emissions as pollution 

that can be regulated. We thank it for its critique of the State Department’s 

Environmental Review of the Keystone XL pipeline. Please hold firm on those stances 

and expand them. Please don’t give in to pressure from the fossil fuel industry. We 

want the EPA to take an aggressive stand to fight for our planet and reject the 

powerful lobbies of the money-hungry corporations that will let us all die for a dollar. 

 

We propose that the United States Adopt a Carbon Tax, as described by the Citizens 

Climate Lobby:

http://citizensclimatelobby.org/carbon-tax/

 

Submitted by 

Fox Valley Citizens for Peace & Justice 

PO Box #3, 

Geneva, IL 60134 

847-742-1406 

www.fvc4pnj.org
26

marysedrop@att.net

 

 

 

 

 
27

From: drupal_admin@epa.gov on behalf of Mary Shesgreen [marysedrop@att.net]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 6:22 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Webform Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Submitted on Thu, 11/07/2013 - 18:21 

Submitted values are: 

Name: Mary Shesgreen 

Email: marysedrop@att.net

Comments: 

Our planet is becoming a perilous environment for humans and other living 

things. It is becoming toxic. Our air, water, land, food, and animals are 

being contaminated daily: toxic water from fracking, overflowing landfills, 

the destruction of the earth through coal removal and processing, depleted topsoil through 

monoculture crops, methane about to be released from the thawing of the permafrost in the 

Arctic, overfishing of our oceans, GMOs in our food, bees dying from pesticide use. The list 

goes on. Most urgent is global climate change caused by our use of fossil fuels. 

We must change our economy and our culture. We must disengage from the current economic 

model which requires constant growth and which stimulates artificial "needs" while not 

fulfilling genuine human needs. We must move away from our consumerism and materialism. We 

must stop rewarding greed and extraction. We must build community by doing such things as 

encouraging 

local self-reliance in food production. It will all end soon if we don't. 

Some of these goals are beyond the direct purview of the EPA. But the EPA can influence the 

administration and Congress and other government agencies in ways that we citizens cannot. 

We thank the EPA for labeling carbon emissions as pollution that can be regulated. We thank 

it for its critique of the State Department’s Environmental Review of the Keystone XL 

pipeline. 

 Please hold firm on those stances and expand them. Please don’t give in to pressure from 

the fossil fuel industry. We want the EPA to take an aggressive stand to fight for our planet 

and reject the powerful lobbies of the money-hungry corporations that will let us all die for 

a dollar. 

We propose that the United States Adopt a Carbon Tax, as described by the Citizens Climate 

Lobby: 

http://citizensclimatelobby.org/carbon-tax/

Submitted by 

Fox Valley Citizens for Peace & Justice 

PO Box #3, 

Geneva, IL 60134 

847-742-1406 

www.fvc4pnj.org

marysedrop@att.net
28

Web Area: Carbon Pollution Standards 
29

From: drupal_admin@epa.gov on behalf of Mary Shesgreen [marysedrop@att.net]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 6:20 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Webform Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Submitted on Thu, 11/07/2013 - 18:19 

Submitted values are: 

Name: Mary Shesgreen 

Email: marysedrop@att.net

Comments: 

Our planet is becoming a perilous environment for humans and other living 

things. It is becoming toxic. Our air, water, land, food, and animals are 

being contaminated daily: toxic water from fracking, overflowing landfills, 

the destruction of the earth through coal removal and processing, depleted topsoil through 

monoculture crops, methane about to be released from the thawing of the permafrost in the 

Arctic, overfishing of our oceans, GMOs in our food, bees dying from pesticide use. The list 

goes on. Most urgent is global climate change caused by our use of fossil fuels. 

We must change our economy and our culture. We must disengage from the current economic 

model which requires constant growth and which stimulates artificial "needs" while not 

fulfilling genuine human needs. We must move away from our consumerism and materialism. We 

must stop rewarding greed and extraction. We must build community by doing such things as 

encouraging 

local self-reliance in food production. It will all end soon if we don't. 

Some of these goals are beyond the direct purview of the EPA. But the EPA can influence the 

administration and Congress and other government agencies in ways that we citizens cannot. 

We thank the EPA for labeling carbon emissions as pollution that can be regulated. We thank 

it for its critique of the State Department’s Environmental Review of the Keystone XL 

pipeline. 

 Please hold firm on those stances and expand them. Please don’t give in to pressure from 

the fossil fuel industry. We want the EPA to take an aggressive stand to fight for our planet 

and reject the powerful lobbies of the money-hungry corporations that will let us all die for 

a dollar. 

We propose that the United States Adopt a Carbon Tax, as described by the Citizens Climate 

Lobby: 

http://citizensclimatelobby.org/carbon-tax/

Submitted by 

Fox Valley Citizens for Peace & Justice 

PO Box #3, 

Geneva, IL 60134 

847-742-1406 

www.fvc4pnj.org

marysedrop@att.net
30

Web Area: Carbon Pollution Standards 
31

From: Eve Gutman [egutman@haverford.edu]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 5:40 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Listening session comments

To whom it may concern; 

I will not be at tomorrow's listening session, but I would like to submit comments. I am very excited about the 

possibility of increased regulations on coal-fired power plants by the Environmental Protection Agency. If we 

want to prevent a global temperature increase of more than a 2 degree Celsius and unlivable conditions that 

come with that, our nation must act comprehensively and swiftly. Using regulations on coal to shift to a clean 

energy economy is exactly what the EPA's responsibility should be. Thus, I urge you to support stronger 

regulations on coal-fired power plants. Thank you for your time. 

Sincerely, 

Eve Gutman 

370 Lancaster Avenue 

Haverford, PA 19041 
32

From: Laurie Arends [slsgds.la@gmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 5:46 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

I absolutely support tough legislation on Coal fired plants, and I would like to see us off of coal entirely as soon 

as possible... 

 

Laurie Arends 

Worth, IL 

slsgds.la@gmail.com
33

From: Shirley fastner [shirleyfastner@hotmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 5:17 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Establish strong carbon pollution standards for power plants

Dear EPA, 

Thank you for conducting "listening sessions" across the country to allow people like me to 

share our thoughts on the upcoming carbon pollution standards. Though I was not able to 

attend a session in person I wanted to make my concerns known. 

Large coal-fired power plants remain a threat to lung health. The Midwest still has a large 

concentration of old, dirty coal power plants that produce far too much air pollution that 

both worsens climate change and affects our lung health. Smog and soot pollution created by 

these facilities already increases the number of asthma attacks, respiratory emergency room 

visits and hospitalizations and premature deaths. But emissions that drive climate change 

will only worsen the risk to vulnerable people in the Midwest. More extreme heat waves will 

put people living with lung disease at increased risk of illness or death; Hotter, longer 

summers will also worsen smog and soot pollution. Exposure to mold from extreme flooding and 

increased exposure to wildfire smoke driven by stronger droughts are other unacceptable lung 

health threats that are being increasingly driven by climate change. 

Carbon pollution is hurting our health and scientists say the threat is only growing larger 

with time, making action now critical to preserving our health and protecting the air we will 

leave future generations. For these reasons I urge the EPA to design and implement STRONG 

standards to curb carbon pollution from power plants that will make a significant difference 

in addressing climate change and in preserving human health. 

Sincerely, 

Shirley fastner 

1460 North Sandburg 

chicago, IL 60610 
34

From: Marcia Rutan [mersong@yahoo.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 5:01 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Coal facilities and terminals

Burning and transporting coal makes people sick and is unhealthy for the planet. It's like a huge 

cigarette polluting the lungs of life. It is not a the right way to get energy for human endeavors. Please 

stop this terrible trail of efforts that can only lead to ruined landscapes, polluted air, more children sick 

with asthma, and devastated oceans. 

 

Thank you. 

 

Marcia

Marcia Rutan 

May my heart be open in gratitude

For the beauty of you, the amazing

World we dwell in together, surprising

Possibility each and every day. 
35

From: Michael Rahaman [mr0520@outlook.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 5:01 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Testimony for EPA Carbon Pollution Standards for Existing Power Plants

Hi - My name is Michael Rahaman and I would like to submit my written testimony to the EPA concerning 

setting carbon pollution standards for power plants. 

First, a little about myself. I immigrated to this country from Guyana , South America, in 1985, coming first as 

a student of the University of Illinois, from which I graduated in 1988 with a B.Sc. in Accounting. That same 

year, I also sat and passed the CPA exam. I later attended De Paul University in Chicago, where I obtained 

professional qualifications to become a computer programmer. I have worked in the IT industry as a Senior 

Application Developer for over 15 years. 

I don't want to preach but nothing can be more important than preserving a healthy, habitable environment 

to ensure the continued existence of present and future generations of humans and all other living things on 

this planet. We must always follow the science, since science is the the only reliable, objective tool we have to 

inform our actions. If the science is a little ambiguous about certain important matters as it relates to the 

environment, because of current limited knowledge, we must always act on the side of caution and give the 

benefit of the doubt to the environment. 

However, as it relates to carbon pollution and its harmful effects, mainstream science is unambiguous. Just 

yesterday, the WMO (World Metereological Organization) announced that carbon dioxide and the other 

gasses that drive global warming increased to a record high in 2012. The harmful effects, such as rising ocean 

levels, are already being felt in the country of my birth, Guyana, which lies about a foot or more below sea 

level and where sea defenses such as dykes and seawalls are beginning to prove ineffective as over topping 

and flooding by the rising oceans are now occurring more frequently. 

Science has told us that mass extinctions of life have happened more than once on Earth in the distant past. 

We must do everything in our power to prevent another mass extinction of all life, including our own, from 

happening because of the effects of human activities. 

US power plants account for 40% of carbon pollution. We need standards desperately to limit this pollution. 

With smart thinking, the standards can be set in a way that it can be a win-win situation for both private 

industry and the environment at once. 

Thank you. 

Sincerely, 

Michael Rahaman 

5420 N Sheridan Rd., Unit 304, 

Chicago, IL 60640 

Tel.: 630-687-1393 
36

From: Michael Rahaman [Mijazrahaman@gmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 4:57 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Establish strong carbon pollution standards for power plants

Dear EPA, 

Thank you for conducting "listening sessions" across the country to allow people like me to 

share our thoughts on the upcoming carbon pollution standards. Though I was not able to 

attend a session in person I wanted to make my concerns known. 

Large coal-fired power plants remain a threat to lung health. The Midwest still has a large 

concentration of old, dirty coal power plants that produce far too much air pollution that 

both worsens climate change and affects our lung health. Smog and soot pollution created by 

these facilities already increases the number of asthma attacks, respiratory emergency room 

visits and hospitalizations and premature deaths. But emissions that drive climate change 

will only worsen the risk to vulnerable people in the Midwest. More extreme heat waves will 

put people living with lung disease at increased risk of illness or death; Hotter, longer 

summers will also worsen smog and soot pollution. Exposure to mold from extreme flooding and 

increased exposure to wildfire smoke driven by stronger droughts are other unacceptable lung 

health threats that are being increasingly driven by climate change. 

Carbon pollution is hurting our health and scientists say the threat is only growing larger 

with time, making action now critical to preserving our health and protecting the air we will 

leave future generations. For these reasons I urge the EPA to design and implement STRONG 

standards to curb carbon pollution from power plants that will make a significant difference 

in addressing climate change and in preserving human health. 

Sincerely, 

Michael Rahaman 

5420 N Sheridan Rd 

Apt 304 

Chicago, IL 60640 
37

From: Tad Anderson [tadand99@gmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 4:32 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Cc: Tad Anderson

Subject: I support regulation of CO2 emissions

I am a PhD Atmospheric Scientist, recently retired from a 25-year career as a researcher and professor at the 

University of Washington. 

I strongly support the regulation of carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from power plants in the U.S. 

Specifically, I urge the EPA to adopt policies that will (1) dramatically reduce emissions of CO2 from U.S. 

power plants within the next few decades and (2) recognize the necessity for the U.S. to leave most of its 

current coal reserves in the ground. I expand upon these points below. 

(1) I urge the EPA to enact regulations that will rapidly and dramatically reduce CO2 emissions from U.S. 

power plants. Left unchecked, these emissions will increase the Earth’s greenhouse effect causing planetary 

warming via well known physical processes, and will do so for centuries to come. Emissions may be reduced 

by (a) energy conservation, (b) switching to non-fossil-fuel power sources such as wind or solar, (c) switching 

to fossil fuels with higher energy content per unit of CO2 (e.g. replacing coal with natural gas), or (d) power 

plants that capture the CO2 prior to emission and permanently sequester it underground. 

Of these options, methods (a) and (b) are the best, since the technologies are readily available, safe, and 

sustainable for generations to come. These approaches appear expensive only when the costs of CO2 emissions 

associated with long-term climate disruption are ignored. 

Method (c) is potentially problematic since the fugitive methane emissions from natural gas extraction is highly 

uncertain and may actually result in a higher CO2-equivalent impact than coal. I urge the EPA to closely follow 

research in this area -- see, e.g., Karion et al., 2013, Geophysical Research Letters, 40, 4393-4397, doi: 

10.1002/grl.50811, which reports fugitive methane emissions by an independent, top-down method that are 

higher than previous estimates by more than a factor-of-two. 

Method (d) would mean using power plants with so-called “carbon-capture-and-storage” (CCS) capability. 

While CCS is an active area of engineering research, this technology has yet to prove practical on a large scale. 

As such, it would be inappropriate, at this time, to rely on this method. 

(2) It is particularly important to reduce the use of coal and, in fact, to ensure that most of our current coal 

reserves remain in the ground. This can be demonstrated by considering the following question: Would it be 

safe for humanity to mine and burn our existing, proven coal reserves? Using the best available science, it 

is remarkably easy to show that the answer to this question is “no”. First, scientists have established that global 

warming greater than 2 degrees Celsius must be avoided in order to prevent calamitous disruption of the Earth’s 

climate system. Almost every country (including the United States) has accepted this 2 degree Celsius 

threshold. Second, in order to have a reasonable chance of staying below this threshold, the maximum amount 

of CO2 that can be emitted into the atmosphere is about 550 billion tons. Third, the world’s proven coal 

reserves, if burned, would release about 2000 billion tons of CO2 into the atmosphere -- almost four times more

than would be safe with regard to climate stability. 

The implication is clear: the vast majority of the world’s existing coal reserves must be left in the ground (or 

burned in CCS-equipped power plants, which do not currently exist) if we are to avoid climate calamity. The 
38

United States has a special responsibility to lead in this area since the U.S. possesses more coal reserves 

than any other country. Therefore, I urge EPA to adopt policies which recognize the fundamental scientific fact 

that the world cannot safely exploit more than a small fraction of its current coal reserves. 

Thank you for considering these comments. 

Respectfully yours, 

Theodore L. Anderson, PhD 

2807 NW 68th St / Seattle, WA 98117 

email: tadand99@gmail.com
39

From: Bob Randall [YearRoundGardening@comcast.net]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 4:22 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Re: Comment on Carbon Pollution Standards for Existing Sources

Dear EPA 

I want to support in the strongest terms efforts to reduce and stop carbon emission pollution 

in the US. 

I believe I have studied the problem of climate change extensively and am convinced that 

those polluting the world atmosphere with greenhouse gasses should not be allowed to change 

the climate and cost of living in major ways without being required to pay the full cost to 

future populations of what they are doing. As an agronomist, I am deeply concerned about the 

future of our food system under unpredictable and novel weather events and am frightened by 

the general lack of awareness in the population about the likely consequences for taxes, cost 

of living, quality of life, and living standards generally, if emissions are allowed to 

proceed past a tipping point to amplifying global warming feedbacks. 

Bob Randall 

10601 Bassoon Drive 

77025 

Houston TX 

"Share What You Grow and What You Know!" 

Bob Randall, Ph.D. 

YearRoundGardening@comcast.net

http://yearroundgardening.me

home/office: 713-661-9737 

cell 832-317-8983 
40

From: Laurie Casey [laurie@chicagocasey.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 4:20 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards for Existing Sources

I am unable to attend the Public Listening Session in Chicago on 11/8/13, but as a resident of a nearby suburb of 

Chicago, I would like to register my opinion in writing. 

I am extremely concerned about climate change. The UN's recent report on climate change should be a strong impetus for the United States to reduce our greenhouse gas pollution. Even if all American households drastically reduced our driving and lowered our thermostats, which my family and millions of others already have done, it won't be enough to curb global warming. 

We need corporations and utility companies to do their share. And as we've seen over the past 2 decades, as the calls to slow global warming went largely ignored, these companies are not motivated to make changes on their own. The new EPA rules could and should be a powerful way to drastically reduce climate pollution in the coming years. 

Americans like me and my two young daughters are counting on the EPA to create and 

enforce tough rules that will curb greenhouse emissions, and eliminate coal-fired power 

plants, which are the dirtiest and most harmful for the planet. 

We absolutely need to transition from coal to clean energy as soon as possible. These EPA rules can help make that transition happen. The coal industry is blowing off mountain tops to mine coal, creating terrible environmental repercussions for those ecosystems. And, coal-fired power plant emissions poison the air, creating high rates of respiratory diseases and cancers. Coal is bad for our health, bad for our communities, and bad for the climate. 

How can this be justified? It's 2013, and we are using technology that's been in place for more than 150 years! 

In addition, climate change will have huge effects on our GDP, our economy, coastal cities (anyone remember Hurricane Sandy?) and inland areas alike (the drought in Illinois a few years back caused crops to fail and put stress on farmers). How much money and productivity has been lost by unpredictable weather and extreme storms over the last decade? And that will only continue. 

The coal companies and their supporters will counter that they create jobs and cheap energy. But we can create so many more jobs and equally if not cheaper energy sources if we develop new, sustainable energy sources--without all the costs that come with environmental devastation.

I want our country to build a robust green energy infrastructure. Let's stop supporting coal and replace it with solar, wind and other sources of renewable, clean energy. My daughters are counting on us to do this, for the good of the planet and the next generation. We can't do this soon enough.

Sincerely,

Laurie Casey

645 N Kenilworth

Oak Park, IL 60302
41

From: Christine Nannicelli [christine.nannicelli@sierraclub.org]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 4:16 PM

To: Michael Rahaman

Cc: Carbon Pollution Input; kady.mcfadden@sierraclub.org

Subject: Re: Testimony for EPA Carbon Pollution Standards for Existing Power Plants

Hi Mike, 

This is fantastic. I made one edit below. I think leaving out the SC affiliation will be more effective. What time 

are you planning on arriving tomorrow? 

Christine 

On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 1:17 PM, Michael Rahaman <mr0520@outlook.com> wrote: 

Hi - My name is Michael Rahaman, a proud resident of XXXXXXXXXXX and I would like to submit my 

written testimony to the EPA concerning setting carbon pollution standards for power plants. 

First, a little about myself. I immigrated to this country from Guyana , South America, in 1985, coming first as 

a student of the University of Illinois, from which I graduated in 1988 with a B.Sc. in Accounting. That same 

year, I also sat and passed the CPA exam. I later attended De Paul University in Chicago, where I obtained 

professional qualifications to become a computer programmer. I have worked in the IT industry as a Senior 

Application Developer for over 15 years. 

I don't want to preach but nothing can be more important than preserving a healthy, habitable environment to 

ensure the continued existence of present and future generations of humans and all other living things on this 

planet. We must always follow the science, since science is the the only reliable, objective tool we have to 

inform our actions. If the science is a little ambiguous about certain important matters as it relates to the 

environment, because of current limited knowledge, we must always act on the side of caution and give the 

benefit of the doubt to the environment. 

However, as it relates to carbon pollution and its harmful effects, mainstream science is unambiguous. Just 

yesterday, the WMO (World Metereological Organization) announced that carbon dioxide and the other gasses 

that drive global warming increased to a record high in 2012. The harmful effects, such as rising ocean levels, 

are already being felt in the country of my birth, Guyana, which lies about a foot or more below sea level and 

where sea defenses such as dykes and seawalls are beginning to prove ineffective as over topping and flooding 

by the rising oceans are now occurring more frequently. 

Science has told us that mass extinctions of life have happened more than once on Earth in the distant past. We 

must do everything in our power to prevent another mass extinction of all life, including our own, from 

happening because of the effects of human activities. 

US power plants account for 40% of carbon pollution. We need standards desperately to limit this pollution. 

With smart thinking, the standards can be set in a way that it can be a win-win situation for both private industry 

and the environment at once. 

Thank you. 
42

Sincerely, 

Michael Rahaman 

5420 N Sheridan Rd., Unit 304, 

Chicago, IL 60640 

Tel.: 630-687-1393

-- 

Christine Nannicelli 

IL Field Organizer 

Sierra Club 

(c) 508-740-9202 

(o) 312-251-1680 x115 
43

From: drupal_admin@epa.gov on behalf of Shaun Dakin [sdakin@usa.net]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 4:10 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Webform Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Submitted on Thu, 11/07/2013 - 16:10 

Submitted values are: 

Name: Shaun Dakin 

Email: sdakin@usa.net

Comments: 

My comments 

https://docs.google.com/document/d/12KSdSKkaQUn4RqQo7j9NwTyOrwdv3MV6LVYhlemJm7w/edit?usp=shar

ing

Testimony of Shaun Dakin 

Digital Director, Moms Clean Air Force 

Carbon Pollution Standards 

EPA Public Listening Session 

November 7th, 2013 

EPA Headquarters, William Jefferson Clinton East Building, 1201 Constitution Ave NW 

Good afternoon, I’m Shaun Dakin. I live in Falls Church, VA. I am speaking today as a 

representative of Moms Clean Air Force and a Dad. My Son is 9 years old. 

I am grateful for the opportunity to speak with you today in support of EPA’s proposed carbon 

standards. 

Moms Clean Air Force is a community of Moms and Dads who are united by concern over the 

effects of air pollution on our children. 

We read the health research on air pollution, and we have learned a lot about the health 

effects of breathing dirty air. We know that in its many forms, air pollution has been linked 

to the major health problems of our time. We see that asthma attacks, heart attacks, heart 

disease, stroke, lung cancer, premature death, emergency room visits, hospital admissions– 

all of these health problems have been linked to air pollution. 

Many of these problems harm our children in particular. We at Moms Clean Air Force think 

that’s unacceptable. 

Moms Clean Air Force has over 180,000 Moms, Dads, Grandparents and concerned citizens that 

are working for a clean air future for all of us. 

I’m a Dad and I care about the future of our planet. But I really care 

about the future of our planet for my son. 

We are lucky. My son has grown up going to the beaches of Rhode Island and 

Maryland enjoying the sun, water and sand and collecting sea glass. 

I worry about what will happen to those beaches as he grows up. Will 

climate change increase the sea levels so that all that he knows now will soon be under 

water? Will he be able to bring his children to these same beaches? 
44

Right now the house that we go to each summer in Rhode Island is surrounded 

by water on almost all sides. The road that leads to the house was washed 

out during a recent storm, making it almost impossible to get to the home. 

I want to be able to tell my son that this home will be there forever. But 

I can’t. Due to climate change, there is a good possibility that this summer home will no 

longer be reachable. 

I’m here to ask that the EPA take action. 

The EPA should propose a strong carbon pollution standard for existing power plants, so they 

are no longer allowed to dump unlimited amounts of dangerous carbon pollution into the air. 

In fact, Addressing climate change is our obligation to our children and future generations, 

and the EPA can take the largest step our country has ever taken in that effort by limiting 

carbon pollution from power plants. 

 Thank you. 

Shaun Dakin 

dakinshaun@gmail.com

Web Area: Carbon Pollution Standards 
45

From: Twila Slind [twislind@gmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 4:00 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: air pollution

Scientists are warning that if we do not do something about co2 we will pass 1 billion tons in 15 years and won't 

be able to breathe. Protecting our air is the EPA's most important job. Please fight for us! 

Sincerely, Twila Slind, Gig Harbor, WA 
46

From: Stelzer, Steve - HPC-PWE [Steve.Stelzer@houstontx.gov]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 4:00 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Carbon Pollution Standards for Existing Sources

TO: United States Environmental Protection Agency 

RE: Comment on Carbon Pollution Standards for Existing Sources 

To whom it may concern: 

I live in Harris County, Texas, approximately twenty miles from the Sugar Land Power Project - a coal plant. I understand 

that you are in a public comment process on proposed regulations for existing power plants. I strongly support 

regulations that will properly assign the price of emissions to the source as well as measures to help plants reduce 

emissions. 

I believe that the continued perversion of the marketplace by the power plants is egregiously enabled by the US 

Government neglecting its role to regulate externalities of power generation and causing a negative effect on my 

family's health, the Texas economy, and that of the planet. The children of the Houston region suffer too much at the 

hands of this market perversion through current real negative effects, such as rates of asthma, and the long term risk to 

their ability to sustain the region in the face of climate change. 

The emissions of this plant - and all such existing coal power plants - are likely contributing to climate change, along with 

various other obvious negative effects, including local agricultural and health impacts. As a consumer who probably gets 

some of my electricity from this plant, I wish I was paying the full price for my electricity, based on the assumption that 

properly efficient and non-polluting power generation would result in higher consumer prices. The ongoing federal 

perversion of the marketplace is manipulating consumer decisions, making consumers waste more energy, and making 

substitute goods, such as solar, relatively more expensive. Inadequate information and perversion in a market leads to 

inequality, inefficient decisions, and long term loss to the economy. 

Please act now to correct this situation. 

Steve Stelzer teve Stelzer AIA LEED AP 

Program Director 

City of Houston Public Works & Engineering

Code Enforcement Green Building Resource Center

1002 Washington Avenue 

Houston, TX 77002 

832-394-9050

steve.stelzer@houstontx.gov

 www.codegreenhouston.org

 Facebook.com/HoustonGBRC

 Twitter.com/HoustonGBRC

To receive periodic emails from Mayor Annise D. Parker and the City of Houston on topics of interest to you and your neighborhood, please visit 

www.houstontx.gov and register with CitizensNet.

CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT: This email and any attachment is confidential. It is intended solely for the use by the intended recipient (s), and any 

unauthorized disclosure, reproduction, distribution, use, or retention of its contents is strictly prohibited. 

Please consider the environment before printing this email.
47

From: drupal_admin@epa.gov on behalf of Kyle Murphy [IamSpam514@aol.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 3:55 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Webform Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Submitted on Thu, 11/07/2013 - 15:54 

Submitted values are: 

Name: Kyle Murphy 

Email: IamSpam514@aol.com

Comments: Please put forth the strongest possible carbon pollution standards. 

CO2 emissions, primarily from coal power plants threaten all life on the planet, including 

your children and my children. Let's set the world on a better course for future generations, 

not cower before powerful corporate interests. 

Web Area: Carbon Pollution Standards 
48

From: William & Dolly Byrne [Thepitstopbase@aol.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 3:54 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Establish strong carbon pollution standards for power plants

Dear EPA, 

Thank you for conducting "listening sessions" across the country to allow people like me to 

share our thoughts on the upcoming carbon pollution standards. Though I was not able to 

attend a session in person I wanted to make my concerns known. 

Large coal-fired power plants remain a threat to lung health. The Midwest still has a large 

concentration of old, dirty coal power plants that produce far too much air pollution that 

both worsens climate change and affects our lung health. Smog and soot pollution created by 

these facilities already increases the number of asthma attacks, respiratory emergency room 

visits and hospitalizations and premature deaths. But emissions that drive climate change 

will only worsen the risk to vulnerable people in the Midwest. More extreme heat waves will 

put people living with lung disease at increased risk of illness or death; Hotter, longer 

summers will also worsen smog and soot pollution. Exposure to mold from extreme flooding and 

increased exposure to wildfire smoke driven by stronger droughts are other unacceptable lung 

health threats that are being increasingly driven by climate change. 

Carbon pollution is hurting our health and scientists say the threat is only growing larger 

with time, making action now critical to preserving our health and protecting the air we will 

leave future generations. For these reasons I urge the EPA to design and implement STRONG 

standards to curb carbon pollution from power plants that will make a significant difference 

in addressing climate change and in preserving human health. 

Sincerely, 

William & Dolly Byrne 

3959 W 105th Street 

Chicago, IL 60655 
49

From: Phyllis Groff [pgroff2@yahoo.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 3:33 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Establish strong carbon pollution standards for power plants

Dear EPA, 

Thank you for conducting "listening sessions" across the country to allow people like me to 

share our thoughts on the upcoming carbon pollution standards. Though I was not able to 

attend a session in person I wanted to make my concerns known. 

Large coal-fired power plants remain a threat to lung health. The Midwest still has a large 

concentration of old, dirty coal power plants that produce far too much air pollution that 

both worsens climate change and affects our lung health. Smog and soot pollution created by 

these facilities already increases the number of asthma attacks, respiratory emergency room 

visits and hospitalizations and premature deaths. But emissions that drive climate change 

will only worsen the risk to vulnerable people in the Midwest. More extreme heat waves will 

put people living with lung disease at increased risk of illness or death; Hotter, longer 

summers will also worsen smog and soot pollution. Exposure to mold from extreme flooding and 

increased exposure to wildfire smoke driven by stronger droughts are other unacceptable lung 

health threats that are being increasingly driven by climate change. 

Carbon pollution is hurting our health and scientists say the threat is only growing larger 

with time, making action now critical to preserving our health and protecting the air we will 

leave future generations. For these reasons I urge the EPA to design and implement STRONG 

standards to curb carbon pollution from power plants that will make a significant difference 

in addressing climate change and in preserving human health. 

Sincerely, 

Phyllis Groff 

39 N Warrington Rd 

Des Plaines, IL 60016 
50

From: Iona Park [ionapark@me.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 3:28 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: listening session Seattle

To the EPA, 

We are a family of four living in Seattle, WA, and we support action to reduce coal plant 

emissions. For the future of our planet, and our children, we need to create higher 

standards and better regulations - 

there are other options, better ones, for cleaner energy consumption. 

We support the EPA rules that insist on reductions of climate pollution. 

Best, 

David Taber, Iona Park, and family 
51

From: Jeff Tangel [jeff.tangel@gmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 3:18 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Establish strong carbon pollution standards for power plants

Dear EPA, 

Thank you for conducting "listening sessions" across the country to allow people like me to 

share our thoughts on the upcoming carbon pollution standards. Though I was not able to 

attend a session in person I wanted to make my concerns known. 

Large coal-fired power plants remain a threat to lung health. The Midwest still has a large 

concentration of old, dirty coal power plants that produce far too much air pollution that 

both worsens climate change and affects our lung health. Smog and soot pollution created by 

these facilities already increases the number of asthma attacks, respiratory emergency room 

visits and hospitalizations and premature deaths. But emissions that drive climate change 

will only worsen the risk to vulnerable people in the Midwest. More extreme heat waves will 

put people living with lung disease at increased risk of illness or death; Hotter, longer 

summers will also worsen smog and soot pollution. Exposure to mold from extreme flooding and 

increased exposure to wildfire smoke driven by stronger droughts are other unacceptable lung 

health threats that are being increasingly driven by climate change. 

Carbon pollution is hurting our health and scientists say the threat is only growing larger 

with time, making action now critical to preserving our health and protecting the air we will 

leave future generations. For these reasons I urge the EPA to design and implement STRONG 

standards to curb carbon pollution from power plants that will make a significant difference 

in addressing climate change and in preserving human health. 

Sincerely, 

Jeff Tangel 

2028 W 101st Pl 

Chicago, IL 60643 
52

From: drupal_admin@epa.gov on behalf of Michelle Marinelli Prindle [marinelli.michelle@gmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 2:49 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Webform Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Submitted on Thu, 11/07/2013 - 14:48 

Submitted values are: 

Name: Michelle Marinelli Prindle 

Email: marinelli.michelle@gmail.com

Comments: 

As a mother to two delightful young children, and an early childhood educator and private 

music teacher, all of the time I spend is with children. I care so deeply for their future -

and had hoped to offer them one full of promise, and the chance to see their dreams 

fulfilled. In the light of decades worth of climate science, and new studies that confirm 

scientists' worst fears, how can I hope to look them in the eyes when I speak of their bright 

futures? 

How can I hope to do that at all unless you, our trusted public servants, boldly act to make 

real change. Do not cave to the self-serving interests of powerful industry lobbyists, who 

care only for their own investment returns and bottom lines. I urge you to look deeply into 

the eyes of two and four year-old little boys, as I do each day, and ask your conscience, 

"What is the right thing for us to do, at this historic moment in history?" 

Now is the time for you, our trusted public servants, to act, to save this planet from 

disaster and preserve our hope for a better tomorrow. I urge you to make bold, sweeping 

changes to emission regulations. Stand up for something that really matters. The future of 

my two young sons, and all the other children like them, around the world. 

Thank you for your time. 

Web Area: Carbon Pollution Standards 
53

From: Sara Via [svia@umd.edu]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 2:38 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: comments

To the EPA: 

The EPA regulations for new coal-fired power plants are a big step forward, and I thank you for those. 

But, to have a real impact on toxic emissions, these standards need to be extended to EXISTING coal-fired 

plants. 

 

As a scientist and a parent, I’m here to strongly support STRINGENT regulations for existing coal-fired 

plants.

 

Burning coal has two disastrous impacts on Americans:

First, coal combustion has well documented and serious health effects. 

 - These plants emit acid-forming gases, cause serious respiratory problems. 

- They also emit large amounts of mercury, lead, arsenic, heavy metals and about 75 other poisons. 

- Many of these compounds adhere to the tiny pieces of soot emitted, and are easily breathed deep into 

 lungs – where they enter the bloodstream, causing sickness and even death. 

- In fact, as of 2005, Baltimore residents could expect over 800 deaths/year from toxic emissions, mostly from 

coal plants within the city. 

 

Secondly, climate change from fossil fuel combustion is a scientific fact, and coal combustion accounts for 

40% of all US CO2emissions 

- Data show that the 50 dirtiest coal-fired plants emit 12% of ALL CO2 in US! 

- What an opportunity!! If we cleaned up or closed these 50 plants, we would be long way toward our 2020 

emissions target! 

 

Both the National Resource Defense Council and the Union of Concerned Scientists have released 

comprehensive roadmaps for carbon reduction. These plans combine stricter emissions standards with 

increased efficiency and use of renewable energy to get the deep emissions reductions we need by 2030. This 
54

type of multifaceted approach is necessary, and regulation of coal emissions through the Clean Air Act is a key 

aspect!! 

Coal advocates say regulations will cost consumers too much. 

- But given the huge health costs of coal emissions and the $188B taxpayers spent for disaster relief in just 2011 

and 2012, we are already paying! 

- And this kind of uncontrolled spending will only increase—

Please adopt strict standards for emissions from existing coal-fired plants!

 

Thank you, 

Dr. Sara Via

Department of Biology and

Department of Entomology

University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742

svia@umd.edu
55

From: Monique Howard [Bmhoward2004@yahoo.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 2:34 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Establish strong carbon pollution standards for power plants

Dear EPA, 

Thank you for conducting "listening sessions" across the country to allow people like me to 

share our thoughts on the upcoming carbon pollution standards. Though I was not able to 

attend a session in person I wanted to make my concerns known. 

Large coal-fired power plants remain a threat to lung health. The Midwest still has a large 

concentration of old, dirty coal power plants that produce far too much air pollution that 

both worsens climate change and affects our lung health. Smog and soot pollution created by 

these facilities already increases the number of asthma attacks, respiratory emergency room 

visits and hospitalizations and premature deaths. But emissions that drive climate change 

will only worsen the risk to vulnerable people in the Midwest. More extreme heat waves will 

put people living with lung disease at increased risk of illness or death; Hotter, longer 

summers will also worsen smog and soot pollution. Exposure to mold from extreme flooding and 

increased exposure to wildfire smoke driven by stronger droughts are other unacceptable lung 

health threats that are being increasingly driven by climate change. 

Carbon pollution is hurting our health and scientists say the threat is only growing larger 

with time, making action now critical to preserving our health and protecting the air we will 

leave future generations. For these reasons I urge the EPA to design and implement STRONG 

standards to curb carbon pollution from power plants that will make a significant difference 

in addressing climate change and in preserving human health. 

Sincerely, 

Monique Howard 

847 Juniper Lane 

Northbrook, IL 60062 
56

From: drupal_admin@epa.gov on behalf of Lisa [genielisa@yahoo.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 2:19 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Webform Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Submitted on Thu, 11/07/2013 - 14:19 

Submitted values are: 

Name: Lisa 

Email: genielisa@yahoo.com

Comments: Please, please regulate current, existing power plants. I live next to one of the 

biggest polluting plants in the nation, Luminant's Martin Lake Plant. They have not lived up 

to their promises to install new technology on their plant. Meanwhile, those of us who live 

close continue to have our health compromised. They are even opening a new strip mine right 

across the road from my house and putting in a coal crushing/loading station withing 2500 

feet of my residence. Their out of compliance diesel engines will be pulling their coal 

trains into this station to load up, pull out and spread not only coal dust but diesel 

emissions into our front and back yards. 

 They should not be able to get away with endangering the public health. 

Web Area: Carbon Pollution Standards 
57

From: Marcy Gustafson [moosegustafson4@gmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 2:18 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: From Children (2nd grade to 8th grade)

The bad guys in most children's books are the greedy, the mean, and most of all those who won't hear the 

audience yelling a positive directive that could make the story come out positively. 

 

Almost every child believes climate change (global warming) is real. Can you imagine how it feels to be them 

as they watch the inaction and sometimes pretense of the adults that they see in power. 

 

Ever think about all the anger we have seen: ask a child why! They will tell you the truth. For a while we 

answer to what we know is fair and even noble; then something happens and we are swept away by all kinds of 

special interests. 

 

Stand up (real tall) for children. 
58

From: Michael Rahaman [mr0520@outlook.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 2:17 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Cc: kady.mcfadden@sierraclub.org; christine.nannicelli@sierraclub.org

Subject: Testimony for EPA Carbon Pollution Standards for Existing Power Plants

Hi - My name is Michael Rahaman, a proud member of the Sierra Club, and I would like to submit my written 

testimony to the EPA concerning setting carbon pollution standards for power plants. 

First, a little about myself. I immigrated to this country from Guyana , South America, in 1985, coming first as 

a student of the University of Illinois, from which I graduated in 1988 with a B.Sc. in Accounting. That same 

year, I also sat and passed the CPA exam. I later attended De Paul University in Chicago, where I obtained 

professional qualifications to become a computer programmer. I have worked in the IT industry as a Senior 

Application Developer for over 15 years. 

I don't want to preach but nothing can be more important than preserving a healthy, habitable environment 

to ensure the continued existence of present and future generations of humans and all other living things on 

this planet. We must always follow the science, since science is the the only reliable, objective tool we have to 

inform our actions. If the science is a little ambiguous about certain important matters as it relates to the 

environment, because of current limited knowledge, we must always act on the side of caution and give the 

benefit of the doubt to the environment. 

However, as it relates to carbon pollution and its harmful effects, mainstream science is unambiguous. Just 

yesterday, the WMO (World Metereological Organization) announced that carbon dioxide and the other 

gasses that drive global warming increased to a record high in 2012. The harmful effects, such as rising ocean 

levels, are already being felt in the country of my birth, Guyana, which lies about a foot or more below sea 

level and where sea defenses such as dykes and seawalls are beginning to prove ineffective as over topping 

and flooding by the rising oceans are now occurring more frequently. 

Science has told us that mass extinctions of life have happened more than once on Earth in the distant past. 

We must do everything in our power to prevent another mass extinction of all life, including our own, from 

happening because of the effects of human activities. 

US power plants account for 40% of carbon pollution. We need standards desperately to limit this pollution. 

With smart thinking, the standards can be set in a way that it can be a win-win situation for both private 

industry and the environment at once. 

Thank you. 

Sincerely, 

Michael Rahaman 

5420 N Sheridan Rd., Unit 304, 

Chicago, IL 60640 

Tel.: 630-687-1393 
59

From: Ian Magargee [ian.magargee@gmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 1:39 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Regulating Carbon Emissions from US Power Plants

Dear EPA Representative: 

I have first-hand experience with extreme weather events associated with climate change. I lived in New York 

for both tropical storm Irene and hurricane Sandy. Shortly after Sandy dissipated, I spent my days cleaning out 

the basements and first floors of businesses in lower Manhattan and saw the incredible amount of damage and 

loss resulting from Sandy’s record setting 32-foot-plus waves. Neighborhoods were flattened in the Rockaways 

where people lived without power or permanent shelter for months. Redhook, Brooklyn was under water, as 

were traffic and subway tunnels. Now, a year later, local economies are still struggling to recover. Computer 

simulations reveal the particular track of hurricane Sandy to occur only once every approximately 714 years. If 

that’s the case, then why did we have such enormous storms travel similar courses up the East Coast in 2011 

and 12? I think a likely culprit is CO2 pollution. 

 

Prior to industrialization, the earth’s atmospheric concentration of CO2 never exceeded about 280ppm. We’re 

currently at about 394ppm, with a record setting 400ppm measured just this year in May. At the same time 

we’re setting such records, nearly 40% of carbon emissions in the US come from our under-regulated power 

plants. China and the US lead the world in global CO2 emissions, the US alone responsible for just over 20%, 

China responsible for 21%. Russia comes in at a distant 3rd with only 5.5%. In emissions per capita, we lead 

the world by far. For a country as wealthy and innovative as ours, this is shameful. 

 

While global surface temperatures have risen almost 1 degree Celsius in the last century, America is showing no 

significant leadership. With enormous global population growth, rapid industrialization of the third world, and 

slow progress in moving away from fossil fuel dependence in the developed world, we’re headed quickly 

toward a climate bubble. The symptoms are already showing, and within our next generation this bubble will 

burst with cataclysmic effect – a massive, runaway warming of the planet. Something needs to be done. We 

need strong carbon emission standards imposed on our power plants, now. And we need stronger support for 

wind and solar, shifting those energy sources to fill the primary, not supplementary, role in our energy 

production. Clean, renewable energy sources now account for 25% of Germany's power generation. We must 

follow their example. We need to flank the highway system in solar panel arrays to create a decentralized, 

abundant energy source that can almost single-handedly power our nation. We need to harness wind power in 

the Great Lakes. We need sharp regulations that can steer wealthy power-generating companies to reinvest, 

embracing clean energy production using their vast financial and mechanical capital. And as members of the 

federal government, we need action and activism on your part, as well as ours. Thank you. 

Sincerely, 
60

Ian Magargee 

450 W Melrose St 

Apt 538 

Chicago, IL 60657 
61

From: drupal_admin@epa.gov on behalf of Liz Mednick [EMednick@gmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 1:39 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Webform Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Submitted on Thu, 11/07/2013 - 13:38 

Submitted values are: 

Name: Liz Mednick 

Email: EMednick@gmail.com

Comments: 

Dear EPA, 

Thank you for your proposed carbon pollution regulations. I am sure that you will hear 

complaints from energy providers and others that these regulations will raise the price of 

energy. I'd like to make two points: 

First, the price of carbon pollution to the environment, our collective health, and the 

health and well-being of future generations who will have to live with the consequences of 

climate change, are incalculably large. 

Second, I am the owner of a 2359 square foot condominium apartment. My monthly electricity 

bill is around $34.00 a month, and that is using the most expensive renewable blend on offer 

from the Energy Coop. According to PECO, which delivers my electricity, I use 21 percent 

less than "efficient similar homes" and less than one third the energy typically used in 

"similar homes" 

nearby. I've done this without making big alterations or expensive purchases, just small, 

incremental changes such as using LED and flourescent bulbs, lowering the thermostat, cooking 

more efficiently, and air drying some of my clothes. We can all make these changes, but most 

people will not bother while energy companies and their customers receive what amounts to a 

subsidy in the form of cost-free damage to the air, the water, West Virginia's mountaintops, 

and the earth's climate. 

Please put all of your Carbon Pollution Standards into full force and effect as quickly as 

possible. We will all learn to cope. 

Thank you for your kind attention, 

Liz Mednick 

Web Area: Carbon Pollution Standards 
62

From: Marti Cockrell [marti.cockrell@gmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 1:10 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Comment on Carbon Pollution Standards for Existing Sources

Please limit carbon emissions from power plants! We have two people in our family with asthma, who have a 

terrible time breathing at certain times when they have to work outside. This must depend on the wind 

condtions, etc, and limiting the carbon emissions is vitally necessary! 

Also, the US needs to LEAD when it comes to making the world a better, healthier place for future generations, 

NOT in the direction of making it worse! 

Thank you for your consideration, 

Marti Cockrell 

2814 Mintwood Place 

Arlington, TX 

76016 
63

From: Jay Crossley [jcrossley@gmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 12:54 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Cc: Luke Metzger, Environment Texas Director; David Crossley; Lawrence Spence; Brandt 

Mannchen; Jaime Gonzalez; Paul Schechter; Matthias Jung; Jaime Lawson; Jody Blazek; Bob 

Randall; Lisa - MYR Lin; Nan Hildreth; Nancy Edwards; Steve - HPC-PWE Stelzer; Lisa Gray

Subject: Comment on Carbon Pollution Standards for Existing Sources

TO: United States Environmental Protection Agency 

RE: Comment on Carbon Pollution Standards for Existing Sources 

To whom it may concern: 

I live in Austin County, Texas twenty miles from the Fayette Power Project, a coal plant. I 

understand that you are in a public comment process on proposed regulations for existing 

power plants. I strongly support regulations that will properly assign the price of emissions 

to the source as well as measures to help plants reduce emissions. 

I believe that the continued perversion of the marketplace by the US Government neglecting 

its role to regulate externalities of power generation is having a negative effect on my 

family's health, the Texas economy, and that of the planet. The children of the Houston 

region suffer too much at the hands of this market perversion through current real negative 

effects, such as rates of asthma, to the long term risk to their ability to sustain the 

region in the face of climate change. 

The emissions of this plant - and all such existing coal power plants - are known to be 

contributing to climate change, along with various other negative effects, including local 

agricultural and health impacts. As a consumer who probably gets some of my electricity 

(through the Fayette Electric Cooperative) from this plant, I wish I was paying the full 

price for my electricity. The ongoing federal perversion of the marketplace is manipulating 

my decisions, making me waste more energy, and making substitute goods, such as solar, 

relatively more expensive. 

This continued market perversion is also a threat to the Houston energy economy and the State 

of Texas. Inadequate information and perversion in a market leads to inequality, inefficient 

decisions, and long term loss to the economy. 

Please act now to correct this situation. 

Sincerely, 

Jay Blazek Crossley 

2583 Witte-Schmid Road 

New Ulm, TX 78950 

jcrossley@gmail.com

713-244-4746 
64

From: Wendy Jo Harmston [srednew@sbcglobal.net]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 12:49 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Establish strong carbon pollution standards for power plants

Dear EPA, 

Thank you for conducting "listening sessions" across the country to allow people like me to 

share our thoughts on the upcoming carbon pollution standards. Though I was not able to 

attend a session in person I wanted to make my concerns known. 

Large coal-fired power plants remain a threat to lung health. The Midwest still has a large 

concentration of old, dirty coal power plants that produce far too much air pollution that 

both worsens climate change and affects our lung health. Smog and soot pollution created by 

these facilities already increases the number of asthma attacks, respiratory emergency room 

visits and hospitalizations and premature deaths. But emissions that drive climate change 

will only worsen the risk to vulnerable people in the Midwest. More extreme heat waves will 

put people living with lung disease at increased risk of illness or death; Hotter, longer 

summers will also worsen smog and soot pollution. Exposure to mold from extreme flooding and 

increased exposure to wildfire smoke driven by stronger droughts are other unacceptable lung 

health threats that are being increasingly driven by climate change. 

Carbon pollution is hurting our health and scientists say the threat is only growing larger 

with time, making action now critical to preserving our health and protecting the air we will 

leave future generations. For these reasons I urge the EPA to design and implement STRONG 

standards to curb carbon pollution from power plants that will make a significant difference 

in addressing climate change and in preserving human health. 

Sincerely, 

Wendy Jo Harmston 

3928 N Kenneth Avenue 

Chicago, IL 60641 
65

From: Patty Graham [patjanet59@hotmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 12:47 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Establish strong carbon pollution standards for power plants

Dear EPA, 

Thank you for conducting "listening sessions" across the country to allow people like me to 

share our thoughts on the upcoming carbon pollution standards. Though I was not able to 

attend a session in person I wanted to make my concerns known. 

Large coal-fired power plants remain a threat to lung health. The Midwest still has a large 

concentration of old, dirty coal power plants that produce far too much air pollution that 

both worsens climate change and affects our lung health. Smog and soot pollution created by 

these facilities already increases the number of asthma attacks, respiratory emergency room 

visits and hospitalizations and premature deaths. But emissions that drive climate change 

will only worsen the risk to vulnerable people in the Midwest. More extreme heat waves will 

put people living with lung disease at increased risk of illness or death; Hotter, longer 

summers will also worsen smog and soot pollution. Exposure to mold from extreme flooding and 

increased exposure to wildfire smoke driven by stronger droughts are other unacceptable lung 

health threats that are being increasingly driven by climate change. 

Carbon pollution is hurting our health and scientists say the threat is only growing larger 

with time, making action now critical to preserving our health and protecting the air we will 

leave future generations. For these reasons I urge the EPA to design and implement STRONG 

standards to curb carbon pollution from power plants that will make a significant difference 

in addressing climate change and in preserving human health. 

Sincerely, 

Patty Graham 

2315 N. 77th Ct. 

Elmwood Park, IL 60707 
66

From: Eva Lange [eval006@epix.net]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 12:43 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Carbon Pollution Limits

It has been a long standing conflict of interest between public health and safe use of 

technology versus profits of powerful industry. The way our environment has been degraded and 

polluted by the industry became a bold proof that industry's profits ARE a priority and 

public safety means nothing or very little to the top game players. 

I have always wondered where those polluting people would live if there is NO LIFE left on 

our planet as a result of their actions. 

 Have they secured other planets of our solar system or beyond for future living there? 

Or there is no planning or ability of foreseeing the results of massive destruction of our 

environment that has been taking place in ever increasing pace????????????? 

What sense does it make to maintain any regulatory agencies if they are rendered powerless by 

big $$$$$$$$$$ ? 

It is a very sad state of our human affairs, for we don't know how to function in harmony 

with the rest of life on our planet. We only know how to destroy it!!! 

Eva Lange M.D.,Ph.D. 

Sent from my iPad 
67

From: Daniel Dolan-Laughlin [ddolanlaughlin@gmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 12:40 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Establish strong carbon pollution standards for power plants

Dear EPA, 

Thank you for conducting "listening sessions" across the country to allow people like me to 

share our thoughts on the upcoming carbon pollution standards. Though I was not able to 

attend a session in person I wanted to make my concerns known. 

Large coal-fired power plants remain a threat to lung health. The Midwest still has a large 

concentration of old, dirty coal power plants that produce far too much air pollution that 

both worsens climate change and affects our lung health. Smog and soot pollution created by 

these facilities already increases the number of asthma attacks, respiratory emergency room 

visits and hospitalizations and premature deaths. But emissions that drive climate change 

will only worsen the risk to vulnerable people in the Midwest. More extreme heat waves will 

put people living with lung disease at increased risk of illness or death; Hotter, longer 

summers will also worsen smog and soot pollution. Exposure to mold from extreme flooding and 

increased exposure to wildfire smoke driven by stronger droughts are other unacceptable lung 

health threats that are being increasingly driven by climate change. 

Carbon pollution is hurting our health and scientists say the threat is only growing larger 

with time, making action now critical to preserving our health and protecting the air we will 

leave future generations. For these reasons I urge the EPA to design and implement STRONG 

standards to curb carbon pollution from power plants that will make a significant difference 

in addressing climate change and in preserving human health. 

Sincerely, 

Daniel Dolan-Laughlin 

326 W. Seminary Ave 

Wheaton, IL 60187 
68

From: Joy Perlman [legallink1717@aol.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 12:35 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Establish strong carbon pollution standards for power plants

Dear EPA, 

Thank you for conducting "listening sessions" across the country to allow people like me to 

share our thoughts on the upcoming carbon pollution standards. Though I was not able to 

attend a session in person I wanted to make my concerns known. 

Large coal-fired power plants remain a threat to lung health. The Midwest still has a large 

concentration of old, dirty coal power plants that produce far too much air pollution that 

both worsens climate change and affects our lung health. Smog and soot pollution created by 

these facilities already increases the number of asthma attacks, respiratory emergency room 

visits and hospitalizations and premature deaths. But emissions that drive climate change 

will only worsen the risk to vulnerable people in the Midwest. More extreme heat waves will 

put people living with lung disease at increased risk of illness or death; Hotter, longer 

summers will also worsen smog and soot pollution. Exposure to mold from extreme flooding and 

increased exposure to wildfire smoke driven by stronger droughts are other unacceptable lung 

health threats that are being increasingly driven by climate change. 

Carbon pollution is hurting our health and scientists say the threat is only growing larger 

with time, making action now critical to preserving our health and protecting the air we will 

leave future generations. For these reasons I urge the EPA to design and implement STRONG 

standards to curb carbon pollution from power plants that will make a significant difference 

in addressing climate change and in preserving human health. 

Sincerely, 

Joy Perlman 

711 Lakeside Circle Drive 

Wheeling, IL 60090 
69

From: Mary Hagele [mchagele@sbcglobal.net]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 12:32 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Establish strong carbon pollution standards for power plants

Dear EPA, 

Thank you for conducting "listening sessions" across the country to allow people like me to 

share our thoughts on the upcoming carbon pollution standards. Though I was not able to 

attend a session in person I wanted to make my concerns known. 

Large coal-fired power plants remain a threat to lung health. The Midwest still has a large 

concentration of old, dirty coal power plants that produce far too much air pollution that 

both worsens climate change and affects our lung health. Smog and soot pollution created by 

these facilities already increases the number of asthma attacks, respiratory emergency room 

visits and hospitalizations and premature deaths. But emissions that drive climate change 

will only worsen the risk to vulnerable people in the Midwest. More extreme heat waves will 

put people living with lung disease at increased risk of illness or death; Hotter, longer 

summers will also worsen smog and soot pollution. Exposure to mold from extreme flooding and 

increased exposure to wildfire smoke driven by stronger droughts are other unacceptable lung 

health threats that are being increasingly driven by climate change. 

Carbon pollution is hurting our health and scientists say the threat is only growing larger 

with time, making action now critical to preserving our health and protecting the air we will 

leave future generations. For these reasons I urge the EPA to design and implement STRONG 

standards to curb carbon pollution from power plants that will make a significant difference 

in addressing climate change and in preserving human health. 

Sincerely, 

Mary Hagele 

9236 Harding Ave 

Apt. 1 

Evanston, IL 60203 
70

From: Peggy Willis [methowpeggy@gmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 12:21 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: EPA Carbon Listening Sessions Input

Dear EPA Administrator, 

Thank you for the opportunity to provide input regarding carbon pollution. I urge adoption 

of a strong EPA policy regulating carbon emissions, especially from existing power plants 

which are responsible for 40% of current carbon pollution. 

Carbon pollution is increasing global warming and climate changes that impact future 

generations. Changes in habitat and growing seasons, impacts on mankind and other living 

creatures and predicted extinction of US polar bears within 50 years are a few examples of 

why the US needs to change direction and adopt a strong carbon pollution policy. 

We protect public health from mercury, lead, soot and other air pollution, but there are no 

public health safeguards from carbon pollution. 

Increased air pollution caused by carbon pollution results in thousands of premature deaths 

each year. It is estimated that 35,000 premature deaths could be prevented by implementation 

of strong carbon pollution standards. Elderly, children and other vulnerable populations are 

especially at risk from health effects of increased air pollution due to climate change. 

More than 120 organizations including the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American 

Lung Association are on record stating that climate change is a serious public health issue. 

We need a strong carbon pollution standard for existing power plants that will reduce carbon 

pollution by 35-40%. 

Peggy Willis 

Twisp, Washington 98856 

509 393-6797 

Sent from my iPhone 
71

From: Tim Riley [teriley162@gmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 12:20 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Comment on Carbon Pollution Standards for Existing Sources

As a resident of one of the regions producing both coal and energy through coal power plants (Carbon and 

Emery Counties, Utah), I am writing to express my support for higher standards on carbon pollution from coalfired power plants. We need to limit these emissions not just for global climate change, but also because of the 

impact on local communities. Please stand up for science and the average person in the face of some of the 

most powerful industries in the world. 

Dr. Tim Riley, 

Helper, UT 
72

From: drupal_admin@epa.gov on behalf of David E Steele [dvd.steele@yahoo.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 11:56 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Webform Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Submitted on Thu, 11/07/2013 - 11:56 

Submitted values are: 

Name: David E Steele 

Email: dvd.steele@yahoo.com

Comments: 

I am a voter strongly supporting EPA's proposed revised standards for carbon emissions from 

coal fired power plants. 

David E Steele 

8 Clarewood Mall 

Oakland CA 94618 

Web Area: Carbon Pollution Standards 
73

From: Aarati Kasturirangan [aarati.kasturirangan@gmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 11:55 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Set strict limits for carbon emission

Dear EPA, 

 

I am writing as a mother of two young children, a concerned citizen of Philadelphia, and a person who lives on 

this planet and sees the direct impact carbon emissions is having on our climate. I want my children to be able 

to breathe clean air, and I want to increase the chances that they will have long healthy lives on this planet. This 

will not happen if we do not cap carbon emissions now! We need strict standards for existing power plants and 

limits on the development of new power plants. We need bring the carbon in the atmosphere down to 350 parts 

per million in order to restore balance to our climate. We are all at risk and so we must all act. 

 

I appreciate the opportunity to express my views. 

-- 

In peace, Aarati (Arthi) 

 

Dr. Aarati Kasturirangan 

Community Psychologist 

773.307.9120 

aarati.kasturirangan@gmail.com

Check out my blog: aarati.kasturirangan.wordpress.com

"Whether you think you can or you think you can't, you are right." 
74

From: drupal_admin@epa.gov on behalf of James Stillwell [fjstillwell@gmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 11:39 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Webform Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Submitted on Thu, 11/07/2013 - 11:39 

Submitted values are: 

Name: James Stillwell 

Email: fjstillwell@gmail.com

Comments: 

Reducing carbon pollution from existing carbon plants is an urgent necessity. 

Anything the President and the EPA can do by executive order would be appreciated! 

Web Area: Carbon Pollution Standards 
75

From: Lisa Zaenger [lzang@pulmonaryexchange.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 11:37 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Establish strong carbon pollution standards for power plants

Dear EPA, 

Thank you for conducting "listening sessions" across the country to allow people like me to 

share our thoughts on the upcoming carbon pollution standards. Though I was not able to 

attend a session in person I wanted to make my concerns known. 

Large coal-fired power plants remain a threat to lung health. The Midwest still has a large 

concentration of old, dirty coal power plants that produce far too much air pollution that 

both worsens climate change and affects our lung health. Smog and soot pollution created by 

these facilities already increases the number of asthma attacks, respiratory emergency room 

visits and hospitalizations and premature deaths. But emissions that drive climate change 

will only worsen the risk to vulnerable people in the Midwest. More extreme heat waves will 

put people living with lung disease at increased risk of illness or death; Hotter, longer 

summers will also worsen smog and soot pollution. Exposure to mold from extreme flooding and 

increased exposure to wildfire smoke driven by stronger droughts are other unacceptable lung 

health threats that are being increasingly driven by climate change. 

Carbon pollution is hurting our health and scientists say the threat is only growing larger 

with time, making action now critical to preserving our health and protecting the air we will 

leave future generations. For these reasons I urge the EPA to design and implement STRONG 

standards to curb carbon pollution from power plants that will make a significant difference 

in addressing climate change and in preserving human health. 

Sincerely, 

Lisa Zaenger 

1601 Westminster Dr 

Apt 107 

Naperville, IL 60563 
76

From: Eileen Lowery [elowery@lungchicago.org]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 11:22 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Establish strong carbon pollution standards for power plants

Dear EPA, 

Thank you for conducting "listening sessions" across the country to allow people like me to 

share our thoughts on the upcoming carbon pollution standards. Though I was not able to 

attend a session in person I wanted to make my concerns known. 

Large coal-fired power plants remain a threat to lung health. The Midwest still has a large 

concentration of old, dirty coal power plants that produce far too much air pollution that 

both worsens climate change and affects our lung health. Smog and soot pollution created by 

these facilities already increases the number of asthma attacks, respiratory emergency room 

visits and hospitalizations and premature deaths. But emissions that drive climate change 

will only worsen the risk to vulnerable people in the Midwest. More extreme heat waves will 

put people living with lung disease at increased risk of illness or death; Hotter, longer 

summers will also worsen smog and soot pollution. Exposure to mold from extreme flooding and 

increased exposure to wildfire smoke driven by stronger droughts are other unacceptable lung 

health threats that are being increasingly driven by climate change. 

Carbon pollution is hurting our health and scientists say the threat is only growing larger 

with time, making action now critical to preserving our health and protecting the air we will 

leave future generations. For these reasons I urge the EPA to design and implement STRONG 

standards to curb carbon pollution from power plants that will make a significant difference 

in addressing climate change and in preserving human health. 

Sincerely, 

Eileen Lowery 

1502 Mulford St 

Evanston, IL 60202 
77

From: Margo Tuite [margoht@sbcglobal.net]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 11:21 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Establish strong carbon pollution standards for power plants

Dear EPA, 

Thank you for conducting "listening sessions" across the country to allow people like me to 

share our thoughts on the upcoming carbon pollution standards. Though I was not able to 

attend a session in person I wanted to make my concerns known. 

Large coal-fired power plants remain a threat to lung health. The Midwest still has a large 

concentration of old, dirty coal power plants that produce far too much air pollution that 

both worsens climate change and affects our lung health. Smog and soot pollution created by 

these facilities already increases the number of asthma attacks, respiratory emergency room 

visits and hospitalizations and premature deaths. But emissions that drive climate change 

will only worsen the risk to vulnerable people in the Midwest. More extreme heat waves will 

put people living with lung disease at increased risk of illness or death; Hotter, longer 

summers will also worsen smog and soot pollution. Exposure to mold from extreme flooding and 

increased exposure to wildfire smoke driven by stronger droughts are other unacceptable lung 

health threats that are being increasingly driven by climate change. 

Carbon pollution is hurting our health and scientists say the threat is only growing larger 

with time, making action now critical to preserving our health and protecting the air we will 

leave future generations. For these reasons I urge the EPA to design and implement STRONG 

standards to curb carbon pollution from power plants that will make a significant difference 

in addressing climate change and in preserving human health. 

Sincerely, 

Margo Tuite 

Sandburg 

Chicago, IL 60610 
78

From: Linda Harth [lharth@kr-law.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 11:18 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Establish strong carbon pollution standards for power plants

Dear EPA, 

Thank you for conducting "listening sessions" across the country to allow people like me to 

share our thoughts on the upcoming carbon pollution standards. Though I was not able to 

attend a session in person I wanted to make my concerns known. 

Large coal-fired power plants remain a threat to lung health. The Midwest still has a large 

concentration of old, dirty coal power plants that produce far too much air pollution that 

both worsens climate change and affects our lung health. Smog and soot pollution created by 

these facilities already increases the number of asthma attacks, respiratory emergency room 

visits and hospitalizations and premature deaths. But emissions that drive climate change 

will only worsen the risk to vulnerable people in the Midwest. More extreme heat waves will 

put people living with lung disease at increased risk of illness or death; Hotter, longer 

summers will also worsen smog and soot pollution. Exposure to mold from extreme flooding and 

increased exposure to wildfire smoke driven by stronger droughts are other unacceptable lung 

health threats that are being increasingly driven by climate change. 

Carbon pollution is hurting our health and scientists say the threat is only growing larger 

with time, making action now critical to preserving our health and protecting the air we will 

leave future generations. For these reasons I urge the EPA to design and implement STRONG 

standards to curb carbon pollution from power plants that will make a significant difference 

in addressing climate change and in preserving human health. 

Sincerely, 

Linda Harth 

5237 W Dakin Street 

Chicago, IL 60641 
79

From: drupal_admin@epa.gov on behalf of George Seielstad [g.seielstad@gmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 11:17 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Webform Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Submitted on Thu, 11/07/2013 - 11:17 

Submitted values are: 

Name: George Seielstad 

Email: g.seielstad@gmail.com

Comments: The new standards are overdue and, if anything, are too timid. 

Coal-burning is harmful to the entire planet, both because of its emissions of carbon dioxide 

and its mercury deposition. The world needs to tap renewable sources of energy. 

Web Area: Carbon Pollution Standards 
80

From: Northa Johnson [northajj@yahoo.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 11:15 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Establish strong carbon pollution standards for power plants

Dear EPA, 

Thank you for conducting "listening sessions" across the country to allow people like me to 

share our thoughts on the upcoming carbon pollution standards. Though I was not able to 

attend a session in person I wanted to make my concerns known. 

Large coal-fired power plants remain a threat to lung health. The Midwest still has a large 

concentration of old, dirty coal power plants that produce far too much air pollution that 

both worsens climate change and affects our lung health. Smog and soot pollution created by 

these facilities already increases the number of asthma attacks, respiratory emergency room 

visits and hospitalizations and premature deaths. But emissions that drive climate change 

will only worsen the risk to vulnerable people in the Midwest. More extreme heat waves will 

put people living with lung disease at increased risk of illness or death; Hotter, longer 

summers will also worsen smog and soot pollution. Exposure to mold from extreme flooding and 

increased exposure to wildfire smoke driven by stronger droughts are other unacceptable lung 

health threats that are being increasingly driven by climate change. 

Carbon pollution is hurting our health and scientists say the threat is only growing larger 

with time, making action now critical to preserving our health and protecting the air we will 

leave future generations. For these reasons I urge the EPA to design and implement STRONG 

standards to curb carbon pollution from power plants that will make a significant difference 

in addressing climate change and in preserving human health. 

Sincerely, 

Northa Johnson 

445 E Ohio St 

1105 

Chicago, IL 60611 
81

From: Judy Devine [jdevine818@gmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 11:13 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Establish strong carbon pollution standards for power plants

Dear EPA, 

Thank you for conducting "listening sessions" across the country to allow people like me to 

share our thoughts on the upcoming carbon pollution standards. Though I was not able to 

attend a session in person I wanted to make my concerns known. 

Large coal-fired power plants remain a threat to lung health. The Midwest still has a large 

concentration of old, dirty coal power plants that produce far too much air pollution that 

both worsens climate change and affects our lung health. Smog and soot pollution created by 

these facilities already increases the number of asthma attacks, respiratory emergency room 

visits and hospitalizations and premature deaths. But emissions that drive climate change 

will only worsen the risk to vulnerable people in the Midwest. More extreme heat waves will 

put people living with lung disease at increased risk of illness or death; Hotter, longer 

summers will also worsen smog and soot pollution. Exposure to mold from extreme flooding and 

increased exposure to wildfire smoke driven by stronger droughts are other unacceptable lung 

health threats that are being increasingly driven by climate change. 

Carbon pollution is hurting our health and scientists say the threat is only growing larger 

with time, making action now critical to preserving our health and protecting the air we will 

leave future generations. For these reasons I urge the EPA to design and implement STRONG 

standards to curb carbon pollution from power plants that will make a significant difference 

in addressing climate change and in preserving human health. 

Sincerely, 

Judy Devine 

3184 Teal Bay Ct. 

Aurora, IL 60503 
82

From: Colleen Bransfield [colleenbransfield@yahoo.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 11:12 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Establish strong carbon pollution standards for power plants

Dear EPA, 

Thank you for conducting "listening sessions" across the country to allow people like me to 

share our thoughts on the upcoming carbon pollution standards. Though I was not able to 

attend a session in person I wanted to make my concerns known. 

Large coal-fired power plants remain a threat to lung health. The Midwest still has a large 

concentration of old, dirty coal power plants that produce far too much air pollution that 

both worsens climate change and affects our lung health. Smog and soot pollution created by 

these facilities already increases the number of asthma attacks, respiratory emergency room 

visits and hospitalizations and premature deaths. But emissions that drive climate change 

will only worsen the risk to vulnerable people in the Midwest. More extreme heat waves will 

put people living with lung disease at increased risk of illness or death; Hotter, longer 

summers will also worsen smog and soot pollution. Exposure to mold from extreme flooding and 

increased exposure to wildfire smoke driven by stronger droughts are other unacceptable lung 

health threats that are being increasingly driven by climate change. 

Carbon pollution is hurting our health and scientists say the threat is only growing larger 

with time, making action now critical to preserving our health and protecting the air we will 

leave future generations. For these reasons I urge the EPA to design and implement STRONG 

standards to curb carbon pollution from power plants that will make a significant difference 

in addressing climate change and in preserving human health. 

Sincerely, 

Colleen Bransfield 

2020 N Lincoln Park W 

Chicago, IL 60614 
83

From: Dorothy Williams [dorwil16@sbcglobal.net]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 11:10 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Establish strong carbon pollution standards for power plants

Dear EPA, 

Thank you for conducting "listening sessions" across the country to allow people like me to 

share our thoughts on the upcoming carbon pollution standards. Though I was not able to 

attend a session in person I wanted to make my concerns known. 

Large coal-fired power plants remain a threat to lung health. The Midwest still has a large 

concentration of old, dirty coal power plants that produce far too much air pollution that 

both worsens climate change and affects our lung health. Smog and soot pollution created by 

these facilities already increases the number of asthma attacks, respiratory emergency room 

visits and hospitalizations and premature deaths. But emissions that drive climate change 

will only worsen the risk to vulnerable people in the Midwest. More extreme heat waves will 

put people living with lung disease at increased risk of illness or death; Hotter, longer 

summers will also worsen smog and soot pollution. Exposure to mold from extreme flooding and 

increased exposure to wildfire smoke driven by stronger droughts are other unacceptable lung 

health threats that are being increasingly driven by climate change. 

Carbon pollution is hurting our health and scientists say the threat is only growing larger 

with time, making action now critical to preserving our health and protecting the air we will 

leave future generations. For these reasons I urge the EPA to design and implement STRONG 

standards to curb carbon pollution from power plants that will make a significant difference 

in addressing climate change and in preserving human health. 

Sincerely, 

Dorothy Williams 

15916 Minerva Ave. 

South Holland, IL 60473 
84

From: Chris Gronkiewicz [cgronkiewicz@rcn.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 11:10 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Establish strong carbon pollution standards for power plants

Dear EPA, 

Thank you for conducting "listening sessions" across the country to allow people like me to 

share our thoughts on the upcoming carbon pollution standards. Though I was not able to 

attend a session in person I wanted to make my concerns known. 

Large coal-fired power plants remain a threat to lung health. The Midwest still has a large 

concentration of old, dirty coal power plants that produce far too much air pollution that 

both worsens climate change and affects our lung health. Smog and soot pollution created by 

these facilities already increases the number of asthma attacks, respiratory emergency room 

visits and hospitalizations and premature deaths. But emissions that drive climate change 

will only worsen the risk to vulnerable people in the Midwest. More extreme heat waves will 

put people living with lung disease at increased risk of illness or death; Hotter, longer 

summers will also worsen smog and soot pollution. Exposure to mold from extreme flooding and 

increased exposure to wildfire smoke driven by stronger droughts are other unacceptable lung 

health threats that are being increasingly driven by climate change. 

Carbon pollution is hurting our health and scientists say the threat is only growing larger 

with time, making action now critical to preserving our health and protecting the air we will 

leave future generations. For these reasons I urge the EPA to design and implement STRONG 

standards to curb carbon pollution from power plants that will make a significant difference 

in addressing climate change and in preserving human health. 

Sincerely, 

Chris Gronkiewicz 

652 W. Buena Ave. 

Apt. 4 

Chicago, IL 60613 
85

From: Mary Mathews [timmary747@aol.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 10:54 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Establish strong carbon pollution standards for power plants

Dear EPA, 

Thank you for conducting "listening sessions" across the country to allow people like me to 

share our thoughts on the upcoming carbon pollution standards. Though I was not able to 

attend a session in person I wanted to make my concerns known. 

Large coal-fired power plants remain a threat to lung health. The Midwest still has a large 

concentration of old, dirty coal power plants that produce far too much air pollution that 

both worsens climate change and affects our lung health. Smog and soot pollution created by 

these facilities already increases the number of asthma attacks, respiratory emergency room 

visits and hospitalizations and premature deaths. But emissions that drive climate change 

will only worsen the risk to vulnerable people in the Midwest. More extreme heat waves will 

put people living with lung disease at increased risk of illness or death; Hotter, longer 

summers will also worsen smog and soot pollution. Exposure to mold from extreme flooding and 

increased exposure to wildfire smoke driven by stronger droughts are other unacceptable lung 

health threats that are being increasingly driven by climate change. 

Carbon pollution is hurting our health and scientists say the threat is only growing larger 

with time, making action now critical to preserving our health and protecting the air we will 

leave future generations. For these reasons I urge the EPA to design and implement STRONG 

standards to curb carbon pollution from power plants that will make a significant difference 

in addressing climate change and in preserving human health. 

Sincerely, 

Mary Mathews 

1111 Waukegan Rd 

Lake Forest, IL 60045 
86

From: Teresa Safron [tsafron@soldinger.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 10:53 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Establish strong carbon pollution standards for power plants

Dear EPA, 

Thank you for conducting "listening sessions" across the country to allow people like me to 

share our thoughts on the upcoming carbon pollution standards. Though I was not able to 

attend a session in person I wanted to make my concerns known. 

Large coal-fired power plants remain a threat to lung health. The Midwest still has a large 

concentration of old, dirty coal power plants that produce far too much air pollution that 

both worsens climate change and affects our lung health. Smog and soot pollution created by 

these facilities already increases the number of asthma attacks, respiratory emergency room 

visits and hospitalizations and premature deaths. But emissions that drive climate change 

will only worsen the risk to vulnerable people in the Midwest. More extreme heat waves will 

put people living with lung disease at increased risk of illness or death; Hotter, longer 

summers will also worsen smog and soot pollution. Exposure to mold from extreme flooding and 

increased exposure to wildfire smoke driven by stronger droughts are other unacceptable lung 

health threats that are being increasingly driven by climate change. 

Carbon pollution is hurting our health and scientists say the threat is only growing larger 

with time, making action now critical to preserving our health and protecting the air we will 

leave future generations. For these reasons I urge the EPA to design and implement STRONG 

standards to curb carbon pollution from power plants that will make a significant difference 

in addressing climate change and in preserving human health. 

Sincerely, 

Teresa Safron 

151 South Walnut Street 

Palatine, IL 60067 
87

From: Sean Maloney [Maloney88@hotmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 10:53 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Asthmatic urging strong carbon standards for power plants

Dear EPA, 

I have asthma and air quality is of particular concern to me. 

Thank you for conducting "listening sessions" across the country to allow people like me to 

share our thoughts on the upcoming carbon pollution standards. Though I was not able to 

attend a session in person I wanted to make my concerns known. 

Large coal-fired power plants remain a threat to lung health. The Midwest still has a large 

concentration of old, dirty coal power plants that produce far too much air pollution that 

both worsens climate change and affects our lung health. Smog and soot pollution created by 

these facilities already increases the number of asthma attacks, respiratory emergency room 

visits and hospitalizations and premature deaths. But emissions that drive climate change 

will only worsen the risk to vulnerable people in the Midwest. More extreme heat waves will 

put people living with lung disease at increased risk of illness or death; Hotter, longer 

summers will also worsen smog and soot pollution. Exposure to mold from extreme flooding and 

increased exposure to wildfire smoke driven by stronger droughts are other unacceptable lung 

health threats that are being increasingly driven by climate change. 

Carbon pollution is hurting our health and scientists say the threat is only growing larger 

with time, making action now critical to preserving our health and protecting the air we will 

leave future generations. For these reasons I urge the EPA to design and implement STRONG 

standards to curb carbon pollution from power plants that will make a significant difference 

in addressing climate change and in preserving human health. 

Sincerely, 

Sean Maloney 

9533 S Clifton Park Avenue 

Evergreen Park, IL 60805 
88

From: Laiah Factor [laiah.factor@gmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 10:48 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Establish strong carbon pollution standards for power plants

Dear EPA, 

Thank you for conducting "listening sessions" across the country to allow people like me to 

share our thoughts on the upcoming carbon pollution standards. Though I was not able to 

attend a session in person I wanted to make my concerns known. 

Large coal-fired power plants remain a threat to lung health. The Midwest still has a large 

concentration of old, dirty coal power plants that produce far too much air pollution that 

both worsens climate change and affects our lung health. Smog and soot pollution created by 

these facilities already increases the number of asthma attacks, respiratory emergency room 

visits and hospitalizations and premature deaths. But emissions that drive climate change 

will only worsen the risk to vulnerable people in the Midwest. More extreme heat waves will 

put people living with lung disease at increased risk of illness or death; Hotter, longer 

summers will also worsen smog and soot pollution. Exposure to mold from extreme flooding and 

increased exposure to wildfire smoke driven by stronger droughts are other unacceptable lung 

health threats that are being increasingly driven by climate change. 

Carbon pollution is hurting our health and scientists say the threat is only growing larger 

with time, making action now critical to preserving our health and protecting the air we will 

leave future generations. For these reasons I urge the EPA to design and implement STRONG 

standards to curb carbon pollution from power plants that will make a significant difference 

in addressing climate change and in preserving human health. 

Sincerely, 

Laiah Factor 

Laiah Factor 

800 Sherwood Rd 

La Grange Park, IL 60526 
89

From: Jeff Weiss [jeffreyw360@gmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 10:47 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Establish strong carbon pollution standards for power plants

Dear EPA, 

Thank you for conducting "listening sessions" across the country to allow people like me to 

share our thoughts on the upcoming carbon pollution standards. Though I was not able to 

attend a session in person I wanted to make my concerns known. 

Large coal-fired power plants remain a threat to lung health. The Midwest still has a large 

concentration of old, dirty coal power plants that produce far too much air pollution that 

both worsens climate change and affects our lung health. Smog and soot pollution created by 

these facilities already increases the number of asthma attacks, respiratory emergency room 

visits and hospitalizations and premature deaths. But emissions that drive climate change 

will only worsen the risk to vulnerable people in the Midwest. More extreme heat waves will 

put people living with lung disease at increased risk of illness or death; Hotter, longer 

summers will also worsen smog and soot pollution. Exposure to mold from extreme flooding and 

increased exposure to wildfire smoke driven by stronger droughts are other unacceptable lung 

health threats that are being increasingly driven by climate change. 

Carbon pollution is hurting our health and scientists say the threat is only growing larger 

with time, making action now critical to preserving our health and protecting the air we will 

leave future generations. For these reasons I urge the EPA to design and implement STRONG 

standards to curb carbon pollution from power plants that will make a significant difference 

in addressing climate change and in preserving human health. 

Sincerely, 

Jeff Weiss 

360 W Illinois St Apt 416 

Chicago, IL 60654 
90

From: drupal_admin@epa.gov on behalf of Desiree Fleck [greenearthalive@gmail.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 10:14 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Webform Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Submitted on Thu, 11/07/2013 - 10:13 

Submitted values are: 

Name: Desiree Fleck 

Email: greenearthalive@gmail.com

Comments: The biggest problem is that we are still using power plants. They are obviously 

threatening our environment in a very negative way. There's no question about it. The whole 

backbone of power plants is greed and insanity. 

Can we just stop using these horribly destructive energy sources and utilize much safer 

methods like solar, wind, and the many other sources that have been found? 

Web Area: Carbon Pollution Standards 
91

From: Tim Hesterberg [enviro@timhesterberg.net]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 10:12 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Need action on climate change

I am writing today in support of strong action to reduce global 

warming emissions, from power plants and otherwise. 

I am a statistician. I remember the old so-called "uncertainty" about 

whether smoking causes cancer. There was good science and clear 

statistical evidence for the harm, but tobacco companies and a few 

hired scientists managed to delay action by spreading doubt, and 

people kept dying. 

Now we have good science and data and overwhelming scientific consensus 

that climate change due to human activity is happening, causing harm, 

and accelerating. 

Don't let a few deniers delay action. 

The only uncertainty left is just how bad it will be, and that is no 

excuse for inaction. If you're driving too fast and are about 

to plow into a crowd of schoolchildren, do you keep going full-speed 

ahead because you don't know how many of them you'll kill? 

Oysters are dying. Trees are dying. Coral is dying. Polar bears 

are dying. Crops are dying. And people are dying. 

It is time to act. We need to get off coal, 

and replace it with energy conservation and renewable resources. 

A personal note - at my mom's farm in Iowa, our old family farm, she 

couldn't get anything planted this year because of weather; that has 

never happened before. It is time to act. 

Tim Hesterberg, Ph.D. 

2628 31st Ave W 

Seattle, WA 98199 
92

From: Gaytan, Jackie [Jacqueline.Gaytan@trane.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 10:05 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: **********Im not the only one I promise******

Please please please bring back clean airಹಹಹ.nothing ಹNOTHING is more important to our survival. We 

depend on others to be our voice ದ please be the voice we need to hear.

CO2 emissions rose from about 415,000 metric tons in 2011 to close to 525,000 metric tons last year in 

Dallas/Fort Worth. We donಬt have another planet to move to. I should be fighting for a better education for my 

children not clean air for them in their future.

Thank you for reading!!

 

The information contained in this message is privileged and intended only for the recipients named. If the reader is not a representative of the intended recipient, 

any review, dissemination or copying of this message or the information it contains is prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please immediately 

notify the sender, and delete the original message and attachments.
93

From: nancy hansen [nancy@glenwood-gardens.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 9:52 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Contact Us Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Concerns and comments re Carbon Pollution Standards: 

I, and many others, are concerned to a point of disbelief when we see "business as usual" 

going on in industry and government re the issue of the extreme amounts of carbons being 

released into the atmosphere. This is, wish I could think of better words, but it is insane, 

having the amount of information and facts available today. 

I am concerned because if we do not act now, today, it will become a much worsened situation 

to control. 

Scientific studies are numerous. I can quote what I've read, but I believe you know all of 

these. We do know species are dying at an alarming rate, soon it will be humans along with 

these other species. In fact, that is happening already, particularly in undeveloped areas, 

due to pollution and a world unfit to live in. 

My biggest concern is that the people who represent us are not standing up and saying "NO" 

I am older and have seen enough to 

know that even in a period of difficult times earlier, the sentiment was not the same. 

Reason was more prevalent. Today, facts are presented and lawmakers and government are 

pushed so hard away from the truth that maybe they don't know the difference anymore. 

I see that "big oil" will have a difficult time without revenue, so why not help them to move 

towards alternate energy solutions? They could be given incentives to do this. We know the 

money to do this is there. So, why not try giving up some of the technology to them, if they 

will, in turn, help to create a better planet? 

Major power companies could certainly be instrumental in a process such as this. Not easy, 

but I am trusting that there are some out there who use reason to make their judgments. 

Giving up the norm of a century could not be easy. 

And, we've all been just as guilty in the use of so much carbon. 

Higher penalties need to be put in place for any pollution caused by exports. Selling to 

other countries and polluting in the process does not make any sense at all. 

Thank you for listening. 

Nancy Hansen 

nancy@glenwood-gardens.com

15015 Owl Place SW 

Port Orchard, Wa 98367 

mailing address: 

PO Box 692 

Burley, WA 98322 
94

From: kim feil [kimfeil@sbcglobal.net]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 9:47 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: comments for Dallas Listening session for Co2

I have dedicated the last 4 ys of my life w/o pay to report my findings of fracking harm on my 

blog....but alas I couldn’t stop Chesapeake from drilling 2 blocks from my home and now my 

husband got cancer and my teen has adrenal tumor biomarkers. 

 

Making Coal go away for NG is not the answer to avert global warming...we need a paradigm shift away from ALL fossil fuels... 

1) We need to KILL THE GRAND FATHERING of EXISTING COAL plants for starters because reducing the NEW plant’s C02 by 39% while ignoring existing plant’s CO2 is wreckless to our economy now that health care costs will now be paid for by the government through Obamacare. 

2) We need to start measuring economic growth as a NEGATIVE because industrial & manufacturing processes is a zero sum game to the environment. 

3) Because power plants will switch back and fourth from NG to Coal due to which ever is currently cheaper, we must cut off all Gov subsidies to fossil fuel industries and demand payback of 5 times (83%) to correct the disparity of what has been withheld from fast tracking renewables if we are to survive as a species.

 

Kim Feil 

http://barnettshalehell.wordpress.com/ 

TEX LG. CODE ANN. A§ 253.005 : Texas Statutes – Section 253.005: LEASE OF OIL, GAS, OR 

MINERAL LAND 

“(c) A well may not be drilled in the thickly settled part of the municipality..” 

Texas Administrative Code, Title 30, Part 1, Chapter 101, Subchapter A, 

Rule 101.4, Environmental Quality, Nuisance 

No person shall discharge from any source whatsoever one or more 

air contaminants or combinations thereof, in such concentration and 

of such duration as are or may tend to be injurious to or to adversely 

affect human health or welfare, animal life, vegetation, or property, or 

as to interfere with the normal use and enjoyment of animal life, vegetation, 

or property. 
95

From: Ryan K [wrench_one@msn.com]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 9:12 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Carbon Capture

I am employed by a coal mining company in OHIO, I work hard everyday to support my family. 

WE have no need for government assisance via food stamps or REGULATONS that could someday 

negatively affect my livelyhood. We the coal miners are hard working, TAX PAYING AMERICANS. 

 

The EPA has arbitrarily assigned a cost to CO2 when they way the benefits of regulation against the costs to 

the economy. That arbitrary assignment does not make any true economic sense and is simply wrong, false, 

and improper. 

 

The poorest people in America spend the largest percentage of thier income on energy, i.e., heat for thier 

homes, gas for thier cars, and electricity for lights and refridgerators. Anything increasing the cost of these 

basic necessities of life greatly impacts them and is simply wrong and not in anyones best interest. 

 

Cheap afforable energy is one of the key factors that has made our Country great. The great American way of 

life, 

and all of the freedoms that go with it, is now in great danger from over regulation of government. 

 

You, who have been kind enough to read this message, are also at risk. Let me ask you, Can you afford higher 

gas prices? higher electric bills? Do you worry about the future of your children? Or Grand children. 

 

Let US BURN COAL AND BE FREE. 

 

 

Ryan Keesey 

Cadiz, Ohio 

 

 

 

 
96

From: Laurie Cummings [mail@changemail.org]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 8:47 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: I just signed "EPA: Limit CO2 Emissions From Existing Power Plants"

Dear EPA, 

I just signed Solve The Climate Crisis's petition "EPA: Limit CO2 Emissions From Existing Power Plants" on 

Change.org. 

I strongly support strict limits on carbon pollution from existing power plants. Reducing greenhouse gas 

emissions from both new and existing power plants is vital if we are going to avoid the worst effects of climate 

change. 

Sincerely, 

Laurie Cummings norwich, New York 

There are now 2 signatures on this petition. Read reasons why people are signing, and respond to Solve The 

Climate Crisis by clicking here: 

http://www.change.org/petitions/epa-limit-co2-emissions-from-existing-powerplants/responses/new?response=1e2ea64ba3d0 

Right-click 

here to 

download 

pictures. To 

help protect 

your privacy, 

Outlo ok 

prevented 

auto matic 

download of 

this picture 

from the 

Internet.
97

From: Environmental Law and Policy Center [elpcinfo@elpc.org] on behalf of John Rhyne [rhynej@sbcglobal.net]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 3:27 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: It's time for strong carbon standards

Nov 7, 2013 

U.S. EPA 

Dear EPA, 

Thank you for conducting "listening sessions" across the country to allow citizens like 

myself to share our thoughts on the upcoming carbon pollution standards. I was pleased when 

President Obama announced his Climate Action Plan in June, and I hope U.S. EPA follows 

through with aggressive carbon pollution reduction standards that will make a difference in 

our fight against climate change. 

This is especially important in the Midwest, where we have a large concentration of old, 

dirty coal power plants that produce a lot of air pollution that contributes to our climate 

change problems and that affects our health. 

Climate change impacts are already starting to hurt people in the Midwest. More days of 

extreme heat are hard in old cities like Chicago, where lots of folks have asthma and other 

respiratory issues and where lots of folks don't have access to air conditioning. It's also 

very hard on Midwestern farmers, who deal with droughts one year and floods the next -- and 

that, in turn, can affect food prices for everyone. 

This is hurting our health and hurting our pocketbooks. And it's only going to get worse 

unless we do something about it. That's why I hope the U.S. EPA designs STRONG standards to 

curb carbon pollution. 

Sincerely, 

Mr. John Rhyne 

2423 Edison St 

Gary, IN 46406-2451 

(219) 576-2710 
98

From: Mike Vandeman [mjvande@pacbell.net]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 12:28 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Carbon Emissions

Please do everything in your power (no pun intended) to reduce carbon emissions! With the advent of the 

electric-assist bicycle, there are no longer any excuses for most of the population to get rid of their car and use a 

bicycle instead. (Yes, it really is that simple!) Insulation can keep homes warm in the winter and cool in the 

summer. A simple switch (or power strip) can totally eliminate all "vampire power". The U.S. can, and should, 

reduce its carbon footprint overnight! 

-- 

I am working on creating wildlife habitat that is off-limits to humans ("pure habitat"). 

Want to help? (I spent the previous 8 years fighting auto dependence and road construction.) 

Please don't put a cell phone next to any part of your body that you are fond of! 

http://mjvande.nfshost.com
99

From: drupal_admin@epa.gov on behalf of Sharon Larson [ms06rn64lsv65@sbcglobal.net]

Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 12:03 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Webform Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Submitted on Thu, 11/07/2013 - 00:02 

Submitted values are: 

Name: Sharon Larson 

Email: ms06rn64lsv65@sbcglobal.net

Comments: 

Hello: 

I favor the use of clean coal technology in the production of electricity. 

It has a record of reducing carbon pollution while providing affordable electricity. There 

is no other comparable source of electricity production which would not bankrupt American 

citizen users. 

Web Area: Carbon Pollution Standards 
100

From: drupal_admin@epa.gov on behalf of David Borglum [borglumdavid50@gmail.com]

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 10:55 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Webform Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Submitted on Wed, 11/06/2013 - 22:55 

Submitted values are: 

Name: David Borglum 

Email: borglumdavid50@gmail.com

Comments: Please do everything possible to significantly reduce carbon 

pollution-- your stand will be a blessing to my children and all children. 

Also, please discontinue allowing hydraulic fracturing off the California coastline, which 

puts marine life as well as humans at risk. 

Web Area: Carbon Pollution Standards 
101

From: Gail Mershon [gaildmershon@gmail.com]

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 10:45 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Regulating GHG emissions

Thank you for reading my comments. 

I work in Philadelphia with young children (ages 3-5), visiting them in their homes, pre-schools, Headstarts, etc. 

any of these children suffer from asthma. They are frequently ill with asthma attacks, which I have noticed 

correspond with "high" pollution alerts in the news. On the day after an asthma attack I have noticed these 

children are frequently hyperexcitable, have difficulty concentrating, and cannot sit still, which is related to the 

medication (side effects) given during asthma attacks. As these children enter elementary school, it is important 

that they do not have frequent absences and are able to attend to learning, in order to have the best opportunity 

to succeed. I am asking you, on their behalf, to impose the strictest standards on GHG emissions. It is simply 

unconscionable for corporations to profit from the suffering of children and the pollution of our one and only 

planet. 

In addition, I have seen firsthand how parents of these children are affected by time lost from work when they 

must stay home to care for a sick child. In the past year, I know personally 3 women who have lost their jobs 

due to absences related to caring for their children during and after asthma attacks. The cost to our economy of 

lost work days is another serious consideration. For these economic reasons, I am asking you to impose the 

strictest standards possible. 

Finally, I am an asthma sufferer. Since moving to the Philadelphia area 4 years ago, I have had more frequent 

attacks, have lost days to work due to complications from asthma, and am restricted in the number of days each 

year that I am able to enjoy being outdoors for my health and well being. On my behalf, I ask you to impose the 

strictest standards on GHG emissions. from existing power plants. 

Thank you for the work you do and for caring about the health of our children and families. 

Sincerely, 

Gail Mershon 

940 E Pleasant St 

Wyndmoor, PA 19038 
102

From: Environmental Law and Policy Center [elpcinfo@elpc.org] on behalf of Alexandra Davila 

[agnoske@aol.com]

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 10:26 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: It's time for strong carbon standards

Nov 6, 2013 

U.S. EPA 

Dear EPA, 

Thank you for conducting "listening sessions" across the country to allow citizens like 

myself to share our thoughts on the upcoming carbon pollution standards. I was pleased when 

President Obama announced his Climate Action Plan in June, and I hope U.S. EPA follows 

through with aggressive carbon pollution reduction standards that will make a difference in 

our fight against climate change. 

This is especially important in the Midwest, where we have a large concentration of old, 

dirty coal power plants that produce a lot of air pollution that contributes to our climate 

change problems and that affects our health. 

Climate change impacts are already starting to hurt people in the Midwest. More days of 

extreme heat are hard in old cities like Chicago, where lots of folks have asthma and other 

respiratory issues and where lots of folks don't have access to air conditioning. It's also 

very hard on Midwestern farmers, who deal with droughts one year and floods the next -- and 

that, in turn, can affect food prices for everyone. 

This is hurting our health and hurting our pocketbooks. And it's only going to get worse 

unless we do something about it. That's why I hope the U.S. EPA designs STRONG standards to 

curb carbon pollution. 

Sincerely, 

Mrs. Alexandra Davila 

5031 N Bernard St 

Chicago, IL 60625-4915 
103

From: drupal_admin@epa.gov on behalf of Sonya Myers [sonyamyersdvm@yahoo.com]

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 10:22 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Webform Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Submitted on Wed, 11/06/2013 - 22:21 

Submitted values are: 

Name: Sonya Myers 

Email: sonyamyersdvm@yahoo.com

Comments: We need to do everything we possibly can to reduce carbon emissions if we are to 

have any chance of mitigating environmental and resource damage caused by global warming and 

climate change caused by carbon pollution. 

Please be as strict as possible in limiting carbon emissions of current power plants. If we 

don't act now and act strong, we will be paying the price later. 

Web Area: Carbon Pollution Standards 
104

From: drupal_admin@epa.gov on behalf of Denis Martynowych [denismarty@gmail.com]

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 10:16 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Webform Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Submitted on Wed, 11/06/2013 - 22:16 

Submitted values are: 

Name: Denis Martynowych 

Email: denismarty@gmail.com

Comments: Coal is bad for our health, bad for our communities, and bad for the climate. From 

Appalachia, where the tops of mountains are blown off to mine coal, to communities living 

with respiratory diseases and cancers in the shadow of power plants, the coal industry has 

run ragged over our country. 

Coal CEOs continue to reap profits while harming f workers and the planet -- and it's past 

time to move our country and our planet beyond fossil fuels. 

Web Area: Carbon Pollution Standards 
105

From: Wanda Ballentine [wsb70@comcast.net]

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 10:00 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards for Existing Sources

Hello, EPA: 

We should, of course, cut fossil fuels way, way back - like 20 years ago, as we are now 

experiencing what greenhouse gases were released back then. We should cut back to nothing - 

ha, ha - but maybe it will help people further down the line. But now, of course, we have 

methane hydrates coming up from Siberia and other parts of the ocean 

- which is terrifying. 

Yet, still, the oil companies are still digging and drilling, though the big ones have enough 

to fry the planet right now. We look at tar sands and fracking as a "bridge" to cleaner 

fuels, when they should stop. We have to keep the economy going, despite the fact that it is 

in many, many ways killing all species - so one would think that a planet without this 

wonderful "economy" is somehow better than a dead planet. The environment can get along just 

fine without a healthy economy - the reverse is not true. 

I have been studying climate change for at least ten years, and from all I can gather we've 

already passed the tipping points. My grandchildren - all grandchildren of all species have 

nothing to look forward to. 

However, if you can reduce fossil fuels a little, please, please do. 

Wanda S. Ballentine 

1181 Edgcumbe Rd., #314 

St. Paul, MN 55105- 2833 

651-200-3093 
106

From: Diane Simpson [simpsond65@gmail.com]

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 9:29 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Please Put in Stronger Rules Against Carbon Pollution!

Good morning, 

I'm sorry I was unable to go to the public listening session in Boston about your new rules on coal-fired power 

plants. These new EPA rules, if done well, could be a very useful way to reduce climate pollution in the coming 

years. I hope you read the story in last week's Globe about a 2% expected drop worldwide in food production 

due to climate change! Stopping or reducing pollution from coal-fired power plants could go a long way to 

mitigating this crisis. 

Thanks for listening and I hope you can implement those new rules ASAP. 

--Diane(:^]

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

DIANE SIMPSON

BOARD ADMINISTRATOR-HARVEST CO-OP MARKET

SECRETARY-TREASURER 

BROOKSIDE NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION

617-522-2209 | SIMPSOND65@GMAIL.COM
107

From: Becky Burmester [becky.burmester@mindspring.com]

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 8:49 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: no more dirty power plants

I support the EPA's regulating the carbon pollution from existing power plants and want more 

bold actions like it to transition to a renewable future. We can't afford dirty air. 

Becky Burmester 

Sent from my iPad 
108

From: Koehn, Ashlie [ashliekoehn@ku.edu]

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 7:48 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Coal Standard Inputs

To whom it may concern, 

 After attending the EPA public hearing in Lenexa, Kansas, I would like to vocalize how climate change is effecting 

people in the Midwest to which, I myself, can give testimony. I come from a small, rural Kansas town of 260 and my 

friends and family, farmers and ranchers, have already been increasingly concerned with the recent droughts that have 

scorched their lands and damaged their crops. These concerns multiply when looking to my relatives that live in Western 

Kansas who face increased concerns of water depletion from the aquifer on which they rely. If nothing is done to curb 

climate change, I fear that the people I love who desire to carry on their family’s traditions of growing wheat, milo, corn 

or beans will instead be cultivating rock gardens in a desert. 

 

 Climate change has already begun to displace people and lead to environmental disasters such as Hurricane Sandy. 

We in the United States have seen the devastating harm to communities, homes and lives in situations like the Colorado 

wildfires. As for myself, I eventually hope have a career in global health and, despite climate change dramatically 

increasing my job security, America, an international leader in the production of CO2, should take the lead on reducing 

these impacts starting now. I ask the EPA to expediently implement new and harsher regulations on both existing and 

future coal power plants. 

Best, 

Ashlie Koehn 
109

From: drupal_admin@epa.gov on behalf of Barbara Gaman [bgaman@hotmail.com]

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 7:20 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Webform Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Submitted on Wed, 11/06/2013 - 19:20 

Submitted values are: 

Name: Barbara Gaman 

Email: bgaman@hotmail.com

Comments: 

I feel it is past time to put our focus on renewable energy sources. Coal is not a good idea, 

fracking an environmental disaster and oil is limited in scope. Let's devote ourselves to 

clean, green sources of energy from here on out. 

Thank you. 

Web Area: Carbon Pollution Standards 
110

From: Gerilyn Denny [gdenny@sonic.net]

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 6:57 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Thoughts on Carbon Pollution

Hello there: I'm a Managing Director and Head of Platform Sales at a Big Data Analytics 

start up here in the Bay area and I'd like to provide my thoughts on your efforts to curb 

carbon pollution and keep our air clean. I believe it is incumbent upon regulators to put in 

place the most stringent regulations possible by placing a carbon tax or implementing a fee 

and dividend policy on carbon emissions polluters immediately. Over the past several years 

I've learned about Climate Change, the efforts of the Fossil Fuel industry to fund a denial 

campaign about the existence of AGW and have become more and more aware of the fact that the 

denial campaign is winning. We MUST implement a tax on carbon pollution immediately because 

giving the subsidies we have to the Fossil Fuel and Utilities industries and industrial 

polluters have caused them to pollute with impunity. We are already seeing the impacts of a 

too high concentration of Carbon pollution in the way of droughts, wildfires, more extreme 

weather events, health problems among our population etc. The profit motive behind the fossil 

fuel industry is tanking the planet and making it uninhabitable for many species including 

increasingly humans. The longer we wait to implement strong measures to reduce carbon 

emissions, the more costly is will be to halt the nasty feedback loop. New clean technologies 

will not be funded until a tax is placed on carbon pollution and we must move toward 

investments in clean energy in order to transition completely off of fossil fuel based 

electricity. It's up to the EPA to implement tough measures on existing power plants and 

industrial polluters since our Congress has become so dysfunctional and are only interested 

in near-term solutions that will get them elected again. Please be the heroes of our future 

and do the job you are charged to do! 

Thank you! 

Sincerely 

-- 

Gerilyn Denny 
111

From: Environmental Law and Policy Center [elpcinfo@elpc.org] on behalf of charlene pollard 

[charleypollard2010@gmail.com]

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 6:56 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: It's time for strong carbon standards

Nov 6, 2013 

U.S. EPA 

Dear EPA, 

Thank you for conducting "listening sessions" across the country to allow citizens like 

myself to share our thoughts on the upcoming carbon pollution standards. I was pleased when 

President Obama announced his Climate Action Plan in June, and I hope U.S. EPA follows 

through with aggressive carbon pollution reduction standards that will make a difference in 

our fight against climate change. 

This is especially important in the Midwest, where we have a large concentration of old, 

dirty coal power plants that produce a lot of air pollution that contributes to our climate 

change problems and that affects our health. 

Climate change impacts are already starting to hurt people in the Midwest. More days of 

extreme heat are hard in old cities like Chicago, where lots of folks have asthma and other 

respiratory issues and where lots of folks don't have access to air conditioning. It's also 

very hard on Midwestern farmers, who deal with droughts one year and floods the next -- and 

that, in turn, can affect food prices for everyone. 

This is hurting our health and hurting our pocketbooks. And it's only going to get worse 

unless we do something about it. That's why I hope the U.S. EPA designs STRONG standards to 

curb carbon pollution. 

Sincerely, 

Ms. charlene pollard 

134 Collier Ave 

Shelbyville, TN 37160-2408 

(931) 685-1530 
112

From: Donald Necessary [dnldnecessary@gmail.com]

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 6:20 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: 111(d) Carbon Pollution Standards for Existing Power Plants testimony

Hello, 

 

My name is Don Necessary. I am 61 years old and remember when the Edwards Plant was built. I lived in 

Morton, Illinois and lived there until 1977. So, maybe I'm fortunate to have spared my lungs until I returned to 

Central Illinois in 2010. I remember when I was going to college at ICC and I took photos of the Sulfer 

Dioxide spewing from the plant to have as backdrop to the silhouette of the transmission towers East of 

Pekin. The plumes were brown and ugly as they trailed off to the north east. While I was away from Illinois 

and the pollution here, I worked at the Central Intelligence Agency. There, we used modern technology and 

science to make sound judgment calls. I realize that when the early settlers lived in the Midwest, they had no 

knowledge modern technology to rid themselves of pollutants. So, they buried them, dumped them in the river 

or burned them. Back then the world seemed large and unaffected by the scale of their ignorance. Today, We 

now know you cannot bury or dump garbage in rivers without affecting water resources, nor can you burn coal 

without putting everyone around you at risk or killing the plants with the Sulfuric Acid formed in the water 

vapors. 

So, it astounds me that in this day and age, the EPA even considers an appeal to give a variance to a energy 

company that wants to continue burning coal in Illinois. Solar and Wind turbine technology is being used 

finally and should be promoted we dismantle the old obsolete and dangerous technology over 100 years old. 

Electricity produced by coal fired plants is no longer worth the health risks it creates as the facts show. I urge 

all those who are responsible for the public well being act like it and refuse any variances. I had to be 

responsible when I was protecting your well being. 

 

Sincerely, 

 

Don Necessary 
113

From: drupal_admin@epa.gov on behalf of Joe Halvorson [jrhalvor@gmail.com]

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 6:10 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Webform Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Submitted on Wed, 11/06/2013 - 18:09 

Submitted values are: 

Name: Joe Halvorson 

Email: jrhalvor@gmail.com

Comments: 

Incentives for transferable technology 

Strategic planning for resource conversion to less carbon-intensive energy methods and 

phasing out dirty/obsolete programs Web Area: Carbon Pollution Standards 
114

From: drupal_admin@epa.gov on behalf of Jesse Hunter [jessehntr@yahoo.com]

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 5:33 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Webform Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Submitted on Wed, 11/06/2013 - 17:32 

Submitted values are: 

Name: Jesse Hunter 

Email: jessehntr@yahoo.com

Comments: 

For the sake of the health and even survival of the species, we need to implement the now 

available comprehensive plans for conversion to the least harmful systems of energy 

production. Namely, a fast and full move away from coal, oil, gas AND nuclear; towards Wind, 

Water and Solar. The best plan I've seen is by Stanford Professor Mark Jacobson. Here is a 

concise presentation of his plan: 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_XCYlCF3QuQ

Thanks, Jesse Hunter 

Web Area: Carbon Pollution Standards 
115

From: drupal_admin@epa.gov on behalf of Catharine Carey [cgc57@bresnan.net]

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 4:44 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Webform Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Submitted on Wed, 11/06/2013 - 16:44 

Submitted values are: 

Name: Catharine Carey 

Email: cgc57@bresnan.net

Comments: Old, as well as new, coal fired power plants need to meet CO2 pollution standards 

to reduce global warming and its dire consequences. Our grandchildren should not have to pay 

for the short term profits of power and coal companies. 

Web Area: Carbon Pollution Standards 
116

From: Environmental Law and Policy Center [elpcinfo@elpc.org] on behalf of Jerry Mattox 

[jerrymattox@yahoo.com]

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 4:25 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: It's time for strong carbon standards

Nov 6, 2013 

U.S. EPA 

Dear EPA, 

Thank you for conducting "listening sessions" across the country to allow citizens like 

myself to share our thoughts on the upcoming carbon pollution standards. I was pleased when 

President Obama announced his Climate Action Plan in June, and I hope U.S. EPA follows 

through with aggressive carbon pollution reduction standards that will make a difference in 

our fight against climate change. 

This is especially important in the Midwest, where we have a large concentration of old, 

dirty coal power plants that produce a lot of air pollution that contributes to our climate 

change problems and that affects our health. 

Climate change impacts are already starting to hurt people in the Midwest. More days of 

extreme heat are hard in old cities like Chicago, where lots of folks have asthma and other 

respiratory issues and where lots of folks don't have access to air conditioning. It's also 

very hard on Midwestern farmers, who deal with droughts one year and floods the next -- and 

that, in turn, can affect food prices for everyone. 

This is hurting our health and hurting our pocketbooks. And it's only going to get worse 

unless we do something about it. That's why I hope the U.S. EPA designs STRONG standards to 

curb carbon pollution. 

Sincerely, 

Mr. Jerry Mattox 

217 E Davenport St 

Iowa City, IA 52245-2105 
117

From: Courtney Young [courtney.a.young@gmail.com]

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 4:10 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: My comment

I want the Environmental Protection Agency to serve it's purpose and protect our environment. Coal is responsible for 1/3rd of our greenhouse gas emissions and is also responsible for destroying precious habitats. We will eventually be forced to move completely away from coal into 100% clean energy sources like wind and solar. In the meantime, I think it is a reasonable request to ask for a 25% reduction in CO2 emissions from coal-fired power plants by 2016.
118

From: joan susman [josusman@tx.rr.com]

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 3:59 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards for Existing Sources

 

Dear Members of the Environmental Protection Agency: 

I am writing in favor of reducing carbon pollution from existing power plants in 

Texas. The most important point I want to make is this: There is no real merit to the 

opposition’s position because it is short-sighted. 

In business, looking 10 – or perhaps, 15 – years out is considered long-term planning. 

But what is required of your agency now is a much longer perspective. Without that, 

coal-fired power plant owners, their employees, and suppliers face the same 

predictable catastrophe as everyone else. They may not personally experience the 

hardships and illnesses that climate change will bring, but their children and grand 

children certainly will. 

And, as another countervailing argument against opponents of carbon reduction, and 

with respect to North Texas in particular, I add this: My research indicates to me that 

illness and air pollution caused or worsened by coal fired power plants near Dallas are 

perhaps far worse than they are reported to be, due to monitoring and measuring 

deficiencies. 

Regulations to reduce carbon pollution should be stringent and instituted quickly. 

There really are no responsible alternatives. 

I support carbon reduction for all the reasons it has been recommended in the first 

place – reasons you know well enough. 

Do it for the children. 

Respectfully, 

Joan Susman

6227 Twin Oaks Circle 

Dallas, Texas 75240 

josusman@tx.rr.com

972-458-2347 
119
120

From: Tom Lalley [tlalley@gmail.com]

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 3:56 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Statement of Tom Lalley

I'll be speaking at 10:28 tomorrow in Washington, D.C. with my 1-year old daughter Jane. 

Statement of Tom Lalley, Washington, D.C. resident, at the listening session on the E.P.A’s proposed regulation 

on Carbon Pollution from existing power plants. 

Tom Lalley, Washington, D.C. resident 

 

November 7, 2013 

 

My name is Tom Lalley. I was born and raised in Washington, D.C. and this is my daughter Jane. Today is her 

first birthday. She was born at the same hospital in DC that I was and we live with her mother in the 

Tenleytown house I grew up in. 

I’m here today because of Jane, because her generation will suffer greatly from climate change. 

I strongly support carbon pollution standards for existing – and new – power plants. 

Without them, there would still be no limits on the amount of carbon pollution a U.S. power plant can emit. 

That doesn’t make sense. We wisely limit other pollutants from power plants but not the carbon pollution 

mostly responsible for the climate crisis? 

These standards must only be a start to prevent Jane from living a world forced to take drastic steps to address 

climate change like geoengineering. 
121

When I turned one year old, the overriding global threat was nuclear war - every bit as terrifying and potentially 

apocalyptic as climate change. Although the world came very close on numerous occasions, nuclear war did 

not happen. 

It’s too late for climate change to not happen. Carbon pollution has already caused profound changes and we’re 

locked into even more drastic change in the future. 

But just as we avoided a nuclear apocalypse, I believe we can avoid a climate change apocalypse. Ingenuity, 

common sense, luck and grace saved us from nuclear war and it can save us again. 

Let’s implement these rules and then do much more so that, years from now, Jane’s first birthday story will be 

about a fun day out with daddy and not about how our generation failed hers when we had the chance to act on 

climate change. 
122

From: Jennifer Blando [jenblando@hotmail.com]

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 3:37 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Support Strong New Source Carbon Pollution Rules

Dear EPA: 

Like millions of fellow Americans, I support the draft limits on the carbon pollution that 

would be allowed to be emitted from new power plants. It is essential to the future of our 

health, environmental and quality of life that we make the transition from dirty coal-burning 

power plants to cleaner fuels and sources of energy such as solar and wind power. 

That’s why it’s so encouraging right now to see draft rules that would put a cap of 1,100 

pounds of carbon dioxide per megawatt-hour, a sharp improvement considering the average plant 

produces an average of 1,768 pounds at that level. This a positive step in the right 

direction and we must uphold the strength of these draft rules. 

I cannot stress enough the critical need for this change. Already, we are feeling the impacts 

of climate change through more extreme weather. We’ve seen too many stories on the news about 

droughts, floods and the devastating impacts major storms have had on countless households, 

small businesses and families throughout our nation. 

I applaud the steps taken so far, but these pollution limits are long overdue and so we need 

to act NOW. Please don’t water down these carbon pollution limits in the final rule and keep 

this process on the right path toward a sustainable future. 

Sincerely, 

Jennifer Blando 

3855 North Morris Boulevard 

Milwaukee, WI 53211 
123

From: Margaret Nelson [mnelson@saic.edu]

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 3:27 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Reduction of air and water pollution from ALL coal-fired plants

Dear Sirs, dear Ladies: 

As a senior citizen born, raised, and resident in the Midwest, with nieces and growing grandnephews the area, I 

want strong anti-pollution standards to be applied to all coal-fired industries and power plants, existing or 

proposed. The power companies' contention that Federal regulations should leave them free to dump carbon, 

sulphur and mercury-containing coal ash into the air and water is indefensible. 

When I was a kid, we fished for, caught and ate bluegills and other small fish from local ponds. Now, the 

natural resources departments of Illinois, Wisconsin and Michigan say fish from shallow surface waters are no 

longer safe to eat, because their flesh contains high levels of mercury from power plant coal ash. 

When I was a kid, extreme weather events were rare: the twenty-five year flood, the blizzard of the century. 

Now, global warming driven by increased CO2 in the air has driven Midwestern weather patterns all awry. It is 

difficult even for hobby gardeners such as myself to successfully plant and harvest vegetables, herbs and fruits. 

For the family and commercial farms on which most Americans depend for food, each successive year's 

planting is more of a crap shoot. 

Please don't allow the power companies to poison the Midwest's air, soil and water any longer. Insist that they 

install, use and maintain the equipment to clean up their emissions. 

Sincerely, 

Margaret J. Nelson 

2206 Green Bay Road 

Evanston IL 60201 

(847) 425-9412 
124

From: Shane Cummings [mail@changemail.org]

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 2:43 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: I just signed "EPA: Limit CO2 Emissions From Existing Power Plants"

Dear EPA, 

I just signed Solve The Climate Crisis's petition "EPA: Limit CO2 Emissions From Existing Power Plants" on 

Change.org. 

I strongly support strict limits on carbon pollution from existing power plants. Reducing greenhouse gas 

emissions from both new and existing power plants is vital if we are going to avoid the worst effects of climate 

change. 

Sincerely, 

Shane Cummings Norwich, New York 

There are now 1 signatures on this petition. Read reasons why people are signing, and respond to Solve The 

Climate Crisis by clicking here: 

http://www.change.org/petitions/epa-limit-co2-emissions-from-existing-powerplants/responses/new?response=1e2ea64ba3d0 

Right-click 

here to 

download 

pictures. To 

help protect 

your privacy, 

Outlo ok 

prevented 

auto matic 

download of 

this picture 

from the 

Internet.
125

From: Jason A Schwartz [doeo@mail.sfsu.edu]

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 1:49 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: RE: EPA Carbon Rule -- Public Comment -- Jason Schwartz

Dear EPA: 

I would like to submit a public comment in favor of imposing regulation on the energy sector to limit carbon pollution in 

the United States. According the the latest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 

greenhouse gas emission is almost certainly responsible for warming global temperatures. Climate change has been 

indicated by scientists in an increasing severity of storms and other natural events like wildfires. I live in Northern 

California and we are seeing already a noticeable increase in the severity of fires and drought. Please see through the 

influence of the fossil fuel industry and push aggressively for clean energy policy. Thank you very much for this 

opportunity to comment. 

Sincerely, 

Jason Schwartz 

2100 Alemany Blvd. 

San Francisco, CA 

94112 

(415) 933 4664 
126

From: Michele Racioppi [michele.racioppi@gmail.com]

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 1:41 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Clean Air Act Public Comment

Dear President Obama and EPA Commissioner, 

I am sending this email to express my opinion that President Obama and the EPA to come out with the strongest 

possible protections to crack down on global warming pollution from power plants. Power plants are the 

nation’s largest stationary source of carbon pollution, responsible for about one third of all greenhouse gas 

pollution in the United States. I am very worried about global warming and I support the strongest possible 

protections for our environment, our health, and our future. 

Thank you, 

Michele Racioppi 

Highland Park, NJ 
127

From: Colby Allerton [gcolby1@gmail.com]

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 1:39 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Regulating Power Plants

Dear EPA, 

We have a moral obligation to protect the environment and climate, for our health, and the health and 

sustainability of our children and our children's children. 

Power plants, coal, and other polluting sources must be more strictly regulated. 

It's unjust that they pollute so freely, and progress dictates that we change their practices, and allow cleaner less 

polluting energies their rightful chance at replacing the finite and polluting fossil fuels. 

Please act strongly and immediately. 

You have our support. 

G. Colby Allerton 

235 Main St. #318 

Venice, CA 90291 
128

From: Roberta Dees [rdees@peregrine.net]

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 1:22 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards for Existing Sources

I couldn't go to a hearing. But I support reduced carbon pollution standards for every energy 

source. Whether the climate is changing or not, it is necessary that people have clean air to 

breathe. 

Poisons from fossil fuels, including coal, that have been subsidized by my taxes have hurt me 

and my family and others. It is not right. 

Beside the pollution in the air we breathe, the burning of coal and its toxic waste ponds 

despoil our creeks and rivers and ground water, all of which are used in providing our 

drinking water. So it is not just the polluted air, but other dangerous trash they leave us. 

And they refuse to clean up their mess - even refuse that they are liable. 

Duke Energy builds wind farms in other states, but no wind farms in North Carolina. Nor does 

Duke support solar energy. But they are planning to build another coal plant (or more) in 

North Carolina. This is a slap in the face of every citizen. 

Please reduce carbon pollution standards for coal plants and do whatever else you can to help 

us. 

Roberta Dees 

15627 Thomas Road 

Charlotte, NC. 

704-504-3214 
129

From: Jonathan Tittler [jtittler@camden.rutgers.edu]

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 1:08 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Coal-fired power plants

Coal may have gotten our society this far, but with CO2 levels in the air, the ground, and 

the seas at record levels, it is time to phase them out and turn toward renewable energy 

resources. Now that our economy is in recovery, it is time to act in favor of a healthier 

environment for everyone. 

Dr. Jonathan Tittler 

Professor Emeritus of Hispanic Studies 

Rutgers University 
130

From: Roger Judson [rjudson@pma.org]

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 1:03 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards for Existing Sources

If you don’t enact strong CO2 controls you are contributing to killing us all!!! You included. Do the right thing. 

Roger L. Judson 

Exhibition Sales Manager 

Precision Metalforming Association 

6363 Oak Tree Blvd. 

Independence Ohio, 44131 

P : 216-901-8800 X 2155 

C : 330-388-0533 

Mitakuye Oyasin ( Lakota Sioux for “ We are all related “ ) 

Please consider the envirionment before printing this. Thank you. 
131

From: David Newton [dsnewt10@gmail.com]

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 12:16 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Curbing Carbon Pollution Without Delay

Of course, we must greatly reduce greenhouse gas emissions. An important step in these efforts is to clean up the ways 

we generate electricity. 

Please take steps to do this. 

Unfortunately, I cannot attend one of your listening sessions; therefore, I am offering these comments instead. 

Thank you. 

David Newton 

336 Carter St. 

Auburn, AL 36830 
132

From: Chris Crosby [chriscrosby2@icloud.com]

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 11:36 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Cc: Pete Maysmith; Patrick Massaro

Subject: Listening Session 10/30/13

Thank you for putting on the listening session here in Denver 10/30/13. 

I was there all day to hear the coal folks from Montana and Wyoming as well as the enviros 

from Denver. 

It is of utmost importance to strengthen coal pollution standards for EXISTING coal plants as 

well as new plants. 

I offered 3 thoughts at the end of the day: 

1- From various readings I think that there will be more and better jobs from the alternative 

energies such as wind, solar, batteries, efficiency and conservation hydro etc than coal. The 

REA and transmission jobs will be needed with or without coal. 

2- Total Cost Accounting is the best way to compare the various energy sources. This means 

including the health costs of coal such as black lung in deep mines and coal dust in open pit 

mines as well as the long term air pollution (asthma etc) and water pollution such as mercury 

in fish and our children. Also the storm damage costs of Climate Change caused by GHG from 

coal, methane from gas drilling,etc. And food shortages caused by using corn ethanol to 

alleviate our fossil fuel dependence on foreign oil because we have failed to produce enough 

alternative energies. Total means to include ALL the costs of continuing with coal. 

3- Missing at this event were any medical experts to describe the health ramifications of 

continuing with coal. Back in the 1970's I served on the Rocky Flats Monitoring Committee for 

it's first 5 years ( Ch for 2) and we had many presentations from epidemiologists about the 

health effects of low level contaminants such as plutonium. No doubt EPA has considerable 

info about coal emissions as do the big enviro groups such as NRDC, EDF, UCS, Sierra Club, 

etc. At your listening session the coal folks only talked about jobs and they heard nothing 

about how coal is damaging the health of not only the public bit also some of them who work 

near coal dust etc. 

More power to you in your efforts to protect all of us from the health and economic problems 

of our major reliance on coal. 

For our descendants, 

Chris Crosby , 251 South Grape St., Denver, Colo 80246 
133

From: Sengupta, Caryn

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 11:32 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: FW: Information about Thursday's listening session on developing carbon pollution standards 

From: Heather Lowe [mailto:heatherlowe@hlwhitingham.com] 

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 8:24 AM 

To: Sengupta, Caryn 

Subject: RE: Information about Thursday's listening session on developing carbon pollution standards 

OK. The whole point is to REDUCE CARBON EMISSIONS from ALL POWER PLANTS. 

Please have your office watch this film DIRECTLY relating to carbon emissions – seriously all sectors of EPA needs to 

watch this documentary in addition to everything else you take into consideration. 

A FIERCE GREEN FIRE is a must see for thinking people to make the correct choices about our planet –please share with 

others in the Seattle EPA Office 

http://www.ovguide.com/a-fierce-green-fire-9202a8c04000641f80000000208680c5

Thank you, 

Heather 
134

From: Donna Gregory [ondverge@hotmail.com]

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 11:13 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: reduction of carbon pollution

Dear EPA, 

I am unable to attend your public session in Philly on Friday, but wanted to write briefly to say that I support 

EPA measures to reduce carbon pollution emitted from power plants. I currently live in Delaware, which has 

received a failing grade for air pollutants from the American Lung Association for around a decade. Our state 

government has done a good job of reducing pollutants from power plants here locally, but more can always 

be done. My understanding is that some states to our west have not been as proactive, and that much of 

Delaware's ozone and particle pollution is blown in from power plants and industry located in more western 

states. I encourage EPA to set tougher standards, so that power plants across the nation are required to take 

steps to reduce emissions. 

Donna C. Gregory 

30 South Main Street 

Middletown DE 19709 
135

From: Thomas Browne [tw.browne@att.net]

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 11:12 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Carbon Pollution

Good Day-i`m writing you today to urge you to begin more seriously regulating carbon output in this country. 

As a major contributor to climate change, the CO2 output of power plants needs to be reduced. The technology 

is there to do this. It just needs to be implemented! Please protect the health of people and the planet by 

mandating a reduction of this gas. Thanks! Tom Browne 
136

From: Alec Hendrickson [alechendrickson@me.com]

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 10:53 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: no more dirty power plants

I support the EPA's regulating the carbon pollution from existing power plants and want more 

bold actions like it to transition to a renewable future. 
137

From: Scott Luchessa [ecologicalsolutions@seanet.com]

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 9:38 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Strengthen emission requirements for coal plants

I am extremely concerned that burgeoning emissions of greenhouse gases will jeopardize the future quality of life for my 

children and posterity. The scientific consensus is clear, carbon dioxide concentrations have never been higher since the 

appearance of mankind on this planet. Already we are seeing impacts from carbon pollution that are causing serious 

economic and ecological impacts, including coastal erosion and translocation of coastal communities in Alaska and 

failure of natural reproduction of oysters in the Pacific Northwest as a result of ocean acidification. Though we may not 

thoroughly understand all the positive and negative feedback mechanisms that contribute to climate change, we cannot 

afford to take chances. Please strengthen emission standards for coal plants. The stakes are too high. EPA cannot 

afford to delay. 

Thanks, 

Scott Luchessa 

Certified Ecologist 

Ecological Solutions, Inc. Ecological Solutions, Inc. cological Solutions, Inc. 

4013 32nd Ave W 

Seattle, WA 98199 

(206) 285-3015 office 

(206) 841-3801 cell 
138

From: Monica Jenkins [mnjenkins23@gmail.com]

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 8:15 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Public Listening Session - Written Statement / Carbon Pollution Regulation

Dear EPA Leadership: 

Your decision to begin to address our Climate Crisis today will be something you tell your grandchildren some 

day. Or not. It really is that black and white. A decision to regulate carbon gives a glimmer of hope that we will 

be able to survive Climate Change. Without it, our chances for survival as a species are diminished. We are at 

that crossroads and you, members of the US Environmental Protection Agency, may very well be deciding the 

fate of our species and many other life forms on this planet. 

Coming to realize just how dire this crisis is has been a very painful journey for me. I am a Climate Leader, a 

volunteer with the Climate Reality Project. The more I learn, the more I want to shake everyone I see and meet 

and tell them that this is the crisis of our lifetimes, not some future generation. It is happening NOW. To 

convince others to wake up, to act, to write their Congressman or Congresswoman and demand action be taken 

immediately is my goal for the rest of my life. 

At this point, it is very much like standing in a theater shouting FIRE but the audience remains transfixed by the 

images on the screen, not hearing our cries. Except with this fire, there are no exits. Either we extinguish the 

flames together or die a certain death together. 

What I hope you do is to first fine those corporations who are spewing carbon, the major cause of global 

warming, into our atmosphere. We will not be the first country to do so. In fact, there are nearly 40 countries 

before us who are already regulating carbon polluters to help curb Climate Change. Even China already has a 

pilot carbon policy program in place that they will expand to the rest of the country by 2015. Even China 

understands what this crisis means. 

Secondly, my hope is that you and the Obama Administration will set up a task force to determine our way 

forward as curbing our carbon output is only the very first small step toward addressing this crisis. We need a 

task force comprised of: 

Climate Scientists who can tell us the best and worst case scenarios over the next year as well as 5, 10 

and 15 years from now and how much carbon needs to be reduced. 
139

Ecologists/Environmentalists who have had boots on the ground for the past 50 years, passionately 

telling us that this was coming, who have vital networks within our communities who will help us roll 

out the plan or plans determined to be best. 

Community Leaders who can tell us how to best organize these plans in their towns, cities and rural 

areas, what kind of practical application will best be applied to their home territories and others in their 

charge. 

Policy makers who know the laws, who know what laws will affect this process and can suggest fair 

and just laws that need to be written to support this way forward. 

What this task force will determine are two vital points: 

What sources of energy will be used going forward? 

How will we capture the carbon existing in the atmosphere? 

BOTH tasks need to happen simultaneously if we are to survive this crisis. Choosing to only secure alternative 

energy sources will only lead to a longer lingering death for millions. We must also draw the carbon out of our 

atmosphere to avoid further degradation of our overall climate, water, and soil systems. There are carbon 

capturing resources that exist now and many are being developed and championed. These technologies exist 

and more will be invented as we focus on this crisis. 

We are a creative, thoughtful species and we are approaching the 11th hour to address this Crisis. Please lead 

the way. 

Thank you for the opportunity to speak out on this issue. 

Monica Jenkins, Climate Leader 

Geneva, Illinois, USA 

mnjenkins23@gmail.com

630-677-0185 (cell) 

-- 

Monica N. Jenkins

Exploring The Green Road
140

From: Barb Drake [worldpeace7@comcast.net]

Sent: Wednesday, November 06, 2013 2:41 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: My Comment

Oil companies - look upon the vast wealth you have accumulated at the expense of a once 

healthy planet. Look upon her lands and seas that you have polluted in the name of profit 

and power. Look at the devastation of her forests that keep the air clean and at the oceans 

that hold the key to all life. Look into the eyes of children who are plagued by diseases 

because of your irresponsibility. Look at the countless animals and plants that have become 

ill or genetically altered by your careless hands - some even driven towards extinction Look 

at your ignorance and blindness to see how your actions today will burden the people of the 

future. And look at the number of human deaths and injuries that have occurred because of 

your senseless misuse of earth's precious gifts. You have lost your way, indeed, and are 

charged to clean up your act by investing in clean technologies that promote wellness, care, 

and sensitivity for the earth and it's inhabitants. If you chose to remain blind, you will 

wake up some day finding that the rest of the world has gone on without you. That day is 

coming soon. People all over the world are "drawing the line" because they know there is no 

future if we don't change now. 

Barb Drake 

Seattle, WA. 
141

From: Helen Hanna [helenhanna@sbcglobal.net]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 11:48 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: no more dirty power plants

I strongly support the EPA's regulating the carbon pollution from existing power plants and 

want more bold actions like it to transition to a renewable future. This is surely one of 

the most important things our government can do for our people. 

Sincerely yours, 

Helen N. Hanna 

183 Gifford Way 

Sacramento, CA 95864 
142

From: drupal_admin@epa.gov on behalf of Libby Stortz [libbystortz@gmail.com]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 11:04 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Webform Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Submitted on Tue, 11/05/2013 - 23:03 

Submitted values are: 

Name: Libby Stortz 

Email: libbystortz@gmail.com

Comments: 

Today we know that to avoid reaching a 2 degree Celsius global average temperature increase, 

as much as 2/3 to 3/4 of known fossil fuel reserves must stay in the ground. Feedbacks have 

already begun through deforestation of old growth forests, lower Arctic albedo (reflectivity) 

as white ice turns to dark ocean, and permafrost release, stabilizing at 2 degrees. We must 

make these new CO2 restrictions as stringent as possible if we have any hope of averting 

future catastrophe. Every idea that is floated to reduce CO2 must be seriously considered, 

and a great many must be implemented with haste. 

Unless we are willing to condemn the future of our planet and our species, and generations of 

Americans, to poverty, resource wars, pestilence, and food and water scarcity, action must be 

taken now. The fate of our world is in the hands of those with the power to do the right 

thing so please do the right thing. The courage to protect the planet and from that, the 

people, is what will make your positive place in history. All others will be scorned and 

derided for their lack of foresight and fortitude. 

Web Area: Carbon Pollution Standards 
143

From: Clayton Norcross [claytonnorcross3@gmail.com]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 10:34 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Emissions controls letter

Please know that as a resident of the Los Angeles basin I am highly aware of variations in air quality. 

The best thing California ever did was require motorists to have their car smog checked every 2 years to be 

reregistered. 

I vote for officials who keep their campeign promises around the environmental issues in particular. It is a 

minimum trust issue that then gives me confidence in their wisdom to represent me for a host of other issues. 

Please put our environment first. Clean industry and protection of our water and fisheries should be job one 

priority for all California residents and representatives. 

Voter, 

Clayton Norcross, 

Arcadia, California, 91006 
144

From: drupal_admin@epa.gov on behalf of David Landskov [landskov@gmail.com]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 10:12 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Webform Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Submitted on Tue, 11/05/2013 - 22:11 

Submitted values are: 

Name: David Landskov 

Email: landskov@gmail.com

Comments: I strongly support setting the standards you are proposing, as long as there is no 

price on emitting carbon. 

Web Area: Carbon Pollution Standards 
145

From: cbrexel@aol.com

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 9:38 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: no more dirty power plants

I support the EPA's regulating the carbon pollution from existing power plants and want more bold actions like it to 

transition to a renewable future. 

Thank you. 

Charles Sr. Brexel 

12085 Wexford Overlook 

Roswell, GA 30075 
146

From: Linda Porter [linda.porter88@gmail.com]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 7:45 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards for Existing Sources

11-8-13 

 

 LETTER TO EPA, CONCERNING CARBON EMISSIONS 

 

To The EPA Commission, 

 

My name is Linda Porter and I am a Lead Volunteer for Organizing For Action, Indiana Chapter. I am also a 

Lead for our Climate Change Steering Committee in Indianapolis, Indiana. We are part of a coalition of many 

organizations in Indiana, such as Sierra Club, Earth Charter, Sustainable Indiana 2016, Hoosier Interfaith Power 

and Light, Citizens Climate Lobby and Hoosier Environmental Council. I am not appearing before you in 

Chicago as I am working in Indianapolis to make sure that Hoosiers who could not attend your meeting can 

still have an opportunity to be heard through our petition process. 

Every day our organization works to educate and increase public awareness of the dangers of climate change 

and we work toward finding ways to help reduce the effects of climate change that we are facing. We represent 

a large portion of our community who understand that climate change is happening, that it is real, that it is 

serious and that it is manmade. We also educate the public to understand that we can take tangible steps to 

address the effects of climate change and that the number one action which can be taken is to reduce the amount 

of CO2 that is being emitted into our atmosphere. As a citizen and as a representative of citizens in Indiana who 

are concerned about climate change, I call on you, the EPA to take direct action to severely limit the amount of 

CO2 that is currently being emitted into our atmosphere. To do anything less is putting us on a collision course 

of destruction as we head over the tipping point of the amount of carbon that our world environment can 

withstand. I urge you to do everything within your power to set strict standards on CO2 emissions from coal and 

fossil fuel plants. Without your intervention the coal industry and fossil fuel industry will continue to send 

unspeakable amounts of this deadly toxin into our atmosphere with no thought about future generations or the 

quality of life for countless human beings who depend on earth as we know it. 

Thank You, 

Linda L. Porter, OFA 

 

Linda Porter 

Organizing For Action 
147

Indianapolis, Indiana 

Cell: 317 640 0865 

Email: linda.porter88@gmail.com

-- 
148

From: drupal_admin@epa.gov on behalf of Alice Eckart [eckart@horizoncable.com]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 7:42 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Webform Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Submitted on Tue, 11/05/2013 - 19:42 

Submitted values are: 

Name: Alice Eckart 

Email: eckart@horizoncable.com

Comments: 

Please concentrate on reducing carbon emissions and move us away from fossil fuels. 

Alternative energy is the way to go. 

Web Area: Carbon Pollution Standards 
149

From: drupal_admin@epa.gov on behalf of arvia morris [morris358@zipcon.com]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 7:14 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Webform Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Submitted on Tue, 11/05/2013 - 19:14 

Submitted values are: 

Name: arvia morris 

Email: morris358@zipcon.com

Comments: To whom it may concern--CO2 emissions from human burning of fossil fuels is 

destroying our natural life support systems. A recent series of articles in the Seattle 

Times "Sea Change" September 15th-17th 2013, documents how the Pacific Ocean and other oceans 

are becoming more acidic due to the increased C02 in the atmosphere. This C02 equilibrates 

with the ocean water and forms an acid in the ocean water that causes the pH of the whole 

ocean to go down. Plant and fish life in the ocean is very sensitive to the pH of the water 

it lives in, and many ocean species are showing signs of extreme stress. For example shell 

fish such as oysters that are commercially important can not mature due to the acidic 

condition of the ocean. In addition to the negative impact to the ocean, increased C02 from 

fossil fuels is also causing the atmosphere to hold more moisture and less heat is released 

back into space. This change in energy and moisture balance is causing more extreme weather 

patterns such as Hurricane Sandy and very strong typhoons in Asia. The national budget to 

deal with natural disasters related to new weather patterns has increased to 60billion in 

recent years compared with 15 billion a decade ago. We must stop C02 accumulation in the 

atmosphere, we will be spending too much of our national budget dealing with the weather 

consequences of too much C02 in the atmosphere. One of the largest sources is the burning of 

fossil fuels. We must build more wind and solar capacity as well as use all technology 

possible to improve the efficiency of our heating, cooling systems to get the same GDP with 

much less energy. I believe we should have a carbon tax or cap and trade system to limit 

carbon pollution, ban on all new fossil fuel burning power capacity. 

We need to close down older power plants that release high levels of C02. 

Coal releases more C02 /Kw than natural gas, so coal is the worst offender. 

Coal companies should be offered incentives to switch their business plans to become Solar or 

wind companies. We need to invest heavily into developing new materials that are lighter 

for our transportation systems thus would use less fuel to move. We need a state of the art 

high speed rail system on the West coast and across the country to compete with air travel 

and reduce the 

C02 from air transport. There are many things we can do, we must start with a strong mandate 

to dramatically reduce the burning of fossil fuels. 

Web Area: Carbon Pollution Standards 
150

From: drupal_admin@epa.gov on behalf of Kevin Jackson [kjbiker@netzero.net]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 7:10 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Webform Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Submitted on Tue, 11/05/2013 - 19:09 

Submitted values are: 

Name: Kevin Jackson 

Email: kjbiker@netzero.net

Comments: Given the reality of climate change and the likely consequences, I don't believe it 

is possible to go too far in trying to minimize the damage. 

Please do all you can to require power plants to be responsible for the enormous damage they 

are doing. 

Web Area: Carbon Pollution Standards 
151

From: Barbara Rothkrug [rothkrug@gmail.com]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 6:34 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Regulating new coal plants

As a citizen concerned about climate change and particulate pollution causing illnesses such as asthma (I'm a 

nurse) I believe that green house gases should be kept to zero in new coal powered plants. Further, current 

plants must be brought up to the zero output of greenhouse gases or decommissioned. We need to keep 80% or 

even more of the world's fossil fuel supplies in the ground or it's game over for the climate. Barbara Rothkrug 

158 Mariner Green Court Corte Madera, CA 94925-2014. 
152

From: donsiefkes@aol.com

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 6:01 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Listening Session - San Francisco Tuesday, Nov. 5

Comments by Don Siefkes - Executive Director E100 Ethanol Group at San Francisco 

EPA Listening Session Tuesday, Nov. 5, 2013

A lot of carbon has been put into the air during the last 100 years. We’d like 

to see the EPA come up with more ideas to use this carbon that’s already 

above ground to generate power rather than bring up new carbon. 

/span> 

One such idea we would like the EPA to consider is to expand the use of 

cellulosic ethanol to power light cars and trucks. How does this relate to 

electric power plants? It relates quite directly. 

/span> 

We have over 200 ethanol plants producing ethanol to blend into gasoline. 

Many of these plants are using municipal solid waste, crop stover and 

other waste cellulose to run their operations and some have become very 

efficient. Those plants have excess energy which they use to produce 

electricity, a lot of it. 

/span> 

/span> 

Argonne National Lab’s GREET program shows that each gal of EtOH 

produced from waste cellulose produces 2.3 KWHrs of electricity which is 

sold back to the grid. 

/span> 

Mandating that 50% of all light duty vehicles sold in the U.S. be optimized 

for mileage on ethanol in accordance with the 2017-2025 fuel standards 

would quickly generate a market of >50 billion gallons of cellulosic ethanol 

annually. 

/span> 

/span> 

Such an E100 engine mandate would thus produce over 115 (50*2.3) billion 

KWhrs of electricity without bringing up one lump of coal. /span> 
153

/span> 

Such a mandate would also reduce total CO2 emissions by 1.2 trillion lbs/yr 

by replacing those 50 billion gals of gasoline with ethanol (24.2 lbs CO2 per 

gal of gasoline). 

/span> 

In other words, an E100 mandate using cellulosic ethanol gives a 2 for 1 

contribution to lowering global warming. /span> 

/span> 
154

From: Max Clifford [xamnamron@yahoo.com]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 5:42 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: listening session on new rules for coal fired power plants

To whom it may concern: 

I am unable to make the session on new rules for coal fired power plants in person s I am sending 

this email to show my support for stricter regulations on coal fired power plants. 

 

Sincerely, 

Max Clifford, 

26 Chester Ave. 

Fairfax, CA 94930 
155

From: Giessel/Voss [ecos@everestkc.net]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 5:28 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Fwd: LTE re: Tim Carpenter piece on EPA Listening Session in Lenexa

Below is a letter that I sent today to the Topeka Capital-Journal in response to an article on the Reg. 7 Listening 

Session. Please enter the letter into your public comment record. 

Thank you, 

Elaine Giessel 

Overland Park, KS 

-------- Original Message -------- 

Subject: LTE re: Tim Carpenter piece on EPA Listening Session in Lenexa

Date: Tue, 05 Nov 2013 15:59:12 -0600 

From: Giessel/Voss <ecos@everestkc.net>

To: letters@cjonline.com

I appreciate the Topeka Capital-Journal sending a reporter to the EPA's Carbon Pollution Listening 

Session, November 4, in Lenexa. I do wish to express my concern about one of Mr. Carpenter's 

statements: "EPA action to address emissions in the United States won’t alter the global pollution 

balance if other countries continue to use coal." This belongs on the opinion page unless it is 

attributed to someone at the session.

Our energy use and CO2 emissions per capita rank far above China and India, the two nations often 

used an excuse for not regulating our own carbon emissions. The US must lead on pollution reductions, 

so others will follow. New CO2 control technologies we develop can grow our economy and positively impact 

the "pollution balance" globally. 

History demonstrates that industry will not voluntarily make changes to reduce emissions. 

Shareholder profits take priority over public health and the environment. Decades after passage of 

the Clean Air Act, thousands of "grandfathered" facilities continued to avoid making the improvements 

needed to come into compliance. It takes regulations.

If CO2 standards result in fewer coal-fired plants, the US benefits from construction of cleaner, more 

efficient energy facilities (jobs, jobs, jobs!), from promotion and construction of renewable energy 

sources (more jobs!) and from reduction of air pollution and associated health care costs. 

It is also a matter of environmental justice. The oldest and dirtiest facilities are typically located in low 

income, minority communities, home to the most disenfranchised of us. 

Energy prices are going to go up, with or without CO2 regulations. Demand for energy is increasing 

globally and natural gas prices will rise again -- the shale gas boom isn't sustainable. What this 

country really needs is a comprehensive energy plan that focuses first on conservation and efficiency. 

The cheapest and cleanest energy is the energy we don't use.
156

C. E. Giessel 

Overland Park, KS
157

From: Laura Fultz Stout [Laura.FultzStout@lung.org]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 5:16 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Carbon Pollution comments

Dear EPA Staff, 

Thank you for beginning to reduce carbon from power plants. It was with great hope that I read that 

reductions in carbon was the lowest this year than any decades earlier. 4% reductions is a good start and 

needs to be increased through strong reduction standards to stave off pollution related deaths and 

catastrophic weather events. 

• EPA must require existing power plants to reduce carbon pollution to protect public health. EPA’s 

next carbon pollution proposal should cover existing power plants. Over time, forward-looking 

standards that clean up existing plants will ensure that power generation in this country becomes 

cleaner and more efficient. Coupled with the steps being taken to cut other dangerous power plant 

pollutants – soot, smog, mercury, and other toxics –EPA carbon pollution standards for existing plants 

would help protect our health, improve efficiency, and encourage innovation. 

Thank you again, 

Sincerely, 

Laura Fultz Stout 

424 Pendleton Way 

Oakland, CA 94621 

Phone: 510.982.3151
158

From: drupal_admin@epa.gov on behalf of Tracy Jolivette [tjol2012@gmail.com]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 5:06 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Webform Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Submitted on Tue, 11/05/2013 - 17:05 

Submitted values are: 

Name: Tracy Jolivette 

Email: tjol2012@gmail.com

Comments: 

More strident standards need to be adopted. We cannot rely on companies to police themselves, 

nor determine what is an acceptable levels. They are only concerned with making money, not 

human health or clean air. Create a nationwide challenge for students to come up with a 

reduction program. As a laid off teacher, I can still recognize opportunities to get students 

to problem solve and come up with alternative solutions. 

Thanks 

Web Area: Carbon Pollution Standards 
159

From: drupal_admin@epa.gov on behalf of Kevin Jolivette [jolivette.kevin@yahoo.com]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 4:57 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Webform Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Submitted on Tue, 11/05/2013 - 16:57 

Submitted values are: 

Name: Kevin Jolivette 

Email: jolivette.kevin@yahoo.com

Comments: 

Please regulate green house gases under the clean air and water act. 

Thanks 

Web Area: Carbon Pollution Standards 
160

From: Gray, Stephen P [Stephen.Gray@tmcmed.org]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 4:49 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Regulation on Carbon Pollution from Coal-Fired Plants

To the EPA: 

The use of coal-fired power plants to supply energy to this country needs to be eliminated as soon as possible. While it 

is a cheap energy on the front-end because the system is in place, it is too costly and gravely dangerous on the back 

end. There is no doubt that it is polluting our air, water, and wildlife to such a degree that our way of life will soon be 

threatened if it is already not. If we want this country to maintain some semblance of being progressive, innovative, and 

concerned with the welfare of the planet, then we must not be short-sighted on this issue. 

There are doomsday voices on both sides of this issue for sure. One side of the argument is that coal is dirty energy that 

will negatively impact our health and quality of life. This side argues that there are alternative energies that are cleaner 

and less expensive in the long run. The other side says that it is too immediately costly to shift away from coal because 

coal is the cheapest form of energy and the economy would suffer or even collapse from investment in something more 

expensive. This second viewpoint is a fiscal bluff. It is dishonest because the inexpensiveness of coal is only based on its 

price for units of energy. The other costs of coal, such as declining health of our citizens, elimination of wildlife, and 

higher cost in the long run, are rarely mentioned. 

With this issue, it is important to look at the next 100 years and not simply the next business quarter. Once networks for 

solar, wind, and geothermal energies are in place, this energy would be practically free. The faster we move to get these 

networks in place, the quicker we become energy-independent for generations. The only way to get started on this 

project is to impose tougher standards on coal-fired power and provide more incentives to clean energies. It is the way 

of the future whether we start now or in 25 years. The only question is whether the damage will be too great to recover 

by the time we are forced into the future. It would be better to make the choice now than be backed into a corner that 

we may not get out of later. 

We should be creating policies, initiatives, and programs that will long outlive us rather than continuing down a path 

that threatens how long we might actually live. 

Thank you, 

Stephen Gray, LMSW 

Kansas City, MO 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-

The information contained in this communication may be confidential and is intended only for the 

use of the intended recipient(s). If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient(s), 

you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this communication, 

or any of its contents, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, 

please return it to the sender immediately and delete any copy of it from your computer system. 
161

From: Oliver [oliverohaver@gmail.com]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 4:27 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Regulate emissions 

Hi EPA please regulate power plant CO2 emission levels. That would mean so much to me. I am 

an environmental studies major so I may be biased but it's very important you reduce this 

because we can no longer live the way we do. The world will end. 
162

From: Environmental Law and Policy Center [elpcinfo@elpc.org] on behalf of Katie Coleman 

[katieelizabethcoleman@hotmail.com]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 4:23 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: It's time for strong carbon standards

Nov 5, 2013 

U.S. EPA 

Dear EPA, 

Thank you for conducting "listening sessions" across the country to allow citizens like 

myself to share our thoughts on the upcoming carbon pollution standards. I was pleased when 

President Obama announced his Climate Action Plan in June, and I hope U.S. EPA follows 

through with aggressive carbon pollution reduction standards that will make a difference in 

our fight against climate change. 

This is especially important in the Midwest, where we have a large concentration of old, 

dirty coal power plants that produce a lot of air pollution that contributes to our climate 

change problems and that affects our health. 

Climate change impacts are already starting to hurt people in the Midwest. More days of 

extreme heat are hard in old cities like Chicago, where lots of folks have asthma and other 

respiratory issues and where lots of folks don't have access to air conditioning. It's also 

very hard on Midwestern farmers, who deal with droughts one year and floods the next -- and 

that, in turn, can affect food prices for everyone. 

This is hurting our health and hurting our pocketbooks. And it's only going to get worse 

unless we do something about it. That's why I hope the U.S. EPA designs STRONG standards to 

curb carbon pollution. 

Sincerely, 

Ms. Katie Coleman 

436 Harrison St 

Apt 1 

Oak Park, IL 60304-1466 

(847) 828-0205 
163

From: Martin Washington [martinwashington977@googlemail.com]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 4:18 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: No More Dirty power plants!

Please go Solar! Make California the Solar Energy Capitol of the World! 

-- 

Martin Deporres Washington 
164

From: Shirley Peeke Wallack [shpeeke@me.com]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 4:12 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: no more dirty power plants

I support the EPA's regulating the carbon pollution from existing power plants and want more 

bold actions like it to transition to a renewable future. 
165

From: Geoff Chapin [geoff@nextsteplivinginc.com]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 4:00 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Input on Carbon Pollution from Next Step Living at EPA Nov 4, 2013

Thank you, committee members, for your attention and focus on this critical legislation. 

My name is Geoff Chapin. I am the CEO and founder of Next Step Living, a New 

England-based residential energy efficiency retrofit and solar provider. Next Step Living 

works with communities and individuals to reduce energy use and help transition our 

economy towards sustainable levels of fossil fuel use.

Next Step Living is five years old and has grown from 10 employees to more than 750, 

with another approximately 500 jobs created through our installation of (energy-saving) 

measures and demand created for product. We are honored to be No. 84 on the Inc. 500

list of the fastest growing private companies in the United States and more proud of our 

Inc. Hire Power award for being No. 49 of 437 employers for their ability to create highroad, good-paying careers with benefits.

We are one implementer of what Commissioner (David W.) Cash of the state 

Department of Public Utilities pointed out as energy efficiency savings that have helped 

stabilize the grid, reduce costs, and reduce emissions across the region. 

We encourage the committee to push for the lowest emissions possible through this 

legislation for the hundreds of reasons we all know and have heard today that we are 

running out of time. Without repeating all the harrowing facts, this fundamentally boils 

down to a moral question we will have to explain to the next generation and a matter of 

deciding the best path that is most humane to workers who will suffer displacement. 

Please also ensure that states are left to their own decision about how to reach these 

targets, whether it be reductions at the plant level, ramping up energy efficiency 

measures, or ramping renewable energy programs. This is critical for cost-effective 

adaptations in each state.
166

There are two arguments we've heard today:

1) The cost will be high.

2) This will eliminate jobs when we need them.

1) The cost will be high. Commissioner Cash outlined how energy efficiency helps the 

grid as a whole and has a proven track record of success. For consumers who implement 

any energy efficiency measures at all, they can save between 10 and 45 percent. We 

know this from the approximately 60,000 homes we've visited and from our close 

working relationship with the utilities in Massachusetts that have allowed us to 

implement these programs and help track savings.

2) This will eliminate jobs. We must indeed be humane about this. There are coal 

workers who will be displaced. My primary message to you and them is that the cleanenergy sector is hiring rapidly, and as an industry we would love to hire those hardworking folks and put them to work in high-road, good-paying jobs with benefits. 

Hiring is something of a constraint on our growth, actually. We'll likely put another 1,200 

people to work over the next few years. If there were just two companies in each state 

doing similar hiring work, and there are indeed many, that would mean more than 

250,000 new clean-energy jobs nationally, from just two residential companies alone per 

state over the next few years.

Let's implement ways to ensure the coal workers (who total many fewer than the 

number above) have access to training and job placement and bring them into the new 

energy economy with green-collar careers.

The policies in Massachusetts have allowed us to grow even faster than we would have. 

The utilities have been close working partners, and Massachusetts is the canary in the 

coal mine of what many other states are poised to do. If this legislation allows states to 

determine how they reach these targets, it will mean a clean, cost-effective new step 

forward in the most critical fight of our generation, one that will preserve or not, this 

planet for the next generations.
167

Thank you

-- 

Geoff Chapin

CEO 

Next Step Living

21 Drydock Avenue, 2nd Floor

Boston, MA 02210-2384

Direct: 617.999.6240

Geoff.Chapin@NextStepLiving.com

NextStepLiving.com

Home Energy Solutions.
168

From: Holly Mehl [hollymehl@gmail.com]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 3:55 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Contact Us Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

I believe that standards for existing coal-fired power plants should be as strict (protective of human health and 

environment) as possible without making it impossible to run the plants to produce energy. Yes, we might have 

to pay more for our energy but we are already paying dearly in the form of natural disasters that are now more 

frequent due to carbon overload in the atmosphere....put there by us. 
169

From: Larry [bethanylm@wightman.ca]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 3:52 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: no more dirty power plants

 

I support the EPA's regulating the carbon pollution from existing power plants and want more bold actions like 

it to transition to a renewable future. The sands of destruction are falling through the hour glass. If we love the 

earth and our children, we can't waste time. 
170

From: drupal_admin@epa.gov on behalf of Shane McKibben [smckibben47@gmail.com]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 3:40 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Webform Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Submitted on Tue, 11/05/2013 - 15:39 

Submitted values are: 

Name: Shane McKibben 

Email: smckibben47@gmail.com

Comments: 

Science is the best tool we have to understand the world we inhabit and share. Scientists who 

study the climate (i.e. who are not shills for special 

interests) are united in their diagnosis: catastrophic effects await in this century unless 

we take rapid action to mitigate, not just adapt, regarding climate change. We face myriad 

environmental challenges on multiple fronts, but it is essential that we use the tools at our 

disposal NOW so that in the future, things are not as bad as they might be. 

Study after study has demonstrated that it is not only in our best interest environmentally 

to act now, but it is also in our best interest economically, as the longer we wait, the 

greater the costs to respond become. Every day wasted is one more day of expense and 

investment in the status quo, rather than a sustainable and just future. I say just because 

justice is not served when mega-corporations and their pathological leaders get rich today on 

the backs of the planet and our children's future. 

Already, we can see the signs of a changing climate. We must take action TODAY to mitigate 

the damage this will cause. Regulating carbon dioxide is one of the most important steps in 

that process. It will spur investment in clean, renewable, sustainable energy sources; it 

will ween us off our addiction to fossil fuels; it will internalize the true cost of fossil 

fuels, rather than allowing externalities to be heaped on those least able to cope with them; 

and it is the scientifically, economically, morally, and rationally right thing to do. 

To avoid reaching a 2 degree Celsius global average temperature increase, as much as 2/3 to 

3/4 of known fossil fuel reserves must stay in the ground. 

Since feedbacks have already begun through deforesting old growth forests, lower Arctic 

albedo (reflectivity) as white ice turns to dark ocean, and permafrost release, stabilizing 

at 2 degrees is a daunting enough challenge. 

We must use every tool in the toolbox to make these new CO2 restrictions as stringent as 

possible if we have any hope of averting future catastrophe. 

Every idea that is floated to reduce CO2 must be seriously considered, and a great many must 

be implemented with greatest haste. 

Governing is hard, and procrastination is easy, but unless we are willing to condemn the 

future of our planet and our species, not to mention generations of Americans, to a world of 

poverty, resource wars, pestilence, and food and water scarcity, action must be taken now. It 

must. It must. The fate of our world is in the hands of those with the power to do the right 

thing. Do the right thing. 

Web Area: Carbon Pollution Standards 
171

From: Edna Rainey [browngrandma1@yahoo.com]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 3:36 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: no more dirty power plants

I support the EPA's regulating the carbon pollution from existing power plants and want more bold actions like it to 

transition to a renewable future. 
172

From: Ramiro Bahamon [ramirobahamon@gmail.com]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 3:28 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Cc: Santiago Bahamon; Kiersten Iwai; jasmin.vargas@sierraclub.org; Kanako Ishikawa

Subject: To support EPA regulations to Power Plants

Thank you for this opportunity. 

Without Oxygen you will die in less than 5 Minutes! Even worse than that, with a limited 

supply of clean air, you will not have a normal life and your priorities will be to create 

and maintain an artificial existence because of the damage made on what we now are taking for

granted: Air. That is what we are doing to ourselves and our children. 

As a Biologist, a father of a 9 years old American Citizen, and a citizen of the Earth It is 

my responsibility to encourage the EPA to enforce and apply, As Soon As Possible, strong 

regulations against the production of electricity from coal base Power Plants and strong 

regulations against the use of combustion for transportation as well. 

We are late! We are on this problem because a narrow approach to solve energy problems 100 

years ago... I don't want to make the same mistake; a holistic approach should take place. 

That being said, EPA regulations must consider the effects of closing Power Plant on the 

workers, coal miners, and their communities, especially the low wage Power Plant families, 

miners, and Oil refinery workers. 

It is my belief that taxation is the price we have to pay for civilization. Civilization is a 

demonstration of intelligence, an effective education, and good communication. 

Unfortunately, the most effective way to proceed with the implementation of new standards is 

by forcing citizens to pay an additional temporary tax for each KiloWatt produced by a Power 

Plant and for each gallon of gas used for transportation until these sources of pollution are 

removed completely and replace with other cleaner sources. 

This tax can be easily collected through the electricity bill and by the pump in the gas 

station. The Clean Air fund created from these collection should be used to create an 

educational fund for the kids of the families affected for the closing of the plants and 

provide training in new fields to Power Plant workers and miners. 

Ultimately, please extend this call to other countries. Atmosphere is an organ of the Earth. 

This is not only about the air over our heads. 

-- 

Ramiro Eduardo Bahamon B. Sc. 

Biologist 
173

From: hklbrries@aol.com

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 3:12 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Green, sustainable energy is what is needed - not more dirty fossil fuels!

Dear EPA, 

I am a longtime supporter of "green" and sustainable energy and want to advise you today that 

I completely support the EPA's regulating carbon pollution from existing power plants. I 

wish to see more bold actions like this with an eventual (and rapid) transition to a clean, 

renewable energy future. Other places are doing it and there is no reason whatsoever the 

United States shouldn't be embracing these technologies as well. It is the least we can do 

for future generations and our shared planet. 

Sincerely, 

Cheryl Costigan 
174

From: Dave Cline [Dave@ClineOnlineMarketing.com]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 3:05 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: no more dirty power plants

I support the EPA's regulating the carbon pollution from existing power plants and want more bold actions like 

it to transition to a renewable future. 
175

From: Claire Tiernan [clairetiernan1027@gmail.com]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 2:54 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Limiting Carbon/Greenhouse Gas Emissions

I am writing to urge the EPA to finalize its 2013 Proposed Carbon Pollution Standards for new power plants. I 

hope that existing power plants are made to cut their pollution. I also hope the EPA administrator and staff will 

not be intimidated by the powerful fossil fuel industry and lobbyists who oppose efforts to address climate 

change. All of us need to do what is necessary to address climate change for the long-term health of our 

citizens and planet. Thank you for listening and hosting the public listening sessions throughout the country on 

best approaches to this issue. 

 

Sincerely, 

-- 

Claire Tiernan 
176

From: drupal_admin@epa.gov on behalf of Aaron Myran [aaron.myran@gmail.com]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 2:25 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Webform Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Submitted on Tue, 11/05/2013 - 14:24 

Submitted values are: 

Name: Aaron Myran 

Email: aaron.myran@gmail.com

Comments: please put stronger limits on carbon pollution Web Area: Carbon Pollution Standards
177

From: Anne Cummings Jaccopetti [cummings@sonic.net]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 2:01 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Contact Us Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Among the many important reasons for instituting strong, enforceable carbon standards, the 

most immediately urgent may be the unconscionable rise in rates of asthma among children and 

the elderly. 40 million Americans currently suffer from asthma and the rate is rising. ( 

Prevalence in California alone) has increased by 75% since 1980. The cost of this preventable 

illness is also astronomic, estimated currently at $56 billion dollars a year for medical 

treatment, lost school and work hours and early death. The rising number of children 

suffering from asthma will have impaired breathing for life because asthma adversely affects 

lung development during the maturation years. A number of studies, including the Children's 

Health Study conducted in 1992 of 5500 children in 12 communities, confirm the connection 

between asthma and inhalation of nitrous oxide, acid vapors, particulate matter and carbon. 

Now in my mid 70's I have dealt with asthma throughout my life, first as a child with 

seasonal allergies and now as an adult who has become environmentally sensitive. My impaired 

lungs are affected by traffic exhaust, the indoor air pollution of K-Mart, and the scents 

worn by my fellow citizens, etc.. I cough a lot, even when I faithfully take my prescribed 

medications. As a former teacher and educator, it broke my heart to see the number of 

children struggling to breath in my school. 

Even in idyllic Sonoma Valley the air hangs heavy with agricultural chemicals and sprays. I 

ask you to protect children by holding accountable those industries and entities, that are 

currently treating our airways as a free and unlimited sewer. Establish firm limits, put a 

price on carbon pollution. Help restore a world in which children can breath freely as part 

of their birthright. 
178

From: drupal_admin@epa.gov on behalf of Howard Langeveld [hlangeveld@comcast.net]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 12:44 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Webform Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Submitted on Tue, 11/05/2013 - 12:43 

Submitted values are: 

Name: Howard Langeveld 

Email: hlangeveld@comcast.net

Comments: I believe the epa should continue to treat carbon as pollution and do what it can 

to cut down on its use both in the US and elsewhere. I think cutting down on enabling other 

countries by allowing new pipelines and coal ports defeats this purpose. The epa should also 

be working on taxing carbon use and production as a fuel. 

Web Area: Carbon Pollution Standards 
179

From: Pamela Bergdall [pbergdall@yahoo.com]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 12:06 PM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Comments for EPA Listening session

Who else can we turn to in order to protect our God-given air and water that is 

absolutely critical to human life? Certainly not those who are polluting our air and water 

and land. Certainly not those who only look toward immediate gains and profits. 

 Certainly not those who if they could, would even claim ownership and charge us for 

sunshine and the air we breathe. YOU are our voice and our protector. And we 

appreciate it when you are. Thank you. 
180

From: Buffy [bshake@wtechlink.us]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 11:52 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Climate Change

I am very worried about Climate Change and its effects on weather systems and the health of 

our oceans. Please take all steps possible to slow its progression. In my opinion Fracking, 

strip mining coal, and bituminous sands used for petroleum production are all terrible ideas. 

Most of these dirty fuel products these activities are producing are going to be shipped 

overseas, making the 1% even more wealthy and will 

continue the destruction of our planet. The rest of us will have to 

live with the negative impacts this will cause. I am totally against 

LNG, KeystoneXL (and all the other existing pipelines) and the proposed Coal Trains and 

Ports. 

We need to focus on sustainable energies. Please help us. 

Buffy Hake 

49591 River Rd 

Pendleton, OR. 97801 

541-276-0117 
181

From: drupal_admin@epa.gov on behalf of Jennifer Smith [jensmith810@yahoo.com]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 10:31 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Webform Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Submitted on Tue, 11/05/2013 - 10:30 

Submitted values are: 

Name: Jennifer Smith 

Email: jensmith810@yahoo.com

Comments: I think it is great if it helps with pollution and creates jobs. 

Web Area: Carbon Pollution Standards 
182

From: Pugsley Al [apphs58@yahoo.com]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 10:08 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Carbon Polution limits

I want to encourage strong limits on all coal-burning power plants. In my opinion we 

should move away from burning all fossil fuels. Look at the air quality in China. 

America should take the lead in protecting humans and we can lead by example. But 

we must take a stand. The EPA can do this. 

Please connect the dots between coal use and health care costs. 

"Coal combustion is the world's foremost offender in the production of greenhouse gas 

emissions..." (Prescription for the Planet by Tom Blees, p. 48). All of life is riding 

on spaceship earth and our actions affect everyone. 

Al Pugsley 

9029 Rosewood Dr. 

Prairie Village, KS 66207 
183

From: Anne Nielsen [nielsena57@gmail.com]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 10:03 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: For EPA consideration

 November 5, 2013 

Thank you for the opportunity to express my views to this EPA panel. 

May I begin by applauding EPA for proposing to regulate coal and natural gas through air quality protections. 

If these standards are strong enough, they will be a significant advance from where we stand now. Polluters 

will be held accountable, with the price paid by those who have profited from the use, especially of coal, finally 

paying at least part of the price. 

 

I am an emeritus professor of Biology from Blue Ridge Community College. At this and other colleges where I 

taught in my working career, global warming was always in the curriculum. But only as I reached retirement 

age has the situation become truly alarming, as the politics of dealing with carbon emissions has collided with 

climate change already underway and a generation of climate scientists under attack from government agents in 

the U.S., Canada and Britain, perhaps others. I am also a founding member of the Climate Action Alliance of 

the Valley, a local grassroots organization now in its fifth year. 

While attempts to "put a price on carbon" have been made by members of the US Congress several times, they 

have always been successfully defeated, either by entrenched commercial interests or by an economic recession 

that made them afraid to push this. 

Now, however, it will be necessary to do something far more drastic if we intend to avoid the worst scenarios of 

climate chaos which the best models of climate change have consistently presented: We must stay under 2 

degrees Celsius of additional warming. The global fever has already risen by 1 degree C., so there is no longer 

a margin of error nor time to debate whether energy efficiency or alternative energies might suffice. We will 

need every measure, every technology, including banning the use or sale of coal here and by export, and the 

interim use of nuclear energy if we are to reduce carbon emissions by 10%/annum, the only measure that will 

now be enough. 

Yes, raise my taxes, let the president be seen wearing a sweater, let Congress deal with this or be removed from 

office, but it must be done. Had we heeded President Carter, this would be behind us now. Instead we elected 

Reagan, and we lost that momentum. 

I have grandchildren now. What will their world be like? And I also care about the countless animals, plants, 

bugs, microbes that are a part of earth's systems, so finely adapted to the roles they play, and whose loss will be 

immeasurably sad as well as damaging those systems in unpredictable ways. 

So please do what you can, do it now, do it quickly, plug your ears against the flood of vitriol that will surely 

come from certain elements in Congress, from the Chamber of Commerce and those who fund them, from the 

Koch Brothers and Warren Buffet and other powerful interests who stand to lose short term but massive profits. 

This is your moment, and we're counting on you and behind you all the way. 

 Sincerely, 

 Anne W. Nielsen 

 256-A Rocco Ave. 

 Harrisonburg, VA 22801 
184

 

 
185

From: drupal_admin@epa.gov on behalf of Gail Downward [eg315@comcast.net]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 9:43 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Webform Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Submitted on Tue, 11/05/2013 - 09:42 

Submitted values are: 

Name: Gail Downward 

Email: eg315@comcast.net

Comments: Please vote for stricter regulations on carbon emissions before more illness, 

disability and death are caused by these pollutants Web Area: Carbon Pollution Standards 
186

From: drupal_admin@epa.gov on behalf of Christine Schuba [silverhillalts@yahoo.com]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 9:41 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Webform Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Submitted on Tue, 11/05/2013 - 09:41 

Submitted values are: 

Name: Christine Schuba 

Email: silverhillalts@yahoo.com

Comments: I live less than 2 miles from one of the top 5 dirtiest coal plants...Ameren In 

Labadie, MO. Now they propose that after living with this pollution my entire lifetime 

(plant went on line when I was a baby) they want to dump toxins in the floodplain & continue 

their pollution of the environment even more! I have 2. Young kids & I am sick and only in 

my 40's...please make them regulate as tightly as possible so we can get to solar, wind, & 

combinations of viable renewable energy sources! They have had leaking ash ponds for over 20 

years in a flood plain!!!! Protect us all!!! Please & Thank You for listening. 

Web Area: Carbon Pollution Standards 
187

From: Susan Cummings [susankcummings@comcast.net]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 8:40 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Don't back down

I am writing to urge you to continue the work of ensuring the safety of the air we breathe. 

Please do not bend to the pressures of the coal mining industry whose claims of "Clean" coal 

are bogus. Our right to clean air outweighs their desire for profit. 

Thank you. 

Susan Cummings 

281.787.4303 

4200 Queenswood, 

Baytown, TX 

Be the Change You Wish to See in the World. 
188

From: Nizich, Sharon

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 7:36 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: FW: Public Hearing

Sharon Nizich 

Minerals and Manufacturing Group 

OAQPS Sector Policies and Programs Division 

US EPA 

Research Triangle Park, NC 

919 541 2825 

From: Esther Sue Holdeman [mailto:susique@cox.net] 

Sent: Monday, November 04, 2013 8:57 PM 

To: Nizich, Sharon 

Subject: Fw: Public Hearing 

 

To: Sharon Nizich

Subject: Public Hearing 

 

From: Esther Holdeman [mailto: susique@cox.net] 

Sent: Monday, November 04, 2013 2:31 PM 

To: 'Nizich.Sharon@epa.gov' 

Subject: EPA invites opinions on coal-plant emissions policy Lenexa, KS. 

 

I will be unable to attend the Lenexa, Ks. Hearing today. Here are my comments. The Jeffrey Energy Center owned by 

Westar Energy, ranked 12th nationally in carbon dioxide emissions, releasing 14.5 million metric tons in 2011 or 

equivalent of 3 million passenger car miles. The La Cygne, plant owned by Kansas City Power and Light, ranked 69th on 

the national list of emissions. It emitted 8.2 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions. These emissions levels are 

unacceptable. Please keep these facts in mind as you deliberate over future carbon emissions. Please hold the new 

project in Holcomb Ks. to the highest standards of emissions control. I believe the Kansas Department of Health and 

Environment incorrectly interpreted state and federal law when approving a 2010 permit to Sunflower Electric Power 

Corp. of Hays. KDHE failed to take into account revised nitrogen dioxide and sulfur dioxide restrictions. This needs to be 

corrected. 

 

Thank you, 

 

Esther Holdeman 

susique@cox.net

722 East 10th Street 

Newton, Ks. 67114 
189

From: Nizich, Sharon

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 7:20 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: FW: EPA invites opinions on coal-plant emissions policy Lenexa, KS.

Sharon Nizich 

Minerals and Manufacturing Group 

OAQPS Sector Policies and Programs Division 

US EPA 

Research Triangle Park, NC 

919 541 2825 

From: Roger Rutschman [mailto:rrutschman@cox.net] 

Sent: Monday, November 04, 2013 3:31 PM 

To: Nizich, Sharon 

Subject: EPA invites opinions on coal-plant emissions policy Lenexa, KS. 

I will be unable to attend the Lenexa, Ks. Hearing today. Here are my comments. The Jeffrey Energy Center owned by 

Westar Energy, ranked 12th nationally in carbon dioxide emissions, releasing 14.5 million metric tons in 2011 or 

equivalent of 3 million passenger car miles. The La Cygne plant owned by Kansas City Power and Light ranked 69th on 

the national list. It emitted 8.2 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions. These emissions levels are 

unacceptable. Please keep these facts in mind as you deliberate over future carbon emissions. Please hold the new 

project in Holcomb Ks. to the highest standards of emissions control. I believe the Kansas Department of Health and 

Environment incorrectly interpreted state and federal law when approving a 2010 permit to Sunflower Electric Power 

Corp. of Hays. KDHE failed to take into account revised nitrogen dioxide and sulfur dioxide restrictions. This needs to be 

corrected. 

Thank you, 

Roger Rutschman 

rrutschman@cox.net

304 SE 7th Street 

Newton, Ks. 67114 
190

From: Robert Sommer [rsommer@kc.rr.com]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 6:46 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: EPA Region 7: Comment on carbon pollution

Re: Regulation of carbon pollution from coal-fired power plants 

To the EPA: 

During the EPA Region 7 listening session on November 4, 2013, only one speaker who opposed strengthening 

EPA standards for coal-fired power plants addressed the question of whether carbon emissions were harming 

the planet—and he relied on junk science to do so, denying that a problem even existed. No one else from 

that camp spoke to the issue of carbon pollution or climate disruption. Rather they chose to rely on faulty 

logic and flawed data (when they used any data at all) to claim that tougher standards would harm the 

economy. 

Coal pollution has badly damaged our planet, and the damage to air, water, wildlife, and the quality of 

human life only grows worse. The U.S. should take a leadership role in establishing a standard that will close 

every coal-fired plant in the country by mid-century. Meanwhile existing coal plants should be required to 

mitigate their emissions to the toughest standards available technology will allow. 

The cheapest and cleanest energy is the energy we don’t use. It is past time for the U.S. to develop a 

program of conservation on a scale that exceeds the nationwide effort that went into World War II. The coal 

plants have to go—and the way of life we lead must change. The planet can no longer accommodate the 

frenzy of carbon emissions we have poured into the atmosphere during the past century. 

Robert F. Sommer

12020 Westgate St. 

Overland Park, KS 66213
191

From: David Nadolski [david.nadolski@gmail.com]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 2:17 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Contact Us Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Hello! 

My name is David Nadolski and I am a climate leader who attended Al Gores Climate Reality 

Project. It was at that event when I came up with an idea that stumped the panelists. They 

wondered out loud at the summit why they hadn't thought of this and told me it was a great 

idea. 

My idea is simply this: to elect board members of publicly held and traded companies who are 

considered environmentally friendly and then send to supporters who the EPA's endorsed 

candidate is for that elected position. This way we evoke change from within and as an 

investor I have an incentive to send back that envelope with my vote in it while knowing I 

did something major to create change. This way we are changing corporate America company by 

company. 

I hope that helps! 

David J. Nadolski 

Chicago, IL 

Sent from my iPhone 
192

From: drupal_admin@epa.gov on behalf of max hosey [max@townhallsf.com]

Sent: Tuesday, November 05, 2013 1:55 AM

To: Carbon Pollution Input

Subject: Webform Comment: Carbon Pollution Standards Website

Submitted on Tue, 11/05/2013 - 01:54 

Submitted values are: 

Name: max hosey 

Email: max@townhallsf.com

Comments: 

Hello EPA, Coal and gas-fired power plants hurt our communities and our climate. They are one 

of the worst sources of climate pollution in the United States, and until now, they've been 

allowed to pollute without limits. 

Carbon pollution is the main cause of climate problems, which means more droughts, wildfires, 

and storms. This costs Americans over $140 billion a year. Each family's share is over $1,000 

per year. Fossil fuel companies are getting rich, but our families and communities pay the 

bill. 

Carbon pollution is also linked to dangerous air pollution like the smog that triggers asthma 

attacks. 

If the clean air protections are strong enough, then rich fossil fuel companies will no 

longer get a free pass to pollute. They won't be able to dump unlimited amounts of climate 

pollution into our air anymore. These safeguards will also protect families from dangerous 

air pollution like toxic mercury, dirty soot and the smog that triggers asthma attacks. 

We can’t give a free pass to natural gas -- more gas in the electricity sector just means 

more fracking and more pollution. We need strong standards that limit pollution from coal AND 

natural gas-fired power plants, and we need a commitment to true clean energy like wind and 

solar. 

Polluters can't balance their books on the backs of the poor. We need protections that make 

sure pollution doesn't disproportionately hurt America’s poorest and most vulnerable 

communities. 

Strong standards will hold polluters accountable. 

We can get rid of more than a third of the climate pollution from power plants so that we hit 

our nation's climate goals - what scientists say we need to do to stop runaway climate 

change. 

It's a win-win - we can modernize and clean up our communities and create new jobs at the 

same time. 

Web Area: Carbon Pollution Standards