Testimony ofThomas D Schuster on behalfofSierra Club Clean Power Plan Proposed Rule Docket ID # EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0602 Thursday, July 31, 2014 Pittsburgh Hearing
Good afternoon. My name is Tom Schuster, and I live at 605 23'd Street in Windber, PA. I represent the Sierra Club, which has over 24,000 members in Pennsylvania. Ialso represent mywife and especially mythree-year-old daughter, who is still tooyoungto speak for herself, butwho will have to deal with the consequences ofthe decisions the grown-ups will make overthe next several years, for better orworse.

We fully supportthe proposal by the EPA to limit carbon pollution from existing power plants forthe firsttime in history. The costs offailing to adequately deal with climate disruption, caused mainly by carbon pollution, are immense. By the end ofthe century, the northeast as a region is expected to see an additional 57 days peryear (nearly 2 more full months) oftemperatures over95 degrees. 1 This will have severe consequences on our health, our economy, and the infrastructure and natural systems on which we all depend.
Higher average temperature leads to worse air quality, and in turn more hospital admissions and premature deaths, particularly among children. It leads tothe spread of insect borne diseases that were once only problems in the tropics. It leads to morefrequent intense storms, which can damage our homes and threaten our lives with high winds and flooding. It also threatens our economy. A 10-yearflood in Allegheny County costs over $8 billion to clean up, and that is moneythat can't be invested in growing our regional economy. These will only become more severe. Agriculture currently employs more people in Pennsylvania than extraction ofcoal, oil, and gas combined.2 It is projected to suffer from extreme heat, droughts and storms, and could shed manythousands ofjobs.

1 http:I Iriskybusiness.orglreportloverview Iregionslnortheast 2 US Bureau of Economic Analysis, 2012 statisticsThese are just some examples ofthe severe and permanent consequences of inaction, which would dwarfany transitional impacts ofcleaning up carbon pollution. Fortunatelythough, the transition does not need to be difficult. In fact, Pennsylvania is already well on its wayto meeting the proposed target. We have energy efficiency requirements and clean energy requirements that are already
on the books and being implemented that will get us over 1/3 ofthe way to our proposed target. When we add in coal plant retirements that have already taken place since 2012 and additional retirements or conversions to gas that have already been announced, we will be morethan halfwaythere.

But there is much more we can doto implement clean energy and efficiency in Pennsylvania. Our current annual efficiencytargets are half ofwhat many leading states are achieving. Our current Tier I clean energytarget is only 8%, compared to 20% for Maryland, 22% for NewJersey, and 25% for Delaware. Ifwe simply match the commitments ofother leading states by doubling our commitment to efficiency and achieving 20% renewable energy by 2030, we will meet over 96% of
ourtarget. That's before we even start talking about upgrades to the power plants themselves.
Energy efficiency saves us money. Through the firstfour years of our energy efficiency program, ratepayers in Pennsylvania saw savings of nearly $4.2 billion, equal to $2.40 saved for every dollar invested. 3 And we've only scratched the surface. Efficiency investments createjobs directly, but also boost the broader economy by putting more spending money in families' pockets.
Investing in renewable energy also saves us money. Earlierthis year, a study was conducted by PJM, the regional grid operator, on the impacts of integrating up to 30% renewable energy by 2026. 4 Itfound that by using 30% solar and wind we would save up to $16 billion peryear on electricity production, because it would replace the least efficient and most expensive power plants. It also found that there would be no significant reliability issues from phasing in this level of

3 Act 129 Statewide Evaluatorfinal report, March 2014. 4 PJM Renewable Integration Study, Executive Summary Report, Revision 05, March 31, 2014.renewable energy. Wind and solar also create morejobs than natural gas and coal per dollar invested, per MW ofcapacity, and per MWh orgeneration. Nationally, there are already morejobs in the wind and solar industrythan in coal mining and coal powergeneration, so the potential is enormous. By one estimate, Pennsylvania could create 500,000 40-yearjobs by transitioning to 100% renewable energy by 2050, which would be over 10times morejobs than the coal industry in the state currently supports. 5

Ifwe act to limit our carbon pollution, the coal mining sector will certainly be impacted. But ifwe don't act, all other sectors will be impacted. That does not
mean that we can neglect mineworkers, their families, and communities like my hometown. We need to commit to helping them transitionjustas we have helped tobacco farming and logging communities transition in the past. I am very confident that we can dothis, butwe cannot leave itto chance. Fortunately, this plan provides for a great deal offlexibility in how states meettheirtargets, and sufficient planningtime fortransition.

What we simply cannot afford to do, however, is wait any longerto address climate change. The longer we wait, the harderthetransition will be, and the
worse offwe all will be due to climate disruption. But ifwe begin now, we can still achieve a cleaner, healthier, and more prosperous future. Thank you for your time.

5 http:/ /thesolutionsproject.org/infographic/#pa