CHEAPER AND CLEANER:

Using the Clean Air Act to SharpCarbon Pollution from Existing PPlants, Delivering Health, Enviroand Economic BenefitsMarch 2014 Update
“We limit the amount of toxic chemicals like mercury and sulfur and arsenic in our air or our water, but 

power plants can still dump unlimited amounts of carbon pollution into the air for free. That’s not right, that’s not safe, and it needs to stop.”-President Obama, June 25th, 2013

CLOSING THE POWER PLANT CARBON POLLUTION LSMART WAYS THE CLEAN AIR ACT CAN CLEAN UP AMERICA’SBIGGEST CLIMATE POLLUTERS
THE TIMELINE

January 20th End of President Obama's second term. 

2017

January 20th Start of President Obama's second term.

June 25th President Obama announces Climate Action Plan.September 20th EPA proposes carbon pollution standards for future 

2013

May 9th End of public comment period for future power pla

June 1st EPA to propose guideline for carbon pollution stan

power plants.

June-September Public comment period on existing power plant pro

2014

June 1st 2015 EPA to finalize power plant carbon pollution standaJune 30th States to submit implementation plans for existing 

power plants to EPA.

July-December EPA reviews state plans for compliance with its gui

2016
9 EPA proposes “emission guideline” June 2014, final June 2015. 

9 Guideline includes performance standard and compliance provisions.9 States have until June 2016 to adopt and submit state plans. If a state 

submits no plan, or one EPA cannot approve, EPA must issue a federal pla

EPA CO2 Emissions Guideline & State Plans

THE CLEAN AIR ACT AND EXISTING POWER PLANTSTHE “101” ON 111 (d)

9 “Source-based” approach limited to options plants can do “within the fe

(e.g. heat-rate improvements) – yields limited reductions, higher costs

9 “System-based” approach includes all options that reduce emissions –yie

deeper reductions, lower costs

Heat-rate improvements Shifting generation from coal to gasIncreasing zero -emission power (renewables and nuclear) Increasing energy efficiency 

“Best System of Emission Reduction”
State-specific fossil-fleet average CO2 emission rates (lbs/MW

for 2020 and 2025Calculated by applying benchmark coal and gas rates to each state’s baseline (2008-2010) fossil generation mixAveraging allowed among all fossil units in state (including neunits subject to the 111(b) standard)States may opt in to interstate averaging or credit tradingCredit for incremental renewables and energy efficiency (equivalent to adding MWhs to denominator in calculating emission rate for compliance purposes)

NRDC PROPOSALSYSTEM-BASED, STATE SPECIFIC STANDARDS

States may adopt alternative plans, including mass-based standards, provided they achieve equivalent emission reductio
FLEXIBLE 

COMPLIANCE OPTIONS

Heat rate reductions Cleaner power sources More renewables Investme
Reference Case

Moderate Case,Constrained Efficiency

Ambitious Case,Full Efficiency

AmbitConstra

Ambitious Case,Constrained Efficiency

Moderate Case,Full Efficiency

NRDC SPECIFICATIONSLIST OF SCENARIOS
9 AEO 2013 demand projections

9 Onshore wind costs: DOE/LBL 2012 Wind Technologies Report9 Nuclear units re-licensed

All Cases

NRDC SPECIFICATIONSLIST OF SCENARIOS

9 Full Efficiency Cases: 482 TWh available in 2020 (Synapse)9 Constrained Efficiency Cases: 241 TWh available in 2020

Efficiency AssumptionsAmbition Assumptions
EE Program Costs (cents/kWh) 2013-2020 Low 2.3 Middle 2.6 High 3.2 

9Same energy efficiency potential (maximum MWhs saved) as in 2012 analysis 9Divided evenly into three cost blocks in each region, 482 TWh in total

Energy Efficiency Quantity Assumptions

9Costs apply nationwide, do not vary 

across regions

9Derived based on utility program costs 

from Synapse and relative values from LBNL cost curve to estimate costs of each block

9Middle cost block is equal to the 

Synapse utility program cost 

9Customer contribution at 45% of total 

cost is included in cost-benefit calculations

Energy Efficiency Cost Assumptions

NRDC SPECIFICATIONSSIMPLE ENERGY EFFICIENCY SUPPLY CURVE
2012 Actual 2020 Reference

NRDC POLICY CASES vs REFERENCE CASEGENERATION MIX: 2012 vs. 2020 REFERENCE CASE
NRDC POLICY CASES vs REFERENCE CASE

PROJECTED GENERATION MIX IN 2020
NRDC POLICY CASES vs REFERENCE CASEEMISSIONS 2014-2025

Historical

-

500

1,0001,5002,0002,5003,000

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2

CO2 Emissions (short tons)
NRDC POLICY CASES vs REFERENCE CASE

EMISSIONS REDUCTIONS IN 2020: CO2 SO2 NO

x

CO2 reductions are more 

than double those from EPA’s vehicle emission standards.

SO2 reductions add onethird to reductions from 

MATS.

Nox reduccomparabvehicle red
NRDC POLICY CASES vs REFERENCE CASE

COSTS AND BENEFITS FROM REDUCED EMISSIONS IN 2020
ddoniger@nrdc.org

syeh@nrdc.org

dhawkins@nrdc.org