Union of Concerned Scientists Docket 10 No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2011-0660 

Citizens and Scientists for Environmental Solutions 

Testimony of Rachel Cleetus in support of EPA's Power Plant Carbon Standard 

On behalf of the Union of Concerned Scientists 

May24, 2012 

Thank you for the opportunity to testify today in support of EPA's power plant carbon 

standard. My name is Rachel Cleetus and I am a senior climate economist at the Union of 

Concerned Scientists (UCS}. UCS is the nation's leading science-based nonprofit working for 

a healthy environment and a safer world. We work to advance both awareness of the 

science of climate change, and the solutions available to help lower emissions and mitigate 

some of the worst impacts of climate change. 

On behalf of UCS's more than 400,000 supporters, and network of more than 18,000 

scientists, I want to say today that we strongly support the Environmental Protection 

Agency's (EPA} efforts to regulate carbon emissions from fossil fuel-fired power plants 

under the Clean Air Act. Our supporters have written over 55,000 supportive comments to 

EPA, which is part of over one million such comments that are being delivered to the EPA. 

We believe that EPA's actions are firmly grounded in science. The threat posed by 

unchecked climate change, which is driven by human activities, has been clearly articulated 

by numerous national and international scientific organizations, including the U.S. National 

Academy of Sciences. If we fail to make deep reductions in our carbon emissions, we will 

greatly increase the risk of serious economic, public health and environmental 

consequences including sea level rise, extreme weather events, increased risks of asthma 

and heat stress, a strain on water resources and the loss or degradation of vital 

ecosystems. 

www.ucsusa.org Two Brattle Square· Cambridge. MA 02138-378o ·TEL: 617.547.5552 ·FAX: 617.864.9405 

1825 K Street NW ·Suite 8oo ·Washington, DC 20006·1232 ·TEL: 202.223.6133 · FAX: 202.223.6162 

2397 Shattuck Avenue · Suite 203 • Berkeley, CA 94704-1567 ·TEL: 510.843.1872 · FAX: 510.843.3785 

One North LaSalle Street · Suite 1904 ·Chicago, IL 6o6o2·4064 · TEL: 312.578.1750 · FAX: 312.578.1751 

Printed on too% Post-Consumer Recycled Paper 
Union of Concerned Scientists 

Citizens and Scientists for Environmental Solutions 

EPA' s obligation and authority to regulate global warming emissions under the Clean Air 

Act is clearly supported by a 2007 Supreme Court ruling1 and the subsequent 

endangerment finding issued by the agency in 2009. 2 In 2010, carbon dioxide (C02) 

emissions from power plants were the largest single source of U.S. C02 emissions, 

responsible for approximately 40 percent of these emissions. 3 Taking action to reduce 

emissions from the electricity sector is therefore crucial to our overall efforts to tackle 

climate change. 

EPA's draft proposal for carbon standards for new power plants is a good start. Setting an 

ambitious but achievable output-based standard that is applied uniformly to all new fossilfuel fired power plants will help ensure a transition to cleaner generation sources over 

time. We believe the standard would be improved by lowering it from 1000 pounds C02 per 

megawatt-hour (lbs COy'MWh) of electricity generated to 800 lbs COy'MWh, a level of 

emissions that is currently achievable by a modern natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) unit. 

As EPA has noted, based on EIA's 2011 reference case forecast, there are no new 

conventional coal-fired power plants projected to be built through 2030, beyond a handful 

of plants that are currently under development. EIA's most recent projections4 carry the 

same message: even under a business-as-usual scenario, virtually no new conventional 

coal-fired plants are forecast to be built through 2035. Low natural gas prices, mounting 

production and pollution costs of coal-fired power, and increased competition from low1 Massachusetts et al. v. Environmental Protection Agency et al. 2007. http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/06pdf/OS1120.pdf 2 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2009. Endangerment and cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases 

Under Section 202(a} of t he Clean Air Act; Final Rule. 40 CFR Chapter I. 

http://epa.gov/climatechange/endangerment/downloads/Federal Register-EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-Q171-Dec.15-Q9.pdf 3 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2012. Inventory of US Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks, 1990-2010. 

http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/downloads12/US-GHG-Inventory-2012-Main-Text.pdf 4 Energy Information Administration. 2012. Annual Energy Outlook 2012 Early Release Overview. 

http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/er/ 

www.ucsusa.org Two Brattle Square· Cambridge. MA 02138·378o ·TEL: 617.547·5552 · FAX: 617.864.9405 

1825 K Street NW ·Suite 800 ·Washington. OC 20006·1232 ·TEL: 202.223.6133 • FAX: 202.223.6162 

2397 Shattuck Avenue· Suite 203 · Berkeley. CA 9470.4·1567 · TEL: 510.843.1872 · FAX: 510.843.3785 

One North LaSalle Street· Suite 1904 ·Chicago. IL 6o6o2·4064 ·TEL: 312.578.1750 ·FAX: 312.578.1751 

Printed on too% Post-Consumer Recycled Paper 
Union of Concerned Scientists 

Citizens and Scientists for Environmental Solutions 

cost alternatives like energy efficiency and renewable energy are making coal-fired power 

plants increasingly uneconomic. Thus the proposed carbon standard for new plants simply 

underscores a reality that is already underway. 

We do have some serious reservations about the 30-year averaging alternative compliance 

mechanism proposed, both because of difficulties in enforcing the provisions of this 

mechanism and because of concerns about the cost and performance assumptions for 

carbon capture and sequestration (CCS} technology. If this provision remains in the final 

rule, it must be significantly tightened to ensure that it does not merely serve as a loophole 

for new high-emitting power plants to continue to be built with a high risk that those 

emissions may never be significantly reduced. Furthermore, we do not see a reason for 

special treatment for CCS. EPA should explore the possibility of alternative compliance 

mechanisms that utilize other measures that help reduce emissions, such as energy 

efficiency and renewable energy. These options are already readily available and affordable 

and therefore far less risky than banking on CCS. 

Of course reducing emissions from the power sector requires that we also set standards for 

the existing fleet of power plants, which are the main source of emissions currently. Since 

much of our current fleet of power plants is old, inefficient and dirty, there are significant 

opportunities to lower emissions by modernizing our electric system. Now that EPA has 

moved to regulate emissions from new power plants under section lll(b} of the Clean Air 

Act, we note that it is legally obligated to similarly regulate emissions from existing power 

plants under section lll(d}. As EPA itself has stated in the draft rule: Once the 

Administrator promulgates standards for new sources under CAA section 111{b}, the States, 

consistent with EPA regulatory requirements, must take action under CAA section 111{d) to 

establish requirements for "any existing source for ony air pollutant (i) [that falls into 

specified categories] but (ii) to which a standard of performance under this section would 

apply if such existing source were a new source .... " 

www.ucsusa.org Two Brat tie Square · (ambridge, MA 02138·3780 · TEL: 617.547.5552 • FAX: 617.864.9405 

1825 K Street NW • Suite 800 • Washington, DC 200o6·U32 · TEL: 202.223.6133 · FAX: 202.223.6162 

2397 Shattuck Avenue· Suite 203 ·Berkeley, CA 94704-1567 ·TEL: 510.843.1872 ·FAX: 510.843.3785 

One North LaSalle Street· Suite 1904 • Chicago, IL 6o6o2-4064 ·TEL: 312.578.1750 • FAX: 312.578.1751 

Printed on 100% Post-Consumer Recycled Paper 
Union of Concerned Scientists 

Citizens and Scientists for Environmental Solutions 

We hope to see a draft proposal for existing plants issued in a timely fashion. This will 

provide more certainty to investors and utilities as they make decisions about how best to 

meet all their Clean Air Act obligations. 

We encourage EPA's efforts to engage with and consult with states and appropriate 

stakeholders to ensure that standards for the existing fleet are well-coordinated with state 

actions to reduce carbon emissions. Several states and regions have taken a leadership role 

in setting up carbon reduction programs and they should have appropriate incentives to 

continue to implement and strengthen their programs. In all cases the Clean Air Act 

standards for the existing fleet should provide an ambitious framework to encourage 

greater emission reductions than would occur without it. We especially encourage EPA to 

conduct this dialog in an open fashion, perhaps by holding public listening sessions with 

relevant stakeholders. 

The work that the EPA has begun to reduce global warming emissions is of crucial 

importance to the health and well-being of Americans. We request that you move quickly 

to finalize these carbon standards for new power plants, and we also urge you to issue 

strong carbon standards for existing power plants without delay. Ultimately, other strong 

actions will be required to achieve the deep reductions in emissions needed to reduce or 

avoid some of the worst impacts of climate change, but these standards are very necessary 

and important first steps. 

UCS will also be submitting detailed written comments related to the power plant carbon 

standard by June 25, which we hope will be taken into account as you move forward to 

finalize these standards. 

On behalf of UCS and all our members and supporters, we thank you for all the good work 

you are doing. 

www.ucsusa.org Two Brattle Square · Cambridge, MA 02138·378o • TEL: 617.547.5552 • FAX: 617.864.9405 

1825 K Street NW • Suite 800 • Washington, DC 20006·1232 • TEL: 202.223.6133 • FAX: 202.223.6162 

2397 Shattuck Avenue· Suite 203 • Berkeley, CA 94704-1567 ·TEL: 510.843.1872 • FAX: 510.843.3785 

One North LaSalle Street· Suite 1904 ·Chicago, IL 6o6o2-4064 ·TEL: 312.578.1750 ·FAX: 312.578.1751 

Printed on 100% Post-Consumer Recycled Paper