US to seek 30-percent emissions cut

Jun 02, 2014
Emissions spew out of a large stack at the coal fired Morgantown Generating Station, on May 29, 2014 in Newburg, Maryland

The US government will propose a rule Monday requiring power plants to cut by 30 percent carbon dioxide emissions by 2030 based on 2005 levels, US media reported Sunday.

The Wall Street Journal cited people briefed on the rule as saying the Environmental Protection Agency's draft measure was due to be completed within a year.

It will give leeway to US states to decide how to fulfil the reductions targets, such as through new cap-and-trade programs, deploying more renewable energy or developing energy-efficient technologies.

Although each state will have difference standards of reduction, the national average will stand at 25 percent by 2020 and 30 percent by 2030, according to the Journal.

The Washington Post said the plan would cut five million metric tons of carbon dioxide by 2030, which may make it President Barack Obama's most sweeping .

US officials declined to comment.

The hundreds of power plants whose emissions will be controlled include about 600 coal plants, which will be the most affected by the new rule.

Power plants account for about 40 percent of in the United States.

Even as natural gas gains in popularity, coal remains a key component in the American energy landscape. Wyoming leads the pack of 25 states that mine the fossil fuel, followed by West Virginia, Kentucky, Pennsylvania and Illinois.

Hundreds of coal-fired dotted across the country provide about 37 percent of the US electricity supply, ahead of natural gas (30 percent) and nuclear reactors (19 percent).

The Obama administration's approach has faced criticism from the coal industry and business officials who say it will cause coal miners to lose their jobs and may trigger electricity shortages.

The Electric Reliability Coordinating Council lobby group, a coal-based energy lobby, cited a study as saying that the emissions limits would cost 2.85 million lost jobs and $13 to $17 billion a year to consumers from 2018 to 2033.

The group also expressed concern that the new rule could place the United States at a disadvantage over major developing economies such as China and India.

"Our trading partners with measurably worse environmental records may be the real winners when the US goes it alone with unilateral carbon regulations," it said.

Explore further: 'Obama wants to force coal plants to reduce emissions'

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Report: Use of coal to generate power rises

Jul 12, 2013

Power plants in the United States are burning coal more often to generate electricity, reversing the growing use of natural gas and threatening to increase domestic emissions of greenhouse gases after a period of decline, ...

Fewer US nuclear plants could curb climate change fight

May 07, 2014

Nuclear power plants in the United States increasingly risk closure amid growing competition from cheap natural gas, which experts said could hamper President Barack Obama's efforts to combat climate change.

Obama officials: Rule won't kill coal-fired power

Sep 18, 2013

President Barack Obama's top energy and environmental officials said Wednesday there is a future for coal, despite a pending regulation aimed at limiting global warming pollution from new power plants that ...

US to limit emissions at new power plants

Sep 20, 2013

The US Environmental Protection Agency proposed Friday to limit carbon dioxide emissions from new power plants in a bid to implement President Barack Obama's plan to fight climate change.

Recommended for you

'Shocking' underground water loss in US drought

Jul 24, 2014

A major drought across the western United States has sapped underground water resources, posing a greater threat to the water supply than previously understood, scientists said Thursday.

User comments : 1

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

mbee1
2.3 / 5 (3) Jun 03, 2014
The lies on this subject of global warming just go on and on. Take the picture, that is not pollution coming out of the stack, it is steam. The 30 percent reduction is from 2005 a record high year the real reduction is about 15 percent. The states or states groups will have other reduction numbers rather than an across the board reduction of 30 or 15 percent. It should be noticed that in the ice core studies, 800,000 years of data, CO2 level changes never caused a climate change. The current Mauno Loa study also shows zero correlation between CO2 levels and climate change. Perhaps somebody will notice that the current temperature is less than in 900-1000 AD when CO2 was half todays levels. Finally the climate has not actually changed in 17 years per the giss data set.