WASHINGTON, D.C. – Senator Thom Tillis recently joined Senator Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), Ranking Member of the Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee, and 37 of their Senate colleagues in urging Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Michael Regan to withdraw the unlawful “Clean Power Plan 2.0.” The plan effectively shuts down affordable and reliable energy, intensifying the energy shortage the United States is already facing.
“The EPA has again grossly misinterpreted the scope of authority Congress granted under Section 111 of the Clean Air Act by proposing a rule that would require generation shifting and transform our nation’s power sector with neither a clear and explicit congressional authorization nor adequate process as required under the Administrative Procedure Act,” the senators wrote.
“As you know, the power plants being targeted by this rule are not only having to comply with this regulation. They are also being targeted by the agency’s overarching power plant strategy, called the Electric Generating Unit (EGU) Strategy, as a way to shutter fossil-fuel power plants and bolster President Biden’s climate goals. If the proposed Clean Power Plan 2.0 is finalized along with the rest of the EGU Strategy, our country will face a crisis in electricity supply that will dwarf the regional outages that we have seen in California, Texas, and New England in recent years,” the senators continued. “We request the EPA expeditiously withdraw this unlawful proposal.”
Issued by the Biden Administration’s EPA in May, the Clean Power Plan 2.0 would require almost all fossil fuel plants to cut or capture nearly all their CO2 emissions. If finalized, the rule will mark the first time the federal government has limited carbon emissions from existing power plants. Approximately 60 percent of the country’s electricity comes from fossil fuels, including 22 percent from coal, according to 2021 data from the Energy Information Agency (EIA).
The proposed rule requires fuel switching, which directly conflicts with the Supreme Court’s ruling in West Virginia v. EPA. The proposal’s “best system of emission reduction” has not been adequately demonstrated, as required by the Clean Air Act.
Read the letter in full here.
###
