As the EPA’s long-awaited rule to control emissions from existing power plants draws near – the official announcement is expected Monday – stakeholders and lobbyists on both sides of the debate are sharpening their swords. The issue has also taken on considerable political significance ahead of the November elections. Fossil fuel interests are releasing estimates of power price spikes, job losses and decreased reliability, while environmental groups and climate change activists project new job opportunities and costs savings. “Because the new U.S. rules would take years to implement, perception matters more than facts, particularly ahead of November elections, said Andrew Holland, a former Republican legislative aide who is now an energy analyst at the American Security Project, a nonpartisan think tank. The industry’s arguments have ‘the virtue of not being testable’ before the midterm elections, he said, noting previous EPA rules have ended up being cheaper than industry feared. ‘It turns out that engineers are better at this than the lawyers expect them to be,’ said Holland. [Reuters] Check back later today for Breaking Energy coverage of the EPA rule battle.
Meanwhile on the other side of the Atlantic, the European Union is struggling to hatch a plan that satisfies the twin goals reducing carbon emissions while increasing energy security – without causing economically-depressing price spikes. The European Commission released a new energy security strategy Wednesday that environmental groups attacked for relying too heavily on natural gas and not enough on energy efficiency and renewables. “Increasing indigenous energy production was also listed as a priority by the commission. But as well as including renewable energy, which has been the main focus in the past, this would now explicitly include “sustainable production of fossil fuels”, which would be expected to include shale gas.” [The Guardian]
Back in the US a more local battle is brewing over the proposed Dominion Cove Point LNG liquefaction project. Environmental groups filed for a 60-day extension to comment on FERC’s Environmental Assessment, while API and the project developers filed in opposition to the request. [Sutherland LNG Law Blog]
