CFE agenda 091415 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Last Wednesday, the Senate Agriculture and Environment Committee adopted a substitute draft of H 571 that would prohibit DENR from taking any action or expending any state resources on development of a CO2 reduction plan until all legal challenges to the federal rule had been resolved or until July 1, 2016 (whichever came later). Asked to comment on the proposed substitute bill, Secretary van der Vaart indicated that DENR would prefer to submit a CO2 reduction plan by June 30, 2016 as required under the federal rule — but a plan based entirely on reducing power plant emissions. (Note: The bill has not yet gone to the floor for a vote and discussions between the Senate and DENR are apparently ongoing.) Most states have started planning to meet the CO2 reduction targets. Even in coal - producing states where political opposition to the EPA rule tends to be highest, state air quality agencies have begun sketching out CO2 reduction scenarios in case the rule survives the expected legal challenges. Only one state — Oklahoma — has prohibited its environmental agency from developing a plan. A recent Washington Post story reported that even coal- dominated states like Kentucky seem confident of meeting the CO2 reduction target thanks in part to recent investments in renewable energy generation. It isn't clear that any state other than North Carolina has decided to develop a plan based solely on CO2 reductions at coal -fired power plants. All of which leaves something of a public policy mystery. A state with significant advantages in renewable energy, energy efficiency and already on the road to transitioning power plants from coal to natural gas seems to have settled on a policy that throws those advantages away. Instead of working with electric utilities, consumers and environmental organizations to develop the most cost - effective CO2 reduction plan for the state, DENR intends to unilaterally develop a plan based entirely on reducing power plant emissions. Moreover, it isn't clear why or what that policy choice could cost the state. Robin Smith is a lawyer with more than 25 years of experience in environmental law and policy and a former Assistant Secretary for Environment at the North Carolina Department of Environment and Natural Resources. She blogs at hp: / /wwwosmithenvironmentocom/