IEA Countries To Release 60 Million Barrels Of Reserve Oil

Jun 23: International Energy Agency (IEA) Executive Director Nobuo Tanaka announced that the 28 IEA member countries, including the United States, have agreed to release 60 million barrels (mb) of oil in the coming month in response to the ongoing disruption of oil supplies from Libya. IEA said this supply disruption has been underway for some time and its effect has become more pronounced as it has continued. The normal seasonal increase in refiner demand expected for this summer will exacerbate the shortfall further. Greater tightness in the oil market threatens to undermine the fragile global economic recovery.

    In deciding to take the collective action, IEA member countries agreed to make "2 million barrels of oil per day" available from their emergency stocks over an initial period of 30 days. Leading up to this decision, the IEA has been in close consultation with major producing countries, as well as with key non-IEA importing countries. Tanaka said, "Today, for the third time in the history of the International Energy Agency, our member countries have decided to release stocks. I expect this action will contribute to well-supplied markets and to ensuring a soft landing for the world economy."

    The IEA estimates that the unrest in Libya had removed 132 mb of light, sweet crude oil from the market by the end of May. Although there are huge uncertainties, analysts generally agree that Libyan supplies will largely remain off the market for the rest of 2011. Given this loss and the seasonal increase in demand, the IEA warmly welcomes the announced intentions to increase production by major oil producing countries. As these production increases will inevitably take time and world economies are still recovering, the threat of a serious market tightening, particularly for some grades of oil, poses an immediate requirement for additional oil or products to be made available to the market. The IEA collective action is intended to complement expected increases in output by these producing countries, to help bridge the gap until sufficient additional oil from them reaches global markets.

    Total oil stocks in IEA member countries amount to over 4.1 billion barrels, and nearly 1.6 billion barrels of this are public stocks held exclusively for emergency purposes. IEA net oil-importing countries have a legal obligation to hold emergency oil reserves equivalent to at least 90 days of net oil imports. These countries are holding stock levels well above this minimum amount, currently at 146 days of net imports.The IEA Governing Board will within 30 days of this notice reassess the oil market, review the impact of their coordinated action and decide on possible future steps.

 

    In the United States, Department of Energy Secretary Steven Chu announced that the U.S. and its partners in IEA have decided to release a total of 60 million barrels of oil onto the world market over the next 30 days to offset the disruption in the oil supply caused by unrest in the Middle East. He said the U.S. will release "30 million barrels" of oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR). The SPR is currently at a historically high level with 727 million barrels. Chu said, "We are taking this action in response to the ongoing loss of crude oil due to supply disruptions in Libya and other countries and their impact on the global economic recovery. As we move forward, we will continue to monitor the situation and stand ready to take additional steps if necessary."

    Chu indicated that the U.S. has been in close contact with oil producing and consuming countries about disruptions to the international oil market that could affect the global economy. The situation in Libya has caused a loss of roughly 1.5 million barrels of oil per day - particularly of light, sweet crude - from global markets. As the U.S. enters the months of July and August, when demand is typically highest, prices remain significantly higher than they were prior to the start of the unrest in Libya.

    The United Kingdom (UK) is contributing some "3 million barrels." Chris Huhne, UK Secretary of State for Department of Energy and Climate Change said, "This coordinated global action shows that both producer and consumer nations around the world are taking decisive steps to ensure enough oil is available. That's why we strongly welcome Saudi Energy Minister al-Naimi's statement earlier this month that Saudi Arabia and other Gulf countries will increase oil production to supply whatever the market needs."

 

    House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) released a statement on the SPR announcement saying, "Everyone wants to help the American people and lower prices at the pump -- especially now, in tough economic times. And it is good that the Obama Administration is conceding that increased supply will lower those costs. But by tapping the Strategic Petroleum Reserve, the President is using a national security instrument to address his domestic political problems. The SPR was created to mitigate sudden supply disruptions. This action threatens our ability to respond to a genuine national security crisis and means we must ultimately find the resources to replenish the reserve -- at significant cost to taxpayers. There is a better way: we need a sensible energy policy to increase the supply of American energy, which will lower costs and create millions of American jobs. According to the Congressional Research Service, the U.S. has 163 billion barrels of recoverable oil. Unfortunately, this administration has consistently blocked the production of American-made energy and opposed legislative efforts in the House to increase supply.  House Republicans will continue to advance the American Energy Initiative and work to lower gas prices and create jobs by responsibly increasing the production of energy here at home."

 

    House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) issued a statement saying, "Today, America's families face near-record prices at the pump while Big Oil rakes in near-record profits. With speculators and special interests standing in the way of lower gas prices, with Republican leaders supporting continued giveaways to the oil industry and letting speculators off the hook, and with Middle East unrest disrupting the supply of oil worldwide, we must do everything in our power to ease the burden on American consumers. The Obama Administration is fulfilling this charge by releasing oil from our national stockpile to bring relief to our middle class, responding to calls by House Democrats, led by Congressmen Bishop and Markey. We are already seeing the results in falling oil prices. This action echoes Democratic legislation in our Clean Energy Jobs Now agenda -- the Taxpayer and Gas Price Relief Act -- that calls for a release from the SPR during periods of high gas prices, along with an end to tax breaks for Big Oil. We are sending a clear message to speculators: we stand with American consumers and businesses; we will keep working to alleviate their economic struggles; and we will place our families' interests ahead of Big Oil's bottom line."

 

    The National Petrochemical & Refiners Association (NPRA) President Charles Drevna criticized the decision by the Obama administration to release 30 million barrels of oil from the SPR. He said, "Releasing oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve today, when gasoline prices are falling and there is no supply shortage, makes no sense and weakens our economic and national security. The Strategic Petroleum Reserve is an emergency lifeline to protect our nation against critical shortages in our oil supply and shouldn't be used as a Strategic Political Reserve to boost the popularity of elected officials.

    "This action today will do nothing to benefit consumers. Instead, it leaves our nation vulnerable if hurricanes, other natural disasters or a foreign crisis causes a real supply shortage. These are the types of emergencies the Strategic Petroleum Reserve was created to protect against. Instead of releasing 30 million barrels of oil from our emergency supply when there is no emergency, our leaders should be drawing up plans to lift the roadblocks preventing our nation from utilizing the billions of barrels of oil and natural gas reserves right here in America. This would produce more energy, more jobs and economic prosperity. No other nation puts so many limits on the use of its own natural resources to benefit its own people."

 

    The U.S. Chamber of Commerce also said it thinks the release of SPR oil "is bad energy policy." Karen Harbert, president and CEO of the U.S. Chamber's Energy Institute said, 

"The Obama Administration's decision to release oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve is ill-advised and not the signal the markets need. Unrest in the Middle East is likely to continue for quite some time, so a temporary increase in supply is not a substitute for a long term fix. Our reserve is intended to address true emergencies, not politically inconvenient high prices. Rather than dabbling around the edges, the Administration should take steps to increase domestic production of oil -- on and offshore, like the bill the House passed last night. With U.S. crude oil production expected to decrease by 90 million barrels in the next year, the Administration should instead focus on increasing domestic production to improve our energy security, reduce our dependence on foreign oil, and create thousands of jobs."

    Access a release from IEA (click here). Access a fact sheet from IEA with more details (click here). Access a table of IEA members and their latest import levels and public and private reserve levels (click here). Access a release from DOE (click here). Access a release from the UK (click here). Access a release from Speaker Boehner (click here). Access a release from Rep. Pelosi (click here). Access a release from NPRA (click here). Access a release from the U.S. Chamber Energy Institute (click here). [*Energy/Oil]

(click here for information on getting the links and more information about eNewsUSA).

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS

For a limited time period you can access today's complete issue of eNewsUSA without the links http://bit.ly/kPRdso.

House Members Introduce EPA Regulatory Relief Act

Jun 22: Responding to what they say are "urgent calls from job creators across a range of industries, bipartisan members of the U.S. House Committee on Energy and Commerce have introduced H.R.2250, the EPA Regulatory Relief Act of 2011. The proposal, which directs EPA to develop achievable standards affecting non-utility boilers and incinerators and grants additional time for development of and compliance with the rules, was offered by Representatives Morgan Griffith (R-VA) and G.K. Butterfield (D-NC), together with Representatives John Barrow (D-GA), Jim Matheson (D-UT), Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA), Pete Olson (R-TX), Mike Ross (D-AR), and Steve Scalise (R-LA). The lawmakers said economic analyses have "projected that compliance with the rules as currently proposed could cost in excess of $14 billion, which could put more than 200,000 jobs at risk."

 

    In a joint statement the legislators said, "Our goal is simple. With the EPA Regulatory Relief Act, we are giving EPA the time it needs -- the time it has requested -- to address difficult technical issues and develop rules that are workable in the real world. Likewise, businesses, institutions, and facilities need adequate time to finance the new monitoring and control equipment that will be required to meet the new standards, to obtain necessary regulatory approvals, and to design, procure, install, test, train personnel, and start up equipment. Without regulatory relief, EPA's current rules endanger hundreds of thousands of jobs nationwide by forcing plant shutdowns and relocation of American manufacturing and jobs overseas. We look forward to working with our colleagues on both sides of the aisle, and the Obama administration, to see this type of common-sense relief become law."

 

    Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-MI) lent his support to the legislation, endorsing what he called "the members' bipartisan approach to protecting jobs and pursuing sensible regulations." He said, "All year long, the Energy and Commerce Committee has focused on creating jobs and spurring economic growth. The EPA Regulatory Relief Act is exactly the brand of regulatory common sense we promised. This bill gives EPA the time it needs to write rules that make sense, and it gives businesses, schools, and other affected facilities the time they need to put the rules into action. This bill is proof positive that Members can work together to protect jobs and guard against regulatory overreach."

 

    On February 23, 2011, in response to Federal court orders in Sierra Club v. EPA requiring the issuance of final standards [See WIMS 1/21/11], U.S. EPA issued final Clean Air Act standards for boilers and certain incinerators -- the so-called "Boiler MACT" rules [See WIMS 2/23/11]. In response to a September 2009 court order, EPA issued the proposed rules in April 2010, prompting significant public input. The proposed rules followed a period that began in 2007, when a Federal court vacated a set of industry specific standards proposed during the Bush Administration. Based on the public input received following the April 2010 proposal, EPA made extensive revisions, and in December 2010, requested additional time for review to ensure the public's input was fully addressed. EPA had sought in its motion to the court an extension to finalize the rules by April 13, 2012. Instead, the court granted EPA only 30 days and it issued the final rules on March 21, 2011.

 

    On May 16, 2011, EPA announced a temporary stay of the effective date of two of the rules (Boiler MACT and CISWI Rules), stating, "[t]he stay will allow the agency to seek additional public comment before requiring thousands of facilities across multiple, diverse industries to make investments that may not be reversible if the standards are revised following reconsideration and a full evaluation of all relevant data." The Members pointed out that, "The stay will last only until completion of the reconsideration process (or the judicial review of the rules if earlier). The stay does not apply to the other two rules and does not extend the compliance deadlines for any of the four rules." [See WIMS 5/16/11].

   

    H.R.2250 would stay the four proposed EPA rules including:

• (1) National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Major Sources: Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers and Process Heaters, published at 76 Fed. Reg. 15608 (March 21, 2011).
• (2) National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Area Sources: Industrial, Commercial, and Institutional Boilers, published at 76 Fed. Reg. 15554 (March 21, 2011).
• (3) Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources and Emission Guidelines for Existing Sources: Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration Units, published at 76 Fed. Reg.15704 (March 21, 2011), and,
• (4) Identification of Non-Hazardous Secondary Materials That are Solid Waste, published at 76 Fed. Reg. 15456 (March 21, 2011).

    According to a release from the members, "to protect jobs and allow time for development of achievable standards," H.R.2250 would:

• Provide EPA with at least 15 months to re-propose and finalize new rules for boilers, process heaters, and incinerators;
• Extend compliance deadlines from 3 to at least 5 years to allow facilities adequate time to comply with the standards and install necessary equipment;
• Direct EPA, when developing the new rules, to adopt definitions that allow sources to use a wide range of alternative fuels; and, 
• Direct EPA to ensure that the new rules are achievable by real-world boilers, process heaters, and incinerators and impose the least burdensome regulatory alternatives consistent with the President's Executive Order 13563.

    Access a release from the Members (click here). Access a fact sheet from the Members with links to background information (click here). Access legislative details for H.R.2250 (click here). Access links to the final rules, fact sheets, and regulatory impact analyses for each of EPA's regulatory actions (click here). Access more information from EPA's Emissions Standards for Boilers and Process Heaters and Commercial / Industrial Solid Waste Incinerators website (click here). [*Air]

(click here for information on getting the links and more information about eNewsUSA).

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS

For a limited time period you can access today's complete issue of eNewsUSA without the links http://bit.ly/kPRdso.

EPA Extends Comments On Mercury & Air Toxics Standards 30-Days

Jun 21: U.S. EPA announced that in response to requests from members of Congress and to encourage additional public comment it will extended the timeline for public input by 30 days on the proposed mercury and air toxics standards, an extension that will not alter the timeline for issuing the final standards in November 2011 [See WIMS 3/16/11].

    In a brief statement, Administrator Lisa Jackson said, "EPA will put these long-overdue standards in effect in November, as planned. In our effort to be responsive to Congress and to build on the robust public comment process, we will extend the timeline for public input by 30 days, which will not impact the timeline for issuing the final standards. These standards are critically important to the health of the American people and will leverage technology already in use at over half of the nation's coal power plants to slash emissions of mercury and other hazardous pollutants. When these new standards are finalized, they will assist in preventing 11,000 heart attacks, 17,000 premature deaths, 120,000 cases of childhood asthma symptoms and approximately 11,000 fewer cases of acute bronchitis among children each year. Hospital visits will be reduced and nearly 850,000 fewer days of work will be missed due to illness."

    EPA proposed the first ever national mercury and air toxics standards on March 16, 2011. The standards will be phased in over three years, and states have the ability to give facilities a fourth year to comply. EPA said that currently, more than half of all coal-fired power plants already deploy widely available pollution control technologies that are called for to meet these important standards. Once they are final in November, these standards will ensure the remaining coal-fired plants, roughly 44 percent, take similar steps to decrease dangerous pollutants. 

    Access the announcement from EPA (click here). Access more information including the Proposed Rule, Fact Sheet Summary, Overview Presentation, Overview Fact Sheet, and Regulatory Impact Analysis (click here). [*Air, *Toxics]

(click here for information on getting the links and more information about eNewsUSA).

 

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS

For a limited time period you can access today's complete issue of eNewsUSA without the links http://bit.ly/kPRdso.

Sen. Conrad's "Fulfilling U.S. Energy Leadership Act" (S.1220)

Jun 16: Senator Kent Conrad (D-ND) introduced what he called "comprehensive energy legislation intended to lessen America's dependence on foreign oil, reduce gas prices, and strengthen the national economy." He said the legislation, "Fulfilling U.S. Energy Leadership Act" (S.1220) -- also known as the FUEL Act -- "is a blueprint for a national energy policy that would support domestic oil and gas production, including an environmentally responsible expansion of offshore activity, while also investing in the development of renewable fuels." The bill also promotes more alternative fuels and clean sources of electricity, including clean coal, and nuclear energy.

    Senator Conrad said, "American families are struggling. Soaring gas prices are putting a squeeze on their budgets, forcing many to make tough choices as they struggle to make ends meet. Our dependence on foreign energy threatens both our economic security and our national security. The FUEL Act takes a responsible approach to securing  America's energy independence." Senator Conrad indicated that through a mix of tax credits, grants and directives, the bill would increase production of domestic oil, gas and coal, as well as renewable and alternative fuels;boost manufacturing and use of electric vehicles; and dramatically cut America's need for foreign oil.

    Senator Conrad said, "The FUEL Act is a balanced plan to reduce America's dependence on foreign oil. A key component of my plan is additional investment in one of America's biggest powerhouses -- North Dakota. The FUEL Act provides incentives for biofuels production and incentives for our coal-based facilities and rural electric cooperatives that utilize clean energy technologies. This bill could provide a big boost for both our nation and North Dakota." He indicated that several North Dakota energy and agriculture organizations have come out in support of the bill including: the North Dakota Corn Growers Association, North Dakota Association of Rural Electric Cooperatives, and Great River Energy (GRE).

    According to summary information provided by Senator Conrad some aspects of the FUEL Act include:

• Boosting Alternative Fuels and Highly Fuel Efficient - Vehicles national plan for broad deployment of electric vehicles
• Expanding Oil and Gas Development - in the in the eastern Gulf of Mexico and, if requested by the governor and state legislature,  in the mid- and southern Atlantic areas
• Alternative Fuel Deployment - fuels  derived from biomass
• Support for Advanced Battery Technology - a "clean energy standard" that promotes the use of renewable
• Incentivizes Development of Clean Coal Technology - a 30 percent investment tax credit & $5 billion for clean coal bonds
• Supports Expansion of Nuclear Power - $36 billion in additional authority under DOE's Innovative Technologies Loan Guarantee Program
• Energy Efficiency - $4.9 billion for the Rural Utilities Service for energy efficiency loans

    Access a release from Senator Conrad with further details (click here). Access legislative details for S.1220 (click here). [*Energy] (click here for information on getting the links and more information about eNewsUSA).

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS

For a limited time period you can access today's complete issue of eNewsUSA without the links http://bit.ly/kPRdso.

"Cauldron Of Confusion;" Senate Ends Ethanol Subsidy & Tariff

Jun 17: On June 16, the U.S. Senate voted 73-27 in favor of an amendment (S.Amdt. 476) by Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) to eliminate the Volumetric Ethanol Excise Tax Credit (VEETC) and repeal the import tariff on foreign ethanol. The amendment was identical to the Ethanol Subsidy and Tariff Repeal Act, which was introduced by Senator Tom Coburn, M.D. (R-OK) and Senator Feinstein in May. The vote reversed a vote on June 14, on an identical amendment offered by Senator Coburn -- Amdt. No. 436 to S.782, the Economic Development Revitalization Act of 2011, that was defeated by a vote of 40-59.

    Senator Feinstein said, "Today's overwhelming vote shows a bipartisan consensus to repeal irresponsible ethanol subsidies and tariffs. The 73 votes sent a powerful message that the days of big subsidies for ethanol are coming to a close. We must be serious about addressing the debt and deficit, and this is a good first step." The ethanol subsidy currently gives large oil companies 45 cents for every gallon of ethanol they blend with gasoline, even though much of that use is mandated by law. If the subsidy is repealed by July 1, as the amendment calls for, it will save approximately $2.7 billion for the remainder of 2011.

    The ethanol tariff is comprised of a 54-cent-per-gallon secondary tariff and a 2.5 percent ad valorem tax. The ethanol tariff makes the United States nation more dependent on foreign oil by increasing the price of imported ethanol. Senator Feinstein said, "Ethanol is the only industry I know of that receives a triple crown of government support: its use is mandated by law, it enjoys protective tariffs and oil companies receive federal subsidies to use it. These flawed policies, which cost taxpayers nearly $6 billion a year, must be changed."

    Senator Coburn issued a release saying, "Today's vote was a major victory for taxpayers and a positive step toward a serious deficit reduction agreement, which is our only hope of averting a debt crisis. An overwhelming bipartisan majority of senators embraced pro-growth tax reform while rejecting the parochial politics that so often paralyze the Senate. The best way to reduce our crushing $14.3 trillion debt is by reducing wasteful spending a billion dollars at a time. This amendment saves taxpayers $3 billion. In light of today's lopsided vote, I urge my colleagues in the House to eliminate this wasteful earmark and tariff at their earliest opportunity." Coburn indicated that on an annual basis the Feinstein-Coburn amendment would save taxpayers $6 billion. Because the year is half over, the amendment would save $3 billion.

    Sen. Coburn also indicated that a broad coalition of organizations on the left and right including the Club for Growth, Americans for Prosperity, Koch Industries, and the Sierra Club all supported the Feinstein-Coburn amendment. The highly diverse coalition included many other major national environmental organizations supported the amendment, along with the Competitive Enterprise Institute.

    In response to a question: "What's the White House's reaction to the ethanol subsidies vote that's going to take place in the Senate?"; White House Press Secretary Jay Carney responded, "Well, we oppose the full repeal of that subsidy, but as you know, we are focused and have been focused on a broad strategy including increasing domestic development of oil and gas but also aggressive development of alternative fuels including biofuels, and also improving our efficiency, our fuel efficiency. And as part of our overall strategy, we would like to see reform that would reduce costs in terms of the subsidy in question here, but not -- we were not -- we did not support the full repeal."

 

    The Renewable Fuels Association (RFA) issued a statement saying, "We are disappointed in the shortsightedness of this vote, particularly as this same body voted less than one month ago to preserve billions of dollars in taxpayer handouts to the oil industry. As the underlying bill to which this amendment is attached is unlikely to make it to the president's desk, this vote was a freebie with no real consequences."

 

    Brooke Coleman, Executive Director of the Advanced Ethanol Council (AEC) dismissed the Senate passage of the amendment to end the ethanol tax credit saying it was "a distraction from a real energy discussion." She said, "This week's debate over ethanol is another case of politics over substance that once again distracts from an honest and comprehensive discussion about America's energy future. With this song and dance now over, advanced and cellulosic ethanol producers will continue to work with Senators to find common ground on a forward-looking and productive new way to promote a fuel that is already an important part of the U.S. energy portfolio and has a very bright future. We look forward to moving a proposal to the President's desk that expands the market for ethanol and expedites the commercialization of promising new ethanol technologies and fuels."

   

    The Senate also rejected by a vote of 41-59, an amendment (Amdt. 411) by Senator John McCain (R-AZ) that would have prohibited the use of Federal funds to construct ethanol blender pumps or ethanol storage facilities. RFA reacted to that defeat in a statement saying, "This vote signifies that an anti-ethanol wave in Congress isn't swelling, but rather that all this attention on ethanol was little more than political posturing. Lawmakers must now pivot to fact-based, comprehensive discussions about diversifying America's fuel markets and weakening the grip of OPEC and other nation's over our economy and energy security. American ethanol producers look forward to working in a constructive manner with lawmakers keeping an open mind about the future of American energy production. Renewable fuels like ethanol are the most effective tools we have today to reduce oil imports and prices at the pump."

    RFA issued a statement on the defeat of the McCain amendment saying, "This vote signifies that an anti-ethanol wave in Congress isn't swelling, but rather that all this attention on ethanol was little more than political posturing. Lawmakers must now pivot to fact-based, comprehensive discussions about diversifying America's fuel markets and weakening the grip of OPEC and other nation's over our economy and energy security. American ethanol producers look forward to working in a constructive manner with lawmakers keeping an open mind about the future of American energy production. Renewable fuels like ethanol are the most effective tools we have today to reduce oil imports and prices at the pump."

    On June 17, RFA issued a lengthy release entitled, "Senate Ethanol Debate: Peeling Away the Onion," attempting to explain the happenings in the Senate over the last several days. According to RFA, "For ethanol interests, the United States Senate was a cauldron of confusion this week. In rapid succession, the Senate voted to keep ethanol tax credits through the end of the year, to repeal those tax credits immediately, and then to allow federal funds to assist in the installation of ethanol refueling infrastructure like blender pumps. Pundits, ethanol advocates, and many others are now trying to make sense of what happened and where the debate goes from here."

 

    RFA President and CEO Bob Dinneen provides some insight into the votes this week and what it may or may not mean. The release indicates that the RFA "continues to support transitioning and transforming the current tax incentive and will work with lawmakers in both chambers to craft a policy that does so in a fiscally responsible and forward-looking manner to ensure America's ethanol industry continues to evolve." The posting concludes, "At the end of a crazy week, it is more clear than ever that the Senate needs and the public will demand a more thoughtful and comprehensive discussion about ethanol and energy policy. . . this week's political theatre did very little to provide answers. With a dose of common sense and the dogged commitment of Senators Klobachar, Thune, Grassley, Durbin and others, perhaps we'll have clarity soon."

 

    Julie Sibbing, director of the agriculture program for the National Wildlife Federation (NWF) praised the Congressional action and said, "With the tremendous success of Senators Coburn and Feinstein's amendment in the Senate to end the ethanol tax credit and Representative Flake's success in the House in prohibiting funding for special ethanol infrastructure, we are happy to see that Congress is finally willing to draw the line with regard to subsidizing the corn ethanol industry. This industry has been extremely damaging to the environment, causing increased soil erosion, water pollution, and loss of wildlife habitat. It is far beyond time to stop throwing money after conventional biofuels and to move on to launching the next generation of cleaner, greener bioenergy from native grasses and trees." 

    Access a release from Sen. Feinstein (click here). Access a release from Sen. Coburn (click here). Access the listing of the diverse coalition (click here). Access the White House press briefing containing Carney's response (click here). Access a release from RFA on the Feinstein amendment (click here). Access a release from AEC (click here). Access a release from RFA on the McCain amendment (click here). Access a release from NWF (click here). Access a release from RFA's Dinneen explaining the week's events (click here). Access an insider report from The Hill that attempts to explain vote reversal (click here). Access legislative details for S.782 including amendments and roll call votes (click here). [*Energy/Biofuels] (click here for information on getting the links and more information about eNewsUSA).

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS

For a limited time period you can access today's complete issue of eNewsUSA without the links http://bit.ly/kPRdso.

 

Bipartisan Policy Center Release Surface Transportation System Plan

Jun 16: The Bipartisan Policy Center's (BPC) National Transportation Policy Project (NTPP) held a press conference to release a new report, Performance Driven: Achieving Wiser Investment in Transportation, which they said is a bold set of recommendations for creating a more effective and efficient federal surface transportation system given the current fiscal realities facing the nation.

 

    BPC Board Member, and NTPP Co-Chair, Chairman Emeritus, Dickinson Wright, PLLC and Former Detroit Mayor Dennis Archer said, "The economic strength of the country is dependent on our ability to invest effectively in our transportation infrastructure. In the context of severe fiscal challenges and budgetary constraints, we need to make difficult choices and to consider trade-offs. But these constraints and limits can also provide us with the opportunity to accomplish significant programmatic reforms and to do more with less. What NTPP proposes in this report is a framework for ensuring that, no matter the amount of resources available, we should invest in a targeted and performance-driven way. Such an investment strategy can bring both short and long-term benefits. But, as the Report notes, '. . . no matter how much money is available for transportation at the federal level, it needs to be invested wisely.'"

 

    Co-Chair Congressman Martin Sabo (D-MN), former Chairman of the House Budget Committee said, "This report being issued today retains and builds upon the principles contained in our June 2009 report, translating that long-term vision for the nation's surface transportation policies into an immediately implementable and streamlined programmatic structure that can manage within existing revenue levels. As recommended in NTPP's 2009 report, it is nearly impossible to imagine that the comprehensive reforms that we recommend can be achieved without fundamental reform in the transportation planning process. Such changes will enable almost everything that we recommend in this new report, including, importantly, our capacity to invest scarce resources in the most beneficial programs and projects. A more outcome- and performance-driven planning process is fundamental to ensuring that better investment decisions will be made."

 

    According to summary information, the aim of this report is to reform, consolidate, and scale the Federal transportation program to maximize progress toward a set of clear national objectives, within a budget constrained by existing revenue levels. "NTPP continues to believe that any amount of federal investment in transportation should advance specific national purposes in the areas of: economic growth, national connectivity, metropolitan accessibility, energy security and environmental protection, and safety. NTPP evaluated existing transportation programs based on the extent to which each is able to advance these national purposes and leverage non-federal funding." The "Key Legislative Recommendations" include:

• Streamline over 100 programs, by consolidation and elimination, into ten core programs
• Eliminate programs that lack a specific national purpose
• Clearly articulate national purposes and a suite of overarching national goals
• Prioritize the management and preservation of existing transportation system assets
• Put a more robust, outcome-oriented, better funded transportation planning process in place
• Develop a National Freight Strategic Plan
• Make bonus funding available to incentivize effective performance
• Put in place incentives for investments that are able to leverage non-federal resources
• Support, promote and reward states and metropolitan regions that secure sustainable revenue
• Reduce restrictions, regulations, and barriers to non-federal investment in transportation
• Restructure and adjust the existing match funding requirements
• Provide funds for pilot programs that help refine performance metrics and develop improved user-based funding mechanisms

    The report indicates that, "We found a major streamlining and downsizing of the current suite of programs can be achieved if one rigorously aligns spending priorities with the advancement of compelling national interests. By cutting more than $14 billion in annual expenditures from the existing program, we are able to propose a consolidated structure with ten core programs that are all clearly focused on advancing our nation's most important transportation related interests. . . In the long term, the programmatic framework proposed in this report allows for the achievement of wiser investments. It offers a sound strategy for securing broad public support for policies and resource commitments that will allow the U.S. to continue to achieve high standards of living and remain competitive in a highly mobile, global economy. It provides a way to make substantial investment and tangible improvement to the vital transportation systems on which our nation depends."

 

    Access an overview and link to the full report, executive summary, key recommendations, and a Powerpoint presentation (click here). Access the statements from Archer & Sabo (click here). Access the BPC website for more information (click here). [*Transport] (click here for information on getting the links and more information about eNewsUSA).

 

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS

For a limited time period you can access today's complete issue of eNewsUSA without the links http://bit.ly/kPRdso.

Senate EPW Hearing On Clean Air Act & Public Health

Jun 15: The Senate Environment and Pubic Works (EPW) Committee, Chaired by Senator Barbara Boxer (D-CA), with Ranking Member James Inhofe (R-OK), held a hearing on, "The Clean Air Act and Public Health." Witnesses included U.S. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson and representatives from: American Nurses Association; the Mid-Atlantic Center for Children's Health & the Environment at the Children's National Medical Center; University of North Texas; MidAmerican Energy Holdings Company; and Washington Adventist Hospital.

 

    Chairman Boxer indicated that she held the hearing to "conduct oversight on one of the most successful and significant public health statutes in our nation's history, the Clean Air Act" signed by President Richard Nixon in 1970. She cited numerous incidents of severe air pollution problems in the past and said, "While the Clean Air Act has dramatically improved health safeguards, more work remains to be done. A 2011 report by the American Lung Association shows that 154 million people live in areas with levels of toxic soot and smog pollution that current science demonstrates is dangerous."

 

    She said, "Under the Clean Air Act, EPA is required to strengthen protections if scientific data indicates that pollution adversely impacts public health, including children's health. Recently, EPA proposed much-needed federal safeguards to reduce toxic air pollution from old power plants by requiring the use of modern pollution controls. These proposed safeguards would reduce mercury, lead, and chromium, which are known to cause cancer and birth defects. When EPA reduces toxic air pollution, it helps families and children in communities across our country. . . In contrast to the unsupported claims by some polluters who argue that health threats from mercury and other air pollutants are "exaggerated," we will hear today from EPA Administrator Jackson and representatives from the American Academy of Pediatrics, American Nurses Association, and the American Thoracic Society, who are experts on the issue. These witnesses will describe the critical steps that have been taken to reduce dangerous air pollution, and the important work that remains to be done."

 

    Senator Inhofe said, "Over the past two years, the Obama EPA has moved forward with an unprecedented number of rules that will have enormous consequences for families, businesses, and the nation's fiscal well-being. Take for example, EPA's new greenhouse gas (GHG) cap and trade regulations. Administrator Jackson, you have admitted that regulating GHGs in the U.S. will have no impact on global GHG concentrations, yet your rules will come at an estimated cost of $300 to $400 billion annually. The Agency's voluntary reconsideration of the national ambient air quality standards for ground-level ozone -- a decision based on outdated data that could lead to significant economic constraints on the country -- is an another Agency action of dubious merit. EPA projects the cost of this rule in the order of $90 billion. Meanwhile, the Agency is planning to tighten the standards again in just two years. The Obama EPA is aggressively moving forward to regulate nearly all aspects of American life -- it now has regulations covering dust on farms and puddles of water along the side of road.  And it is businesses and working families who will pay the price. . ."

 

    Senator Inhofe also highlighted the recent announcement from American Electric Power (AEP) saying that because of EPA's proposed rules they would be forced to close nearly 6,000 Megawatts of "low cost (coal) power generation" and nearly 600 power plant workers will lose their jobs, totaling nearly $40 million in annual wages. He said, "These are good paying jobs in rural areas of Virginia, West Virginia, Kentucky, Ohio, Indiana and Texas. These jobs won't easily be replaced." [See WIMS 6/10/11]. It should be noted, however, that the Bipartisan Policy Center (BPC) Energy Project released a 56-page report on June 13, entitled, Environmental Regulation and Electric Sector Reliability, that concluded among other things that the, "impacts on the reliability of the electric system due to retirements and retrofits necessary to comply with EPA regulations are manageable.

 

    Joe Kruger, Director for Energy and Environment, BPC Energy Project indicated in a cover letter to the report, "Overall, the report finds that the impacts on the reliability of the electric system due to EPA regulations are manageable and that there are tools available at the Federal, state, and local levels to address localized reliability risks. Nevertheless, the electric power sector and its regulators face significant planning challenges if the aim is to avoid localized reliability problems and minimize impacts on electric rates. Further, while recognizing the political difficulties, the report finds that there may be an opportunity to enact a legislative fix that could guarantee the environmental benefits of the Clean Air Act and provide a lower cost transition for the power sector." [See WIMS 6/14/11].

 

    Administrator Jackson testified that, "All Americans should be very proud of the significant progress we have made cleaning up our air. However, we still have more to do. For example, about 25 million people now battle asthma. One of those 25 million is my youngest son. I am reminded on a regular basis about the importance of cleaning up our air. . . The Clean Air Act saves lives and strengthens the American workforce, and, as a result, the economic value of clean air far exceeds the costs. Expressed in dollar terms, the benefits of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 alone are projected to reach approximately $2 trillion in 2020 with an estimated cost of $65 billion in that same year – a benefit to cost ratio of more than 30 to 1. . ."

 

    She reviewed the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards proposed on March 16 [See WIMS 3/16/11], to regulate mercury and other toxic air pollution from power plants. She said The Clean Energy Group, a coalition of electric power companies, said, "Since 2000, the electric industry has been anticipating that EPA would regulate hazardous air pollutant emissions, and as a result, many companies have already taken steps to install control technologies that will allow them to comply with requirements of the rule on time. The technologies to control emissions at coalfired power plants, including mercury and hydrochloric acid, are available and cost-effective."

 

    She also discussed the "Clean Air Transport Rule," proposed on July 6 of last year [See WIMS 7/6/10], which she said "would significantly improve air quality in cities throughout the eastern half of the U.S. by requiring 31 states and the District of Columbia to reduce their emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx) which contribute to ozone and fine particle pollution across state lines. . . we estimated that the rule would result in more than $120 billion annually in health benefits. . ."

    Access the EPW hearing website for links to all testimony, opening statements and a webcast (click here). [*Air]

 

GET THE LINKS & THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS

For a limited time period you can access today's complete issue of eNewsUSA without the links http://bit.ly/kPRdso.

BPC Says EPA Rules Are Manageable For Electric Reliability

Jun 13: The staff of the Bipartisan Policy Center (BPC) Energy Project released a 56-page report on Environmental Regulation and Electric Sector Reliability. The report follows last week's release by American Electric Power (NYSE: AEP) of a lengthy and detailed plan for complying with a series of EPA proposed air and climate proposed regulations which it said would impact coal-fueled power plants. AEP indicated it would have to prematurely shut down nearly 6,000 megawatts (MW) of coal-fueled power generation (25 percent of its current coal-fueled generating capacity), cut hundreds of power plant jobs, and invest from $6 billion to $8 billion in capital investment [See WIMS 6/10/11]. 

 

    The BPC report's main findings are:

• The impacts on the reliability of the electric system due to retirements and retrofits necessary to comply with EPA regulations are manageable;
• Compliance with regulations will drive noticeable cost increases and produce significant health benefits;
• The industry and its regulators face significant planning challenges, but there are a number of tools and policies available for addressing localized reliability concerns; and
• Legislation may be able to facilitate a smoother, lower cost transition without jeopardizing health and environmental protections.

    Over the course of several months, the BPC hosted a series of three workshops to assess the possible impacts of regulation and identify a range of strategies for managing associated reliability concerns. The workshops featured presentations and panel discussions by nearly 60 energy experts, including representatives of the electric utility industry, environmental organizations, labor unions, state regulators, regional transmission organizations, federal agencies, and Congressional staff. The report's findings and recommendations build on the expert presentations and public dialogue at these workshops, BPC's review of a range of existing analyses, and BPC's own analytic work.

    According to a cover letter for the report from Joe Kruger, Director for Energy and Environment, BPC Energy Project:

"A smooth and cost-effective transition to a cleaner, more reliable power generation fleet is essential for our economy. Balancing protection of public health and the environment with concerns about the economic impacts of new regulations is always controversial, and the suite of recent EPA regulations of power plants has reinvigorated this familiar debate. The report issued today by the BPC, Environmental Regulation and Electric System Reliability, is the product of an extensive effort by BPC to examine reliability and cost issues associated with forthcoming EPA regulations.

 

"Over the course of several months, the BPC collaborated with the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners (NARUC), and Northeast States for Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM) to host three day-long workshops. These workshops featured presentations and panel discussions by nearly 60 energy experts, including representatives of the electric utility industry, environmental organizations, labor unions, state regulators, regional transmission organizations, federal agencies, and Congressional staff. These stakeholders contributed to a vigorous, fact-based discussion of the regulatory and technical challenges at hand and available strategies to manage reliability concerns surrounding forthcoming EPA regulations. To supplement these discussions, BPC staff conducted its own independent analysis and thoroughly reviewed the range of existing analyses.

 

"Overall, the report finds that the impacts on the reliability of the electric system due to EPA regulations are manageable and that there are tools available at the Federal, state, and local levels to address localized reliability risks. Nevertheless, the electric power sector and its regulators face significant planning challenges if the aim is to avoid localized reliability problems and minimize impacts on electric rates. Further, while recognizing the political difficulties, the report finds that there may be an opportunity to enact a legislative fix that could guarantee the environmental benefits of the Clean Air Act and provide a lower cost transition for the power sector.

 

"Going forward, BPC will continue to examine the challenges and opportunities facing the electric power sector as it transitions to a cleaner, more modern fleet. Please don't hesitate to contact us if you have questions about this report or future BPC initiatives in this area."

    The report indicates, "Key benefits of the suite of EPA regulations include the avoidance of tens of thousands of premature deaths annually, reductions in pollution-related illnesses, and improved visibility and ecosystem health. These new conditions in the power sector are expected to increase the number of coal-fired power plants that will be retired in the next several years; in fact, a number of plant shutdowns have recently been implemented or announced."

 

    The report highlights a number of recent developments that it says are especially relevant from the standpoint of addressing reliability concerns:

• EPA's proposed cooling water regulations are far less stringent than assumed in the vast majority of analyses, many of which considered worst-case scenarios in which cooling towers would be required on all existing units.
• Some commercially available, lower-cost technologies (e.g., dry sorbent injection) for treating hazardous air pollutants were not factored into most previous analyses. Including them significantly reduces retirement projections.
• Most of the units projected to retire are small, older units that are already operating infrequently. Some of these units may be needed to meet peak demand on the hottest and coldest days or to provide voltage support. In some cases, there may be viable mechanisms, other than one-to-one capacity replacement, available to serve these needs.
• The industry has significant amounts of existing natural gas generating capacity that is currently underutilized and may be available to take up the slack, depending on the region.
• Some previous assessments do not account for market responses to future retirements, specifically to the potential for adding new capacity to meet reserve margins. Assuming timely permitting, the need for modest new capacity resources could be met with quick-to-build natural gas turbines, as well as demand side resources.

    The report analyzed the various forthcoming U.S. EPA regulations including:

• Transport Rule – On July 6, 2010, EPA proposed the Transport Rule, a replacement for the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) which was previously remanded in a 2008 court decision. The newly proposed Transport Rule would require 31 states and the District of Columbia to meet state pollution limits for sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOX) as a means to ensure compliance with National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ground-level ozone and fine particulate matter (PM).
• Utility Air Toxics Rule – On March 16, 2011, EPA proposed its Utility Air Toxics Rule under a court-ordered deadline to control hazardous air pollutants, including mercury, acid gases and nonmercury metals. As specified by the Clean Air Act, the Utility Air Toxics Rule provides that plants must com ply with emission limitations for hazardous air pollutants within three years, but allows an additional year for plants to come into compliance if such time is necessary to install pollution controls.
• Coal Combustion Waste Disposal Regulations – On June 21, 2010, EPA published a proposed rule to take comment on whether or not coal combustion waste should be regulated as hazardous waste.9 These wastes, which primarily consist of coal ash, are generated in large quantities by the power sector. According to the proposal, ash could be regulated as "special waste" under the Clean Air Act's hazardous waste provisions (Subtitle C). Alternatively, EPA could deem the coal ash non-hazardous and regulate under Subtitle D, with self-implementing requirements that are not subject to federal enforcement.
• Clean Water Act Section 316(b) Cooling Water Intake Structures – To protect fish and aquatic ecosystems, EPA proposed regulations on March 28, 2011 for cooling water intake structures at electric generating units (EGU) and other industrial facilities that draw large amounts of water out of rivers, lakes, and oceans. This proposed regulation responds to a settlement agreement that was reached after EPA's earlier cooling water proposals were litigated.
• Greenhouse Gas Performance Standards – On December 23, 2010, EPA announced that it will propose greenhouse gas performance standards for power plants by July 2011 and finalize standards by May 2012. This action is being taken under a settlement agreement. At public "listening sessions" to inform this rulemaking process, EPA indicated that its greenhouse gas performance standards would not be designed to induce "game-changing" technology improvements; rather the Agency aims to bring older plants up to modern standards of efficiency.

    The Bipartisan Policy Center (BPC) is a think tank that was established in 2007 by former Senate Majority Leaders Howard Baker, Tom Daschle, Bob Dole and George Mitchell "to develop and promote solutions that can attract public support and political momentum in order to achieve real progress. The BPC acts as an incubator for policy efforts that engage top political figures, advocates, academics and business leaders in the art of principled compromise. Too often partisanship poisons our national dialogue. Unfortunately, respectful discourse across party lines has become the exception - not the norm.

    "To confront this challenge, the BPC seeks to develop policy solutions that make sense for the nation and can be embraced by both sides of the aisle. After reaching shared solutions through principled compromise, we work to implement these policies through the political system. The BPC is currently focused on the following issues: health care, energy, national security, homeland security, financial services, and transportation. Each of these efforts is led by a diverse team of political leaders, policy experts, business leaders and academics. The BPC provides a bipartisan forum where tough policy challenges can be addressed in a pragmatic and politically-viable manner."

       Access an overview and link to the complete report, executive summary, cover letter, technical appendix (click here). Access Information from all three workshops (click here). Access links to videos from the workshops (click here). Access an online form to comment on the report (click here). Access the BPC website for more information (click here). [*Energy/Coal, *Air, *Climate]

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS

Senate To Vote On Ending Ethanol Tax Credit Tomorrow

Jun 13: U.S. Senator Tom Coburn, M.D. (R-OK) released a statement regarding the Senate's plan to vote this tomorrow on his amendment No. 436 to S.782, the Economic Development Revitalization Act of 2011, sponsored by Senator Barbara Boxer. Sen. Corburn's amendment, which is identical to S.871 which he has introduced with Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) to repeal the ethanol tax earmark and tariff. Sen. Coburn indicated that the amendment would save $3 billion for the remainder of this year and $6 billion annually. The amendment would end the current ethanol tax credit on July 1, 2011.

 

    Senator Coburn said, "The days of placing spending programs in the tax code and giving them holy status are over. Economic conservatives and leading free-market groups like the Club for Growth understand that using the tax code to pick winners and losers kills economic growth and job creation. Today's way of doing business is a tax increase on anyone who can't hire a tax lobbyist or make large donations to special interest groups in Washington. Taxpayers are tired of this game and expect us to eliminate wasteful special interest spending in all of its forms. Eliminating the ethanol tax earmark and tariff would be a big step toward restoring fiscal sanity in Washington. I urge my colleagues to support my amendment on Tuesday. Ethanol is bad economic policy, bad energy policy and bad environmental policy."

 

    The Renewable Fuels Association (RFA) issued a statement in advance of the cloture vote on the Coburn amendment. RFA said the tax credit, known as VEETC, is already set to expire at the end of this year. They said the association has been working "in good faith with leaders in Congress to transition and transform ethanol tax policy to address budget concerns while providing for the continued growth and evolution of American ethanol production." RFA reported that Sen. Coburn was the recipient of some $250,000 in oil and gas industry donations since 2005. 

 

    RFA President and CEO Bob Dinneen said, "This is the same kind of political gamesmanship that nations like Iran and Venezuela are exercising to keep consumer energy prices artificially high and Americans addicted to oil. If this were truly about sound policy and concerns over energy tax subsidies, then this amendment would include efforts to repeal the billions of taxpayer dollars oil and other mature energy industries receive each year while posting tens of billions of dollars in profits quarterly. As few observers give this bill any chance of getting to the president's desk, Sen. Coburn's efforts are yet another example of oil-patch politics trumping sound national energy policy. We encourage Sen. Coburn to lay down his arms and work with the ethanol industry to craft thoughtful and fiscally responsible legislation that allows for continued innovation and growth of domestic biofuel production and use without pushing the industry off a cliff.

    "Ethanol is the only alternative to imported oil available today and the only technology keeping money out of bank accounts in Caracas and Tehran. Pulling the rug out from under a still maturing industry would force consumers to pay more at the pump, do nothing to mitigate impacts of rising food prices resulting from exorbitant oil prices, and jeopardize the commercialization of promising new ethanol and biofuels technologies. This is an amendment meant with an eye toward reelection, not deficit reduction." 

    In a second release issued today, RFA said, ". . . pro-oil and environmental lobbyists are spending millions of dollars on a smear campaign against ethanol in Washington, New Hampshire, and around the county. The mud-slinging by some special interests and the flood of misinformation being propagated about ethanol aside, the focus on ethanol at this point in time provides an opportunity for a much more comprehensive and adult conversation about America's energy future – beyond 'Drill, baby, drill.'"

 

    Access a release from Sen. Coburn with links to the amendment, background, letter of support, Club for Growth's statement, Council for Citizens Against Government Waste letter (click here). Access a 6/10 release from RFA (click here); and a 6/13 release (click here). Access legislative details for S.782 including amendments and roll call votes (click here). Access legislative details for S.871 including amendments and roll call votes (click here). [*Energy/Biofuels]

AEP Releases Air Regs Compliance Plan & Devastating Impacts

Jun 9: In a move designed to draw attention to U.S. EPA's proposed air and climate rules, American Electric Power (NYSE: AEP) announced in a lengthy and detailed company press release its plan for complying with a series of proposed regulations which it said would impact coal-fueled power plants. AEP said that based on the regulations as proposed, its compliance plan would retire nearly 6,000 megawatts (MW) of coal-fueled power generation; upgrade or install new advanced emissions reduction equipment on another 10,100 MW; refuel 1,070 MW of coal generation as 932 MW of natural gas capacity; and build 1,220 MW of natural gas-fueled generation. The cost of AEP's compliance plan could range from $6 billion to $8 billion in capital investment through the end of the decade. The company said that high demand for labor and materials due to a constrained compliance time frame could drive actual costs higher than these estimates. AEP noted, "The plan, including retirements, could change significantly depending on the final form of the EPA regulations and regulatory approvals from state commissions."

    According to the release, the retirements and retrofits in the plan are in addition to more than $7.2 billion that AEP has invested since 1990 to reduce emissions from its coal-fueled generation fleet. "Annual emissions of nitrogen oxides from AEP plants are 80 percent lower today than in 1990. Sulfur dioxide emissions from AEP plants are 73 percent lower than in 1990." The company currently owns nearly 25,000 MW of coal-fueled generation, approximately 65 percent of its total generating capacity. Coal would fuel approximately 57 percent of AEP's total generating capacity by the end of the decade.

    Michael Morris, AEP chairman and chief executive officer said, "We support regulations that achieve long-term environmental benefits while protecting customers, the economy and the reliability of the electric grid, but the cumulative impacts of the EPA's current regulatory path have been vastly underestimated, particularly in Midwest states dependent on coal to fuel their economies. We have worked for months to develop a compliance plan that will mitigate the impact of these rules for our customers and preserve jobs, but because of the unrealistic compliance timelines in the EPA proposals, we will have to prematurely shut down nearly 25 percent of our current coal-fueled generating capacity, cut hundreds of good power plant jobs, and invest billions of dollars in capital to retire, retrofit and replace coal-fueled power plants. The sudden increase in electricity rates and impacts on state economies will be significant at a time when people and states are still struggling."

    The company said although some jobs would be created from the installation of emissions reduction equipment, AEP expects a net loss of approximately 600 power plant jobs with annual wages totaling approximately $40 million as a result of compliance with the proposed EPA rules. Morris said, "We are deeply concerned about the impact of the proposed regulations on our customers and local economies. Communities that have depended on these plants to provide good jobs and support local services will face significant reductions in payroll and property taxes in a very short period of time. The economic impact will extend far beyond direct employment at power plants as thousands of ancillary jobs are supported by every coal-fueled generating unit. Businesses that have benefited from reasonably priced coal-fueled power will face the impact of electricity price increases ranging from 10 percent to more than 35 percent just for compliance with these environmental rules at a time when they are still trying to recover from the economic downturn."

    "Although discounted by some, the potential impacts on the reliability of the transmission system, particularly in the Midwest, are significant. The proposed timelines for compliance aren't adequate for construction of significant retrofits or replacement generation, so many coal-fueled plants would be prematurely retired or idled in just a few years. AEP's compliance plan alone would abruptly cut generation capacity in the Midwest by more than 5,400 MW. Depending on the year, another 1,500 MW to 5,200 MW of AEP generation would be idled or curtailed for extended periods as pollution control equipment is installed," Morris said.

    AEP said it has shared its compliance plan with PJM Interconnection, Southwest Power Pool and North American Electric Reliability Corp. for use in their evaluation of the impacts of EPA's proposed rules. Morris said, "We will continue to work through the EPA process with the hope that the agency will recognize the cumulative impact of the proposed rules and develop a more reasonable compliance schedule. We also will continue talking with lawmakers in Washington about a legislative approach that would achieve the same long-term environmental goals with less negative impact on jobs and the U.S. economy. With more time and flexibility, we will get to the same level of emission reductions, but it will cost our customers less and will prevent premature job losses, extend the construction job benefits, and ensure the ongoing reliability of the electric system."   

    U.S. Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV) issued a statement regarding what he said was AEP's "plans to shut down three plants in West Virginia, resulting in 242 lost jobs." He said, "Let me be clear, it's decisions like the one made by AEP today that demonstrate the urgent need to rein in government agencies like the EPA, preventing them from overstepping their bounds and imposing regulations that not only cost us good American jobs, but hurt our economy. Onerous regulations issued by the EPA are the reason that 242 West Virginians will lose their jobs, and that's simply wrong. It is because of out-of-control agencies like the EPA as well as the need to protect American jobs that I sponsored the REINS Act [Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny, H.R.10 & S.299]-- a commonsense measure that will help protect and create jobs by reigning in needless or burdensome regulations, and that will put responsibility back where it belongs -- in the hands of the people who are elected to govern and lead this great nation."

    Access the AEP release with further details including a listing of plants that would be impacted (click here). Access a release from Sen. Manchin (click here). Access legislative details for S.299 (click here). [*Air, *Climate]