New Biden EPA rule puts all of us at risk of energy shortages
Get ready for more energy shortages. The Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) power plant rule was finalized last week, and it is bad news for America’s energy supply.
Under the new rule, all coal plants that plan to stay open beyond 2039 and any new natural gas plant would have to cut or capture 90% of their carbon dioxide emissions by 2032.
Plants that expect to retire by 2039 face less stringent standards but still would have to capture some emissions. And while current natural gas plants are safe for the time being, any new plant will have to adhere to these regulations.
Carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) is the idea that CO2 can be captured, transported and then stored in underground wells. But despite decades of research and development, CCS remains extremely expensive and largely unsuccessful. Only a handful of functioning CCS facilities operate worldwide, and they only capture a small fraction of what experts had projected.
BIDEN ADMIN CRACKS DOWN ON POWER PLANTS FUELING NATION'S GRID
Bottom line: These projects are nowhere near ready for wide-scale adoption and implementation.
But the lack of progress is not the only impediment.
Less than a month ago, the House Climate Solutions Caucus sent a letter to the head of the EPA expressing deep concerns about the underground CO2 storage permitting delays which "are actively crippling U.S. efforts to deploy vital clean energy and carbon capture infrastructure alike."
It is vital that the infrastructure is made available in time frames that align with decarbonization goals. Now that the power plant rule is finalized, the permit backlog is only sure to worsen if no action is taken.
25 STATES SUE OVER EPA SOOT POLLUTION RULE: ‘BIDEN’S RADICAL GREEN AGENDA'
The EPA is setting power plants up for failure. But perhaps this is the plan all along?
Fossil fuels have been under attack since Biden’s first day in office. This regulation will force many power plants to shut down, precisely what this administration hopes to achieve. Their end goal is a transition to renewables.
A study published last year concluded that switching to a mostly renewable electric grid would cause electricity prices to soar more than threefold. The demand for hydrocarbons is not falling. Restricting supply would only lead to sustained increases in oil and gas prices, delivering "body blows to the economies of the West."
The truth is fossil fuels can and do dispatch uninterrupted, cost-effective and resilient energy, which in turn fosters and supports strong economic activity. Renewables are not a technological or sound replacement, and nowhere near capable of being a major energy source. Their intermittence and unreliability have already caused some unfortunate events.
PROOF THAT WIND AND SOLAR ARE DISASTERS, AND NOT THE ENERGY AMERICA REALLY NEEDS
Several years ago, Winter Storm Uri left millions without power and several hundred dead. Weather-dependent sources failed, and without readily available coal, the Texas power grid was minutes away from total collapse.
Storm Elliot in December 2022 ripped through the Southeast, where several major utilities had to implement rolling outages to preserve supply. To prevent system collapse, coal provided nearly 40% of the critically needed energy.
California has experienced its share of rolling blackouts and has even asked its residents to conserve energy for fear of further electricity deficits. Roughly a quarter of the Golden State’s energy comes from wind and solar, having the most ambitious green agenda on the books.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE FOX NEWS OPINION
According to the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC), risks of blackouts are increasing across America due to state and federal mandates for carbon-free electricity. Potential energy deficiencies are "projected in areas where the future resource mix could fail to deliver the necessary supply of electricity under energy-constrained conditions." Coal-heavy regions like the Midcontinent Independent Systems Operator (MISO) are at very high risk.
During a Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee hearing a year ago, NERC’s CEO was asked whether energy sources forced to retire early under EPA’s regulations could be replaced by suitable renewables. "No. Not in the timeframe we’re looking at."
The new EPA rule is sure to face legal challenges. Eerily similar to the West Virginia v. EPA verdict, in which the government agency lost big, lawsuits will likely also claim "the emissions rule far surpasses the EPA's legal authority, triggers the major questions doctrine and violates administrative law."
Fossil fuels are and will continue to be in the foreseeable future the reliant and resilient backbone of the energy grid. We cannot place our fate in the hands of technology that currently fails to demonstrate commercial viability.
The EPA’s final rules will impact grid reliability and put American’s safety and livelihoods at risk.