Clean Air Task Force

Shortcut Navigation:
Switch Styles:

coal-fired power plants

At Last: A First Step on GHGs

April 5th, 2012 by Ann Weeks, Senior Counsel and Legal Director

This posting originally appeared in the National Journal’s Energy and Environment Expert Blog.

Last week, the Administration took a bold step forward to curb greenhouse gas emissions. In a long-anticipated action, EPA proposed new source performance standards (NSPS) for fossil-fueled power plants that would limit emissions from new plants to a rate of 1,000 lbs. of CO2 per megawatt-hour, averaged annually. This level is comparable to the annual average emissions rate of the existing fleet of U.S. natural gas power plants. The rule levels the playing field between coal and gas on greenhouse gas emissions, so new coal and gas plants will compete on price. When finalized, the rule will provide a much-needed and long-overdue step on the path towards full decarbonization of all domestic coal and gas power plants.
Read the rest of this entry »

Enhanced Oil Recovery takes a big step forward

March 3rd, 2012 by Kurt Waltzer, Carbon Storage Development Coordinator

There was some rare bipartisan good news on the Hill this week, with the release of the National Enhanced Oil Recovery Initiative (NEORI) study and policy recommendations. Congressman Mike Conaway (R-TX) joined Senator Kent Conrad (D-ND) for the announcement in the Dirksen Senate Office Building, and three other Senators (Baucus, D-MT, Hoeven, R-ND and Lugar, R-IN) supplied written statements in support NEORI’s objective to significantly ramp up the use of enhanced oil recovery (EOR) in this country. If the report’s recommendations are implemented, the Initiative’s recommendations will significantly decrease our dependence on imported oil, reduce CO2 emissions, and will create good, permanent jobs in the U.S., while adding billions of additional dollars to the federal treasury without raising taxes. The initiative, convened by C2ES and the Great Plains Institute, has support from environmental groups, fossil energy companies, labor, and bioenergy companies – including Clean Air Task Force, NRDC, Southern Company, GE, the AFL-CIO, and Archer Daniels Midland. Seems too good to be true? Read on.

Enhanced Oil Recovery has been successfully utilized in West Texas since 1972, pumping pressurized CO2 deep underground into depleted oil fields to force up hundreds of millions of barrels of oil that would be otherwise not recoverable. During EOR, most CO2 is trapped in the rock., but because CO2 is both valuable and limited in supply, the CO2 that is not trapped returns to the surface mixed with the oil, and is separated, recycled and reused for additional EOR. Eventually, all the CO2 that is purchased by the EOR facility stays trapped in the micro-pores of the oil field, just as the oil was – deep below layers of impermeable caprock. Nearly a billion tons of CO2 have been safely injected since the practice of CO2 EOR began 40 years ago. EOR currently accounts for 281,000 barrels of oil per day, or 6% of our total domestic oil production. But, with next-generation technology, CO2 EOR could provide the U.S. with an additional 67 billion barrels of oil, and requiring 20 billion tons of CO2 to produce it – resulting in millions of additional barrels per day. Moreover, this figure could be much higher as new CO2 EOR oil reserves known as “residual oil zones” are proven. So what’s the holdup? Essentially, adequate supplies of CO2.

Meanwhile, abundant supplies of CO2 are being vented from industrial sources each year, trapping more and more heat in our atmosphere. For example, coal and gas power plants in the U.S. emit 2.4 billion tons to the atmosphere each year. And, according to a study last year by the National Energy Technology Laboratory, the EOR industry is facing 20 billion tons of unmet demand for CO2. If we could direct the CO2 from being emitted where it harms the climate to US oil fields, we would reduce CO2 emissions to the atmosphere while also reducing the amount of oil imported into the US. We would also begin broad deployment of a technology that is necessary for decarbonizing our energy system – carbon capture and sequestration (CCS). The potential scale of deployment for this technology will spur innovation and reduce costs.

To increase US EOR production and drive the deployment of low carbon energy technology, the NEORI study recommends a number of federal and state incentives, including tax breaks for CO2 capturers, such as power plant operators, and for transporters, including pipeline operators, to jumpstart the fledgling CO2 industry in this country. The recommendations include the development of a new tax incentive that would provide a tax credit for the first ten years for CO2 emitters who become CO2 suppliers to the EOR industry. This tax incentive more than pays for itself through additional revenue from federal taxes on the incremental additional oil that is produced. In other words, the cost of the incentive is smaller than the additional revenue that would be generated by the additional production and sale of new domestic oil. And this incremental new oil (and taxes) can’t be produced without the CO2, so it’s new, real money to help with our federal balance sheet problems. NEORI estimates this program would add a net present value of $100 billion to the US treasury over a 40-year period. NEORI also offers recommendations for modifying the existing Section 45Q Federal Tax Credit for Carbon Dioxide Sequestration, and suggests a number of model state policies including tax credits, exemptions or abatements, and the inclusion of CCS in electricity portfolio standards, among others.

All the supporters of this effort may not share a common view about fossil fuels or climate change, but they all understand this is indeed a win-win-win. Are there risks? Sure, if oil prices dropped substantially and stayed there, then the incentive might not pay for itself. An even bigger challenge is that the atmosphere in Washington may be so toxic that even a no-brainer like this idea won’t move forward. But if there was ever a chance for a big idea to succeed in our current political climate – EOR is it.

Many climate decisions ahead for EPA

January 25th, 2012 by Armond Cohen, Executive Director

This posting originally appeared in the National Journal’s Energy and Environment Expert Blog.

photoWhatever the symbolic importance of the Keystone XL decision, it is only one of several climate-related policy decisions facing the Administration this year – and arguably one of the less significant ones. The Environmental Impact Statement on the project produced by the U.S. Department of State estimates that stopping the pipeline would avoid between 3 and 21 MMT CO2e (carbon dioxide equivalent) in U.S. greenhouse gas emissions annually. While environmental commenters have suggested that this estimate may understate these benefits, they haven’t yet provided alternatives.
Read the rest of this entry »

GHG Regs Must Be Top Priority

January 9th, 2012 by Ann Weeks, Senior Counsel and Legal Director

This posting originally appeared in the National Journal’s Energy and Environment Expert Blog.

Setting greenhouse gas performance standards for new and existing coal-fired power plants has to be THE environmental, energy, and climate policy priority for 2012. Given the carbon footprint of this industry, building a new coal fired power plant without some level of carbon dioxide control is simply not justifiable technically, politically, or even economically. Cleaning plants up later costs more than building them with clean technology now.

The first of these U.S. EPA rules is now under review at the Office of Management and Budget, and EPA must finalize the rule in the late spring, under a consent decree with environmental groups. This rule is critical because coal-fired power plants are the largest stationary sources of carbon dioxide air pollution – and there is now available control technology permitting deep reductions, as we are seeing with the first applications for plants that capture and sequester carbon dioxide.
Read the rest of this entry »

Making Sense of Gas vs. Coal and Climate: A Look at the Recent Paper by Tom Wigley

September 14th, 2011 by David McCabe, Atmospheric Scientist

The last few months have seen a flurry of academic papers investigating whether using natural gas for power generation creates more global warming than using coal for power generation.  A few have reached the startling conclusion that using gas for power is just as bad, or worse, than coal.  The most recent of these is by Tom Wigley, a global leader in climate science, and therefore bears special examination.  As we’ll argue below, natural gas is no climate panacea, especially over the time scales that Wigley examines.  We need zero-carbon energy.  But it is also important to consider how we get to that future, and natural gas – coupled with carbon capture and storage and tight controls on methane leaks – will likely have a big role to play there in the next few decades.  It is critical that we accurately account for the climate impacts of gas, and we don’t agree with Wigley’s approach in two key areas.
Read the rest of this entry »

Natural Selection in the Energy Industry: Demise of the Dinosaurs

June 22nd, 2011 by Conrad Schneider, Advocacy Director

Last week, amid great fanfare, American Electric Power Company (AEP) announced it would close twenty-one of its coal-fired electrical units in order to comply with proposed Clean Air Act regulations on the emissions of air toxics. Such compliance, AEP asserted, would be financially prohibitive. AEP claimed in a front-page article in the Chicago Tribune that such closures would result in higher monthly electricity bills for its customers. AEP’s proposed “solution” has been to call for a bill that would weaken the Clean Air Act, by providing more time to comply with laws that have been on the books since 1990.
Read the rest of this entry »

Natural Gas: Palliative, Not a Cure

April 29th, 2011 by Armond Cohen, Executive Director

Plentiful and cheap natural gas is the Prozac of American energy policy. It may take the edge off of some of our worst symptoms in the near term. But it can also dull us to solving key long term and chronic problems, especially regarding climate change. And, as with any medication, there can also be some negative side-effects – some clearly remediable (methane leaks), and some (water and air contamination impacts from fracturing – or “fracking” – of shale to yield gas) still to be managed with sufficient rigor and transparency.

On the positive side, there is little doubt that cheap natural gas can help provide some environmental relief in the short term by lowering the cost of displacing older coal-fired electric generation. Natural gas power plants emit less than half of the CO2 per kilowatt-hour as do those powered by coal; the emissions reduction gains are even greater for conventional pollutants like smog and soot and for air toxics like mercury. True, upstream leaks of methane (a far more potent global warmer than CO2) are a source of greenhouse gas pollution that cuts into the climate advantages of burning natural gas. But these leaks can be virtually eliminated, and the gas industry needs to focus a lot more on fixing them, and less on insisting that we should only consider climate impacts over a full century (which de-emphasizes the importance of the methane leaks, relative to the CO2 advantages of gas over coal, because CO­2 lasts longer in the atmosphere).
Read the rest of this entry »

It’s finally time to regulate air toxics

March 15th, 2011 by Ann Weeks, Senior Counsel and Legal Director

This posting originally appeared in the National Journal’s Energy and Environment Expert Blog.

Did you know that air emissions from coal- and oil-fired power plants — the largest industry emitter of mercury, dioxins, acid gases, and arsenic and nickel and other heavy metals — are not subject to national regulations to protect human health and the environment? Moreover, this surprising lapse in federal protection of human health and the environment has existed for a decade.

Whatever EPA’s rules will say – and we won’t know that for sure until they are announced – they will provide significant environmental and public health benefits beyond today’s intolerable situation. In fact, the new rules will provide even greater public health and environmental benefits than the EPA can yet quantify.
Read the rest of this entry »

Practical Cooperation on Coal, Climate

January 18th, 2011 by Armond Cohen, Executive Director

This posting originally appeared in the National Journal’s Energy and Environment Expert Blog.

In his just-published remarks to the Washington Post prior to Wednesday’s upcoming summit with President Obama, Chinese President Hu called for “common ground” and “practical cooperation” between the two countries. From the standpoint of confronting our greatest mutual challenge — global climate change — the two largest emitters of greenhouse gases share no greater common ground than a warming planet.

And on Tuesday, a series of agreements that make good on President Hu’s second call — practical cooperation — for the joint development of clean energy technologies, are being inked by AEP, the largest utility in the U.S., and two of the biggest Chinese energy enterprises: China Huaneng Group and State Grid.
Read the rest of this entry »

Cheering Long Awaited Rules

January 3rd, 2011 by Conrad Schneider, Advocacy Director

This posting originally appeared in the National Journal’s Energy and Environment Expert Blog.

On January 2, 2011, something amazing happened, or more accurately, didn’t happen. Despite the direst predictions of climate deniers and regulatory naysayers, the sky didn’t fall, or even begin to fall. Because on that day, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency started to roll out long-awaited Clean Air Act regulations that will eventually require major stationary greenhouse gas emitters like power plants, oil refineries and industrial facilities, to reduce their emissions. As a result, our country, and our atmosphere, will be better off, not worse.
Read the rest of this entry »