Get Energy Smart! NOW!

To be clear, “clean coal” is an oxymoronic statement, at least for the next few decades. From mining through the emitted pollutants in the burning process to the resulting ash, there are many “dirty” aspects to coal. Thanks to the dedicated efforts of a Sierra Club legal team led by Joanne Spalding, the future prospects for “dirty coal” just got a little more dismal. In short, the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Environmental Appeals Board just issued a ruling in the Bonanza case that has the implication that will require Best Available Control Technology (BACT) for Carbon Dioxide (CO2) as part of the air pollution permits for all new coal plants. What does this mean? Unclear exactly, but likely this stops all new coal plants in their tracks as owners and operators consider their options. This also, in the face of likely green stimulus focus, could help turn attention to the high economic payoff from pursuing alternatives. And, no, alternatives do not just mean “alternative energy”, alternatives also mean “negawatts” (energy efficiency) and lookign toward new ways for power management that will control demand for power into the future rather than simply adopt a developmental approach that incorrectly assumes that economic development requires more megawatts of electrical capacity with each passing day.

In addition to opening the door for greater attention to alternative power and alternative approaches to power management/efficiency, this ruling opens the door to looking seriously at paths for eliminating coal from our electricity grid. In short, this rulling is a backhanded way of stating that we need to be considering the very significant external costs from coal-electricity air pollution: particulates driving up respiratory disease rates, mercury and other poisons entering the food cycle, and CO2 driving global warming. The simple reality: we cannot afford business as usual, it has too many real costs — including economic costs. Moving away from coal will have many benefits, near-term and long-term. This ruling is a real step into that better future.

Thus: some thanks, from myself and speaking for my descendents, to the Sierra Club for their hard work and to the EPA Environmental Appeals Board for being open to the arguments and evidence put before them.

What look to be some of the implications, on first review:

A question to ask: what investor, in the face of this decision and possible climate change legislation, will choose to put their money into building new coal-electricity plants?

See, also, Jesse Jenkins on It’s Getting Hot in Here: Huge Legal Ruling Blocks All US Coal Development

Of course, this will also leave President Obama with an interesting ruling to make with some real political ramifications. But I’d say Obama has plenty of cover since the coal industry has been so avidly touting how clean it is these days. The real bold move would be to require all new coal plants to meet an emissions performance standard that essentially means they’d have to sequester at least half their emissions (as in CA or WA state’s emissions performance standards), put an end to mountain top removal coal mining, and really tell the coal industry, “it’s time to put up or shut up” and make this “clean coal” thing they keep talking about a reality.

And, I would expect Warming Law to have a good discussion of it in the near future.

The Sierra Club’s press release:

Ruling: Coal Plants Must Limit C02

In a move that signals the start of the our clean energy future, the Environmental Protection Agency’s Environmental Appeals Board (EAB) ruled today EPA had no valid reason for refusing to limit from new coal-fired power plants the carbon dioxide emissions that cause global warming. The decision means that all new and proposed coal plants nationwide must go back and address their carbon dioxide emissions.

“Today’s decision opens the way for meaningful action to fight global warming and is a major step in bringing about a clean energy economy,” said Joanne Spalding, Sierra Club Senior Attorney who argued the case. “This is one more sign that we must begin repowering, refueling and rebuilding America.”

“The EAB rejected every Bush Administration excuse for failing to regulate the largest source of greenhouse gases in the United States. This decision gives the Obama Administration a clean slate to begin building our clean energy economy for the 21st century,” continued Spalding

The decision follows a 2007 Supreme Court ruling recognizing carbon dioxide, the principle source of global warming, is a pollutant under the federal Clean Air Act.

“Coal plants emit 30% of our nation’s global warming pollution. Building new coal plants without controlling their carbon emissions could wipe out all of the other efforts being undertaken by cities, states and communities across the country,” said Bruce Nilles, Director of the Sierra Club’s National Coal Campaign. “Everyone has a role to play and it’s time that the coal industry did its part and started living up to its clean coal rhetoric.”

The Sierra Club went before the Environmental Appeals Board in May of 2008 to request that the air permit for Deseret Power Electric Cooperative’s proposed waste coal-fired power plant be overturned because it failed to require any controls on carbon dioxide pollution. Deseret Power’s 110 MW Bonanza plant would have emitted 3.37 million tons of carbon dioxide each year.

“Instead of pouring good money after bad trying to fix old coal technology, investors should be looking to wind, solar and energy efficiency technologies that are going to power the economy, create jobs, and help the climate recover,” said Nilles.

To get background information and see how the case unfolded.

Additional reactions include Josh Nelson at the Seminal , Joe Romm at ClimateProgress,

The single most important policy measure the rich nations must embrace as soon as possible is to stop building coal plants that have no CO2 controls. This ruling may do that for the foreseeable future. Also, it may be just the leverage the Obama administration needs to get a serious domestic climate bill passed, which is crucial to getting serious international action on climate.

and Brad Johnson at the WonkRoom:

In a landmark action, the Environmental Protection Agency’s final decision-making board has ruled that all new and proposed coal-fired power plants must have their carbon dioxide emissions regulated. The Environmental Appeals Board ruled today that the EPA has no valid reason for refusing to place limits on the global warming emissions from Desert Power’s proposed 110-megawatt coal-fired power plant in Vernal, Utah.
…
The 69-page decision described the Bush administration’s arguments as “weak,” “questionable,” “not sustainable,” “not sufficient,” and rebuked EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson for failing to issue CO2 regulations, repeatedly recommending an “action of nationwide scope.”