Sep 20, 2013 3 min read

Most energy experts agree that the Obama administration’s new proposed regulations limiting carbon emissions from power plants will have an impact, but they differ on whether those changes will be for the better.

In order to comply with Environmental Protection Agency regulations, new power plants would be expected to install costly technology that would capture carbon dioxide and bury it underground, according to the Associated Press.

“These new regulations predominantly impact new coal-fired power plants,” said Chris Eck, spokesman for First Energy. “At this point, it won’t impact us because we don’t have any new plants planned.”

Cecil Roberts, international president of the United Mine Workers of America, said in a new release Friday that the proposed EPA regulations would put an end to coal-fired power plants because it would cost billions to add “unproven CCS capability” to new plants.

“These regulations lay the groundwork for a future of significantly higher electricity bills for American ratepayers, especially those who live in states where a majority of the electricity is generated from coal,” Roberts said. “The current low price of natural gas will not last long, especially in a marketplace where it becomes the dominant fuel.”

Likewise, Consol Energy issued a statement calling the regulations “dangerous and unnecessary” measures that would “only exacerbate the issues where Americans are demanding leadership by putting our most abundant and affordable domestic resource on the sidelines.”

U.S. Rep. Tim Murphy, R-Upper St. Clair, said the plan to reduce carbon emissions is not technically achievable. But if the regulations were successful, he said they would eliminate 40 percent of the country’s energy and thousands of jobs for miners, electricians and factory workers.

“This rule, which completely bypassed Congress, proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the administration wants to eliminate American coal as a fuel source,” Murphy said. “I will keep fighting this silly science to protect the families who make a living in coal and work at the factories across Southwestern Pennsylvania that depend on affordable energy.”

Murphy, who serves as chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations, authored legislation that would prohibit consideration of the “social cost of carbon” – the future effects of climate change – in developing regulations, until Congress reviews the issue.

Environmental organizations were more pleased with the news of the proposed regulations. Michael Brune, executive director of the Sierra Club, said in a news release that the regulations would protect Americans from carbon pollution, strengthen the economy and provide clean energy jobs.

“Each year, more and more Americans are threatened by extreme weather events brought on by carbon pollution. And up until now, there have been no national standards for the amount of carbon pollution power plants can dump into our air,” Brune said. “Big polluters have been getting a free ride for decades, while Americans foot the bill in the form of asthma attacks, respiratory illness, floods, wildfires and superstorms.”