Sentences with phrase «existing plant emissions»
A Supreme Court decision from 2007 gave the White House jurisdiction over existing plant emissions.
https://news.nationalgeographic.com/ Not exact matches
Obama is directing the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to work with existing and new power plants to develop emission standards, according to a blueprint for the proposals from the White House.
RESOLVED: That Berkshire Hathaway Inc. («Berkshire») establish reasonable, quantitative goals for reduction of greenhouse gas and other air emissions at its energy - generating holdings; and that Berkshire publish a report to shareholders by January 31, 2015 (at reasonable cost and omitting proprietary information) on how it will achieve these goals — including possible plans to retrofit or retire existing coal - burning plants at Berkshire - held companies.
By further strengthening the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative and welcoming new state members, New York will continue its progress in slashing emissions from existing fossil fuel power plants.
Katko said he opposes applying the EPA's clean power rules to existing power plants, but wants to leave the door open to limit greenhouse gas emissions from new plants built in the future.
The Obama plan requires existing power plants to cut carbon emissions by 32 percent from 2005 levels by the year 2030.
The House also voted 242 - 180 to disapprove of Obama's Clean Power Plan that mandates reductions in carbon emissions from existing power plants.
With no chance of Congress enacting legislation to make these targets into actual U.S. law, the White House is depending on using existing authority under the Clean Air Act and other laws to set regulations in place on power plant emissions, heavy - duty vehicles and more.
There also will be additional tests at Pacific Northwest National Laboratory to test impurities that can exist in actual coal - plant emissions as opposed to simulated gas streams in a lab.
In the short term, new gas - fired power stations can help cut emissions, but only if they replace existing coal - fired power stations rather than nuclear plants or renewable energy sources.
According to Princeton University scientists Stephen Pacala and Robert Socolow's «wedge» strategy of climate change mitigation — which quantifies as a wedge on a time series graph various sets of efforts to maintain flat global carbon emissions between now and 2055 — at least two million megawatts of new renewable energy will have to be built in the next 40 years, effectively replacing completely all existing coal - fired power plants as well as accounting for increases in energy use between now and mid-century.
Johnson and colleagues in IIASA's Energy Program also examined two additional strategies with this limitation: grandfathering existing plants so that they are exempt from future climate policies, or retrofitting plants with Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS), a yet unproven technology that would capture greenhouse gas emissions and store them underground.
But immediate replacement is not advised for existing CFLs and LEDs, unless your main concern is helping to reduce power - plant emissions, according to the study scheduled for publication Nov. 15 in Environmental Research Letters.
Other proposed amendments would provide for compliance with U.S. EPA's Clean Power Plan for existing power plants, allocate allowances to businesses in order to prevent emissions from escaping state borders, and streamline how emitters register and participate in auctions.
On Monday, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) officially released their highly anticipated rule for carbon emissions reductions in existing power plants.
And emissions could be pushed down further still if the EPA is aggressive in regulating existing US power plants.
Yesterday afternoon's announcement concerned three different sets of proposed power plant rules: language aimed at curbing greenhouse gas emissions in new, existing and modified power plants.
No Obama climate regulation has drawn Trump's ire more than the Clean Power Plan, which would limit carbon emissions from existing coal - fired power plants as a way to reduce U.S. greenhouse gas emissions.
«Although these results are «good news» in the sense that the underlying physiology of plants is not going to make the warming of the planet radically worse, the problem we have created in the first place with our greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuel burning still exists,» he says.
The 184 page publication, A Handbook for the States: Incorporating Renewable Energy into State Compliance Plans for EPA's Clean Power Plan, «was prepared by the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) and the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) and is intended as a starting point for states that are considering renewable energy as a compliance tool for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) proposed regulation of carbon emissions from existing power plants (Clean Power Plan).»
Secretary Perry's attempts to tip the scale in favor of uneconomic coal and nuclear power plants to provide a «resilience» benefit that doesn't exist would have increased carbon emissions, raised costs to consumers, and distorted competitive markets.»
By 2030, the U.S. would see carbon dioxide emissions from existing power plants using fossil fuels fall by 30 percent below 2005 levels if the Clean Power Plan, announced on June 2, is finalized in 2015.
President Barack Obama on 3rd August announced the EPA's final rules to limit greenhouse gas emissions from new and existing power plants.
With a rule addressing not - yet - built facilities followed by a rule for existing ones, the EPA's tack in writing new landfill emissions regulations follows a pattern similar to the Obama administration's proposed regulations for new and existing power plants.
President Obama has charted a creditable course given the limits set by a paralyzed and polarized Congress, moving toward regulations curbing emissions of greenhouse gases from proposed and (more important) existing power plants.
If I understand the above calculation correctly, it would seem that, in the electricity sector, we could mostly concentrate on meeting additional demand with efficiency and carbon neutral generation (and avoid some of the fights associated with replacing existing coal generation plants); but if we need to reduce emissions by 80 % by 2050, then I am not sure whether this makes sense.
Any hope about quick action in a second Obama term to crack down on carbon dioxide emissions from existing power plants seems doomed to disappointment.
To put a specific point on it, EPA's top air regulator, Gina McCarthy, told utility regulators Nov. 13 that it would be «at least several years» before EPA addressed a top priority of environmentalists: carbon emission standards for existing coal - fired power plants.
With the release this morning of the Obama administration's proposed regulations curbing emissions of heat - trapping gases from existing power plants, the battle to shape public attitudes is already in high gear.
Consider the Prairie State Energy Campus, with more than $ 1 billion in clean coal technologies and criteria emissions some 80 % below the existing coal fleet... along with a carbon dioxide emission rate some 40 % below existing plants.
Four - fifths of the total energy - related CO2 emissions permissible by 2035 in the 450 Scenario are already «locked - in» by our existing capital stock (power plants, buildings, factories, etc.).
• New coal - fired power plants would only be permitted when they replace existing coal - fired capacity (so they would not increase the total capacity) unless they were completely clean, i.e., unless they had a way of removing carbon dioxide from emissions.
The ancient Chinese mask - changing dance that I saw here Tuesday night (at a dinner for participants in a meeting on science and sustainable development) came to mind in considering the unraveling of news a few hours earlier of an official Chinese plan for a firm cap on emissions of carbon dioxide, hard on the heels of President Obama's proposed carbon pollution rules for existing American power plants.
With that in mind, Fuzz Hogan, the managing editor at the New America Foundation, invited me to weigh in with others on this question about President Obama's proposed «Clean Power Plan» — the first American regulations restricting carbon dioxide emissions from existing power plants:
Substitution through increased utilization of existing combined cycle natural gas power plants provides a relatively low - cost, short - term opportunity to reduce U.S. power sector carbon dioxide emissions by up to 20 percent, while also reducing emissions of criteria pollutants and mercury.
In addition to rapidly increasing China's adoption of non-fossil power sources such as renewables and nuclear, to mitigate long - lived CO2 emissions, carbon capture and sequestration (CCS) must be applied to both new and existing China plants, both coal and gas.
[Updated, June 2, 4:55 a.m. The proposed rules, according to a batch of news stories, would by 2030 require a 30 - percent cut in carbon dioxide emissions from existing power plants, from a 2005 baseline.]
I'm in Beijing to participate in a week of meetings related to the unfolding international science effort called Future Earth, so I won't be able to weigh in in a timely fashion on President Obama's planned Monday release of regulations restricting carbon dioxide emissions from existing American power plants.
That's about 10 years worth of current emissions from existing power plants alone, and enough to put a big dent in the remaining budget of emissions we can dump into the atmosphere and still have a reasonable chance of avoiding 2 degrees C of warming relative to the preindustrial era.
Suppose that electric utilities, in order to meet the new rules, decide to close some existing power plants and invest in new, lower - emission capacity.
Our paper demonstrates the concept of this commitment accounting by quantifying the CO2 emissions that are expected to come from now - existing power plants.
What we found is that the currently existing power plants around the world — unless they are retired early or retrofitted so that their emissions are captured — can be anticipated to emit roughly 300 billion tons of CO2 in the future.
Among other initiatives, we're proud to have reduced our greenhouse gas emissions intensity by more than 30 % since 1990; to be the initial developer of a supercritical coal plant that will emit 15 % lower carbon dioxide than existing plants; to be a founding member of the FutureGen Alliance; to be a part of Australia's low - carbon Coal 21 program; and to be the only non-Chinese partner in China's zero - emissions GreenGen project.
Proposed actions include the development and finalization of EPA standards that set limits on carbon emissions for both new and existing power plants, improved energy efficiency standards for buildings and appliances, and increased deployment of renewable energy.
In June 2014, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed the Clean Power Plan (CPP) to regulate CO2 emissions from existing power plants.
The meeting will also focus on Obama's plan, announced last June, to use the EPA to limit greenhouse gas emissions from future and existing power plants.
The CEIP's core function is to jumpstart compliance with EPA's so - called Clean Power Plan (CPP)-- the agency's carbon dioxide (CO2) emission standards for existing fossil - fuel power plants.
President Obama's highly anticipated Climate Action Plan was released earlier this week, the centerpiece of which focuses on cutting carbon emissions from new and existing coal fired power plants.
As EPA's plan to regulate CO2 emissions from existing power plants — the «Clean Power Plan» or «CPP» — gets closer to being finalized, we've been hearing a lot of talk about how Congress should rein in EPA, by either specifically stopping the CPP or revoking EPA's CO2 regulatory authority under the Clean Air Act.
Congress directed the agency to address these pollutants, the Supreme Court confirmed the agency's duty, and the president should ensure that the agency acts swiftly to cut carbon emission from both existing and new power plants.