Sentences with phrase «regulations on carbon dioxide emissions»

In a recent interview with E&E TV's Monica Trauzzi, the American Wind Energy Association's (AWEA) Rob Gramlich discussed the effects that EPA's new regulations on carbon dioxide emissions from existing power plants would have on wind energy.

Not exact matches

Obama had introduced a raft of regulations intended to slash emissions of carbon dioxide blamed for climate change, a policy course that accelerated the retirement of older coal - fired power plants and bolstered the nascent solar and wind sectors, which depend heavily on weather conditions for their power output.

The U.S. power sector must cut carbon dioxide emissions 30 percent by 2030 from 2005 levels, according to federal regulations unveiled on Monday that form the centerpiece of the Obama administration's climate change strategy.

Moreover, the Senate bill that would fund DOE — the so - called energy and water bill — hangs in limbo, thanks to the political battle over the Obama administration's plan to use Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations to set new limits on carbon dioxide emissions from power plants, especially those that burn coal.

These regulations shall take into account the total number of tons of carbon dioxide equivalent of greenhouse gas emissions for which a covered entity is demonstrating compliance temporarily, and may set a limit on this amount.

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:

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.

An important question that political and climate analysts will be examining is how much bite is in the regulations — meaning how much they would curb emissions beyond what's already happening to cut power plant carbon dioxide thanks to the natural gas boom, the shutdown of old coal - burning plants because of impending mercury - cutting rules (read the valuable Union of Concerned Scientists «Ripe for Retirement» report for more on this), improved energy efficiency and state mandates developing renewable electricity supplies.

Although U.S. carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions associated with electricity generation have fallen from the 2005 level, they are projected to increase in the coming decades, based on analysis in EIA's Annual Energy Outlook 2015 (AEO2015) that reflects current laws and regulations, and therefore does not include proposed rules such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Power Plan.

Mr. Barbour mainly works to loosen enforcement of environmental regulations affecting utilities, though other Washington lobbyists said that he had also argued against action on reducing carbon dioxide emissions.

When it comes to climate change issues, the spotlight is always on the regulation of carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuels.

These regulations shall take into account the total number of tons of carbon dioxide equivalent of greenhouse gas emissions for which a covered entity is demonstrating compliance temporarily, and may set a limit on this amount.

When US President Obama announced revised regulations on reducing carbon dioxide emissions from US power plants on August 3, 2015 in a laudable speech supporting the new rules, as he predicted opponents of US climate change policy strongly attacked the new rules on grounds that they would wreck the US economy, destroy jobs, and raise electricity prices.

If the regulations are extremely costly, such as the current proposed regulations to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) or the ban on DDT in 1972, it is often not possible to justify them.

President Donald Trump signed an executive order today (March 28) that dismantles the Clean Power Plan, an Obama - era regulation that would have set limits on emissions of carbon dioxide and other pollutants from power plants.

The EPA is on the verge of finalizing regulations that would limit carbon dioxide emissions from power plants by forcing states to adopt measures to cut emissions from the energy sector.

4) July 13, 2010: Despite his claim that it was about fraud and not about science, Cuccinelli relies on blog - science in a brief filed with the court, arguing that Mann and his colleagues have manipulated scientific data for years to back the regulation of carbon dioxide emissions.

Instead of acknowledging this progress, the administration's piling on of new regulation could hinder domestic natural gas production, potentially reducing supply and natural gas use that has played a leading role in reducing U.S. emissions of carbon dioxide to near 20 - year lows.

Various organizations have published forecasts of the economic impacts of the Clean Power Plan (CPP), EPA's regulation that limits carbon dioxide emissions from power plants, with studies arriving at markedly different conclusions about the effect of the policy on electricity affordability and the overall economy.

The U.S. power sector must cut carbon dioxide emissions 30 percent by 2030 from 2005 levels, according to federal regulations unveiled by the EPA on Monday.

You may wonder why the government finds the need to pursue such action since 1) U.S. carbon dioxide emissions have already topped out and have generally been on the decline for the past 7 - 8 years or so (from technological advances in natural gas extraction and a slow economy more so than from already - enacted government regulations and subsidies); 2) greenhouse gases from the rest of the world (primarily driven by China) have been sky - rocketing over the same period, which lessens any impacts that our emissions reduction have); and 3) even in their totality, U.S. carbon dioxide emissions have a negligible influence on local / regional / global climate change (even a immediate and permanent cessation of all our carbon dioxide emissions would likely result in a mitigation of global temperature rise of less than one - quarter of a degree C by the end of the century).

Based upon it's conclusions, governments have implemented expensive carbon taxes and new overbearing regulations designed to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, cap and trade schemes, a phased - in ban on incandescent light bulbs, the forced relocation of whole populations of people to make room for carbon credit producing plantations and numerous other far reaching and expensive initiatives.

This week, however, the blog Moonbattery found a very interesting memo from Romney's office in 2005 announcing tough new regulations on emissions... Governor Mitt Romney today announced that Massachusetts will take another major step in meeting its commitment to protecting air quality when strict state limitations on carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from power plants take effect on January 1, 2006.

The Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) forthcoming climate change regulations for new and existing electricity generating units have been appropriately labeled the «war on coal,» [1] because the proposed limits for carbon dioxide emissions would essentially prohibit the construction of new coal - fired power plants and force existing ones into early retirement.

The proposed regulation, which resulted from a federal energy bill signed by President Bush in December, promises to curtail carbon dioxide emissions from cars and light trucks and reduce America's reliance on foreign oil.

Ironically, these aerosols are also the product of fossil fuel burning and strict regulations were imposed in the developed world on their emissions in the 1960s and 1970s which allowed the warming from carbon dioxide to emerge again.

EPA's attempt to regulate emissions of carbon dioxide would also be a disaster if the Trump Administration allows the Obama regulations to be implemented since CO2 is not a pollutant, does not have a significant effect on global temperatures, and would have had huge adverse effects on the economy, on plants, and on poor people for no purpose.

The House Energy and Commerce Committee, on a mostly partisan vote, approved the bill that would halt EPA regulations that began this year to control emissions of carbon dioxide and other pollutants linked to climate change.

Two new federal air pollution regulations are expected to spur the closure of up to 69 aging, inefficient, coal - fired power plants, reducing both harmful air pollutants and emissions of the climate destabilizing greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide (CO2), according to an AP survey of US power plant operators and a preliminary Breakthrough Institute analysis of the likely impacts on CO2 emissions.