Investor Presentaiton slide image

Investor Presentaiton

7 Section 111(d) into a tool to do unilaterally what Congress purportedly "wouldn't”—“lead[] global efforts to address climate change." JA.222. EPA took a new approach to curbing emissions designed to alter the makeup of the nation's energy grids-changing which plants generate electricity and where they generate it. The CPP required States to achieve reductions that EPA admitted individual sources could not meet using current or even near-future technologies and process improvements. JA.853-54. To address this otherwise fatal flaw, EPA asserted new authority to regulate source owners and operators, as opposed to the sources themselves. JA.543, 737, 761-62. EPA then crafted a figure it termed the "adjusted CO2 emission rate." This accounting trick nominally counted the emission reductions individual plants could achieve, but it relied mainly on how much EPA believed source owners could invest in different generators more acceptable to the agency. Specifically, EPA divided the amount of emissions from a given source by the amount of that source's generation and the amount of generation from EPA-preferred, zero-emitting sources. JA.1604-06. The more generation from agency-approved sources regulated source owners helped fund, the bigger the denominator and the lower the "adjusted" rate. In this way, EPA baked into its metric the idea that owners and operators would subsidize renewable-energy sources like windmills and solar panels. EPA used this approach to impose an impossible-to- achieve standard on coal-fired plants-limiting them to two-thirds of the emissions the agency calculated they could achieve using then-current technology. See JA.300; EPA, DKT. No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0602-36850, CO₂ EMISSION PERFORMANCE RATE AND GOAL COMPUTATION
View entire presentation