EPA carbon rule: ‘First step,’ but from where?

The Obama administration released changes to the way the government regulates CO2 emissions Monday, saying new rules will cut U.S. emissions by 30 percent by 2030.

The rule will not be finalized until next year, but represents the first attempt to set a national limit for carbon dioxide, one of the main contributors to global warming. The Environmental Protection Agency’s “Clean Power Plan” will directly affect U.S. power plants, especially those that use coal, “setting state-specific rate-based” goals for carbon emissions.

The administration first determined that greenhouse gasses posed a danger to human health in 2009, and were empowered to impose statandards under the Clean Air Act of 1970, but it has been a much-delayed and politically fraught process to get to today’s proposal.

Environmentalists and climate watchers have called the plan a “good first step,” but one that falls short of what is necessary to head off much of the future problems predicted to come with rising temperatures resulting from high CO2 emissions. Since today’s release starts a public comment period, those concerned say they will push for a more ambitious final rule.

At stake are what year is defined as the baseline from which reduction will be measured, as well as whether the EPA will use the authority assumed in this rule to regulate emissions of other greenhouse gasses, and what moves the U.S. might make to get other countries on board.

The baseline year is especially important to U.S. producers. Traditional energy providers would favor measuring from 2005, the high point of domestic CO2 emissions. But the economic slowdown starting in 2008 significantly decreased output, and the fracking boom drove down natural gas prices and encouraged a shift from coal- to lower-carbon gas-fired electricity generation.

By way of example, the U.S. needs to reduce GHG emissions by 25 percent to meet targets set in Copenhagen in 2009, but that’s 25 percent from current levels, which represents a significantly steeper cut than 30 percent from a 2005 baseline.

Still, environmentalists this morning seem to be sounding an optimistic note, hoping Obama can take this U.S. move to the world to restart meaningful negotiations on global pollution standards. Some also point to other moves that could be made by the EPA, such as more tightly regulating methane leaks in the extraction and shipping of natural gas and fracked oil. Methane is, liter for liter, a more potent greenhouse gas than CO2.

And the environmental community still holds out hope that the comment period in the rule-making process will encourage a stricter standard.

“The key will be how they solicit comments on more ambitious targets,” said David Hawkins, Natural Resources Defense Council’s director of climate programs, to Grist. “We need an open mind on their part to consider evidence we can do better.”