Via One News Now:

As explained by EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy, the Clean Power Plan aims to cut carbon pollution from the power sector by 32 percent.

“All while keeping energy reliable and affordable,” she claims.

“It is the worst regulation that I certainly have ever seen come down, on the power industry anyway,” responds Terry Jarrett, attorney and former Missouri public service commissioner comments.

Not only is the final rule vastly different from the proposed rule, he says, it’s more onerous on states in the Midwest and the West.

“They have increased the carbon reduction goals for many states,” Jarrett says of the EPA. “They do increase the time for compliance for the interim goals of the plan by two years. However, that really is not really not an effective increase in time to comply.”

That’s because it takes from five to 12 years to build new infrastructure that will comply with the Clean Power Plan.

In a commentary on National Review Online, Diana Furchgott-Roth notes that the EPA admits its new policies will reduce full-time employment – approximately 30,000 jobs – due to higher electrical prices that affect manufacturing.

“Environmental justice is not much use if people lack jobs,” Furchgottt-Roth writes.

Not only is a 32-percent cut in carbon pollution not feasible, says Jarrett, cost is a concern.

“Most utilities were planning under the proposed rule to rely more on gas-fired generation by building new gas plants, because gas emits about 50 percent less carbon than coal,” the attorney explains. “However, the EPA has put out more stringent renewable standards. The utilities can’t rely on gas as much.”

What’s coming in the future, he predicts, is a “nightmare for the electric utility industry.”

See the article here.