– Ten States Granted Easements to Lessen Costs –
Georgia Attorney General Sam Olens has filed suit on behalf of the state of Georgia against the Environmental Protection Agency. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution story states that Olens filed suit because the the rule would cause a major disruption in how the state produces electricity. Sixty-seven percent of Georgia Power’s electricity is produced by the affected coal-fired power plants.
Attorney General Sam Olens said the rule would cause major changes to the way electricity would be produced in the state.
“The EPA has overstepped their authority with a heavy-handed federal takeover of the enforcement of environmental regulations,” Olens said in a statement Thursday. “More significantly, implementation of this rule will be extremely damaging to our already struggling economy.”
The EPA’s Cross-State Air Pollution Rule imposes caps on sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide in 27 states. Ten of those states, including New York, New Jersey and Texas; were granted cost-lessening adjustments to the regulation.
Georgia Power can either install expensive pollution-reduction machinery in its coal-based power plants or Georgia can buy “emission allowances” from other states. Either way look for your power bills to increase. So what are emission allowances? It appears they are just the recycled, Carbon Tax Credit idea that failed miserably in Europe.
So you thought carbon tax credits were dead because they were such a stupid, expensive, socialistic idea that did nothing to lessen pollution? No, they’re back because Washington loves stupid, expensive socialistic pollution regulations that do nothing to actually lessen pollution. I call them: Son of Carbon Tax Credits or Friday the 13th Part 2012.
The rule allows air-quality-assured allowance trading among covered sources, utilizing an allowance market infrastructure based on existing, successful allowance trading programs. The final Cross-State Air Pollution Rule allows sources to trade emissions allowances with other sources within the same
program (e.g., ozone season NOX) in the same or different states, while firmly
constraining any emissions shifting that may occur by requiring a strict emission
ceiling in each state (the budget plus variability limit). It also includes assurance provisions that ensure each state will make the emission reductions necessary to fulfill the “good neighbor” provision of the Clean Air Act
So we have the ability to pay another state for the right to pollute or we can pay to install expensive anti-pollution equipment – and what better time to do so than in a lengthy period of high unemployment? All because it’s more important to have more regulations than more jobs.