WASHINGTON, D.C. — The goal of a new proposed rule from the federal Environmental Protection Agency is to cut carbon emissions from existing power plants in the U.S. by a national average of 30 percent — compared with 2005 levels — before 2030.

“Climate change that’s fueled by carbon pollution is super charging risks, not just to our health, but to our communities, to our economy and to our way of life,” said EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy. “Can we cut pollution while keeping our energy affordable and reliable? Sure we can. We can and we will.”

On Monday at EPA headquarters, McCarthy detailed the 645-page draft rule that would give states differing deadlines and options for meeting emission-reduction targets that also would vary by state.

With the flexibility, states could meet their individualized targets by reducing energy demand through more energy efficiency programs, by utilizing solar, wind energy or natural gas more or by installing pollution-control technology.

“The goal is achievable because innovations in the production, distribution and use of electricity are already making the power sector more efficient and sustainable while maintaining an affordable, reliable and diverse energy mix,” read part of the proposed rule.

The full proposal is available here.

Even with the requirements in the proposed rule, officials with the EPA said the two leading sources of electricity generation in the United States would be coal and natural gas with each providing more than 30 percent of expected generation by the 2030 target date. ¬†Currently, about 40 percent of the country’s energy comes from coal.

Critics, though, have claimed the new emissions limits will cost billions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of jobs by relying on technology that has not yet been developed while, at the same time, driving up electricity prices nationwide.

“I look at this and I see that they (the proposed emissions limits) are going to have real, harmful impacts on West Virginia, not just the coal miners specifically, but all of the indirect jobs too. It’s unacceptable because it doesn’t address the impact, the livelihood of West Virginians and our families,” said Secretary of State Natalie Tennant, a U.S. Senate candidate.



“This is cap-and-trade in another cloak,” said Second District Congresswoman Shelley Moore Capito, a U.S. Senate candidate. “This is just, obviously, West Virginia under attack. I think if we didn’t understand the term ‘War on Coal,’ I think today the declaration is in its final stages and I think it will be devastating to our coal industries, our families, our communities and other jobs.”



Both Tennant and Capito were guests on Monday’s MetroNews “Talkline” as the EPA’s proposal was released to the public.

“What is most baffling about President Obama’s new rules is that reports indicate they will only reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 1.8 percent while the global carbon emission levels are expected to increase by 31 percent between 2011 and 2030,” said Steve Roberts, president of the West Virginia Chamber of Commerce, in a statement.

“This is just unnecessarily hindering our economy while the rest of the world waves and passes us.”

State Attorney General Patrick Morrisey called the proposed rule a “sweeping and draconian proposal.” “My office will review every line, of every paragraph, or every page of this proposal and take all legal actions necessary to protect West Virginia jobs, uphold the rule of law and challenge this unprecedented attack on coal miners and their families,” Morrisey said.

In July, four public hearings on the proposed rule will be held in Washington, D.C., Atlanta, Ga., Denver, Co. and Pittsburgh, Pa.

Comments can be submitted, using the Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2013-0602, online at www.regulations.gov, via e-mail at A-and-R-Docket@epa.gov, through fax at 202-566-9744 or by mail to EPA, EPA Docket Center, Mail code 28221T, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. 20460.

The proposed EPA rule could be finalized by June of next year. After that, states would have at least a year to craft their own plans.

bubble graphic


bubble graphic


  • DWL

    You stupid m0r0n loving liberal, leftists, (d)'s, democrats. Economic suicide by your leader!

  • Jeff Long

    Do you have an extra 3400.00 dollars a year for your electric bills. Yes Its going to cost you more, don't forget 2001 when California Power Plants were shut down by their government. Electric bills shot out the roof, and the rolling blackouts and brownouts they put in place. Only thing there people raised cain about what was going on so their legislation changed the laws and the power plants started generation again. Only thing here when the east coast in sitting in the dark hotter that hades, I don't think Washington DC will have the good sense to change the laws. Yes Virginia and the surrounding states you will be dark and hot (summer) and dark and cold (winter).

  • JTC

    Take a ride on US Route 50 from Clarksburg to Parkersburg, that is where the battlefield for your so called War on Coal is being fought, it is going to be a Natural Gas world, the days of King Coal will fade away, deal with it.

    • Aaron

      Even THIS administration does not predict natural gas to replace coal as the leading supply of electrical generation for another 2 decades and that is if the liberal eco-terrorist can keep themselves from attacking fracking during that time span. Please educate yourself if your going to parrot the liberal agenda.

      • Imlovinit

        Eco-terrorist? Talk about parroting an agenda

  • 2XLPatriot

    Coming from a family of coal miners, union coal miners to be more specific, it is laughable that the unions urge the members to vote democrat and they end up voting themselves out of a job, knowing up front that the POTUS wants to kill coal. Laughable to the point of a crying shame. What were / are you people thinking? "Republicans want to dismantle unions but, democrats want us to vote for them and they'll regulate us out of a job." North and South Carolina, get ready for the biggest wave of unemployed, former coal mining West Virginians in history. Please teach them to stop voting like their parents and grandparents.

  • Hillbilly

    Oh , J the C , please help yourself , Oh , if you are lucky you might get a windmill in your back yard . LOL You silly people , just wait until the Affordable Care Act is fully implemented , it is all a part of the redistrubition of wealth from the middle class to the lower class . The lower class wins , the upper class wins , all on the backs of the working class . You silly fools ! LOL

  • Hillbilly

    You silly silly people . You know that when Oboma first ran for office he said he was going to kill the coal industry , but you were so taken by the new black man , you voted for him anyway . So now you are all getting just exactly what you voted for , enjoy !!! LOL

  • Ranger Rick


    • J the C

      Keep it up, Mr. President. Good job!

  • Benthere

    Instead of having a special session on an a fetal pain bill...they better get back to Charleston and begin to develop a post coal economy.

    • JTL

      They already have, they've decided to drop all of their eggs into the tourism basket which means they the state government will reap the profits while leaving the WV middle class still devastated due to job loss.

  • rick

    Vote Rebublican again....look how well it has always worked out before....what could possibly go wrong?

    • CharlieDon'tSerf

      No. Keep voting for the jackass party in November since times are so great now.

  • sammy

    The only fix. Vote straight Republican ticket in November.

    • J the C

      Great idea Sammy. I'll slash my wrists while I'm at it

      • wow

        J the C, please don't get my hopes up on the wrist thing, that would be great. One less libtard to deal with.

      • Jonesburger

        You don't have the courage or conviction to do anything pal. This nation will survive and overcome you freaks and then you may be ready to actually slash your wrists.

  • Aaron

    On another thread, Bookman said "Government is so broken, inefficient, and unaccountable. We waste so much for so little." This is the perfect example.

    Our government is so overreaching and out of bounds that it is absurd yet there are those who believe that government knows best and only government can solve our problems. Even when it is proven that government interference hinders growth while doing nothing to improve in other areas, progressives still insist on deferring to the government.

    Even the most ardent Federalist would be rolling in their graves today as they declared Independence based on far less intrusion. If Congress does not act, the states need to.

    • J the C

      Gee Aaron, can you see any difference in the Country today, as opposed to 225 years ago. We have 30 times more people, 10 times more area, technology coming out the wazoo. Right wingers today who live in the eighteenth century are dragging us down to an eighteenth century standard of living, and are destroying the Republic.

      • Aaron

        Technology is no excuse to ignore the Constitution. If changing of times require a change to the document, the Founders put in place a mechanism to do just that thus your comment is bunk. Perhaps if you actually take the time to read the Constitution, you would know that.

    • The bookman

      As posted in response to Wirerowe's comment in the first story, 18 AG's from various states have informed Gina McCarthy of their intentions, and did so back in September 2013. The 11 page document specifically lays out the legal challenge. You might ask how in September of last year thus was accomplished? It is because it was common knowledge the Natural Resources Defense Council was assisting in the development of the rule, and it was widely available to review. So the death knell to the coal industry will have been dealt by an environmental watchdog group through the complicity of the Federal Government, and specifically this President's EPA. Amazing, yet true!

      • Hillboy

        Some people find it equally amazing when environmental regulations are drafted by the industries the rules are intended to regulate. That has probably happened much more often.

        • Wirerowe

          Would agree Hillboy that industry probably has had more input in the past. This particular action is all hat and no cattle. There are absolutely no tangible benefits for the environment and significant costs to state and local governments jobs and industrial and residential ratepayers.You always say we need to do something. We need to do something that is right and this is dead wrong and a loser on balance.. Co2 has been declining and will continue to decline without this executive order . This is posturing fueled by fear mongering and inaccuracies as evidence by the President's speech on Friday where he tied this action to health impacts when co2 has no health impacts and tying global warming to increased hurricanes activity and severity when we are currently experiencing the longest hiatus in category 3+ since 1900 as reported in the Washington Post on the same day.

          • Wirerowe

            I would add while a number of the voters believe in global warming for whatever reason. Very few think it is a major concern. I think that is why the interest groups and the President resort to unsubstantiated scare claims,

          • Wirerowe

            There is no consensus among the voters on the severity of global warming and it is a very partisan and regional issue.i know the democrats who believe in this are very frustrated and try to ram these through with executive orders and use scare tactics and say things that are just not true. The first step is to reach some agreement , consensus is impossible on asked on the two extremes . The agreement would include what is the severity of the problem. Co2 emissions in Thai country have been essentially flat for 20 years and have declined in recent years and will continue to decline. Our carbon footprint declines over time due to technology and economics.I think the President should acknowledge this but I think he is more focusing on scoring points than solutions, The truth is a starting point, the republicans shoukd acknowledge that many scientist think there is global warming. The middle way is between the deniers and the alarmists.

          • Hillboy

            I don't think this is the best approach either. But, this is what happens when you have two parties who are unable to work together to come up with any sort of plan to either address GHGs or to develop a coherent national energy policy that is acceptable to both parties.

        • The bookman

          Neither leads to a balanced approach. The pendulum continues to swing way left and way right. No balance.

      • Aaron

        I just wonder that if this administration is so arrogant that it undertakes these actions now, what will they resort to when they are truly lame duck? If this does not switch the Senate, I'm not sure what will.

        • Ranger Rick


  • Jonesburger

    From 1990 to 2012 world wide Co 2 emission grew 53%, China grew 315% and Us grew 4%.
    Between 2007 and 2012 US emission declined 12% and China's grew 44%. In 1990 US
    accounted for 23% of worlds Co 2 and China 10%. Currently the Us accounts for 15%
    and China 29%. That differential will only grow as without any new legislation
    Co 2 will go down in the US. Because of energy efficiency in all sectors better
    mpg of total on road fleet,EPA's prohibition against new coal fired power plants
    , EPA's early shuttering of old power plants and substitution of natural gas for
    coal in power plants. The proposed reduction of 30% of CO 2 in coal plants by 2030 will
    lead to less than 1 % reduction in world wide Co 2 emissions . China will wipe that out with increases in a couple of years. The costs will be
    huge and pervasive through our economy in terms of higher energy cost and jobs
    loss. Huge negative impact on blue collar jobs directly and indirectly in energy
    intensive manufacturing and huge negative impact on those residential energy
    users least able to pay, the poor and the elderly Terrible policy.

    • J the C

      Same old stupid rationale from the right. Don't do anything about the environment because foreign countries aren't. Go follow the rest of your lemming friends into the ocean.

      • Jonesburger

        J the c read please. If you have data that says this will make one iota of difference in our environment please share it, or continue calling people names because you know nothing about what you are talking about. This does nothing for the environment.

      • The bookman

        Yet I see the transverse of that equation, in that the Left makes choices to the detriment of our economy that won't result in any improvement to our environment. Even the scientific community who are supportive of your argument make no claim that this rule will result in a reversal of the warming that, I guess, we're still waiting to observe. So where is the benefit to these reductions?

  • Worm

    Duke Energy announced plains for a huge natural gas power generating facility to be completed by 2020. Built in North Carolinia.

  • The bookman

    There is no flexibility for states like WV whose generation is 90+% coal fueled. The flexibility that is discussed is the back door that allows the EPA to formulate the limits. The EPA will give each state a target, and the time to develop a plan to achieve it. States will then have to look at all point sources and attempt to come under the levels set by EPA. This is achieved by selectively choosing higher cost, lower emission point sources, by energy conservation measures, better land use management, or carbon trading with regional partners.

    If a state looks at their situation and decides to not develop a plan, then the EPA will develop one for them.

    It is inconsistent with the CAA at its core, and the over reaching strangulation by this administration must stop!

  • JL

    This is exactley what Obama wants the other countrys past us by when the American people suffer. The American people had better wake up before this president destroys us.

    • J the C

      JL, now there's an intellectual comment.Duuuuh!

      • caccamo

        hey J the C, you might want to move Obama's boys from in front of your face so you can read the comments before you attempt a comment