The change is part of the Biden administration’s broader agenda to strengthen regulations governing industrial polluters that have benefited from a more permissive environmental regime under President Donald Trump. But it also dovetails with the president’s emphasis on fighting climate change, by tending to accelerate the phase out of coal, the single largest source of planet-warming carbon pollution.
The new rule will require coal power plants to more thoroughly filter toxic metals such as arsenic, mercury and selenium from their wastewater before discharging it into nearby rivers, streams and lakes. . The EPA’s proposed rule does not mandate that plant operators use specific technology, but to comply, they would likely need to upgrade their pollution control equipment.
EPA officials estimate that the new rule will reduce the discharge of pollutants into the nation’s waterways by about 584 million pounds annually. They did not provide an estimate of how much it would cost plant operators to comply with the regulation, but they said that implementing the rule would likely increase electricity costs by 63 cents per household annually.
For operators who do not want to spend a lot on a source of power generation abandoned in the US market, the rule offers an alternative path – an off-ramp. Plant operators may choose to stop burning coal by 2028 instead of unnecessarily making significant investments in how they dispose of waste.
In a call with reporters Tuesday night, Regan said the Biden administration’s proposed rule was intended “to protect public health and water quality” and was not intended to “drive specific outcomes in terms of companies’ investment strategies.”
Despite meetings leading up to the proposed rule, EPA officials say some coal plant operators have expressed renewed interest in retiring their coal-fired units. Others don’t want to share their plans with the agency. Administration officials have offered few details on how the change will affect the industry, other than to say they expect it will only lead to one more coal power plant closing.
The Trump administration has offered operators a similar deal in 2020.
That year, Trump’s EPA weakened Obama-era pollution limits on coal plants and extended compliance deadlines until 2025 — one of several attempts by the administration to boost the industry’s fortunes. Its ruling largely exempts plants that plan to shut down or switch to gas by 2028.
Environmentalists condemned the rollback as a gift to an industry, citing power plant discharge as the biggest source of toxic water pollution in the country.
However, even looser regulation doesn’t change the math for many plant operators. According to the EPA, 74 electricity generating units at 33 power plants nationwide have notified state regulators of their plans to retire or convert to gas, at least in part because of the cost of stricter water pollution control. But there is some uncertainty about this total, and the Sierra Club’s anti-coal campaign knows of 71 units that plan to stop burning coal.
Josh Smith, senior staff attorney for the Sierra Club, said it’s likely some of these plants will still be closed.
“It’s up to each utility to determine if compliance is financially responsible,” Smith said in an email. “We think utilities will continue to move toward renewable energy because the economy is more attractive than ever with the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act.”
