(Bloomberg) — President Barack Obama’s pledge to the
United Nations Tuesday to sharply cut greenhouse-gas emissions
relies on being able to rebuff legal and legislative challenges
— and the continuing availability of cheap natural gas.
It’s no slam dunk. A coal-industry suit over the
Environmental Protection Agency’s plan to force reductions in
emissions from power plants is set for argument in federal court
next month, and Republican leaders are prodding states to refuse
to implement the rules in any case. More court challenges are
likely after the rule gets finalized this year.
Efforts to cut methane emissions from oil and gas drilling,
raise mileage standards for trucks and increase the efficiency
of household appliances all face their own challenges, and some
may be undone by a future president who doesn’t share Obama’s
conviction that fighting global warming should be a top
priority.
“The administration is taking the first steps,” said
Peter Ogden, a senior fellow at the Center for American Progress
in Washington and former White House climate adviser. “The
challenge for getting all the way there will be one for future
administrations and future Congresses.”
Obama, who made fighting climate change a priority in his
second term, submitted Tuesday a plan he outlined in November to
slash U.S. greenhouse gases by more than a quarter over the next
decade. The filing with the UN is intended to boost talks among
190 nations that are set to conclude in Paris this December with
an agreement on how each nation will tackle the issue in 2020
and beyond.
Emissions Increase
The U.S. promised to cut its greenhouse-gas emissions 26
percent to 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025. U.S. emissions
are already down more than 10 percent from 2005, although the
independent Energy Information Administration predicts emissions
will increase, not fall, over the next decade.
The White House said the cuts can be achieved because of
the EPA’s proposal to get states to cut emissions from power
plants, and upcoming rules on methane and refrigerants will
bring about further reductions. The majority of the reductions
in the EPA’s power plant rule comes from switching from coal
power to natural gas, as the fracking boom has made low-cost gas
a strong competitor to coal.
“From an engineering perspective, it’s easy to get those
kinds of cuts,” said Michael Webber, deputy director of the
Energy Institute at the University of Texas at Austin. “We
could ramp up natural gas plants to displace coal.”
Court Test
“The harder part is getting the policymakers to stick with
it,” Webber said. “I’m optimistic, even though I have no
reason to be.”
The power plant rule faces its first court test next month,
and the final rule, set to come out within the next six months,
is likely to be litigated all the way to the Supreme Court, EPA
Administrator Gina McCarthy said Monday. Harvard University law
professor Laurence Tribe, who was hired by coal producer Peabody
Energy Corp., argues the rule violates the Constitution and
should be tossed out by the courts.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Republican from
coal-rich Kentucky, has urged states not to implement plans to
meet the EPA goals, which could complicate the so-called Clean
Power Plan.
“Even if the job-killing and likely illegal Clean Power
Plan were fully implemented, the United States could not meet
the targets laid out in this proposed new plan,” McConnell said
Tuesday in a statement. “Our international partners should
proceed with caution before entering into a binding,
unattainable deal.”
Linchpin Rules
The scope of those power plant rules is the linchpin of the
U.S. pledge because it’s such a large share of emissions, said
John Larsen, a senior analyst at the Rhodium Group in
Washington. “Whatever EPA finalizes will set the tone for
reductions in the power sector.”
Still, not everything relies on these federal policies.
Individual states are pursuing renewable energy and energy
efficiency plans, and falling costs of solar and wind power mean
changes could accelerate, Karl Hausker, a senior fellow at the
World Resources Institute, wrote after the U.S. unveiled this
overall goal last November.
“Innovation and technology also have the potential to
bring down costs and make it easier to meet — or even exceed —
the proposed targets,” he wrote.
To contact the reporter on this story:
Mark Drajem in Washington at
To contact the editors responsible for this story:
Jon Morgan at
Elizabeth Wasserman