PROTECT THE CLEAN POWER PLAN: Oppose Trump’s repeal

SUM Environmental Issues Working Group C2A

THE ISSUE

Coal- and natural-gas-fired electric power plants contribute about one-third of the carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from the U.S., a key contributor to climate change. But an Obama-era policy, the Clean Power Plan (CPP), established in 2015 would cut CO2 emissions from the fossil-fuel-fired power plants by 32% over 2005 levels by 2030. EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, a notorious climate change denier who spent much of his prior career suing the agency he now leads, announced plans last fall to rescind the CPP. Pruitt claims that the CPP is an illegal overreach and rejects the health concerns related to the burning of fossil fuels. As it moves forward with its repeal plan, the Trump administration is also planning to change the metrics for how the impact of pollution is weighed, an effort to manipulate the cost of implementing the CPP and to reduce the health and environmental impact of the original legislation. Congress pushed back late last year, questioning Pruitt’s methodology and logic for the repeal. Earlier this year, more than 200 mayors—including Portland’s mayor Ethan Strimling—sent a letter to the EPA opposing the repeal. And in early April, Apple became the first business to publicly denounce the planned CPP repeal, noting that a repeal would hurt the company’s future in clean energy investments. A public comment period on the planned CPP repeal has been open since late last year and closes this week.

THE ACTION

Submit a comment to the EPA (Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2017-0355-14998) opposing weakening or repealing the Clean Power Plan by the April 26 deadline. Use the talking points below and find tips on how to write an effective public comment HERE or with tips from former EPA staffers HERE.

TALKING POINTS

For your public comment, feel free to use some or all of these talking points from Save EPA, a volunteer organization made up of retired and former employees of the Environmental Protection Agency. Save EPA recommends first explaining why you are commenting on this rule, highlighting any personal experiences or relevant expertise you may have on the topic.

• Fossil fuel-fired power plants are the largest source of greenhouse gas pollution in the U.S., emitting 31% of U.S. emissions. Any credible effort to cut climate-changing emissions must substantially cut power plant emissions.
• The CPP requires substantial reductions in CO2 emissions from power plants while allowing each state to design its own implentation program.
• The EPA’s 2015 analysis shows that implementing the CPP would prevent 1,500 to 3,600 premature deaths, 90,000 asthma attacks in children, up to 1,700 heart attacks, 1,700 hospital admissions, and 300,000 missed workdays and missed school days by 2030. Repeal means that these health benefits would be lost.
• The EPA’s 2015 analysis estimates that the CPP’s benefits ($31-$54 billion) would far exceed the costs ($5.1-$8.4 billion) upon full implementation in 2030.
• The CPP encourages investment in clean renewable technologies, a growing industry that has created jobs and improved the energy efficiency of homes, buildings, and equipment. Under the CPP, the average homeowner’s monthly electricity bill would go down over time as the electricity system becomes cleaner and more efficient.