Cookies help us run our site more efficiently.

By clicking “Accept”, you agree to the storing of cookies on your device to enhance site navigation, analyze site usage, and assist in our marketing efforts. View our Privacy Policy for more information or to customize your cookie preferences.

Biden crackdown on power plants expected to speed shift away from coal

News Feed
Sunday, April 28, 2024

The Biden administration's crackdown on power plants' planet-warming emissions will accelerate a shift away from coal, and potentially speed the U.S.'s adoption of renewable energy sources. The administration this past week announced a new rule that will require coal plants and new gas plants to install carbon capture technology to mitigate 90 percent of their emissions — or find another way to achieve the equivalent climate protections.  But experts say that rather than try to meet these requirements, more coal plants may just retire — and some power companies may opt to invest in renewables over keeping existing coal plants or putting costly carbon capture on new gas ones.  “What we've seen, even without these rules, is that coal generation is falling,” said Christopher Knittel, a professor of applied economics at MIT, noting that "the writing's kind of on the wall" because of fracking driving down natural gas prices. "But," Knittel added, "these new rules will certainly push to speed that transition up." The Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) analysis shows that the rule could increase the amount of coal power that comes offline between 2028 and 2035 by nearly 25 percent. It projects that without the rule, 84 gigawatts of coal power would have retired during that period. But under the rule, that number is expected to jump to 104 gigawatts of power.  Research firm BloombergNEF reached similar findings for this decade.  Julia Attwood, an industrial decarbonization specialist with the firm, estimated that around 44 gigawatts of coal power was due to retire by the end of 2030 anyway, but the rule will cause an additional 30 to 40 gigawatts to go offline during that period. Attwood said BloombergNEF models an average coal plant as being equivalent to about 0.65 gigawatts, so this would amount to around 46 to 62 additional plant closures during that period.  “A lot of coal plants are just going to be pushed to retirement because of the expense of using [carbon capture and storage],” she said. The new rule received significant pushback from coal advocates, including workers, industry and Republicans.  Cecil Roberts, president of the United Mine Workers of America union, said in a written statement that it “looks to set the funeral date for thermal coal mining in America for 2032” — the date by which coal plants will now be required to cut their emissions. Roberts added that the rule will “threaten the livelihoods of our members” and said that the administration has been unsuccessful at replacing the jobs lost by miners in the energy transition thus far. “I am not aware of a single dislocated coal miner who has been hired as a result of legislation or other initiatives put in place over the last several years,” he said.  Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), meanwhile, said she would introduce legislation to rule.  “The administration has chosen to press ahead with its unrealistic climate agenda that threatens access to affordable, reliable energy for households and employers across the country,” Capito, the top Republican on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, said in a written statement.  “I will be introducing a Congressional Review Act resolution of disapproval to overturn the EPA’s job-killing regulations announced today,” she added. In addition to driving the country further away from coal, the rule may also speed up an ongoing shift toward renewable energy. The EPA projects the rule will boost the amount of the country's power that is supplied by renewable energy by an additional 4 percent in 2030. Its impact will taper off over the years, however, as renewables would also be expected to grow under previous policies: In 2040, it is expected to result in just 1 percent more renewable energy. Attwood of BloombergNEF said she believes the rule is good for renewables because it will “free up some needed capacity on the grid that renewables can fill.” Mark Thurber, associate director at Stanford University’s Program on Energy and Sustainable Development, said that renewables’ reliance on weather conditions means they may not be able to sub in for coal in many cases. “It's kind of an apples and oranges comparison between renewables and then on the other side, gas and coal because of the intermittency of those renewables," Thurber said. But Attwood noted that the rule’s exclusion of existing gas plants from the new requirements could keep some such plants online — mitigating concerns about renewables not working when there’s no sun or wind. Knittel from MIT also believes the rule will “delay the closure of existing gas plants” because maintaining such plants will be cheaper than building new gas ones with carbon capture. The Biden administration initially proposed restricting emissions from some existing gas plants under the rule, but ultimately dropped those provisions, saying it would pursue a separate rule for existing gas. It may not have time to do so if Biden isn’t reelected in November, however — and if former President Trump returns to the White House, he is not expected to increase climate regulations on power plants.  “The big uncertainty that really remains here is what happens with existing gas plants,” Attwood said. “If it's the same administration, then the EPA will probably go back to those gas plants and try to figure out a way to put emissions restraints on them as well,” she added.

The Biden administration's crackdown on power plants' planet-warming emissions will accelerate a shift away from coal, and potentially speed the U.S.'s adoption of renewable energy sources. The administration this past week announced a new rule that will require coal plants and new gas plants to install carbon capture technology to mitigate 90 percent of their emissions — or...

The Biden administration's crackdown on power plants' planet-warming emissions will accelerate a shift away from coal, and potentially speed the U.S.'s adoption of renewable energy sources.

The administration this past week announced a new rule that will require coal plants and new gas plants to install carbon capture technology to mitigate 90 percent of their emissions — or find another way to achieve the equivalent climate protections. 

But experts say that rather than try to meet these requirements, more coal plants may just retire — and some power companies may opt to invest in renewables over keeping existing coal plants or putting costly carbon capture on new gas ones. 

“What we've seen, even without these rules, is that coal generation is falling,” said Christopher Knittel, a professor of applied economics at MIT, noting that "the writing's kind of on the wall" because of fracking driving down natural gas prices.

"But," Knittel added, "these new rules will certainly push to speed that transition up."

The Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) analysis shows that the rule could increase the amount of coal power that comes offline between 2028 and 2035 by nearly 25 percent.

It projects that without the rule, 84 gigawatts of coal power would have retired during that period. But under the rule, that number is expected to jump to 104 gigawatts of power. 

Research firm BloombergNEF reached similar findings for this decade. 

Julia Attwood, an industrial decarbonization specialist with the firm, estimated that around 44 gigawatts of coal power was due to retire by the end of 2030 anyway, but the rule will cause an additional 30 to 40 gigawatts to go offline during that period.

Attwood said BloombergNEF models an average coal plant as being equivalent to about 0.65 gigawatts, so this would amount to around 46 to 62 additional plant closures during that period. 

“A lot of coal plants are just going to be pushed to retirement because of the expense of using [carbon capture and storage],” she said.

The new rule received significant pushback from coal advocates, including workers, industry and Republicans. 

Cecil Roberts, president of the United Mine Workers of America union, said in a written statement that it “looks to set the funeral date for thermal coal mining in America for 2032” — the date by which coal plants will now be required to cut their emissions.

Roberts added that the rule will “threaten the livelihoods of our members” and said that the administration has been unsuccessful at replacing the jobs lost by miners in the energy transition thus far.

“I am not aware of a single dislocated coal miner who has been hired as a result of legislation or other initiatives put in place over the last several years,” he said. 

Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), meanwhile, said she would introduce legislation to rule. 

“The administration has chosen to press ahead with its unrealistic climate agenda that threatens access to affordable, reliable energy for households and employers across the country,” Capito, the top Republican on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, said in a written statement. 

“I will be introducing a Congressional Review Act resolution of disapproval to overturn the EPA’s job-killing regulations announced today,” she added.

In addition to driving the country further away from coal, the rule may also speed up an ongoing shift toward renewable energy.

The EPA projects the rule will boost the amount of the country's power that is supplied by renewable energy by an additional 4 percent in 2030. Its impact will taper off over the years, however, as renewables would also be expected to grow under previous policies: In 2040, it is expected to result in just 1 percent more renewable energy.

Attwood of BloombergNEF said she believes the rule is good for renewables because it will “free up some needed capacity on the grid that renewables can fill.”

Mark Thurber, associate director at Stanford University’s Program on Energy and Sustainable Development, said that renewables’ reliance on weather conditions means they may not be able to sub in for coal in many cases.

“It's kind of an apples and oranges comparison between renewables and then on the other side, gas and coal because of the intermittency of those renewables," Thurber said.

But Attwood noted that the rule’s exclusion of existing gas plants from the new requirements could keep some such plants online — mitigating concerns about renewables not working when there’s no sun or wind.

Knittel from MIT also believes the rule will “delay the closure of existing gas plants” because maintaining such plants will be cheaper than building new gas ones with carbon capture.

The Biden administration initially proposed restricting emissions from some existing gas plants under the rule, but ultimately dropped those provisions, saying it would pursue a separate rule for existing gas.

It may not have time to do so if Biden isn’t reelected in November, however — and if former President Trump returns to the White House, he is not expected to increase climate regulations on power plants. 

“The big uncertainty that really remains here is what happens with existing gas plants,” Attwood said.

“If it's the same administration, then the EPA will probably go back to those gas plants and try to figure out a way to put emissions restraints on them as well,” she added.

Read the full story here.
Photos courtesy of

German Coalition Agrees to Fast-Track Infrastructure, Scrap Unpopular Heating Law

BERLIN, Dec 11 (Reuters) - Germany's ruling coalition has agreed ‌a ​new law to fast-track infrastructure projects ‌and to scrap clean-heating...

BERLIN, Dec 11 (Reuters) - Germany's ruling coalition has agreed ‌a ​new law to fast-track infrastructure projects ‌and to scrap clean-heating legislation in favour of a broader law ​on modernising buildings, Chancellor Friedrich Merz said on Thursday.Merz's government, which took power seven months ago, has ‍pledged to revive Germany's sluggish economy, ​Europe's largest, by accelerating projects to improve infrastructure.The conservative chancellor said a wide range of ​transport schemes ⁠would be classified as being of "overriding public interest" under the new law, giving them priority in planning and approval processes.All related administrative procedures will move to a "digital only" standard intended to shorten timelines, while electrifying rail lines of up to 60 kilometres (37 miles) will no longer require ‌an environmental impact assessment, he said."Environmental protection remains important but it can no longer block ​urgently ‌needed measures through endless procedures," ‍Merz told ⁠a press conference following Wednesday evening's cabinet meeting.Germany was long admired for the efficiency of its infrastructure but has been increasingly criticised for letting it decay due to successive governments' aversion to taking on new debt.Breaking with that fiscal tradition, Merz's government earlier this year pushed through debt reforms to borrow hundreds of billions of euros in a special fund, though critics say some of that fiscal firepower has ​been used to prop up day-to-day spending.MORE FLEXIBILITY ON TECHNOLOGY CHOICESOn heating, Merz confirmed the coalition would scrap a contested law that requires most newly installed systems to run largely on renewable energy.The measure, pushed through by the previous centre-left government, triggered a backlash from homeowners and opposition parties and was widely seen as contributing to a sharp slump in support for the coalition that eventually collapsed.The revamped Building Modernisation Act will keep the goal of cutting emissions from buildings but give households more flexibility over technology choices and timelines. The government plans to send it to parliament ​by next spring.With five state elections looming next year, Merz's conservatives and their junior coalition partner, the centre-left Social Democrats, need some wins after a series of political blunders.Support for both parties has dropped since February's federal election, while the far-right Alternative ​for Germany has shot into pole position in nationwide surveys.(Reporting by Sarah Marsh; editing by Matthias Williams and Gareth Jones)Copyright 2025 Thomson Reuters.Photos You Should See – December 2025

The Navajo Nation said no to a hydropower project. Trump officials want to ensure tribes can’t do that again.

The U.S. Energy Secretary said allowing tribes to weigh in on energy projects on their land creates "unnecessary burdens to the development of critical infrastructure."

Early last year, the hydropower company Nature and People First set its sights on Black Mesa, a mountainous region on the Navajo Nation in northern Arizona. The mesa’s steep drop offered ideal terrain for gravity-based energy storage, and the company was interested in building pumped-storage projects that leveraged the elevation difference. Environmental groups and tribal community organizations, however, largely opposed the plan. Pumped-storage operations involve moving water in and out of reservoirs, which could affect the habitats of endangered fish and require massive groundwater withdrawals from an already-depleted aquifer.  The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, which has authority over non-federal hydropower projects on the Colorado River and its tributaries, ultimately denied the project’s permit. The decision was among the first under a new policy: FERC would not approve projects on tribal land without the support of the affected tribe. Since the project was on Navajo land and the Navajo Nation opposed the project, FERC denied the permits. The Commission also denied similar permit requests from Rye Development, a Florida-based company, that also proposed pumped-water projects. Now, Department of Energy Secretary Chris Wright wants to reverse this policy. In October, Wright wrote to FERC, requesting that the commission return to its previous policy and that giving tribes veto power was hindering the development of hydropower projects. The commission’s policy has created an “untenable regime,” he noted, and “For America to continue dominating global energy markets, we must remove unnecessary burdens to the development of critical infrastructure, including hydropower projects.”  Wright also invoked a rarely used authority under the Federal Powers Act to request that the commission make a final decision no later than December 18. And instead of the 30 to 60 days generally reserved for proposed rule changes, the FERC comment period was open for only two weeks last month. If his effort proves successful, hydropower projects like the ones proposed by Nature and People First could make a return to the Navajo Nation regardless of tribal support.  More than 20 tribes and tribal associations largely in the Southwest and Pacific Northwest, environmental groups, and elected officials, including Representative Frank Pallone, a Democrat from New Jersey, sent letters urging FERC to continue its current policy. “Tribes are stewards of the land and associated resources, and understand best how to manage and preserve those resources, as they have done for centuries,” wrote Chairman William Iyall of the Cowlitz Indian Tribe in Washington in a letter submitted to the commission.  Tó Nizhóní Ání, or TNA, a Diné-led water rights organization based in Black Mesa on the Navajo Nation, also submitted comments opposing the proposed hydropower project. In the 1960s, after Peabody Coal broke up sections of the resource-rich region between the Hopi and Navajo tribes for mining, the company was accused of misrepresenting the conditions of its operations and the status of mineral rights to local communities. Environmental problems soon followed, as the company’s groundwater pumping exceeded legal limits, compromising the aquifer and access to drinking water. According to Nicole Horseherder, Diné, and TNA’s executive director, this led residents of Black Mesa to use community wells. “They were now starting to have to haul all their water needs in this way,” she said. “That really changed the lifestyle of the people on Black Mesa.”  After the coal mines closed 20 years later, Black Mesa communities have focused on protecting their water resources while building a sustainable economy. But when Nature and People First’s founder Denis Payre presented the company’s plans, he seemed unaware of the tribes’ history in the region. During these presentations, Payre also made promises that if the company’s hydropower project went forward, it would benefit residents. The project would generate 1,000 jobs during construction and 100 jobs permanently, he claimed, and would help locals readily access portable drinking water. “He wasn’t understanding that our region has a history of extraction, and that is coal mining and its impact on our groundwater,” said Adrian Herder, Diné, TNA’s media organizer. “It seemed like this individual was tugging at people’s heartstrings, [saying] things that people wanted to hear.” If the commission decides to retract tribes’ ability to veto hydropower projects, it will mark a shift in the relationship between Indigenous nations and the federal government. Horseherder described such a move as the “first step in eroding whatever’s left between [these] relationships.” She is pessimistic about the commission’s decision and expects it will retract the current policy.  “The only thing I’m optimistic about is that Indigenous people know that they need to continue to fight,” she said. “I don’t see this administration waking up to their own mistakes at all.”  This story was originally published by Grist with the headline The Navajo Nation said no to a hydropower project. Trump officials want to ensure tribes can’t do that again. on Dec 10, 2025.

Georgia hashes out plan to let data centers build their own clean energy

Big companies have spent years pushing Georgia to let them find and pay for new clean energy to add to the grid, in the hopes that they could then get data centers and other power-hungry facilities online faster. Now, that concept is tantalizingly close to becoming a reality, with regulators, utility Georgia Power,…

Big companies have spent years pushing Georgia to let them find and pay for new clean energy to add to the grid, in the hopes that they could then get data centers and other power-hungry facilities online faster. Now, that concept is tantalizingly close to becoming a reality, with regulators, utility Georgia Power, and others hammering out the details of a program that could be finalized sometime next year. If approved, the framework could not only benefit companies but also reduce the need for a massive buildout of gas-fired plants that Georgia Power is planning to satiate the artificial intelligence boom.Today, utilities are responsible for bringing the vast majority of new power projects online in the state. But over the past two years, the Clean Energy Buyers Association has negotiated to secure a commitment from Georgia Power that ​“will, for the first time, allow commercial and industrial customers to bring clean energy projects to the utility’s system,” said Katie Southworth, the deputy director for market and policy innovation in the South and Southeast at the trade group, which includes major hyperscalers like Amazon, Google, Meta, and Microsoft. The ​“customer-identified resource” (CIR) option will allow hyperscalers and other big commercial and industrial customers to secure gigawatts of solar, batteries, and other energy resources on their own, not just through the utility. The CIR option isn’t a done deal yet. Once Georgia Power, the Public Service Commission, and others work out how the program will function, the utility will file a final version in a separate docket next year. And the plan put forth by Georgia Power this summer lacks some key features that data center companies want. A big point of contention is that it doesn’t credit the solar and batteries that customers procure as a way to meet future peaks in power demand — the same peaks Georgia Power uses to justify its gas-plant buildout. But as it stands, CEBA sees ​“the approved CIR framework as a meaningful step toward the ​‘bring-your-own clean energy’ model,” Southworth said — a model that goes by the catchy acronym BYONCE in clean-energy social media circles. Opening up the playing field for clean energy The CIR option is technically an addition to Georgia Power’s existing Clean and Renewable Energy Subscription (CARES) program, which requires the utility to secure up to 4 gigawatts of new renewable resources by 2035. CARES is a more standard ​“green tariff” program that leaves the utility in control of contracting for resources and making them available to customers under set terms, Southworth explained. Under the CIR option, by contrast, large customers will be able to seek out their own projects directly with a developer and the utility. Georgia Power will analyze the projects and subject them to tests to establish whether they are cost-effective. Once projects are approved by Georgia Power, built, and online, customers can take credit for the power generated, both on their energy bills and in the form of renewable energy certificates. Georgia Power’s current plan allows the procurement of up to 3 gigawatts of customer-identified resources through 2035. Letting big companies contract their own clean power is far from a new idea. Since 2014, corporate clean-energy procurements have surpassed 100 gigawatts in the United States, equal to 41% of all clean energy added to the nation’s grid over that time, according to CEBA. Tech giants have made up the lion’s share of that growth and have continued to add more capacity in 2025, despite the headwinds created by the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress. But most of that investment has happened in parts of the country that operate under competitive energy markets, in which independent developers can build power plants and solar, wind, and battery farms. The Southeast lacks these markets, leaving large, vertically integrated utilities like Georgia Power in control of what gets built. Perhaps not coincidentally, Southeast utilities also have some of the country’s biggest gas-plant expansion plans. A lot of clean energy projects could use a boost from power-hungry companies. According to the latest data from the Southern Energy Renewable Association trade group, more than 20 gigawatts of solar, battery, and hybrid solar-battery projects are now seeking grid interconnection in Georgia. “The idea that a large customer can buy down the cost of a clean energy resource to make sure it’s brought onto the grid to benefit them and everybody else, because that’s of value to them — that’s theoretically a great concept,” said Jennifer Whitfield, senior attorney at the Southern Environmental Law Center, a nonprofit that’s pushing Georgia regulators to find cleaner, lower-cost alternatives to Georgia Power’s proposed gas-plant expansion. ​“We’re very supportive of the process because it has the potential to be a great asset to everyone else on the grid.” Isabella Ariza, staff attorney at the Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal Campaign, said CEBA deserves credit for working to secure this option for big customers in Georgia. In fact, she identified it as one of the rare bright spots offsetting a series of decisions from Georgia Power and the Public Service Commission that environmental and consumer advocates fear will raise energy costs and climate pollution.

Renowned Astronomers Push to Protect Chile's Cherished Night Sky From an Industrial Project

Chile’s Atacama Desert is one of the darkest spots on earth, a crown jewel for astronomers who flock from around the world to study the origins of the universe in this inhospitable desert along the Pacific coast

SANTIAGO, Chile (AP) — Chile’s Atacama Desert is one of the darkest spots on earth, a crown jewel for astronomers who flock from around the world to study the origins of the universe in this inhospitable desert along the Pacific coast.“It's a perfect cocktail for astronomy,” said Daniela González, executive director of the Skies of Chile Foundation, a nonprofit that defends the quality of the country’s night skies. A private company is pressing ahead with plans to construct a giant renewable energy complex in sight of one of Earth’s most productive astronomical facilities — the Paranal Observatory, operated by an international consortium known as the European Southern Observatory, or ESO.In the letter, 30 renowned international astronomers, including Reinhard Genzel, a 2020 Nobel laureate in astrophysics who conducted much of his prize-winning research on black holes with the ESO-operated telescopes in the Atacama Desert, describe the project as “an imminent threat” to humanity's ability to study the cosmos, and unlock more of its unknowns.“The damage would extend beyond Chile’s borders, affecting a worldwide scientific community that relies on observations made at Paranal to study everything from the formation of planets to the early universe,” the letter reads. “We are convinced that economic development and scientific progress can and must coexist to the benefit of all people in Chile, but not at the irreversible expense of one of Earth’s unique and irreplaceable windows to the universe.”The scientists join a chorus of voices that have been urging the Chilean government to relocate the hydrogen-based fuel production plant since the plan was unveiled a year ago by AES Andes, an offshoot of the American-based multinational AES Corp. In response to a request for comment, AES Corp. said that its own technical studies showed the project would be “fully compatible” with astronomical observations and compliant with the Chilean government's strict regulations on light pollution. "We encourage trust in the country’s institutional strength, which for decades has guaranteed certainty and environmental protection for multiple productive sectors," the company said.The plan, which is still under environmental review, calls for 3,000 hectares (7,400 acres) of wind and solar energy farms, a desalination plant and a new port. That means not only a major increase in light pollution but also new dust, ground vibrations and heightened atmospheric turbulence that blurs stars and makes them twinkle. All of that — just three kilometers (miles) from the Paranal Observatory’s high-powered telescopes — will mess the view of key astronomical targets and could obstruct scientific advances, experts say. “At the best sites in the world for astronomy, stars don't twinkle. They are very stable, and even the smallest artificial turbulence would destroy these characteristics,” said Andreas Kaufer, the director of operations at ESO, which assesses that the AES project would increase light pollution by 35%.“If the sky is becoming brighter from artificial light around us, we cannot do these observations anymore. They're lost. And, since we have the biggest and most sensitive telescopes at the best spot in the world, if they're lost for us, they're lost for everyone." “Major observatories have been chased out to remote locations, and essentially now they’re chased out to some of the last remaining dark sky locations on Earth, like the Atacama Desert, the mountain peaks of Hawaii, areas around Tucson, Arizona,” said Ruskin Hartley, the executive director of DarkSky International, a Tuscon-based nonprofit founded by astronomers. “All of them are now at risk from encroaching development and mining. It’s happening everywhere.”DeBre reported from Buenos Aires, Argentina Copyright 2025 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.Photos You Should See – Nov. 2025

Suggested Viewing

Join us to forge
a sustainable future

Our team is always growing.
Become a partner, volunteer, sponsor, or intern today.
Let us know how you would like to get involved!

CONTACT US

sign up for our mailing list to stay informed on the latest films and environmental headlines.

Subscribers receive a free day pass for streaming Cinema Verde.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.