To the Editor:
Environmental Protection Agency hearings took place Oct. 1 in Chicago to replace the Clean Power Plan with the Affordable Clean Energy rule.
Calling this regulatory change the Affordable Clean Energy rule is a misrepresentation and anything but accurate. The true cost of any energy plan must factor an accurate assessment of the external costs (in dollars and lives) of its related greenhouse gas emissions.
As recently as this year, Congress again has voted to retain the social cost of carbon as a consideration in policy decisions. When considering the future effect of its scaled-back carbon emissions and its related health and environmental effects, this plan is anything but affordable – it is more costly.
Furthermore, taking the ACE approach, we are pursuing a path that tries to pick market winners and losers, rather than trying to establish a level playing field with consideration of external costs. We don’t need to contrive out-of-market solutions to keep expensive and polluting power plants to provide for America’s electricity needs.
Combined with a biased and unrealistic discount rate in the EPA’s revised social cost of carbon, we have the worst of all alternatives. We have a plan that actually could increase emissions, picks market winners and losers, unfairly passes the costs to future generations and ignores global effects of our actions.
As our state’s attorney general has stated, “The EPA’s rejection of the Clean Power Plan and its path to a cleaner and safer environment will have disastrous consequences.”