text: Yedlin: New U.S. emissions rules should take focus off oilsands
  Yedlin: New U.S. emissions rules should take focus off oilsands By Deborah Yedlin, Calgary Herald
  The new regulations could create problems for U.S. President Barack Obama and coal-state Democrats.Photograph by: Mandel Ngan, AFP-Getty Images
  , Calgary HeraldNew regulations governing coal-fired power announced Monday by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency should finally take the focus off the oilsands as the continent's carbon villain.For the longest time, the energy sector - including pipeline companies - eschewed pointing the finger at the coal industry and accusing it of being a greater contributor to the problem of greenhouse gas emissions than oil and gas producers.Yet as information mounted showing emissions from coalfired power in the U.S. far outstripped what was generated by the oilsands, tactics changed.And Monday's proposed regulations - which won't come into effect until 2015 and gives states until 2016 to implement them - should leave no room for doubt as to which fuel source is the greater villain when it comes to carbon emissions.Coal-fired power plants south of the border - which also boast an average age of 42 years - are the largest source of carbon dioxide emissions, responsible for 38 per cent, according to EPA figures. The transportation sector comes in second, at 32 per cent.The goal announced Monday - to reduce carbon emissions by 30 per cent from 2005 levels by 2030 - gives companies plenty of time to comply.The reduction target works out to about 1 per cent of global emissions, while the oilsands is equivalent to one-tenth of one per cent of global emissions.That said, the EPA is also allowing each state to determine its own path in complying with the new requirements. If they don't, the EPA can impose a federal plan. This all stems from a 2009 Supreme Court ruling that allowed the EPA to take these steps if it was found that GHGs are a danger to public health.But reaching these targets will be anything but an easy task to accomplish.For one thing, coal is big business in the U.S. and the coal lobby is not to be underestimated. Attack the coal industry and you are attacking America, which explains why it's been far easier for Americans to cast blame on the oilsands rather than dealing with what's in their own backyard.What will be interesting is how coal-state Democrats and Senate hopefuls from states such as Kentucky and West Virginia will fare in the mid-term elections.Democrats running in these states are likely to have a rough ride, which could spell problems for Obama when the ballots are counted in November.Another issue is the impact on the American economy.A recent U.S. Chamber of Commerce study showed the cost of phasing out coal will boost electricity costs by as much $289 billion by 2030, with a potential impact on the U.S. economy of as much $50 billion per year. Retail electricity prices in the U.S. are expected to rise between 6 and 7 per cent by 2020 and by 3 per cent by 2030.The U.S. manufacturers association is also worried, saying higher energy costs will affect American competitiveness, although a study done by the Boston Consulting Group in 2013 showed only 7 per cent of manufacturers had chosen to locate operations in the U.S. because of low energy costs.A bigger driver behind locating production facilities was the ability to attract skilled labour. There are also obstacles to increasing the amount of renewable power because it means building transmission lines in places where the 'Banana' (Build Absolutely Nothing Anywhere Near Anyone) factor is particularly high.Think about the incongruity of citizens in California denying the building of a solar power generating facility because they didn't want to deal with the transmission lines that would be associated with the project.Perhaps what's most interesting is the impact these regulations will have on GHGs, compared with what is alleged with respect to the Keystone XL pipeline.According to Kevin Book, managing director at ClearView Energy Partners LLC, the impact of Monday's new rules will be to decrease GHGs by 169 metric tonnes a year. By comparison, the EPA estimates Keystone will add 18.7 metric tonnes of GHGs per year.If anyone doubted the relative impact of Keystone versus coalfired power, those numbers do a good job of putting it in context.The biggest question, however, is whether all this makes sense in the absence of a coherent carbon policy.On the face of it, taking steps to limit carbon dioxide emissions from coal-fired power plants makes sense, but this is one aspect - albeit a big one - in the carbon conundrum.Why take a piece of the issue and single it out, instead of developing a strategy that is more comprehensive and includes a carbon policy that may very well include a price per tonne of GHG emissions? Obviously, these new regulations are Plan B. Plan A would have been for Congress to set the standard for carbon emissions and pass the 'cap and trade' legislation proposed during Obama's first term.Taken together, these new regulations should be applauded. They focus the lens on the right source of GHG emissions - coal - and set the stage for a more successful session next year in Paris when the next round of international climate talks take place.The last round of talks - in Copenhagen five years ago - did not produce a meaningful outcome. Moreover, the 17 per cent reduction in emissions by 2020 from 2005 levels that was put forth by both the United States and Canada lags that of other developed countries.Obama now has a different card to play next year.He and the EPA have set a very important precedent. The question now is how Canada's leadership should respond.Deborah Yedlin is a Calgary Herald columnist dy edlin@calgaryherald.com « Previous 1 2 View as one page Next »
  The Calgary HeraldOriginal source article: Yedlin: New U.S. emissions rules should take focus off oilsands E-mail this ArticlePrint this ArticleShare this Article Story Tools E-mail this ArticlePrint this Article Font:***** Image:****
  PreviousNext The new regulations could create problems for U.S. President Barack Obama and coal-state Democrats.Photograph by: Mandel Ngan, AFP-Getty Images, Calgary Herald E-mail this GalleryPrint this GalleryShare this Gallery Photo Galleries »
  »	Photos of the dayThe day's top photos, as chosen by our editors...more » Photos: CFL Hall of Fame ceremony...Neil Lumsden, Charles Roberts, Uzooma Okeke, Ben Cahoon...more » Photos: Pitbull performs at the...Pitbull performs at the Bell Centre Tuesday, Sept. ...more » More Photo Galleries »