In overhauling some previous EPA findings about greenhouse gases and climate change, the new EPA chief Lee Zeldin says:
“…we are driving a dagger through the heart of
climate-change religion and ushering in America’s Golden Age.”
He heralded March 13, 2025, as:
“…the most consequential day of deregulation in American
history.”
“Today, the Green New Scam ends as the EPA does its part
to usher in the Golden Age of American success.”
Along with these gloating “owns” of past EPA focuses there
is the plan to dismiss 65% of the EPA workforce. Some of that lost work will be
taken up by the states but much of it will go undone. Now, it certainly can be
argued that the EPA is overly detailed on some of its rules, which can require teams of people to interpret them, costing companies money as they navigate the
difficulty of compliance. Simplification is a better way to regulate, for
several reasons.
At the recent
CERAWeek conference Alan Armstrong, the CEO of Midstream pipeline company
Williams, noted that it costs his company more to get permits than to buy the
steel and install a pipeline. In other words, there is a pressing need for
streamlining permits and for permit reform in general. Armstrong noted:
“We need a permitting system that allows us to build
efficiently and predictably, instead of being mired in endless bureaucracy. The
way we're going to succeed globally is by delivering low-cost solutions. And we
can't do that if we're spending twice as much on permitting as we are on the
actual infrastructure.”
“It's amazing to me that not all governments recognize
the importance of enabling more infrastructure competition,” he said. “If we
had the ability to overbuild infrastructure, to let companies like ours compete
and build, consumers would win. That’s the right answer for energy security and
affordability, yet we continue to see policymakers constrain development, which
is the wrong answer for consumers and the wrong answer for the environment.”
“It’s time for common sense to prevail in energy policy,
and for us to build the infrastructure that will define the next era of energy
security.”
Of course,
companies realize that the Trump team and Republican control won’t last
forever, and in the case of Congressional majorities could fall as soon as the
fall of 2026. Who knows, we could have a Dem administration in 2028/2029
clawing it all back and gloating in the other direction.
In terms of
deregulation, the news is not all bad, nor all good. Every issue is different.
It can be argued, as I have many times, that some things are over-regulated and
some are under-regulated. We need to get projects that are in the public
interest approved in a timely manner. It’s odd that one reason given for the
slowness of government approvals for things like pipelines, LNG terminals,
hydroelectric plants including their relicensing, and many other projects, is the lack of adequate staff at government agencies to do the necessary due diligence
for things like environmental impact statements required under the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Other issues like gathering data, making
determinations, and remediation plans for emerging contaminants like PFAS will
be put on the back burner.
I think there is
a very good argument to be made that the Biden administration over-reached
significantly with climate-related regulations. Shuffling large sums of money
to what are essentially climate advocacy groups showed that the focus was more
on policy and ideology than on science and technology. Conflating ideological
“climate justice” concerns with valid environmental justice concerns only
served to sully the whole environmental justice issue as the new administration
seems to consider all environmental justice issues as frivolous. That is a
shame because many environmental justice issues are valid.
There is a need
to reform the current permitting system where well-funded environmental groups
are permitted to repeatedly sue the government and delay needed projects for
years. That reform is happening a little at the executive branch level, but it
needs to be enacted by Congress. There have been several good bipartisan permit
reform proposals, but none have been enacted.
Climate Action
Campaign’s Director Margie Alt had this to say about Zeldin’s actions:
“It would put every American at greater risk from
dangerous and deadly pollution while fast tracking a get-richer-quick scheme
for big polluters. It prioritizes burning filthy fossil fuels like oil, gas and
coal over protecting clean air and clean water. It would ensure the climate
disasters we are experiencing now will only get more frequent and more
catastrophic.” Alt said. “And it would make big polluter CEOs even richer while
saddling the rest of us with shorter life spans, more disease, and higher costs.”
This is basically activist rhetoric. New York Governor Kathy
Hochul called the deregulatory push:
“…a direct threat to the health of New Yorkers and
communities across the country.”
An article in
River Head Local referred to Long Island’s air quality issues where smog from
smokestacks and vehicles in New York City triggers air quality alerts in
summer. They didn’t mention the air quality alerts issued in the winter due to
the burning of fuel oil that emits much higher quantities of pollutants and
greenhouse gases than natural gas does. Natural gas is often not available on
those cold winter days as there is not enough pipeline capacity to deliver it.
It is the same story for the residents and businesses that still rely on
burning expensive fuel oil for heat. The state’s denial of the Williams
pipeline that Trump and Zeldin now plan to fast-track is one solution that was
prevented by the climate-oriented state regulators. Climate change is an
important issue, and we should do our best within reason to limit emissions but
that should not include unnecessarily harming ourselves in the process. More
natural gas pipelines mean better air quality than the status quo and lower
costs for consumers. That is a win-win that has long been prevented in the name
of climate activism.
Of course, the
new deregulatory push does not mean an ideological anti-climate change focus,
at least we hope it doesn’t. Zeldin has noted in the past that:
“Climate change is something we need to take seriously,”
and “We need to ensure all our constituents have access to clean air and
clean water.”
The EPA website
gives a summary of pending rule changes:
UNLEASHING AMERICAN ENERGY
• Reconsideration
of regulations on power plants (Clean Power Plan 2.0)
• Reconsideration
of regulations throttling the oil and gas industry (OOOO b/c)
• Reconsideration
of Mercury and Air Toxics Standards that improperly targeted coal-fired power
plants (MATS)
• Reconsideration
of mandatory Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program that imposed significant costs on
the American energy supply (GHG Reporting Program)
• Reconsideration
of limitations, guidelines and standards (ELG) for the Steam Electric Power
Generating Industry to ensure low-cost electricity while protecting water
resources (Steam Electric ELG)
• Reconsideration
of wastewater regulations for coal power plants to help unleash American energy
(Oil and Gas ELG)
• Reconsideration
of Biden-Harris Administration Risk Management Program rule that made America’s
oil and natural gas refineries and chemical facilities less safe (Risk
Management Program Rule)
LOWERING THE COST OF LIVING FOR AMERICAN FAMILIES
• Reconsideration
of light-duty, medium-duty, and heavy-duty vehicle regulations that provided
the foundation for the Biden-Harris electric vehicle mandate (Car GHG Rules)
• Reconsideration
of the 2009 Endangerment Finding and regulations and actions that rely on that
Finding (Endangerment Finding)
• Reconsideration
of technology transition rule that forces companies to use certain technologies
that increased costs on food at grocery stores and semiconductor manufacturing
(Technology Transition Rule)
• Reconsideration
of Particulate Matter National Ambient Air Quality Standards that shut down
opportunities for American manufacturing and small businesses (PM 2.5 NAAQS)
• Reconsideration
of multiple National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for
American energy and manufacturing sectors (NESHAPs)
• Restructuring
the Regional Haze Program that threatened the supply of affordable energy for
American families (Regional Haze)
• Overhauling
Biden-Harris Administration’s “Social Cost of Carbon”
• Redirecting
enforcement resources to EPA’s core mission to relieve the economy of
unnecessary bureaucratic burdens that drive up costs for American consumers
(Enforcement Discretion)
• Terminating
Biden’s Environmental Justice and DEI arms of the agency (EJ/DEI)
ADVANCING COOPERATIVE FEDERALISM
• Ending
so-called “Good Neighbor Plan” which the Biden-Harris Administration used to
expand federal rules to more states and sectors beyond the program’s
traditional focus and led to the rejection of nearly all State Implementation
Plans
• Working
with states and tribes to resolve massive backlog with State Implementation
Plans and Tribal Implementation Plans that the Biden-Harris Administration
refused to resolve (SIPs/TIPs)
• Reconsideration
of exceptional events rulemaking to work with states to prioritize the
allowance of prescribed fires within State and Tribal Implementation Plans
(Exceptional Events)
• Reconstituting
Science Advisory Board and Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (SAB/CASAC)
• Prioritizing
coal ash program to expedite state permit reviews and update coal ash
regulations (CCR Rule)
• Utilizing
enforcement discretion to further North Carolina’s recovery from Hurricane
Helene
As can be seen,
most of the rollbacks are rollbacks of Biden administration changes. Several I
agree with but some I don’t. I posted recently about 00001b
compliance but that will be rolled back. I don’t know what will happen to
the companies with contracts to ensure compliance. Since the information
gathered is valuable, I would guess that some companies would continue meeting
or exceeding emissions targets and robust monitoring programs will continue.
What I am saying is that I think compliance will become voluntary rather than
mandated and many companies will continue to track and limit their emissions.
The
reconsideration of the 2009 Endangerment Finding that defines CO2 as a
pollutant is mostly symbolic but will likely limit climate-based lawsuits,
which I think is a good idea since these lawsuits have been abused in the past.
I agree that the social cost of carbon should not be considered in rulemaking
since the effects of CO2 are not immediate.
I don’t think that reconsidering the Coal Combustion Rule (CCR) is a
good idea although they say they are updating it. I believe it should include
effects on groundwater. Contamination of groundwater by coal ash slurry ponds
needs to be addressed.
The changes will
be good for extending the lifespans of coal-fired plants, which the energy
secretary has indicated he wants to do. Rollbacks of air toxics standards,
wastewater regs, the CCR rule, and steam power plants are in the works. I
probably disagree with any rollbacks of particulate matter limits. Greenhouse
gas reporting is also likely to go to a more voluntary status and my guess is
that most companies will continue to estimate their emissions without the
government mandating it.
While I generally
agree with limiting DEI programs, I think that environmental justice is
important and while it can and should be downsized, it should remain an
important aspect of environmental protection. Thus, I’m OK with terminating DEI
offices but I think EPA should have some kind of environmental justice office,
preferably one that does not include climate justice.
The so-called
“Good Neighbor” plan is sensible and should not be abandoned even if it makes
it harder for states to finish their implementation plans. Pollution sources in
one state very often impact nearby states, sometimes more than the source
state. Therefore, it is simply illogical not to count such pollution. It is a
commonsense idea and should be in place in some form.
While I agree that
best available technologies (BATs) should be promoted, there are often cost
considerations. Perhaps if governments could give tax breaks for certain
implementations of them it could be helpful.
Zeldin’s nod to
cooperative federalism echoes that of Trump’s previous EPA administrators
Pruitt and Wheeler. Cooperative federalism is a commonsense approach to
environmental jurisdiction based on the regulatory cooperation of state and federal
governments. Conservatives tend to favor it more, but some liberals do as well.
My next post,
excerpted from my 2021 book Sensible Decarbonization, will delve into
regulatory approaches and examples of cooperative federalism. It will also
offer a comparison to deregulation during Trump’s first term which was still in
power when I wrote it.
References:
Zeldin’s
massive environmental deregulation plans: What will the changes mean for his
native Long Island and former NY-1 constituents? Denise Civiletti. Riverhead
Local. March 13, 2025. Zeldin’s
massive environmental deregulation plans: What will the changes mean for his
native Long Island and former NY-1 constituents? - RiverheadLOCAL
Williams
CEO: Pipeline Permitting Cots Twice the Price of Steel, Calls for ‘Common Sense’
Reform. Mary Holcomb. Pipeline & Gas Journal. March 12, 2025. Williams
CEO: Pipeline Permitting Costs Twice the Price of Steel, Calls for ‘Common
Sense’ Reform | Pipeline and Gas Journal
EPA
Launches Biggest Deregulatory Action in U.S. History: Administrator Zeldin
Announces 31 Historic Actions to Power the Great American Comeback. U.S. EPA. March
12, 2025. EPA
Launches Biggest Deregulatory Action in U.S. History | US EPA
No comments:
Post a Comment