Reactions came from every corner of the energy industry to the proposed Obama administration emissions regulations that would cut U.S. CO2 to 30% below 2005 levels by 2030 but leave each state free to choose between means such as increased use of natural gas, renewables, or energy efficiency or a free-market-based cap-and-trade system for emissions credits.
Edison Electric Institute statement: “…EPA appears to have allowed for a range of compliance options to reflect the diversity of approaches…to maintain a diverse portfolio of generating sources. However, there are some concerns about EPA’s broad approach to ‘best system of emissions reductions,’ and we will look at this issue carefully…”
American Public Power Association statement: "…[C]limate change should be addressed but Congress, not EPA, should determine the best framework …The Clean Air Act is ill-suited to regulate CO2 emissions. If the EPA moves forward with regulations that call for too much change too fast, we will likely see unnecessary coal-plant retirements without long-term plans for viable, cost-effective alternatives; higher electricity prices; and potential shortage of electricity..."
Business Council for Sustainable Energy President Lisa Jacobson: "…94 percent of all new electric power capacity built in the US since 1997 has come from natural gas or renewable energy…[T]he US can meet the new regulations affordably and reliably, while creating new jobs."
Sanford C. Bernstein & Co. analysts: …Exelon and Entergy Corp., the two largest nuclear plant owners, could enjoy “material earning gains…This is all about keeping the nukes around.”
American Wind Energy Association CEO Tom Kiernan: "Reducing carbon pollution through the deployment of wind energy can be done in a manner that keeps electricity affordable and reliable, creates jobs, and supports local economic development…"
American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity CEO/President Mike Duncan: “If these rules are allowed to go into effect, the administration for all intents and purposes is creating America’s next energy crisis…These guidelines represent a complete disregard for our country’s most vital fuel sources…[T]he rule threatens the energy reliability and economic promise we enjoy today…”
Alliance to Save Energy President Kateri Callahan: "Energy efficiency is our country's cheapest, cleanest, most abundant and most readily available energy resource…By allowing and encouraging energy efficiency as a compliance mechanism, this rule has the potential to greatly advance the nation's energy productivity…"
Association for Demand Response & Smart Grid Executive Director Dan Delurey: "[The draft regulations] provide states with substantial flexibility in how they put together plans to meet those targets. We are surprised, however, to see that demand-side efficiency is described in the regulations as only being 'end-use' efficiency. [...] With the use of demand response and smart grid technologies and practices, it is possible to manage peak load, and for efficiency to be dynamic and dispatchable on a 24/7 basis. It can thus play a greater role in optimizing our electricity system and reducing emissions. It may even be possible to consider using demand response as a dynamic emissions reduction tool."
Solar Energy Industries Association President/CEO Rhone Resch: "For state regulators looking to meet the new EPA standards, solar can be a game-changer…"
