Contact Us   |   Sign In   |   Join ICAC
Share |

On August 18th President of ICAC, Stan Mack, Fuel Tech consultant, Vince Albanese (and former ICAC President) and Executive Director, Betsy Natz met with House Energy and Commerce Committee Staff: Tom Hassenboehler, Major Chief Counsel, Energy and Power Committee, Mary Neumayr, Senior Energy Counsel and Allison Busbee, Policy Director, Energy and Power to discuss the President’s Clean Power Plan and NSPS rule.


ICAC shared its concerns about the Clean Power Plan and how the ICAC is interested in keeping all energy options available and technology opportunities viable. ICAC emphasized its support for market incentive programs that have worked well in the past for criteria pollutants to facilitate compliance with the CPP.  ICAC noted how building blocks 1 & 2 can work against each other for CPP compliance.  ICAC also noted that the research budget for CCS is inadequate, especially in light of the technology-forcing aspect of the New Source Rule.  ICAC also questioned the cost-effectiveness of the 16-23% CCS mandate in the New Source Rule.  Ms. Gunasekara was of the opinion the CPP will get serious attention after Congress returns from summer recess.  As with the Senate, House staff members indicated that they do not believe the CPP will be upheld in the courts, but no one can anticipate what the courts will do.  They too expect it to go to the Supreme Court eventually.  They expect that the CRA is the only available option at this point along with the legal challenges until there is a new administration.  It is assumed that the House E&C Committee will hold oversight hearings in the fall.

Congressional members suggested that they are very interested in ICAC’s thoughts around the CPP and would like to bring to share these with the EPA.

The arguments they are most interested in from our dialogue and that ICAC should more clearly explain, include:

1.    How do the building blocks 1 and 2 contravene each other.  As coal capacity factors decrease at the expense of gas, what is the true net CO2 benefit considering coal’s lower efficiency when not at full load?

2.    Why is CCS not economical today?

3.    Why would partial CCS not be any more economical, and maybe more expensive?

4.    Illustrate other new technology adoption timescales to demonstrate and deploy, and why going to commercial CCS in the time frame permitted is not realistic.  Mr. Albanese shared the experience of SCR.

Membership Management Software Powered by YourMembership  ::  Legal