Nixon prepares to comply with EPA greenhouse gas rules

WASHINGTON – Missouri Gov. Jay Nixon is preparing to comply with the Obama administration's proposed rules to reduce carbon emissions from coal-fired power plants, even as Republicans in Washington - including Sen. Roy Blunt - push states to defy the president's Clean Power Plan.

Nixon, a Democrat, will soon send a slew of state officials from Missouri's energy and environmental agencies to attend a special "policy academy" aimed at helping states find low-cost ways to meet the new requirements. Missouri is one of four heavily coal-dependent states participating in the policy sessions, organized by the National Governors Association, along with Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Utah.

The NGA academy will give state officials technical expertise and data to help draft an initial plan for complying with the controversial regulations, a central part of President Barack Obama's climate change initiative. The Obama administration unveiled the proposal in June, calling for a 26 percent reduction in carbon emissions from the nation's power plants by 2020 and a 30 percent reduction by 2030.

A spokeswoman for the NGA said the policy academy is likely to be held in early May in Annapolis, Md., but she declined to provide additional details.

Nixon's spokesman, Channing Ansley, said the NGA session will help state officials come up with a plan to reduce carbon emissions that ensures Missourians "continue to have access to affordable, reliable and abundant energy."

Missouri's step toward meeting the new requirements, which have not yet been finalized by the Environmental Protection Agency, come as the Republican-controlled Congress is pushing states in the opposition direction.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., has written to the nation's governors, urging them not to go along with "this deeply misguided plan." McConnell, Blunt, and other critics have called the EPA rules a massive federal overreach that will devastate the coal industry and jack up electricity bills.

"This proposed plan is already on shaky legal grounds, will be extremely burdensome and costly, and will not seriously address the global environmental concerns that are frequently raised to justify it," McConnell wrote to the governors. He said states would not risk anything by refusing to comply and said such resistance would give the courts and Congress more time to try to block the plan.

Last week, Blunt co-sponsored an amendment to the GOP budget that would allow states to opt out of the regulations. He said the EPA plan "goes beyond the kinds of things that need to be done to protect the environment."

"States should be able to make this regulation work if they want to, and they should be able to move beyond it if they don't," Blunt told Missouri reporters last week. He said his amendment would give states "an orderly way" to bypass the rules.

The amendment did not come up for a vote during the Senate's budget debate. But Blunt and other Republicans have promised to fight the Clean Power Plan on a variety of fronts.

There's no question the EPA proposal will hit Missouri hard. The state gets about 80 percent of its energy from coal-fired plants. Such plants are the single largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the U.S., generating about 38 percent of heat-trapping gases.

The EPA plan sets annual emissions targets that each state must hit, starting in 2020 and continuing through 2030. Under the proposal, Missouri would have to achieve a 21 percent reduction in carbon emissions per megawatt hour of electricity by 2030, with interim targets in the decade leading up to that final goal.

EPA officials have said each state's rate reductions were set based on what's feasible given its current energy mix, with the goal of giving states maximum flexibility to make the reductions. As it's currently drafted, the plan could force Missouri's coal-fired power plants to dramatically change the way they operate, for example, by improving efficiency, switching to natural gas or closing.

Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., has said the plan is "front-loaded" and argued that utility companies cannot realistically meet the initial targets. She has not joined GOP efforts to kill the EPA rules, but she has asked the Obama administration to give states more time to reduce carbon emissions from coal-fired power plants.

Nixon has also requested more wiggle room. In a November letter to the EPA, he suggested the agency's timeline was too "aggressive" and said EPA should allow states to modify the targets. "I ask that you "1/8 give us the flexibility to develop a plan that fits the circumstances and needs of our state."

Ansley said the NGA summit is another step toward making sure Missouri can devise a compliance plan that minimizes costs and other disruptions. She said Nixon will send a team to Annapolis that includes staff from the Department of Economic Development's Division of Energy, the Department of Natural Resources' Division of Environmental Quality, and the Public Service Commission, as well as "stakeholders" from outside groups representing consumers, industry and environmental groups.

James Van Nostrand, director of the Center for Energy and Sustainable Development at West Virginia University, said Missouri's approach makes sense, even if it's politically difficult.

"It's just popular to beat up on the EPA and say everything will be fine in the coal industry if the EPA would just go away," Van Nostrand said. "But I think you have to assume that those rules are going to go into effect, or something very much like them."

Given that, he said, "it's irresponsible for state officials to not be looking at how to implement this."

If states don't prepare, the federal government could step in and impose a carbon-reduction plan that's more rigid and costly, Van Nostrand said.

"The states know best what works for them," he said.

Contact Deirdre Shesgreen at dshesgreen@gannett.com.