By Taylor Kuykendall

While the coal industry kicks back against the U.S. EPA's proposed restrictions on carbon dioxide emissions impacting existing coal-fired power plants, the majority of comments pouring in appear to support the rule.

As of July 16, the EPA said it had received 4,753 public comments on the Clean Power Plan, a rule that aims to reduce U.S. greenhouse gas emissions from power plants by 19.2% from 2012 by 2030, according to SNL Energy. Of the 3,640 comments posted to the EPA docket for the rule, at least 485 of the public submissions mentioned the word "coal," and among those, only a handful of commenters who identify themselves in the comments cast a positive light on the industry compared to those in support of the rule.

"Fossil fuels have benefited from huge taxpayer support over the years," Linda Beischel wrote in June 3 comments submitted to the EPA. "We need a plan for future jobs to counteract the coal industry's scare tactics."

Others called the event a "historic occasion" or called for even more stringent carbon dioxide regulations. A significant portion of the comments supporting the rule appear to have come from template forms from other sites that some chose to customize with various personalized additions.

"I strongly support EPA's rule to reduce industrial carbon pollution from existing power plants," wrote Joan Jones of Milan, Mich. "Dangerous carbon pollution is the leading contributor to climate change. Climate change poses a grave risk to all American[s] through extreme weather, higher risk of disease, and weather-related deaths."

The relatively rare comments defending the coal industry mostly argued that the rule would cost jobs, raise electricity prices or have little or no effect on the Earth's climate.

T. Lance Morgan, identified as a mine engineer with Alpha Natural Resources Inc., submitted a public comment pleading with the agency to "reconsider the structuring of the energy policies that are being forced upon America at one of our most fragile times in history." He said his immediate and extended family members are all being hurt by the regulations.

"The lowest and highest income folks are going to pass these costs along to the middle class, which is fragile at best right now," Morgan wrote. "Please second guess what you are doing to America, particular[ly] the Appalachia folks, and back down on these unfair practices targeting our way of life and the backs of the people that built America."

Morgan suggested that, instead, "clean coal technology" could be implemented in "stages that are achievable," allowing sustained use of coal. Another commenter, Danita Sisco, wrote that the Clean Power Plan is "nothing more than a liberal governmental grab to stifle our economy and country."

"I am totally against the Clean Power Plan proposed rule," Sisco wrote. "This particular rule will cause loss of jobs — especially pertaining to our coal industry, higher utility rates, and more government intrusion. Instead of forcing EPA rules on us homeowners and private citizens, how about educating and encouraging different ways that we can save — both in power and price. We cannot afford to keep paying for governmental requirements that shut down jobs."

The EPA's own estimates project coal production for the power sector will decline by roughly 25% to 27% in 2020 from base case levels and will decrease roughly 30% to 32% in 2030. While the EPA projects the rule will spur a net job gain across the economy, the United Mine Workers of America has estimated that the rule could cost as many as 75,000 "direct coal generation jobs," including jobs in coal mines, power plants and railroads, by 2020.

The rule has prompted backlash in multiple forms from the industry. Several states recently joined an effort led by coal producer Murray Energy Corp. in a legal effort to block the rules.

Interest groups spurring public comment

Several of the commenters providing a name appear to have been directed from the website of Greenpeace, an environmentally oriented campaigning organization. David Pomerantz, senior climate and energy campaigner at Greenpeace, told SNL Energy that Greenpeace plans to also submit comments from the organization stating that nearly twice the emissions reductions proposed in the rule could be achieved through a quick transition to renewable energy and by scaling up energy efficiency measures.

"Thousands of Greenpeace supporters have joined many others to comment on the proposed rule to cut carbon pollution from power plants, calling for it to be strengthened considerably," Pomerantz said. "Polls show strong support for policies that will reduce carbon pollution and that coal is Americans' 'least favored' energy source, so the coal industry's misleading rhetoric and scare tactics will continue to be largely ineffective."

Pomerantz was referencing a March 2013 Gallup poll that found only about 1 in 3 Americans would prioritize domestic coal production over other forms of energy. Other recent polls have found mixed results, including a Rasmussen poll that recently found nearly half of U.S. adults have a favorable view of the U.S. coal industry.

Laura Sheehan, senior vice president of the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity, said groups in the environmental community have flooded the public comment process "due to their endless supply of money and resources." She said many of the comments they are generating in support of the rule are coming from cities such as New York and San Francisco "that are filled with elitist activists who are out of touch with real America and the plight of people from areas struggling to make ends meet."

"It's not surprising that groups like Greenpeace, with their fully stocked war chests of multimillion-dollar funding, are attempting to drown out the voices of people whose livelihoods depend on resources like coal to keep energy costs down and keep food on their tables," Sheehan said. "ACCCE is attempting to provide a platform and a voice to those who are being outshouted by fringe radical groups."

ACCCE, like numerous organizations of differing ideologies, are encouraging people to participate in the public rulemaking process through their organizations' websites. Sheehan said the ACCCE plans to file its own comments that will outline why it believes EPA's proposed standards are "flawed, ineffective and exorbitantly costly."

"We will also highlight our concerns about the potentially devastating impact EPA's proposal will have on our nation's economy, workforce and families," she said.

Sheehan also expressed doubt that the EPA will place a high value on any public comment that is received.

"We are hopeful that EPA will utilize the comments it receives in finalizing the rule," Sheehan said. "Unfortunately, we aren't holding our breath, and we are concerned that EPA will forge ahead without really considering the concerns being voiced by a growing chorus of opposition."

Melinda Pierce, Sierra Club's deputy director for federal policy, disagrees. She told SNL Energy the EPA has made it clear that the agency is listening to the public, states and private sector.

"We don't doubt EPA's commitment to ensuring that the Clean Power Plan is the best possible solution to address the climate crisis and speed our transition to clean energy," Pierce told SNL Energy.

Pierce said the Sierra Club alone has generated more than 89,200 online comments in support of the plan and plans to continue to urge members to speak out through various avenues of public participation. Sierra Club leadership, members and volunteers will be testifying at all four hearing locations the EPA is hosting to "applaud this first-ever action to curb carbon pollution from existing power plants and will urge EPA to strengthen the standard."

"Support for the Clean Power Plan that we're seeing in public comments is further evidence of public demand for leaders in Washington to step up and rein in out-of-control climate disruption," Pierce said. "We know from recent polls that a majority of Americans (even in red states) want safeguards from climate-disrupting pollution. It's time to clean up how we power our country."

Representatives of the National Mining Association and the UMWA, both active critics of the Clean Power Plan, did not immediately respond to questions regarding early public comments on the rule. Public comment on the rule is open until mid-October.