EPA panel denies Utah coal plant permit / LJWorld.com

Archive for Friday, November 14, 2008

By H. Josef Hebert - Associated Press Writer

November 14, 2008

Washington, D.C. — The Environmental Protection Agency was blocked Thursday from issuing a permit for a proposed coal-burning power plant in Utah without addressing global warming. The ruling by an agency appeals panel means the Obama administration probably will determine the fate of other similar plants.

The panel said the EPA's Denver office failed to adequately support its decision to issue a permit for the Bonanza plant without requiring controls on carbon dioxide, the leading greenhouse gas.

The matter was sent back to that office, which must better explain why it failed to order limits on carbon dioxide.

EPA spokesman Jonathan Shrader said the agency was reviewing the ruling by the appeals panel. He declined to say how many other coal plant permits might be affected.

Environmentalist and lawyers representing industry groups said the ruling stops the permitting of perhaps as many as 100 coal plants.

"In essence, this is a punt to the Obama administration," said Jason Hutt, a lawyer who represents a number of utilities, merchant energy developers and refineries seeking permits. He said it also would affect permits for oil refinery expansion.

The Sierra Club had appealed the Bonanza permit. David Bookbinder, a lawyer for the group, said the ruling will stop the permitting of any coal burning power plants "while EPA mulls over what to do next."

The gas is a product of burning fossil fuels and a leading culprit in global warming.

Bookbinder had led the club's efforts to block the attempt by six electric cooperatives to build a second coal-burning generating unit at the Bonanza facility on the Uintah and Ouray Indian reservation in Utah, knowing a decision on carbon dioxide could have broad implications.

The co-op group, Deseret Power, had no comment about the EPA developments.

Discussion

LJWorld.com doesn't necessarily condone the comments here, nor does it review every post.
Read our full policy. Also, read about banned accounts and harassing comments.

14 November 2008
at 4:06 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

belexus73 (Anonymous) says…

This is significant. Either EPA can do some quick regulatory writing (6-12 months), and issue a ruling for a specific BACT technique (best available control technology), or the Obama administration can intervene within the EPA and write regulations that the new coal plants must take out a signifcant amount of CO2 above what technology can do at the present-this will take sometwhat longer to do. This would put pressure on Congress to enact a cap-and-trade that is tougher than some may hope for.
14 November 2008
at 4:43 p.m.

Suggest removal

Permalink

rooster (Anonymous) says…

Come on xd40 you links would matter if they came from a u.s. source. 2 Australian links is like providing a link from thedailykos or some christian fundamentalist site. They only serve to prop your arguement not the facts.