WhatFinger

EPAs 28 GW Assault on Coal

IER Identifies Coal Fired Power Plants Likely to Close as Result of EPA Regulations


By Institute for Energy Research ——--October 9, 2011

Global Warming-Energy-Environment | CFP Comments | Reader Friendly | Subscribe | Email Us


"So if somebody wants to build a coal-fired plant they can. It's just that it will bankrupt them..." --Barack Obama speaking to San Francisco Chronicle, January 2008 EPAs 28 GW Assault on Coal (PDF)
The United States has the world's largest coal resources. In fact we have 50 percent more coal than Russia, the country with the next largest reserves. But coal use in the United States is under assault. Before becoming President, Barak Obama promised to bankrupt coal companies. As President, he has tried various strategies to force Americans to use less coal. After failing to pass a national energy tax (cap-and-trade), the President vowed to continue his attack on coal stating, there is "more than one way to skin a cat." Currently, EPA is leading the Obama administration's assault on coal with a number of new regulations. Two of the most important are the "transport rule" and the "toxics rule" (Utility MACT). Combined, these regulations will systematically reduce access to affordable and reliable energy. According to our report:

  • EPA Regulations Will Close At Least 28 GW of Generating Capacity
EPA modeling and power-plant operator announcements show that EPA regulations will close at least 28 gigawatts (GW) of American generating capacity, the equivalent of closing every power plant in the state of North Carolina or Indiana. Also, 28 GW is 8.9 percent of our total coal generating capacity.

  • Current Retirements Almost Twice As High As EPA Predicted
EPA's power plant-level modeling projected that Agency regulations would close 14.5 GW of generating capacity. That number rises to 28 GW when including additional announced retirements related to EPA rules, almost twice the amount EPA projected. Moreover, this number will grow as plant operators continue to release their EPA compliance plans.

  • Announced and Projected Retirements Higher Than Worst Case Scenarios
Analysis by the North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC), the entity in charge of grid reliability, projected that EPA's Transport Rule and Toxics Rule would close 20 GW of generating capacity. This list indicates that at least 28 GW will retire. EPA's Transport Rule and Toxics Rule push U.S. energy security past the NERC worst case scenario.

  • EPA's New Regulations Will Hit States Trying To Get Back On Their Feet
Current announcements and EPA projections indicate that EPA regulations have a dramatic impact on states reeling from economic hardship.

  • Ohio: 2,894 MW retired, 8.6% of state total generating capacity.
  • West Virginia: 2,448 MW retired, 14% of state total generating capacity.
  • Indiana: 2,168 MW retired, 7.5% of state total generating capacity.
  • Tennessee: 1,376 MW retired, 6.2% of state total generating capacity.
  • Missouri: 1,325 MW retired, 6.3% of state total generating capacity.
  • Wisconsin: 902 MW retired, 5% of state total generating capacity.
image You can download the excel document by clicking here:Announced and EPA Projected Power Plant Retirements

You can view the complete list below:

Plant NameUnitCityCountyStateCapacity (MW)YearFuel SourceCitation
Colbert1TuscumbiaColbertAL1762015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Colbert2TuscumbiaColbertAL1762015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Colbert3TuscumbiaColbertAL1762015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Colbert4TuscumbiaColbertAL1722015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Navajo3PageCoconinoAZ7502015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
BP Wilmington CalcinerGEN 1WilmingtonLos AngelesCA292015Petroleum CokeIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Rio Bravo PosoCFBBakersfieldKernCA332015Petroleum CokeIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Northside Generating Station1JacksonvilleDuvalFL2752015Petroleum CokeIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Northside Generating Station2JacksonvilleDuvalFL2752015Petroleum CokeIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Scholz1SneedsJacksonFL492015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Scholz2SneedsJacksonFL492015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Harllee Branch1MilledgevillePutnamGA2622015CoalSouthern Company Comments on EPA NESHAP Action (Aug. 4, 2011).
Harllee Branch2MilledgevillePutnamGA3192015CoalSouthern Company Comments on EPA NESHAP Action (Aug. 4, 2011).
Dubuque1DubuqueDubuqueIA352015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Dubuque5DubuqueDubuqueIA302015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Earl F Wisdom1SpencerClayIA382015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Dallman31SpringfieldSangamonIL862015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Dallman32SpringfieldSangamonIL872015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Hutsonville3HutsonvilleCrawfordIL752012CoalAmeren to shutter 2 coal plants in Illinois, Chicago Tribune (Oct. 4, 2011).
Hutsonville4HutsonvilleCrawfordIL752012CoalAmeren to shutter 2 coal plants in Illinois, Chicago Tribune (Oct. 4, 2011).
Marion4MarionWilliamsonIL1702014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule/Transport Rule)
Meredosia4MeredosiaMorganIL1662012OilAmeren to shutter 2 coal plants in Illinois, Chicago Tribune (Oct. 4, 2011).
Meredosia5MeredosiaMorganIL2032012CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule); Ameren to shutter 2 coal plants in Illinois, Chicago Tribune (Oct. 4, 2011).
State Line1HammondLakeIN1972015CoalAging Indiana Power Plant to Shut Down, Cutting Chicago-Area Air Pollution, Chicago Tribune (May 5, 2011).
State Line2HammondLakeIN1002015CoalAging Indiana Power Plant to Shut Down, Cutting Chicago-Area Air Pollution, Chicago Tribune (May 5, 2011).
State Line3HammondLakeIN3182015CoalAging Indiana Power Plant to Shut Down, Cutting Chicago-Area Air Pollution, Chicago Tribune (May 5, 2011).
State Line4HammondLakeIN1802015CoalAging Indiana Power Plant to Shut Down, Cutting Chicago-Area Air Pollution, Chicago Tribune (May 5, 2011).
Tanners Creek1LawrenceburgDearbornIN1452015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Tanners Creek2LawrenceburgLawrenceburgIN15312/31/2014CoalAEP Shares Plan For Compliance With Proposed EPA Regulations, Press Release (June 9, 2011)
Tanners Creek3LawrenceburgLawrenceburgIN21512/31/2014CoalAEP Shares Plan For Compliance With Proposed EPA Regulations, Press Release (June 9, 2011)
Wabash River2Terre HauteVigoIN1132014CoalEPA regs may force Duke to shut Indiana coal plant, Reuters (Sep. 20, 2011)
Wabash River3Terre HauteVigoIN1232014CoalEPA regs may force Duke to shut Indiana coal plant, Reuters (Sep. 20, 2011)
Wabash River4Terre HauteVigoIN1132014CoalEPA regs may force Duke to shut Indiana coal plant, Reuters (Sep. 20, 2011)
Wabash River5Terre HauteVigoIN1252014CoalEPA regs may force Duke to shut Indiana coal plant, Reuters (Sep. 20, 2011)
Wabash River6Terre HauteVigoIN3872014CoalEPA regs may force Duke to shut Indiana coal plant, Reuters (Sep. 20, 2011)
Lawrence Energy Center3LawrenceDouglasKS482015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Riverton39RivertonCherokeeKS382014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule/Transport Rule)
Riverton40RivertonCherokeeKS542014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule/Transport Rule)
Tecumseh Energy Center9TecumsehShawneeKS742015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Big Sandy2LouisaLouisaKY43812/31/2014CoalAEP Shares Plan For Compliance With Proposed EPA Regulations, Press Release (June 9, 2011).
Cane Run1LouisvilleLouisvilleKY162016CoalThe 2011 Joint Integrated Resource Plan of Louisville Gas and Electric Company and Kentucky Utilities Compny (Apr. 21, 2011)
Cane Run2LouisvilleLouisvilleKY1632016CoalThe 2011 Joint Integrated Resource Plan of Louisville Gas and Electric Company and Kentucky Utilities Compny (Apr. 21, 2011)
Cane Run3LouisvilleLouisvilleKY2092016CoalThe 2011 Joint Integrated Resource Plan of Louisville Gas and Electric Company and Kentucky Utilities Compny (Apr. 21, 2011)
Cane Run4LouisvilleLouisvilleKY2722016CoalThe 2011 Joint Integrated Resource Plan of Louisville Gas and Electric Company and Kentucky Utilities Compny (Apr. 21, 2011)
D B WilsonW1CentertownOhioKY4202015Petroleum CokeIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Dale1WinchesterClarkKY272014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Transport Rule)
Dale2WinchesterClarkKY272014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Transport Rule)
Dale3WinchesterClarkKY752014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Transport Rule)
Dale4WinchesterClarkKY752014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Transport Rule)
Green River1Central CityCentral CityKY752016CoalThe 2011 Joint Integrated Resource Plan of Louisville Gas and Electric Company and Kentucky Utilities Compny (Apr. 21, 2011)
Green River2Central CityCentral CityKY1142016CoalThe 2011 Joint Integrated Resource Plan of Louisville Gas and Electric Company and Kentucky Utilities Compny (Apr. 21, 2011)
Robert A Reid1RobardsWebsterKY652014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule/Transport Rule)
TyroneVersaillesVersaillesKY1352016CoalThe 2011 Joint Integrated Resource Plan of Louisville Gas and Electric Company and Kentucky Utilities Compny (Apr. 21, 2011); IPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Nelson Industrial Steam and Operating Company1AWestlakeCalcasieuLA1072015Petroleum CokeIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Nelson Industrial Steam and Operating Company2AWestlakeCalcasieuLA1062015Petroleum CokeIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Brayton Point3SomersetBristolMA6122015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Brayton Point4SomersetBristolMA4352014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Transport Rule)
Salem Harbor1SalemSalemMA82June, 2014CoalDominion Sets Schedule to Close Salem Harbor Power Station, Press Release, May 11, 2011; IPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule).
Salem Harbor2SalemSalemMA82June, 2014CoalDominion Sets Schedule to Close Salem Harbor Power Station, Press Release, May 11, 2011; IPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule).
Salem Harbor3SalemSalemMA166June, 2014CoalDominion Sets Schedule to Close Salem Harbor Power Station, Press Release, May 11, 2011; IPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule).
Salem Harbor4SalemSalemMA476June, 2014CoalDominion Sets Schedule to Close Salem Harbor Power Station, Press Release, May 11, 2011.
Eckert Station1LansingInghamMI402015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Eckert Station2LansingInghamMI422015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Eckert Station3LansingInghamMI412015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Eckert Station4LansingInghamMI692015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Eckert Station5LansingInghamMI692015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Eckert Station6LansingInghamMI672015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Endicott Station1LitchfieldHillsdaleMI552014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule/Transport Rule)
James De Young5HollandOttawaMI272014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule/Transport Rule)
Blue Valley3IndependenceJacksonMO512014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Transport Rule)
Chamois2ChamoisOsageMO492014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule/Transport Rule)
James River Power Station3SpringfieldGreeneMO412015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
James River Power Station4SpringfieldGreeneMO562015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Lake Road6St JosephBuchananMO972015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Meramec1St. LouisSt. LouisMO1382015CoalThe Ameren 2011 Integrated Resource Plan
Meramec2St. LouisSt. LouisMO1382015CoalThe Ameren 2011 Integrated Resource Plan
Meramec3St. LouisSt. LouisMO2892015CoalThe Ameren 2011 Integrated Resource Plan
Meramec4St. LouisSt. LouisMO3592015CoalThe Ameren 2011 Integrated Resource Plan
Sibley1SibleyJacksonMO542014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Transport Rule)
Sibley2SibleyJacksonMO542014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Transport Rule)
Colstrip Energy LPBLR1ColstripRosebudMT352015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Yellowstone Energy LPBLR1BillingsYellowstoneMT282015Petroleum CokeIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Yellowstone Energy LPBLR2BillingsYellowstoneMT282015Petroleum CokeIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Buck5SalisburyRowanNC382014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule/Transport Rule)
Buck6SalisburyRowanNC382014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule/Transport Rule)
Buck7SalisburyRowanNC382014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule/Transport Rule)
Cape Fear5'MoncureMoncureNC14812/31/2014CoalProgress Energy Carolinas Integrated Resource Plan (Sep. 13, 2010).
Cape Fear6'MoncureMoncureNC1512/31/2014CoalProgress Energy Carolinas Integrated Resource Plan (Sep. 13, 2010); IPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule).
Riverbend7Mount HollyGastonNC942015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Riverbend8Mount HollyGastonNC942015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Weatherspoon1LumbertonRobesonNC4912/31/2014CoalProgress Energy Carolinas Integrated Resource Plan (Sep. 13, 2010)
Weatherspoon2LumbertonRobesonNC4912/31/2014CoalProgress Energy Carolinas Integrated Resource Plan (Sep. 13, 2010)
Weatherspoon3LumbertonRobesonNC7912/31/2014CoalProgress Energy Carolinas Integrated Resource Plan (Sep. 13, 2010)
Schiller4PortsmouthRockinghamNH482015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Deepwater8PennsvilleSalemNJ802015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Glenwood40Glenwood LandingNassauNY1172015Natural GasIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Glenwood50Glenwood LandingNassauNY1222015Natural GasIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Port Jefferson3Port JeffersonSuffolkNY1852015Natural Gas, Residual Fuel OilIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
WPS Power Niagara1Niagara FallsNiagaraNY532015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Avon Lake10Avon LakeLorainOH932014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Transport Rule)
Conesville3ConesvilleConesvilleOH16512/31/2014CoalAEP Shares Plan For Compliance With Proposed EPA Regulations, Press Release (June 9, 2011)
Hamilton8HamiltonButlerOH332014Natural Gas, Residual Fuel OilIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Transport Rule)
Miami Fort6North BendMiami TownshipOH1631/1/2015CoalThe Duke Energy Kentucky 2011 Integrated Resource Plan (July 1, 2011).
Muskingum River1BeverlyBeverlyOH22012/31/2014CoalAEP Shares Plan For Compliance With Proposed EPA Regulations, Press Release (June 9, 2011); IPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Muskingum River2BeverlyBeverlyOH22012/31/2014CoalAEP Shares Plan For Compliance With Proposed EPA Regulations, Press Release (June 9, 2011); IPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Muskingum River3BeverlyBeverlyOH23812/31/2014CoalAEP Shares Plan For Compliance With Proposed EPA Regulations, Press Release (June 9, 2011)
Muskingum River4BeverlyBeverlyOH23812/31/2014CoalAEP Shares Plan For Compliance With Proposed EPA Regulations, Press Release (June 9, 2011)
Niles2NilesTrumbullOH1112015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule/Transport Rule)
PicwayLockbourneLockbourneOH10012/31/2014CoalAEP Shares Plan For Compliance With Proposed EPA Regulations, Press Release (June 9, 2011); IPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
R E Burger5ShadysideBelmontOH472014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Transport Rule)
R E Burger6ShadysideBelmontOH472014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Transport Rule)
WC Beckjord1New RichmondClermontOH1151/1/2015CoalThe Duke Energy Ohio 2011 Integrated Resource Plan (July 15, 2011); IPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
WC Beckjord2New RichmondNew RichmondOH1131/1/2015CoalThe Duke Energy Ohio 2011 Integrated Resource Plan (July 15, 2011); IPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
WC Beckjord3New RichmondClermontOH1251/1/2015CoalThe Duke Energy Ohio 2011 Integrated Resource Plan (July 15, 2011); IPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
WC Beckjord4New RichmondNew RichmondOH1631/1/2015CoalThe Duke Energy Ohio 2011 Integrated Resource Plan (July 15, 2011); IPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
WC Beckjord5New RichmondClermontOH2451/1/2015CoalThe Duke Energy Ohio 2011 Integrated Resource Plan (July 15, 2011); IPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
WC Beckjord6New RichmondNew RichmondOH4611/1/2015CoalThe Duke Energy Ohio 2011 Integrated Resource Plan (July 15, 2011); IPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Anadarko Plant3AnadarkoCaddoOK442015Natural GasIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Mustang1Oklahoma CityCanadianOK532015Natural GasIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Mustang2Oklahoma CityCanadianOK532015Natural GasIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Mustang3Oklahoma CityCanadianOK1182015Natural GasIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Mustang4Oklahoma CityCanadianOK2502015Natural GasIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
BoardmanBoardmanBoardmanOR601Not AvailableCoalPortland Gas and Electric Comments on EPA NESHAP Action (Aug. 2, 2011)
G F Weaton Power Station1MonacaBeaverPA562015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
G F Weaton Power Station2MonacaBeaverPA562015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
New Castle3West PittsburgLawrencePA952014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Transport Rule)
New Castle5West PittsburgLawrencePA1382014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Transport Rule)
Shawville1ShawvilleClearfieldPA1222014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule/Transport Rule)
Sunbury Generation LP3Shamokin DamSnyderPA942014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule/Transport Rule)
Sunbury Generation LP4Shamokin DamSnyderPA1282014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule/Transport Rule)
Sunbury Generation LP2AShamokin DamSnyderPA402014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Transport Rule)
Sunbury Generation LP2BShamokin DamSnyderPA402014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Transport Rule)
Canadys Steam1WalterboroColletonSC1052015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
John Sevier4RogersvilleHawkinsTN1762014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Transport Rule)
Johnsonville1New JohnsonvilleHumphreysTN1062014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Transport Rule)
Johnsonville2New JohnsonvilleHumphreysTN1062014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Transport Rule)
Johnsonville3New JohnsonvilleHumphreysTN1062014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Transport Rule)
Johnsonville4New JohnsonvilleHumphreysTN1062014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Transport Rule)
Johnsonville5New JohnsonvilleHumphreysTN1062014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule/Transport Rule)
Johnsonville6New JohnsonvilleHumphreysTN1062014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule/Transport Rule)
Johnsonville7New JohnsonvilleHumphreysTN1412014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule/Transport Rule)
Johnsonville8New JohnsonvilleHumphreysTN1412014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule/Transport Rule)
Johnsonville9New JohnsonvilleHumphreysTN1412014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule/Transport Rule)
Johnsonville10New JohnsonvilleHumphreysTN1412014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule/Transport Rule)
AES DeepwaterAAB0 01PasadenaHarrisTX1392015Petroleum CokeIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
ERCT_TX_Coal steam1n/an/aTX3002015Petroleum CokeIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Lone Star1Lone StarMorrisTX502014Natural Gas, Distillate Fuel OilIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule/Transport Rule)
Monticello1Mount PleasantTitusTX5932012CoalLuminant Announces Facility Closures, Job Reductions in Response to EPA Rule, Luminant (Sep. 12, 2011)
Monticello2Mount PleasantTitusTX5932012CoalLuminant Announces Facility Closures, Job Reductions in Response to EPA Rule, Luminant (Sep. 12, 2011)
Moore County3SunrayMooreTX482012Natural GasIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
San MiguelSM-1ChristineAtascosaTX39112/31/2014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Welsh2PittsburgPittsburgTX5282015CoalAEP Shares Plan For Compliance With Proposed EPA Regulations, Press Release (June 9, 2011)
Carbon1PriceCarbonUT672015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
KUCC1MagnaSalt LakeUT302015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
KUCC2MagnaSalt LakeUT302015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
KUCC3MagnaSalt LakeUT302015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Sunnyside Cogen Associates1SunnysideCarbonUT512016CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Chesapeake1ChesapeakeChesapeake (city)VA192016CoalDominion plans to shutter Yorktown and Chesapeake power plants between 2015 and 2022, Daily Press (Sep. 1, 2011).
Chesapeake2ChesapeakeChesapeake (city)VA162016CoalDominion plans to shutter Yorktown and Chesapeake power plants between 2015 and 2022, Daily Press (Sep. 1, 2011).
Chesapeake3ChesapeakeChesapeake (city)VA1852016CoalDominion plans to shutter Yorktown and Chesapeake power plants between 2015 and 2022, Daily Press (Sep. 1, 2011).
Chesapeake4ChesapeakeChesapeake (city)VA162016CoalDominion plans to shutter Yorktown and Chesapeake power plants between 2015 and 2022, Daily Press (Sep. 1, 2011).
Chesapeake6ChesapeakeChesapeake (city)VA162016CoalDominion plans to shutter Yorktown and Chesapeake power plants between 2015 and 2022, Daily Press (Sep. 1, 2011).
Chesapeake7ChesapeakeChesapeake (city)VA242016CoalDominion plans to shutter Yorktown and Chesapeake power plants between 2015 and 2022, Daily Press (Sep. 1, 2011).
Chesapeake8ChesapeakeChesapeake (city)VA242016CoalDominion plans to shutter Yorktown and Chesapeake power plants between 2015 and 2022, Daily Press (Sep. 1, 2011).
Chesapeake9ChesapeakeChesapeake (city)VA242016CoalDominion plans to shutter Yorktown and Chesapeake power plants between 2015 and 2022, Daily Press (Sep. 1, 2011).
Chesapeake10ChesapeakeChesapeake (city)VA242016CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
ChesapeakeST1ChesapeakeChesapeake (city)VA1132016CoalDominion plans to shutter Yorktown and Chesapeake power plants between 2015 and 2022, Daily Press (Sep. 1, 2011).
ChesapeakeST2ChesapeakeChesapeake (city)VA1132016CoalDominion plans to shutter Yorktown and Chesapeake power plants between 2015 and 2022, Daily Press (Sep. 1, 2011).
ChesapeakeST4ChesapeakeChesapeake (city)VA23912/31/2014CoalDominion plans to shutter Yorktown and Chesapeake power plants between 2015 and 2022, Daily Press (Sep. 1, 2011).
Clinch River3ClevelandClevelandVA23512/31/2014CoalAEP Shares Plan For Compliance With Proposed EPA Regulations, Press Release (June 9, 2011)
Glen Lyn1Glen LynGilesVA10012/31/2014CoalAEP Shares Plan For Compliance With Proposed EPA Regulations, Press Release (June 9, 2011)
Glen Lyn2Glen LynGilesVA2382015CoalAEP Shares Plan For Compliance With Proposed EPA Regulations, Press Release (June 9, 2011)
Glen Lyn51Glen LynGilesVA452015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Glen Lyn52Glen LynGilesVA452015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Potomac River1AlexandriaAlexandria (city)VA882015CoalAlexandria coal plant may shut by 2012, Washington Post (Aug. 30, 2011); IPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Transport Rule)
Potomac River2AlexandriaAlexandria (city)VA882015CoalAlexandria coal plant may shut by 2012, Washington Post (Aug. 30, 2011)
Potomac River3AlexandriaAlexandriaVA1102015CoalAlexandria coal plant may shut by 2012, Washington Post (Aug. 30, 2011)
Potomac River4AlexandriaAlexandriaVA1102015CoalAlexandria coal plant may shut by 2012, Washington Post (Aug. 30, 2011)
Potomac River5AlexandriaAlexandriaVA1102015CoalAlexandria coal plant may shut by 2012, Washington Post (Aug. 30, 2011)
Yorktown1YorktownYorkVA1882015CoalDominion plans to shutter Yorktown and Chesapeake power plants between 2015 and 2022, Daily Press (Sep. 1, 2011).
Yorktown2YorktownYorkVA1882015CoalDominion plans to shutter Yorktown and Chesapeake power plants between 2015 and 2022, Daily Press (Sep. 1, 2011).
Blount Street8MadisonDaneWI492015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Blount Street9MadisonDaneWI482015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
South Oak Creek5Oak CreekMilwaukeeWI2612015CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
South Oak Creek6Oak CreekMilwaukeeWI2642014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule)
Valley1MilwaukeeMilwaukeeWI702014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule/Transport Rule)
Valley2MilwaukeeMilwaukeeWI702014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule/Transport Rule)
Valley3MilwaukeeMilwaukeeWI702014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule/Transport Rule)
Valley4MilwaukeeMilwaukeeWI7012/31/2014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule/Transport Rule)
Kammer1CaptinaMoundsvilleWV23812/31/2014CoalAEP Shares Plan For Compliance With Proposed EPA Regulations, Press Release (June 9, 2011)
Kammer3CaptinaMoundsvilleWV23812/31/2014CoalAEP Shares Plan For Compliance With Proposed EPA Regulations, Press Release (June 9, 2011)
Kammer2OrovilleMoundsvilleWV23812/31/2014CoalAEP Shares Plan For Compliance With Proposed EPA Regulations, Press Release (June 9, 2011)
Kanawha1GlasgowGlasgowWV22012/31/2014CoalAEP Shares Plan For Compliance With Proposed EPA Regulations, Press Release (June 9, 2011)
Kanawha2GlasgowGlasgowWV22012/31/2014CoalAEP Shares Plan For Compliance With Proposed EPA Regulations, Press Release (June 9, 2011)
Phillip Sporn1Graham StationNew HavenWV1532011 (450 MW), Dec. 31, 2014 (600 MW)CoalAEP Shares Plan For Compliance With Proposed EPA Regulations, Press Release (June 9, 2011)
Phillip Sporn2Graham StationNew HavenWV1532011 (450 MW), Dec. 31, 2014 (600 MW)CoalAEP Shares Plan For Compliance With Proposed EPA Regulations, Press Release (June 9, 2011)
Phillip Sporn3Graham StationNew HavenWV1532011 (450 MW), Dec. 31, 2014 (600 MW)CoalAEP Shares Plan For Compliance With Proposed EPA Regulations, Press Release (June 9, 2011)
Phillip Sporn4Graham StationNew HavenWV1532011 (450 MW), Dec. 31, 2014 (600 MW)CoalAEP Shares Plan For Compliance With Proposed EPA Regulations, Press Release (June 9, 2011)
Phillip Sporn5Graham StationNew HavenWV4962011 (450 MW), Dec. 31, 2014 (600 MW)CoalAEP Shares Plan For Compliance With Proposed EPA Regulations, Press Release (June 9, 2011)
Rivesville7RivesvilleMarionWV462014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule/Transport Rule)
Rivesville8RivesvilleMarionWV912014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule/Transport Rule)
Willow Island1Willow IslandPleasantsWV542014CoalIPM Parsed Results - Policy Case (Toxics Rule/Transport Rule)
You can download the excel document by clicking here:Announced and EPA Projected Power Plant Retirements. Notes: 1. All retirements announced by plant owners result from EPA regulation. In each such case, the citation included directly identifies EPA regulations as the sole or main reason for the power plant's retirement. 2. Plant closures attributed to EPA modeling only include those plants that EPA projects to close as a result of EPA regulations. "Toxics Rule" results were found by removing plants listed on the Toxics Rule "IPM Parsed File--Base Case" (EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0234-3032) from the "IPM Parsed File--Policy Case" (EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0234-3033). "Transport Rule" results were found by removing plants listed on "TR Base Case Final" from the "TR Remedy Final" (both files available at: http://www.epa.gov/airmarkets/progsregs/epa-ipm/transport.html). 3. According to the EPA, the Toxics Rule base case includes the Transport Rule. Thus, theoretically, both the Toxics Rule Policy Case and Transport Rule Remedy Case (when controlled for their respective base cases) should not both independently identify closure of the same plant. Nevertheless, the list shows a 2 GW overlap between the two rules. This is, presumably, due to variance in the modeling platforms EPA utilized for both rules.

Power Plant Retirement ListBackground Information

Methodology

List Sources This list is derived from three sources: (1) EPA's parsed modeling files, which identify the power-plant units that EPA models say will close as a result of either the Clean Air Transport Rule (Transport Rule) or Utility MACT (Toxics Rule); (2) news releases or press stories where a power-plant operator says a unit will or is likely to close due to EPA regulations; and (3) filings with state public utility commissions where a power-plant operator says a unit will or is likely to close due to EPA regulations. All sources are publically available information. EPA Parsed Files Process to Identify Units Closed by EPA Regulation Individual power-plants often have multiple boilers, called "units," that generate electricity. EPA, in addition to overall modeling, models the impact that the Agency believes its regulations will have on each unit, at each power-plant in America. EPA lists these results in "parsed files." When producing parsed files for a regulation, EPA will first create a business-as-usual "base" case parsed file where the Agency details what it believes will happen absent EPA's new regulation. Next, EPA creates a "policy" or "remedy" case parsed file showing how EPA believes plants will respond to a regulation. Thus, one can find the difference between these two cases, and figure out the impact EPA believes a regulation will have, by comparing the policy/remedy case parsed file to the base case parsed file. As such, the following steps were taken so that the list would only include those units EPA said would retire as a result of the Transport Rule and Toxics Rule: For the Transport Rule, data from the parsed files for the Transport Rule's base case and remedy case were put on a single spreadsheet. The combined results were organized by plant name. Each plant listed in both the base case and remedy case was removed. Thus, the resulting list only shows those plants that EPA believes will close because of the Transport Rule. For the Toxics Rule, data from the parsed files for the Toxics Rule's base case and policy case were put on a single spreadsheet. The combined results were organized by plant name. Each plant listed in both the base case and policy case was removed. Thus, the resulting list only shows those plants that EPA believes will close because of the Toxics Rule. The resulting base case-free Transport Rule list and Toxics Rule list were then put on a single spreadsheet. The combined results were organized by plant name. In each instance where the Transport Rule and the Toxics Rule independently said the same plant would retire, one of the entries was deleted so as to not double-count it. The citation was modified to attribute the unit closure to both the Transport Rule and Toxics Rule. Transport Rule Parsed File The parsed file for the Transport Rule is based on EPA's proposed Clean Air Transport Rule and not the final Cross State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR). EPA has not yet made the CSAPR parsed files available to the public. However, given that the final CSAPR is more stringent than the rule's proposed version, it is likely that CSAPR's parsed file will show more unit closures than the parsed file used on this list. Power-plant Owner Public Announcements Ensuring that Retirements are Result of EPA Regulation All retirements announced by plant owners in news releases or through public filings on this list were due to EPA regulation. In each such case, the source cited directly identifies EPA regulations as the sole or main reason for the power plant's retirement. Avoiding Double-Counting If a unit was identified to close by both EPA parsed files and public announcements, then the duplicate entry was released. The units citation was modified to indicate that both EPA and public announcements slated the unit for retirement.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why is this list's total retired capacity higher than EPA's total? The total retired capacity for this list is higher than EPA's total because this list includes EPA's projected unit retirements and unit retirements announced by power-plant operators. No unit cited by both sources was double counted. Does this list include plants that will close even without the Transport Rule or Toxics Rule? No. The parsed file results used in this list do not include business-as-usual base case results. In other words, if EPA modeled a unit to close even if the Transport Rule or Toxics Rule were not implemented, then that unit was not included. EPA says only 9.9 GW will close, so why are these numbers higher? The 9.9 GW retired coal-plant capacity figure is from the EPA Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) for the Toxics Rule alone. The Transport Rule RIA projects an additional 4.8 GW of coal-plant capacity to retire due to the Transport Rule. When combined, the RIA's project 13.8 GW of coal-plant capacity to retire due to the Toxics Rule and Transport Rule. As noted above, additional plant retirements are due to actually announced retirements. Why do EPA's RIAs say the Transport and Toxics Rule will retire 13.8 GW of coal-capacity, while EPA's parsed files say the two rules will retire 14.5 GW? EPA's overall modeling runs and parsed model use slightly different methods. Thus, the totals for the final results are slightly different, though very similar. The difference between the two totals is only .8 GW. When a power-plant operator announces that it is closing a certain unit, how do you know that is because of EPA regulations? In each case where a retirement is attributed to public announcements, the cited source material lists EPA regulations as the sole or main reason for the plant's retirement. Some groups have said EPA regulations will retire 60--80 GW of coal-fired generation, but this list only shows 28 GW. Does this mean those projections are wrong? No. If anything this list gives more credibility to those higher retirement projections. This list is very conservative; it merely shows what units EPA says its regulations will close, plus specific units that plant-operators have said will close because of EPA regulations. Those analyses that show higher power-plant retirements than this list lay out what the final overall impact of EPA's regulation will be. On the other hand, this list focuses just on the currently disclosed impact. Plant-operators generally announce retirements only when required to by public filings. Thus, this list will likely grow far higher. However, because this list already finds twice as many retirements as EPA projected, the Agency's claim that its regulations will have minimal impact on electric generation are clearly incorrect. EPA has said that other projections showing a high coal generation retirements were based on incorrect assumptions. Is that the case for this list? No. The only modeling in this list is from EPA. Thus, any mistaken assumption would be EPA's mistaken assumption. Otherwise, the remaining data is from actual public announcements detailing the imminent or highly possible closure of specific units at specific power-plants. The North American Electric Reliability Corporation (NERC) projected that most power-plants will retire because of EPA 316(b) cooling tower regulations. Does this list account for the fact that EPA has since indicated it will pursue less stringent 316(b) regulations? This list only includes the parsed files for EPA's Transport Rule and Toxics Rule modeling. EPA's modeling for the 316(b) is not included. Public unit retirement announcements largely cited the Transport Rule and Toxics Rule as causing a unit to retire; there is little discussion of 316(b) regulations. This is likely due to the fact that EPA ultimately chose to pursue less stringent cooling tower rules than the Agency originally insinuated. Regardless, all of the publically announced plant retirements listed are retiring due to EPA regulations. This list compares its total numbers to NERC's worst case analysis. Does that include NERC's analysis of 316(b) regulations? No. The NERC analysis was broken down between the Transport Rule, the Toxics Rule and 316(b) regulations. The chart compares the list only to the NERC Transport Rule and Toxic Rule "strict," or worst case, scenarios.

Support Canada Free Press

Donate


Subscribe

View Comments

Institute for Energy Research——

The Institute for Energy Research (IER) is a not-for-profit organization that conducts intensive research and analysis on the functions, operations, and government regulation of global energy markets. IER maintains that freely-functioning energy markets provide the most efficient and effective solutions to today’s global energy and environmental challenges and, as such, are critical to the well-being of individuals and society.


Sponsored
!-- END RC STICKY -->