Grimes Donor Helped White House Craft New Regulations To Kill Kentucky Coal


May 29, 2014

Contact: Allison Moore 502-618-1372

LOUISVILLE – Team Mitch today released the following statement from spokeswoman Allison Moore and background information regarding President Obama’s upcoming EPA regulations and the close ties to the Grimes campaign.


NRDC President Donated To Grimes In April

Background On The Natural Resources Defense Council

Frances Beinecke Is The President Of The NRDC. (“Frances Beinecke,

NRDC President,”, Accessed 5/28/14)

Frances Beinecke: “Americans… Have Paid A Steep Price” For Our Use Of Coal. “Coal has a long history in this country, and it continues to supply more than a third of our electricity. Americans, though, have paid a steep price for our use of this energy source, which has ravaged our environment and undermined our health. (Frances Beinecke, “Questions about energy, 'war on coal' mantra,” Herald-Leader, 10/10/12)

VIDEO: NRDC Report Was Consulted By The White House As They Were Coming Up With New Carbon Regulations. “BETTY LUI: Megan, the EPA hasn't even released its recommendations yet, so where did the Chamber get their numbers? MEGAN HUGHES: So they got a lot of this from an analysis of a Natural Resources Defense Council report that the White House has apparently been looking at or consulting in coming up with its proposal.  Now that report was first released late in 2012 but was updated last year, looking at what the EPA could do.” (Bloomberg’s In The Loop, 5/28/14)

·      Watch Video

NRDC “Works Closely With The White House And EPA On Climate Policy”. “Last year, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), one of the most influential environmental lobbying groups in Washington, published its own recommendations for emissions standards for existing coal plants, in a report provocatively titled "Closing the Power Plant Carbon Pollution Loophole". The NRDC's proposals are significant because the council works closely with the White House and EPA on climate policy and they could have a significant influence on the EPA's own rulemaking.” (John Kemp, “COLUMN-U.S. EPA must set realistic emissions limits for coal: Kemp,” Reuters, 12/6/13)

NRDC Has Been Pushing The EPA To Put “Strict Limits” On Emissions From Power Plants. “The Natural Resources Defense Council is among environmental groups pushing the EPA to impose strict limits on greenhouse-gas emissions from the plants. Just after Obama was re-elected, the NRDC issued the most detailed proposal for how the EPA could use regulations under the Clean Air Act to limit emissions from the plants. (Lisa Lerer, Julianna Goldman, “Obama Said to Put Personal Push Behind EPA Emission Rules,” Bloomberg, 5/15/14)

NRDC’s Goal Was To “Rehabilitate” The Clean Air Act So That It Could Be Used To Regulate Power Plant Emissions. “Dan Lashof, NRDC's climate and clean air program director, said the group wrote the plan to "rehabilitate the reputation of the Clean Air Act," which critics say will raise electricity prices, "and show there is a flexible way to regulate carbon." (Valerie Volcovici, “Stakeholders brace for White House move on power plant emissions,” Reuters, 6/23/13)

Chamber of Commerce Analysis On The Costs Of EPA Regulations

New Chamber Of Commerce Analysis Says EPA Regulations Will Cost $50 Billion Annually. “The country’s largest business lobby warned Wednesday that the Obama administration’s proposal to impose new limits on greenhouse gas emissions from power plants could eclipse $50 billion in annual costs through 2030. (Benjamin Goad, “Chamber: Costs of EPA climate rule could top $50 billion a year,” The Hill, 5/28/14)

 Up To 224,000 Jobs Will Be Lost Through 2030. “The Chamber’s study says as many as 224,000 jobs would be eliminated annually through 2030 under the proposal. (Benjamin Goad, “Chamber: Costs of EPA climate rule could top $50 billion a year,” The Hill, 5/28/14)

Consumers Would Pay An “Estimated $289 Billion More For Electricity”, While Disposable Income Will Drop By $586 Billion. “Consumers would also have to pay an estimated $289 billion more for electricity and their disposable income would decrease by $586 billion, according to the report.” (Benjamin Goad, “Chamber: Costs of EPA climate rule could top $50 billion a year,” The Hill, 5/28/14)

 Background On The White House and EPA’s New Carbon Regulations

“Coal… Would Bear The Heaviest Burden” Under New EPA Regulations. “The rule, set to become final in mid-2015, would apply to the nation’s thousands of coal and natural gas-fired power plants. But coal — the cheapest, dirtiest and most abundant fossil fuel — would bear the heaviest burden. (Erica Martinson, “President Obama’s big carbon crackdown readies for launch,” Politico, 5/16/14)

 “Greatest” Impact Could Be Felt In “States Like Kentucky”. That means its impact could be greatest in states like Kentucky, a major coal producer that gets as much as 90 percent of its power from the fuel — and which as recently as 2010 had the country’s lowest electricity prices.” (Erica Martinson, “President Obama’s big carbon crackdown readies for launch,” Politico, 5/16/14)

The New Regulations Would Shift The Power Industry Away From Coal-Burning Plants. “The move could produce a dramatic makeover of the power industry, shifting it away from coal-burning plants toward natural gas, solar and wind. While this is the big move environmentalists have been yearning for, it also has major political implications in November for a president already under fire for what the GOP is branding a job-killing “war on coal” and promises to be an election issue in energy-producing states such as West Virginia, Kentucky and Louisiana. (Erica Martinson, “President Obama’s big carbon crackdown readies for launch,” Politico, 5/16/14)

Existing Power Plants Are The Target Of The EPA’s New Regulations. “The Environmental Protection Agency’s proposed rule is aimed at scaling back carbon emissions from existing power plants, the nation’s largest source of greenhouse gases. It’s scheduled for a public rollout June 2, after months of efforts by the administration to publicize the mounting scientific evidence that rising seas, melting glaciers and worsening storms pose a danger to human society.” (Erica Martinson, “President Obama’s big carbon crackdown readies for launch,” Politico, 5/16/14)

Coal Consumers Would Be The “Hardest Hit” By These New Regulations. “But no matter how much flexibility the EPA’s rule offers, somebody will have to pay for complying with it — and again, coal customers would feel the biggest hit. Utilities heavy on coal-fired power would be the ones paying for credits in any carbon-trading scheme, while utilities with lots of gas, nuclear and wind power would have credits to sell. (Erica Martinson, “President Obama’s big carbon crackdown readies for launch,”Politico, 5/16/14)

Do you like this post?