After Supreme Court Ruling, Kentucky Will Delay Outreach On Carbon Plan

In a surprise procedural decision yesterday, the U.S. Supreme Court put the Obama administration’s Clean Power Plan on pause while a lower court reviews it.

On Feb. 9, the U.S. Supreme Court granted a request to delay enforcement of the U.S. EPA’s Clean Power Plan until legal challenges are resolved. This is a major victory for North Dakota and the hard working men and women employed in our state’s energy sector.

The states claim that the Obama administration seeks via the emissions controls to shut down as many as 50 coal-fired power plants.

“The harm is that the fossil fuel industry has held up action on the climate change for 20 years”, he said.

Democratic Gov. John Hickenlooper sees the Clean Power Plan as a cornerstone of the state’s climate agenda. On Jan. 21, the Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet joined with other states and stakeholders to submit comments to the EPA regarding the Federal Plan Requirements for Greenhouse Gas Emissions and implementation of the Clean Power Plan. “I think at the end of the day, the Supreme Court has indicated that we’re going to win on the merits, as well”. But no matter the outcome, he says the U.S.is already addressing climate change as utilities close old coal burning plants and expand renewable energy. “In blocking the CPP’s implementation, SCOTUS has granted us time to continue our ongoing fight to protect American jobs and dismantle the Obama EPA’s far-left liberal plan”.

“We continue to believe that the Clean Power Plan could negatively impact reliability and affordability of electricity in the state of Georgia and are pleased with the court’s decision”, said Georgia Power spokesman Jacob Hawkins.

“Ordinarily, regulations issued by government agencies begin to take effect even while legal challenges continue in court”. In a split decision, the US’s highest court issued a stay while lawsuits against the plan proceed.

“As a not for profit electric cooperative, obviously if there is an additional cost, that is a burden we do not want to put on the consumers unless we absolutely have to”, Soderberg says.