Comments Support CPS Repeal
The repeal of the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) greenhouse gas emissions standards for fossil fuel-fired electric generating facilities marks a pivotal moment in federal energy policy. In recent comments filed with the EPA, Always On Energy Research (AOER) provided detailed modeling that quantifies the risks posed by these rules and demonstrates the economic and reliability benefits of repeal. Our analysis underscores a simple but critical point: durable energy policy must rest on lawful authority, proven technology, and a commitment to affordability and reliability—not on aspirational mandates that jeopardize both consumers and the grid.
The Biden administration built its Carbon Pollution Standards (CPS) on a faulty foundation. EPA’s own modeling assumed away the true cost of compliance by hiding 90 percent of the price tag in a “baseline” scenario propped up by perpetual subsidies and unrealistic assumptions about wind and solar deployment. The reality is that scenario would produce rolling blackouts across the Midwest, including a modeled 20 percent loss of power during a hot July week in 2040. Families and businesses in MISO—Midcontinent Independent System Operator serving 45 million Americans—could face $2.6 billion in blackout damages in a single year.
By contrast, the Trump administration’s proposal to repeal these rules restores balance and reliability. AOER’s analysis shows that keeping affordable, dispatchable resources like coal and nuclear online, while allowing new natural gas to be built, saves ratepayers more than $560 billion through 2055 and avoids 8.8 million megawatt hours of blackouts valued at $53.6 billion. Even after accounting for EPA’s estimates of increased criteria pollutants, the net benefit to consumers in the MISO region alone is $314.6 billion. In short, repeal means Americans can count on the lights staying on and their bills staying affordable.
Prime Mover Institute
The Prime Mover Institute, a new public interest legal organization, cited AOER in its comments and included our comments as an attachment. PMI emphasizes that EPA has overstepped its statutory authority under the Clean Air Act by attempting to regulate greenhouse gases without a proper pollutant- and source-specific finding.
PMI argues that Section 111 was never intended to serve as a vehicle for global climate regulation, and that the Major Questions Doctrine, reinforced by the Supreme Court in West Virginia v. EPA, bars such sweeping action absent clear congressional authorization. PMI further notes that Congress provided narrow international air pollution authority under Section 115, but that provision also cannot justify EPA’s approach
PMI also underscores the grid reliability consequences of the Biden Carbon Pollution Standards, highlighting AOER’s modeling of blackouts and massive hidden costs in MISO as proof that EPA’s assumptions were not just unrealistic, but dangerous. By placing these issues squarely within a legal and constitutional framework, PMI provides a powerful complement to AOER’s economic and reliability modeling.
Fun Fact: We’re Good!
Six additional groups cited AOER studies in their comments. Two groups also cited Mitch and Isaac, and one cited Amy.