On the recordMarch 5, 2014
I don't know how to oppose this amendment because it doesn't seem to make the underlying bill any worse. The problem is this: The bill requires that, before a new standard for coal-powered plants is set, there has to be six coal-powered plants in this country that are already using this technology; and we have argued: Well, that is not going to happen because no one is going to use the technology if their competitors aren't going to use the technology. And if there is technology outside of this country that is being used successfully, EPA can't rely on that. Mrs. Capps' amendment would have changed that. That is still going to be voted on later. Mrs. Capito's amendment says EPA could consider technologies developed in other countries, but only if those technologies are also being broadly adopted in the United States, as I understand it. Well, in fact, that will lead to the exact same problem as we have in the underlying bill. Under both the amendment and the bill, EPA would still be prevented from proposing a standard based on cleaner coal technologies, such as ultrasupercritical boilers, which can reduce pollution by improving efficiency. That kind of technology is already being used in more than 100 ultracritical coal units generating power in China, but the United States has only installed one. Well, we can't let that one and all the others that are being used in China allow the EPA to set a standard that would require that technology.…





