COLSTRIP, Mont. (AP) — Actions by President Joe Biden’s administration that could hasten closures of heavily polluting coal power plants and the mines that supply them are reviving Republican rhetoric about a so-called “war on coal” ahead of the November election.

The front line in the political battle over the fuel is in the Powder River Basin of Wyoming and Montana, a sparsely populated section of the Great Plains with the nation’s largest coal mines. It’s also home to a massive power plant in Colstrip, Montana, that emits more toxic air pollutants such as lead and arsenic than any other U.S. facility of its kind, according to the Environmental Protection Agency.

The EPA last month finalized a suite of rules that could force the Colstrip Generating Station to shut down or spend an estimated $400 million to clean up its emissions within the next several years. Another proposal, from the U.S. Interior Department, would end new leasing of taxpayer-owned coal reserves in the Powder River Basin, clouding the future of mines including Westmoreland Mining’s Rosebud Mine that provides about 6 million tons of fuel annually for Colstrip.

Eight years ago during his first White House run, Donald Trump stoked populist anger against government regulation by highlighting anti-coal measures taken under former President Barack Obama. The latest moves against coal have teed up the issue again for Republicans seeking to unseat Biden in the November election. Some coal-state Democrats also raised concerns.

“This onslaught of new rules is going to kill jobs and will kill communities like Colstrip,” Montana Republican Sen. Steve Daines said during a visit to Rosebud Mine this week with Republican Gov. Greg Gianforte. “What will change this outcome is an election and a new administration.”

U.S. coal consumption dropped precipitously over the past decade as cheap natural gas and renewables expanded. Yet coal’s political potency endures as detractors try to further curb burning of the fuel that’s a major contributor to climate change and air pollution.

It remains an economic mainstay in communities such as Colstrip, generating jobs where workers can earn $100,000 annually, according to union officials.

The Biden administration defended the latest restrictions on coal as necessary to reduce harmful pollutants, improve public health and address court rulings over climate change.

A Biden campaign representative noted that coal’s decline continued during Trump’s presidency.

“There is no war on coal, there is only a fight for our energy future,” campaign spokesperson James Singer said. “Under President Biden, the United States is closer to energy independence than we have been in decades.”

Even with the ban on new coal leases, companies already hold leases on more than 4 billion tons of coal on taxpayer-owned lands. And administration officials say that’s enough to sustain mining for decades.

Supporters said the crackdown on pollution from coal plants was long overdue. Its origins trace to 1990 amendments to the Clean Air Act that directed the EPA to set standards for pollution reduction technologies.

Dr. Robert Merchant, a pulmonologist from Billings, Montana, said research data is clear that pollution from Colstrip and other plants is linked to medical problems including cancers, developmental delays in children and heart attacks.

“The problem with Colstrip or any large industry like that is they’re very good at understanding the economics as it impacts their balance sheets and bottom line,” Merchant said. “Unfortunately, the health effects are not appearing on their bottom line.”

Representatives of the Northern Cheyenne Tribe had urged the Biden administration to adopt the pollution rules to protect air quality on their reservation just south of Colstrip.

The plant opened in the mid-1970s and was later expanded. It towers over Colstrip, a town of about 2,000 people. It’s linked to the Rosebud Mine by miles of conveyor belts that transport a steady supply of coal to the 1,480 megawatt plant, where it is burned to generate electricity for distribution across the state.

Brian Bird, president of Colstrip co-owner NorthWestern Energy, said the characterization of Colstrip by EPA Administrator Michael Regan during Congressional hearings as the “highest emitter in the country” was deceptive because of the plant’s size — one of the largest coal plants west of the Mississippi River. Bird said Colstrip was “in the middle of the pack” in terms of the amount of pollution per megawatt of power generated.

Some Democrats said federal agencies were moving too fast and too aggressively against coal.

Montana Democratic Sen. Jon Tester said the EPA rules “missed the mark” since it could cost hundreds of millions of dollars for Colstrip to come into compliance. In West Virginia — the second largest coal producer behind Wyoming — Sen. Joe Manchin accused Biden of trying to “score short-term political points” by issuing the new rules in an election year.

Manchin announced Friday that he was leaving the Democratic party and registering as an independent, citing the “partisan extremism” of the two major political parties.

Tester is considered one of the most vulnerable Democrats in the Senate heading into the election, with Republicans needing to pick up just two seats to retake control of the chamber.

His Republican challenger, Tim Sheehy, railed against the “Biden Tester climate cult” following announcement of the ban on new coal leases. Tester spokesperson Eli Cousin said the lawmaker was still reviewing the administration’s proposal.

Manchin is not seeking reelection when his term ends in January. Republican Gov. Jim Justice is running for the seat, and the EPA rules could help push voters into his corner as he faces Democrat Glenn Elliott, the mayor of Wheeling, West Virginia.

Elliott has advocated for more green energy in West Virginia but hasn’t commented on the EPA rules.

EPA officials pledged to work with the Colstrip plant’s owners “to help them find a path forward” in response to concerns from by Tester and other lawmakers. Agency officials said 93% of coal-fired plants had shown they could comply with the new air pollution standards.

“We gave plants the maximum amount of time to comply with the standards we are allowed to under the Clean Air Act — three years plus the possibility of a one-year extension,” EPA spokesperson Shayla Powell said in a statement.

___

Associated Press reporters Matthew Daly in Washington and Leah Willingham in Charleston, West Virginia, contributed to this story.

NASHVILLE, Tenn. (AP) — The nation’s largest public utility is moving ahead with a plan for a new natural gas plant in Tennessee despite warnings that its environmental review of the project doesn’t comply with federal law. The Tennessee Valley Authority announced in April that it would replace the aging coal-burning Kingston Fossil Plant with gas amid growing calls for the agency’s new board of directors to invest in renewables.

The board, with six of nine members appointed by President Biden, is expected to meet on Thursday in Nashville, a day after a planned protest by a coalition of environmental groups demanding the utility stop investing in fossil fuels.

Decommissioning the Kingston plant, the site of a massive 2008 coal ash spill, is part of TVA’s overall plan to reduce its reliance on coal. In analyzing alternatives to replace the plant, the utility considered either a new 1,500-megawatt gas plant or 1,500 megawatts of solar combined with 2,200 megawatts of battery storage. TVA concluded that a 2027 deadline for retiring the current plant does not give it enough time to develop the renewables alternative.

The Environmental Protection Agency asked the utility in a March 25 letter to redo several aspects of its analysis, citing “numerous” concerns with the plan to install new gas turbines. Among other things, the EPA accused the utility of defining the Kingston project so narrowly that only its predetermined choice of a new gas plant would meet the parameters, making the evaluation process a “foreordained formality.” EPA said the utility did not adequately explain the need for the 2027 closure or look at possible alternatives.

The EPA said the environmental review does not meet the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act, which requires federal agencies like the Tennessee Valley Authority to assess the environmental impact of proposed actions before making a decision.

TVA declined to follow the Environmental Protection Agency’s suggestion for a do-over. It decided in April to forge ahead with gas — continuing to follow a plan of action that the EPA says fails to consider recent changes in the energy sector, including falling prices for renewables, billions of federal dollars for clean energy projects, and ever stricter environmental regulations. The corporation remains off track to meet the Biden administration’s goal of eliminating carbon pollution from power plants by 2035 to try to limit the effects of climate change.

The utility said in a statement that “we met with EPA following the letter and addressed their concerns.” EPA, meanwhile, maintained in an email to The Associated Press that its request that TVA revise its environmental impact statement still stands.

Dennis Wamsted, an energy analyst at the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis, said even with TVA’s 2027 deadline, “They could build twice the amount of solar that they say they need and twice the amount of battery storage they say they need.”

Other utilities are taking advantage of price drops, technical improvements and government incentives to build out solar, including in Texas and Florida.

By 2030, Florida Power and Light expects solar to account for close to 40% of its generation, Wamsted said.

“This is a big utility with, you know, the same daily responsibilities as TVA,” he said. “And they are building out solar as fast as they can.”

TVA provides power to 10 million people across seven Southern states. Florida Power and Light serves over 12 million people in that state.

Even if solar doesn’t produce power 24 hours per day, the amount of energy it does produce is knowable and can be planned for, Wamsted said. It can also be paired with batteries that store excess energy during the day to release back to the grid at night. That is already happening on a large scale in California where batteries are providing more than 20% of the power in the system on many evenings, he said.

In Wamsted’s view, many utilities resist the transition to renewables primarily because they are unfamiliar.

He points to an area called the Southwest Power Pool that runs from Oklahoma to Canada and now sees days where 60% or 70% of the system is wind-powered. In the late 2000s, he spoke to grid operators there who were afraid to go above 5% or 10% because they had never done it before, he said.

TVA’s Kingston project is not its first clash with the EPA over gas. The environmental regulator made many of the same criticisms a year ago when the utility decided to build a new 1,450-megawatt natural gas plant at its coal-burning Cumberland Fossil Plant. The Sierra Club and other groups are suing over that decision as well as an earlier one to install gas turbines at a retired coal plant in New Johnsonville. Both lawsuits claim that TVA’s environmental reviews are perfunctory, in violation of the law — similar to the EPA’s criticism of the Kingston plant.

Democratic Sen. Ed Markey, of Massachusetts, a frequent TVA critic, said in a statement to The Associated Press that the corporation should listen to the EPA.

“The National Environmental Policy Act isn’t optional — it’s the bedrock of our environmental protection and community engagement laws,” he said.

Although TVA has not embraced renewables, the utility still says a majority of its energy is carbon-free because 42% comes from nuclear and another 9% is from hydropower. Purchased wind and solar make up another 4% of its energy portfolio. The utility currently produces 1 megawatt of its own solar and has 20 megawatts of battery storage. It estimates that the new gas plant will produce 1.68 million tons (1.52 million metric tons) of greenhouse gases a year, noting that that is a steep decline from Kingston’s current emissions.

Nationally, coal provided about 16% of U.S. electricity last year, down from about 45% in 2010. Natural gas provides about 43% of U.S. electricity, with the remainder from nuclear energy and renewables such as wind, solar and hydropower.

The Tennessee Valley Authority has said it intends to build 10,000 megawatts of solar by 2035. Wamsted contends that is too far in the future.

“It should be, ‘We’re going to build as much solar as we possibly can now,’ because it’s now that we really need to worry about,” he said. “We don’t need to worry about 10 years from now or 15 years from now.”

WASHINGTON (AP) — The United States on May 1 imposed new sanctions on hundreds of companies and people tied to Russia’s weapons development program, more than a dozen Chinese entities accused of helping Moscow find workarounds to earlier penalties, and individuals linked to the death of Kremlin opposition leader Alexei Navalny.

The actions by the departments of Treasury and State target Russia’s military-industrial base, chemical weapons programs and people and companies in third countries that help Russia acquire weapons components as its invasion of Ukraine has entered its third year

Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said the action “will further disrupt and degrade Russia’s war efforts by going after its military industrial base and the evasion networks that help supply it.”

The Senate, meanwhile, gave final approval to legislation barring imports of Russian uranium, boosting U.S. efforts to disrupt Russia’s war in Ukraine. Democratic President Joe Biden is expected to sign the bill into law.

About 12% of the uranium used to produce electricity at U.S. nuclear power plants is imported from Russia, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

A spokesperson for the National Security Council said Wednesday that Biden shares lawmakers’ concerns about U.S. reliance on Russia for low-enriched uranium to support its domestic nuclear fleet.

Included in the administration’s announcement are importers of cotton cellulose and nitrocellulose, which are used to produce gunpowder, rocket propellants and other explosives. The penalties also target Russian government entities and people tied to Russia’s chemical and biological weapons programs, companies related to Russia’s natural gas construction projects and three workers at the penal colony where Navalny died.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has railed against earlier rounds of U.S. and Western penalties, claiming they are “illegitimate sanctions” on his country.

A group of 16 targets in China and Hong Kong, most of which are related to Russian procurement workarounds, are named by the Biden administration.

Yellen traveled to Guangzhou and Beijing last month to warn Chinese officials that they “must not provide material support for Russia’s war and that they will face significant consequences if they do.”

China has said it is not providing Russia with arms or military assistance, although Beijing has maintained robust economic connections with Moscow, alongside India and other countries, as the West imposes sanctions.

Companies in China, Azerbaijan, Belgium, Slovakia, Turkey and the United Arab Emirates were accused of helping Russia acquire technology and equipment from abroad. The penalties aim to block them from using the U.S. financial system and bar American citizens from dealing with them.

Biden last week said he would immediately rush badly needed weaponry to Ukraine as he signed into law a $95 billion war aid measure that also included assistance for Israel, Taiwan and other global hot spots.

The upcoming uranium ban is also expected to impact Russian revenues by at least $1 billion. The U.S. banned Russian oil imports after Russia invaded Ukraine in early 2022 but did not against uranium, despite frequent calls to do so by U.S. lawmakers in both parties.

Wyoming Sen. John Barrasso, the top Republican on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, called the import ban “a tremendous victory” and said it “will help defund Russia’s war machine, revive American uranium production and jumpstart investments in America’s nuclear fuel supply chain.”

“Wyoming has the uranium to replace Russian imports, and we’re ready to use it,” Barrasso added.
West Virginia Sen. Joe Manchin, a Democrat who heads that Senate committee, said it was “unconscionable” for the U.S. to help make it possible for Putin to “finance his unlawful war against Ukraine” through U.S. reliance on Russian uranium.

Besides the import ban, the legislation frees up $2.7 billion in previously authorized funding to ramp up domestic uranium production.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Environmental Protection Agency said Thursday it is delaying planned rules to curb emissions from existing natural gas plants that release harmful air pollutants and contribute to global warming.

The agency said it is still on track to finalize rules for coal-fired power plants and new gas plants that have not come online, a key step to slow planet-warming pollution from the power sector, the nation’s second-largest contributor to climate change.

But in a turnaround from previous plans, the agency said it will review standards for existing gas plants and expand the rules to include more pollutants. The change came after complaints from environmental justice groups, who said the earlier plan allowed too much toxic air pollution which disproportionately harms low-income neighborhoods near power plants, refineries and other industrial sites.

“As EPA works towards final standards to cut climate pollution from existing coal and new gas-fired power plants later this spring, the agency is taking a new, comprehensive approach to cover the entire fleet of natural gas-fired turbines, as well as cover more pollutants,” EPA Administrator Michael Regan said in a statement.

He called the new plan a “stronger, more durable approach” that will achieve greater emissions reductions than the current proposal. It also will better protect vulnerable frontline communities suffering from toxic air pollution caused by power plants and other industrial sites, Regan said.

Still, the plan was not universally welcomed by environmentalists, who said the new approach will likely push rules for existing gas plants past the November presidential election.

“We are extremely disappointed in EPA’s decision to delay finalizing carbon pollution standards for existing gas plants, which make up a significant portion of carbon emissions in the power sector,” said Frank Sturges, a lawyer for the Clean Air Task Force, an environmental group.

“Greenhouse gas emissions from power plants have gone uncontrolled for far too long, and we have no more time to waste,” he said.

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, a Rhode Island Democrat, called EPA’s decision “inexplicable,” adding: “Making a rule that applies only to coal, which is dying out on its own, and to new gas power plants that are not yet built, is not how we are going to reach climate safety.”

But some environmentalists hailed the decision, saying the new plan would ultimately deliver better results.

“We have always known that the fight for a clean power sector wouldn’t be a quick one,” said Charles Harper of Evergreen Action. “EPA’s first order of business should be finalizing strong and necessary limits on climate pollution from new gas and existing coal plants as quickly as possible.”

“We are glad that EPA is committed to finishing the job with a new rule that covers every gas plant operating in the U.S.,” Harper added.

“Tackling dirty coal plants is one of the single most important moves the president and EPA can make to rein in climate pollution,” said Abigail Dillen, president of Earthjustice. “As utilities propose new fossil gas plants, we absolutely have to get ahead of a big new pollution problem.”

EPA issued a proposed rule in May 2023 that called for drastically curbing greenhouse gas emissions from existing coal and gas-fired plants, as well as future gas plants planned by the power industry. No new coal plant has opened in the U.S. in more than a decade, while dozens of coal-fired plants have closed in recent years in the face of competition from cheaper natural gas. The Biden administration has committed to create a carbon pollution-free power sector by 2035.

The EPA proposal could force power plants to capture smokestack emissions using a technology that has long been promised but is not used widely in the United States.

If finalized, the proposed regulation would mark the first time the federal government has restricted carbon dioxide emissions from existing power plants, which generate about 25% of U.S. greenhouse gas pollution, second only to the transportation sector. The rule also would apply to future electric plants and would avoid up to 617 million metric tons of carbon dioxide through 2042, equivalent to annual emissions of 137 million passenger vehicles, the EPA said.

Almost all coal plants — along with large, frequently used gas-fired plants — would have to cut or capture nearly all their carbon dioxide emissions by 2038, the EPA said. Plants that cannot meet the new standards would be forced to shutter.

Much of the EPA plan is expected to be made final this spring and is likely to be challenged by industry groups and Republican-leaning states. They have accused the Democratic administration of overreach on environmental regulations and warn of a pending reliability crisis for the electric grid. The power plant rule is one of at least a half-dozen EPA rules limiting power plant emissions and wastewater treatment.

The National Mining Association warned of “an onslaught” of government regulation “designed to shut down the coal fleet prematurely″ when the EPA proposal was announced last year.

Regan has denied that the power plant rule is aimed at shutting down the coal sector, but acknowledged last year that, “ we will see some coal retirements.”

Coal provided just over 16% of U.S. electricity in 2023, down from about 45% in 2010, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. Natural gas provided about 43% of U.S. electricity. The remainder comes from nuclear energy and renewables such as wind, solar and hydropower.

Peggy Shepard, co-founder and executive director of WE ACT for Environmental Justice, a New York-based group, said she was pleased that the concerns of environmental justice communities will be factored into EPA’s rulemaking.

“The power sector is one of the top sources of carbon emissions and pollution,” she said. “With this pause to take a deeper dive into developing the most comprehensive and thoughtful rulemaking for existing gas plants, we have an opportunity to do this work correctly and effectively to protect the human and environmental health of the most overburdened, neglected and vulnerable people across the country.”

The EPA’s revised plan was first reported by Bloomberg News.

TOKYO (AP) — A drone small enough to fit in one’s hand flew inside one of the damaged reactors at Japan’s Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant Feb. 28 in hopes it can examine some of the molten fuel debris in areas where earlier robots failed to reach.

Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings also began releasing the fourth batch of the plant’s treated and diluted radioactive wastewater into the sea. The government and TEPCO, the plant’s operator, say the water is safe and the process is being monitored by the International Atomic Energy Agency, but the discharges have faced strong opposition by fishing groups and a Chinese ban on Japanese seafood.

A magnitude 9.0 quake and tsunami in March 2011 destroyed the plant’s power supply and cooling systems, causing three reactors to melt down. The government and TEPCO plan to remove the massive amount of fatally radioactive melted nuclear fuel that remains inside each reactor — a daunting decommissioning process that’s been delayed for years and mired by technical hurdles and a lack of data.

To help on data, a fleet of four drones were set to fly one at a time into the hardest-hit No. 1 reactor’s primary containment vessel. TEPCO plans to probe a new area on Feb. 29.

TEPCO has sent a number of probes — including a crawling robot and an underwater vehicle — inside each reactor but was hindered by debris, high radiation and the inability to navigate through the rubble, though they were able to gather some data. In 2015, the first robot to go inside got stuck on a grate.

The drone flight comes after months of preparations that began in July 2023 at a nearby mock facility.

The drones, each weighing 185 grams (6.5 ounces), are highly maneuverable and their blades hardly stir up dust, making them a popular model for factory safety checks. Each carries a front-loaded high-definition camera to send live video and higher-quality images to an operating room.

In part due to battery life, the drone investigation inside a reactor is limited to a 5-minute flight.
TEPCO officials said they plan to use the new data to develop technology for future probes as well as a process to remove the melted fuel from the reactor. The data will also be used in the investigation of how the 2011 meltdown occurred.

On Feb. 28, two drones inspected the area around the exterior of the main structural support in the vessel, called the pedestal. Based on the images they transmitted, TEPCO officials decided to send the other two in Thursday

The pedestal is directly under the reactor’s core. Officials hope to film the core’s bottom to find out how overheated fuel dripped there in 2011.

About 880 tons of highly radioactive melted nuclear fuel remain inside the three damaged reactors. Critics say the 30- to 40-year cleanup target set by the government and TEPCO is overly optimistic. The damage in each reactor is different, and plans need to accommodate their conditions.

TEPCO’s goal is to remove a small amount of melted debris from the least-damaged No. 2 reactor as a test case by the end of March by using a giant robotic arm. It was forced to delay due to difficulty removing a deposit blocking its entry.

As in the past three rounds of wastewater discharges which started in August, TEPCO plans to release 7,800 metric tons of the treated water through mid-March after diluting it with massive amounts of seawater and sampling it to make sure radioactivity is far below international standards.

China’s Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning on Wednesday accused Japan of risking the whole world with “nuclear-contaminated water” and demanded it stop “this wrongdoing.” Mao urged Japan to cooperate in an independent monitoring system with neighboring countries and other stakeholders.

The Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) last week arrested an individual for allegedly communicating safeguarded information in relation to critical infrastructure.

The individual is accused of “intentionally communicating safeguarded information to a foreign entity or terrorist group knowing or being reckless as to whether the communication would increase the capacity of the foreign entity or terrorist group to harm Canadian interests,” according to a RCMP release from Feb. 16.

Evidence indicates that the individual acted with intent to put critical infrastructure at risk, RCMP said.

Ontario Power Generation said its nuclear stations use sophisticated security technology and intelligence to keep its facilities and communities safe. This includes robust, “defense in depth” security systems to ensure OPG is prepared to pre-empt or respond to any situation.

Immediately upon identifying the information breach, OPG and RCMP implemented measures to “mitigate and manage any further unauthorized disclosure,” OPG said in a statement released Feb. 20.

RCMP is continuing to investigate.

Ohio law enforcement authorities on Monday filed numerous felony charges against two former First Energy executives and a former top utility regulator in what has been called the biggest bribery and money-laundering scandal in Ohio history.

Ohio Attorney General Dave Yost announced scores of felony charges against a former regulator who also has been charged federally, and against two people who haven’t — former top executives for Akron-based FirstEnergy whom the company admitted paid more than $60 million in bribes between 2016 and 2020 in exchange for a $1.3 billion ratepayer bailout.

Charged were Sam Randazzo, former chairman of the Public Utilities Commission. Already facing felony charges in federal court, the state indictment charges him with 22 more, including grand theft, bribery, and money laundering. The indictment accuses him of taking bribes from FirstEnergy from 2010 until just before he became chairman of the commission in 2019.

Also charged were former FirstEnergy CEO Chuck Jones and Vice President Michael Dowling. Between them, they face 22 felony charges similar to those faced by Randazzo.

“This indictment is about more than one piece of legislation,” Yost said Monday. “It is about the hostile capture of a significant portion of Ohio’s state government by deception, betrayal, and dishonesty.”

The state charges that were announced Monday didn’t deal with much of the activity addressed in the federal case. They instead focused on the relationship between Jones, Dowling, and Randazzo between 2010 and early 2019, when they paid him $4.33 million just as he was becoming the state’s top utility regulator.

The House Bill 6 scandal

Back in 2019, former Ohio House Speaker Larry Householder took $61 million in bribes in exchange for legislation to give FirstEnergy a $1 billion bailout, named House Bill 6, all at the expense of the ratepayers.

The scheme was revealed in three main ways — two separate whistleblowers and a phone wiretap.

In March 2023, a jury found Householder and former Ohio Republican Party leader Matt Borges guilty beyond a reasonable doubt for their involvement in the racketeering scheme that left four men guilty and another dead by suicide.

In late June that year, federal judge Timothy Black sentenced Householder to 20 years in prison. Borges got 5 years. The two surviving defendants took plea agreements early on, helping the FBI, and are still awaiting their sentencing. The feds are asking for 0-6 months for them.

Until Monday, only federal indictments had been handed out.

HB 6 mainly benefited FirstEnergy’s struggling nuclear power plants, but those provisions were later repealed. There are aspects of the bill still in place, though.

The Ohio Valley Electric Corporation (OVEC) got a handout from the scheme. It expanded a bailout of the OVEC plants and required Ohioans to pay for two 1950s-era coal plants— one in the Southern area of the state and the other in Indiana. The main beneficiaries of this are American Electric Power Company (AEP), Duke Energy and AES Ohio.

Despite this scandal becoming public years ago, ethics laws in the state have not changed to prevent schemes like this from happening.

There are numerous bipartisan efforts to repeal HB 6 totally and to put forward ethics laws. None are going anywhere, it seems.

Monday’s indictments

AG Yost was joined by Summit County Prosecutor Sherri Bevan Walsh and Sheriff Kandy Fatheree for the announcement Monday.

“The crimes committed by these individuals impacted the pocketbooks of every hard working Ohioan and further shook our faith in the institutions and organizations that we count on to represent us and to provide us with essential services,” Fatheree said. “Today, we take another important step in ensuring that justice is served for these crimes and that those who took advantage of the public’s trust are held accountable.”

FirstEnergy as a company has already admitted in a deferred prosecution agreement to bribing public officials in Ohio, including a $4.3 million bribe to Randazzo. Jones and Dowling allegedly paid this to him.

Randazzo pleaded not guilty to the federal charges against him in December.

The Sustainability Funding Alliance of Ohio and IEU-Ohio Administration Company are also named in the filing. Randazzo controlled each of them, and they were allegedly shell companies created to further his criminal activity.

Reactions

While Monday was probably not the best day for Randazzo, Jones and Dowling, it was a great day for whistleblower Tyler Fehrman.

Fehrman is the Republican operative-turned-FBI informant who is credited with exposing this mass public corruption at the Statehouse — and he is cheering the AG and Summit County for these arrests.

“These guys deserve to have everything taken away from them,” Fehrman said. “They deserve it.”

Borges attempted to bribe Fehrman, and threatened him, to be a part of the scandal — even at one point telling him that if he snitches, Borges would “blow up his house.”

That conversation was actually set up and recorded by the feds. Instead of staying quiet, Fehrman testified, helping the jury to return guilty verdicts in the federal trial.

Fehrman ended up having to change careers and flee the state due to fears of retaliation — and because he was ostracized — but now he gets to watch as the scheme continues to unravel.

“You can hide your actions in the dark for a little bit,” Fehrman said Monday. “But the sun always rises and the truth always comes out. Every time one of these guys gets indicted, especially the people that made it possible for Matt and Larry to have the opportunity to do what they did to me — to see them get in trouble, it’s extremely vindicating.”

He agreed with Yost’s statement that there can be no justice without holding the check-writers and the masterminds accountable.

Case Western Reserve University law professor Mike Benza believes these charges are going to be hard to fight. When asked the best possible scenario for them, other than pleading guilty, he said their best bet could be to argue this is politics as usual.

“It seems that the focus from the defense side is going to be much like the focus from Householder and Borges — this is just how things get done in Columbus,” Benza said. “This is just the normal sausage-making of public policy and it may not be pretty and you may not like it, but this is the reality and it doesn’t equal corruption.”

Clearly, that wasn’t a winning argument in federal court.

Part of the reason why it may have worked so poorly in Black’s federal courtroom is because Householder went against the advice of the vast majority of criminal defense attorneys and decided to testify in his defense.

The now-convicted felon used the bribe money to put himself and his allies into power, demolishing and threatening anyone in his path, as well as paying off credit card debt and renovations to his home in Florida.

Benza believes Randazzo, Jones, and Dowling are facing difficult days ahead.

“Randazzo is probably going to be looking at dying in prison,” Benza responded. “Jones and Dowling are probably in that same boat.”

Ferhman is hoping for more indictments, including high-profile names.

“The clock is ticking for the other people that were involved,” Fehrman said.

He named Gov. Mike DeWine Lt. Gov. Jon Husted as people of interest for him.

DeWine has been complying with a subpoena he received in a civil case connected to the scandal, he said.

FirstEnergy investors are suing for being negatively impacted financially by the scandal. They have subpoenaed documents from DeWine, and they’re scheduling a sworn deposition with Husted.

In a one-on-one interview with the governor, DeWine was asked if he was nervous about the scandal, or, more importantly — if was he worried for Husted. DeWine said no to both.

Randazzo has been named as the mastermind behind HB 6, due to him being one of the creators of it — according to the feds. But DeWine was how he came into power.

DeWine was asked in the same interview if he regretted naming Randazzo the state’s top utility regulator.

“Oh, look, if I knew what I know now, if I knew that — I certainly would not have appointed Sam Randazzo to that position,” DeWine responded.

DeWine said he was the best person for the job, claiming that he wasn’t aware that Randazzo was FirstEnergy’s handpicked man.

“While our office was not privy to the indictment and have not yet reviewed it, the indictment alleges very serious acts,” DeWine’s spokesperson Dan Tierney said Monday afternoon. “Our office has full faith in the criminal justice system to adjudicate these serious allegations in an appropriate manner.”

2023’s Release of New Regulations was the first Mega Session held at POWERGEN. Regulations highlighted in the 90-minute panel included New Source Performance Standards, the Good Neighbor Rule, Effluent Limitation Guidelines, Coal Combustion Residuals and others.

But a majority of the time was spent talking about proposed carbon emission standards for coal-fired plants and new and existing natural gas-fired plants. The technology-based standards, proposed by EPA in May 2023, lean on hydrogen co-firing and carbon capture and sequestration (CCUS) as strategies for decarbonizing these plants.

Nick Hutson, Energy Strategies Group Lead at EPA and one of the Mega Session panelists, said the agency has heard from various groups and stakeholders during the comment period leading up to the final rule being issued.

The comment period ended December 20, with a finalized rule expected in the Spring.

As we’ve reported, the power industry is fractured over EPA’s proposal. Some utility trade groups say the proposal should not be finalized, while others say improvements are needed. Still other utilities have thrown their support behind it. Opposition to the rule often comes with concerns that its implementation would jeopardize reliability.

While emissions reduction is EPA’s primary objective, Hutson said the agency always wants to “make sure that we’re not adding to the problem unnecessarily.”

“We always do modeling to evaluate what is the projected outcome of our policies,” he said.

As the rule is currently proposed, any coal-fired power plant intending to operate past 2040 would have to install a CCS system that captures 90% of its CO2 emissions by 2030. Any large, frequently operating natural gas-fired power plant would have to either install a 90% capture CCS system by 2035 or operate nearly entirely on clean hydrogen by 2038.

Generators that can’t meet the new standards would be forced to retire.

Jordan Flanagan spoke on the panel representing the Institute of Clean Air Companies (ICAC), a trade association representing technology, equipment and service providers in the power sector.

She said the proposed EPA rules offer both opportunities and challenges for ICAC members.

“Our members have a lot of proven technologies that are available right now to deploy commercially,” said Flanagan, Policy and Programs Associate for ICAC. “But they’re also seeing lots of opportunities and challenges for some of the newer concepts posed by the greenhouse gas power plant rule. There’s a lot of uncertainty around it.”

David Triplett, Sr. Mgr. Environmental Policy & Sustainability at Entergy, offered a utility’s perspective on the proposed rules.

He said while the rules are only proposed and are subject to change before being finalized, they are “important additional inputs” that utilities need to factor into their generation planning processes.

“Our sector really is at an inflection point in terms of change with how we’re meeting resource adequacy requirements,” said Triplett.

Entergy is already taking an “all of the above” approach to resource planning, with a goal of 50% carbon reductions from its fleet by 2030 and to be completely net-zero by 2050.

Triplett said Entergy has signed memorandums of understanding with “a number of partners” to include all potential technologies.

“We’re investigating every possible path to find the one that’s going to be most cost effective and effective feasible for our fleet to get to [net-zero],” he said.

Triplett was asked about what he expects to be the most significant challenges in complying with the proposed power plant emission rules.

“With the with the hydrogen and CCS aspects, there’s significant infrastructure that needs to be built out to support those technologies at our generating facilities that doesn’t exist today or exist in a limited extent,” he said.

Triplett added the caveat that if it does happen, “it will happen here first,” speaking on the existing pipelines in the Gulf Coast region.

Regarding other potential compliance considerations, Triplett noted the importance of timing. With multiple proposed power sector regulations expected to be finalized in 2024, he said thoughtful alignment of compliance requirements is critical to ensuring effective utility resource planning, integration of new generation and continued reliable operation of existing generation resources.

For example, Entergy plans to exit coal by 2030, yet coal compliance dates from the EPA come both before and after Entergy’s anticipated coal retirements.

“Our hope is as EPA takes action to finalize these rules, these various dates will become into closer alignment,” said Triplett. “From our perspective, we don’t want to have to dedicate additional capital to units that are going to deactivate in the near to medium term that could otherwise be deployed more productively for new generation.”

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Biden administration released its highly anticipated proposal for doling out billions of dollars in tax credits to hydrogen producers Friday, in a massive effort to build out an industry that some hope can be a cleaner alternative to fossil fueled power.

The U.S. credit is the most generous in the world for hydrogen production, Jesse Jenkins, a professor at Princeton University who has analyzed the U.S. climate law, said last week.

The proposal — which is part of Democrats’ Inflation Reduction Act passed last year — outlines a tiered system to determine which hydrogen producers get the most credits, with cleaner energy projects receiving more, and smaller, but still meaningful credits going to those that use fossil fuel to produce hydrogen.

Administration officials estimate the hydrogen production credits will deliver $140 billion in revenue and 700,000 jobs by 2030 — and will help the U.S. produce 50 million metric tons of hydrogen by 2050.

“That’s equivalent to the amount of energy currently used by every bus, every plane, every train and every ship in the US combined,” Energy Deputy Secretary David M. Turk said on a Thursday call with reporters to preview the proposal.

That may be a useful metric for comparison, but it’s a long way from reality. Buses, planes, trains and ships run on liquid fuels for which a delivery infrastructure exists, and no such system exists to deliver cleanly-made hydrogen to the places where it could most help address climate change. Those include steel, cement and plastics factories.

Hydrogen is being developed around the world as an energy source for sectors of the economy like that which emit massive greenhouse gases, yet are difficult to electrify, such as long-haul transportation and industrial manufacturing. It can be made by splitting water with solar, wind, nuclear or geothermal electricity yielding little if any planet-warming greenhouse gases.

Most hydrogen today is not made this way and does contribute to climate change because it is made from natural gas. About 10 million metric tons of hydrogen is currently produced in the United States each year, primarily for petroleum refining and ammonia production.

As part of the administration’s proposal, firms that produce cleaner hydrogen and meet prevailing wage and registered apprenticeship requirements stand to qualify for a large incentive at $3 per kilogram of hydrogen. Firms that produce hydrogen using fossil fuels get less.

The credit ranges from $.60 to $3 per kilo, depending on whole lifecycle emissions.

One contentious issue in the proposal was how to deal with the fact that clean, electrolyzer hydrogen draws tremendous amounts of electricity. Few want that to mean that more coal or natural gas-fired power plants run extra hours. The guidance addresses this by calling for producers to document their electricity usage through “energy attribute certificates” — which will help determine the credits they qualify for.

Rachel Fakhry, policy director for emerging technologies at the Natural Resources Defense Council called the proposal “a win for the climate, U.S. consumers, and the budding U.S. hydrogen industry.”

But Marty Durbin, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s senior vice president for policy, said the guidance released today “will stunt the growth of a critical industry before it has even begun” and his organization plans to advocate during the public comment process “for the flexibility needed to kickstart investment, create jobs and economic growth, and meet our decarbonization goals.”

He accused the White House of failing to listen to its own experts at the Department of Energy.

The Fuel Cell & Hydrogen Energy Association includes more than 100 members involved in hydrogen production, distribution and use, including vehicle manufacturers, industrial gas companies, renewable developers and nuclear plant operators. Frank Wolak, the association’s president, said it’s important the industry be given time to meet any provisions that are required for the top tier of the credit.

“What we can’t have is is an industry that is stalled because we have imposed requirements that the marketplace is not ready to fulfill,” Wolak said, particularly with the time it takes to bring new renewable resources online.

If the guidance is too restrictive, he said, “you’ll see a much smaller, if not negligible growth in this industry and a failed opportunity to capitalize on the IRA.”

“While we’ve been eagerly awaiting the Administration’s proposal on 45V guidance for the clean hydrogen Production Tax Credit (PTC), we are concerned with the lack of flexibility in the proposed rule and the impact it may have in jump-starting a hydrogen industry at scale,” said Ray Long, President and CEO of the American Council on Renewable Energy (ACORE). “As our analysis with E3 demonstrated, an annual match accounting approach could help unleash America’s nascent clean hydrogen industry and accelerate our energy transition. ACORE will continue to work with the Administration throughout this comment period, and we remain hopeful the final rule ultimately released has the needed flexibility to support the scale and role that hydrogen can play in achieving our decarbonization goals.”

Other industry representatives welcomed the proposal.

Chuck Schmitt, president of SSAB Americas — a supplier of steel plates— said the proposal “supports SSAB’s leadership and innovation in the decarbonization of the steel industry. This clarifying language will help drive new technology investment and create clean energy jobs in the United States.”

A 60-day comment period on the proposal now begins.

Energy Secretary Jennifer M. Granholm said the proposal “will further unprecedented investments in a new, American-led industry as we aim to lead and propel the global clean energy transition.”

Some of the money will flow to regional networks, or “hubs,” of hydrogen producers, consumers and infrastructure that the Biden administration is also trying to kickstart with a $7 billion program. This fall, officials selected clean-energy projects from Pennsylvania to California for the program.

Each project aims to demonstrate integrated carbon capture, transport and storage technologies and infrastructure that can be deployed at power plants. However, the technologies and environments are different. In this case, three novel solvents would be demonstrated and combined with carbon transport and storage in different geological settings.

Funding for the projects – in California, North Dakota and Texas – comes from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law signed in 2021.

The Biden Administration believes the large-scale deployment of carbon capture, transport and storage infrastructure could play a vital role in reducing emissions in the U.S. For more than a decade the federal government has provided financial support to boost the development and use of technologies for capturing CO2 emissions.

But in the last couple of years, legislation has significantly increased annual funding for these efforts. The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, formally known as the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, provides $8.2 billion in advance appropriations for CCS programs over the 2022–2026 period, according to a recent Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report.

Proponents say carbon capture could have a huge role in reducing emissions, while many environmentalists note the technology is far from scale and argue that focusing on it distracts from renewable energy solutions.

According to the CBO report, 15 CCS facilities are currently operating in the U.S. Together, they have the capacity to capture 0.4 percent of the nation’s total annual CO2 emissions.

The report notes an additional 121 CCS facilities are under construction or in development. If all were completed, they would increase the nation’s CCS capacity to 3 percent of current annual CO2 emissions.

Here are the three projects selected for award negotiation: 

Baytown Carbon Capture and Storage Project

The Baytown Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) Project plans to capture CO2 from the Baytown Energy Center, a natural gas combined-cycle plant in Baytown, Texas. The project would use Shell’s CANSOLV solvent to capture CO2, which would be transported through new and existing pipelines and sequestered in storage sites on the Gulf Coast.

Calpine is serving as the lead for the Baytown CCS project and Covestro, an industrial manufacturer of plastics, will serve as the project’s primary power off-taker. Calpine expects the project will capture up to 2 million metric tons of CO2 per year

The project is also considering the use of greywater cooling to minimize freshwater consumption by reusing wastewater, according to DOE.

The 896 MW Baytown Energy Center provides steam and power to the adjacent Covestro chemicals manufacturing facility as well as power to the Texas electric grid.

Calpine said adding post-combustion carbon capture equipment to this facility would reduce the carbon dioxide emissions intensity of two of its three combustion turbines at a design capture rate of 95%.

Calpine has a total of 11 CCS projects in its pipeline.  

In July 2022 the company unveiled a carbon capture demonstration pilot project at its combined-cycle plant in Pittsburg, California. The CCS project at Calpine’s Los Medanos Energy Center will use a chemical solvent developed by ION Clean Energy to bind with carbon dioxide in the plant’s flue gas.

In the case of this pilot, the project will not store the captured carbon and instead release it back into atmosphere. However, in future plants, the CO2 could be pumped and stored underground.

Project Tundra

Project Tundra is a carbon capture system to be developed adjacent to the Milton R. Young Station, a coal-fired plant near Center, North Dakota. The project plans to use Mitsubishi Heavy Industries’ KS-21 solvent to capture CO2, which would be permanently stored in saline geologic formations beneath and surrounding the power plant. The storage site has already been approved for a Class VI well permit.

Project Tundra is being developed by project sponsors which include Minnkota Power Cooperative and TC Energy. The project is expected to capture an annual average of 4 million metric tons of CO2.

Minnkota said it plans to retrofit the coal-fired plant’s 430 MW Unit 2 to capture up to 90% of its CO2 emissions. Unit 2 is a cyclone-fired wet bottom boiler from Babcock & Wilcox.

MHI will collaborate on the CO2 capture facility with Kiewit, which will construct the project.

Project Tundra is receiving up to $350 million.

Sutter Decarbonization Project

The Sutter Decarbonization Project plans to demonstrate and deploy a carbon capture system at the Sutter Energy Center, a 550 MW combined-cycle plant near Yuba City, California. The project would use ION’s ICE-21 solvent to capture the CO2 and sequester it permanently more than a half a mile underground in saline geologic formations.

This project would be the first in the world to deploy an air-cooling system at a carbon capture facility, which will eliminate the use of cooling water and significantly minimize freshwater usage—a critical concern of the local community.

The Sutter Decarbonization Project will receive up to $270 million. Sutter CCUS (a subsidiary of Calpine) is developing the project.  

Funding applicants were required to submit Community Benefits Plans, intended to spur community and labor engagement in carbon management technologies while addressing environmental burdens in partnership with surrounding communities.

DOE estimates that reaching the current administration’s plan for a net-zero emissions economy would require capturing and storing between 400 million and 1.8 billion metric tons of CO2 annually by 2050. The power sector accounts for more than a quarter of U.S. carbon emissions.

According to the CBO report, the future adoption of carbon capture and storage depends on a variety of factors, like changes in the cost to capture CO2, the availability of pipeline networks and storage capacity for transporting and storing CO2, federal and state regulatory decisions and the development of clean energy technologies that could affect the demand for CCS.

DOE said it will host a national briefing on Dec. 18 to share more information about the selected projects. A period of stakeholder engagement will then take place starting in January.