美国新鲜出炉的《清洁电力计划》全览（英文版）

 The final rule also gives states the option to work with other states on multi-state approaches, including emissions trading, that allow their power plants to integrate their interconnected operations within their operating systems and their opportunities to address carbon pollution.

 The flexibility of the rule allows states to reduce costs to consumers, minimize stranded assets and spur private investments in renewable energy and energy efficiency technologies and businesses.

 States can tailor their plans to meet their respective energy, environmental and economic needs and goals, and those of their local communities by:

 relying on a diverse set of energy resources;

 protecting electric system reliability;

 providing affordable electricity; and

 recognizing investments that states and power companies are already making.

EMISSIONS TRADING

 One cost-effective way that states can meet their goals is emissions trading, through which affected power plants may meet their emission standards via emission rate credits (for a rate-based standard) or allowances (for a mass-based standard).

 Trading is a proven approach to address pollution and provides states and affected plants with another mechanism to achieve their emission standards. Emission trading is a market-based policy tool that s a financial incentive to reduce emissions where the costs of doing so are the lowest and clean energy investment enjoys the highest leverage.

 Market-based approaches are generally recognized as having the following benefits:

o Reduce the cost of compliance

o Create incentives for early reduction

o Create incentives for emission reductions beyond those required

o Promote innovation, and

o Increase flexibility and ensure reliability

 In addition to including mass-based state goals to clear the path for mass-based trading plans, the final rule gives states the opportunity to design state rate-based or mass-based plans that will make their units “trading ready,” allowing individual power plants to use out-of-state reductions – in the form of credits or allowances, depending on the plan type – to achieve required CO2 reductions, without the need for up-front interstate agreements.

 EPA is committed to supporting states in the tracking of emissions, as well as tracking allowances and credits, to help implement multi-state trading or other approaches.

RELIABILITY ASSURANCE

 The final rule has several features that reflect EPA’s commitment to ensuring that compliance with the final rule does not interfere with the industry’s ability to maintain the reliability of the nation’s electricity supply:

o A long compliance period, and phased-in reduction requirements, providing sufficient time and flexibility for the planning and investment needed to maintain system reliability.

o A basic design that allows states and affected EGUs flexibility to include a large variety of approaches and measures to achieve the environmental goals in a way that is tailored to each state’s and utility’s energy resources and policies, including trading within and between states, and other multi-state approaches that support electric system reliability.

o A requirement that each state demonstrate in its final plan that it has considered reliability issues in developing its plan.

o A mechanism for a state to seek a revision to its plan in case unanticipated or significant reliability challenges arise.

o A reliability safety valve to address situations where, in the wake of an unanticipated event or other extraordinary circumstances, an affected power plant must provide reliability-critical generation notwithstanding CO2 emissions constraints that would otherwise apply.

 In addition to the measures outlined in the rule EPA, the Department of Energy (DOE) and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) are coordinating efforts to monitor the implementation of the final rule to help preserve continued reliable electricity generation and transmission.