The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) on September 14 announced the repeal of carbon emission limits on coal- and gas-fired power plants, marking a significant rollback of climate regulations implemented under the Biden administration. The move aims to eliminate federal greenhouse gas restrictions on the power sector, which is the second-largest source of emissions in the country, and seeks to prevent future administrations from imposing similar regulations. The announcement was made during a Group of 20 energy ministers meeting in Houston, Texas.
EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin stated that the rollback will ease regulatory burdens, allowing the construction of new power plants needed to meet surging electricity demand, including from energy-intensive sectors such as artificial intelligence data centers. He criticized prior administrations for waging a “war on coal” that led to the premature closure of coal plants and asserted that greenhouse gas emissions from power plants have “no material impact on global climate change.” The agency projects that this deregulatory approach will save the power industry approximately $370 million in direct compliance costs.
However, environmentalists, health experts, and several legal authorities strongly dispute the EPA’s rationale. They emphasize that electricity generation accounts for nearly a quarter of the nation’s carbon pollution and that the U.S. power sector, if treated as a country, would rank as the world’s fifth-largest carbon emitter after China, the United States, India, and Russia. Critics argue that removing emission limits threatens public health and environmental safety, potentially worsening global warming and exacerbating extreme weather events such as heatwaves, wildfires, and storms.
The Obama and Biden administrations had put forth regulations requiring power plants to install technologies to capture and store carbon emissions or transition to cleaner energy sources. The Biden-era rules, finalized in 2024, were projected to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 1 billion metric tons by 2047, along with delivering $370 billion in net benefits, including preventing thousands of premature deaths, asthma attacks, and other health issues by significantly improving air quality.
In stark contrast, under the current EPA administration, the agency no longer includes public health benefits in its cost-benefit analyses, focusing solely on the financial costs of compliance to businesses. The EPA also rescinded a 2009 endangerment finding that recognized greenhouse gases as a threat to human health and the environment, citing a Supreme Court ruling as justification.
Industry advocates, including coal sector representatives, have welcomed the rollback, viewing the Biden-era regulations as economically prohibitive and harmful to energy production. Coal usage in the U.S. has declined markedly over recent decades, partly due to the higher costs relative to natural gas and renewable energy sources. Nonetheless, officials have underscored the importance of securing reliable baseload energy supply as demand rises.
The repeal faces immediate legal challenges from environmental groups and Democratic-led states, who argue that the EPA’s decision neglects scientific consensus and public health concerns. This latest action is part of a prolonged legal and regulatory struggle over controlling emissions from the power sector. Past efforts, such as the Clean Power Plan under Obama, were blocked by the Supreme Court, which limited the EPA’s authority to shape nationwide shifts in energy generation.
As the legal battle unfolds, power plants remain regulated differently at the state level, with some states maintaining stricter emissions standards despite the federal rollback. The future of U.S. climate policy, especially regarding power sector emissions, remains uncertain amid contrasting views on balancing environmental protection with energy development.