[Congressional Record Volume 170, Number 99 (Wednesday, June 12, 2024)]
[Senate]
[Pages S4038-S4039]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]



                           Energy Regulation

  Mr. HOEVEN. Madam President, I join my colleagues today to discuss 
the Biden administration's onslaught of energy regulations that will 
make electricity more expensive and less reliable for homes and 
businesses across the country.
  In April, the Environmental Protection Agency finalized four new 
regulations specifically targeting our coal-fired electric 
powerplants--certainly the coal-fired powerplants in my State of North 
Dakota--including an expensive, unachievable new mercury and air toxics 
standards, or MATS, rule, despite the EPA's own regulatory analysis--
their own regulatory analysis--stating that the previous rule was 
adequately protecting public health; the Clean Power Plan 2.0--so-
called Clean Power Plan 2.0--requiring existing coal-fired and new gas-
fired plants to reduce CO2 emissions by 90 percent when the 
technology is not yet commercially viable. They can't do it. That just 
puts them out of business, meaning less baseload electricity.
  And also they put forth a new coal ash management rule and water 
discharge rule, imposing costly, unachievable requirements on power 
generators, all at a time when we need more electricity.
  Now, the Biden administration's regulatory blizzard comes at a time 
when the North American Electric Reliability Corporation, or NERC, 
continues to raise concerns about elevated risks of blackouts and 
brownouts.
  The Presiding Officer comes from a State where you know how important 
it is, in these really hot days--100-plus degrees--that we have power 
to power people's air-conditioning. It can be a life-threatening 
situation if we don't.
  Further, multiple independent grid operators are warning that EPA's 
power sector rules will further threaten reliability. We need this 
baseload for reliability of the grid nationwide. That includes the 
Southwest Power Pool, which covers part of my State of North Dakota, 
which stated that it, meaning the Southwest Power Pool, ``remains 
concerned . . . about the impact the Final Rule''--the findings of 
these final rules--``may have on the region's ability to maintain 
resource adequacy and ensure reliability.''
  Again, this is about that baseload electricity that we need for 
stability and reliability of the entire grid nationwide.
  The PJM Interconnection, which serves 65 million Americans, noted 
that ``the Final Rule may work to drive premature retirement of coal 
units that provide essential reliability services and dissuade new gas 
resources from coming online.'' Again, less power when we need more.
  ERCOT, covering Texas, stated that EPA's rule poses an unacceptable 
risk to the reliability of the ERCOT system.
  So, in all cases, these are examples where, across the country, the 
very institutions required to make sure that that grid is stable, the 
baseload power is there on the hottest day or the coldest day for 
reliability, they are sounding the warnings--very clear. They are 
sounding the warnings.
  These regulations will drive up the cost of operations and force 
powerplants to prematurely close. This approach is in direct conflict 
with our Nation's energy reality. We need more energy, not less. 
Multiple forecasts show that electricity demand is projected to rise in 
the coming years as much as 27 percent in some parts of the country. 
Fast-growing areas, again, like the Presiding Officer's State, probably 
are going to see that 27 percent and maybe more as a function not only 
of growth but the fact that we are using more electricity in so many 
ways.
  Much of the demand is coming from things like data centers, for 
example, that support cloud computing and artificial intelligence. 
Dispatchable resources like coal, gas, and nuclear powerplants remain 
critically important to meet demand, precisely because of their ability 
to operate regardless of weather conditions.
  That is why, in North Dakota, we have been working for over a decade 
to crack the code on carbon capture technologies, allowing us to 
continue leveraging over 700 years of fuel supply in the form of coal 
supplies with the best environmental stewardship. We have worked to 
bring regulatory certainty, and, as a result, our State became the 
first one to be granted regulatory primacy for class VI wells to ensure 
that CO2 is safely and securely stored below the surface. 
Wyoming and Louisiana are the only other States in the Nation that also 
have this authority.
  We also recently secured $350 million in a demonstration grant from 
the Department of Energy to advance Project Tundra, which will enable 
the coal-fired Milton R. Young facility to capture and store 4 million 
metric tons of CO2 per year.
  We also have proven that we can lead the way in preducing 
SOX, NOX--sulfur oxides, nitrous oxides--and 
mercury emissions, and now we are working to lead the way forward on 
CO2.
  However, the Biden administration's regulations are adding these 
costly regulatory burdens at the very time we are working to deploy 
these new technologies. So think about it. Think about it. We are 
deploying these new technologies to produce more energy more reliably, 
baseload electricity that will stabilize the grid; and we are putting 
new technologies on that will enhance our ability to reduce emissions--
not only SOX, NOX, and mercury, but 
CO2 as well. But the regulations the administration is 
bringing forward are going to impede our ability to do exactly that: 
produce more energy more cost-effectively, more dependably--right--with 
better environmental standards.
  And that means not only deploying those technologies here, but then 
other places around the world will follow our lead on this. I mean, 
that is the solution, and it is being impeded by these regulations that 
go so far that they prevent the industry from deploying the new 
technology. That makes no sense. That is not common sense. That is not 
the way to solve a problem.

  So, again, Congress needs to push back against the EPA's regulations 
that go too far, undermining the reliability and affordability of the 
grid.
  I am working with 12 of my Senate colleagues on a congressional 
review resolution of disapproval to overturn the MATS rules, and we 
will have CRAs to overturn other of these rules as well. For example, 
Senator Capito is leading the effort to overturn the Clean Power Plan 
2.0 rule, and Senator Mullin has also got a CRA to overturn the EPA's 
coal ash rule.
  Our Nation is a global energy powerhouse. We have vast resources with 
its coal, oil, natural gas--many different sources, many different 
types of energy. We need to use them all. And we have the best 
environmental standards in the world. We lead in terms of those 
technologies and, again, environmental standards. It only makes sense, 
for all those reasons as well as national security reasons, to produce 
that energy here at home rather than forfeit that energy production to 
other parts of the world that pose either a security threat to us or, 
at the same time,

[[Page S4039]]

produce energy with vastly inferior environmental standards. Again, 
common sense.
  Blackouts and brownouts are simply unacceptable in an energy-rich 
nation such as ours. And, again, it is about global competitiveness. 
Almost everything we do requires energy. If we are going to compete in 
a global economy, we need low-cost, dependable energy so that we can 
outcompete the rest of the world.
  Instead of overregulation and Green New Deal-style mandates, we need 
to take the handcuffs off our energy producers, and we need to allow 
American ingenuity to continue to do what they can do better than 
anyone else in the world: produce more energy more cost-effectively, 
more dependably, with the best environmental standards. That is the 
right approach--not an approach of overregulation that handcuffs our 
energy producers.
  With that, I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Nebraska.