Washington Post: EPA rules cumbersome and expensive.

A Washington Post (8/25) editorial that is critical of Congress for not being proactive about passing environmental policies in response to climate change argues that President Obama has “filled the policy void with executive actions designed to cut greenhouse emissions” through rules by the EPA. The Post characterizes the rules as “a cumbersome and expensive way to slash emissions.” It suggests that “industry may press for more efficient policies that sting companies and consumers less,” and the Post says they will be adding their voice to the debate to point out strategies that work better and explain why the EPA’s efforts “are not ideal.”

NAM Urges EPA To Step Back From Emissions Regulations. The NAM’s Shopfloor (8/26) blog post says that the Washington Post editorial “could do worse” than to call the new regulations “cumbersome” and “expensive.” These words were “repeatedly heard” from the industries to be affected by the regulations during hearings on the rule in July. The blog also notes the likelihood of “dramatic” energy price increases as one reason manufacturers find it hard to support the policy – “particularly when foreign competitors aren’t paying” similar prices and are “more than offsetting” US reductions in emissions. The posting also notes “troubling…uncertainty and questions” about the new regulation’s legal basis, as well as the need for uninterrupted electricity. The blog finishes by saying “it’s time for the EPA to take a step back…for the Administration to remove the arbitrary deadlines,” and “to explore better ways” to establish our nation’s environmental and energy policies.