Latest news with #powersector
Bloomberg
09-07-2025
- Business
- Bloomberg
India Gets Serious About Stone-Tainted Coal in Its Supply Chain
India is urging its coal producers to improve fuel quality amid ongoing complaints from the power sector, which sometimes receives shipments that don't meet agreed specifications. The power ministry, which set up a panel to address the issue, proposed measures such as testing coal quality upon arrival to customers, according to people with knowledge of the matter. It also recommended examining multiple layers of the stock pile instead of just the surface level, a method known as auger sampling, to ensure accuracy, the people said, asking not to be named as they are not authorized to speak to media.
Reuters
01-07-2025
- Business
- Reuters
US power pollution climbs on higher coal use
LITTLETON, Colorado, July 1 (Reuters) - U.S. power sector emissions are already at their highest levels in three years, but will likely climb further during the peak summer months as greater use of air conditioning systems drives higher generation from coal and natural gas plants. Over the first five months of 2025, U.S. power sector emissions from the burning of fossil fuels were up 5% to around 640 million metric tons, according to data from Ember. The roughly 32 million ton rise in emissions from the same months a year ago stems mainly from higher use of coal within the U.S. generation mix, as power firms have so far cut back on natural gas use from a year ago after gas prices rallied. However, power firms are starting to dial up generation from both coal and gas in order to meet higher electricity demand from homes and businesses tied to the greater use of power-hungry air conditioners. Those higher generation trends will in turn further lift power sector pollution totals, even as electricity production from clean power sources such as solar farms hit record highs. Over the first half of 2024, U.S. coal-fired power generation climbed by 14% from the same period in 2024 to 14.9 million megawatt hours (MWh), according to data from LSEG. The chief driver behind the rise in coal use was a steep rise in the price of natural gas during the opening quarter of the year, which applied fresh cost pressure on utilities and spurred higher use of cheaper coal within generation mixes. Henry Hub natural gas futures - the main benchmark price for U.S. natural gas - have averaged around $3.53 per million British thermal units (BTU) so far this year, LSEG data shows. That compares to an average of $2.15 per BTU during the first half of 2024. As a result of that over 60% jump in gas costs, gas-fired power production during January to June was down 4.2% to 31.8 million MWh, according to LSEG. The higher proportion of coal power within the U.S. generation mix has had a big impact on overall emissions. Coal-fired power stations emit roughly 950,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide per terawatt hour of electricity production, according to Ember. That compares to around 540,000 tons of CO2 per TWh from gas-fired plants, and explains why overall fossil fuel emissions have climbed much more steeply than fossil fuel power output so far this year. The U.S. has two well-defined peak periods of power use every year - for heating during winter and for cooling during summer. And for more than a decade, power use during the summer has exceeded the power needs over the winter, as air conditioning units require greater volumes of electricity than heating systems. This year that trend looks set to be extended after several parts of the U.S. were gripped by record-setting heat waves during the latter half of June, and are forecast to get further hot spells during July, August and into September. To meet the resulting rise in electricity use, utilities will need greater power output from all production sources, but especially from fossil fuels which are needed to meet the lion's share of system use at night when solar generation stops. And as gas prices remain well above year-ago levels, most power generation systems will continue to prioritize lifting output from relatively cheaper coal rather than costlier gas. That sets the stage for a fresh climb in power emissions, which are already at their highest since 2022 and are primed to hit their annual peak over the coming months as power firms deploy all the power they can muster to keep up with demand. The opinions expressed here are those of the author, a columnist for Reuters. Enjoying this column? Check out Reuters Open Interest (ROI), your essential new source for global financial commentary. ROI delivers thought-provoking, data-driven analysis of everything from swap rates to soybeans. Markets are moving faster than ever. ROI can help you keep up. Follow ROI on LinkedIn, opens new tab and X, opens new tab.
Zawya
20-06-2025
- Business
- Zawya
Senegal and Kenya Top African Development Bank's Electricity Regulatory Index, as Regulators Drive Tangible Reforms
Kenya and Senegal have claimed the top spots in the African Development Bank's 2024 Electricity Regulatory Index (ERI) ( demonstrating exceptional progress in power sector governance and regulatory outcomes. The comprehensive assessment, officially unveiled today at the Africa Energy Forum in Cape Town, evaluates regulatory frameworks across 43 African countries. Uganda, Liberia and Niger round out the top five performers, with Niger registering one of the biggest gains, underlining the strong impact of sustained reforms and political commitment to power sector development. The ERI evaluates three dimensions—Regulatory Governance, Regulatory Substance, and Regulatory Outcomes (ROI). Notably, the ROI, which tracks service delivery and utility performance, recorded the most substantial improvement across the continent. Key findings from the 2024 ERI: Kenya and Senegal led with a score of 0.892, reflecting standout progress in tariff reform, regulatory outcomes, and utility performance. A remarkable 41 out of 43 participating countries achieved RGI scores above 0.5, representing a significant increase from 24 countries in 2022. Countries scoring below 0.500 reduced significantly from 19 in 2022 to just 6 in 2024. Even the lowest-performing country tripled its score—from about 0.10 to 0.33. The ROI surged from roughly 0.40 in 2022 to 0.62 in 2024, showing that reforms are delivering tangible service improvements on the ground. Now in its seventh edition, the ERI shows strong momentum toward more effective, transparent, and impactful regulation, with real-world results beginning to emerge. 'The 2024 ERI shows that Africa's regulators are stepping up. We are now seeing stronger institutions delivering real results for utilities and consumers. This shift is critical if we are to achieve Mission 300 and connect 300 million people to electricity by 2030,' says Dr. Kevin Kariuki, AfDB Vice President for Power, Energy, Climate and Green Growth. For the first time, the 2024 ERI also assessed regional regulatory bodies, recognizing their growing role in harmonizing technical standards and enabling cross-border electricity trade. As the backbone of Mission 300, ERI continues to inform the design and implementation of national energy compacts—currently active in 12 countries, with another 20 in development. Bridging the Gap – Addressing Ongoing Challenges While celebrating regulatory progress, the report calls for greater focus on regulatory independence, the financial viability of utilities, and the integration of off-grid and mini-grid systems into national frameworks. The ERI underscores that regulation must translate into better access, affordability, and reliability, especially for underserved rural populations. The report outlines priority areas for enhancing regulatory effectiveness: Strengthening regulatory independence Enhancing accountability mechanisms Promoting transparency and predictability Improving stakeholder participation Deepening economic regulation and advancing cost-reflective tariff methodologies. 'The ERI 2024 tells a hopeful story. African countries are not just passing laws—they are implementing them. Regulators are transforming from administrative bodies into strategic institutions with measurable influence. However, challenges related to independence, financing, and enforcement persist,' said Wale Shonibare, Director for Energy Financial Solutions, Policy and Regulation at the Bank Group. Launched in 2018, the ERI is a diagnostic and policy tool used by governments, regulators, and development partners to identify gaps, track progress, and prioritize reform efforts. The 2024 edition incorporates extensive feedback from utilities, regulators, and regional energy bodies. The full ERI 2024 report will be available here ( Distributed by APO Group on behalf of African Development Bank Group (AfDB). Media Contact: Gertrude Kitongo Communication and External Relations Department Technical Contact: Callixte Kambanda Manager, Energy Policy, Regulations, and Statistics email: About the African Development Bank Group: The African Development Bank Group (AfDB) is Africa's premier development finance institution. It comprises three distinct entities: the African Development Bank (AfDB), the African Development Fund (ADF) and the Nigeria Trust Fund (NTF). On the ground in 44 African countries with an external office in Japan, the AfDB contributes to the economic development and the social progress of its 54 regional member states.
E&E News
30-05-2025
- Business
- E&E News
Inside EPA's backdoor bid to stop regulating climate pollution
EPA is expected to soon argue that the U.S. power sector doesn't contribute 'significantly' to climate change — a bid that could give the agency cover to not regulate planet-warming emissions from a wide range of sources. EPA included the argument in its draft repeal of Biden-era rules to limit pollution from power plants, according to two people briefed by EPA personnel and granted anonymity to discuss those conversations. The agency bolsters its argument by stating in the draft sent to the White House that U.S. fossil fuel power plants account for 3 percent of global emissions, The New York Times reported last week. The assertion would take advantage of a section of the Clean Air Act that instructs the EPA administrator to decide whether a category of sources contributes enough harmful pollution to warrant regulation. That could offer a backdoor avenue for EPA to stop regulating most climate pollution — one where the agency has to clear a lower legal bar than overturning the so-called endangerment finding that underpins all Clean Air Act climate regulations. Advertisement Industry attorneys who have expressed skepticism about the Trump administration's broader assault on climate science see some merit in a more targeted approach under Section 111. 'We've been telling folks for a while that we thought it was easier for them to make a run at the power sector or the oil and gas sector than the vehicle sector, just because of the word 'significantly' in the statute,' said Jeff Holmstead, who served as EPA air chief under former President George W. Bush. But if EPA's bid to label power plants as insignificant contributors to harmful pollution survives the inevitable legal challenges, it could absolve the agency from regulating a wide range of stationary emissions sources under Section 111. That's because the U.S. power sector is a major source of climate pollution. Declaring that it doesn't contribute 'significantly' to pollution could rule out regulation of any source category that emits less pollution — which would be nearly all of them. 'If the courts agree that greenhouse gas emissions from the power sector do not 'significantly contribute' to air pollution that endangers public health or welfare, then this would prevent EPA from regulating greenhouse emissions from any industrial sector,' said Holmstead. Transportation would be a notable exception. It emits more and is regulated under a different section of the law, so the move wouldn't affect tailpipe emissions rules. If the courts agree with EPA's proposed threshold for what constitutes a 'significant' contribution, that could also create hurdles for future administrations, experts said. 'They may well get a judicial decision on what it means to contribute significantly under Section 111 of the Clean Air Act,' said Jonathan Adler, a conservative legal scholar and founding director of Case Western Reserve University's environmental law center. 'That would potentially lock that in place. Not just for power plants, but arguably for other stationary source categories.' Coal- and gas-fired power plants released 31 percent of domestic CO2 emissions from fossil fuels combustion in 2023, according to EPA's own emissions inventory, which the Environmental Defense Fund released this month after obtaining it via a Freedom of Information Act request. That's more than any other source category except transportation. EPA's inventory showed that industrial energy use collectively accounted for 26.3 percent of CO2 from fossil fuels combustion in 2023 — a significant share of emissions but less than the power sector. The 3% problem Section 111 of the Clean Air Act doesn't set a threshold above which sectors are deemed to contribute 'significantly' to climate pollution. The New York Times' reporting hints that EPA may be preparing to propose '3 percent of global emissions' as that threshold, but experts agree that the agency would need to give a strong justification for choosing that as the cutoff. Only six economies emit more than 3 percent of global emissions, comprising China, the United States, India, the European Union, Russia and Brazil. In other words, the U.S. power sector is responsible for more greenhouse gas emissions than the national emissions of most countries. EPA also has the challenge of seeking to introduce this threshold — for the first time in the Clean Air Act's 50-year history — a year after the Supreme Court issued a landmark decision to sharply limit the degree of deference courts afford to agencies in interpreting vaguely worded statutes. The Loper Bright v. Raimondo decision upended a decades-old legal precedent known as the Chevron doctrine that directed courts to give agencies the benefit of the doubt in their 'reasonable' interpretations of laws when Congress' intent was unclear. 'This is a matter of statutory interpretation,' said Joe Goffman, who served as EPA air chief in the Biden administration. 'I think at least in passing, they will regret the demise of Chevron deference.' Holmstead noted that EPA would benefit from statutory language that instructs the EPA administrator to decide 'in his judgment' whether a source category contributes significantly to harmful pollution. Robert Sussman, who served as senior policy counsel at EPA during the Obama administration, said that EPA would also need to explain a rule from Trump's first term — which was never implemented — that sought to make 3 percent of domestic greenhouse gas emissions the threshold for a finding of significant contribution under Section 111. That's a much lower bar than 3 percent of global emissions, and EPA said explicitly at the time that the power sector qualified as contributing significantly. 'They would need to demonstrate why the rule that they themselves promulgated in the first term no longer represents their thinking,' Sussman said. The Trump EPA's strategy on endangerment shows it trying to avoid a frontal assault on climate science, relying instead on 'a fairly narrow legal formulation that they can apply without much effort,' said Sussman. The administration hasn't devoted any time to building an alternative scientific record to support its bid to overturn the foundational scientific finding — as it considered doing during Trump's first term. Less than a month after inauguration day, EPA sent the White House recommendations for upending the agency's 2009 endangerment finding, which declared that greenhouse gas emissions endangered public health and welfare. The power plant repeal proposal followed a couple of months later. But Sussman said the agency would need to provide analysis based on science for the criteria it proposes for sources that 'contribute significantly.' 'They will actually have to, I think, get into the science of climate change here in order to have an intelligent position on what is a 'significant contribution,'' he said. 'If you just pick a number out of the air — like 3 percent — how can that number be meaningful without regard to the context of the pollution problem that you're trying to address?' Environmental lawyers see another statutory problem. EPA has always considered all the pollution from a source category — like power plants or oil refineries — when interpreting Section 111. That means the agency might have to argue that U.S. power plants don't contribute significantly to any harmful pollution, not just planet-warming emissions, to undo its 1971 decision to list fossil fuel power plants under Section 111. 'Administratively, this is a through line of EPA's interpretation,' said Patrick A. Parenteau, a senior fellow of climate policy in the Environmental Law Center at Vermont Law School. The Biden EPA did discuss the greenhouse gas emissions from U.S. power plants as part of the carbon rule it finalized last year. It stated the sector was responsible for 4 percent of global heat-trapping emissions, based on 2021 data. But Goffman said that information was included at EPA's discretion, not because Section 111 required a separate significant contribution finding for power plant carbon emissions. But Holmstead said courts have never weighed in on whether that EPA interpretation is the best reading of the statute. And he said he thought the Trump administration was right to argue — as it likely will — that the statute requires a dedicated finding for each pollutant, not just for source categories. 'It doesn't make any sense to say that EPA can regulate any pollutant that it wants, even if there's no sense in regulating it,' he said. 'I don't always agree with the legal positions of this administration, but I think they're right on this one.'
