Agencies | Governor
Virginia Regulatory Town Hall
Agency
Department of Environmental Quality
Board
Air Pollution Control Board
chapter
Regulation for Emissions Trading [9 VAC 5 ‑ 140]
Action Reduce and Cap Carbon Dioxide from Fossil Fuel Fired Electric Power Generating Facilities (Rev. C17)
Stage Proposed
Comment Period Ends 3/6/2019
spacer
All comments for this forum
Page of 13       comments per page    
Next     Back to List of Comments
 
2/5/19  12:38 pm
Commenter: Andrea Trimble

Support
 

I would like to express my strong support for the action "Reduce and Cap Carbon Dioxide from Fossil Fuel Fired Electric Power Generating Facilities (Rev. C17)" as written.  It is important to cap Virginia's electricty sector carbon dioxide emissions.  Given the accelerating impacts of climate change and the urgency of climate action, the lower cap described in this revised rule is important. Virginia will benefit from cost savings by joining RGGI and because large firms are now acting to limit their emissions, this rule is business-friendly.  In addition to helping reduce the possibility of sea level rise, an important economic and social consideration for Virginia, there are also significant health benefits to residents from lowering emissions.  I support the rule as written.


2/6/19  1:24 pm
Commenter: Dianna L Howard

Regional Greenhouse Gas Iniative
 

Entering into the RGGI would require the state’s utilities to pay a carbon tax on their fossil fuel power plants and to reduce operation of those plants, this cost would be passed on to consumers and couls cost  ratepayers of Dominion Energy Virginia $3.3 to $5.9 billion over the first decade, according to a State Corporation Commission staff estimate.  This is just a backdoor tax on us and does nothing to solve any problem related to climate change, sea level rise or clean air.  I oppose this cap and trade bill that will benefit those selling the credits by picking our pockets and would hurt those that are already struggling on fixed incomes and the poor.pe over this text and enter your comments here. You are limited to approximately 3000 words.


2/6/19  2:38 pm
Commenter: Marcia Geyer

Support
 

I strongly support the current version of the revised rule as it is now written, and ask that the Air Control Board approve the rule without any further changes.  I support the lower cap in the revised rule.

Capping the emissions of Virginia's electricity sector is an important part of standing with the rest of the world to limit climate change.  If humanity does't limit our collective emissions from fossil fuels, nothing else will matter very much in a few generations because we will be dying off as a species. 

It is fortunate that there is a regional trading group we can trade with, RGGI, that successfully facilitates this objective.

 


2/7/19  7:31 am
Commenter: Mark Eggeman

Oppose!
 

Entering into the RGGI would require the state’s utilities to pay a carbon tax on their fossil fuel power plants and to reduce operation of those plants, this cost would be passed on to consumers and could cost ratepayers of Dominion Energy Virginia $3.3 to $5.9 billion over the first decade, according to a State Corporation Commission staff estimate.  This is just a backdoor tax on us and does nothing to solve any problem related to climate change, sea level rise or clean air.  I oppose this cap and trade bill that will benefit those selling the credits by picking our pockets and would hurt those who are already struggling on fixed incomes and the poor. 


2/7/19  10:06 am
Commenter: Don

STOP MAKING DECISIONS AGAINST THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE
 
Stop regulating us into poverty. The General Assembly is there to represent the people and there is nothing, to include payoffs, bribes and campaign donations, that give Northam the right to just enter in to contractual and financial obligations on behalf of taxpayers AGAINST their wishes....

2/7/19  10:51 am
Commenter: Richard Roberts

Support any efforts to reduce or cap CO2 emissions especially through regional cooperation
 

Efforts to support reductions and cap of CO2 emissions and collaborating in a regional way all positive steps to preserving our and our childrens futures. Obstructing by distortion of the results through fear mongering is not supported by the economic facts. Sustainable energy initiatives happen when non sustainable cheap polluting energy becomes less cost effective. We can no longer afford to sacrifice the future for the sake of profits. And when most studies show sustainable energy is actually more cost effective, seems the only thing we are sacrificing are the profits of the few at the expense of the environment for all.


2/8/19  2:47 pm
Commenter: Virginia Clinicians for Climate Action

Support
 

Climate change is already impacting the health of Virginians.  Physicians are seeing in their offices and in the ER increased cases of heat illness, more asthma and earlier onset of spring allergies.  We have also noted the increasedspread of Lyme disease carried by ticks and are concerned about the spread of tropical diseases like Zika and Dengue as the mosquito vector moves into warming states.  The health system is adversely impacted by super storms and floods and our economy is being impacted by sea level rise.  It is imperative as noted by the recent IPPC 1.5 report and the US Fourth Climate impact report that we act now.  Joining RGGI is a way to send a market signal to energy producers of the need to limit CO2 production and to move to renewables. Look at the impact of RGGI on the 9 states who are currently participating.  It has been a win-win situation.  The Commonwealth can't afford to miss this opportunity.


2/9/19  9:18 pm
Commenter: Bob Phaneuf

Don't buy the junk science
 

Everyone seems to be upset about carbon dioxide emissions but are you aware that carbon dioxide is too heavy to reach the atmosphere?  If you remember your science, you will recall that every element has a specific gravity.  The air all around us has a specific gravity of 1.000.  Helium, which is lighter than air, has a specific gravity of 0.138 so obviously is rises into the atmosphere.  Carbon dioxide has a specific gravity of 1.5189 which is too heavy to get off the ground.  Therefore, there should be no regulation of emissions which cannot affect the atmosphere.


2/10/19  9:57 am
Commenter: David Flowers

Oppose This Junk Science
 

I do not support this tax scam wrapped in the phony wrapping paper of pure junk science. Don't soak Virginia taxpayers to fund your Marxist nightmare.


2/10/19  10:03 am
Commenter: Jennifer Flowers

Oppose
 

This is rediculous pseudo-science which I do not support whatsoever. This is Marxism in environmental sheep's clothing. Sorry but I outgrew fairy tales long long ago.


2/10/19  10:08 am
Commenter: Lance

Completely Opposed
 

This is complete lunacy and I'm totally opposed to this madness.


2/10/19  10:17 am
Commenter: Jeanne

Oppose
 

Who comes up with this? Is this even science or political agenda? No I don't support this craziness at all, I can't imagine anyone in their right mind would.


2/11/19  7:44 pm
Commenter: Hunter Frakes

Support Revised Rule
 

I support the revised cap on carbon dioxide emissions in the electricity sector.  This proposition is both environmentally friendly and business friendly, as it helps reduce the amount of greenhouse gasses in our environment and goes along with the trend of many other businesses capping emissions.  It also provides health benefits for all residents by increasing air quality.  


2/11/19  8:42 pm
Commenter: Rees Huggins

Support the Emissions Cap
 

I write in favor of Virginia’s proposed regulation for capping CO2 emissions. I support this cap, which will hold Virginia accountable to the global community. Capping 2020 emissions from electric power plants that burn fossil
fuels such as coal, natural gas, and oil will help to protect the rights of Virginians to clean air and quality soil. It is important to note that this will not significantly impact electricity rates. The great state of Virginia joining with 9 other states in their commitment to limit power plant emissions is a noble cause that will protect the independence, health, and happiness of both local and global citizens. 


2/11/19  8:44 pm
Commenter: Hannah

Support
 

This cap on emissions is very important, economically viable, and essential to the health of our planet as a whole and to individual health.


2/11/19  9:05 pm
Commenter: Joyce Cheng

Support the Proposed CO2 Cap
 

I support the proposal to cap Virginia's electricity sector CO2 emissions. It is critical that every locality, state, nation, etc. do everything they can to limit emissions and curb climate change. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change shocked us all last fall by announcing we would be experiencing 1.5 degrees Celsius of warming by 2040, if we continue on our current path. This would be accompanied by famines, wildfires, mass migration, and other disasters. Just last month, research showed that ocean temperatures are rising 40% faster than expected, also as a consequence of fossil fuel use and climate change. Emissions also directly endanger human health, exacerbating respiratory issues. Fossil fuel industries play a major role in contributing to emissions, and it will benefit our society to limit their impact. Virginia must join the other states in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initative and hold itself accountable to the Paris Climate Accords. Many large businesses are taking initiative on their own to limit their emissions, and our state must follow in their example. This rule would reduce the proposed 2020 cap from around 33-34 million tons per year to 28 million tons per year, and if the social cost of carbon is theoretically valued at $50, the rule equates to almost a $250 million gain to society per year. DEQ modeling estimates that the cap will not significantly increase the costs of electricity generation; the benefits of this new rule greatly outweigh the costs to our society.


2/12/19  9:22 pm
Commenter: Stephanie

Support the proposal
 

I support the proposed regulation to cap CO2 emissions in Virginia. The 9-state trade program is beneficial for the economy, for maintaining properly regulated rules on emission capping among states, and for supporting the requirements laid out in the Paris Climate Accords. Because the rule largely reduces emissions from power plants, etc. and does not deal with electricity or the burning of biomass, it is not a great public cost, but rather a gain in saving energy. This would be a positive step towards complying with the Paris Cimate Accords, which recognize how urgent the issue of the addition of carbon to the atmosphere is.


2/12/19  10:44 pm
Commenter: Molly

Support!
 

In the face of devastating effects of climate change, we must do everything we can to reduce our carbon emissions and shift towards clean energy. Continuing to burn fossil fuels with no regard for the future is irresponsible and dangerous. Therefore, I support the lower cap in the revised rule for regulating CO2 emissions in Virginia.


2/13/19  10:48 am
Commenter: Brooke Crouch, UVA

Support the proposal
 

Support this proposal!


2/13/19  11:55 am
Commenter: Rachel McGill

Support the proposal
 

I strongly support the proposal to further limit the cap for electric power plants' ability to burn fossil fuels for the following reasons:

- There is a severe need for greenhouse gas reductions as the projections for climate change worsen

- Cap and trade programs are neessary to incentivize innovation for renewable energy

- Cap and trade programs, and continuously tightening such programs, have historically led to desired results of healthier populations and environments very efficiently, as was observed with the cap and trade program for sulfate emissions in the 1990's

- Virginians are already suffering from climate change costs including: sea level rise on the eastern shore that is ruining croplands with increased salinity, and shifting precipitation patterns that are increasing annual rainfall and causing increased nutrient runoff into the Chesapeake Bay and subsequently increased eutrophication. Those are just a couple of examples of the harmful effects being experienced in Virginia, and we have a responsibility as Virginians to prevent this situation from increasing in severity to protect our neighbors and the economic capacity of the state. 


2/13/19  7:20 pm
Commenter: Nina

Support
 

I support this cap and trade legislation as written to help curb virginia’s Greenhouse gas emissions. This sets an important precedent that Virginia is a leader in climate action and will help both businesses and residents to thrive for generations to come.

 


2/14/19  6:05 pm
Commenter: Stephanie Malady

Reduce CO2 emissions
 

The experts have told us that our current rate of production of CO2 emissions is aggrevating climate change. We need bold action now to mitigate the disasterous effects of human induced climate change, sea rise and extreme weather events. This rule is a weak start, but it's better than nothing. Start here now. Much more dramatic, sweeping actions will be required in the immediate future.


2/16/19  7:35 am
Commenter: Fran

Virginia's Proposed Rule for Capping CO2 Emissions
 

Virginia has the chance right now to take a major stance in the fight against climate change by adopting this rule capping CO2 emissions as it is without revision. We will see a cost savings by  joining a regional trading group. Even though business savings should not be the reason we reduce CO2 emissions (we want to reduce them to save the earth), the sad fact is that money drives change. And so I will note that this rule is business friendly as well as environmentally friendly because many large firms are now acting to limit their emissions.In addition, there are substantial health benefits to all residents from lowering emissions levels and reducing global warming and sea-level rise. The rising sea levels is definitely of concern to the beautiful coastal areas of Virginia.  I am hopeful that the proposal to cap Virginia’s CO2 emissions from electric power plants will be an important step  toward protecting the earth from the devastating effects of climate change. 

 

 


2/17/19  10:46 am
Commenter: Lance

Support Proposed Rule to Cap CO2 emissions
 

As a long time resident in Virginia and a member of the medical field, I wanted to offer my support for the proposed rule to cap and reduce CO2 emissions here in the commonwealth of Virginia. The collateral costs of continuing down our current path of emissions, from coastal sea level rise, the effect of air pollution on the health of residents in the commonwealth, and the overall effects of climate change on our planet, necessitate a change in course. Although this is one step in many, it is an important step that I feel Virginia must take to do its part in the fight against human fueled climate change. It is my hope that as the state moves forward, that we will continue to institute policies and investments into sustainable industries that will both secure our economic as well as environmental future.


2/18/19  1:21 pm
Commenter: Jennifer Moseley

Support!
 

I strongly support regulating and lowering the carbon emissions of Virginia's fossil fuel burning plants.  Study after study outlines the catastrophic effects of burning fossil fuels has on our planet.  We must pick up where the Federal Government has failed us and regulate and lowe carbon emisions on the state level to ensure we have a future.  


2/18/19  5:50 pm
Commenter: Xabier

Support Virginia DEQ greenhouse gas reduction plans
 

As a Virginia resident and health scientist I strongly support plans to reduce our states greenhouse gas emissions. The scientific community and reputable organizations such as the World Health Organization, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the U.S. Department of Defense have concluded that man made climate change is a serious threat to our safety. As a coastal state, Virginia stands to suffer tremendously from the catastrophic effects caused by climate change.  I strongly support plans to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in our state and mitigate the effects on climate change as much as possible. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Sincerely,

Xabier

 


2/18/19  8:52 pm
Commenter: Robert P

Support
 

I am in complete support of this plan to cap CO2 emissions from electricity production.  I am both a Dominion customer and stock holder.  Virginia's participation in RGGI is an important step in showing our children that we have the courage to take action to do something about climate change.  This action will improve our air quality  by reducing health risks from air pollutants associated with energy production. It is about time we realized the true cost of producing electricity from fossil fuels.  In addition, there will be long term economic benefits from capping CO2 emissions to 28 million tons per year.  It will promote the development of a green energy economy that can provide young people with stable high paying jobs.  Granting free allowances will keep the cost to rate payers minimal.  It is better to pay a little today than a lot tomorrow when we have to face the true cost of climate change.  


2/20/19  8:35 am
Commenter: Dennis Woodriff, Kardinal Hall

Virginia rule to join RGGI
 

I support capping Virginia’s electricity sector CO2 emissions, and the cost savings that we get by joining a regional trading group matter.

I support the lower cap in the revised rule as many large firms are now acting to limit their emissions.

This rule is business friendly, as well as environmentally friendly.

There are substantial health benefits to all residents from lowering
emissions, in addition to the benefits of helping reduce global warming, excessive storms, devastating drought and sea-level rise.

Dennis Woodriff, Kardinal Hall,  722 Preston Ave, Charlottesville, VA  22903


2/20/19  8:38 am
Commenter: Dennis Woodriff, Beer Run, 156 Carlton Rd, Charlottesville, VA

Virginia rule to join RGGI
 

I support capping Virginia’s electricity sector CO2 emissions, and the cost savings that we get by joining a regional trading group matter.
I support the lower cap in the revised rule as many large firms are now acting to limit their emissions.
This rule is business friendly, as well as environmentally friendly.
There are substantial health benefits to all residents from lowering
emissions, in addition to the benefits of helping reduce global warming, excessive storms, devastating drought and sea-level rise.
Dennis Woodriff, Beer Run, 156 Carlton Rd, Charlottesville, VA  22903


2/20/19  8:39 am
Commenter: Dennis Woodriff, Charlottesville Citizens Climate Lobby

Virginia rule to join RGGI
 

I support capping Virginia’s electricity sector CO2 emissions, and the cost savings that we get by joining a regional trading group matter.
I support the lower cap in the revised rule as many large firms are now acting to limit their emissions.
This rule is business friendly, as well as environmentally friendly.
There are substantial health benefits to all residents from lowering
emissions, in addition to the benefits of helping reduce global warming, excessive storms, devastating drought and sea-level rise.
Dennis Woodriff, 512 13th St NW, Charlottesville, VA  22903


2/20/19  9:21 am
Commenter: Larry Underwood, PhD

VA Shoukd Join REGGI
 

Virginia should definitely join the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative.   I am a research ecologist who’s been concerned with climate change for over 30 years. I know the climate change is an existential threat to the planet and to society.  Putting a price on carbon is the single most important step we can take to solve this problem.  By joining with other states Virginia can be a leader in this effort.

 


2/20/19  10:49 am
Commenter: Bonnie J Redding

I am for RGGI
 

I would like to applaud the revised version of the RGGI rule, with its higher goals.   I support capping Virginia's electricity sector's CO2 emissions.  Joining a regional trading group will certainly lead to cost savings.  Implementing RGGI will lead to cleaner air with health benefits for all Virginians and will help mitigate the devastating effects of climate change.

Thank you,

Bonnie J. Redding


2/20/19  11:05 am
Commenter: Kathie Trapkin

I support a cap and reduction of carbon emissions
 

The science is clear, and has been for decades. Science is about facts, not politics or beliefs. Global warming as a result of the industrial revolution was predicted before the 1920s. In fact, it was being written about in the late 1800s. We need to step up to protect the environment of the only planet we have. 

Cap and lower emissions, support alternative energies, tax us on carbon usage and put the proceeds into responsible, green initiatives. Our childrens', and Grand childrens' health and future depends on what we do now.

 

Thank you, Kathie Trapkin

Suffolk, Virgina


2/20/19  11:09 am
Commenter: Homan Wai

DEQ regulations under ED11/RGGI
 

As a physician, 

I applaud Virginia's commitment to climate action and look forward to the finalization of the DEQ regulations under Executive Order 11 (ED 11).

Virginia becoming the first southern state to cap carbon pollution from power plants will be an important step in tackling climate change in the Commonwealth.  Throughout the process to link with the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), this carbon rule has only gotten better. The reduced pollution cap will make sure Virginia is on track to address one of the most pressing problems of our time. Lowering the carbon limit will have benefits for the health of our children and families, as climate change causes a miriad of health consequences in our bodies.

I also appreciate the increased effort to include communities most impacted by environmental injustices. These affected individuals are integral to Virginia’s just transition to a clean energy future.
 

Homan Wai, MD


2/20/19  1:30 pm
Commenter: Stephanie Burns

Support
 
As a Virginian, I fully support this proposed rule for Virginia to limit its carbon emissions in the power sector. Climate change impacts such as sea-level rise and extreme heat pose serious risks to our communities, and we need to do our part to phase out greenhouse gas pollution. This proposed rule would be an effective step that would benefit Virginians' health and economic well-being.

2/20/19  2:20 pm
Commenter: Anna Wright, UVA

Support for Joining RGGI
 

I support Virginia joining RGGI with the carbon cap as it is currently written, which will have immediate positive effects on Virginia's carbon outputs. It will benefit the environment and reward businesses who at actively working to reduce their emissions. Instead of being left behind, Virginia can now be at the forefront of innovation in fighting climate change and protecting our own coastal communities against the current and future devastating impacts of rising sea levels. We know exactly the harm we are causing to the environment and this is our opportunity to fight for the future by reining in our unnecessary release of carbon by holding businesses responsible to the people and environment of Virginia.


2/20/19  4:31 pm
Commenter: Lisa Glassco

RGGI
 

I support Virginia joining the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative and/or working with states that are already in it.

Thank you.


2/20/19  4:59 pm
Commenter: Sophie Ericsson, UVA

Support for Emissions Cap
 

I strongly support this proposal. Virginians are already suffering the consequences of climate change, especially on the Eastern seaboard as sea levels rise. We must hold Virginia responsible and implement a cap and trade program to stop the snowballing problem. Mitigating fossil fuel use by incentivizing cleaner energy is a proven success in other states and we should follow in their footsteps. 


2/20/19  5:43 pm
Commenter: Willis Jenkins

I support the RGGI revised rule
 

I support Virginia capping its emissions by joining RGGI, and endorse the revised rule with the lower total cap. This is an important step for the state in addressing basic drivers of climate change and sea level rise, and for beginning to transition our energy economy.


2/20/19  6:04 pm
Commenter: Alice Clair

I Support Lowering the Base Year Emission Cap But Still Have Concerns
 

 

I support setting the strongest possible standard to cut Virginia emissions from power plants through participation in a carbon market. This is a critically important step toward carbon pollution reductions. I support the revised, lower base year emission cap and appreciate that the Department of Environmental Quality included environmental justice as a consideration with regards to program evaluation and monitoring. However, I have serious concerns about the biomass exemption and I would like to see specific recommendations for how environmental justice will be considered in program evaluation and monitoring. 

  I request that DEQ use its authority to adopt and implement a final standard that:

 

1. Retains the currently-proposed base year emission cap of 28 million tons

 

2. Fully covers carbon pollution from biomass facilities, which can be more climate polluting than fossil fuel power plants. Virginia’s first ever plan to reduce carbon pollution from power plants shouldn’t be weakened by special interests! Exempting biomass makes Virginia’s carbon program less effective and gives monopoly utilities like Dominion even more of an unfair economic advantage. 

 

3. More fully articulates plans for environmental justice considerations for program monitoring and evaluation, and requires DEQ to include mitigation measures for any adverse program impacts on vulnerable, environmental justice and under served communities that are identified through the Department’s evaluation of the program.

 

4. More fully articulates the Department’s plan for increasing participation of environmental justice communities in the review of impacts of the program on those communities. This plan should be consistent with the National Environmental Justice Advisory Council’s Model Guidelines for Public Participation.

 

 

Best,

Alice


2/20/19  6:18 pm
Commenter: Christine Putnam

Support for Carbon Cap
 

As a teacher, I am hopeful that Virginia will begin to address the threat of climate change by joining RGGI and adhering to a significant cap on CO2 emssions from electricity production.  This will push forward efforts to improve energy efficiency and it will promote green energy jobs.  It will be good for the economy, and it will be good for the health and wellbeing of future generations and the planet.  


2/21/19  9:29 am
Commenter: John Cruickshank

I support joining RGGI
 

Virginia should definately join the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative.  The plan to trade with other RGGI states will help us reduce the greenhouse gasses from producing electricity from fossil fuels.  I support ED11.

Climate change is the greatest threat to our environment and the health and safety of our people.

 

 


2/21/19  11:11 am
Commenter: The RGGI Participating States

RGGI States' Comments on Re-Proposed Virginia Regulation for Emissions Trading
 

The nine states participating in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) today submit joint comments to Virginia regarding the compatibility of Virginia’s re-proposed regulation with the RGGI states’ existing 2017 Model Rule.

https://www.rggi.org/sites/default/files/Uploads/Participation/2019_02_21_Virginia_Re-Proposed_Comments.pdf


2/21/19  2:26 pm
Commenter: Nick Gomer

No Pipeline. Yes Offshore Wind
 

I support setting the strongest possible standard to cut Virginia emissions from power plants through participation in a carbon market. This is a critically important step toward carbon pollution reductions. I support the revised, lower base year emission cap and appreciate that the Department of Environmental Quality included environmental justice as a consideration with regards to program evaluation and monitoring. However, I have serious concerns about the biomass exemption and I would like to see specific recommendations for how environmental justice will be considered in program evaluation and monitoring. 

  I request that DEQ use its authority to adopt and implement a final standard that:

 

1. Retains the currently-proposed base year emission cap of 28 million tons

 

2. Fully covers carbon pollution from biomass facilities, which can be more climate polluting than fossil fuel power plants. Virginia’s first ever plan to reduce carbon pollution from power plants shouldn’t be weakened by special interests! Exempting biomass makes Virginia’s carbon program less effective and gives monopoly utilities like Dominion even more of an unfair economic advantage. 

 

3. More fully articulates plans for environmental justice considerations for program monitoring and evaluation, and requires DEQ to include mitigation measures for any adverse program impacts on vulnerable, environmental justice and under served communities that are identified through the Department’s evaluation of the program.

 

4. More fully articulates the Department’s plan for increasing participation of environmental justice communities in the review of impacts of the program on those communities. This plan should be consistent with the National Environmental Justice Advisory Council’s Model Guidelines for Public Participation.

 

 

Best,

 

Nick

 

P.S. NO PIPELINE

Attachments area


2/21/19  2:38 pm
Commenter: Dana Schroeder, UVA

Support joining RGGI
 

I am writing to voice my support for this piece of legislation. It is very exciting that Virginia will join the network of states working together to limit greenhouse gas emissions! I am glad to see the cap has been lowered since the last round of public comments, and I commend the legislators who have put this policy forward. Virginia should be a leader in our region for cleaner energy production!


2/22/19  10:28 am
Commenter: Bradford Slocum

Young Engineers for Carbon Regulation
 

I strongly recommend that the Air Pollution Control Board develop a regulation that fulfills items i. & ii., to reduce and cap carbon dioxide emissions from fossil-fuel power plants.

As a young materials engineer, I've grown up and studied many of the environmental impacts and related technologies around carbon emissions, including from fossil-fuel power plants. It is the responsibility of the Air Pollution Control Board to help manage air quality on behalf of citizens of the Commonwealth, and so from my experience, this proposed Regulatory Action is perfectly in line with that responsibility and the science & policy surrounding emissions. Actions such as this one, now, are part of the much-needed wider effort to manage and reduce nation- and world-wide emissions, to ensure a liveable and healthy environment for current and future generations.

Please, please, for my sake and the sake of Virginians now and in the decades ahead, take this Regulatary Action to bring Virginia into better accord with the RGGI emissions-market system. This will help ensure that our electrical grid and the associated utilities can move into the 21st-century, away from outdated and dangerous power technologies, and towards improved systems which will benefit all citizens of the Commonwealth.


2/22/19  2:15 pm
Commenter: John Meyer

Virginia should not join RGGI
 

Virginia should not join RGGI.  This is a Northeastern high-tax high-regulation enterprise and participation in it will damage Virginia's business climate.  Any carbon tax proposal will drive up costs all around. 

This is not an appropriate area for Virginia State action.  This is world environmental policy and should be left to the Federal Government.  .Nor do i accept the argument that "the Federal government isn't doing enough."  Irrespective of one's view as to the issue of CO2 emissions, [atchwork tax and regulatory policies make no sense.  Regulation of outright pollutants at the State level can make sense, because they have localized bad effects.  CO2, however, is a part of the natural cycle and does not hurt anyone; indeed, it actually promotes more plant growth.  Thus CO2 poses no localized health or other environmental risks and should not be regulated, except at the Federal level.  

Indeed, CO2 should not be regulated as a pollutant, because it isn't one.  The issue is whether the rate of worldwide CO2 emissions causes Global Warming (Climate Change is a nonsense phrase, as the climate always changes, while Global Warming is a testable hypothesis).   CO2 should have a different regulatory scheme, since specific, large emissions are harmless; what may be harmful is increasing average emissions.

I fear that you cannot resist the itch to tax and regulate, even though Virginia and even the Northeast is not the proper venue for regulating a environmental issue that is national (actually international in scope.  If you do so, at least the cost of any carbon tax should be returned dollar for dollar to taxpayers in reductions of other taxes and fees.  Since this is going to be very oppressive for motorists, road tolls should be cut and the Car Tax eliminated, using money from the carbon tax to replace these sources of revenue. But, whatever you do, the dollar-for-dollar return of carbon tax to taxpayers and businesses should be the guiding principle.  

Finally, I do not understand how the Executive Branch can impose any carbon tax, as taxation is a legislative function. You can legitimately recommend a carbon tax, but it is usurpation of the legislative brach's proper powers to impose any tax without its passage through the Virginia Legislature.  


2/22/19  7:59 pm
Commenter: Nicole

Rggi
 

I am writing in  support of the proposed rule for Virginia to join the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI). If this rule is adopted, Virginia would become the first southern state to put a price on carbon pollution. Let’s improve our environment!


2/22/19  8:03 pm
Commenter: Eric Claunch, no organization

"Carbon credits"--a disguised way to tax the gullible
 

Tax carbon dioxide? I exhale it every breath! Plants use it in the photosynthesis cycle! This is just another way to collect funds from unknowing, unsuspecting ignorant voters. It is, and never will be, a clear-cut, measurable way to do anything, and electricity generators users are prevented from keeping any taxes collected, meaning it will go to the state gov't. It will harm far more people (electricity generating employers and employees, all people paying power bills) than it will help.

Base decisions on facts, not emotions. Avoid any carbon tax schemes.