This is the Cato Daily Podcast for Thursday, September 26, 2013.

I'm Caleb Brown.

Many Conservatives have claimed that EPA rules now in the pipeline for coal-fired power plants

are just further evidence of an Obama-led war on coal.

The truth is more complicated.

According to Peter Van Doerrand, editor of Regulation magazine, he argues that most of the EPA's

power is, well, right there in the statute, but lawmakers are loath to change it.

We have new rules in process for how new coal-fired power plants should one be built are to operate,

and this is cited as evidence again as an Obama-led war on coal and how credible is that claim?

Well in regards to CO2 emissions what I find interesting is the EPA chose to initially at least regulate only new coal-fired power

plants.

And since there aren't any being built and aren't any being proposed because of the low price of natural gas.

You could argue that the EPA has declared a war on cold if you really hate the EPA.

Or you could argue, boy, are they they clever and the Obama administration has managed to sort of comply

with the Mass versus EPA Supreme Court decision which mandated that the EPA not dodge greenhouse gas regulation has it had been.

And by saying that they're going to regulate only new coal-fired power plants since there aren't

going to be any because of the low price of natural gas this in effect means in

fact when I read the cost- analysis in the EPA document of the proposed rule,

the EPA even admitted that this proposal had no cost because there weren't going to be any new coal-fired power plants built.

This is, depending on your point of view, either a clever Dodge on the part of the EPA or a Draconian

rule, because indeed given current technology

no new coal-fired power plants could sequester carbon and meet the new rules.

...