Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin said reversing power plant regulations imposed during the Biden administration could produce more than $300 billion in projected savings while allowing coal and natural gas plants targeted by the rules to continue operating.

The EPA announced the repeal of most of the 2024 power plant requirements on Sept. 14 and projected approximately $310 billion in savings. (US EPA)

During an exchange with Stuart Varney, Zeldin argued that the regulatory changes imposed technological requirements that some existing power plants could not realistically meet, effectively putting those facilities on a path toward closure.

“Am I right in saying that you're looking at potentially $300 billion worth of savings with this move?” Varney asked.

“Yeah, absolutely,” Zeldin responded.

“You're talking about hundreds of billions of dollars, over 300 billion, as you pointed out, of savings.”

Zeldin said the financial impact was connected to regulations that placed additional requirements on power plants, including facilities relying on coal and natural gas.

“A lot of plants were targeted to go out altogether, and with the 2024 Biden rules that came into place, they had set technological requirements on these plants that they would not be able to meet,” Zeldin said.

According to Zeldin, the inability of some plants to comply was not an unintended consequence of the regulations.

He argued that the standards were structured in a way that would ultimately force affected facilities to cease operations.

“That was by design, and when a plant is unable to meet that infeasible target, they would have to shut down,” Zeldin said.

Zeldin traced the broader regulatory approach back to the Obama administration, arguing that the policies affecting conventional power generation developed over multiple administrations rather than beginning solely under former President Joe Biden.

“This started during the first Obama administration, and you know, this is the the biggest one that gets referenced most often, but there were a whole bunch of different rules,” Zeldin said.

He said the combined impact of those regulations placed pressure on several forms of domestic energy production, particularly coal and natural gas.

“More than triangulating coal and natural gas and more,” Zeldin said.

His criticism also extended to the effect those policies had on workers and states whose economies depend heavily on traditional energy production.

Zeldin argued that regulatory decisions made in Washington were accompanied by a dismissive attitude toward workers whose livelihoods were tied to industries facing increased restrictions.

He specifically referenced the message that coal workers should move into different types of employment rather than continue working in the industry.

“And with a message, by the way, telling coal workers they should just learn to code,” Zeldin said.

Zeldin also said states that depend on coal and natural gas for employment, economic activity and energy production were effectively told they would have to absorb the consequences of those policies.

“And telling states that rely on these sources of energy that they they're out of luck,” Zeldin said.

WATCH:

The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Conservative Scoop. Contact us for guidelines on submitting your own commentary.