Gina McCarthy
Gina McCarthy
Regina "Gina" McCarthyis an American public administrator and an environmental health and air quality expert, currently administrator for the United States Environmental Protection Agency. On March 4, 2013, President Barack Obama nominated McCarthy to replace Lisa Jackson as head of the EPA. Confirmation hearings started April 11, 2013. On July 18, 2013, she was confirmed after a record 136-day confirmation fight, becoming the face of Obama's global warming/climate change initiative...
NationalityAmerican
ProfessionPublic Servant
CountryUnited States of America
But just [proposing the standard] puts companies on notice that if you're looking to construct a new natural-gas or coal facility, you really need to pay attention to these. This is what they should be designing new facilities toward as soon as this proposal hits the streets.
I love disagreements. I love the democratic process. If I'm in a room where everybody agrees, I start to nod off.
States with tremendous oil and natural gas reserves have the most to gain economically from proper regulation.
There is no threshold level of fine particle pollution below which health risk reductions are not achieved by reduced exposure.
Any first-generation technology will. But we are looking at carbon the same way we look at every pollutant under the Clean Air Act; we look for the new technologies that are available. We recognize that these power plants are going to be around for decades.
Even if there's controversy, I'm going to make the decision, and people are going to be happy in one instance and unhappy in the next. But that's the job I've been given and the job I'm going to embrace.
I definitely challenge people. But hopefully, I am working harder than anybody else, and so people won't resent the fact that I want them to work hard, as well.
Proponents of efficiency standards argue that they save consumers and businesses money, reduce energy use, and reduce emissions. But families and businesses already understand how energy costs impact their lives and make decisions accordingly.
We are very confident that the data is showing that carbon capture and sequestration is technologically feasible and it's available. It has been successfully demonstrated and there are full-scale both conventional and unconventional coal projects with CCS that are moving forward. So there is no question that there's continued investment in this technology.
The EPA's greenhouse gas regulations, along with a host of other onerous regulations, are unnecessarily driving out conventional fuels as part of America's energy mix. The consequences are higher energy prices for families and a contraction of our nation's economic growth.
When consumers do not take full advantage of efficiency gains, it is because they are weighing other factors that influence their decision making. When the federal government arbitrarily places one of those factors over others, it makes consumers worse off.
When discussing overall impacts on employment, it is important not to overlook the new technologies and industries that can be driven by pollution control standards.
If coal wants a place in a carbon-constrained future, they have to look at technology like this. And we think that our rule can help stimulate technology, growth, and innovation, bring those costs down, and allow coal a more stable opportunity to continue to be invested in.
Climate change is the greatest threat of our time.