The Briefing:
- EPA finalized the repeal of the 2024 Carbon Pollution Standards on September 14, 2026, ending the requirement that coal plants and new baseload gas plants capture 90% of their carbon emissions.
- The agency projects the repeal will save $310 billion ; a separate, not-yet-finalized proposal to eliminate all remaining power plant GHG rules could add another $370 million in savings.
- Environmental Defense Fund, the Natural Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club, the Center for Biological Diversity and New York Attorney General Letitia James have all signaled plans to challenge the repeal in court.
- The move follows the EPA's earlier 2026 revocation of the 2009 "endangerment finding," the scientific basis the agency has used for more than a decade to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency finalized the repeal of most of its 2024 Carbon Pollution Standards on September 14, 2026, eliminating the rule that forced coal and gas-fired power plants to capture the bulk of their carbon dioxide emissions, according to the agency's official announcement.
The rollback removes the federal government's central tool for regulating climate pollution from the power sector, and it lands as the EPA simultaneously proposes wiping out every remaining greenhouse gas standard that still applies to power plants.
What the 2024 Rule Actually Required
The regulation being dismantled dates to the Biden-Harris administration, which finalized it as part of a broader package aimed at reducing pollution from fossil fuel-fired power plants, according to EPA's original 2024 release. Under that rule, any coal-fired plant planning to keep running long-term, along with any new baseload gas-fired plant, had to capture 90% of its carbon pollution, primarily through carbon capture and storage technology.
EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin framed the repeal as a correction to more than a decade of energy policy. "For over 15 years, the Obama and Biden administrations implemented a war on coal to destroy reliable and affordable energy," Zeldin said in the agency's announcement. Energy Secretary Chris Wright echoed that argument, saying the decision "will help ensure reliable electricity generation regardless of whether the wind is blowing or the sun is shining."
Announced in Houston, at an Energy Summit
EPA made the announcement in Houston, Texas, during the G20 Energy Abundance Ministerial placing the decision squarely inside an international forum focused on expanding energy production rather than curbing it.
The repeal finalized this week is not the end of the process. In the same announcement, EPA proposed eliminating every greenhouse gas standard still on the books for power plants — a step that has not been finalized and remains open to public comment. If it goes through, the agency projects an additional $370 million in direct compliance-cost savings on top of the $310 billion already claimed. ABC News reports the broader proposal is expected to go through a 45-day public comment period and a public hearing before any final decision.
A Different Set of Numbers From Environmental Groups
The EPA's $310 billion savings figure is not the only number in play. According to an analysis by The Associated Press, the rules now being eliminated were projected — using EPA's own prior assessments and other research — to prevent roughly 30,000 deaths and save $275 billion annually while in effect. The two figures describe opposite things: one is the cost avoided by repealing the rule, the other is the benefit that analysis suggests will now be lost. They should not be added together or compared as if they measure the same thing.
Environmental and Health Groups Vow to Sue
Reaction from environmental and public health organizations was immediate. Vickie Patton, general counsel for the Environmental Defense Fund, said, "Tearing down our national protections against climate pollution will have enormous costs for health, safety and well-being," according to Al Jazeera.
Maggie Coulter of the Center for Biological Diversity was sharper still, warning that "denying the existence of a quarter of the country's climate pollution is utterly reckless" and would lead to "more lost lives and suffering from intense heatwaves, drastic storms and destructive wildfires," per the same report.
At the Southern Environmental Law Center, senior attorney Gudrun Thompson told NPR that "these rules are really important, not just for our climate, but also to protect public health from the dangers of local air pollution." Former EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy, now president of America Is All, said "the most vulnerable among us, our kids and grandkids, will suffer the most."
New York Attorney General Letitia James called the rules "some of our nation's most essential climate policies," signaling that legal action from state governments is likely to follow.
Part of a Broader Pattern
This repeal does not stand alone. It follows the EPA's earlier move this year to revoke the 2009 endangerment finding, the scientific determination that has served as the legal foundation for regulating greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act for more than a decade. That earlier action is already facing separate litigation from multiple state attorneys general, setting up a broader legal confrontation over how — or whether — the federal government can regulate climate pollution going forward.
For now, the repeal finalized on September 14 is final and in effect, while the more sweeping proposal to erase all remaining greenhouse gas standards for power plants still has to clear a public comment period before EPA can act on it.
