The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has announced two major proposals aimed at dismantling key elements of the Biden administration’s climate agenda, citing the need to safeguard energy affordability and national energy independence. The proposed actions include repealing federal greenhouse gas emissions standards for power plants and scaling back amendments to mercury and air toxics regulations that critics say have driven coal plant closures.
The announcement was made by EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin during a press conference attended by several Republican lawmakers and Navajo Nation President Buu Nygren. The proposals seek to roll back Section 111 regulations under the Clean Air Act and the 2024 amendments to the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS), introduced by the current administration.
“Affordable, reliable electricity is the cornerstone of the American dream,” said Zeldin. “The prior administration’s regulations have been widely viewed as ideologically driven, imposing significant economic burdens on coal, oil, and gas-fired power generation, while compromising grid reliability and increasing household costs.”
Repeal of greenhouse gas emissions standards
The EPA is proposing to rescind emissions limits introduced in both 2015 and 2024 that apply to new and existing fossil fuel-fired power plants. The Biden-era rule, which succeeded the Supreme Court-invalidated Clean Power Plan, has faced widespread criticism from industry stakeholders and conservative lawmakers for allegedly overstepping EPA’s statutory authority by forcing a shift away from fossil fuels.
The agency argues that the targeted emissions—largely carbon dioxide—are global pollutants and not clearly linked to local or regional public health impacts from U.S. power generation. Accordingly, the EPA contends that it must first determine whether emissions from such sources “significantly contribute to dangerous air pollution” before regulating them under the Clean Air Act.
Under an alternative option, the EPA may also remove the most costly compliance mechanisms, including carbon capture and storage mandates for new natural gas turbines and emission guidelines for existing coal plants. According to EPA estimates, the repeal would save the power sector approximately $19 billion over 20 years—equivalent to $1.2 billion annually beginning in 2026.
Rollback of 2024 MATS amendments
In a parallel move, the EPA is proposing to reverse specific 2024 amendments to the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards, reverting to the original 2012 rules. The rollback targets more stringent particulate matter (PM) emission limits for coal-fired plants, tighter mercury standards for lignite combustion, and mandatory use of continuous PM monitoring systems.
Industry groups have raised concerns over the 2024 revisions, especially in states such as North Dakota, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Texas, citing heightened compliance costs and operational uncertainty. The proposed repeal would deliver an estimated $1.2 billion in savings over the next decade.
Despite the repeal proposal, the EPA stressed that the original 2012 MATS rule had already achieved significant environmental gains. Between 2010 and 2021, mercury emissions from coal plants fell by 90%, while emissions of acid gases and non-mercury metals like arsenic, lead, and nickel dropped by over 80%.
Political and legal backdrop
The move comes amid renewed Republican pressure to prioritise domestic energy production and reverse what they see as regulatory overreach. The EPA’s actions also echo the Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling in West Virginia v. EPA, which curtailed the agency’s authority to reshape the nation’s electricity mix without explicit Congressional approval under the so-called “major questions doctrine.”
Critics of the Biden-era policies claim the administration used environmental regulation as a backdoor mechanism to phase out fossil fuel use in favour of renewables—an approach they argue undermines energy security and economic competitiveness.
Public consultation
Both proposals are subject to public comment, and further deliberations are expected in the coming months. Environmental groups have signalled strong opposition, warning that the rollback may compromise long-term climate goals and public health protections.
