The resolution proposed by Oklahoma Senator James Inhofe who is the top Republican on the Senate’s environmental panel was intended to apply a more measured approach to reducing mercury emissions from coal-fired power plants.

Rejection of Inhofe’s resolution in the Senate sparked reaction from the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity which said the EPA’s MACT rule was a costly burden not only on the coal industry, but the whole of the economy.

“It’s disappointing that the Senate did not pass this resolution because it could have forced EPA to adopt a more reasonable approach to reducing mercury emissions,” ACCCE president and chief executive Steve Miller said.

“The Utility MACT rule is expected to cost $10 billion per year and destroy as many as 215,000 jobs by 2015. EPA rules are already responsible for the premature closure of power plants in 21 states.

“However, we are grateful for Senator Inhofe’s efforts to replace a bad regulation with a reasonable one. The fact that almost half of the US Senate voted for the resolution should send a strong signal to EPA to stop pursuing its overly aggressive regulatory agenda that is increasing energy prices unnecessarily and killing jobs.”

Public officials were outspoken on the issue yesterday as Inhofe’s resolution went to vote as West Virginia Senator Joe Manchin, Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell and Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney signalled support for the resolution.

West Virginia Senator Jay Rockefeller voted against the resolution, saying it failed to embrace coal’s challenges realistically.

“I don’t support this resolution of disapproval because it does nothing to embrace coal’s potential,” Rockefeller said. “It moves us backward, not forward.”

“[U]nless this industry aggressively leans into the future, coal miners will lose the most. It’s not too late for the coal industry to step up and lead by embracing the realities of today and creating a sustainable future.

“Beyond the frenzy over this one EPA rule, we need to focus squarely on the real task of securing coal for the long term while addressing legitimate environmental and health concerns. Let me be clear. I’m frustrated with some of the top levels of the coal industry, but I’m not giving up hope for real solutions for clean coal.”

Wyoming Senator Mike Enzi voted in favor of the resolution to strike down the EPA rule, citing a grueling economic test for the coal and power production sectors.

“The cost-benefit ratio of the Utility MACT rule, assuming the EPA's best-case scenario, is 1600-1,” Enzi said.

“These costs would be passed on to consumers and will result in higher electricity prices. The administration's greenhouse gas standard would make it impossible to build a new coal-fired power plant in the United States.”

Wyoming Governor Matt Mead said the rule was one of the most expensive in history.

“By EPA’s own analysis, the annual reoccurring net loss of jobs as a result of these rules is up to 17,000,” Mead said.

“With the host of proposed and implemented rules, there will be a severe negative net effect on jobs and the economy. This cumulative impact should have been analyzed by the EPA.”