PRESS RELEASE: Heartland Institute Experts Applaud EPA’s Repeal of Strict Greenhouse Gas Emissions Rule for Power Plants

By H. Sterling Burnett, Anthony Watts, Linnea Lueken

‘This represents a massive victory for energy and climate realists who have fought this unscientific overreach for decades.’

SCHAUMBURG, IL (September 14, 2026) Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin on Monday announced the repeal of an Obama/Biden rule that regulated emissions of greenhouse gases from power plants with the intent to shutter all coal and most natural gas power plants in America.

The Trump administration says the change will remove more than $300 billion in costs to the American electricity industry. Zeldin has in past interviews stated that carbon dioxide is not a pollutant and that natural forcings, not human-generated emissions of greenhouse gases, are the primary drivers of global warming.

The following statements from energy and environment experts at The Heartland Institute may be used for attribution. For more information or to schedule an interview, please contact Vice President and Director of Communications Jim Lakely at jlakely@heartland.org or call/text 312-731-9364.

The Heartland Institute is a national free market think tank that The Economist magazine called “the world’s most prominent think-tank promoting skepticism about man-made climate change.”

Heartland has organized 16 International Conferences on Climate Change with the last in April 2026 that featured Zeldin as the opening keynote speaker. Heartland also published the 3,000-page Climate Change Reconsidered series of volumes by the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change.


“EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin’s action is welcome, but overdue. The Clean Air Act does not countenance restrictions on carbon dioxide for power plants, so the efforts by Biden and Obama to do so through regulations was illegal to start with – which is the why the courts issued stays for the power plant rules.

“There is no climate catastrophe, but if there were, it is Congress’ responsibility, and its alone, to regulate energy and emissions through its interstate commerce power. EPA should never attempt this again. Thanks, President Trump, for this move in the right direction.”

H. Sterling Burnett, Ph.D.
Director, Arthur B. Robinson Center on Climate & Environmental Policy
The Heartland Institute
hsburnett@heartland.org


“The case against carbon dioxide too often ignores its well-documented benefits. Peer-reviewed research shows that rising atmospheric CO₂ has contributed substantially to the greening of the planet by increasing photosynthesis and plant growth, while also benefiting the productivity of important food crops. CO₂ is, after all, an essential ingredient for plant life, and satellite observations have documented widespread increases in vegetation across much of the globe.

“If power-plant CO₂ emissions are supposedly destroying the planet, a greener Earth with enhanced plant growth is an inconvenient fact that deserves far more attention. Any rational assessment of CO₂ regulation should consider these measurable benefits alongside its claimed costs.”

Anthony Watts
Senior Fellow
Arthur B. Robinson Center on Climate and Environmental Policy
The Heartland Institute
awatts@heartland.org


“It was never appropriate for the EPA to regulate carbon dioxide, a gas essential to life on Earth. The demonization and then overregulation of carbon dioxide and other trace gases has led to colossal increases in energy costs, which then exacerbated the rising costs of food and other essential goods and services.

“Everything runs on energy. It’s not even just about the cost of your household electric bill, but everything that you interact with on a daily basis. This represents a massive victory for energy and climate realists who have fought this unscientific overreach for decades.”

Linnea Lueken
Senior Fellow
Arthur B. Robinson Center on Climate and Environmental Policy
The Heartland Institute
llueken@heartland.org


The Heartland Institute is a national nonprofit organization founded in 1984 and headquartered in Schaumburg, Illinois. Its mission is to discover, develop, and promote free-market solutions to social and economic problems. For more information, visit our website or call 312/377-4000.

heartland leaf

.
Heartland Institute

The Heartland Institute is one of the world’s leading free-market think tanks. It is a national nonprofit research and education organization based in Arlington Heights, Illinois. Its mission is to discover, develop, and promote free-market solutions to social and economic problems.

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
5 8 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
17 Comments
September 18, 2026 11:12 am

PRESS RELEASE: Heartland Institute Experts Applaud EPA’s Repeal of Strict Greenhouse Gas Emissions Rule for Power Plants

And if the Democrats manage to steal enough votes to gain majorities in Congress and “win” the White House by 2028 they will put it all back in place.

Reply to  Steve Case
September 18, 2026 12:02 pm

Pretty unlikely. I suspect many on the left actually like some of Trump’s policies including his energy policies, it’s just that they’re too cowardly to admit it- their friends might hate them.

Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
September 18, 2026 12:37 pm

Like everyone else leftist like to pay more for their energy, breathe polluted air and cheer for the rich getting richer.

paul courtney
Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
September 18, 2026 1:02 pm

Mr. MyUselessCommentUnloaded: Thanks for the report from within the lefty camp. Your leader B. Obama said your electric bill would skyrocket, and you folks never complained; if the pollution you breathe is CO2 (it isn’t), then you are exhaling it; and you cheered E. Musk getting richer selling Teslas when you thought it virtuous.
Unlike everyone else, you comment here to display your profound ignorance. On purpose??

Reply to  paul courtney
September 19, 2026 2:48 am

As for Musk, he recently commented on his wealth saying that he’s not just sitting around on a mountain of cash, most of his wealth is tied up in extremely productive, extremely advanced industries.

MarkW
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
September 19, 2026 11:04 am

Socialists seem to believe that wealthy people are like Scrooge McDuck who keep all their wealth in a big vault so they can go swimming in it.

MarkW
Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
September 18, 2026 1:46 pm

And speak of the devil.
I love the way socialists pretend that every regulation is not just needed, but vital, and none of them have any cost.

oeman50
Reply to  MyUsernameReloaded
September 19, 2026 8:53 am

Yes, MUR, you hit the nail on the head! Those the consequences of the leftist approach to regulating CO2.

September 18, 2026 11:47 am

I guess I’ll wait a long time for the British MSM to report this.

September 18, 2026 12:00 pm

“The Heartland Institute is a national free market think tank…”

Referred to in the MSM of course, as a FAR right front for the oil companies. Sure doesn’t seem far right to me and it claims to not get much $$$ from the oil companies- too bad. 🙂

MarkW
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
September 18, 2026 12:15 pm

These guys consider socialists to be center right.

MarkW
September 18, 2026 12:12 pm

No doubt the usual suspects will soon be here to proclaim that this move means we all want rivers to burn again.

CD in Wisconsin
Reply to  MarkW
September 18, 2026 4:56 pm

By chance, are you referring to the Cuyahoga River (empties into Lake Erie) in Ohio that caught fire a number of times in 1969 because it was so badly polluted?

I vaguely remember hearing about it in the news back then because it seemed so weird hearing about a body of water actually catching on fire. It is said that this led to the start of the environmental movement.

What Environmental Problems Did the Great Lakes Face? – ScienceInsights

AWG
Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
September 19, 2026 10:49 am

Yeah, pollution happens. So instead of the Cuyahoga River catching on fire, we let India and China do that for us. Since the US could no longer compete, it meant the ending of millions of well paying union jobs.

The river isn’t on fire, yet in return, women are compelled to enter into the job market just to keep the American Dream.

That is the price of virtue.

Mr.
Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
September 19, 2026 3:06 pm

There is a small river in Queensland, Australia that can be lit when the flow is weak.
Apparently it’s methane from decaying flora that bubbles up from the river bed.

Attributed to climate change of course.

September 18, 2026 2:28 pm

I commented extensively on this new EPA ruling on a previous post. In summary for those who prefer things are VEREY cleansly. There are two separate grounds that EPA is right here, and that inevitable Lawfare will eventually fail.
First, the newish SCOTUS ‘major questions’ doctrine embodied by WV v. EPA says only SCOTUS ultimately decides. Second, an express CAA provision requiring EPA only apply ‘commercially available’ mitigation to stationary sources. For SO2 flue gas it then already was—and then applied to forced retrofits to curb acid rain. For flue gas CO2 it still isn’t despite several EPA subsidized CCS tries, so cannot be. Those failed EPA efforts to get around the intent of CAA ‘commercially available’ CCS requirement were documented in essay ‘Clean Coal’ in ebook Blowing Smoke.

DMA
September 19, 2026 6:58 am

The intent of the laws and rules restricting CO2 emissions was to reduce warming attributed to rising atmospheric CO2. We now have a growing body of unrefuted work showing that human sourced CO2 is a very small part of the increase. This fact should nullify any of those legal actions when they are challenged.