Data compiled by the American Petroleum Institute that shows America's carbon footprint is shrinking--due to a conversion in using more natural gas. The free market works far better than any government edict to lessen our carbon footprint.

1. The Right Road to
Clean Power
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
describes President Obama’s Clean Power Plan
(CPP) as a “historic” step forward in reducing
carbon emissions from power plants. However,
a closer look reveals yet another government
preference for renewable power that ignores the
current contributions and future potential for
natural gas, nuclear and hydroelectric power.
In many ways, it’s as if the administration has
charted a path forward that completely ignores the
energy superhighway that is built on the back of
traditional zero- and low-emissions power sources.
Instead, the CPP quietly steers the American
electricity sector toward an off-roading adventure
down an uncertain path with an unclear future.

2. The plan places a premium on the development of new
renewable power resources (classified as wind, solar and
energy efficiency), offering significant incentives to states
that invest heavily in renewables to meet CPP targets.
Renewable power shows great potential for the future,
but favoring it over other low- and non-emitting sources
doesn’t make sense if the goal is really to reduce carbon.
There is another way if we follow the signs pointing
toward a strong economy and environmental future.
Let Markets Work
America’s energy revolution continues to deliver broad
economic benefits while helping to reduce emissions
of carbon dioxide (CO2
) from energy production to
near 27-year lows.1
These reductions are the result of
market forces. They have nothing to do with government
programs and everything to do with the fact that the
United States is the world’s leading producer of natural
gas. With such an abundant supply of affordable fuel
on hand, power plants already have an incentive to
use cleaner-burning natural gas without government
interference.
CT
ID ME
RI
CA MA
OR
NJ
NV
NH
NY
MSFLDE
VA
AL AZ GA
LA
OK
WA
TX
HYDROCOALNATURALGASNUCLEAR
CT
NH
NJ
VA
CA
DE
FL
LA
MA
MS
NV
NY
OK
RI
TX
AL
AZ
GA
ID
ME
OR
WA
36.47% 28.18% 37.58% 28.79%
53.42% 74.14% 61.42% 61.97%42.79% 65.27%
41.28%66.61% 39.99%
29.43% 22.01% 28.23%
44.68%
9.91% 29.96% 15.10% 4.01%
97.81%
Nuclear
STATES WITH BELOW
AVERAGE EMISSION RATES
Wind Other
Hydro Coal
Natural Gas
PRIMARYFUELSOURCES
The EPA ignores the strong performance of current low-
and no-emission generation leaders (nuclear, hydro and
natural gas) in favor of a segment of the power industry
that represents less than 7 percent2
of current electricity
generation. This interference with the market could
have dire economic consequences. All energy sources
have a role to play in supplying America’s energy needs.
But using regulatory authority to benefit one power
source over another in electricity generation could stifle
innovation, destroy jobs and raise energy bills for those
who can least afford it.
EPA’s own data shows that natural gas is the prime
power source in 11 of the 22 states with below average
emission rates. An additional eight states in this group
rely on natural gas to deliver more than 20 percent of
electricity consumed.
EPA’s own data shows that natural
gas is the prime power source in 11
of the 22 states with below average
emission rates.
Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, State Energy Data System - http://www.eia.gov/state/seds/

3. In the 25 states with above average emission
rates, targeted switching to natural gas
could reduce emissions below EPA goals.
Yet EPA seeks to downplay natural gas use.
This is what happens when ideology and
politics trump science.
It is not only natural gas that suffers from
the government’s decision to use the CPP to
advantage only certain energy sources. New
solar technologies3
can’t compete when
the government dictates energy sources.
The same is true for advanced biofuels4
and
new technologies5
and services that could
challenge and transform the electric utility
industry.
Look no further than California to see how
this has played out. After passing its own
directive global warming legislation back
in 2006, which could be considered Clean
Power Plan light, the state has removed
twice6
as much energy from hydroelectric
and nuclear sources than has been replaced
by wind and solar.
In a country with an abundance of rushing
rivers, there is an estimated 65 GW7
(enough
power to light up nearly 50 million homes)
of available power that could be developed
through non-powered dams and new
resources that suffer from regulatory and
legal obstacles.
1,400
1,200
1,200
800
600
400
200
EPA Emissions Targets
Fuel Switching to Combined Cycle Natural Gas
Arkansas
Colorado
IllinoisIndiana
Iow
a
KansasKentuckyM
arylandM
ichigan
M
innesotaM
issouriM
ontanaN
ebraska
N
ew
M
exico
N
orth
Carolina
South
D
akota
O
hio
Pennsylvania
South
Carolina
South
D
akota
Tennessee
Utah
W
estVirginia
W
yom
ing
W
isconsin
CO2 RATE (LBS/NET MWH)
CPP 2020 to 2030 Baseline
Source: API calculation based on EPA Clean Power Plan data - http://1.usa.gov/1MMpplL

4. 3,000
2,750
2,500
2,250
2,000
1,750
1,500
1,250
1,000
750
500
250
0
-250
-500
-750
United
States
Italy
United
Kingdom
SpainCanadaFranceG
erm
any
N
etherlands
Sw
itzerlandAustralia
JapanM
exico
Turkey
Brazil
Indonesia
South
Korea
SaudiArabiaRussia
India
China
TOP 20 ECONOMIESChange in Carbon Emissions from Energy: 2005 - 2012
MILLIONMETRICTONS
-728.72
-86.07
-84.19
-70.48
-58.77
-49.43
-45.27
-11.44
-2.78
11.45
17.80
56.03
66.03
129.47
130.07
163.29
180.74
194.19
649.54
2,990.08
Sources: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Emissions Data
World Bank, GDP Data
120%
100%
80%
60%
40%
20%
0%
-20%
-10%-20%-30% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
Worse on Emissions, Better on Growth
Worse on Emissions,Worse on Growth
None of the world’s
top 20 economies
are better on emissions
and better on growth.
Better on Emissions,
Worse on Growth
CHANGE IN CARBON
EMISSIONS VS. GDP
2005 - 2012
GDP
Emissions from Energyon
China
India
Saudi ArabiaIndonesia
Brazil
South KoreaTurkey
Mexico
Russia
Japan
Germany
Netherlands
U.S.
Canada
UK
Switzerland
Australia
FranceSpain
Italy
Sources: U.S. Energy Information Administration, Emissions Data
World Bank, GDP Data
Leading the World
America’s energy and environmental
leadership is more than just flag-waving
talk. When you compare the top 20
economies in the world, the United
States is second to none in reducing
greenhouse gas emissions from energy.
U.S. oil and natural gas companies are
making big investments in production
and innovation, driving the country’s
growing economy while lowering
emissions. Between 2000 and 2014,
the oil and natural gas industry directly
invested8
approximately $90 billion into
zero- and low-emissions technologies.
When comparing GDP growth and
emissions reductions, you can again
see U.S. leadership. For most countries,
GDP growth is synonymous with
emissions growth, but this is not true
for the United States. Natural gas
is enabling this rare combination of
increased economic growth and falling
emissions.
Our challenge is clear. We need to
provide more energy while lowering
greenhouse gas emissions. We don’t
need government mandates for natural
gas to make it happen; the market is
doing that on its own. And a market-
based, all-of-the-above energy policy
that encourages innovation and meets
demand is the best roadmap for our
future. We have made great progress on
ozone, methane and GHG emissions,
and progress should be allowed
to continue without government
interference, while allowing access to
resources, markets and consumers.
The road to energy success is paved with industry innovation and leads to
the same environmental goals the EPA has established in its plan. And it
does so without harming our strong economy, those in need of good jobs
or consumers who rely on abundant and affordable energy.
1220 L Street, NW
Washington, DC 20005-4070
www.api.org
1
U.S. Energy Information Administration - http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=22372
2
U.S.Energy Information Administration - http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=427t=3
3
Varun Sivaram - http://bit.ly/1MMoLVc
4
Advanced Biofuels Association - http://bit.ly/1MMoV
5
Advanced Energy Economy - http://bit.ly/1MMoZfe
6
U.S. Energy Information Administration, State Energy Data System - http://www.eia.gov/state/seds/
7
Oak Ridge National Lab - http://1.usa.gov/1MMp9Di
8
T2 and Associates - http://bit.ly/1MMpiq9