LARAMIE—Gov. Mark Gordon and the state’s top environmental regulators are often at loggerheads with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, especially when it comes to fossil fuel emissions. But last week, Gordon and EPA administrator Michael Regan found room for agreement: Advancing carbon capture technologies is vital to sustaining reliable energy while combating the climate crisis.

“I think what we want to do is not lose focus on the fact that [Gordon] and others are leading the charge so that we can explore the viability of this technology,” Regan told reporters during a joint press conference Wednesday at the University of Wyoming. “We [EPA] also collectively believe that if we can perfect this technology domestically, it’ll put us in a globally competitive position to export this technology to other countries who have carbon-intensive economies,” Regan said.

Regan visited with Tribal leaders on the Wind River Indian Reservation earlier in the week and was joined by Gordon while touring the Integrated Test Center in Gillette and UW’s School of Energy Resources. Gordon said he shares the Biden administration’s sense of urgency to address the global climate crisis, and insists that coal can be part of the solution. Though he disagrees on the details of the administration’s climate measures, he said, Wyoming is on the same page when it comes to developing and deploying carbon capture technologies.

Gov. Mark Gordon and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Michael Regan held a joint press conference at the University of Wyoming on Aug. 9, 2023. (Dustin Bleizeffer/WyoFile)

“We have to make sure that we can power the nation consistently and reliably over the future and understand that we can do that,” Gordon told reporters. “We really want to lead the climate charge. I believe we can do it within an all-of-the-above approach.”

Gordon and Wyoming’s Department of Environmental Quality disagree, however, on EPA’s claims that the technology can help existing coal-fired power plants capture 90% of carbon dioxide emissions by 2030, as proposed under the agency’s new carbon emission standards for power plants — commonly referred to as the “power plant rule.”

Power plant rule

The proposed power plant rule, rolled out in May, would require natural gas-burning plants to capture 90% of their carbon dioxide emissions by 2035, while existing coal-fired power plants would have to capture 90% of their carbon dioxide emissions by 2030. The new standards would “deliver up to $85 billion in climate and public health benefits over the next two decades,” according to the EPA.

Though “ambitious,” the proposed limits and guidelines are “based on proven and cost-effective control technologies that can be applied directly to power plants,” EPA said.

Basin Electric Cooperative’s Dry Fork Station, pictured in 2018, is home to Wyoming’s Integrated Test Center. (Andrew Graham/WyoFile)

In May, Gordon described the proposal — as “altogether unworkable.” He wrote “one has to wonder if this administration has their heads in the sand to be so tone deaf. EPA must work with states on solutions that meet the needs of those states, rather than release edicts from afar that will destroy Wyoming jobs and communities, such as this proposed rule.”

Standing with Gordon at the University of Wyoming Wednesday, Regan reiterated that EPA is taking to heart that the rule — in whatever form it takes — shouldn’t be a “one-size-fits-all” approach. Advancing carbon capture technology, including its potential to reduce planet-warming emissions from existing coal plants, is integral to making the proposed rule work.

“In order to have a viable rule,” Regan said, “it’s important that we have these conversations with academic institutions, with coal [utilities] that are actively exploring this technology and with folks like the governor here who’s going to help inform how we apply this rule nationwide.”

For the past several years, Gordon and the Wyoming Legislature have claimed that capturing carbon dioxide from coal plants and pumping the liquidized gas into oilfields can can meet tighter restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions. In fact, the Legislature has passed seven laws since 2021 intended to force utilities with coal plants in the state to install carbon capture, use and sequestration systems rather than schedule coal plants for early retirement.

EPA Administrator Michael Regan and Gov. Mark Gordon visited the Energy Innovation Center at the University of Wyoming on Aug. 9, 2023. (Dustin Bleizeffer/WyoFile)

Despite the state’s legislative efforts and confidence in the technology, however, the EPA’s claims regarding carbon capture for coal plants are “highly problematic,” the Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality wrote in its comments to its federal counterpart. “EPA has not provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that its proposed BSER [best system of emission reduction] technology will be readily available, and capable of the required performance, by the 2030 compliance deadline.”

The state also contends that the EPA’s public comment period — which opened in May and closed Aug. 8 — was woefully inadequate. “How can EPA possibly expect to receive comprehensive comments from technical experts when EPA does not provide a meaningful comment period?” DEQ wrote.

The power plant rule amounts to setting energy policy, therefore EPA’s proposal exceeds its authority, DEQ said. “Practically speaking, EPA is once again proposing a rule that mandatorily shifts [electric] generation from one type to another.”


Gordon said his time with Regan in Wyoming was a continuation of a conversation the two have been engaged in for the past two years. They discussed the “practical implications” of the power plant rule and how it might be tweaked to accommodate Gordon’s “all-of-the-above” approach to energy and combating climate change, he said.

“I think Wyoming has decided that we want to participate in the climate solution,” said Gordon, who recently assumed chairmanship of the Western Governors’ Association and launched Decarbonizing the West as his priority initiative for the organization. “And as the solution requires getting rid of CO2 in the atmosphere, let’s focus on getting rid of CO2 in the atmosphere. Killing the coal industry only kills the coal industry.”

The EPA and Biden administration are focused on cutting greenhouse gas emissions, Regan said, stopping short of describing a climate emergency.

“Under the president’s leadership, we have both looked at opportunities through the Inflation Reduction Act and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law to begin to adjust to the climatic impacts that we’re currently seeing — those that won’t be reversible anytime soon,” Regan said. 

The approach of the power plant rule, Regan said, is to set standards that drive cleaner technologies. Not to pick and choose power sources.

“We believe that CCS [carbon capture and sequestration] is a viable technology for compliance,” Regan said. “But we also understand that there’s a lot of research and development that needs to go into this technology.

“The power plant rule, as proposed,” Regan added, “is designed to spark this conversation and to solicit comments from Wyoming and from North Carolina and Nevada. Again, because it’s not a one-size-fits-all, we need to have a really comprehensive technology standard that really takes into consideration the economies and the opportunities for all of these things and for all of our states to participate.”

Dustin Bleizeffer is a Report for America Corps member covering energy and climate at WyoFile. He has worked as a coal miner, an oilfield mechanic, and for 25 years as a statewide reporter and editor primarily...

Join the Conversation


Want to join the discussion? Fantastic, here are the ground rules: * Provide your full name — no pseudonyms. WyoFile stands behind everything we publish and expects commenters to do the same. * No personal attacks, profanity, discriminatory language or threats. Keep it clean, civil and on topic. *WyoFile does not fact check every comment but, when noticed, submissions containing clear misinformation, demonstrably false statements of fact or links to sites trafficking in such will not be posted. *Individual commenters are limited to three comments per story, including replies.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  1. Mr Gordon I don’t think your doing enough to protect wyoming. Why do we have DEW.also why the windmills?

  2. Please explain the science behind the carbon capture. What happens to it when it is pumped into the earth. Gases expand, and we know what happens if you blow up a balloon with too much oxygen. It will eventually pop!

  3. The talk of Carbon (dioxide) capture and sequestration is ignoring the potential danger to mammalian life and development posed by excessive CO2. I would not want to raise children (or live) in an area earmarked for underground CO2 storage or where a CO2 pipeline (all pipelines leak) is planned or built. As it is, we don’t know what effect increased atmospheric CO2 might have on human development; but we do know that CO2 is heavier than the oxygen molecule and forces O2 away from the ground. It’s definitely deadly and might cause permanent damage to survivors of CO2 accidents.
    In Wikipedia the August 21, 1986 story of Lake Nyos in Cameroon tells of a CO2 bubble that rolled down a mountain and killed 1756 people and 3500 livestock.
    Closer to home and less than 4 years ago — February 22, 2020 — a CO2 pipeline ruptured in Satartia MI. According to a recent CNN news story: “As the carbon dioxide moved through the rural community, more than 200 people evacuated and at least 45 people were hospitalized. Cars stopped working, hobbling emergency response. People lay on the ground, shaking and unable to breathe. First responders didn’t know what was going on.”
    I have the impression that some Satartians experienced a long recovery from their brain’s oxygen deprivation.
    Do not think lightly of concentrating CO2 and running it through pipelines. Accidents have and will happen. If such be contemplated, move your family away.

  4. Truth is the first casualty of war, a saying that surely applies to the war against climate disruption. The stance of Governor Gordon and EPA administrator Regan obfuscates the truth with incomprehensible jargon and double-talk.
    Coal communities in the U.S. must re-structure and retrain themselves into renewable energy centers. But to get around this vote-killing fact, federal, state and local politicians pretend it’s not true and feed unaffordable pablum to their constituents. They try to make Carbon Capture and “Sequestration” look, not only viable, but true, even though they admit that the CO2 would be blasted underground by oil and gas companies to extract more fossil fuels, thus belying its removal from the atmosphere to obtain a product that will produce more CO2 than was ever extracted by CC”S”.
    The Prairie State Energy Campus in Illinois perpetrates comforting lies like, “We don’t have to forsake coal”, “Coal can be made clean”, and “CCS is a new technology that works (or can be made to work)”.
    In addition, the CCS facility at Prairie State uses a mysterious chemical in its filters, whose formula is, of course, “proprietary”. If they called it secret instead of proprietary, Joe six-pack might demand to know its nature.
    But can Wyoming and the EPA bite the bullet and face a system-changing transition to proven, inexpensive renewable energy? I am asking this question.