The human race is responsible for over 2000 gigatonnes of carbon emissions since 1750. Carbon emissions have been there since the industrial revolution, with the major sources of emissions originating from human activities. Carbon dioxide emissions, mainly from fossil fuels, have been rising dramatically since the start of the industrial revolution. Increased carbon emissions from developing and developed countries have been associated with increased global warming and climate change in recent times. The relationship between carbon emissions and how they contribute to global warming has raised debates on controlling carbon emissions.
The EPA released a proposal that will require the power plants using coal to capture and store carbon emissions instead of releasing the emissions into the atmosphere. The proposal has raised major arguments between groups that oppose it and those who embrace it. Eileen Claussen supports the proposal arguing that it would decarbonize the power plant industry, allow clean energy production, and allow the choice between coal and natural gas. However, Paul Cicio claims that the proposal is dictating over the energy policy, that power production will be costlier, and that EPA can eliminate natural gas from the power generation industry. Eileen argues against the idea that the proposal will be a threat to the US economy.
Even though the EPA proposal is meant to reduce carbon emission, it will be costly for upcoming power plants. Manufacturers in the US cannot spur meaningful economic growth, retain and attract investment in US production if the EPA imposes this enormous regulatory burden. According to Paul Cicio, the proposal will increase costs in the manufacturing industry and will bring uncertainty to the US manufacturing competitiveness and jobs. The restrictions on carbon emission pose a serious threat to the US economy (Easton, 2011).