The Trump administration has issued a climate-related rule that would give it more control over federal energy regulations, including ones on methane emissions and carbon dioxide emissions from coal-fired power plants.
The White House said the rule would create a “global commons,” which means the rule “will be enforceable by all members of the global community.”
The rules, however, do not go far enough to curb climate change, which has been blamed for the worsening of the worst drought in the United States since the 1930s.
And while Trump has called climate change a hoax, the rule is not a formal proposal.
Instead, it is a list of ideas for what the administration wants the Environmental Protection Agency to do on climate change and the environment.
The rule would require federal agencies to “develop a detailed plan” to address climate change by the end of 2020.
The proposed rule is a “pivot,” meaning the administration has begun to shift from the Obama administration’s environmental policy to the “new normal,” which includes a focus on environmental protections, according to the Interior Department.
That’s in contrast to the Obama-era approach of “zero tolerance” on environmental regulations, which led to the closure of many coal-mining facilities.
The new rule could have an even bigger impact on the coal industry.
The coal industry has already seen its share of emissions increase under the rule, which would require coal companies to meet a carbon-reduction goal of 35 percent below 2005 levels by 2030.
“We’re really starting to see a real shift in thinking about what coal means to the coal company,” said John D. Healy, an energy economist at the Center for American Progress and an adviser to the Coal Institute.
“There’s a shift toward the new normal.”
The rule also calls for a “clean coal” technology to replace coal with natural gas and wind energy.
The Clean Coal standard was a pillar of the Obama era’s environmental policies and was an important part of the coal business’s economic survival.
But Trump has repeatedly criticized the standards, calling them too expensive and too inefficient.
The Trump-era coal industry is also concerned about the rule’s effect on coal’s business model.
“In many respects, it’s a bait and switch,” said Tom Zwilling, president of the American Coalition for Clean Coal Electricity.
“It’s not the Clean Coal technology that we want, but it’s the Clean coal technology.”
Healy said coal companies are already seeing a “significant uptick” in costs because of the rule.
“I think we’re going to see some real challenges.”
The new rules will be subject to judicial review by the court, and it is unclear how the court will rule on them.
But the EPA said in a statement that it would not be commenting on “legal matters.”
It said it was “focused on ensuring that the rule provides the EPA with the resources needed to protect the health, welfare, and safety of the public, and that it ensures that the federal government’s efforts to address the effects of climate change are implemented to the fullest extent.”
Trump has also said he is willing to consider an energy policy that puts a “competitive premium” on the U.S. coal industry, though he has yet to announce his position.
He also has called on states to adopt a “carbon tax,” which would tax carbon emissions from the power sector and could help lower energy costs for businesses and consumers.
In his executive order, Trump also called for a new “carbon budget” to be set up to offset the costs of a “new era of prosperity” in the U, which he said would involve a new economy based on energy independence.
“Today, America’s economy is built on energy and it must be an economy based not on cheap foreign oil, but on the clean energy that our country needs to thrive and create jobs for all Americans,” he said.
The administration has been touting a plan to create a carbon tax that could be passed into law, but Trump has yet a plan on how he would pay for it.
His budget proposal includes a proposal for a carbon “offset,” which is supposed to offset future carbon emissions that could otherwise be generated by fossil fuels.
The Energy Department has also been looking at ways to lower carbon emissions, and a draft of a draft plan that would be presented to Congress next month would require an “offsetting carbon tax.”
But Trump’s plan has been met with resistance from coal miners, who have argued that it could cause them to shift to other sources of energy.