the best place to put a coal plant happens to be

where you can pull back a flap of skin
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24658362
hopefully when the worst democractic government leadership yet to come is purged humankind will learn from this tragic aesop fable that despite efforts to try to be more powerful and or destructive than nature, nature truly takes offense to such behavoirs, and issues no rebate checks, only collecters for damages done, and those be a comin'

"What you want to do is reduce the total amount that comes out of these power plants," Holmstead said. "There's no Class 1 area in the country that is only affected by a nearby power plant."

Taken from your reference, from an environmental advocacy group representative--in other words, the problem is already there with current regulations, so the proposed change isn't causing an issue. In fact, your article points out that a regulation passed in 2005 (under "the worst democratic government leadership yet"), the Clean Air Interstate Rule, is having a significant impact to reduce pollution. Keep in mind that opening regions up to industrial development doesn't automatically mean that said development will occur. Does North Dakota really need a new power plant? Could anyone in their right mind justify building one there, far from the usage and far from the coal? Perhaps the sky isn't falling quite so quickly, CU.