The flip-side of the Obama coal plan: 35% increase in gas generation.

Bernstein Research (no url): The principal observation is that the goal is not as ambitious as it seems because the target is backward-dated to 2005 and the U.S. is already 10% below that benchmark level.  Furthermore, an additional 9% will be realized by regulations already in motion by 2017, so the true absolute reduction is more like 11% by 2030.
Nevertheless, coal-fired power generation will be reduced by ~25% under that EPA plan with a balancing increase of 35% in natural gas generation.  Also, nuclear capacity will increase by 12% and renewable capacity by 38%.
While states have token freedom to decide how all this is accomplished, a carbon tax of ~$10/ton CO2 is probable in order to make is less competitive with the sectors designated to increase market share.  Relatively low demand for electric power will also help.
Bernstein does not directly address the impact of these changes on the overall output of the economy or cost to consumers other than to note that the EPA Administrator believes the the benefits to health and the environment have been “reasonably demonstrated.”
“EPA’s CO2 reduction targets for 2020 may require that the cost of coal fired generation rise relative to that of gas; beyond 2020, the maintenance of the new balance between high and low emitting sources of power could conceivably be maintained by state energy efficiency and renewable portfolio standards.”
Bernstein further assumes that utilities would be allowed to recover their cost of compliance by charging more to customers.