The Environmental Protection Agency issued the first limits on greenhouse-gas emissions from U.S. power plants, the largest source of carbon dioxide linked to climate change.
The rules will permit emissions from new power plants at about the level established for a natural-gas plant, the EPA said today in an e-mailed statement, which would effectively preclude construction of new coal-fired plants.
“We’re taking a common-sense step to reduce pollution in our air, protect the planet for our children, and move us into a new era of American energy,” Lisa Jackson, administrator of the EPA, said in a statement.
The proposed nationwide standard is the first of its kind issued by the EPA for carbon-dioxide emissions. The rule would only apply to the construction of new plants, and the administration said it would exempt plants that are proposed to be built within the next year.
The initial impact would be minimal as utilities are closing, not building, coal plants because natural gas prices are at 10-year lows. The share of coal in electricity generation dropped below 40 percent by the end of 2011, the first time it had been that low since 1978, according to the U.S. Energy Information Agency in Washington.
The average U.S. coal plant emits 2,249 pounds of carbon dioxide for each megawatt hour of power produced, compared with 1,135 pounds for a natural gas plant, according to the EPA. Newer combined-cycle natural gas plants, in which the heat exhaust of a first gas-fueled turbine drives a second generator, are more efficient.
“If old King Coal isn’t dead already, he’s certainly teetering toward life support,” Frank O’Donnell, president of Clean Air Watch in Washington.
Carbon-dioxide emissions since the Industrial Revolution have led to a warming of the earth’s temperature in the past 50 years, threatening to cause extreme weather, drought and coastal flooding, according to the U.S. Global Change Research Program.
Social Justice: Current Affairs, Business, Politics, and all the reasons in the world to Thrive on Creative Discontent!
Showing posts with label epa. Show all posts
Showing posts with label epa. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 27, 2012
Saturday, March 10, 2012
Protecting Our Health From A Toxic Threat
Though smaller than regular plants, industrial power plants are the U.S.'s third largest source of mercury pollution. The dirtiest of these facilities released more than 160 million pounds of toxic air pollutants like mercury, lead, benzene and acid gases in 2010 alone. Earthjustice has worked for more than a decade to reduce health threats from pollution caused by industrial power plants - also known as industrial boilers.
In 2011, under a court-ordered deadline, the EPA issued revised Clean Air Act emission standards for these plants that will save thousands of lives each year and prevent widespread sickness and suffering. Industry groups, including the Koch brothers, SPI: The Plastics Trade Association, and others, have launched an attack on Capitol Hill in an attempt to permanently block these protections. If they succeed, the pollution and subsequent health damage will continue unabated.
The baseline emissions of these industrial power plants, according to data from the EPA, exceed:
- 10,000 pounds/year of mercury;
- 215,000 pounds/year of lead;
- 123,000 pounds/year of chromium;
- 100 million pounds/year of hydrochloric acid; and
- 100 million pounds/year of fine particulate matter.
These numbers illustrate the tremendous capacity of industrial power plants to pollute our air. The owners of these industrial power plants, along with their congressional allies, have sought time and again to kill these standards. Two bills were introduced in 2011—S. 1392 in the U.S. Senate and H.R. 2250 in the House of Representatives—that would permanently exempt industrial power plants from the Clean Air Act. These bills have also been attached repeatedly as "riders" to unrelated, must-pass budget and payroll tax bills, a disingenuous strategy to undercut badly needed public health protections by trading them off against legislation designed to provide economic relief.
Friday, March 9, 2012
Time to get real America = let's prevent the next mishap
According to chemical facility reports to the EPA, there are 483 U.S. chemical facilities distributed among 43 states that each put 100,000 or more Americans at risk of a Bhopal magnitude disaster. According to the U.S. Naval Research Laboratory these hazards could easily result in thousands of fatalities in a matter of hours following a terrorist attack. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has identified 4,500 high risk chemical facilities in the U.S. The Homeland Security Council estimated that an attack on a 90 ton tank car of chlorine gas would result in: 17,500 fatalities, 10,000 severe injuries and 100,000 hospitalizations. Plant employees and communities living closest to the plants are at the greatest risk.
Hundreds of chemical facilities have eliminated the possibility of a chemical disaster by converting to inherently safer chemical processes. A famous example was the conversion of Washington, D.C.'s wastewater treatment plant from deadly chlorine gas to harmless liquid bleach within 90 days following the 9/11 attacks. This conversion eliminated a terrorist risk to more than one million people at a cost of less than $0.50 per water customer per year. More than 200 other plants have converted since 9/11 and 49 percent did it for less than $100,000. Unfortunately at this rate it will take decades to convert the 2,498 most dangerous plants and there is no requirement that the highest risk plants convert sooner even where cost-effective alternatives are readily available.
In 2002 the EPA proposed to more fully enforce the 1990 Clean Air Act to prevent chemical disasters through the use of safer chemical processes but the proposal was later killed by the White House. Until Congress acts responsibly, the only way to ensure that the DHS and EPA disaster prevention policies are implemented is to enforce the 1990 Clean Air Act's General Duty Clause (GDC). The GDC in the Clean Air Act obligates all chemical facilities to be designed and operated to prevent catastrophic chemical releases. By issuing new rules and guidance under the GDC any resulting hazard reduction would also reduce the work load on the DHS and Coast Guard as more high-risk plants become safer "de-listed" facilities subject to fewer regulations with far less liability. Such a program would also help close security gaps at water and port facilities because the Clean Air Act program already covers those facilities.
As we have seen with disasters, such as the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, once "fail safe" gadgets fail, it's too late to prevent a catastrophe.
The authority of the Clean Air Act should be used as soon as possible to reduce these catastrophic risks to millions of Americans so that they will no longer be targets of terrorism or Bhopal magnitude chemical accidents.
Hundreds of chemical facilities have eliminated the possibility of a chemical disaster by converting to inherently safer chemical processes. A famous example was the conversion of Washington, D.C.'s wastewater treatment plant from deadly chlorine gas to harmless liquid bleach within 90 days following the 9/11 attacks. This conversion eliminated a terrorist risk to more than one million people at a cost of less than $0.50 per water customer per year. More than 200 other plants have converted since 9/11 and 49 percent did it for less than $100,000. Unfortunately at this rate it will take decades to convert the 2,498 most dangerous plants and there is no requirement that the highest risk plants convert sooner even where cost-effective alternatives are readily available.
In 2002 the EPA proposed to more fully enforce the 1990 Clean Air Act to prevent chemical disasters through the use of safer chemical processes but the proposal was later killed by the White House. Until Congress acts responsibly, the only way to ensure that the DHS and EPA disaster prevention policies are implemented is to enforce the 1990 Clean Air Act's General Duty Clause (GDC). The GDC in the Clean Air Act obligates all chemical facilities to be designed and operated to prevent catastrophic chemical releases. By issuing new rules and guidance under the GDC any resulting hazard reduction would also reduce the work load on the DHS and Coast Guard as more high-risk plants become safer "de-listed" facilities subject to fewer regulations with far less liability. Such a program would also help close security gaps at water and port facilities because the Clean Air Act program already covers those facilities.
As we have seen with disasters, such as the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, once "fail safe" gadgets fail, it's too late to prevent a catastrophe.
The authority of the Clean Air Act should be used as soon as possible to reduce these catastrophic risks to millions of Americans so that they will no longer be targets of terrorism or Bhopal magnitude chemical accidents.
Tuesday, March 6, 2012
TransCanada Announces Plan to Circumvent Environmental Review to Build Rejected Tar Sands Pipeline in US
WASHINGTON, DC – TransCanada, the company behind the rejected Keystone XL tar sands pipeline sent a letter to the US State Department announcing its intention to circumvent US environmental review and build the southern portion of the proposed crude oil pipeline from Cushing, OK, to Port Arthur, TX. In the month since President Obama denied the permit the company has undertaken an unprecedented lobbying and public relations effort to gain approval for the pipeline.
In response, Michael Brune, Sierra Club Executive Director, issued the following statement:
“TransCanada is hell bent on bringing tar sands, the world’s dirtiest oil, through America to reach foreign markets. They can’t wait for a fair, scientific environmental review they know their pipeline would fail. So we see dirty political tricks, dirty PR tricks, and, now, this dirty trick to build the pipeline piecemeal.
“With TransCanada it’s ‘safety last.’ The first US Keystone pipeline averaged a leak a month. But the company can’t wait to divert tar sands crude oil from the Midwest to the Gulf, raising American oil prices and, likely, also gasoline prices. This Oklahoma to Texas segment of the Keystone XL pipeline will mean more tar sands converted to diesel and available for export overseas.
“With this announcement TransCanada is telling the Americans that it is above the law. The company did not expect public scrutiny on this project, but the American people are watching and we are unwilling to sacrifice American farmers and ranchers, and the drinking water for millions of Americans whose water supplies lie below or downstream of this dangerous pipeline.”
In response, Michael Brune, Sierra Club Executive Director, issued the following statement:
“TransCanada is hell bent on bringing tar sands, the world’s dirtiest oil, through America to reach foreign markets. They can’t wait for a fair, scientific environmental review they know their pipeline would fail. So we see dirty political tricks, dirty PR tricks, and, now, this dirty trick to build the pipeline piecemeal.
“With TransCanada it’s ‘safety last.’ The first US Keystone pipeline averaged a leak a month. But the company can’t wait to divert tar sands crude oil from the Midwest to the Gulf, raising American oil prices and, likely, also gasoline prices. This Oklahoma to Texas segment of the Keystone XL pipeline will mean more tar sands converted to diesel and available for export overseas.
“With this announcement TransCanada is telling the Americans that it is above the law. The company did not expect public scrutiny on this project, but the American people are watching and we are unwilling to sacrifice American farmers and ranchers, and the drinking water for millions of Americans whose water supplies lie below or downstream of this dangerous pipeline.”
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
54.5 MPG the new USA standard to be issued by the EPA in July....maybe
Greed is the only obstacle to achieving a MPG standard of 54.5. It’s not your greed or my greed but oil company greed, oil company lobbyists’ greed and their puppet politicians who stand in the way of the right decision.
The EPA has the support of 66.66% of Americans, 19 Auto Manufacturers representing 90% of cars sold in the USA and the United Auto Workers!!!
Not issuing the 545.5 MPG standard will continue and deepen America’s dependence on Foreign Oil, Foreign Refineries. Continue to finance Dictators, Terrorists, and Human Rights Violations.
The technology exists today to set us on the right path. A path that will save:
- - 4 Bln barrels of oil
- - Make $400 bln available to be reinvested into our economy in productive ways
- - Put $4k in each car buyers pocket
- - Reduce the many health risks caused by mobile source pollution, e.g., Lung Damage, Asthma, Premature Births & Deaths, Heart Disease, Eye/Skin Irritation, Cancer and lost work days which measured 2.8 mln per annum in California alone
I, we, call on the EPA to issue strong final standards in July and ensure any flexibilities in the standards do not dilute our oil savings or pollution reductions. When testing vehicles to comply with these standards, the agency’s current test procedure over-estimates efficiency by 25%. It is critical that the agency develops new accurate test procedures.
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
a score late but better late than never = Mercury and Air Toxin Regulation
Gina McCarthy, Assistant Administrator for the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency’s Office of Air and Radiation, will address about 2,000 delegates at EUEC 2012, the USA’s largest energy, utility and environment conference to be held at the Phoenix Convention Center from January 30 to February 2, 2012.
McCarthy’s keynote address will include the EPA’s new Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) issued on December 21, 2011. These are the first national standards to regulate power plant emissions of mercury and toxic air pollution that directly impact 1,400 coal-fired and oil-fired power plants and are estimated to cost $10 billion.
These rules were issued after 20 years of study and litigation that included participation by experts presenting at the EUEC 2012 and at past EUEC conferences.
“We’re fortunate to have Assistant Administrator McCarthy return as a keynote speaker. This year she will discuss the newly issued mercury standards as a follow up to her presentation last year on the proposed rules. Senior executives from the Department of Energy and Southern Company will also speak in the keynote session on how the utility industry plans to comply with these new regulations and how it impacts 1,400 power plants identified by the EPA.” said Dr. Prabhu Dayal, EUEC Chairman.
EUEC 2012 is the 15th annual energy, utility and environment conference, making it the largest and longest running professional networking and educational event of its kind in the United States. EUEC provides an educational forum with 600 expert speakers in 12 tracks and networking events in the exhibit hall to facilitate the collaboration between government, industry and stakeholders for the protection of our environment and energy security.
Agency’s Office of Air and Radiation, will address about 2,000 delegates at EUEC 2012, the USA’s largest energy, utility and environment conference to be held at the Phoenix Convention Center from January 30 to February 2, 2012.
McCarthy’s keynote address will include the EPA’s new Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) issued on December 21, 2011. These are the first national standards to regulate power plant emissions of mercury and toxic air pollution that directly impact 1,400 coal-fired and oil-fired power plants and are estimated to cost $10 billion.
These rules were issued after 20 years of study and litigation that included participation by experts presenting at the EUEC 2012 and at past EUEC conferences.
“We’re fortunate to have Assistant Administrator McCarthy return as a keynote speaker. This year she will discuss the newly issued mercury standards as a follow up to her presentation last year on the proposed rules. Senior executives from the Department of Energy and Southern Company will also speak in the keynote session on how the utility industry plans to comply with these new regulations and how it impacts 1,400 power plants identified by the EPA.” said Dr. Prabhu Dayal, EUEC Chairman.
EUEC 2012 is the 15th annual energy, utility and environment conference, making it the largest and longest running professional networking and educational event of its kind in the United States. EUEC provides an educational forum with 600 expert speakers in 12 tracks and networking events in the exhibit hall to facilitate the collaboration between government, industry and stakeholders for the protection of our environment and energy security.
Tuesday, January 17, 2012
Ohhh Fracking Workers what do you think about all that radioactive waste you're being exposed to???
New York's emerging plan to regulate natural gas drilling in the gas-rich Marcellus Shale needs to go further to safeguard drinking water, environmentally sensitive areas and gas industry workers, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has informed state officials.
The EPA's comments, in a series of letters this week to the state's Department of Environmental Conservation, are significant because they suggest the agency will be watching closely as states in the Northeast and Midwest embrace new drilling technologies to tap vast reserves of shale gas.
New York is in the forefront of the shale gas boom and has been working on regulations for more than three years. Judith Enck, the EPA regional administrator who issued the agency comments, noted that New York "will help set the pace for improved safeguards across the country."
The EPA's comments are among 20,000 the state has received on its proposed plan to regulate the environmental effects of drilling. Many of the EPA's comments focus on how the state DEC will handle the chemically tainted wastewater from the drilling process known as hydraulic fracturing, or fracking.
To free the gas trapped in the Marcellus and other shale formations, drillers pump millions of gallons of water mixed with sand and chemicals deep underground under pressure. The wastewater can get into drinking water by being disposed of at sewage treatment plants, the EPA wrote.
As ProPublica first reported in 2009, these plants don't typically have the equipment necessary to detect and treat the chemicals in drilling wastewater. Plant operators who accept drilling wastewater simply dilute it with regular sewage and then discharge it into water bodies. DEC wastewater samples had levels of radioactive elements thousands of times higher than drinking water limits, ProPublica reported.
In its comments, the EPA pointed out that New York's current permitting system for water treatment plants doesn't include limits on pollutants frequently contained in drilling wastewater, such as radionuclides, which can cause cancer at high levels.
The EPA said it needs to be more closely involved in analyzing and approving any treatment plant's application to accept drilling wastewater. And while the DEC's proposed rules suggest limits on radioactive elements such as radium, the EPA said it's not clear who would be "responsible for addressing the potential health and safety issues" related to radiation exposure.
The EPA also flagged health risks to workers close to wastewater and other potentially radioactive materials, like the large amounts of soil and mud unearthed by drilling. "At a minimum, the human health risks to the site workers from radon and its decay products should be assessed along with the associated treatment technologies such as aeration systems or holding for decay," the agency wrote.
ProPublica reported that neighboring Pennsylvania became overwhelmed by drilling wastewater after the state embraced the industry. The Monongahela River, which provides drinking water to 350,000 people, became contaminated with drilling salts and minerals.
The EPA letters are the latest in a series of federal moves to tighten oversight of gas drilling. In December, the agency scientifically linked underground water pollution to hydraulic fracturing for the first time. Last August, the EPA announced that it would develop its own rules on wastewater disposal instead of leaving it up to states.
The EPA's comments, in a series of letters this week to the state's Department of Environmental Conservation, are significant because they suggest the agency will be watching closely as states in the Northeast and Midwest embrace new drilling technologies to tap vast reserves of shale gas.
New York is in the forefront of the shale gas boom and has been working on regulations for more than three years. Judith Enck, the EPA regional administrator who issued the agency comments, noted that New York "will help set the pace for improved safeguards across the country."
The EPA's comments are among 20,000 the state has received on its proposed plan to regulate the environmental effects of drilling. Many of the EPA's comments focus on how the state DEC will handle the chemically tainted wastewater from the drilling process known as hydraulic fracturing, or fracking.
To free the gas trapped in the Marcellus and other shale formations, drillers pump millions of gallons of water mixed with sand and chemicals deep underground under pressure. The wastewater can get into drinking water by being disposed of at sewage treatment plants, the EPA wrote.
As ProPublica first reported in 2009, these plants don't typically have the equipment necessary to detect and treat the chemicals in drilling wastewater. Plant operators who accept drilling wastewater simply dilute it with regular sewage and then discharge it into water bodies. DEC wastewater samples had levels of radioactive elements thousands of times higher than drinking water limits, ProPublica reported.
In its comments, the EPA pointed out that New York's current permitting system for water treatment plants doesn't include limits on pollutants frequently contained in drilling wastewater, such as radionuclides, which can cause cancer at high levels.
The EPA said it needs to be more closely involved in analyzing and approving any treatment plant's application to accept drilling wastewater. And while the DEC's proposed rules suggest limits on radioactive elements such as radium, the EPA said it's not clear who would be "responsible for addressing the potential health and safety issues" related to radiation exposure.
The EPA also flagged health risks to workers close to wastewater and other potentially radioactive materials, like the large amounts of soil and mud unearthed by drilling. "At a minimum, the human health risks to the site workers from radon and its decay products should be assessed along with the associated treatment technologies such as aeration systems or holding for decay," the agency wrote.
ProPublica reported that neighboring Pennsylvania became overwhelmed by drilling wastewater after the state embraced the industry. The Monongahela River, which provides drinking water to 350,000 people, became contaminated with drilling salts and minerals.
The EPA letters are the latest in a series of federal moves to tighten oversight of gas drilling. In December, the agency scientifically linked underground water pollution to hydraulic fracturing for the first time. Last August, the EPA announced that it would develop its own rules on wastewater disposal instead of leaving it up to states.
Wednesday, January 4, 2012
Earthquakes, water table contamination who cares; on with the fracking.....
Asian and European energy producers are spending billions of dollars to amass stakes in oil and natural-gas discoveries from Ohio to British Columbia even as earthquakes and tainted water threaten to stall the biggest drilling boom (BAKEHORZ) in at least two decades.
Total SA (FP), Europe’s third-largest oil company, and China Petrochemical Corp. (600028), that nation’s second-biggest crude producer, committed $7 billion to U.S. and Canadian shale rock formations during the past two weeks. The investments are aimed at tapping the expertise of smaller explorers including Devon Energy Corp. (DVN) and Chesapeake Energy Corp. (CHK) that pioneered techniques employed to crack previously impervious shale.
The potential rewards from shale regions such as the Utica and Marcellus formations in the eastern U.S. are too big for overseas explorers to ignore, said Mark Hanson, an analyst at Morningstar LLC in Chicago. A New Year’s Eve earthquake in Youngstown, Ohio, linked to a well used to store drilling wastewater prompted the state to halt operations at five such wells. Separately, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is studying whether intensive shale-drilling practices pose a danger to drinking water.
“These shale prospects are exploration frontiers and the big international players see them as a runway to growth,” Hanson said yesterday in a telephone interview. “They are acquiring stakes not only to learn how to drill these kind of formations in other parts of the world, but to understand how to get their arms around prospects of this size.”
Total SA (FP), Europe’s third-largest oil company, and China Petrochemical Corp. (600028), that nation’s second-biggest crude producer, committed $7 billion to U.S. and Canadian shale rock formations during the past two weeks. The investments are aimed at tapping the expertise of smaller explorers including Devon Energy Corp. (DVN) and Chesapeake Energy Corp. (CHK) that pioneered techniques employed to crack previously impervious shale.
The potential rewards from shale regions such as the Utica and Marcellus formations in the eastern U.S. are too big for overseas explorers to ignore, said Mark Hanson, an analyst at Morningstar LLC in Chicago. A New Year’s Eve earthquake in Youngstown, Ohio, linked to a well used to store drilling wastewater prompted the state to halt operations at five such wells. Separately, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is studying whether intensive shale-drilling practices pose a danger to drinking water.
“These shale prospects are exploration frontiers and the big international players see them as a runway to growth,” Hanson said yesterday in a telephone interview. “They are acquiring stakes not only to learn how to drill these kind of formations in other parts of the world, but to understand how to get their arms around prospects of this size.”
Friday, December 30, 2011
Republicans no longer think it's a Right for you to have: clean water, air, and land!!!
House Republicans and Republican presidential candidates have launched unprecedented attacks on the Environmental Protection Agency.
Among the other things causing Richard Nixon to turn over in his grave may be Republican attacks on the Environmental Protection Agency, which the former president and Congress established in a bipartisan response to public demand for cleaner water, air, and land.
Since Republicans regained control of the House of Representatives in the 2010 midterm elections, they have introduced an unprecedented number of measures designed to weaken longstanding environmental protections and block the EPA from putting forth new regulations.
Rep. Henry Waxman, D- Calif., an environmental advocate, has called this “the most anti-environmental Congress in history.” The perceived assault has prompted the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, chaired by Waxman, to develop an online database tracking the number and scope of anti-environment bills proposed on the House floor. According to the searchable database, as of September 2011 there have been 170 anti-environment votes under the Republican majority in the 112th Congress. The database breaks down this number by category, finding the vast majority of anti-environment votes targeting the EPA (91 votes). Some of these seek to block actions that prevent pollution (71 votes), and others to dismantle the Clean Air Act specifically (61 votes). Fewer measures have been directed at weakening regulations of the Department of Energy and Department of the Interior, blocking action on climate change and defunding clean energy initiatives.
Among the other things causing Richard Nixon to turn over in his grave may be Republican attacks on the Environmental Protection Agency, which the former president and Congress established in a bipartisan response to public demand for cleaner water, air, and land.
Since Republicans regained control of the House of Representatives in the 2010 midterm elections, they have introduced an unprecedented number of measures designed to weaken longstanding environmental protections and block the EPA from putting forth new regulations.
Rep. Henry Waxman, D- Calif., an environmental advocate, has called this “the most anti-environmental Congress in history.” The perceived assault has prompted the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, chaired by Waxman, to develop an online database tracking the number and scope of anti-environment bills proposed on the House floor. According to the searchable database, as of September 2011 there have been 170 anti-environment votes under the Republican majority in the 112th Congress. The database breaks down this number by category, finding the vast majority of anti-environment votes targeting the EPA (91 votes). Some of these seek to block actions that prevent pollution (71 votes), and others to dismantle the Clean Air Act specifically (61 votes). Fewer measures have been directed at weakening regulations of the Department of Energy and Department of the Interior, blocking action on climate change and defunding clean energy initiatives.
Sunday, December 18, 2011
Pipelines are only safe when well regulated: ASK the 21 dead, 105 hurt by the 230 gas pipeline accidents last year!!!
WAYNESBURG, Pa. - Through the hilly fields here in southwestern Pennsylvania, crews worked for months this year, cutting a trench through woods and past farms for a new natural gas pipeline.
Like many other lines crisscrossing the state's Marcellus Shale regions, this pipe was big - a high-pressure steel line, 20 inches in diameter, large enough to help move a buried ocean of natural gas out of this corner of the state. It was also plenty big enough to set off a sizable explosion if something went wrong.
There was trouble on the job. Far too many of the welds that tied the pipe sections together were failing inspection and had to be done over.
A veteran welder, now an organizer for a national pipeline union, happened upon the line and tried to blow the whistle on what he considered substandard work.
But there was no one to call.
Pennsylvania's regulators don't handle those pipelines, and acknowledge they don't even know where they are. And when he reported what he saw to a federal oversight agency, an inspector told him there was nothing he could do, either.
Because the line was in a rural area, no safety rules applied.
"It's crazy," said Terry Langley, the union official, worried that any problems would literally be buried. "It seems to me that everyone is turning a blind eye."
In Pennsylvania's shale fields, where the giant Marcellus strike has unleashed a furious surge of development, many natural gas pipelines today get less safety regulation than in any other state in America, an Inquirer review shows.
Hundreds of miles of high-pressure pipelines already have been installed in the shale fields with no government safety checks - no construction standards, no inspections, and no monitoring.
"No one - and absolutely no one - is looking," said Deborah Goldberg, a lawyer with Earthjustice, a nonprofit law firm focusing on the environment.
Belatedly, the state's elected officials and regulators are trying to catch up. The legislature is poised to give the state Public Utility Commission authority to enforce federal safety rules in the shale regions, as in other gas-producing states.
Still, because of a long-standing gap in the federal rules - the same issue that affected the line near Waynesburg - the new law would leave many gas pipelines unregulated over vast swaths of rural Pennsylvania, especially in the very shale regions that are ground zero for pipeline construction.
These new Marcellus Shale "gathering" pipelines that connect to the wells are going unregulated, even though they are large-diameter, high-pressure pipes - as powerful and potentially dangerous as the transmission lines that cut across the continent.
Last year, 21 people died and 105 were hurt in 230 gas-line accidents in the United States, according to federal data, the highest death total in a decade.
This year, 16 people have died in gas explosions, including five people in Allentown and one in Philadelphia. The accidents in this region were all due to failures in old cast-iron pipelines, not the type of lines being installed in the shale regions.
Like many other lines crisscrossing the state's Marcellus Shale regions, this pipe was big - a high-pressure steel line, 20 inches in diameter, large enough to help move a buried ocean of natural gas out of this corner of the state. It was also plenty big enough to set off a sizable explosion if something went wrong.
There was trouble on the job. Far too many of the welds that tied the pipe sections together were failing inspection and had to be done over.
A veteran welder, now an organizer for a national pipeline union, happened upon the line and tried to blow the whistle on what he considered substandard work.
But there was no one to call.
Pennsylvania's regulators don't handle those pipelines, and acknowledge they don't even know where they are. And when he reported what he saw to a federal oversight agency, an inspector told him there was nothing he could do, either.
Because the line was in a rural area, no safety rules applied.
"It's crazy," said Terry Langley, the union official, worried that any problems would literally be buried. "It seems to me that everyone is turning a blind eye."
In Pennsylvania's shale fields, where the giant Marcellus strike has unleashed a furious surge of development, many natural gas pipelines today get less safety regulation than in any other state in America, an Inquirer review shows.
Hundreds of miles of high-pressure pipelines already have been installed in the shale fields with no government safety checks - no construction standards, no inspections, and no monitoring.
"No one - and absolutely no one - is looking," said Deborah Goldberg, a lawyer with Earthjustice, a nonprofit law firm focusing on the environment.
Belatedly, the state's elected officials and regulators are trying to catch up. The legislature is poised to give the state Public Utility Commission authority to enforce federal safety rules in the shale regions, as in other gas-producing states.
Still, because of a long-standing gap in the federal rules - the same issue that affected the line near Waynesburg - the new law would leave many gas pipelines unregulated over vast swaths of rural Pennsylvania, especially in the very shale regions that are ground zero for pipeline construction.
These new Marcellus Shale "gathering" pipelines that connect to the wells are going unregulated, even though they are large-diameter, high-pressure pipes - as powerful and potentially dangerous as the transmission lines that cut across the continent.
Last year, 21 people died and 105 were hurt in 230 gas-line accidents in the United States, according to federal data, the highest death total in a decade.
This year, 16 people have died in gas explosions, including five people in Allentown and one in Philadelphia. The accidents in this region were all due to failures in old cast-iron pipelines, not the type of lines being installed in the shale regions.
Sunday, December 11, 2011
Hey Rick Perry how about that air quality in Texas...
“Every place in Texas suffered worse air quality this year, but Dallas was a particularly extreme case,” said David Allen, a chemical engineering professor at the University of Texas who also directs a state air-quality program.
A number of major metropolitan areas, including Dallas-Fort Worth, San Antonio, Austin and even Waco, exceeded federal limits on ozone on more days this year than last. In the greater Houston area, which includes Galveston and Brazoria County, the number of bad-ozone days dropped slightly, to 29, but the pollution was especially severe on certain summer days. On June 6, an air-quality monitor in Galveston measured 112 parts per billion of ozone — the highest reading in Texas since 2008.
Scientists are still trying to understand the reasons for this year’s statewide spike in ozone, which is largely a summer phenomenon. Possibilities include wildfires, drought and the summer’s extreme heat, all of which can contribute to ozone formation.
Amid shale booms across the state, questions are increasing about the effects of oil and gas drilling on air pollution. Trucks carrying drilling materials emit nitrogen oxides, as does equipment like compressors. Natural gas escaping from pipelines or storage tanks emits volatile organic compounds, or VOCs. Nitrogen oxides and VOCs are known as ozone “precursors” because, aided by sunlight, they can react with each other to form ozone.
A number of major metropolitan areas, including Dallas-Fort Worth, San Antonio, Austin and even Waco, exceeded federal limits on ozone on more days this year than last. In the greater Houston area, which includes Galveston and Brazoria County, the number of bad-ozone days dropped slightly, to 29, but the pollution was especially severe on certain summer days. On June 6, an air-quality monitor in Galveston measured 112 parts per billion of ozone — the highest reading in Texas since 2008.
Scientists are still trying to understand the reasons for this year’s statewide spike in ozone, which is largely a summer phenomenon. Possibilities include wildfires, drought and the summer’s extreme heat, all of which can contribute to ozone formation.
Amid shale booms across the state, questions are increasing about the effects of oil and gas drilling on air pollution. Trucks carrying drilling materials emit nitrogen oxides, as does equipment like compressors. Natural gas escaping from pipelines or storage tanks emits volatile organic compounds, or VOCs. Nitrogen oxides and VOCs are known as ozone “precursors” because, aided by sunlight, they can react with each other to form ozone.
Republicans : We get to screw up the environment if you want your payroll tax cut extension...."It's a wonderful LIFE!"
The Republican House bill containing the payroll tax cut would also push through a decision by the administration on TransCanada Corp.’s proposed Keystone XL pipeline without further needed environmental studies, which would connect Canada’s oil sands to refineries on the Gulf Coast. Environmental groups are opposing the project that will contaminate aquifers and put citizens lives and the lives of their children at risk.
The State Department, which has jurisdiction because the pipeline crosses an international border, has said it will rule on plan in 2013 to allow time to study a new route that avoids the environmentally sensitive Sandhills region in Nebraska.
President Barack Obama has said he’ll reject legislation to extend the payroll tax if the pipeline language is attached.
While he Labor Department last week said the unemployment rate fell to 8.6 percent in November, the lowest since March 2009, Obama administration officials such as Alan Kreuger, chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, said the global economy remains “in a fragile state.”
The Republican legislation would also require the Environmental Protection Agency to delay new pollution rules for industrial boilers.
Obama advisers have said they would recommend the president veto a delay on the boiler rule.
The State Department, which has jurisdiction because the pipeline crosses an international border, has said it will rule on plan in 2013 to allow time to study a new route that avoids the environmentally sensitive Sandhills region in Nebraska.
President Barack Obama has said he’ll reject legislation to extend the payroll tax if the pipeline language is attached.
While he Labor Department last week said the unemployment rate fell to 8.6 percent in November, the lowest since March 2009, Obama administration officials such as Alan Kreuger, chairman of the White House Council of Economic Advisers, said the global economy remains “in a fragile state.”
The Republican legislation would also require the Environmental Protection Agency to delay new pollution rules for industrial boilers.
Obama advisers have said they would recommend the president veto a delay on the boiler rule.
Thursday, December 8, 2011
Ahhh the great outdoors in Wyoming...just don't drink the water!!!
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said for the first time it found chemicals used in extracting natural gas through hydraulic fracturing in a drinking-water aquifer in west-central Wyoming.
Samples taken from two deep water-monitoring wells near a gas field in Pavillion, Wyoming, showed synthetic chemicals such as glycols and alcohols “consistent with gas production and hydraulic-fracturing fluids,” the agency said today in an e- mailed statement.
The U.S. gets about one-third of its gas from fracturing, or fracking, in which millions of gallons of chemically treated water and sand are forced underground to break rock and let trapped vapor flow. The findings give ammunition to environmental groups, such as the Natural Resources Defense Council, that have said the drilling risks tainting drinking water and needs stronger regulation.
“This is just evidence of why we need better rules,” Amy Mall, senior policy analyst for the group in Washington, said in an interview. “It’s a game-changer. EPA experts and scientists have recognized that there is real contamination, that there is a real scientific basis for linking it to fracking.”
After complaints from residents of Pavillion, about 230 miles (370 kilometers) northeast of Salt Lake City, the EPA began investigating private drinking-water wells about three years ago. Calgary-based Encana Corp. (ECA), Canada’s largest natural- gas producer, owns about 150 wells in Pavillion, according to spokesman Doug Hock.
Samples taken from two deep water-monitoring wells near a gas field in Pavillion, Wyoming, showed synthetic chemicals such as glycols and alcohols “consistent with gas production and hydraulic-fracturing fluids,” the agency said today in an e- mailed statement.
The U.S. gets about one-third of its gas from fracturing, or fracking, in which millions of gallons of chemically treated water and sand are forced underground to break rock and let trapped vapor flow. The findings give ammunition to environmental groups, such as the Natural Resources Defense Council, that have said the drilling risks tainting drinking water and needs stronger regulation.
“This is just evidence of why we need better rules,” Amy Mall, senior policy analyst for the group in Washington, said in an interview. “It’s a game-changer. EPA experts and scientists have recognized that there is real contamination, that there is a real scientific basis for linking it to fracking.”
After complaints from residents of Pavillion, about 230 miles (370 kilometers) northeast of Salt Lake City, the EPA began investigating private drinking-water wells about three years ago. Calgary-based Encana Corp. (ECA), Canada’s largest natural- gas producer, owns about 150 wells in Pavillion, according to spokesman Doug Hock.
Friday, November 18, 2011
CAFE 49.6 mpg by 2025; fully supported by manufacturers, citizens and small businesses
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Department of Transportation today formally unveiled their joint proposal to set stronger fuel economy and greenhouse gas emissions standards for model year 2017-2025 passenger cars and light trucks.
The proposed Corporate Average Fuel Economy, or CAFE, standards are projected to require 40.1 miles per gallon in model year 2021, and 49.6 mpg in model year 2025, on an average industry fleet-wide basis for cars and trucks combined.
The EPA's proposed greenhouse gas standards, which are harmonized with the CAFE standards, are projected to require emissions of no more than 163 grams/mile of carbon dioxide, CO2, in model year 2025. This CO2 standard is equivalent to 54.5 mpg if this level of emissions were achieved solely through improvements in fuel efficiency, the EPA says.
Cars, SUVs, minivans, and pickup trucks are currently responsible for nearly 60 percent of U.S. transportation-related petroleum use and greenhouse gas emissions.
These proposed standards will cut oil consumption by four billion barrels and cut two billion metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions over the lifetimes of the vehicles sold in those years, the agencies said.
Mitch Bainwol, president and CEO of the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, said, "This proposal continues the approach of establishing a single, national fuel economy program for fuel economy and greenhouse gas emissions, which is the right overall direction."
The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers is a trade association of 12 car and light truck manufacturers including BMW, Chrysler, Ford, General Motors, Jaguar Land Rover, Mazda, Mercedes-Benz, Mitsubishi, Porsche, Toyota, Volkswagen and Volvo.
"Today, on dealers' lots, there are more than 265 models that achieve 30 plus miles per gallon, with more coming," he said. "Sales of these and even more fuel-efficient vehicles will be critical to achieve these policy goals."
Today's action builds on the success of the first phase of the Obama administration's national program, which covers the model years 2012-2016. These earlier CAFE standards raise fuel efficiency equivalent to 35.5 mpg by 2016 and result in an average light vehicle tailpipe CO2 level of 250 grams per mile.
Automakers say the newly proposed CAFE standards will create more jobs.
Small Business Majority founder and chief executive John Arensmeyer said his members are behind the new CAFE standards.
"Our poll of more than 1,200 small business owners across the country found 87 percent of small business owners overwhelmingly support adopting strong standards now, and 80 percent support requiring the auto industry to increase mileage to 60 mpg by 2025 - an even stronger standard than the one the Obama Administration has announced."
Support from small businesses for increasing fuel economy standards is high in states with large auto manufacturing sectors, including Michigan (73 percent) and Ohio (75 percent), Arensmeyer said.
There is also strong support (71 percent) in the influential automotive market of California, which is preparing to update its Clean Cars Program aimed at reducing carbon emissions from cars sold in the state, he said.
California plans to issue its proposal for model year 2017-2025 vehicle greenhouse gas standards on December 7 and will finalize its standards in January.
The proposed Corporate Average Fuel Economy, or CAFE, standards are projected to require 40.1 miles per gallon in model year 2021, and 49.6 mpg in model year 2025, on an average industry fleet-wide basis for cars and trucks combined.
The EPA's proposed greenhouse gas standards, which are harmonized with the CAFE standards, are projected to require emissions of no more than 163 grams/mile of carbon dioxide, CO2, in model year 2025. This CO2 standard is equivalent to 54.5 mpg if this level of emissions were achieved solely through improvements in fuel efficiency, the EPA says.
Cars, SUVs, minivans, and pickup trucks are currently responsible for nearly 60 percent of U.S. transportation-related petroleum use and greenhouse gas emissions.
These proposed standards will cut oil consumption by four billion barrels and cut two billion metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions over the lifetimes of the vehicles sold in those years, the agencies said.
Mitch Bainwol, president and CEO of the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, said, "This proposal continues the approach of establishing a single, national fuel economy program for fuel economy and greenhouse gas emissions, which is the right overall direction."
The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers is a trade association of 12 car and light truck manufacturers including BMW, Chrysler, Ford, General Motors, Jaguar Land Rover, Mazda, Mercedes-Benz, Mitsubishi, Porsche, Toyota, Volkswagen and Volvo.
"Today, on dealers' lots, there are more than 265 models that achieve 30 plus miles per gallon, with more coming," he said. "Sales of these and even more fuel-efficient vehicles will be critical to achieve these policy goals."
Today's action builds on the success of the first phase of the Obama administration's national program, which covers the model years 2012-2016. These earlier CAFE standards raise fuel efficiency equivalent to 35.5 mpg by 2016 and result in an average light vehicle tailpipe CO2 level of 250 grams per mile.
Automakers say the newly proposed CAFE standards will create more jobs.
Small Business Majority founder and chief executive John Arensmeyer said his members are behind the new CAFE standards.
"Our poll of more than 1,200 small business owners across the country found 87 percent of small business owners overwhelmingly support adopting strong standards now, and 80 percent support requiring the auto industry to increase mileage to 60 mpg by 2025 - an even stronger standard than the one the Obama Administration has announced."
Support from small businesses for increasing fuel economy standards is high in states with large auto manufacturing sectors, including Michigan (73 percent) and Ohio (75 percent), Arensmeyer said.
There is also strong support (71 percent) in the influential automotive market of California, which is preparing to update its Clean Cars Program aimed at reducing carbon emissions from cars sold in the state, he said.
California plans to issue its proposal for model year 2017-2025 vehicle greenhouse gas standards on December 7 and will finalize its standards in January.
Tuesday, September 27, 2011
EPA doing its job again....NOT!!!
NEW TOWN, N.D. — Across western North Dakota, hundreds of fires rise above fields of wheat and sunflowers and bales of hay. At night, they illuminate the prairie skies like giant fireflies.
They are not wildfires caused by lightning strikes or other acts of nature, but the deliberate burning of natural gas by oil companies rushing to extract oil from the Bakken shale field and take advantage of the high price of crude. The gas bubbles up alongside the far more valuable oil, and with less economic incentive to capture it, the drillers treat the gas as waste and simply burn it.
Every day, more than 100 million cubic feet of natural gas is flared this way — enough energy to heat half a million homes for a day.
The flared gas also spews at least two million tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere every year, as much as 384,000 cars or a medium-size coal-fired power plant would emit, alarming some environmentalists.
All told, 30 percent of the natural gas produced in North Dakota is burned as waste. No other major domestic oil field currently flares close to that much, though the practice is still common in countries like Russia, Nigeria and Iran.
With few government regulations that limit the flaring, more burning is also taking place in the Eagle Ford shale field in Texas, and some environmentalists and industry executives say that it could happen in Oklahoma, Arkansas and Ohio, too, as drilling expands in new fields there unlocked by techniques like hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling.
“North Dakota is not as bad as Kazakhstan, but this is not what you would expect a civilized, efficient society to do: to flare off a perfectly good product just because it’s expensive to bring to market,” said Michael E. Webber, associate director of the Center for International Energy and Environmental Policy at the University of Texas at Austin.
The widespread flaring is a step backward for a domestic energy industry. Most oil and gas fields in the United States have well-developed facilities to gather and process gas.
But the recent rise of shale drilling has changed the economic calculus. Natural gas prices have plunged since 2008 as vast shale fields laden with gas are tapped through hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling. Meanwhile, those same techniques have opened up other shale fields rich with oil.
Regulations on flaring are loose in North Dakota, as they are in most states, and there are no current federal regulations on flaring at oil and gas wells. That is largely because flaring has not been a significant concern since the 1970s, when the federal government insisted that oil companies re-inject gas into Alaska’s North Slope rather than flare it.
The federal Environmental Protection Agency has recently proposed new air emissions standards for fracked wells, and it has also begun to ask oil companies to compile data on greenhouse gas emissions from drilling and other operations.
Environmentalists are also beginning to express alarm. “It’s time for the regulators to take a hard look at the impacts of flaring and make sure that available solutions to the flaring problem are required before there is any further widespread expansion of the practice,” said Amy Mall, senior policy analyst at the Natural Resources Defense Council. Some of the companies working in North Dakota, including Whiting, are investing $3 billion over the next three years in pipelines and several large processing plants to deliver gas to Midwest markets rather than burn it.
Wayde Schafer, the Sierra Club’s North Dakota conservation organizer, said that the industry needed to slow down development if it could not protect the air. “You can do it fast or you can do it right,” he said.
They are not wildfires caused by lightning strikes or other acts of nature, but the deliberate burning of natural gas by oil companies rushing to extract oil from the Bakken shale field and take advantage of the high price of crude. The gas bubbles up alongside the far more valuable oil, and with less economic incentive to capture it, the drillers treat the gas as waste and simply burn it.
Every day, more than 100 million cubic feet of natural gas is flared this way — enough energy to heat half a million homes for a day.
The flared gas also spews at least two million tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere every year, as much as 384,000 cars or a medium-size coal-fired power plant would emit, alarming some environmentalists.
All told, 30 percent of the natural gas produced in North Dakota is burned as waste. No other major domestic oil field currently flares close to that much, though the practice is still common in countries like Russia, Nigeria and Iran.
With few government regulations that limit the flaring, more burning is also taking place in the Eagle Ford shale field in Texas, and some environmentalists and industry executives say that it could happen in Oklahoma, Arkansas and Ohio, too, as drilling expands in new fields there unlocked by techniques like hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling.
“North Dakota is not as bad as Kazakhstan, but this is not what you would expect a civilized, efficient society to do: to flare off a perfectly good product just because it’s expensive to bring to market,” said Michael E. Webber, associate director of the Center for International Energy and Environmental Policy at the University of Texas at Austin.
The widespread flaring is a step backward for a domestic energy industry. Most oil and gas fields in the United States have well-developed facilities to gather and process gas.
But the recent rise of shale drilling has changed the economic calculus. Natural gas prices have plunged since 2008 as vast shale fields laden with gas are tapped through hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling. Meanwhile, those same techniques have opened up other shale fields rich with oil.
Regulations on flaring are loose in North Dakota, as they are in most states, and there are no current federal regulations on flaring at oil and gas wells. That is largely because flaring has not been a significant concern since the 1970s, when the federal government insisted that oil companies re-inject gas into Alaska’s North Slope rather than flare it.
The federal Environmental Protection Agency has recently proposed new air emissions standards for fracked wells, and it has also begun to ask oil companies to compile data on greenhouse gas emissions from drilling and other operations.
Environmentalists are also beginning to express alarm. “It’s time for the regulators to take a hard look at the impacts of flaring and make sure that available solutions to the flaring problem are required before there is any further widespread expansion of the practice,” said Amy Mall, senior policy analyst at the Natural Resources Defense Council. Some of the companies working in North Dakota, including Whiting, are investing $3 billion over the next three years in pipelines and several large processing plants to deliver gas to Midwest markets rather than burn it.
Wayde Schafer, the Sierra Club’s North Dakota conservation organizer, said that the industry needed to slow down development if it could not protect the air. “You can do it fast or you can do it right,” he said.
Tuesday, September 20, 2011
Environment = who cares!!! It's not like our children breath the air, drink the water or want to see blue skies & sunsets....
The House of Representatives in the current Congress is the most anti-environment House in the history of Congress. So far this year, the House has voted 125 times to undermine the protection of the environment.
The House has not completed debate of H.R. 2584, the FY 2012 Interior and Environment Appropriations bill, which some have called “the worst assault on clean air and water in history.” This legislation contains 39 new anti-environment riders and slashes funding for the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Interior. This analysis includes the votes on H.R. 2584 taken on or before July 28th, 2011.
The anti-environment votes taken by the House include 20 votes to block actions to address climate change. These include votes to deny that climate change is occurring; to block EPA from regulating carbon emissions from power plants and oil refineries; to block EPA from regulating carbon emissions from motor vehicles, which also reduces oil imports; and even to eliminate requirements that large sources disclose the level of their carbon emissions.
The anti-environment votes include 31 votes to block actions to prevent air and water pollution. These include votes to block EPA from regulating mercury and other hazardous air pollutants emitted from cement plants; to relax emission requirements for offshore oil and gas activities; to stop EPA from establishing new water quality standards or enforcing existing ones; and to prevent EPA from protecting streams from the effects of mountaintop-removal mining.
The anti-environment votes include 33 votes to undermine protection for public lands and coastal areas. These include votes to slash funding for the Land and Water Conservation Fund; to require oil and gas leasing off of the East and West Coasts; and to waive requirements for environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for offshore oil and gas activities.
And the anti-environment votes include 22 votes to defund or repeal clean energy initiatives. These include votes to overturn new, industry-supported energy efficiency standards for light bulbs; to cut funding for renewable energy projects; and to defund research into promising clean energy technologies.
Multiple federal agencies and statutes have been targeted by the anti-environment votes. Among federal agencies, the most common targets have been the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Energy, and the Department of Interior: 50 votes targeted the Environmental Protection Agency; 24 votes targeted the Department of Energy; and 25 votes targeted the Department of the Interior.
Among federal statutes, the most common targets have been the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, and NEPA: 28 votes rolled back or defunded the Clean Air Act; 16 votes rolled back or defunded the Clean Water Act; and 11 votes limited the application of NEPA.
The anti-environment votes were highly partisan. Of the 125 anti-environment votes, 104 were roll-call votes. On average, 96% of Republicans voted for the anti-environment position. In contrast, 84% of Democrats voted for the pro-environment position.
The House has not completed debate of H.R. 2584, the FY 2012 Interior and Environment Appropriations bill, which some have called “the worst assault on clean air and water in history.” This legislation contains 39 new anti-environment riders and slashes funding for the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Interior. This analysis includes the votes on H.R. 2584 taken on or before July 28th, 2011.
The anti-environment votes taken by the House include 20 votes to block actions to address climate change. These include votes to deny that climate change is occurring; to block EPA from regulating carbon emissions from power plants and oil refineries; to block EPA from regulating carbon emissions from motor vehicles, which also reduces oil imports; and even to eliminate requirements that large sources disclose the level of their carbon emissions.
The anti-environment votes include 31 votes to block actions to prevent air and water pollution. These include votes to block EPA from regulating mercury and other hazardous air pollutants emitted from cement plants; to relax emission requirements for offshore oil and gas activities; to stop EPA from establishing new water quality standards or enforcing existing ones; and to prevent EPA from protecting streams from the effects of mountaintop-removal mining.
The anti-environment votes include 33 votes to undermine protection for public lands and coastal areas. These include votes to slash funding for the Land and Water Conservation Fund; to require oil and gas leasing off of the East and West Coasts; and to waive requirements for environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for offshore oil and gas activities.
And the anti-environment votes include 22 votes to defund or repeal clean energy initiatives. These include votes to overturn new, industry-supported energy efficiency standards for light bulbs; to cut funding for renewable energy projects; and to defund research into promising clean energy technologies.
Multiple federal agencies and statutes have been targeted by the anti-environment votes. Among federal agencies, the most common targets have been the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Energy, and the Department of Interior: 50 votes targeted the Environmental Protection Agency; 24 votes targeted the Department of Energy; and 25 votes targeted the Department of the Interior.
Among federal statutes, the most common targets have been the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, and NEPA: 28 votes rolled back or defunded the Clean Air Act; 16 votes rolled back or defunded the Clean Water Act; and 11 votes limited the application of NEPA.
The anti-environment votes were highly partisan. Of the 125 anti-environment votes, 104 were roll-call votes. On average, 96% of Republicans voted for the anti-environment position. In contrast, 84% of Democrats voted for the pro-environment position.
Sunday, July 31, 2011
The rules will also save consumers more than $8,000 a vehicle, on average, in fuel costs, the EPA said.
Automakers agreed to double the fuel economy of the vehicles they sell in the U.S. to a fleetwide average of 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025, President Barack Obama said.
A separate rule issued in 2009 takes effect next year, and requires automakers to increase average fuel economy to 35.5 mpg by 2016.
The White House negotiated the proposal, which will take effect in 2017, with automakers including General Motors Co. (GM), Ford Motor Co. (F) and Toyota Motor Corp. (7203) The administration proposed a 56.2 mpg requirement last month, up from a fleetwide average of 27 mpg today for cars and light trucks.
“This agreement on fuel standards represents the single most important step we’ve ever taken to reduce our dependence on foreign oil,” Obama said today at an event in Washington with auto executives.
Obama is seeking to limit the amount of fuel used by U.S. vehicles as part of a pledge to reduce oil imports by a third by 2025. The agreement with automakers, which also curbs greenhouse-gas emissions, comes as his administration negotiates with Congress on raising the U.S. debt ceiling to avoid default.
Obama used the event to promote his energy priorities and to highlight some of the issues being weighed in the standoff over raising the federal debt ceiling.
The agreement on higher standards “is only possible because we made investments in technology,” Obama said. A “sensible and balanced approach” is needed to make sure the U.S. is able to sustain economic growth in the future, he said.
A separate rule issued in 2009 takes effect next year, and requires automakers to increase average fuel economy to 35.5 mpg by 2016.
The White House negotiated the proposal, which will take effect in 2017, with automakers including General Motors Co. (GM), Ford Motor Co. (F) and Toyota Motor Corp. (7203) The administration proposed a 56.2 mpg requirement last month, up from a fleetwide average of 27 mpg today for cars and light trucks.
“This agreement on fuel standards represents the single most important step we’ve ever taken to reduce our dependence on foreign oil,” Obama said today at an event in Washington with auto executives.
Obama is seeking to limit the amount of fuel used by U.S. vehicles as part of a pledge to reduce oil imports by a third by 2025. The agreement with automakers, which also curbs greenhouse-gas emissions, comes as his administration negotiates with Congress on raising the U.S. debt ceiling to avoid default.
Obama used the event to promote his energy priorities and to highlight some of the issues being weighed in the standoff over raising the federal debt ceiling.
The agreement on higher standards “is only possible because we made investments in technology,” Obama said. A “sensible and balanced approach” is needed to make sure the U.S. is able to sustain economic growth in the future, he said.
Friday, July 15, 2011
Bright blue flame
Working gas in storage was 2,611 Bcf as of Friday, July 8, 2011, according to EIA estimates. This represents a net increase of 84 Bcf from the previous week. Stocks were 218 Bcf less than last year at this time and 52 Bcf below the 5-year average of 2,663 Bcf. In the East Region, stocks were 116 Bcf below the 5-year average following net injections of 59 Bcf. Stocks in the Producing Region were 100 Bcf above the 5-year average of 901 Bcf after a net injection of 14 Bcf. Stocks in the West Region were 36 Bcf below the 5-year average after a net addition of 11 Bcf. At 2,611 Bcf, total working gas is within the 5-year historical range.
The stage is being set for a massive heat wave to develop into next week as a large area of high pressure is anticipated to circulate hot and humid air over much of the central and eastern U.S. Maximum heat index values of at least 100°F are likely across much of this area by the middle of next week, with heat index values in excess of 110°F possible over portions of these areas.
When it’s hot, air conditioning loads increase, power generation and transmission decrease which increase natural gas demand. If our blistering hot summer swings into a remarkably cold winter we could see a real rise in natural gas prices.
In addition, the EPA standards issued let 27 U.S. states from New York to Texas reduce power-plant emissions through trading in which companies exceeding limits can buy credits from those in other states that pollute less. The rules also may force as much as 47.8 gigawatts of electricity, or about 15 percent of coal’s U.S. production capacity to close.
So, short- and long-term natural gas seems to have a bright future. BHP seems to agree, along with Exxon, Shell, et al.
The stage is being set for a massive heat wave to develop into next week as a large area of high pressure is anticipated to circulate hot and humid air over much of the central and eastern U.S. Maximum heat index values of at least 100°F are likely across much of this area by the middle of next week, with heat index values in excess of 110°F possible over portions of these areas.
When it’s hot, air conditioning loads increase, power generation and transmission decrease which increase natural gas demand. If our blistering hot summer swings into a remarkably cold winter we could see a real rise in natural gas prices.
In addition, the EPA standards issued let 27 U.S. states from New York to Texas reduce power-plant emissions through trading in which companies exceeding limits can buy credits from those in other states that pollute less. The rules also may force as much as 47.8 gigawatts of electricity, or about 15 percent of coal’s U.S. production capacity to close.
So, short- and long-term natural gas seems to have a bright future. BHP seems to agree, along with Exxon, Shell, et al.
Monday, June 20, 2011
Be Careful what you wish for, you just might get it!
The case is American Electric Power Co. v. Connecticut, 10-174.
The Supreme Court unanimously ruled on a federal lawsuit Monday by states and conservation groups trying to force cuts in greenhouse gas emissions from power plants.
Eight states initiated this novel approach. They argued that under traditional common law, power plants were creating a public nuisance, and that state governments had the power to intervene. Eight states were originally involved: California, Connecticut, Iowa, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island and Wisconsin. When Republican governors took over in New Jersey and Wisconsin, those states withdrew from the case.
The court said that the authority to seek reductions in emissions rests with the Environmental Protection Agency, not the courts.
EPA said that it will issue new regulations by May 2012 to reduce power plants' emissions of carbon dioxide, the chief greenhouse gas. The Obama administration has already started controlling heat-trapping pollution from automobiles and from some of the largest, and most polluting, industrial plants.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, writing for the court, said the Clean Air Act gives the EPA authority to regulate carbon-dioxide emissions from power plants.
The landmark environmental law leaves no room for what Ginsburg described as a parallel track, "control of greenhouse gas emissions by federal judges."
On the other hand, Ginsburg said, that the states and conservation groups can go to federal court under the Clean Air Act if they object to EPA's eventual decision.
The private defendants in the suit are American Electric Power Co. of Ohio, Cinergy Co., now part of Duke Energy Corp. of North Carolina; Southern Co. Inc. of Georgia, and Xcel Energy Inc. of Minnesota. Five of the biggest greenhouse gas emitters in America. Four of them are part of the Edison Electric Institute, a major industry group.
If the EPA puts forward a national cap & trade regime – much like say Europe; then you have some good shorts on your investment list above. If they don’t, you are still likely to see stiffer state regulations on emissions and that can go to point of origin – simple meaning -- a dirty coal plant in Utah cannot sell power in California without being penalized.
In any event we can all wheeze, cough, and tear while sucking in some more dirty air.
The Supreme Court unanimously ruled on a federal lawsuit Monday by states and conservation groups trying to force cuts in greenhouse gas emissions from power plants.
Eight states initiated this novel approach. They argued that under traditional common law, power plants were creating a public nuisance, and that state governments had the power to intervene. Eight states were originally involved: California, Connecticut, Iowa, New Jersey, New York, Rhode Island and Wisconsin. When Republican governors took over in New Jersey and Wisconsin, those states withdrew from the case.
The court said that the authority to seek reductions in emissions rests with the Environmental Protection Agency, not the courts.
EPA said that it will issue new regulations by May 2012 to reduce power plants' emissions of carbon dioxide, the chief greenhouse gas. The Obama administration has already started controlling heat-trapping pollution from automobiles and from some of the largest, and most polluting, industrial plants.
Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, writing for the court, said the Clean Air Act gives the EPA authority to regulate carbon-dioxide emissions from power plants.
The landmark environmental law leaves no room for what Ginsburg described as a parallel track, "control of greenhouse gas emissions by federal judges."
On the other hand, Ginsburg said, that the states and conservation groups can go to federal court under the Clean Air Act if they object to EPA's eventual decision.
The private defendants in the suit are American Electric Power Co. of Ohio, Cinergy Co., now part of Duke Energy Corp. of North Carolina; Southern Co. Inc. of Georgia, and Xcel Energy Inc. of Minnesota. Five of the biggest greenhouse gas emitters in America. Four of them are part of the Edison Electric Institute, a major industry group.
If the EPA puts forward a national cap & trade regime – much like say Europe; then you have some good shorts on your investment list above. If they don’t, you are still likely to see stiffer state regulations on emissions and that can go to point of origin – simple meaning -- a dirty coal plant in Utah cannot sell power in California without being penalized.
In any event we can all wheeze, cough, and tear while sucking in some more dirty air.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)