S.J. Res. 27, sponsored by Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY), would block the EPA from moving forward with the regulation called the Cross State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR).  Your call or email can make a difference in the air quality of your community.

Need contact information for your U.S. Senator?  Click here to find out who represents you, call or email your Senators and ask them to vote against Sen. Rand Paul’s S.J. Res. 27.

Filed under: Coal Tagged: air pollution, csapr, Environmental Protection Agency ]]> http://texasvox.org/2011/11/09/call-your-senator-and-ask-them-to-not-block-csapr/feed/ 0 Koko http://texasvox.org/2011/06/07/clean-air-act-restrictions-pushed-aside-in-wake-of-political-preparation-and-industry-pressure/ http://texasvox.org/2011/06/07/clean-air-act-restrictions-pushed-aside-in-wake-of-political-preparation-and-industry-pressure/#comments Tue, 07 Jun 2011 20:07:01 +0000 parkerrush http://texasvox.org/?p=13293 ]]>

Election season is imminent and advocates for environmental welfare and public health need not look very far for the hyper-political red tape and drawbacks to pollution legislation. Like many of her colleagues in the Democratic Party, Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lisa Jackson has been campaigning nationwide for the regulation of toxins such as mercury from coal burners which, in effect, could prevent thousands of related deaths and stimulate the job market. Just two weeks ago, Jackson even made an appearance on Jon Stewart’s “Daily Show” encouraging viewers to exercise vigilance in the fight against toxic emissions and to demand personal protections for clean air and water.

Her sentiments were met with grand applause due to their pertinence in 2011 where it is estimated that 72% of all toxic mercury air pollution in the United States is attributable to coal plants in violation of the Clean Air Act. Just to add some perspective to this statistic, such a figure indicates that 386,000 tons of hazardous compounds are being emitted into the atmosphere per year at an unprecedented rate.

Jackson’s apparent support for tightened environmental regulations was short-lived however, when just one week following her Comedy Central interview the EPA halted essential protections for controlling exposure to air-borne mercury, arsenic, lead, and a plethora of acid gases. The basis for these laws were established in 1990 when President H.W. Bush signed Clean Air Act amendments into law thus making it the EPA’s responsibility to establish emission standards for industrial facilities. Originally, these plans operated on a permit system designed to pinpoint power plants, factories, and additional sources of ground level ozone that had exceeded allowable limits for what was deemed “requisite to protect the public welfare.”

One of these statutes created under H.W. Bush’s administration, called Boiler MACT, monitored emission caps from boilers that produced power sources specifically like those found in large to small coal plants. As of February 2011, under a court issued order, the EPA was also charged with the task of enforcing this body of legislative action. And now, a mere two years after the Obama administration vowed to protect the interests of public health and respect the law, this regulation is one of many that Jackson’s post at the EPA has indefinitely delayed.

Historically, the EPA has acted as an outspoken critic of the industrial “Powers that be” and their habits of ignoring Clean Air Act restrictions with economic impunity. In fact it was the EPA’s records that first indicated that more than 4,000 non-fatal heart attacks, 1,600 cases of acute bronchitis and an excess of 313,000 missed work and school days could be avoided if these laws were enacted properly- and this doesn’t even account for the upwards of 6,600 toxic related deaths. But the EPA strayed its course due to the fast-approaching 2012 elections. They managed to place re-election aspirations above environmental necessities on the hierarchy of political agendas, caved to industry pressures, and watered down many of their contingencies to begin with.

In lieu of this regressive blow to mandatory emission guidelines, Lisa Jackson and the EPA as a whole have endangered countless vulnerable Americans by casting a blind eye to the Boiler MACT legislation. Not only are these steps in reverse potentially (almost certainly) disastrous, people living near industrial giants and coal-fired power plants are now at serious odds with their own health and well-being.

The latest controversy involves the decision made late last year that the EPA would in fact be taking over the permitting process regarding emission regulation in Texas.   In response, Texas is now currently suing the EPA to try and halt their implementation plan which would essentially call for more rigid regulation standards in either new or existing power plant and/or oil facilities.

EPA vs. Texas: Emissions Shootout

Texas claims that the EPA is overstepping the state’s authority with respect to emission setting standards.  The EPA’s justification for taking over the permitting process is related to Texas rejecting to comply with the EPA’s new greenhouse gas rules issued earlier this year.  The EPA claims that Texas has left them no other choice but to take over, not only because of the hot-headed letter we sent to EPA refusing to comply with the Clean Air Act, but also since Texas is also the leading nation in greenhouse gas emissions as well as industrial pollution.   By holding this hearing, the EPA is allowing both environmental advocacy groups as well as the public to voice their opinion before the final decision is rendered concerning emission standards.

Will the outcome of this battle prove to be victorious? Tune in next time to find out!

Related Articles:

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2011-01-06/epa-texas-feud-escalates-over-new-carbon-regulations.html

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/tx/7381200.html#drop

http://www.bizjournals.com/sanantonio/print-edition/2011/01/14/epas-takeover-of-permitting-to-have.html

Image via Wikipedia

Yesterday, Halliburton unveiled a new website that offers some details about the mix of chemicals used in a natural gas drilling technique following the Environmental Protection Agency‘s (EPA) decision last week to subpoena Halliburton to force the company to turn over information about the chemicals it produces for hydraulic fracturing, or fracking.

Halliburton has said the website is not a response to EPA’s actions or meant to satisfy the agency’s demands, but it does appear to be an attempt on the company’s part to allay public concerns about the impact of the practice on drinking water.

Fracking is a process that injects a mixture of water, sand and chemicals into rock formations to increase oil and natural gas production. A decades old process, the use of the drilling practice exploded in recent years as companies have begun to realize the profits that can come through the extraction of unconventional yet abundant reserves of shale gas.

The expansion of shale gas drilling has raised ire of some homeowners in areas near gas development, who complain the drilling has contaminated their drinking water, and environmental groups have called for more federal oversight of the practice and complete disclosure of all the chemicals involved.

Energy companies argue that the practice is safe, pointing out that it is done thousands of feet below ground, much deeper than most water sources.  However, in response to public concerns, some companies have begun attempting to make information about the chemicals used in fracking more accessible to the public.

The new website outlines the make-up and concentration of the chemicals contained in three of its products commonly used for hydraulic fracturing in Pennsylvania. (Website: here)  However, the website does not list the chemicals used in individual well sites, but they claim they will expand the site to include details about fracking fluids for every state where the company’s services are used.

###

By promoting cleaner energy, cleaner government, and cleaner air for all Texans, we hope to provide for a healthy place to live and prosper. We are Public Citizen Texas.

Related Articles

• EPA: Halliburton Issued Subpoena For Refusing To Disclose Hydraulic Fracturing, ‘Fracking,’ Chemical Ingredients (huffingtonpost.com)
• Halliburton Announces Ecofriendly Fracking Fluid, More Disclosure (nytimes.com)

The Alliance for a Clean Texas kicked off a series of town hall meetings across the state on the sunset review of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality on September 15 th.  Last night in Corpus Christi, residents criticized the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, saying it holds too much power and ignores public concerns in the interest of business.

Nearly 250 people, participated in the meeting, about the agency’s upcoming review by the state’s Sunset Commission, which is required by state law and seeks to identify and reduce waste, duplication of efforts and inefficiency.

Cyrus Reed, conservation director for the Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club, Ryan Rittenhouse with Public Citizen and Donna Phillips, area director for the agency’s Coastal Bend and East Texas Region all gave brief presentations during the meeting held at Del Mar College’s Center for Economic Development.  Their comments centered on Corpus Christi’s recent experiences with the TCEQ over the proposed Las Brisas Energy Center, a $3 billion petroleum coke-fired electricity plant whose permit application is under review by the state environmental agency. If approved, the plant will be built near the Port of Corpus Christi.

• Cyrus Reed, conservation director for the Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club, said that the agency’s role in the Las Brisas permitting process is at the center of a national debate on energy resources and the environment.  He said that coal plants, including Las Brisas, pose an ongoing threat to the state’s environment and went on to say Sierra Club would like to see the agency increase fines and fees and follow the federal Clean Air Act.
• Ryan Rittenhouse with Public Citizen said that the decision to allow coal plants should not rest with the agency’s three commissioners. “The commissioners are completely ignoring their mission, which is to guard the state’s environment, not its economy,” he said.  Coal-fired plants add toxins such as mercury into the environment. He added that the Gulf Coast and 13 Texas lakes and reservoirs and three rivers are under mercury contamination advisories for two species of fish.
• Donna Phillips, area director for the agency’s Coastal Bend and East Texas Region, told the crowd that the agency’s primary goal is a clean environment and the agency creates and enforces regulations to that end.

Twenty residents spoke during the meeting and none had any praise for the agency.

• Tom Thomas, a teacher, said that he is distrustful of the commissioners of the agency.  “When three people can ignore the warnings of doctors, judges and even their own public interest council and make decisions, that is messed up,” he said.
• “The system is totally broken,” said John Kelly, a local environmental activist. “And I’m not sure TCEQ shouldn’t be totally abolished and we shouldn’t start from scratch.”
• Daniel Lucio, a Corpus Christi resident, said the Las Brisas permit process has not involved the public. He said that the commissioners, who decide which permits are approved, hold too much power.

The state agency, second only to the U.S Environmental Protection Agency in size and jurisdiction, is one of 29 under commission scrutiny this year, including the state’s Public Utility Commission, Railroad Commission and Department of Transportation.

The Sunset Commission is composed of five appointees from each state legislative body and two private citizens. Legislative members serve four-year terms and private citizens serve two-year terms on the commission.  All are appointed by the lieutenant governor and the speaker of the House.

The Sunset Advisory Commission will hear testimony from the agency, commission staff members and the public at hearings Dec. 15 and 16 in Austin and the commission will submit its recommendations to the Legislature when it convenes next year.

The town hall meetings being coordinated by ACT are not part of the Sunset input process but we encourage people around the state to attend those meetings when they are held in your area.  For information about when and were the town hall meetings are being held, click here.

Citizens wishing to speak to the commission will only have that opportunity at the December hearing.  However,  there are other opportunities for members of the public who wish to participate in the review process to do so. It is important for citizens to realize that they can provide valuable information to the Sunset Commission about how well or poorly an agency performs its functions. Your input can help identify potential issues for study and proposed changes to the agency. You can participate in the review of an agency by:

• Providing Input to Sunset Staff. You can submit your comments on an input form or mail them to:.
  Sunset Advisory Commission
  PO Box 13066
  Austin, TX 78711
• Commenting on Sunset Reports. Sunset reports are made available to the public before Sunset Commission hearings to provide an opportunity for public comment on the staff’s findings and recommendations and on the agencies themselves. You may submit comments to the Sunset Commission by letter (at the above address) or by email.
• Testifying at Public Hearings. The Commission holds public hearings on each agency under review. These hearings offer the public an opportunity to testify about an agency and comment on the Sunset staff’s recommendations. If you would like to testify before the Commission, witness affirmation forms are available at the meeting. Public hearings are webcast and archives are available.
• Taking Part in the Legislative Session. Generally, if an agency is to be continued, a bill must be passed by the Legislature. Members of the public can participate in the legislative process as you would with any other legislation.  You can follow the TCEQ Sunset process by visiting our website regularly or Follow us on Twitter- @PublicCitizenTX.

If you have special needs or wish to request an Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) accommodation, contact the Sunset ADA Coordinator at sunset@sunset.state.tx.us or call (512) 463-1300.

This is your process and your participation is vital if any changes to TCEQ are going to happen.  Let your voice be heard.

###

By promoting cleaner energy, cleaner government, cleaner cars, and cleaner air for all Texans, we hope to provide for a healthy place to live and prosper. We are Public Citizen Texas.

This is outrageous. A permit which should have been denied outright, or at the least sent back to the beginning of the process, is instead being temporarily remanded on a number of less significant issues. Below is the proceeding in its entirety. The first video covers the first part of the process when the applicant and the opposition’s representation were allowed time to make comments to the commissioners. The second video shows the commissioners’ decision which is then followed by a press conference which includes responses from local residents in Corpus Christi who would be directly affected by the pollution TCEQ is failing to properly address.

For more information contact Public Citizen’s office at 512-477-1155.

###

By promoting cleaner energy, cleaner government, and cleaner air for all Texans, we hope to provide for a healthy place to live and prosper. We are Public Citizen Texas

Press Conference

Meeting: Presentation and Public Comments

Video Comments Submitted to the EPA

###

By promoting cleaner energy, cleaner government, and cleaner air for all Texans, we hope to provide for a healthy place to live and prosper. We are Public Citizen Texas.

It was a bit surprising that the EPA finally has taken a stand against the TCEQ’s practices of giving “flexible permits.” Prominent Texas politicians including the governor criticized the action taken by the EPA and once again, Gov Perry used a very important local issue to launch his attacks on the Federal government as part of his re-election campaign. “I don’t understand the federal response of coming in to the state that should be the poster child, should be the model for this country,” Perry said last week at a news conference. He was also quoted by the Houston Press saying, “Last week, the federal government sent the very clear message that it seeks to destroy Texas’s successful clean air program and threaten tens of thousands of good Texas jobs in the process.”  Perry’s claims that our air permitting program is successful is equally as dubious as his claims that we are the poster child for clean air.

Perry’s comments came at the same Texas Congress-members criticized Obama’s decision to issue a moratorium on deep-water drilling for a period that can take longer than six months. Some Congress members, who rank among the highest contribution receivers from the oil and energy industry in general, mentioned that jobs will be affected if such regulation was to take place, “”It’s exactly the wrong decision,” said Joe Barton, a Republican from Arlington, “It’s going to raise unemployment, and it’s going to raise oil prices.”

One must question the sincerity of such comments and whether they truly are accurate or not. The Dallas Morning News in an articled called “Texans in Congress say drilling support not tied to campaign donations” showed records that were obtained from Center for Responsive Politics that show how many contributions were received by Texas Congressmen:

NOTE: Tally includes donations from political action committees and individuals starting in 1989, for the lawmaker’s first year in office if later than 1989.

* Rank indicates where the oil industry ranked among the top industries to donate to a lawmaker. N/A means the oil industry wasn’t among the top 20 givers to that lawmaker.

***

These numbers are staggering and if you want to bet that those massive contributions don’t alter or affect the decisions of those politicians, I have some beachfront property in Arizona I’d like to sell you. Will any of these politicians stand up against the polluters? It seems, instead, as if the people who are supposed to protect us from those polluters are in bed with those from which we are to be protected– while the well-being of Texans doesn’t seem to be their concern.  Larry Soward, a former TCEQ commissioner who was appointed by Perry said, “We have a culture at the agency and in the state that economic interests are more protected … than the environment.” It should be noted that Soward is now helping Texas environmentalists in their fight to reform the TCEQ.

Without regulating such industries, our health will be at risk and also, opposite to what Texas Politicians say, not regulating such industries is what can negatively affect the Texas economy and employment. The BP spill, for example, has put under threat more than 15 national parks and wildlife which will potentially affect tourism in the state which is important revenue for Texas and it can jeopardize the jobs of many shrimpers, fishers, and many others in the seafood industry. It is time for Texas politicians to work in the interest of Texans, not in the interest of big business. Texas can use clean energy which can bring many more jobs to Texas, it will also ameliorate our health by providing a cleaner environment.

###

The new rules, which take effect under court order, will prohibit short-term spikes of sulfur dioxide (SO2), which is primarily emitted from coal-fired power plants and other industrial facilities.  Texas has 17 coal plants, with another dozen under construction or in the permitting phase across the state.

The EPA estimates nationally the cost of retrofitting power plants to comply with the new rules will be $1.5 billion over the next 10 years.  The savings in health benefits could be as much as $13 billion to $33 billion a year.

The previous standard called for concentrations of no more than 140 parts per billion, averaged over 24 hours. Under the new rules, the allowable level of SO2 would drop to 75 parts per billion in one hour to guard against short-term spikes, and is seen by the EPA as the most efficient and effective way to protect against SO2 pollution in the air we breathe.

Although the final standard is a bit less strict than the American Lung Association had urged, it is well within the range recommended by EPA’s independent science advisers.

At this writing it is anticipated that Jefferson County is the only area in Texas that would fail the tougher standard, but EPA is requiring additional monitors in some areas of the state that are borderline.

###

By promoting cleaner energy, cleaner government, and cleaner air for all Texans, we hope to provide for a healthy place to live and prosper. We are Public Citizen Texas.

The TCEQ granted a permit to re-open the ASARCO foundry over protests of staff, residents of El Paso, and local leaders. Luckily, the EPA intervened and stopped it.

You’ve probably heard by now.  The TCEQ has failed to adhere to the federal Clean Air Act, jeopardizing our health, our safety, and the quality of our air. This is why, on Tuesday, May 25, the EPA took over the TCEQ’s authority to grant clean air permits for 40 facilities across the state of Texas, most notably the Flint Hills Resources’ crude oil refinery near Corpus Christi.

The TCEQ has failed to fulfill its promises to the federal government and the citizens of Texas, whom it is supposed to protect.

The Sunset Advisory Commission is a 12-member body appointed by the Lieutenant Governor and the speaker of the house to identify and eliminate waste, duplication, and inefficiency in government agencies. Every 12 years, over 150 government agencies are reviewed for potential changes and improvements in their responsibilities and operations. And since the review of Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, the TCEQ, is quickly approaching, we’re getting organized!  Will you join us for a call next Thursday, June 10th at 6pm CT?

From the Alliance for Clean Texas:

The Alliance for a Clean Texas (ACT) will launch its 2010-2011 TCEQ sunset campaign with a conference call next Thursday, June 10th at 6:30 p.m. All Texans committed to protecting our state’s environment and health are invited to participate in the call.

ACT is a coalition of organizations and individuals around the state working together to make this a milestone year for environmental protection in Texas. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) is currently under review by the Texas Sunset Advisory Commission. Now is the time to turn our concerns about how TCEQ does and does not do its job of protecting our environment and our health into real, lasting reform.

In the last week, TCEQ has been at the center of two major stories about the Texas environment. The EPA has finally taken action to bring TCEQ air permitting back into compliance with the federal Clean Air Act–a move opposed by the TCEQ commissioners. And Fort Worth is reeling with the news that TCEQ did not report the results of a second set of air quality tests that showed elevated levels of harmful toxics due to natural gas drilling. Isn’t it time our environmental agency start putting our health and environment first?

The June 10th call kicks off our campaign. We’ll explain the sunset process, hear from policy experts, and talk about what activists around the state are doing to involve and inspire their communities. We’re especially excited to introduce the TCEQ Sunset Town Halls–a series of events that environmental organizations throughout Texas are planning for early fall.  Right now, town halls are in the works all over the state–from Brownsville to Abilene, Nacogdoches to El Paso. Find out if one is planned for your community–and learn how you can help organize one!

Please forward this invitation along to other Texans who share your commitment to a cleaner, healthier Texas.   This year, we’re coming together to make the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality the kind of environmental agency Texas needs–a trusted partner that will stand up for Texans all over the state to keep our water clean, our air healthy, and our lands a treasure for decades to come.

Here are the details for the call:

What: TCEQ Sunset Campaign Information Call

When: Thursday June 10 6:30-7:30

Who: All Texans Standing Up for the Environment, for Public Health and for a Stronger TCEQ

Why: To learn about the TCEQ Sunset review and why reforming the TCEQ is the biggest environmental campaign of the year

How: At 6:30 p.m. on June 10th, call 866-501-6174.  The access code for the call is 31794011892 The call will last one hour.

PS- Public Citizen will be hosting the call in our downtown Austin office.  If you would like to join in person, contact one of us and RSVP.  Bring Your Own Beer Snacks.

For more background on this, here’s how the rest of the process will go:

In December 2010, the Sunset Advisory Commission will hear public testimony about the TCEQ. By writing to the commission, you can give your input and express your concerns about the TCEQ, and we encourage you to do so.  A second hearing will be held in January 2011 to adopt your recommendations concerning the TCEQ.

Stay tuned to TexasVox for updates about the Sunset Advisory Commission’s review of the TCEQ and how you can participate.

On global warming, the science is solid

In recent months, e-mails stolen from the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit in the United Kingdom and errors in one of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s reports have caused a flurry of questions about the validity of climate change science.

These issues have led several states, including Texas, to challenge the Environmental Protection Agency’s finding that heat-trapping gases like carbon dioxide (also known as greenhouse gases) are a threat to human health.

However, Texas’ challenge to the EPA’s endangerment finding on carbon dioxide contains very little science. Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott admitted that the state did not consult any climate scientists, including the many here in the state, before putting together the challenge to the EPA. Instead, the footnotes in the document reveal that the state relied mainly on British newspaper articles to make its case.

Contrary to what one might read in newspapers, the science of climate change is strong. Our own work and the immense body of independent research conducted around the world leaves no doubt regarding the following key points:

• • The global climate is changing.

A 1.5-degree Fahrenheit increase in global temperature over the past century has been documented by NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. Numerous lines of physical evidence around the world, from melting ice sheets and rising sea levels to shifting seasons and earlier onset of spring, provide overwhelming independent confirmation of rising temperatures.

Measurements indicate that the first decade of the 2000s was the warmest on record, followed by the 1990s and the 1980s. And despite the cold and snowy winter we’ve experienced here in Texas, satellite measurements show that, worldwide, January 2010 was one of the hottest months in that record.

• • Human activities produce heat-trapping gases.

Any time we burn a carbon-containing fuel such as coal or natural gas or oil, it releases carbon dioxide into the air. Carbon dioxide can be measured coming out of the tailpipe of our cars or the smokestacks of our factories. Other heat-trapping gases, such as methane and nitrous oxide, are also produced by agriculture and waste disposal. The effect of these gases on heat energy in the atmosphere is well understood, including factors such as the amplification of the warming by increases in humidity.

• • Heat-trapping gases are very likely responsible for most of the warming observed over the past half century.

There is no question that natural causes, such as changes in energy from the sun, natural cycles and volcanoes, continue to affect temperature today. Human activity has also increased the amounts of tiny, light-scattering particles within the atmosphere. But despite years of intensive observations of the Earth system, no one has been able to propose a credible alternative mechanism that can explain the present-day warming without heat-trapping gases produced by human activities.

• • The higher the levels of heat-trapping gases in the atmosphere, the higher the risk of potentially dangerous consequences for humans and our environment.

A recent federal report, “Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States,” commissioned in 2008 by the George W. Bush administration, presents a clear picture of how climate change is expected to affect our society, our economy and our natural resources. Rising sea levels threaten our coasts; increasing weather variability, including heat waves, droughts, heavy rainfall events and even winter storms, affect our infrastructure, energy and even our health.

The reality of these key points is not just our opinion. The national academies of science of 32 nations, and every major scientific organization in the United States whose members include climate experts, have issued statements endorsing these points. The entire faculty of the Department of Atmospheric Sciences at Texas A&M as well as the Climate System Science group at the University of Texas have issued their own statements endorsing these views. In fact, to the best of our knowledge, there are no climate scientists in Texas who disagree with the mainstream view of climate science.

We are all aware of the news reports describing the stolen e-mails from climate scientists and the errors in the IPCC reports. While aspects of climate change impacts have been overstated, none of the errors or allegations of misbehavior undermine the science behind any of the statements made above. In particular, they do not alter the conclusions that humans have taken over from nature as the dominant influence on our climate.

This article was submitted by Andrew Dessler, professor of atmospheric sciences, Texas A&M University; Katharine Hayhoe, research associate professor of atmospheric sciences, Texas Tech University; Charles Jackson, research scientist, Institute for Geophysics, The University of Texas at Austin; Gerald North, distinguished professor of atmospheric sciences, Texas A&M University; André Droxler, professor of earth science and director of the Center for the Study of Environment and Society, Rice University; and Rong Fu, professor, Jackson School of Geosciences, The University of Texas at Austin.

###

By promoting cleaner energy, cleaner government, and cleaner air for all Texans, we hope to provide for a healthy place to live and prosper. We are Public Citizen Texas.

Join us for an important public hearing at Arlington City Hall, 101 W. Abram St, Arlington, TX. For more info check out http://www.cleanairtexas.org

Texas has the potential to be at the forefront of the green economy and the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA’s) proposed new ozone pollution standard would clean up our air, protect our health and improve our quality of life. A stricter ozone standard would put Texas on the path to a cleaner, greener future.

The final decision by the EPA will affect the quality of the air we breathe for decades to come and it is a decision that depends on your input and your support. Your voice can influence the outcome.

The Coal and Oil industries have pulled out all the stops in their attempt to thwart the EPA’s new proposal. Governor Rick Perry, as always, has stood behind them. They’ve challenged the science, used political maneuvers and pushed for legislation to restrict the EPA’s authority. Governor Perry even sued. For too long we have been subject to poor air quality. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality has been issuing illegal air permits for years. For too long the TCEQ has ignored the Clean Air Act and for too long we have suffered the consequences. There are TWELVE NEW coal plants proposed in Texas, and we already have 17 coal plants up and running. We can do better.

Now is the time for the people of North Texas to come together. Now is the time to speak up. Now is time to have our voices be heard. The citizens of Texas deserve better. We deserve clean air and clean air standards that protect our health.

The EPA is currently accepting public comments. Speak up and have your voice be heard!

Who: The EPA, state and local officials, and you, your friends, family and neighbors. Let us know if you want to carpool and we’ll try to help.
What: Public hearing on proposed revision of the ozone standard which would improve the air quality in Texas, and particularly in the DFW area!
Where: Arlington City Hall, 101 W. Abram St, Arlington, TX (map)

When: Tuesday, March 16, from 3 pm-7 pm (or later if there are still people waiting to testify!). Keynote Speakers Mayor Cluck of Arlington and EPA Region 6 Administrator Dr. Al Armendariz will begin at 3 pm.

RSVP: To RSVP or reserve a spot to speak email dfwozonehearing@gmail.com

Comment online: https://secure2.convio.net/sierra/site/Advocacy?pagename=homepage&page=UserAction&id=3435

Join us on March 16th and help ensure a large and compelling response that can be heard across the state!

###

By promoting cleaner energy, cleaner government, and cleaner air for all Texans, we hope to provide for a healthy place to live and prosper. We are Public Citizen Texas.

Clearly, we’re going to have to part ways on that one. Judge McDonald fired the first shot with an op-ed in the Bay City Tribune, but the paper gave us a forum to respond. You’ll find our answer below, and can find the rice farmer’s response here.

No such thing as ‘clean coal’

by Tom “Smitty” Smith

Recently, County Judge Nate McDonald expressed his concerns that rice famers met with Public Citizen, a national consumer and environmental group, to discuss the negative impacts of the proposed White Stallion coal plant, particularly the amount of water the plant will use. Unfortunately, he got his facts wrong about both the plant and our organization.

The judge says he welcomes development and that his requirement for White Stallion is “that it be the cleanest coal plant there is and do no harm to our environment and air quality,” but the facts show that this plant is not the “cleanest coal plant there is” and will do substantial harm.

There is no such thing as “clean coal.” Even if there were, White Stallion would certainly not qualify.

This coal plant would be, by far, the largest source of pollution in Matagorda County. It will not be the cleanest coal plant in the country, or even in Texas. There are at least four other traditional coal plant proposals in Texas that would have cleaner emissions than White Stallion. The sulfur and nitrogen oxide emission rates of the NRG Limestone, Spruce, Coleto Creek, and Tenaska coal plants would all be lower than White Stallion.

The Environmental Protection Agency is on the verge of strengthening air quality attainment standards, and this coal plant could result in Matagorda County being reclassified and included in the Houston/Galveston non-attainment region, which would result in a loss of federal funding and stricter regulations for new businesses.

The Lower Colorado River Authority estimates that White Stallion would require a staggering 36,000 acre feet of water every year — enough to cover 56 square miles one foot deep in water.

The way water deals work, White Stallion would get priority over other users if there isn’t enough water for everyone.

That’s why the rice farmers, and any other industry that uses water, are threatened by this coal plant.

Judge McDonald made some comments about Public Citizen and myself that are not true. Public Citizen isn’t a “protester for hire” as Judge McDonald writes. We advocate for clean energy and oppose dirty energy such as White Stallion. For example, I have worked hard on promoting wind and other types of clean energy, and have recently received a major national award for my work to create the Texas wind energy boom.

To ensure our integrity, Public Citizen doesn’t take money from corporations or government. Instead, we raise money from ordinary citizens and major foundations who share our concerns and vision of a clean economy.

When asked, we offer advice and help organize local groups who have concerns about new facilities.

The rice farmers are just one of many groups who understand what a bad idea this is for their community.

We trust that the judge is a man of his word when he says that he will only support a power plant that will “do no harm.”

Hopefully, with a little more research he’ll see just how miserably White Stallion fails to meet that requirement and oppose this plant.

###

By promoting cleaner energy, cleaner government, and cleaner air for all Texans, we hope to provide for a healthy place to live and prosper. We are Public Citizen Texas.

City’s smog concerns may choke power plant

Pollution near Matagorda could drift to Houston

By MATTHEW TRESAUGUE

HOUSTON CHRONICLE

A proposed coal-fired power plant in mostly rural Matagorda County, 90 miles from the traffic-choked freeways and smokestacks of Houston, has moved to the center of the debate over the big city’s air.

Some federal regulators, Houston lawmakers, and environmentalists say the proposed White Stallion Energy Center would only exacerbate the city’s stubborn smog problem as tougher nationwide limits for the widespread pollutant come into play.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, for one, wants Texas regulators to prove that pollution from the coal plant would not make Houston’s smog worse before issuing permits. Critics also want the state to require the power company to consider new technology that might slash emissions of smog-forming pollution.

The push comes amid a review of the proposal by the State Office of Administrative Hearings, which will soon recommend whether the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality should grant the plant’s air permit.

The plant would be built less than 20 miles from the boundary of the eight-county Houston region that was long in violation of federal limits for smog or ozone. Rules on industrial pollution — in particular, new sources — are tighter inside such areas than outside, even though smog ignores county lines.

The TCEQ has declined to study the smog issue further, saying it would be too costly, take up to a year to complete and still not provide enough information to address the EPA’s concerns.

The state agency declined to comment further because the issue is before the hearing office.

Local concerns

Texas regulators, not the EPA, decide whether to grant power plant permits. But the federal agency can intervene if it finds a problem.

In Matagorda County itself, there is a push-pull between environmental protection and jobs. Some rice farmers also have raised concerns about how much water the proposed plant will use.

In Houston, meanwhile, state Reps. Jessica Farrar, Ana Hernandez and Kristi Thibaut, all Democrats, asked the EPA last week to block the coal plant’s permits until the TCEQ studies emissions that would drift toward Houston and requires stricter pollution controls than proposed.

“Our concern is public health,” Hernandez said. “I think the impact on Harris County should be fully accessed before any permits are issued.”

Houston, once the nation’s smog capital, met the federal ozone limit for the first time last year. But the region will need to make deeper cuts, because the EPA has proposed a stricter smog standard.

The allowable smog level will be between 60 and 70 parts ozone per billion parts air, down from the 84 parts per billion, set in 1997, that Houston met last year.

The EPA says the tighter standard reflects research showing that smog poses greater health risks than previously thought. Ozone is the main ingredient in smog, and chronic exposure can trigger asthma attacks, chest pains and premature death.

Smog is created when a mixture of chemicals emitted mostly by vehicles, industrial plants and refineries reacts with sunlight.

Not the cleanest

If built, the White Stallion plant would be capable of generating 1,320 megawatts, enough to power about 650,000 homes.

The company proposing it, which didn’t respond to requests for comment, says on its Web site the plant’s circulating fluidized bed technology enables it to burn coal and petroleum coke cleanly, meeting rigid environmental standards. The technology burns coal at lower temperatures and uses limestone to capture many emissions that older plants don’t.

Other proposed coal plants in Texas, however, would emit smog-forming pollution at a lower rate than the White Stallion facility, which would pump more than 4,000 tons of nitrogen oxides into the air each year — as much as 4.8 million cars — and increase Houston’s ozone level by 2 parts per billion, according to environmental groups.

“It’s a significant problem, especially since the EPA is tightening the standard” for smog, said Ryan Rittenhouse, a Texas-based analyst with the advocacy group Public Citizen. “It makes no sense to permit this coal plant on Houston’s doorstep.”

###

By promoting cleaner energy, cleaner government, and cleaner air for all Texans, we hope to provide for a healthy place to live and prosper. We are Public Citizen Texas.

But this week our dear Gov was at it again. Tuesday morning he joined Attorney General Greg Abbott and Agriculture Commissioner Todd Staples to announce a lawsuit against the Environmental Protection Agency’s(EPA) endangerment finding for carbon dioxide. We had plenty to say about it, which has already been posted this week, but I think that I like the way Forrest Wilder over at the Texas Observer put it best:

Perry is up to his neck in pseudo-scientific gobbledygook and he’s bringing Attorney General Abbott and Ag Commissioner Todd Staples along with him. The (“frivolous“) lawsuit today is neither a legal nor scientific document. It is a political one: poorly-reasoned, poorly-sourced and containing enough tin-foil hat conspiracies to block a Mexican border blaster.

Check out his blog post for the nitty gritty on the legal brief (“filled with footnotes, giving the appearance that it’s been carefully researched. But on closer inspection many of the references are to rightwing blogs, “studies” by armchair climate analysts, and obscure anti-climate groups like the New Zealand Climate Science Coalition.”)

Luckily we heard about Perry’s press announcement with just enough time to sweep in and have the last word. Officing 3 blocks from the capitol does have its perks. Along with Sierra Club, we were able to stake out a good spot outside the Governor’s Press Room and hold an impromptu reaction press conference by the West Trashcan. With members of the press gathered around, Smitty (our director, of course!) and Eva Hernandez from Sierra Club gave statements crying foul on the Governor’s tomfoolery, and even issued a symbolic “citizen’s citation” to Perry for endangering the health of Texans and the climate. Perry didn’t come out to accept it himself, but did send a policy aide in his honor. Good thing too; we were worried we’d have to slip it under his locked and barred door (not exactly the climactic press moment we were looking for). Check out the video though, editing courtesy of our newest media intern Patrick! Don’t worry, you’ll get to meet him soon enough.

###

By promoting cleaner energy, cleaner government, and cleaner air for all Texans, we hope to provide for a healthy place to live and prosper. We are Public Citizen Texas.

The state’s legal action indicates EPA’s Endangerment Finding is legally unsupported because the agency outsourced its scientific assessment to the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which has been discredited by evidence of key scientists’ lack of objectivity, coordinated efforts to hide flaws in their research, attempts to keep contravening evidence out of IPCC reports and violation of freedom of information laws.

You may have also seen our response.  If you’re a regular reader here, I hope so!

Perry, Abbott, and Staples claim that the science is flawed on climate change, citing recent controversy surrounding the IPCC (a-hem, that’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, gentlemen. Maybe the legal brief should be thrown out due to citation of a ficticious panel? We’ll call it INTERNATL-PANELGATE! We’ve really got ‘em now!).  Too bad the controversy hasn’t affected the main thrust of the underlying science, only some of the claims. Too bad the conclusions of the IPCC have also been independently adopted and verified by the US National Academy of Sciences and the collected opinions of 13 US Gov’t agencies (like those liberals at the CIA and the USDA), collectively put together in the US Global Change Research Program. Despite its problems, the main conclusions of the IPCC’s report, that temperatures were increasing and climate was changing due to greenhouse gas emissions, remains intact.

Too bad Perry, Abbott, and Staples (or maybe more accurately Larry, Moe, and Shemp?) didn’t seek the advice of…oh, actual scientists, like maybe the Texas state climatologist?  Didn’t know we had a climatologist?  (Maybe Governor Perry didn’t either?) Well, we do, and before you dismiss him as some granola-chewing-Austin-based-hippie-liberal, he’s actually anything but.

Meet Dr. John Nielsen-Gammon, of the Texas A&M Department of Atmospheric Sciences, appointed to the position of State Climatologist by noted liberal and hater of greenhouse gases George W. Bush. (hope you caught the irony there).

In a sweeping interview with Brad Johnson’s Wonk Room blog, he fired back against Perry’s allegations that the endangerment finding is flawed:  “Anthropogenic increases of greenhouse gas concentrations clearly present a danger to the public welfare, and I agree with the EPA’s findings in that sense.”

To be fair, Dr. N-G also specifically added a caveat to his comments, “Just to be clear, I do not “utterly dismiss” the Texas petition. I have contributed to pointing out errors in the IPCC reports in my own blog, and it is appropriate for the State of Texas to inquire how much of the IPCC findings will ultimately be called into question. Nor would my considered scientific opinion constitute adequate independent grounds for an EPA finding.”

Wow.  A reasonable climatologist, but one who supports the broad scientific consensus.  What scientific consensus is that, you ask?  Well, as a result of this interview, Dr. Andy Dessler (who we have long been a fan of here at TexasVox) and the entire A&M Dept of Atmo Sciences released the following statement:

Dr. Andrew Dessler, a climatologist at Texas A&M University and author of The Science and Politics of Global Climate Change, tells the Wonk Room in an email interview that the entire Department of Atmospheric Sciences agrees with the IPCC:

“I, along with all of the other faculty in the department, agree with the main conclusions of the IPCC.”In 2007, the Texas A&M Department of Atmospheric Sciences issued a statement that global warming from emissions of greenhouse gases risks “serious adverse impacts on our environment and society” — the key basis for the EPA’s endangerment finding:

1. It is virtually certain that the climate is warming, and that it has warmed by about 0.7 deg. C over the last 100 years.
2. It is very likely that humans are responsible for most of the recent warming.
3. If we do nothing to reduce our emissions of greenhouse gases, future warming will likely be at least two degrees Celsius over the next century.
4. Such a climate change brings with it a risk of serious adverse impacts on our environment and society.When asked if the latest attacks on the IPCC affect their stance, Dr. Dessler responded that “the Department stands by its statement. You can quote me on that.”

You can read the entire interview here.  But, when it comes to this one right here, it’s Science 1 – Perry, Abbott and Staples 0.

Or maybe no one is keeping score, and we just chalk this up as more election year posturing?

###

By promoting cleaner energy, cleaner government, and cleaner air for all Texans, we hope to provide for a healthy place to live and prosper. We are Public Citizen Texas.

Statement from Tom “Smitty” Smith, director of Public Citizen’s Texas Office and Ken Kramer, director of the Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club

This morning Governor Perry attempted to show Texas voters that he is bigger than both Texas and federal law by enacting a lawsuit against the Environmental Protection Agency’s(EPA) endangerment finding for carbon dioxide, but instead just further highlighted his failure to protect Texans’ health and the safety and long term stability of our economy and climate.

Instead of suing the EPA, Perry should be taking proactive steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and build up our clean energy economy.  Our governor likes to brag about all he’s done to promote wind and energy efficiency and the emissions Texas has avoided as a result, but at the same time he is hammering through a second Texas coal rush that will negate all that hard work and add 77 million tons of CO2 to Texas’ already overheated air.

Perry’s blustering behavior has actually caused Public Citizen to file a lawsuit against the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality for its failure to regulate global warming gasses. Texas law clearly requires that “air contaminants” be regulated, and defines contaminants as follows:

“‘Air contaminant’ means particulate matter, radioactive material, dust, fumes, gas, mist, smoke, vapor, or odor, including any combination of those items, produced by processes other than natural.” Tex. Health & Safety Code § 382.003(2).

Perry has proudly demonstrated willful ignorance of this portion of Texas law time and time again, and has ordered state agencies such as the TCEQ to ignore it as well. For this reason and his actions today we are issuing our Governor a Citizens’ Citation to cease and desist endangering the health of breathers, the economy and the climate in Texas by continuing to permit coal plants and other large sources of CO2.

###

By promoting cleaner energy, cleaner government, and cleaner air for all Texans, we hope to provide for a healthy place to live and prosper. We are Public Citizen Texas.

Public Citizen and Area Legislators Urge State to Deny Air Pollution Permit

HOUSTON – Area legislators joined Public Citizen this week in urging environmental agencies to deny the White Stallion coal plant its air permit because if built, the facility would degrade air quality in Houston.  The emissions from this proposed power plant would exacerbate the problem of smog in the Houston-Galveston-Beaumont region, which already is in violation, or “non-attainment,” of federal ozone standards and may soon have to meet higher standards as the result of a new proposal to strengthen the federal ozone rule

“The proposed White Stallion coal plant would harm the health of the people of Matagorda County, degrade the environment, and stifle economic development and tourism throughout the region,” said Ryan Rittenhouse, coal energy analyst with Public Citizen’s Texas office. “We are pleased to see Texas legislators step up to protect our citizens, the environment and Texas’ economic future.”

White Stallion’s air permit hearing before the State Office of Administrative Hearings begins today and will last through Feb. 19. That office will make a recommendation to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ).

The air pollution permit is the first step; the project still will need a wastewater permit from the TCEQ and an additional permit from the Army Corps of Engineers.

If granted an air permit, White Stallion will increase emissions of nitrogen oxide (NOx), the principle component of ozone, by more than a third in Matagorda County, where the plant will be located. That translates to more than 4,000 tons per year of NOx that would blow into the Houston area, dramatically increasing ozone levels in the non-attainment region.

“The proposed White Stallion coal plant will be less than 17 miles from the Houston/Galveston non-attainment region. Coal plants such as this one are one of the largest, individual sources of smog-forming pollutants,” said State Rep. Ana E. Hernandez (D-Houston). “Particularly in light of new EPA ozone standards, why should we allow a coal plant to be built on our doorstep? It will only make it that much harder for us to clean up Houston’s air pollution.”

Last year, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) ruled that the TCEQ has not been adhering to the Clean Air Act in its issuance of new air permits, but the TCEQ has failed to change its permitting process.

For this reason, Texas legislators, including Reps. Hernandez, Jessica Farrar (D-Houston) and Kristi Thibaut (D-Houston), sent appeal letters this week to Dr. Al Armendariz, regional administrator of the EPA, urging the agency to step in and provide much needed guidance and oversight to the TCEQ. Their letters asked that the White Stallion power plant not be given an air permit to begin construction until the EPA ensures that constituents will receive the full public health protections of the federal Clean Air Act.

“I urge TCEQ and the EPA to deny the permit authorizing the White Stallion coal plant to be built in Matagorda County. Texas’ air quality must be improved for the good health of every Texan. The goal of clean air and clean water can be obtained by a commitment to reducing air contaminants,” Farrar said.

Despite the fact that a new coal plant could hinder Houston’s ability to meet federal regulations, the TCEQ refuses to predict or consider air impacts that are outside the non-attainment region. In fact, the TCEQ executive director filed legal briefs arguing that evidence showing White Stallion would contribute to ozone problems in the Houston area is irrelevant to the decision of whether to grant the White Stallion air permit. The TCEQ similarly refuses to consider cumulative impacts when granting an air permit, such as the fact that the 30-year-old Parish coal plant is only 50 miles northeast of the White Stallion site and also within the Houston/Galveston non-attainment region.

White Stallion would also pull 36,000 acre-feet of water from the Colorado River every year. Increased activity from the two barges required to deliver coal every day would contaminate the water with toxic runoff and erode the embankments.

The proposed plant would be located along a 100-year floodplain and would store coal ash waste on site. In the event of extreme weather, that toxic waste could easily wash into public waterways.

“The proposed White Stallion coal plant would dump thousands of tons of toxic pollutants into our air and water every year, when this region is already in non-attainment for clean air,” Thibaut said. “Furthermore, construction of this plant would remove 36,000 acre-feet of water each year from the Colorado River, which serves many drought-stricken areas of our state. As the elected representative for thousands of my constituents who would be affected, and as the mother of a small child, I cannot stand by as our air and water quality are further eroded.”

If the project is granted its air permit, advocates still have a chance to challenge the permit in state court and to reform the TCEQ through the sunset review process.

“The TCEQ is one of a number of state agencies that are about to undergo sunset review at the Texas Legislature. The sunset commission has the power to reform this agency and insist that any permits issued in the future adhere to the Clean Air Act,” said Tom “Smitty” Smith, director of Public Citizen’s Texas office. “With this process, Texas has the opportunity to ensure that the health of Texans and their environment are protected more than the profits of energy corporations.”

###

By promoting cleaner energy, cleaner government, and cleaner air for all Texans, we hope to provide for a healthy place to live and prosper. We are Public Citizen Texas.

Also check out this video of the press conference to hear what matters most about the ozone rule from activists with Kids for Clean Air, Public Citizen, the American Lung Association, Health Professionals for Clean Air, Sierra Club,  and the Galveston-Houston Alliance for Smog Prevention. The lead image is acting a little funny, but the video will still show up, I promise

###

By promoting cleaner energy, cleaner government, and cleaner air for all Texans, we hope to provide for a healthy place to live and prosper. We are Public Citizen Texas.

It’s Time to Weigh in on Smog Limits

Imagine this conversation between a mother and child:

“Mommy, can we go outside and play?”

“Not today, dear, it’s just not safe.”

Most of us growing up in Texas didn’t wait for our parents to check an air quality report before venturing outside in the summer. But things have changed. Today, we know that rising temperatures bring rising ozone levels and as summer arrives we’re forced to restrict outdoor activities to limit harmful exposure.

Still, no matter how hard we try, we just can’t hide from poor air quality. We’ve got to clean it up.

That’s why we are encouraged that the Environmental Protection Agency is proposing new limits on ozone “smog” pollution to protect human health. On Tuesday, the EPA hosts an all-day public hearing at the Houston Hobby Hilton to get your feedback on these proposed stronger standards.

Why should you care about ozone? Ground-level ozone triggers asthma attacks, sends children to the emergency room and can even kill. It’s a serious health threat — especially in states with warmer climates like Texas. When our abundant sunlight and heat “cook” our equally abundant emissions from traffic and refineries, it forms — you guessed it — too much ozone.

In the greater Houston area, hundreds of thousands currently suffer from asthma, chronic bronchitis, emphysema and other lung diseases. Ozone at levels well below the current standards can damage lung tissue and reduce the lungs’ ability to work. This can worsen asthma and chronic bronchitis. Millions of children and older adults are at risk too — risks that may include irreversible lung damage and premature death.

Why strengthen the existing standard? We need stronger, science-based, national air quality standards because the current limits fail to protect our health and our environment. The standards tell communities like Houston how much pollution has to come out of the air we breathe. The scientific evidence, 2,000 pages of it, shows that the standards need to be much, much stronger or millions of children with asthma, and many others, will continue to suffer.

The last EPA administration ignored the standards suggested by its own independent panel of expert science advisers, the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC), leaving the clear impression that air quality standards were being based on politics and special interests rather than science.

The agency now proposes a standard that would limit pollution concentrations in the range of 60 to 70 parts per billion (as measured over an eight-hour period). We believe that human health would most benefit from implementation of the strongest standard in that range: 60 parts per billion.

What about the costs? As they’ve done decades before, opponents from industry and political allies will wave their “sky-is-falling” flag claiming that strengthening standards will cost jobs and hinder economic growth. But history tells a different story: Forty years of evidence shows those claims are false. Over time, such guidelines have spurred market innovation, never cost as much as predicted and ultimately resulted in cleaner air for everyone to breathe.

Right now we are paying a high price for our dirty air. The costs of poor air quality are often hidden but are very real: doctor’s visits, medications, hospitalizations, time missed from work and more.

Finally, we’ve done it before and we can do it again. We’ve made great strides in cleaning up our air but still have air that threatens our health and our lives. We ask the citizens of Houston to seize this important moment and come to Tuesday’s hearing in support of stronger ozone standards.

Leave a legacy of clean air, not only for our health but also for the health of our children and future generations.

The article was submitted by Michelle Bernth, American Lung Association in Texas; Neil Carmen, Sierra Club; Elena Craft, Environmental Defense Fund; and Matthew Tejada, Galveston-Houston Association for Smog Prevention.

###

By promoting cleaner energy, cleaner government, and cleaner air for all Texans, we hope to provide for a healthy place to live and prosper. We are Public Citizen Texas.