Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘clean air act’

EPA disapproves Texas “flex permitting” program at TCEQ- new programs must follow Clean Air Act, transparency standards

Posted in Energy, Good Government, TCEQ, Toxics, tagged , , , , , , , , on June 30, 2010 |

Child using inhaler because of dirty airThe EPA announced today that Texas’s much-discussed and derided flex permitting program does not follow the federal Clean Air Act (big surprise  </sarcasm>).  This was an action that began when the EPA under George W. Bush called into question the transparency and efficacy of the program which allows big polluters to skirt the federal Clean Air Act.  From their press release:

EPA is disapproving the permit program after determining that it allows companies to avoid certain federal clean air requirements by lumping emissions from multiple units under a single “cap” rather than setting specific emission limits for individual pollution sources at their plants.

“Today’s action improves our ability to provide the citizens of Texas with the same healthy-air protections that are provided for citizens in all other states under the Clean Air Act.,” said Al Armendariz, Regional Administrator.  “EPA will continue working closely with Texas, industry, environmental organizations, and community leaders to assure an effective and legal air permitting system.”

We’re chiming in on this, with a joint press release from the Alliance for Clean Texas (ACT), where you can go to read the full press release.  Here’s the highlights: (more…)

Read Full Post »

EPA taking over permitting of Texas facilities: TCEQ’s permitting process doesn’t follow Clean Air Act

Posted in Toxics, tagged , , , , , , on May 26, 2010 |

The other shoe has finally dropped.

Back in September 2009, we let you know how the EPA had issued rulings that condemned TCEQ’s air quality permitting practices. And today, the EPA stopped asking nicely and took some action.

From the Houston Chronicle:

Objecting to how Texas regulates air pollution, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said Tuesday it is taking over the issuance of an operating permit for a Corpus Christi refinery and could step in at some 39 other major facilities across the state.

“I think the writing will be on the wall — unless we start seeing better permits that address our objections, we are very likely to begin federalizing others,” EPA Regional Administrator Al Armendariz said in a telephone interview. “The state is not following federal Clean Air Act requirements.”

At issue here is the process TCEQ uses to permit new industries that contribute to air pollution.  Specifically, these are called “flex permits” and have been roundly criticized by environmentalists and others for being insufficient in protecting human health and safety from dirty air.  During the Bush Administration, the EPA turned a blind eye to these practices, but now are finally giving TCEQ and flex permitting the scrutiny they deserve.

Of interest here is the Sunset Review process that TCEQ will undergo this year and next, giving the Legislature the opportunity to reform the state agency. With EPA showing they are not going to allow the loopholes that flex permitting creates, it is time for TCEQ and lawmakers alike to sunset these specific practices and go about permitting new facilities based on things like… oh, the Clean Air Act.  Because if TCEQ won’t, it certainly looks like EPA will.

Now if only EPA will ask TCEQ to regulate or at least measure emissions of greenhouse gases like the Texas legislature asked TCEQ to do and which they have promised to do in the past?

###

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.

Read Full Post »

North Texas Public Hearing on Ozone Pollution — Have Your Voice Be Heard!

Posted in Coal, Energy, Toxics, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , on March 8, 2010 |

Support the EPA’s proposal for a stricter ozone pollution standard

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. (more…)

Read Full Post »

Houston’s Ozone Compliance Threatened by White Stallion Coal Plant

Posted in Global Warming, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on February 10, 2010 |

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.

Read Full Post »

Protect the Clean Air Act

Posted in Uncategorized, tagged , , , , , , , , on January 19, 2010 |

With climate legislation held up in the Senate and the Copenhagen climate talks’ failure to produce a binding, international agreement, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has emerged as the critical agency in regulating greenhouse gas emissions. Through application of the Clean Air Act, the EPA has the authority to curb climate change. Unfortunately, U.S. Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and lobbyists for some of the biggest polluters in the country have other plans for the Clean Air Act.

Tomorrow, Senator Murkowski is planning to introduce an amendment that would halt the EPA’s implementation of the Clean Air Act and undermine one of our most important environmental laws.

We know that big energy likes the amendment, since they helped draft it. In the Washington Post, a lobbyist for energy giants like Southern Co. and Duke Energy, Jeff Holmsted, admitted to working with Murkowski’s staff on the exact language of the amendment.This is after Senator Murkowski received more than $124,500 from Holmsted’s clients.

Don’t let Big Energy write the law to pollute more! Tell your Senator to protect the Clean Air Act.

The Murkowski amendment seeks to reverse the EPA’s critical finding that greenhouse gas pollution endangers public health. The endangerment finding triggers the Clean Air Act and prompts the EPA to take the first step toward curbing climate change pollution.

Murkowski’s attempt to eviscerate our best existing tool for reducing greenhouse gas pollution not only threatens our ability to reduce the carbon in our atmosphere, but also serves as another shameful example of the role Big Polluters are playing in stalling climate change action.

Please act today to tell the Senate we need the Clean Air Act to curb global warming, and to oppose the attempts of Murkowski and Big Polluters to gut the Act.

Thank you for all you do!

###

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.

Read Full Post »

Lisa Murkowski: The price to pollute

Posted in Global Warming, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , on January 15, 2010 |

Original post can be found at our sister blog, Citizen Vox.

How much does a pro-pollution amendment cost? From the looks of recent reports about the relationship between Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and a big energy lobbyist, at least about $35,000. That’s how much Duke Energy, Southern Co. and their executives gave to Sen. Murkowski’s campaign and leadership PAC so far in the 2009-2010 election cycle, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

It’s no surprise then that Jeffery Holmstead, a registered lobbyist for clients Duke Energy and Southern Co., had extraordinary access to Murkowski – access to help craft an amendment to allow his clients to continue polluting. The amendment proposed by Sen. Murkowski would gut key provisions of the Clean Air Act. The Washington Post reports that Holmstead (also a former top official at the Environmental Protection Agency under George W. Bush) and another lobbyist, Roger Matella, were very hands-on in drafting the amendment:

In an interview, Holmstead said of the Murkowski amendment, ‘I certainly worked with her staff’ on the exact phrasing of the measure in September.

The Obama Administration has moved forward to regulate pollutants that cause climate change using the Clean Air Act. This critical step to rebuild our economy with clean energy, and to protect our health and our climate from global warming and pollution is under attack by the big polluters. And they have friends in high places.

As early as Wednesday, Jan. 20, the Senate could vote on the “Murkowski amendment” to prohibit the U.S. EPA from using the Clean Air Act to regulate carbon dioxide emissions. She may attach the amendment as a “rider” on a bill that has nothing to do with climate. Tyson Slocum, head of Public Citizen’s Energy Program said, “This amendment is all about letting fossil fuel polluters keep their outrageous profits and continue business as usual.”

Of course, the big polluters also have deep pockets. It’s obvious that Murkowski has wrapped herself up with big energy lobbyists and their money. She has received by far the most money from electric utilities and big oil – at least $389,313 so far since 2009. In fact, she’s the top recipient of contributions from the energy industry.

This kind of pay-to-play politics is not new to Washington or Murkowski, but it is the reason the public holds little faith that members of Congress are representing their interests. The story is the same whether the issue is climate change, the financial crisis or health care reform – big industry fuels elections and the policy falls far short of what the American people want and need.

To remove the appearance of corruption, Murkowski should give back the $35,000 and any other contributions she has received from clients of Holmstead and Matella. But if she really wants to show Alaskans that she values representative democracy over pay-to-play politics, then she should become a part of the solution to the underlying problem. She should support an alternative to the current corrosive electoral system and become a co-sponsor of the Fair Elections Now Act. This bill would allow candidates for Congress to run without taking a dime over $100 from individual supporters.

But then again, a fair system with real accountability might make it tougher for polluters to prevail. It might not appeal to Murkowski and her big oil buddies, but it sure sounds like a good idea to us.

###

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.

Read Full Post »

Year in Review: Top Texas Vox Stories of 2009

Posted in Efficiency, Energy, Global Warming, Nuclear, Renewables, solar, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on January 4, 2010 |

Now that the ball’s dropped, toasts made, fireworks popped and black eyed peas consumed, we’re feeling reflective today.  Faced with that eternally annual question, “Should Auld Aquaintance Be Forgot?“, I’m moved to such mental poetry as “Heck no, this year was too much fun!”

We’ve had a hell of a year here at Texas Vox.  In such a short span we’ve gone from a humble policy blog, primarily read internally and by our own interns, to stake our claim as a top climate and energy blog in the state, with a national and even international reach.  And you, dear citizen-readers, are not the only ones to take notice: from responses we’ve received over the year it is clear that we’re also on the radar of agency commissioners, legislators, city council members and even the office of the governor.  Not too shabby for 12 month’s time, and an exciting place to be as we enter a new decade and crucial political time.

So here’s the first segment of our “Year in Review” series: the Top Texas Vox Stories of 2009.

1. Energy Citizens

Remember when, way back in August, your intrepid friends at Texas Vox boogied down to Houston to crash the American Petroleum Institute’s astroturf “Energy Citizens” rally?  This was the first of several rallies across the nation that API staged to make it look like there was a strong, ground-up movement against a federal climate change bill.  But it turned out that the event was more of a company picnic than a grassroots campaign; they blocked our entry and wouldn’t even let in the “real” anti-cap and trade grassroots, as organized by folks like Freedomworks — no American flags either! But never fear, your own Citizen Sarah was able to sneak past their burly guards and interview a few of these so-called Energy Citizens — who we found out say the darndest things (like that they don’t really know much of anything about the climate and energy bill and are there because or their employers)!

API’s antics didn’t end in Houston, either — in North Carolina, they even locked out the state representative of the district where the rally was held! After a few more rallies, it quickly became clear that on top of being funded by the American Petroleum Institute and stocked with energy company employees, the majority of them were also organized by oil-industry lobbyists. But by that point, no one was buying API’s story anymore.  Way to bust ’em, Netroots!

2. The 2009 81st Legislative Session

Activists had high hopes for the 2009 81st Legislative Session.  With the new Obama administration, fear of pending federal climate legislation, and a new Speaker of the House to break the Craddickocracy, it seemed almost certain that good bills would pass to move Texas closer to a clean energy future.

Two weeks into the session, Public Citizen Texas’ legislative package (which included such lofty goals as significant climate change legislation, a major update of state energy efficiency programs, a non-wind renewable portfolio standard (RPS), and a bill to create incentives for solar power) was in the best shape it had ever been, and the session looked to be one of the most productive in history.  At this point, all of the bills Public Citizen’s Texas office supported had made it out of committee, been passed by either one chamber or the other, and had made it out of Calendars committee and were scheduled for debate.

Unfortunately, the vast majority of our legislation was calendared behind an incredibly contentious Voter ID bill which would have required Texas voters to present a valid driver’s license to vote.  In order to block this bill, House Democrats adopted the “chubbing” tactic — talking bills to death — to avoid getting far enough down the bill list to have to vote on the Voter ID bill.

This stalling technique cut five days from the end of the session deadline and killed a tragically long laundry list of bills that were scheduled after Voter ID.  As an example, SB 16, an omnibus air quality bill which would have provided funding for TERP, plug-in hybrids, and a diesel emissions reduction plan, was directly after Voter ID on Calendars.  Our solar incentives bill was also on the same page, and the non-wind RPS bill was scheduled to be discussed the following day.  It was a very disheartening end to an otherwise shining legislative session — kind of like a great interception and full field run that ended in a trip just shy of the 1 yard line.

But there were still some great victories in there. These major wins included:

  • Funding for the Texas Emissions Reduction Program (TERP) for areas in non-attainment status of the federal Clean Air Act (CHB 1796)
  • A carbon dioxide registry to address the state’s contribution to global warming (CHB 1796)
  • A “green fee” bill allowing the governing board of public colleges and universities to institute an environmental service fee (once approved by student body election)
  • A bill to create municipal solar districts that would allow local governments to provide low-cost loans to consumers to install solar on roofs (HB 1937)
  • A “no regrets” strategy for greenhouse gas reduction in the state.  This bill will require the State Comptroller to examine the state’s energy use in order to find ways to reduce our emissions and save money at the same time (SB 184)
  • A green fleets bill to promote low emissions and plug-in hybrid vehicles for fleets of major state agencies (HB 432)

For the full text, all-green-groups wrap-up number, read the press release Texas Legislature Advances Clean Power and Green Jobs, but Loses Steam in Political Wranglings.

Check back with us tomorrow for more fun stories from 2009!

###

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.

Read Full Post »

Recap: Roll Beyond Coal Tour

Posted in Coal, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on December 28, 2009 |

The November/December edition of Public Citizen News, a bi-monthly newsletter distributed to Public Citizen members, featured this article on our statewide “Roll Beyond Coal” Tour.  Since not all of you out there get the newsletter, I thought I’d share:

‘Roll Beyond Coal’ Tours Texas

By Geena Wardaki

It’s not often that you lug a 20-foot-tall inflatable “coal plant” around Texas to protest dirty coal-fueled power plants.

But that’s exactly what Public Citizen and the Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club did in September.

The “coal plant” served as a powerful image that drove home the message to “clean up dirty power plants now,” which the groups delivered to Texas residents during the “Roll Beyond Coal” tour.

The groups visited Texas communities where proposed coal plants would be built and met with local grassroots and citizen organizations.

The two-week tour, which was part of Public Citizen’s Coal Block campaign, stopped in Waco, Dallas, Abilene, College Station, Corpus Christi, Bay City, Houston and Austin. Texas residents turned out in crowds of varying sizes to show their support and protest with the tour at each stop.

“The biggest cities actually had the smallest response,” said Ryan Rittenhouse, Coal Block campaign director for Public Citizen’s Texas office. “The largest turnouts were from grassroots movements where the issue is more local, smaller towns where proposed coal plants would be built and whose residents would be directly affected.”

Area demonstrators included members of T.P.O.W.E.R. (Texans Protecting Our Water Environment and Resources) from Waco, the No Coal Coalition from Bay City, the Multi-County Coalition from Sweetwater and the Clean Economy Coalition from Corpus Christi.

“Roll Beyond Coal” had two main objectives: one, to show support for the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) recent finding that the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality’s (TCEQ) rules for granting permits to new coal plants do not comply with the federal Clean Air Act; and two, to push the EPA to stop  the TCEQ from granting any permits for or allowing the operation of any new coal-powered plants and from issuing any new air pollution permits. TCEQ currently issues “flex permits,” which allow coal plants to sometimes exceed emissions as long as they don’t go over their total emission caps for the year. Eleven coal plants are proposed or under construction in Texas, more than any other state in the country.

The “Roll Beyond Coal” tour also educated people about federal climate change legislation making its way through Congress (H.R. 2454). Concern exists that new climate change legislation will grandfather proposed or newly built plants, allowing the plants to avoid the proposed emissions standards. (Senate climate change legislation also would enable new plants to be evade emission control standards for a decade.)

Public Citizen told residents to call and write Texas Sens. John Cornyn (R) and Kay Bailey Hutchison (R), and urge them to vote against the grandfathering of new coal plants in the climate change legislation. (Visit www.coalblock.org to see how you can e-mail these senators, too.)

“The ‘Roll Beyond Coal’ tour was an important and entertaining way to reach out to Texas residents and get them engaged and involved in blocking dirty coal power plants,” Rittenhouse said.

“Now, people need to let their lawmakers know that coal plants should not get special treatment in any climate change legislation.”

Geena Wardaki is a Public Citizen communications intern.

###

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.

Read Full Post »

TCEQ Gives Green Light to Another Texas Coal Plant

Posted in Global Warming, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on December 9, 2009 |

The dramatic irony of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) decision this morning to grant the NRG Limestone Coal Plant an air permit (and therefore permission to begin construction on a third smokestack) is painful.  At the very moment that leaders from around the world are meeting to come to an international agreement to save the world from catastrophic global warming, at the very moment that residents of developing nations are begging for the continued existence of their land and way of life, Texas gives the green light to build another mercury-spewing, asthma-inducing, planet choking coal plant.

Not exactly what I was hoping to wake up to this morning.

This decision also comes just days after the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) came out with its engangerment finding, which says that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases represent a significant threat to public health and welfare.  Earlier this year, the EPA also ruled that TCEQ has not been adhering to the Clean Air Act in its issuance of new air permits.  This is the first coal plant permit that TCEQ has issued since that warning (which TCEQ doesn’t seem to have taken to heart).  AND, according to Karen Hadden, executive director of SEED Coalition,

The TCEQ is not following federal law (Maximum Achievable Control Technology or MACT) in issuing this permit and a result, mercury emissions will be higher.

So many hearts to break, so little time. But of course there’s always a silver lining. Next legislative session, the TCEQ (and a whole host of other commissions) will undergo the Sunset Review process — and as Tom “Smitty” Smith, director of Public Citizen’s Texas Office mentions, that gives Texas a chance to reform the TCEQ permitting process:

This is just another example of why the Sunset Commission should take a good hard look at how TCEQ rubber stamps permits for coal plants in Texas.

In the meantime, keep your fingers crossed for progress in Copenhagen, and stay tuned at Texas Vox for more information on how you can help fight global warming and a 2nd Texas coal rush.

Full breakdown of the good (NRG has agreed to offset 50% of their emissions, though there’s nothing in their permit to hold them to that), the bad, and the ugly after the jump:

(more…)

Read Full Post »

EPA Should Use Clean Air Act to Address Climate Change

Posted in Global Warming, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on November 18, 2009 |

Statement of Tyson Slocum, Director, Public Citizen’s Energy Program

*Note: Tyson Slocum is delivered this statement today at a public hearing held by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on regulating greenhouse gas emissions from new and existing industrial facilities under the Clean Air Act.

As we approach the 40th anniversary of the Clean Air Act, it is appropriate for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to use this law for the agency’s most important and challenging task yet: solving climate change. Decades of success using the act to make America’s communities cleaner and safer can serve as a model of how to tackle climate change.

Public Citizen supports the development of strong, science-based regulations to sharply reduce greenhouse gas emissions from power plants, oil refineries and other “smokestack” emitters responsible for 70 percent of our nation’s emissions of pollutants that cause climate change. The EPA has emerged as the only arm of the federal government with the credibility to solve climate change, as Congress thus far has produced deeply flawed legislation that provides billions of dollars in financial giveaways to polluters while failing to fix our corporate-controlled energy system, which contributes to unsustainability and pollution.

Most unsettling is the fact that climate legislation passed by the House of Representatives would end the ability of the EPA to regulate greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act. Public Citizen understands why polluters’ lobbyists have tried to eviscerate the EPA’s authority: Because they know that the agency now is largely shielded from the influence of corporate special interests and can therefore concentrate on formulating the regulatory solutions to climate change based on science, not politics.

As world leaders prepare to meet in Copenhagen next month to discuss how nations can work together to solve climate change, the eyes of the world will look not to Congress, but to the EPA for leadership. Public Citizen strongly supports the agency’s efforts to use the full extent of the Clean Air Act to implement science-based regulations to sharply reduce America’s greenhouse gas emissions from new and existing industrial sources.

###

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.

Read Full Post »

Dr. Al Armendariz named Region 6 Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency

Posted in Global Warming, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on November 5, 2009 |

Environmental Groups Applaud EPA Choice

New Regional Administrator could signal change in direction for polluted state

DALLAS – Environmental advocates across several states are applauding the Obama Administration’s choice of Dr. Al Armendariz to lead Region 6 of the Environmental Protection Agency, which includes Texas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma and Arkansas. Armendariz, an engineering professor at Southern Methodist University, has worked with diverse constituencies ranging from corporations to citizens groups and has published dozens of studies on myriad environmental issues throughout his career. His appointment garnered high praise from the environmental community.

“Our region has typically provided a haven for some of the worst polluters in the country, and has paid a steep price,” said Tom “Smitty” Smith, Texas Director for Public Citizen. “I believe the appointment of Dr. Al Armendariz signifies a new direction for Region 6.”

In an effort to make sure EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson and the White House chose a strong environmental leader for Region 6, about twenty prominent advocates signed on to a list of principles that they hoped would guide the appointment. Dr. Armendariz was one of two candidates the groups endorsed for the position. Their list of qualities for an ideal administrator included a commitment to environmental justice and science-based policy, minimal ties to industries regulated by EPA and a strict adherence to the President’s Executive Order on Ethics, which was intended to prevent conflicts of interest between lobbyists and government agencies.

“Al Armendariz demonstrates the kind of vision, integrity and grassroots approach to enforcing environmental law this region needs if we’re truly going to clean up our act,” said Jeffrey Jacoby, Program Director at the Texas Campaign for the Environment (TCE). “He embodies the ‘Principles for Environmental Leadership and Real Change’ we believed should guide this appointment.”

Indeed, many within the environmental community see appointment of Armendariz as indicative of a new approach for the regional EPA.

“We are thrilled with Dr. Armendariz’s appointment,” said Luke Metzger, Director of Environment Texas. “After eight years of the Bush EPA, it’s a new day for Texas’ environment. Move over polluter lobbyists, science and human health are in charge now.”

In addition to environmentalists, some within the business community were also pleased with Obama’s choice. Former Austin City Councilmember Brigid Shea, now principal and co-founder of an environmental consulting firm, stated, “As a businessperson who’s concerned about the environment, it’s time this region got someone who understands that we can have both a healthy environment and a strong economy, that the two are not at odds.”

Dr. Armendariz will take over for Acting Region 6 Administrator Larry Starfield. During his tenure, he will face a number of pressing environmental challenges, including potentially overseeing the implementation of federal climate change legislation, bringing metropolitan areas in Texas into compliance with the Clean Air Act and working to clean up toxic “hot spots” along the Gulf Coast.

“Texas needs a tough air enforcement chief at EPA 6 Dallas like Dr. Armendariz who’s willing to tackle head on the state’s serious air quality challenges with large urban areas like Dallas and Houston failing to meet new ozone standards, and who is willing to require Texas to clean up its large dirty coal plants and refineries,” stated Dr. Neil Carman of the Sierra Club’s Lone Star Chapter.

Environmental justice activists from communities across the state are also hopeful that the appointment of Dr. Armendariz will benefit Texans living directly adjacent to polluting facilities

“The Executive Order 12898 on Environmental Justice is a document that looks good on paper, but in the real world EPA’s office of Environmental Justice has at times sided with industry over our communities; and pollution problems in poor communities have gotten worse, not better,” said Suzie Canales, Executive Director of Corpus Christi-based Citizens for Environmental Justice. “Now under Armendariz, we have real hope that environmental justice issues will be a serious priority to the agency.”

Many environmental justice groups endorsed Armendariz from the beginning of the Regional Administrator selection process, citing his commitment to science, his understanding of the issues and his dedication to enforcing the spirit of environmental laws such as the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts.

“Dr. Armendariz is exactly the kind of person you’d want to have this job, but seemingly never gets it,” said Jim Schermbeck, long-time Field Organizer with Downwinders at Risk. “Because of what’s at stake and the fact that Texas is the belly of the polluter beast, this may be one of the most important, far-reaching appointments the Obama Administration makes. Downwinders at Risk is proud to have been the group that first utilized Dr. Armendariz’s expertise for our cause of cleaning up the Midlothian cement kilns back in 2005. That work lead directly to his becoming the premier ‘citizen’s scientist’ in Texas on air pollution, and paved the way for his much larger influence on the state scene. Congratulations to both Dr. Armendariz and the EPA.”

As enthusiastic as environmentalists are about the appointment, they also promised to hold Dr. Armendariz accountable to the people affected by pollution issues in the five-state region. “As outstanding as Dr. Armendariz has been on paper and in interviews, we’ll be watching to make sure he walks the walk,” says Jacoby, who works in TCE’s Dallas office, “Remember, Al, my office is right down the street.”

# # # #

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.

Read Full Post »

The Business of Climate Change

Posted in Energy, Global Warming, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on October 12, 2009 |

Environmentalists may soon find a powerful ally in big business.  Some of the United States’ top corporations are now rallying together in support of climate and energy reform, after finally realizing the severity of climate change and the negative effects of global warming on our society.  Several Fortune 500 companies, including GE, Johnson & Johnson, HP, eBay, and the Gap, have joined together to form two core coalitions.  The groups—armed with million dollar advertising budgets—plan to nudge Washington toward the passing of comprehensive climate change legislation.  Participating business executives claim that “many businesses, and the overall economy, would eventually benefit from the new law.”

This week, an assemblage of over 150 entrepreneurs, investors, manufacturers, and energy providers—under the banner of the We Can Lead business group—will march to Capitol Hill to show their support for energy legislation such as this year’s American Clean Energy and Security Act.  The attendees will receive media training, go to policy briefings, and have the opportunity to meet and greet with key policy makers.  The main message for the event?  A climate bill is good for the earth, AND good for business.

Contrary to popular belief, not all businesses are alarmed by the alleged high costs of a new climate bill.  Some 28 companies and green groups, including United Technologies and the Nature Conservatory, are paying a pretty penny in advertising to publicly voice their support of energy reform.  The seven-figure campaign will be launched this Tuesday and, hopefully, other companies will take note and realize that there aren’t sufficient financial reasons to fear a climate bill.

Exelon Corp. is one such company participating in both the advocacy events on Capitol Hill and the allied advertising campaign.  As the largest nuclear power company in the nation, Exelon made waves earlier this month when the company left the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.  The company claims the two bodies simply did not see eye-to-eye on climate change issues.  Exelon is not alone in its flight from the Chamber.  California’s PG&E Corp. and New Mexico’s PNM Resources also announced plans last week to disband from the national business alliance.  Most recently, Apple pulled out and Nike relinquished its spot on the group’s board of directors.  The latter also claims its views on climate change differ drastically from those of the Chamber; however the company plans to retain their membership and continue their efforts toward new climate change legislation.  Much of this disapproval came directly after the Chamber publicly challenged positive findings from the federal EPA concerning the regulation of greenhouse gas emissions by the Clean Air Act.

Built at the peak of a major Republican decade, some would say that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is a mostly conservative, antiregulatory lobbying group.  Now that Washington seems to be swaying to the liberal side—essentially becoming more populist and green, the major faces of big business are skeptical of being associated with institutions as such.

According to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce website, the group hopes to promote five core principles in regards to climate change.

Any legislation or regulation introduced must:

  1. Preserve American jobs and competitiveness of U.S. industry;
  2. Provide an international, economy-wide solution, including developing nations;
  3. Promote accelerated development and deployment of greenhouse gas reduction technology;
  4. Reduce barriers to the development of climate-friendly energy sources; and
  5. Promote energy conservation and efficiency.

The group’s stance on global warming legislation is currently and constantly publicly disputed by various parties on the big business roster, including their former members.

From the We Can Lead two-day rally in Washington to the powerfully proclaimed ‘pro-climate bill’ advertising campaigns; from the recent exodus of corporate icons from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to the overall vocal support for climate change legislation.  It seems as if corporate America and the American public alike view climate change as a business worth investing in.

Read Full Post »

Public Citizen Urges Texas Court to Force State Air Agency to Regulate Global Warming Emissions

Posted in Coal, Global Warming, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on October 6, 2009 |

AUSTIN – Saying that climate change must be considered when new coal plants and other facilities are approved, Public Citizen today sued the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ) in the Travis County District Court to require the commission to regulate global warming gases. This case seeks to extend to Texas law the precedent set by the U.S. Supreme Court in Massachusetts  v. EPA, which held that carbon dioxide is a pollutant under the federal Clean Air Act and that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) must regulate it.

“Texas leads the nation in the emissions of global warming gases. If we were a nation, we would rank seventh in emissions among the countries on earth,” said Tom “Smitty” Smith, director of Public Citizen’s Texas office. “The time has come for the TCEQ to take its head out of the sand and begin the process to regulate CO2 emissions from Texas sources. Because the agency will not do so on its own, we are seeking to have a Texas court order it to do so.”

In the past four years, 11 coal plants have applied for permits under the EPA’s New Source Review program, which requires companies to install modern pollution controls when building new plants or expanding existing facilities. If they were all to be built, they would add 77 million tons of CO2 to Texas’ already overheated air. Six permits already have been granted for plants that will produce CO2 emissions of 42 million tons per year. Another five are in the permitting stages, and they would add 35 million tons of CO2 per year.

The issue of global warming has been raised by opponents in permit hearings in all but one of the six power plant cases, but the TCEQ has said it would not consider global warming emissions in the permitting process. Beginning this month, hearings will begin on permits for the remaining five plants.

Texas law gave the TCEQ the authority to regulate climate change emissions in 1991. In May 2009, the Texas Legislature passed a series of laws that would give incentives for new power plants that capture carbon dioxide, allow the TCEQ to regulate the disposal of CO2 emissions, set up a voluntary emissions reduction registry and develop a “no-regrets” strategy for emissions reductions to recommend policies that will reduce global warming gases at no cost to the state and its industries.

Smith noted that the TCEQ is undermining even the inadequate mitigation strategies that several coal plant builders are proposing. The NU Coastal plant promised to offset 100 percent of its CO2 emissions, but the TCEQ refused to make that promise part of the permit. Tenaska is promising to separate 85 percent of the carbon it emits, but it is not in the draft permit from the TCEQ. The Hunton coal gasification plant will separate 90 percent of its CO2, but the TCEQ classified it as an “experimental technology” so it wouldn’t set a precedent for other coal plant applications. NRG is promising to offset 50 percent of its emissions.

“Without the TCEQ putting these limits in the permits, there will be no guarantee that the power plant builders will keep their promises,” Smith said.

“The TCEQ steadfastly refuses to allow any discussion or consideration of CO2 or climate change issues during permit proceedings,” said attorney Charles Irvine of Blackburn & Carter, who is representing Public Citizen in the case. “The State Office of Administrative Hearings administrative law judges have deferred to TCEQ’s position that CO2 is not a regulated pollutant and therefore not relevant during contested case hearings. As a result, all evidence and testimony submitted on these issues has been repeatedly stricken in multiple coal plant cases. We now ask the court for a declaratory judgment to force the agency to follow the broad mandates of the Texas Clean Air Act and recent Supreme Court decisions.”

In 2007, the U.S. Supreme Court in Massachusetts  v. EPA recognized that CO2 is an air pollutant within the definition in the federal Clean Air Act. Public Citizen contends that the Texas Clean Air Act’s definition of “air contaminant” similarly must include CO2. Specifically, the state law says that:

“ ‘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.” [Texas Health and Safety Code § 382.003(2)]

“So any gas created by non-natural processes – including CO2 generated by a power plant – under the plain language of the definition is an air contaminant,” Irvine said.

The lawsuit is can be read in full here.

###

Public Citizen is a national, nonprofit consumer advocacy organization based in Washington, D.C., with an office in Austin, Texas. For more information, please visit .

Read Full Post »

Oppose the Murkowski Amendment and Support the EPA’s Authority to Curb Global Warming

Posted in Coal, Energy, Global Warming, tagged , , , , , , on September 23, 2009 |

Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) has circulated a draft amendment to the Interior Appropriations bill—the Environmental Protection Agency’s annual spending bill—calling to prevent the Agency from regulating stationary sources of greenhouse gases, despite a mandate from the US Supreme Court two years ago to do just that.

The amendment would ignore worldwide scientific consensus that indicates carbon dioxide emissions from both stationary and mobile sources as a major threat to public health and welfare.  Logic, science, and the law agree!  Global warming pollution from power plants and oil refineries is just as harmful as that from cars and other passenger vehicles.  According to major scientific bodies, such as the U.S. Global Change Research Program and the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, carbon dioxide emissions—no matter what its source may be—are warming the planet, as well as threatening public health and the welfare of our citizens.

Furthermore, the Murkowski amendment would severely undermine the Clean Air Act’s provisions to protect public health and the environment.  Oil refineries and coal plants are among the biggest global warming polluters in the nation.  The amendment would let these big players off the hook, delaying any momentum our nation has in transitioning to sources of clean energy.  If the amendment is rejected, our ongoing shift toward solar and wind energy will drastically benefit our nation, providing a continuous and cleaner supply of energy that will only get cheaper over time, while creating millions of clean energy jobs.

The United States is the single largest producer of harmful gases, with China and India following closely behind. China has even surpassed the US at times in CO2 emissions, although with the current economic recession it’s tough to know who is winning, or should we say losing, the carbon pollution race. Our nation alone contributes nearly 25 percent to global greenhouse gas emissions each year. It is feared that the amendment would make a loud statement heard across the world; one that says the U.S. is not serious about reducing and controlling its global warming pollution, giving developing countries a ‘get out of jail free’ card when it comes to reducing their own carbon emissions.  This could be devastating to international negotiations slated to take place in Copenhagen in December to create a framework to follow up to the Kyoto Protocol.

Lastly, the Murkowski amendment could inevitably prevent the EPA from preparing to implement climate legislation.  The Agency would be prohibited from collecting information and expertise it may need to effectively implement climate change legislation, such as the carbon-capture-and-sequestration bonus allowance program, free allowances for energy-intensive manufacturers, or early-offset programs.

If Murkowski gets her way, we could see a vote this week.  This is the wrong message for our Senators to send, who should not be trying to overturn a Supreme Court ruling and impede international climate negotiations through dirty tricks playing with the budgets of federal agencies.

Click here to see a general action alert by the Sierra Club and more reporting on this by the New York Times.

Read Full Post »

To Grandfather or Not to Grandfather? That is the Question.

Posted in Global Warming, tagged , , , , , , , , , on September 23, 2009 |

Public Citizen Texas and the Sierra Club just closed out their first week on the Texas State-Wide Coal Plant Tour. After a quick break, the tour’s fight against grandfathering will continue next Monday, September 28 in College Station.

So far, the media tour has brought awareness to communities in Waco, Dallas, and Abilene in regards to nearby coal plants that are flying under the legal radar.  These districts have been negatively impacted by the failure of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality(TCEQ) to enforce the law and control pollution.

The Environmental Protection Agency(EPA) recently rejected key aspects of the TCEQ’s air permitting plan, and called for proper enforcement of the Clean Air Act in Texas.  The goal of Public Citizen Texas and the Sierra Club has been to stop the development of any new coal plants in Texas, as well as those that are currently being constructed.  The proposed moratorium would last at least until the TCEQ cracks the whip and strictly enforces Clean Air regulations.

According to a clause under the American Clean Energy and Security Act, plants that are already under construction, near construction or were permitted before January 1, 2009, may escape new regulations.  Around 43 new coal plants will be built on American soil within the next five years, with about a dozen of those in Texas alone.  These provisions—which have come to be called ‘grandfathering’ clauses—and others like it, could allow all of these plants to escape recently set performance standards.

To put things into perspective, let’s take a minute to reflect on the original grandfather clauses.  Birthed during the segregationist Jim Crow period that followed the Civil War, grandfather clauses restricted voting rights in several southern states.  It stated that men, or descendents of men, who had voted before 1866 did not have to meet the educational, property, or tax requirements for voting then in existence; however, slaves could not legally vote before or during the Civil War.  Therefore, most individuals were deemed ineligible.  The Jim Crow laws were inevitably struck down, but the idea of the grandfather clause remained.

What’s the phrase?  Oh, yes.  It’s merely history repeating itself.

Congress’ initial decision to exempt existing coal plants from the stipulations listed under the Clean Air Act was to avoid causing any economic disruption.  They assumed the older plants would be replaced with newer, cleaner ones; but instead, the grandfathering clause has encouraged utilities to just extend the lives of the old, high-polluting plants.

There is no reason why plants being permitted and built today should not be held to the new emission standards. The first step to combat this problem should begin at the state level.  If you live in College Station, Corpus Christi, Bay City, or Houston, our clean energy trailer is coming to a venue near you.  The remaining dates and times of the Texas State-Wide Coal Plant Tour are listed in a blog below.

###

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.

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts - Older Posts »