Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘greenhouse gas emissions’

Big Brown coal plant in Texas

Big Brown coal plant in Texas is one of the largest CO2 emitters

Yesterday, EPA administrator Gina McCarthy announced stage two of President Obama’s Climate Action Plan, the Clean Power Plan, which is designed to reduce power plant greenhouse gas pollution and increase energy efficiency. The plan is to create a flexible environment for each state by allowing cooperation between multiple states along with individual state plans to comply with the Clean Power Plan guidelines. The proposal aims to encourage states, companies and private individuals to get involved in the reduction of greenhouse gasses that come from domestic power plants that burn fossil fuels, especially coal. Its flexibility and benefits are what’s going to drive this environmental plan to its final goal.

The plan requires that states have their proposals submitted by June of 2016 and started by 2020, with the goal of reducing carbon emissions 30% below 2005 levels by 2030. In addition to reducing our impact on climate change, the plan is projected have many other benefits as well.  It is projected to cut electric bills by 8%, cut particle pollution, nitrogen oxides, and sulfur dioxide by more than 25%, and have tremendous health benefits. This regulation has the potential to prevent 6,600 premature deaths and hundreds of thousands of asthma attacks in children who are all exposed to the toxins coal plants emit into the environment. According to the EPA, a projected increase of 104,000 jobs will be created in power production, fuel extraction and the demand side energy sector, and up to $93 billion in climate and public health benefits could be made by making the changes this plan guides us to do.

Texas is home to 18 coal plants

Texas is home to 18 coal plants

Coal plants alone count for one third of all greenhouse gas emissions in the US, with Texas being the largest producer from its 18 coal fired power plants located mostly in east Texas. Currently, there is no restriction on carbon pollution from existing power plants and a steady increase of carbon dioxide atmospheric concentration has gone from 387 parts per million in 2009, to a record 401 parts per million as of April 2014 which, according to ice core records, hasn’t been reached in over 800,000 years. With over 40% of US power generated from coal plants, adjustment of environmental regulations has been needed for a long while.

The goals of the Clean Power Plan are outlined with specific requirements of greenhouse gas emissions that will serve as another step forward towards low-carbon technologies and a cleaner planet. The Clean Power Plan will require a change in each state for the better of the environment, fueling new technologies and businesses that support low carbon economy. By requiring action from the states, the plan will hopefully encourage action from the citizens as well.

In addition to making changes here in the United States, the plan is also hoped to spur greater international action to address climate change. The announcement that the worlds largest carbon emitter, China, will place a cap on carbon emissions in 2016, seems to indicate that the strategy might already be working.

This announcement isn’t the end of the process.  EPA is now collecting feedback from the public on this proposal.  You can help ensure that this proposed regulation to address the urgent problem of climate change is adopted and put into action as quickly as possible by letting EPA know that you support limited carbon pollution from power plants.

Read Full Post »

Texas Leads Nation in Generation of Wind Power, Lags in Solar Power

PC Earthday Texas AnnouncementAs Earth Day approaches, Texas environmental groups are urging state leaders to jump at a rare chance to lead the nation in using renewable energy technologies that U.N. climate scientists say are increasingly inexpensive antidotes to climate change.

“Even Citigroup is climbing on the renewables bandwagon,” said Tom “Smitty” Smith, director of Public Citizen’s Texas office. “The company says that the ‘Age of Renewables’ is upon us.”

Smith quoted a recent Citigroup analysis, which said that solar, wind and other renewable energy sources are becoming cost-competitive as gas prices remain high and volatile. The report also predicted that renewables will continue to gain market share from nuclear and coal power.

Study after study has shown there is serious methane leakage during the process of drilling, fracking and processing natural gas and oil,” said Cyrus Reed, Conservation Director of the Lone Star Chapter of Sierra Club. “Methane emissions are cooking our climate, and they are a public health threat. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, the Railroad Commission and ultimately the Legislature need to step up and adopt tough regulations, inspections and enforcement to prevent methane emissions.”

Last week, the International Panel on Climate Change, the U.N. panel of hundreds of climate scientists, issued its fifth and most dire report, warning that greenhouse gas emissions are rising faster than ever. The report said that only concerted action to bring down emissions in the next 15 years will keep global warming to the level the international community has agreed to – an average 3.6 degrees above preindustrial temperatures.

But it also said renewable energy is an increasingly feasible and affordable alternative to fossil fuel-generated power, the culprit in rising greenhouse gas emissions. Renewable energy technologies have shown “substantial improvements,” “cost reductions” and the ability to be deployed “at significant scale,” according to the report. They also have “accounted for just over half of the new electricity generating capacity added globally in 2012, led by growth in wind, hydro and solar power.”

“Texas gets more power from wind than any other state in the nation,” Smith said. “Our climate makes solar power ideal. We need to take advantage of our natural ability to lead the nation in reducing the severity of the coming crisis.”

Texas’s wind farms already have generated as much as 38 percent of the electrical power on the ERCOT grid, according to a recent media report. That reflects the highest power output by wind turbines in the country.

Although Texas is rich in solar resources, it lags behind other states in solar-generated power, in part because the state legislature has not supplied the kind of incentives provided to the fossil fuel industry. Texas ranks 13th in the nation for the amount of power generated by solar, according to the Solar Energy Industries Association (http://www.seia.org/state-solar-policy/texas).

Austin Energy, though, just agreed to what the Austin-American Statesman described as one of the largest solar projects in the world, which will more than double the solar capacity in Austin. The article pointed out that Austin Energy’s contract with Sun Edison is inexpensive – about 4.8 cents per kilowatt-hour for electricity coming from two West Texas sites.

Texas is the No. 1 contributor of greenhouse gases in the nation. Texas emitted nearly 450 million metric tons of carbon dioxide in 2012, according to the most recent EPA statistics. The next highest contributor, Indiana, generated about 150 million metric tons in 2012. Earlier this year, Texas Gov. Rick Perry also proposed that Texas agree to take high-level radioactive waste from the Los Alamos national Laboratory in New Mexico.

“Gov. Perry’s proposal means a high level of risk for the state and its taxpayers,” said Karen Hadden, executive director of the Austin-based SEED Coalition. “Short-term exposure to waste can cause death, cancer, or birth defects. Almost every other state that has looked at this kind of proposal has said it is too risky and turned it away at the border.”

Smith added, “Texas faces both calamity and great possibility. More than most states, Texas is looking at catastrophic impacts from climate change. We’re already experiencing historic drought that has wreaked havoc on communities, businesses and the economy. But more than most states, we’re also in a position to reverse our reliance on the energy sources that cause climate change.”

Read Full Post »

2014-04-10 Austin City HallThis afternoon, Austin City Council passed a resolution establishing a community wide goal of achieving net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050.  This is one of the most ambitions emissions reduction goals in the world and was passed in response to the recent reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change‘s (IPCC) most recent reports, which indicate that climate change is progressing more rapidly than projected.

The resolution will set in motion a process of updating the city’s current Climate Protection Plan to include all emissions from the Austin community, not only those from city departments – a major improvement over the existing Austin Climate Protection Plan.

Austin Climate Protection Plan ResolutionThe resolution also acknowledged that cutting emissions in the near term will have greater impact on reducing climate change, than emissions cuts closer to the 2050 deadline.  This is because carbon dioxide emissions will continue to impact the global climate centuries after they enter the atmosphere.

The ultimate goal of having net zero greenhouse gas emissions was established to ignite creative ideas in the community and to serve as an inspiration to other cities.  Austin has long been considered a leader in renewable energy and other environmental efforts, but Council recognized that other cities were now establishing more aggressive emissions reductions targets and took this opportunity to help Austin maintain its leadership role.

The resolution called for public participation in developing the new Austin Climate Protection Plan and established that boards and commissions, as well as other technical advisory groups should be consulted.  The first deadline established in the resolution is September 1, 2014, when the City Manager will be responsible for presenting City Council with a framework for meeting short and long term emissions reductions goals.  The final community wide Climate Protection Plan is to be presented to City Council by March 1, 2015.  By then the new 10-1 City Council will be in place.

In the meantime, the Austin Energy Resource, Generation, and Climate Protection Plan update will continue and could include improvements to Austin Energy’s climate protection goals.  The Austin Energy Resource Generation Task Force will have it’s first meeting at 3:30pm on Wednesday, April 16.  That meeting, and all subsequent Task Force meetings will be open to the public.

Councilman Riley sponsored the resolution with Councilman Spelman and Mayor Pro Tem Cole as co-sponsors.  The resolution passed on a 6 to 0 vote, which only Mayor Leffingwell voting against it.  The resolution passes with no fanfare, but the sponsors will host a press conference with community leaders tomorrow morning to announce this encouraging progress.

Read Full Post »

Bad Bill Alert Vote NO on SB 875

The House passed on 2nd reading a bill which would give polluters a shield against being sued for nuisance over their greenhouse gas emissions. Unfortunately, greenhouse gases include all sorts of bad pollution, like methane, and even the pollutants that cause smog: NOx and ozone. 

Even worse, there is concern that the Bonnen amendment would apply to every area of the state of Texas water code. 

This is a bailout for polluters and would take away your rights to stop emissions in your backyard that affect your family, your home, your farm, or ranch.

They say this is just about global warming, but it’s not!

Please call your Representative and tell him or her to

VOTE NO ON SB 875

Talking points to tell your legislator when you get their staff on the phone:

This bill is far more than a global warming bill – it’s immunity for polluters

The original bill was a bad concept, but it only limited local governments’ right to bring nuisance or trespass lawsuits for greenhouse gases.  The new version significantly expands the scope of the bill and TAKES AWAY PEOPLES’ (INDIVIDUALS, FARMERS, RANCHERS, BUSINESSES AND LOCAL GOVTS) RIGHT TO PROTECT THEIR PROPERTY FROM POLLUTION.

The Bonnen amendment went way too far

Please vote no

Read Full Post »

Senate Bill 875 by Sen. Troy Fraser (R-Horsehoe Bay) would take away a Texan’s right to sue a company for “nuisance” or “trespass” resulting from greenhouse gas emissions if that company is compliant with air emissions permits issued by Texas Commission on Environmental Quality or an agency of the federal government.

The bill would roll back Texas nuisance law that predates the Clean Air Act, protecting businesses that emit greenhouse gases from enforcement actions, civil lawsuits or criminal claims.

The Texas Chemical Council, Association of Electric Companies of Texas, Texas Association of Business, Texas Association of Manufacturers and Texas Pipeline Association and other business groups back the bill, but environmental groups oppose the measure.

The bill is designed to put a halt to a trend of public nuisance claims as a way to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. Although the EPA has announced plans to issue rules governing greenhouse gas emissions, air quality permits held by Texas businesses do not currently regulate greenhouse gas emissions.

Our ownTom “Smitty” Smith of Public Citizen’s Texas office, testified against the bill in committee, telling the committee that greenhouse gases are effectively a nuisance because they can cause adverse health effects, change the fertility cycles in plants and animals, and require retrofitting of roads and bridges to withstand greater temperatures. The bill would take away a legal tool citizens have used that predates the Clean Air Act and one that has been used by citizens to sue oil and gas companies.

Smitty further testified that if the standards are unclear, the fallback position you have is nuisance. It interferes with your enjoyment of the environment or causes health effects making the bill far more nefarious than it appears on the surface.

Sen. Kirk Watson (D-Austin) argued, “It’s not right, to say you can do whatever you want with greenhouse gases simply because you are in general compliance with some permit that doesn’t cover greenhouse gases.”

Even the TCEQ has reported that the bill could “hamper the agency’s ability to cite a nuisance violation for greenhouse gases” and allow the “nuisance” to persist and result in lower revenues from penalties, according to the bill’s fiscal note.

Bill by bill, this legislature seems intent upon whittling away protections for individual Texas citizens in favor of the rights of industry.

Read Full Post »

At a time when in much of the US we are facing the most significant heat waves in decades, global temperature averages have shown 2010 to be the hottest year ever in recorded history, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration / Climactic Data Center just released its most comprehensive report on climate change which may as well have been called “It’s Real and It’s Here: NOW!”, and droughts, heatwaves, and wildfires are causing Armageddon-like conditions around Moscow, causing even the global warming denying Russian government to capitulate to the scientific consensus…..  Even with all of that, it would seem like an odd time for the state of Texas to send a shot across the EPA’s bow, insulting them and goading them into a fight over Texas carbon emissions and the Clean Air Act.

But yet they have.

Monday August 2nd the state of Texas sent a letter to the EPA (original can be downloaded here) informing them that we would no longer be complying with the Clean Air Act, specifically provisions relating to the regulation of greenhouse gases.  This letter signed by Attorney General Greg Abbott and TCEQ Commissioner Bryan Shaw is full of bluster and short on reasoned legal arguments with any real merit.

Famous painting of Ukrainian Cossacks writing a triumphant and bawdy letter to the Turkish Sultan after the Cossacks defeated his army

What it really remind me of is one of my favorite paintings, Запорожцы пишут письмо турецкому султану or, Zaprozhe Cossacks Writing a Letter to the Turkish Sultan by Ilya Repin.  (For comparison’s sake, I would highly recommend following that link to read the text of the Cossack’s letter– it has language saltier than anything else I’ve heard this side of South Park)  I just can’t help think of the unabashed joy that must’ve coursed through the veins of the Atty General and TCEQ Commissioner as they drafted this, using phrases like (more…)

Read Full Post »

Capitol Power Plant

The Capital Power Plant on Capitol Hill

Tomorrow, Thursday June 10, Sen. Lisa Murkowski’s (R-Alaska) “Disapproval Resolution” will be voted on in the Senate. If passed, it would overturn the EPA’s “endangerment finding”, undermining the Clean Air Act- which by the way is the most successful piece of environmental legislation- and stripping the EPA of its right to regulate Greenhouse Gas emissions.

Congress has the audacity to claim that global warming is their domain, not the EPA’s. If this is true, it’s baffling that the EPA has been taking action to curb greenhouse gas emissions while all the Senate has done is sit on greenhouse gas legislation.

Murkowski’s resolution, because it will be voted on under the Congressional Review Act, only needs 51 votes to pass the Senate and move on to the House. Murkowski has already locked in 40 co-sponsors and is not revealing how many additional votes she has secured. But while she might get her resolution through the Senate without too much sweat, getting enough votes in the House and the approval of the White House- Obama has already threatened to veto it- promises to be more of a challenge.

This is not the only bill that those of us in favor letting the EPA protect our clean air need to keep our eyes on. Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) will try to push his own bill, which if passed would block the EPA from regulating the greenhouse gas emissions from stationary sources such as power plants and oil refineries for two years, through the Senate. He needs 60 votes and is less confident about its getting through the Senate, but either way, he has said, he will vote in favor of Murkowski’s resolution.

Russell Train, former EPA chief wrote a letter urging Republic Senators Reid and McConnell to vote against Murkowski’s resolution:

I am writing as former EPA Administrator under the Nixon and Ford Administrations to urge the Senate to oppose any legislative proposals that would undermine the Clean Air Act. In particular, I ask the Senate to reject the Resolution of Disapproval offered by Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska (S.J.Res.26), which would prevent the EPA from acting on that agency’s endangerment finding and the cause or contribute findings for greenhouse gases.

For 40 years, the Clean Air Act has protected the health and welfare of the American people, saving hundreds of thousands of lives while vastly improving the quality of the air we breathe. The economic benefits provided by the Act have exceeded its costs by between 10 to 100 times over.

Despite the law’s impressive track record, S.J.Res.26 would rollback Clean Air Act protections and prevent the EPA from regulating greenhouse gas emissions, notwithstanding the agency’s scientific determination that these pollutants endanger human health and welfare. If passed, this resolution would fundamentally undermine the Clean Air Act, overturning science in favor of political considerations. (more…)

Read Full Post »

Perry Flaunts State, Federal Law in EPA Lawsuit

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.

Read Full Post »

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 »

By Kirsten Bokenkamp

According to the Environmental Defense Fund,  driving leads to more than 330 million tons of carbon dioxide emissions each year in the United States alone.  This amounts to more than 20% of the nation’s carbon dioxide emissions!  In an effort to cut down on greenhouse gases, the Obama administration’s new fuel efficiency standards require that passenger cars and light trucks cars get a minimum of 35.5 mpg by 2016.  The environmental impact of these new standards is similar to taking 177 million cars off the road.

While this is a positive change in policy, it does not rid us of our personal duty to decrease our own impact.  This is a tough one, because so many of us depend on our car for basically everything.  I am certain, though, that there are actions that we can all take.  Some of us may be able to walk or bike more, or take advantage of public transportation, while others might choose to buy a more efficient car or drive smarter. And we all can ask our legislators to spend more time and resources on energy efficient city planning and transportation.

Nobody has said that reversing global warming will be convenient or easy, politically or personally.  Sometimes, however, walking, biking, or taking public transportation to work or to run errands is much more enjoyable than driving.  Sure, it usually takes a bit more time, but you are also getting some exercise, enjoying the freedom from road rage, and getting to know your neighborhood better.  You will save loads of money on gas, and perhaps you will find yourself in a better mood by the end of the day.  Walking or biking will not only help save the earth, but will also lower the health care costs associated with obesity. It has been shown that countries with the highest levels of active transportation have the lowest rates of obesity.  Have you ever checked out the website Walk Score?  It is pretty neat – you put in your address, and using a 100 point score it tells you how walkable your neighborhood is, and provides a map showing you how close you are to grocery stores, restaurants, coffee shops, bars, movie theaters, parks, drug stores, and the like.

Maybe walking or biking is not an option for you, but the bus is.  Public transportation in the US saves about 37 million tons of carbon dioxide every year, and more than 11 million gallons of gas every day! While it may take a bit longer than driving, you have the freedom of reading a book or the paper, or simply sipping on your coffee and looking out the window.  It may sound crazy, but for every gallon of gas that you spare, you keep 19.4 pounds of carbon dioxide from being emitted into the atmosphere – who says individuals can’t make a difference?

About half the people in the US don’t have access to public transportation.  If this is you, there are other ways to reduce your impact from driving.  If you are in the market for a new car, put fuel efficiency as a top priority.  A hybrid car can save 16,000 pounds of carbon dioxide and $3,750 per year.  Shop around for the most fuel-efficient car that suits your needs on websites like FuelEconomy or GreenCar.  If you don’t really need a big car, then don’t buy one.  Another huge thing you can do is to keep your tires properly inflated. This saves you about 250 lbs of carbon dioxide and $840 per year per vehicle!  Other tips include: don’t use your car as a storage unit, the more stuff it is carrying around, the harder it needs to work; drive more smoothly, try to limit stopping and starting; shift to a higher gear a little bit earlier; and turn off the car instead of idling.  Of course, car-pooling when you can makes a huge difference as well.

Depending on our living situation, we all have different abilities to lessen our impact on the planet from driving.  One thing, however, that we can all do is urge our leaders to invest more in public transportation and cities and towns that are walker and biker friendly.  It is easy, and will only take a minute of your time. Sign a petition here.  In the meantime, do whatever you can to walk more and drive less.  While you are doing your part, you might be surprised at just how rejuvenating slowing down can be.

###
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 »

For any of you global warming denier trolls lurking out there, here you finally have it: ANOTHER final study that undeniably shows a link between manmade greenhouse gas emissions and the warming that has occurred.

Yes, yes, and the sky is blue as well.  AND the Earth revolves around the sun.  I know most of us don’t need more scientific evidence that putting pollution in the atmosphere fundamentally disrupts the climate, but what is most interesting about this study is it calculates a precise amount of warming per ton of CO2 or equivalent:

Until now, it has been difficult to estimate how much climate will warm in response to a given carbon dioxide emissions scenario because of the complex interactions between human emissions, carbon sinks, atmospheric concentrations and temperature change. Matthews and colleagues show that despite these uncertainties, each emission of carbon dioxide results in the same global temperature increase, regardless of when or over what period of time the emission occurs.

These findings mean that we can now say: if you emit that tonne of carbon dioxide, it will lead to 0.0000000000015 degrees of global temperature change.

If we want to restrict global warming to no more than 2 degrees, we must restrict total carbon emissions — from now until forever — to little more than half a trillion tonnes of carbon, or about as much again as we have emitted since the beginning of the industrial revolution.

The full article will eb published in the June 11 edition of Nature.

And if that wasn’t enough, this from the HuffPo about coal ash:

Aerial photo of the Kingston fly ash spill

Aerial photo of the Kingston fly ash spill

Just how bad has the coal ash situation gotten in the United States? So bad that the Department of Homeland Security has told Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) that her committee can’t publicly disclose the location of coal ash dumps across the country.

The pollution is so toxic, so dangerous, that an enemy of the United States — or a storm or some other disrupting event — could easily cause them to spill out and lay waste to any area nearby.

There are 44 sites deemed by the Environmental Protection Agency to be high hazard, but Boxer said she isn’t allowed to talk about them other than to senators in the states affected. “There is a huge muzzle on me and my staff,” she said.

“Homeland Security and the Army Corps [of Engineers] have decided in the interests of national security they can’t make these sites known,” she said.

There are several hundred coal ash piles across the nation, she said, all of them unregulated.

“If these coal ash piles were to fail they’d pose a threat to the people nearby,” she said. While keeping it from the public, DHS is alerting first responders as to the location of the piles.

“I believe it is essential to let people know,” said Boxer, arguing that if people knew what was in their backyard they’d press public officials to clean it up and protect the area. “I think secrecy might lead to inaction…I am pressing on this.”

Especially in the wake of Kingston fly ash disaster, which was the worst environmental disaster ever in the US– worse even than the Exxon Valdez- this seems pretty simple to me: climate change is caused by greenhouse gases, coal is the major contributor to CO2 emissions, coal ash is so dangerous we can’t even know where the dumps are because of national security… so, let’s stop burning coal? That’s a solution so easy, it’s not surprising anyone in Washington (or for that matter, Austin) hasn’t proposed it.  Oh wait, we have.  It’s called a coal moratorium, and we should be doing it.  For more info, visit www.coalblock.org

Read Full Post »

Environmental Groups See Clean Energy Groundwork Laid for the Future

(Austin) Senate and House members from both political parties showed unprecedented support for developing more renewable energy and energy efficiency in Texas by filing a large number of clean power, green jobs bills in the 81st Texas State Legislature. A number of major bills passed either the House or the Senate. Ultimately, political disagreements over other issues and over the size and extent of the programs delayed and killed most of these excellent legislative initiatives.

Environmental groups Sierra Club, SEED, Public Citizen, Environmental Defense Fund, and Environment Texas applaud the passage of some clean energy, green jobs legislation and view the Legislature as having laid ample groundwork for the future.

“The fact that both the House and the Senate passed major legislation on energy efficiency and renewable power with bipartisan agreement shows that Texas leaders are willing and able to develop clean power and green jobs for our state,” noted Cyrus Reed, Conservation Director of the Lone Star Chapter of the Sierra Club. “Nevertheless, leaders were distracted by undue influence from industry interests and by the Voter ID debate which hampered passage of clean energy bills and other more vital areas of legislation.”

“Texas is moving more slowly than a melting glacier toward developing global warming policy. Rather than implementing already available energy efficiency and distributed energy solutions, Texas’ response to global warming is to develop futuristic industrial-sized solutions. As a result the state has legislation pending that may develop standards for large scale carbon sequestration projects and provide incentives to get companies to develop the technologies,” said Tom “Smitty” Smith, Director of Public Citizen’s Texas office. “On the positive side, the state has passed a study to develop a series of ‘no regrets’ solutions to global warming that the State can achieve at no cost. Also, the Texas House, especially the House Committee on Environmental Regulation, should be applauded for their more open leadership style this session which lead to far more reasoned and less ideological bills being developed in the committee.”

Clean Power, Green Energy Bills that passed both bodies and will go to the Governor (as this release goes to press):

  • Green fleets legislation to promote low emissions and plug-in hybrid vehicles for fleets of major State Agencies (HB 432);
  • Legislation allowing cities to create financial districts to loan money for renewable power and energy efficiency (HB 1937).
  • Legislation setting a ‘no regrets’ strategy for greenhouse gas reduction in the State; a study of the state’s energy use to find ways to reduce our emissions and save money at the same time (SB 184)
  • A coordinated green jobs strategy including funds allocated for child care programs, vocational training initiatives, energy efficiency measures, the Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP), and/or any other recovery funds (passed as a Rider to Article 12).
  • Green fee bill passed allowing governing board of public colleges and universities to institute an environmental service fee once approved by student body election.

“This has been a disappointing session,” said Luke Metzger, Director of Environment Texas. “However, with the passage of HB 1937, we can start the ball rolling on developing Texas’ solar future, working with local communities one at a time to start financing solar and energy efficiency projects.”

Groundwork Laid for Next Session

The major Clean Power, Green Jobs bills that passed the House or Senate but did not ultimately make it to the Governor’s Desk include:

  • Raising the state’s minimum residential and commercial building codes from 2001 to 2009 standards (passed Senate as SB 16 and HB 2783 in House);
  • Raising the utility efficiency goal (SB 546 passed both houses but no agreement was reached between Senator Fraser and Representative Anchia on the size of the goals)
  • Adopting appliance efficiency standards for a variety of products, including pool pumps (passed Senate as SB 16)
  • Creating a 1,500 MW Emerging Technology Renewable Standard (SB 541 – passed the Senate)
  • Creating a $500 million solar incentive program (SB 545 – passed the Senate).
  • Creating a Policy requiring utilities and retail electric providers to pay consumers fair buyback rates for excess electricity generation from renewable energy (HB 1243 – passed House and Senate, but was killed in the House through concerns over germaneness and Senate amendments.);
  • High performance energy efficiency building standards for state buildings, including universities and public schools (HB 431). The Senate may pass the conference committee report today, on Sine Die.

Factors which prevented bills with bipartisan support from making it across the finish line:

  • The issue of Voter ID, which put many major efficiency and renewable bills too far down the calendar for consideration in the House;
  • A disagreement over the germaneness and concern over the possible costs to low-income residents of adding the solar incentive bill (SB 545) to the surplus electricity bill (HB 1234), which led Representative Turner to ultimately kill consideration of the bill on the House floor;
  • The election of a new Speaker and the naming of new Committee Chairman understandable led to some delays in getting the committees up and running to begin to consider bills;
  • Disagreement between House and Senate on size and scope of goals set by solar and energy efficiency bills (SB 545 & 546);
  • Disagreement over the potential costs and benefits of the Renewable Portfolio Standard (SB 541);
  • Opposition from the Texas Manufacturers Association, the Governor and many utilities against the Renewable Portfolio Standard.

“We were happy to find some new allies this session including certain members of the legislature and some electric utilities that said they supported renewable energy and energy efficiency legislation,” said Jim Marston, Director of Texas Regional Office of Environmental Defense Fund. “Sadly, some of the electric companies talked a good game, but their support evaporated when opposed by their affiliated retail electric providers or others in the industry. In the end, the Association of Electric Companies of Texas reverted to representing the interests of the regressive elements of their membership harming the ability of Texas to participate successfully in the new energy economy.”

“Moreover, the Texas Association of Manufacturers (TAM) while acknowledging that an expanded renewable portfolio standard was the way to bring clean technology jobs to Texas, distributed false cost information about solar legislation that was repudiated by the PUC and others. The bottom line, TAM fought legislation that would have brought new manufacturing jobs to Texas,” said Marston.

Nuclear Bills Blocked

Environmental groups blocked bad bills that would have removed citizen rights to contest permits and would have promoted nuclear power in the State which many view as a financial drain from investment in truly clean energy.

“Nuclear power is expensive, consumes vast quantities of water, comes with serious security and health risks and creates radioactive waste, for which there is no good storage solution. We were happy to block two bad bills this session that were designed to benefit proposed nuclear reactors in Texas,” said Karen Hadden, Director of the Sustainable Energy and Economic Development Coalition.

The nuclear bills that were blocked:

  • Fast tracked water permits for nuclear power plants and cut out contested case hearings (HB 2721 was left pending in House Environmental Regulation Committee)
  • Subsidies for proposed nuclear power plants in the form of tax rebates (HB 4525 passed the House and was blocked in the Senate.)

“Representative Flynn’s bill would have fast-tracked water permits for nuclear plants, an outrageous attempt in a time of statewide drought,” said Hadden. “It would also have denied citizens an opportunity to contest issuance of the permits through hearings, an assault on democratic process. The other bad bill that we defeated would have given massive subsidies to nuclear power in the form of tax rebates.”

Miscellany

  • A good bill to address the Compact Loophole for the Andrews County Low-Level Radioactive Waste Dump bill, HB 3423 Lon Burnam did not get out of Committee.
  • Environmental groups blocked a bad provision that would have fast tracked water permits for “clean coal” plants in the final version of HB 469 and added cleaner emissions standards for those plants.
  • HB 821 passed, requiring television manufacturers that sell televisions in Texas to make free and convenient recycling available. Texas Campaign for the Environment successfully advocated for this bill.
  • Sen. Ellis used a threatened filibuster last night to kill HB 3827 which would have allowed oil companies to evade liability for MTBE water contamination;
  • SB 2169 Sets up an interagency working group, co-chaired by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, the Texas Department of State Health Services, the Texas Department of Transportation with other agencies to discuss smart growth and make recommendations for developing the state in a sustainable way.
  • An amendment to HB 300 creates a certification program for environmental coordinators in Texas Department of Transportation district offices. This bill is still in conference committee as this release goes to press.

“As it concludes, environmentalists can view this legislative session with some hopefulness – the Legislature is definitely involved and interested in clean energy and green jobs and did move these issues forward. But there is also some sadness – an opportunity to move significantly forward on clean energy was lost,” Cyrus Reed added. “Jobs that could have been created, and new sources of clean energy that could have been advanced in Texas were delayed this Session.”

Read Full Post »

picture-14

The first step towards greenhouse gas regulation is underway! On Wednesday, the EPA proposed a rule that industries measure and report their greenhouse gas emissions. The rule would apply to 13,000 facilities nationwide, including manufacturers of chemicals, oil, cement, iron and steal, automobiles, electricity generation, and more! Green Inc reports that this will cover 85%-90% of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States, and not just carbon dioxide emissions. The reports will also include emission amounts of those other things we hate to inhale, such as methane, hydrofluorcarbons, and nitrous oxide.

If put into action, emissions tracking will begin in 2010 for reports to release in 2011. Of course, this program would cost a significant amount of cash—$160 million in the first year and then $127 million each year thereafter.

The reports will allow us to pinpoint exactly how much greenhouse gas is released into the atmosphere, and from where. Though some firms are already participating in voluntary reporting, this kind of industry-wide reports will provide comparative analysis. With such detailed (and presumably accurate) information, we will also be in a better position to make informed decisions about how emission regulation should be formulated.

CNNMoney.com also reported that this information could be important to investors. For those ill-prepared companies, emission regulation could drastically affect their earnings.

Mindy Lubber, the Director of the Investor Network on Climate Risk stated:

The SEC needs to protect investors from the risks companies face from climate change, whether from direct physical impacts or new regulations. Shareholders deserve to know if their portfolio companies are well positioned to manage climate risks or whether they face potential exposure.

Public release of information would be a powerful tool to prepare companies, especially those that are energy-intensive, to be held accountable for their energy emissions. Or a good kick in the pants to take the next step to become ecologically conscious!

Read Full Post »

fudge1

The EPA’s newest decision definitely brought the dreaded “F-dash-dash-dash” word to mind.

Reports Grist.org:

Coal-fired power plants’ greenhouse-gas emissions shouldn’t be taken into consideration when determining whether to approve their construction, EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson ruled this week. The ruling could clear the way for at least a handful of new coal plants to be approved in the final days of the Bush administration. “The current concerns over global climate change should not drive EPA into adopting an unworkable policy of requiring emission controls,” Johnson wrote.

Just as I was getting into the holiday spirit, Stephen Johnson has to hit us with this.

In case you’re not quite as obsessed with carbon dioxide regulation and coal plants as we are here at Texas Vox, let me provide a little background.  In November the EPA’s governance board ruled that its regional office had been too hasty in approving  a new coal-fired power plant in Bonanza, Utah because the plant didn’t include carbon dioxide emissions or control techniques in their permit application.  The Sierra Club helped secure this victory by filing a suit against Utah’s Deseret Power Electric Cooperative for not controlling carbon dioxide. Their argument was based upon the landmark Massachusetts v EPA case, which required the agency to regulate CO2 as a pollutant under the Clean Air Act.

The Bonanza decision was, in a word, wicked awesome (okay, two words).  It gave environmentalists a great new tool for stopping coal-fired power plants and signalled a sea change in the government’s willingness to take action over carbon dioxide emissions.  So the fact that the EPA is now telling permitters that they cannot consider greenhouse gas emissions when processing applications  is a major kick in the pants.  It could mean slated plants that wouldn’t have been approved could get the green light during these last weeks of the Bush administration. In a New York Times article, Vickie Patton, from the Environmental Defense Fund estimates that as many as 8,000 megawatts of new coal-fired power plants could skate through as a result of this ruling.

I’m still rather uncertain of what this decision means for the incoming administration.   Lisa Jackson, Obama’s new pick to head the EPA, is considerably more progressive on greenhouse gas emissions than Johnson, and could theoretically reverse this decision.

Reports the Washington Post:

It was unclear yesterday what the ruling’s real-world impact will be. The EPA says that about 50 plants — either new or significantly remodeled — must obtain a permit under this provision every year. But Meyers said he does not know if any are positioned to receive final approval before President-elect Barack Obama takes office on Jan. 20.

The Obama administration is likely to review the case, and Democratic officials close to the president-elect’s team say that the Supreme Court ruling and the EPA’s power to regulate carbon dioxide can serve as powerful levers to bring corporations and other parties to a bargaining table about broad framework for controlling greenhouse gases.

Read Full Post »