Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Posts Tagged ‘ozone’

Dallas Morning News Editorial: Texas, a state of denial on pollution rules

Posted in Toxics, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , on January 11, 2010 |

Great editorial in the Dallas Morning News this weekend. We couldn’t agree more 🙂

Editorial: Texas, a state of denial on pollution rules

To the surprise of no one, the Environmental Protection Agency announced tougher ozone limits this week. The move to tighten pollution standards had long been anticipated as evidence mounted to illustrate the serious health risks associated with smog exposure.

In Texas, a state with notoriously dirty air, the appropriate response from leaders would be to get to work. Significant changes must be made to comply with federal rules – not to mention, to protect the people who live here.

But instead of getting started, too many state leaders just got angry. They seemed shocked – shocked! – that the EPA would dare abide by the science showing significant consequences of allowing a less stringent standard.

Gov. Rick Perry stuck with his three-pronged approach to environmental regulations: deny, deflect, pout.

In his statement, the governor denied the need for tougher ozone limits, somehow conflating smog rules with carbon dioxide regulations and suggesting that flawed science spurred this week’s announcement.

In fact, scientists have found that ozone exposure damages our lungs and is linked to heart and respiratory illnesses. Smog can be deadly. By lumping ozone standards in with climate change legislation, Perry only confuses the issue.

The governor also deflected suggestions that the state has less than pristine air. He focused on Texas’ modest anti-pollution efforts, ignoring the fact that our skies are still dangerously dirty.

And Perry pouted, arguing that the EPA has made Texas workers and taxpayers a target. Some of Perry’s allies have echoed that idea, asserting that the new administration has been hostile to the state.

The EPA is not picking on Texas.

The same pollution standards will apply to every state. Inhaling smog-choked air is a dicey proposition, no matter where folks live.

Admittedly, complying with the new rules will be tougher for Texas than many other states. That’s because years of plugging our ears, closing our eyes and pretending that new pollution rules weren’t looming did not leave Texas in a state of preparedness.

Implementing the lower ozone limits will come at a cost. But, the EPA notes, the new rules should yield comparable savings by reducing illnesses, emergency room visits and lost work days resulting from ozone-related symptoms.

The state now must get started on a serious ozone reduction strategy. Deny, deflect, pout doesn’t seem to be working.

###

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 »

Perry, Shaw Blow Smoke About Proposed Ozone Rule

Posted in Energy, Toxics, tagged , , , , , , , , , , on January 7, 2010 |

In response to the EPA’s announcement today of a proposed rule for tougher ozone standards, Governor Perry and his appointee to the TCEQ, Bryan Shaw, have been blowing a lot of smoke and hot air about what the rule would mean for Texas.  Specifically, Perry and Shaw have stated incorrectly that the rule did not take cost-benefit analysis into account, and that it will do nothing more to protect human health.

Current standards for ozone are not protective of human health – in fact, the current rule ignored the recommendations of the EPA’s own scientists, and that is why Obama’s EPA has reconsidered it.  In their decision to propose the rule, EPA reviewed more than 1,700 scientific studies and public comments from the 2008 rulemaking process – studies and comments that were simply ignored by the Bush Administration.  The new rule will save lives, reduce cases of aggravated asthma, and avoid unnecessary hospital and emergency room visits.  All things considered, the proposal will yield health benefits between $13 Billion and $100 Billion, with an implemented cost of $19 – $90 Billion – information which can be clearly found in the EPA’s press announcement today.  It sounds like Governor Perry and Bryan Shaw were taking notes today from oil and gas profiteers scared they’ll have to pay for the devastation they’ve wreaked on Texas’ air rather than sound science and the facts.

###

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 »

EPA: They did it, they did it, they did it, yeah!

Posted in Global Warming, tagged , , , , , , on January 7, 2010 |

Just following up on our post yesterday that the EPA was going to announce a new air quality standard limiting ozone pollution: they did it!

The United States Environmental Protection Agency today proposed the strictest health standards to date for smog…The agency is proposing to set the “primary” standard, which protects public health, at a level between 0.060 and 0.070 parts per million (ppm) measured over eight hours.

For those of you who, like me, loathe decimals, that’s the same as 60-70 parts per billion(ppb). The previous standard was 75 ppb, a threshhold that failed to protect human health.  Ground-level ozone, also known as smog, is linked to a number of health problems such as asthma, and is especially dangerous for those with heart, lung or circulatory problems.  Children are especially at risk.

Yesterday I noted that “the proposed rule would strengthen the Bush administration’s ozone standard, which did not meet scientific scrutiny or standards to protect public health.” But that statement doesn’t tell the whole story (because I didn’t know the whole story at the time — you learn something new every day).  The fault with the current standard doesn’t lie with scientists — EPA scientists actually recommended a stricter standard, those recommendations were ignored when the final rule was set. According to the Washington Post,

Under Bush, EPA officials had initially tried to set a lower seasonal limit on ozone to protect wildlife, parks and farmland, as required under the law, but Bush forced the agency to abandon that proposal just before it announced the new standards.

The proposed rule will now undergo a 60-day comment period, after which it will be published in the Federal Register. The EPA will also have three public meetings on the proposed rule, one of which will be in Houston Feb. 4th.

So what does the new rule mean for Texas? I touched on a bit of that briefly yesterday, but for now I’ll defer to my boss (as he spoke to KERA radio):

That means… we are going to have to find new ways to reduce pollution. It may mean shutting down cement kilns and some plants… It may mean changing some of the ways we drive and getting more efficient automobiles, plug-in-hybrids on the road more rapidly.

###

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 »

Good Bills Being Heard in House Environmental Reg

Posted in Coal, Global Warming, Toxics, tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , on March 31, 2009 |

In addition to Lon Burnam’s HB 3423, there are five other good bills that will be heard in the House Environmental Regulation Committee this Wednesday, April 1, 2009 at 10:30 am or upon adjournment of the House in the Capital extension – Hearing room E1.014. We are incouraging everyone who has a few minutes to stop by the committee room and put in cards supporting these six bills. The five bill numbers are listed below, followed by a brief description of the bill and why your support is important. Please send this message along to anyone else you think might be interested!

HB 1450, Rep. Rodriguez. Relating to the disposal and reuse of coal combustion waste.  HB 1450 establishes the disposal and reuse of coal combustion waste as a class I industrial waste and prohibits use as mine backfill. In addition, it requires groundwater and soil monitoring that must be made publically available.   We’ve been over this one before. Texas tops the list of states at risk from toxic coal ash waste, remember?  No bueno.

HB 557, Rep. Hernandez. Relating to the establishment of an air pollutant watch list and associated reports for the purpose of controlling the emissions of air contaminants under the Texas Clean Air Act.  HB 557 establishes an air pollutant watch list and associated reports for the purpose of controlling the emissions of air contaminants under the Texas Clean Air Act to protect against adverse effects related to :

(1) acid deposition;
(2) stratospheric changes, including depletion of ozone; [and]
(3) climatic changes, including global warming; and

(4) air pollution.

HB 769, Rep. Hernandez. Relating to standards for measuring the emission of air contaminants under the Texas Clean Air Act.  HB 769 requires TCEQ to set standards for measuring the emission of air contaminants under the Texas Clean Air Act that takes into consideration acute and chronic health effects on a person resulting from exposure to an air contaminant; the lifetime exposure of a person to the highest concentration of the air contaminant from an emission source; and does not increase the risk of cancer in a person exposed to the air contaminant by greater than one chance in 100,000.

HB 3428, Rep. Hernandez. Relating to measuring, monitoring, and reporting emissions.  HB 3428 requires TCEQ to establish and maintain an air pollutant watch list available online to the public.

HB 3422, Rep. Burnam. Relating to the establishment of a program for the collection, transportation, recycling, and disposal of mercury-containing lights.  HB 3422 establishes a program to safely dispose of and recycle mercury containing lights. It requires manufacturers to provide collection bins, to collect the bulbs and cover the costs of shipping to an appropriate facility. Mercury containing lightbulbs would have to be removed before buildings are demolished. The bill also has an important educational component.

You can register comment on all of these good bills in one fell swoop by visiting the House Environmental Regulation Committee hearing in E1.014 this morning.  Committee hearings are open to the public, and you can put your official stance on the record by just dropping a card.  If you can’t visit the Capitol today, why not give one of the fine legislators on this committee a call?

Read Full Post »

« Newer Posts