The California Air Resources Board (ARB) charted a new course to reduce California's greenhouse gas emissions by 30% over the next 12 years. The recommended reduction measures will continue to drive innovation, improve the environment and enhance public health, support the growth of the clean-tech sector, and create thousands of new jobs.
"With the release of this draft scoping plan, California is once again blazing a trail to lead other states and the nation to address climate change," said Mary Nichols, Chairman of the Air Resources Board. "Our economy and our society face no greater threat than global warming. This draft plan is the roadmap to move us quickly to a cleaner, more sustainable future, energy independence, and a healthier environment. This plan fulfills the Governor's determination to act now, and it is based on the conviction that Californians will rise to the challenge and develop creative solutions to improve our environment and grow our economy."
Development of the Scoping Plan is a central requirement of AB 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (Nu?ez, Pavley), that calls on California to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed the bill into law in September 2006. Release of the draft plan will be followed by further evaluation and economic modeling, and workshops are planned throughout the state to present the details to the general public and allow ARB to hear public comments.
The comprehensive approach includes both new and existing measures in every sector of California's economy. It is designed with strong elements of enforcement and developed to ensure that emissions—and all reductions—are accurately tracked.
Central to the draft plan is a cap-and-trade program covering 85% of the state's emissions. This program will be developed in conjunction with the Western Climate Initiative, comprised of seven states and three Canadian provinces, to create a regional carbon market.
The draft plan also proposes that utilities produce a third of their energy from renewable sources—such as wind, solar, and geothermal—and proposes to expand and strengthen existing energy efficiency programs and building and appliance standards that have already saved Californians more than $50 billion over the past 30 years in reduced energy costs.
The draft plan calls for full implementation of the California Clean Car law (the Pavley standards) to provide a wide range of less polluting and more efficient cars and trucks to consumers who will save on operating costs through reduced fuel use. It also calls for development and implementation of the Low Carbon Fuel Standard, which will require oil companies to make cleaner domestically produced fuels.
The draft plan encourages improvements to the ways we grow and build our communities to make more livable, walkable cities and shorten commutes.
Several additional initiatives and measures play important roles in reaching the required reductions under AB 32. These include:
- Full deployment of the Governor's Million Solar Roofs initiative
- A high-speed rail
- Water-related energy efficiency measures
- A range of regulations to reduce emissions from trucks and from ships docked in California ports
Under the plan, the State of California is committing to reducing its own carbon footprint by 30%. It also calls on Californians to make changes to their personal behavior to reduce their carbon footprint through carpooling and simple actions, such as adjusting thermostats to use less energy for heating and cooling.
ARB invites public comment on the draft plan. Once the final draft is prepared, it will go to the Board for consideration in November. After plan adoption, all measures will be thoroughly vetted and analyzed, with full public input, over the next two years as they move through the regulatory process.
Preliminary economic modeling of the plan indicates that the overall savings from improved efficiency and the development of alternatives to petroleum will on the whole outweigh the costs. The draft plan recommends targeted fees to fund the state's long-term commitment to AB 32 administration.
EPA Proposes Standards for Water-Efficient Homes
To protect our nation’s water supply for future use, the EPA is promoting and enhancing the market for water-efficient products through the WaterSense program. The latest is a draft specification for water-efficient new single-family homes. The specification will create standards that new homes must meet to be certified and labeled as WaterSense homes.
“WaterSense is a common-sense ethic of efficiency for protecting water, America’s most important liquid asset,” said Donald S. Welsh, regional administrator for EPA’s mid-Atlantic region. “WaterSense certified homes will help homeowners save water, money, and energy, and communities will have an important new tool for sustainable growth and water efficiency.”
The specification is designed to ensure sustainable, efficient water use, as well as a high level of performance and customer satisfaction. WaterSense-labeled new homes will combine with other water-efficient fixtures and practices to reduce water usage by approximately 20%.
Homes earning the WaterSense label must meet criteria for indoor water use, outdoor water use, and homeowner education. Third-party inspectors will certify that homes meet all the required criteria.
EPA is inviting public comment on the draft specification. The comment period will end July 21, 2008.
EPA to Undertake Scientific and Regulatory Evaluation of Formaldehyde Use in Pressed Wood Products
Through this process, EPA will develop risk assessments on the potential adverse health effects, evaluate the costs and benefits of possible control technologies and approaches, and determine whether EPA action is needed to address any identified risks.
The agency plans to issue an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR) in Fall 2008. The agency is pursuing this course of action following the review of a petition submitted under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). The petition requested that EPA adopt nationally a California regulation to control formaldehyde emissions from composite wood products and extend the rule to include composite wood products in manufactured homes.
EPA carefully reviewed the TSCA Section 21 citizens’ petition, submitted by the Sierra Club, a number of other environmental organizations, as well as a large number of private citizens, and sought comment and additional information on the petition. EPA will work closely with the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) on issues related to manufactured housing.
New Jersey to Conduct Infrared Camera Surveys to Reduce Fugitive VOC Leaks
Fugitive leaks of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) are a major source of VOC emissions and contribute to the air pollution in New Jersey, especially ground level ozone. EPA has classified New Jersey as Severe Non-Attainment for ozone pollution.
VOCs are precursors for the formation of ozone. Two kinds of pollution—VOCs and nitrogen oxides (NOx)—react when it’s hot and sunny and produce ozone. Ozone does not come directly from tailpipes or smokestacks. The VOCs that form ozone come from vehicle and industrial exhaust as well as evaporation of gasoline, solvents, paints, and many other sources.
Ozone is of particular concern during the summer months. It irritates the lungs and breathing passages, causing coughing and pain in the chest and throat. Ozone increases susceptibility to respiratory infections and reduces the ability to exercise. Effects are more severe in people with asthma and other respiratory ailments.
The Department of Environmental Protection’s Compliance and Enforcement Program has recently purchased a FLIR Infrared Camera, which is capable of rapidly scanning large areas and miles of piping; this highly specialized infrared camera or thermal imager finds gas leaks and is especially good at finding VOC leaks.
The use of the FLIR Infrared Camera will help find VOC leaks at petroleum, chemical, water treatment, landfills, and other facilities throughout New Jersey as a compliance assistance tool. The Department will then ensure that the facilities repair these leaks to reduce the emissions of VOCs prior to taking formal leak-detection procedures, which could result in enforcement actions, and thereby reduce the formation of ozone faster than would be achieved by traditional compliance and enforcement procedures.
Recent Revisions to IATA Dangerous Goods Regulations
On June 16, the International Air Transport Associations (IATA) released a second addendum to the 49th Edition (2008) of the Dangerous Goods Regulations (DGR). It becomes effective immediately and includes changes to the selection of proper shipping names for mixtures and solutions, packing information, operator variations, and minor editorial changes.
IATA issued new information that helps clarify how to select a proper shipping name for mixtures and solutions. Per IATA DGR 4.1.3.2.1, if a material specifically listed by name in the List of Dangerous Goods (LDG) contains trace or small amounts of other dangerous goods, the name assigned to the majority substance must be used. For example, if a material is benzene with only trace amounts of xylene in it, the proper shipping name is “Benzene.”
The rules do not define trace or small quantities. This new provision does not apply in cases where the mixture is specifically listed by name in the LDG; the entry in the LDG states that it applies only to the pure substance; the classification (i.e., hazard class/division, packing group) or physical state of the mixture differs from the pure dangerous material; or the emergency response information for the mixture is significantly different than that of the pure dangerous good. Mixtures or solutions containing two or more dangerous goods in more than trace amounts continue to follow the rule that indicates an appropriate generic name be selected. For example, if a mixture is made of equal parts benzene and xylene, the name “Flammable liquids, n.o.s. (benzene, xylene)” is the proper shipping name.
The addendum outlines changes in the packing information for gases as well. In IATA Subsection 5.2, the general requirements for packing gases (5.2.0.2) and Packing Instruction 200 are revised to include specific details that were not included in the original publication of the 49th Edition. For example, the newly revised packing instruction indicates that the aluminum cylinder cannot be used as a package for gas mixtures containing the following gases: ethyl chloride, methyl chloride, refrigerant gas R40, vinyl bromide (stabilized), vinyl chloride (stabilized), vinyl fluoride (stabilized), and methyl chloride/methylene chloride mixture.
The addendum includes new or revised operator variations for the following air carriers: Finnair, Nippon Cargo Airlines, Swiss International, and USAirways.
Home Renovations Get Green Treatment
A renovation project is the perfect time to turn your home into a green building—one that uses energy and water efficiently, saves on operating expenses, and lowers the building’s impact on the environment. When most people think of green buildings, they think of new construction. But in the last several years, even minor renovations have been getting the green treatment. And experts are saying that eco-friendly homes full of features such as programmable thermostats, skylights, and Energy Star appliances can add up to 25% more to the value of your home.
In addition to protecting the environment and saving money on utility bills, there could also be tax advantages to making energy-saving improvements. On 2007 federal tax returns, if certain requirements were met, homeowners were allowed to take a credit for installing exterior windows, including skylights, exterior doors, and energy-efficient heating systems. Whether these tax credits will be available for 2008 is not yet known, but it’s definitely something to check into.
Don’t forget the exterior when you’re planning your home’s green make-over. Strategically placed shade trees can lower your air conditioning bill by 15% to 50%.
A simple thing that can make a big impact is redirecting the down spouts directly into the garden or a rain barrel. You can use the free water on your flowers and plants, and, at the same time, you’ll be preventing stormwater from your property eventually getting washed into rivers and streams where it can cause pollution.
If redoing your driveway is on your punch list, you can address the stormwater runoff problem on a larger scale by looking into installing a porous pavement. The porous surface will have openings or gaps that will allow even more rain water to sink into the ground instead of leaving your property.
There’s another renovation issue that most people don’t even think about. It’s the recycling of construction debris. Each year, approximately 60 million tons of building-related construction debris is generated from renovation projects, and the recovery of materials from construction and demolition has important economic and environment implications.
The materials most frequently recycled are metals such as brass and copper, concrete, wood, asphalt shingles, and drywall. Check with your county’s waste authority for a complete list of materials and places to recycle.
Global Challenges/Chemistry Solutions Debuts With Focus on Drinking Water
An authority on the quality of drinking water today describes new challenges for consumers and municipal water supply systems, including unexpected consequences of efforts to conserve water, in the first of a special series of podcasts from the American Chemical Society (ACS), the world’s largest scientific society.
Marc Edwards, Ph.D., notes that reduced-flush toilets, low-flow showerheads, and other well-intentioned water-conservation efforts are allowing water to remain in household pipes longer. As water stagnates in pipes, it may develop undesirable characteristics and have unwanted effects on household plumbing.
He discusses the topic in “The Crisis in Clean Water: Water Purification,” the inaugural episode of Global Challenges/Chemistry Solutions. This series of podcasts focuses on daunting global problems and how new discoveries from the labs of chemists and other scientists offer solutions. The topics include coping with climate change, combating disease, providing safe food, developing new fuels, preserving the environment, assuring personal safety and national security, and promoting public health.
Each podcast will be available without charge for listening on computers and downloading to portable audio devices at iTunes (requires iTunes software) and other podcasting sites. They also can be accessed on ACS’s Global Challenges website. The site provides audio links and full transcripts of each podcast. Additional resources on each Global Challenges topic also are available, including information for consumers, students, and educators.
Debut of the first podcast coincides with publication of a special edition of Environmental Science & Technology, one of ACS’ 36 peer-reviewed scientific journals.
The podcast describes an increasingly serious global shortage of clean drinking water, which claims a huge toll in illness and death in developing countries. It presents examples of scientific research that are reducing that toll today and promise to have further impact in the future. Global Challenges describes one, for instance, as “The Miracle Packet.” These pennies-a-piece packets work like a municipal water purification facility to kill germs, remove harmful substances, and make dirty water fit to drink.
Edwards emphasizes that people in the United States generally enjoy tap water of “very good” overall quality. One exception involves relatively small numbers of children exposed to high levels of lead in their drinking water.
Edwards describes newly emerging concerns, including tap water safety for individuals with weakened immune systems, home plumbing corrosion caused by water purification plants switching to chloramine disinfectant, and water stagnating in household pipes.
With consumers using less for flushing of toilets and showering, water sits in household pipes for longer periods, said Edwards, who is with Virginia Tech. Substances formed as chloramine breaks down can corrode plumbing and have more time to do so when water stagnates.
Edwards indicated that stale water also can lose the disinfectant added at municipal water purification facilities, allowing bacteria to multiply. “So just like milk can go bad if it stays around too long, so too can potable water go bad, and we are discovering this is a downside of water conservation,” he said.
The next Global Challenges/Chemistry Solutions podcast, due in July, deals with advances in water desalination technology that promise to provide a drought-proof supply of fresh water from the sea.
Missouri to Join Lawsuit Seeking to Stop New Federal Ozone Standards
Missouri Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) Director Doyle Childers recently announced that his agency is seeking to join a lawsuit to halt new nationwide federal ozone restrictions.
The new restrictions would likely place Kansas City in non-attainment, make it more difficult for St. Louis to reach attainment, and cause additional Missouri communities to face the burden of being considered non-attainment. This standard would even place rural counties such as Iron, Cedar, and Perry in non-attainment. An area that violates the ozone standard is considered in non-attainment.
Last week, Childers called on Attorney General Jay Nixon to support Missouri's economic health by joining the State of Mississippi’s appeal to halt the restrictions. Because Attorney General Nixon's response failed to indicate he would represent the state of Missouri, the department plans to move forward and will file a motion to intervene immediately.
"No one disputes the importance of maintaining good air quality for the health of Missourians," Childers said. "We believe the new federal regulation will place thousands of Missouri jobs at risk, jeopardizing income for Missouri families, and will result in unwarranted and burdensome regulations on industry."
The ozone issue has been smoldering for some time, according to Childers. Recent action by the U.S. EPA has brought it to the forefront as many states, including Missouri, made comments and suggestions on the issue.
"It would be the height of irresponsibility for the Attorney General to ignore this issue and then complain later when the rule is mandated on the states that this federal rule imposed an unnecessary economic burden on the citizens of Missouri," Childers said. "I had hoped the Attorney General would step forward and represent the State of Missouri, but his obvious reluctance to act on this time-sensitive issue leaves us no option but to intervene in this lawsuit on our own."
Because the Attorney General represents the State of Missouri, Childers said his agency would intervene on behalf of the DNR.
"If the concerns expressed by Mississippi are found to be valid, there's too much at risk for us to sit on the sidelines and hope Jay Nixon does his job," he said. "If we don't intervene now, we won't be able to do so down the road. We want to make sure our concerns about the new, stricter standard are heard by the federal court."
Under the current standard, ozone levels have been on the decline nationally. In Missouri, the DNR has implemented innovative new programs and technologies and aggressive monitoring to reduce ozone levels. The department is concerned that EPA did not consider the positive effects its current standard is having nationwide as well as the mobile nature of ozone. The federal agency also failed to consider addressing the ozone problem at regional or national levels and only accounted for man-made ozone, failing to account for biogenic ozone that occurs naturally.
The new standard could have a particularly detrimental effect on St. Louis and Kansas City. The DNR and local governments in those areas have worked hard to reach attainment status at the previous ozone standard. The new standard would likely place Kansas City in non-attainment and make it even more difficult for St. Louis to reach attainment, which it is projected to do next year. Historically, non-attainment areas have been categorized by the severity of the problem, for example marginal, moderate, serious, severe, and extreme. The higher the monitored ozone values recorded above the standard, the more federally mandated emission controls placed on a community.
Under the new rule, additional areas of Missouri will likely be in non-attainment zones, which will require additional state and local funds and impose oppressive costs on private industry across the state.
Other states asked to join the lawsuit include Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Tennessee, Kentucky, West Virginia, Nevada, Arkansas, Alaska, Texas, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Carolina, Indiana, and Oklahoma.
Red J Environmental Corp. to Pay $63,500 Penalty for Hazardous Waste Violations
Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (ADEQ) Director Steve Owens announced that Red J Environmental Corp., a hazardous waste transporter based in Joseph City, Ariz., will pay $63,500 in penalties for hazardous waste violations that occurred when it transported waste in the Phoenix area.
“This company committed a number of violations that potentially endangered the environment and the public,” Director Owens said. “The company’s actions were simply unacceptable.” ADEQ learned that the Navajo County company illegally stored 32,000 gallons of petroleum-contaminated wastewater treatment sludge after test results indicated the sludge was a hazardous waste. Federal and state law prohibits the storage of hazardous waste for longer than 90 days without a permit, which the company did not have.
Red J had moved the waste from the Cave Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant in 2004 and 2005 to a yard at 3215 S. 7th Street in Phoenix. In February 2005, Red J received the test results, which showed that the sludge contained benzene and could easily catch fire. ADEQ inspectors discovered that the sludge had remained stored at the Phoenix site until the end of April 2005. In addition, the company transported the waste about 15 miles from Cave Creek without the manifest required by state and federal law, transported hazardous waste without a required EPA ID number, and failed to pay the relevant fees.
“If you are going to be in the business of transporting toxic waste, you’d better follow the law,” Owens said.
ASTM Approves New Biodiesel Blend Specifications
The biodiesel industry is celebrating a recent vote by the ASTM International D02 Main Committee to approve a trio of long-awaited ASTM specifications for biodiesel blends. After more than five years of extensive research and subsequent balloting by the ASTM fuel experts in the blended fuel balloting process, ASTM has finally voted to approve three key sets of biodiesel specifications that should significantly bolster automaker support and consumer demand for biodiesel:
- Changes to the existing B100 biodiesel blend stock specification (ASTM D6751)
- Finished specifications to include up to 5% biodiesel (B5) in the conventional petrodiesel specification (ASTM D975)
- A new specification for blends of between 6% biodiesel (B6) to 20% biodiesel (B20) for on- and off-road diesel
Automakers and engine manufacturers have been requesting a finished blend specification for B20 biodiesel blends for several years, with some citing the need for that spec as the single greatest hurdle preventing their full-scale acceptance of B20 use in their diesel vehicles.
“The new ASTM specifications for B6-B20 blends will aid engine manufacturers in their engine design and testing processes to optimize the performance of vehicles running on biodiesel,” said Steve Howell, chairman of the ASTM Biodiesel Task Force. “The new specifications will also help ensure that only the highest quality biodiesel blends are made available to consumers at the retail pump.”
Automaker Chrysler LLC was instrumental in working with the ASTM task force toward B20 specification development and approval, having supported fleet use of B20 in its Dodge Ram diesel pickups since January 2006.
“This action by the ASTM committee is a milestone in our nation’s effort to expand the role of renewable fuels, including biodiesel, in addressing our energy, environmental, and economic challenges,” Chrysler Safety and Regulatory Spokesman Max Gates stated. “Chrysler LLC is committed to working with our partners in the transportation industry to build on this action and make biodiesel an alternative available to all of our customers.”
The final passage of the new ASTM specifications for biodiesel is welcome news for fleets as well.
“We have been running our entire fleet on B20 biodiesel blends for the past seven years in order to meet state requirements for alternative fuel use, and because it is the right thing to do to help clean up our environment,” said James Morwood, Fleet Services Manager for the Las Vegas Valley Water District. “In some cases, that has meant exceeding the biodiesel blend level recommended by some of the automakers represented in our fleet. It is reassuring to know that those automakers now have the ASTM specifications they have said they need in order for them to fully support B20 use.”
The approval of ASTM specifications for inclusion of up to 5% biodiesel (B5) in the regular diesel fuel pool also means that biodiesel could soon become more readily available at retail fueling stations nationwide.
The ASTM International Main Committee also approved a fourth set of specifications for inclusion of B5 biodiesel in heating oil. Marketed as Bioheat®, biodiesel is gaining popularity as a home heating oil, particularly in the Northeast United States.
Biodiesel is a domestically produced, renewable alternative to diesel fuel and can be made from plant oils, animal fats, recycled cooking oils, or new sources such as algae. Biodiesel must be properly processed to meet the approved ASTM specifications regardless of the feedstock used to produce it. Biodiesel blends up to B20 meeting ASTM specifications can be used in any diesel engine without modifications, and nearly all major automakers and engine manufacturers in the U.S. currently accept the use of at least B5, with some such as Caterpillar, Cummins, John Deere, and New Holland already accepting blends of B20 or higher. Several more companies are expected to raise their approvals to B20 now that the final ASTM specifications for B6–B20 blends have been approved.
New Study Finds That Solar Could Provide 10% of U.S. Electricity Generation by 2025
The Utility Solar Assessment (USA) Study, produced by clean-tech research and publishing firm Clean Edge and green-economy nonprofit Co-op America, provides a comprehensive roadmap for utilities, solar companies, and regulators to reach 10% solar in the United States by 2025.
The study finds that significantly scaling solar power in the United States will require active involvement by the nation’s utilities. The study delivers a to-do list for the three key stakeholders in the nation's solar industry. Among others, the action items include:
- For utilities: Take advantage of the unique value of solar for peak generation and alleviating grid congestion; implement solar as part of the build-out of the smart grid; and adapt to new market realities with new business models.
- For solar companies: Bring installed solar systems costs to $3 per peak watt or less by 2018; streamline installations; and make solar a truly plug-and-play technology.
- For regulators and policy makers: Pass a long-term extension of investment and production tax credits for solar and other renewables; establish open standards for solar interconnection; and give utilities the ability to "rate-base" solar.
The USA Study also reports that:
- For the first time, solar power is beginning to reach cost parity with conventional energy sources. As solar prices decline and the capital and fuel costs for coal, natural gas, and nuclear plants rise, the United States will reach a crossover point by around 2015.
- Installed solar PV prices are projected to decline from an average $5.50–$7.00 peak watt ($0.15–$0.32 kWh) today to $3.02–$3.82 peak watt ($0.08–$0.18 kWh) in 2015 to $1.43–$1.82 peak watt ($0.04–$0.08 kWh) by 2025
- Solar power offers a number of advantages over conventional energy sources. Among them, the ability to deliver energy at or near the point of use, zero fuel costs, minimal maintenance requirements, and zero carbon-based source emissions.
- The investment to arrive at 10% solar in the United States is not small, reaching $450 billion to $560 billion between now and 2025, an average of $26 billion to $33 billion per year. However, given utilities' existing capital costs such an investment is not prohibitive. To put the investment in perspective: Utilities spent an estimated $70 billion on new power plants and transmission and distribution systems in 2007 alone.
"One of the big takeaways from this report is that, in many ways, the future of solar is in the hands of utilities," said Ron Pernick, Clean Edge cofounder and managing director and USA Study coauthor. "Reaching 10% of our electricity from solar sources by 2025 will require the active participation of utilities along with the support and participation of regulators and solar technology companies."
In just the past year, a number of utilities and solar companies have announced aggressive programs to deploy large-scale solar power projects, including Southern California Edison's plan to install 250 megawatts of distributed solar PV, Duke Energy's stated goal of investing $100 million in rooftop solar, and Pacific Gas & Electric's announcements to invest in thousands of megawatts of concentrating solar power in California's deserts. While these players are still in the vanguard, a number of other utilities are looking to join them to help bring solar power to scale—and the study shows that solar could become "ubiquitous" as with earlier semiconductor-based revolutions.
"As capital and fuel costs have doubled or tripled for coal, natural gas, and nuclear power over the past few years, solar power costs are coming down," explains Alisa Gravitz, Co-op America executive director and USA Study project director. "For the first time in history, cost-competitive solar power is now within the planning horizon of every utility in the nation."
The study, written by Pernick and Clean Edge contributing editor Clint Wilder, is based on interviews with more than 30 solar, utility, financial, and policy experts and leverages proprietary Clean Edge data on solar PV market size, cost and pricing history and projections, and other key market factors.
DOE to Invest $1.3 Billion to Commercialize Carbon Capture and Storage
The solicitation is seeking multiple cost-shared projects to advance coal-based power generation technologies that capture and store the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide (CO2). The department anticipates $290 million will be available for funding of selected projects through fiscal year (FY) 2009 and an additional $1.01 billion is expected to be available in subsequent years, subject to appropriations by Congress.
“The department is committed to increasing the nation’s energy security and addressing CO2 emissions by ensuring coal, an abundant domestic resource, can be used to meet our growing energy demand in an environmentally responsible way,” Under Secretary of Energy Bud Albright said. “This announcement brings us one step closer towards the installation of carbon sequestration technology on commercial-scale clean coal power plants.”
The FOA provides instructions for submitting applications and outlines the mission need and background, project description, and the primary technical goals and performance requirements. The announcement also provides the evaluation criteria, terms and conditions of a model cooperative agreement, as well as cost-sharing required for public-private cooperation under the restructured FutureGen projects. Applications are due Oct. 8, 2008, and the selection of projects is targeted for the end of calendar year 2008.
DOE announced a restructured approach to its FutureGen project on Jan. 30, 2008, to build on technological research and development advancements in CCS technology achieved over the past five years. This approach responds to changing market conditions for clean coal technology, as well as efforts to limit taxpayer exposure and maximize the federal government's investment in this cutting-edge technology. The restructured approach aims to accelerate the near-term deployment of advanced clean coal technology by equipping new IGCC or other clean coal commercial power plants with CCS technology. By funding multiple projects, DOE expects at least to double the amount of CO2 sequestered compared to the amount under the concept announced in 2003. When these plants are operational, they will be the cleanest coal-fired power plants in the world—each capturing and storing an expected 1 million metric tons of carbon dioxide per year.
Subject to compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act, the FOA envisions commercial operation of IGCC or other clean coal power plants equipped with CCS technology to begin as soon as the plants are commissioned by the end of 2015. The restructured FutureGen approach will focus on the challenges associated with avoiding and reducing carbon emissions through sequestration. Technical, economic, and operational results from multiple projects will inform and guide the promulgation of regulations related to wide-scale carbon sequestration activities and at the same time will help establish technologies and protocols for CO2 monitoring, mitigation, and verification.
DOE’s FOA requires that at least 50% of the energy output of the project’s energy conversion system be used to produce electricity and must be located in the United States. In addition, the FutureGen goal is 90% capture of carbon content in the syngas or flue gas. Projects also must remove at least 90% of the mercury emissions based on mercury content of the coal, and reduce sulfur, nitrogen oxides, and particulate emissions to very low levels.
To ensure safe and permanent sequestration, DOE also includes in the FOA monitoring and verification performance requirements for FutureGen projects, including quantifying and assessing CO2 capture, transport, and storage during a 3–5 year demonstration of at least one million metric tons of CO2 injected per year in a saline formation; monitoring and reporting to DOE the plumes of injected CO2 for a minimum of two years after cessation of the injection demonstration; and developing information necessary to estimate costs of future CO2 management systems.
Climate Change May Challenge National Security
The National Intelligence Council (NIC) has completed a new classified assessment that explores how climate change could threaten U.S. security in the next 20 years by causing political instability, mass movements of refugees, terrorism, or conflicts over water, and other resources in specific countries. The House Intelligence Committee was briefed Wednesday, June 25, on the main findings.
While the assessment itself is confidential, some analyses used as raw material will be open, including a series of studies done by Columbia University's Center for International Earth Science Information Network (CIESIN). On commission from NIC, CIESIN ranked countries by looking at three climate risks: sea-level rise, increased water scarcity, and an aggregate measure of vulnerability based on projected temperature change, compared with the nations' ability to adapt.
"We can pinpoint areas of high projected climate change that are also in historically unstable regions. This suggests that climate change is likely to heighten political risks,” CIESIN Deputy Director Marc Levy, a coauthor of the CIESIN studies, said.
Many countries with high exposure to climate change have low levels of historical instability, he said. For example, U.S. allies like the Netherlands are exposed to perils such as sea-level rise, but have large economies and strong governments, and so are not deemed high risks. However, others suffer both high vulnerability to projected temperature changes, and low levels of adaptive capacity based on the strength of state institutions and their histories of instability and conflict. These tend to cluster in economically depressed southern regions. The more dangerous nations on the CIESIN list—which may or may not match the NIC list—include South Africa, Nepal, Morocco, Bangladesh, Tunisia, Paraguay, Yemen, Sudan, and C?te d'Ivoire.
The greatest number of people exposed to sea-level rise are in China, the Philippines, Egypt, and Indonesia. China and the Philippines alone have 64 million people in the lowest elevation zones (1 meter above sea level). In Egypt, a longtime major recipient of U.S. military aid and scene of recurring internal strife, 37% of its people live within 10 meters of sea level in the fertile Nile delta. In other nations, disruptions in rainfall or other temperature-driven phenomena could contribute to dangerous instability due to crop failures or other phenomena. These include Sudan, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Congo, Ethiopia, and Jordan, suggests the CIESIN research.
Climate-related security impacts could be significant when they cause "a noticeable—even if temporary—degradation in one of the elements of national power (geopoliltical, military, economic, or social cohesion) because it indirectly influences the U.S. homeland, indirectly influences the United States through a major military ally or a major economic partner, or because the global impact is so large, that [it] indirectly consumes U.S. resources," according to an NIC briefing document quoted by the newsletter InsideDefense.com, which first reported on the assessment.
"The additional stress on resources and infrastructure will exacerbate internal state pressures and generate interstate friction through competition for resources or disagreement over responses and responsibility for migration."
The assessment, commissioned by NIC last year at the request of the House and Senate intelligence panels, seems to be part of a growing recognition among military officials that climate change must be reckoned with. A 2007 report by the Center for Naval Analysis called for a comprehensive look at the issue. The 2008 National Defense Authorization Act mandates the Pentagon to "examine the capabilities of the U.S. military to respond to consequences of climate change," particularly preparedness for national disasters due to extreme weather. According to InsideDefense.com, U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates has approved a yet-unreleased National Defense Strategy that includes planning for environmental and climate problems.
Richard Engle, deputy national intelligence officer for science and technology in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, spoke of the classified report in a recent speech. "We wanted to get down to something that might be actionable for the policy community. So we had to be very specific," he said. The assessment was originally supposed to be public, but has been classified as confidential out of fears that it could evoke hostility from red-flagged governments, according to sources close to the process.
NIC Chairman Thomas Fingar will publicly address some portions of the 58-page report, "National Security Implications of Global Climate Change Through 2030," at Wednesday's hearing. The key findings represent the consensus view of all 16 U.S. intelligence agencies.
Along with CIESIN, other sources whose data contributed to the assessment include the U.S. Climate Change Program; Center for Naval Analysis; the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; the Rand Corp.; and Arizona State University.
"There is clearly great interest among policy makers in knowing whether climate change will make crises such as the conflict in Darfur more prevalent, and whether other violent scenarios might be likely to unfold," Levy said. "The science of climate impacts does not yet give us a definitive answer to this question, but at least now we're looking at it seriously."
Eight Companies to Pay 1.2 Million for Clean-up of New York Landfill
New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo announced a $1.2 million settlement with eight companies—including A&P, Quaker Oats, Fisher Price, and Newell Rubbermaid—to reimburse the state for cleanup costs incurred at an Orleans County landfill.
The settlement was entered by U.S. District Judge William Skretny, requiring the eight corporations that disposed of hazardous waste at the Yager Road landfill in Albion to reimburse the state for its cleanup. The landfill was designated a state Superfund site by the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) due to high levels of toxic chemicals including lead, arsenic, and the industrial solvent trichloroethylene (TCE) that were released to soils, surface waters, and groundwater.
“For years, this landfill was a repository for hazardous waste and an ongoing threat to the health of the surrounding community,” Cuomo said. “My office took action to ensure that taxpayer funds used to clean up the mess are reimbursed. Thanks to the DEC and my office’s hard work, the site is secure and the companies who put the waste there are paying back the money owed. My office remains committed to working to hold companies accountable for their pollution, and we are pleased that these companies have done the right thing by agreeing to this settlement.”
“This is a good news ending to what has been a long-running story in the Albion community," DEC Commissioner Pete Grannis said. “Not only has the landfill been capped but also taxpayers are being reimbursed. This settlement demonstrates that DEC and the Attorney General are committed to protecting public health and taxpayers' money.”
The dangers of heavy metals like lead and arsenic, and solvents such as TCE are well documented. For example, low levels of lead are toxic, especially to young children and can cause a variety of permanent developmental and behavioral problems. TCE can cause nerve, kidney, and liver damage as well cancer in people exposed to it.
The landfill, which operated in the 1970s and 80s primarily under the operation of Alan McKenna, was named a hazardous waste site under New York State’s Superfund program in 1991. The landfill was capped and a system to prevent any further releases was put in place in 2002.
In November 2007, Attorney General Cuomo’s Office sued the eight companies—Quaker Oats Company (successor to Fisher Price), Newell Rubbermaid, A&P, Pneumo Abex, Saint Gobain-Technical Fabrics America (successor to Bayex), Conopco, Avon Injected Rubber & Plastics, and Owens-Illinois—seeking reimbursement of any and all costs incurred by the state in preventing the release of hazardous substances from the site into the neighboring community.
The case was handled by Assistant Attorney General Linda White of the Attorney General’s Environmental Protection Bureau under the supervision of Special Deputy Attorney General for Environmental Protection Katherine Kennedy.
First Reporting Deadline Nears for Minnesota Electronics Retailers
As the Minnesota Electronics Recycling Act approaches its first anniversary, retailers of video display devices (monitors, laptops, and TVs) are nearing their first reporting deadline. Retailers who sell to households in Minnesota have until July 1, 2008, to report to each manufacturer the number of video display devices they sold during the previous program year (July 1, 2007, to June 30, 2008).
Retailers are critical to the success of the statewide electronic recycling program. The information generated through the retailers' reporting helps manufacturers determine their recycling obligation. This obligation has translated into an expanding collection infrastructure around the state. There are more than 230 collection locations throughout Minnesota as well as special events and a few mail-back programs.
The law covers online as well as catalog and in-store sales of any video display device greater than nine inches diagonal. Not included in the law are sales to businesses and institutions or items that have been recycled or refurbished.
The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency has additional information for consumers, manufacturers, collectors, recyclers, and retailers at www.pca.state.mn.us/electronics or by calling 651-297-1256.
Large Penalty Assessed for Asbestos Renovation Violations in Ohio
RLR Investments, LLC, has paid a $227,700 penalty for violating Ohio’s asbestos emission control standards at the Urban Resort property, formerly a Days Inn, at 330 W. First St., Dayton. The case, which was settled by the Ohio Attorney General’s office on behalf of Ohio EPA, is the largest civil penalty ever collected by the state for asbestos violations in Ohio.
The Regional Air Pollution Control Agency (RAPCA), which serves as Ohio EPA’s contractual representative in Montgomery County, discovered and documented the violations. RAPCA subsequently referred the case to Ohio EPA for enforcement.
During 2003, RLR Investments, LLC, was responsible for renovating the Days Inn Hotel and failed to provide proper initial notification for the asbestos abatement project, among other violations.
When in a dry state and disturbed, asbestos breaks up into small fibers that can be released to the air if not properly controlled during removal and disposal activities. If inhaled, airborne asbestos can pose health risks including respiratory diseases.
Between April 1, 2003, and December 15, 2003, RAPCA staff performed multiple inspections of the asbestos abatement activities. Significant work practice violations were documented during 10 of the inspections. On three occasions, RAPCA inspectors were denied access to the work site by the company, and on one of these occasions a search warrant had to be obtained for RAPCA's inspectors to gain access.
The asbestos violations included failures to:
- Notify Ohio EPA of the asbestos abatement project
- Inspect the premises for asbestos thoroughly
- Remove regulated asbestos before breaking up, dislodging, or disturbing the materials
- Wet regulated asbestos materials during removal adequately
- Repair, encapsulate, or remove all friable asbestos materials before removing asbestos emission controls.
“The asbestos regulations are intended to protect public health, which is why we take violations very seriously,” said Ohio EPA Director Chris Korleski. “We urge anyone involved in building demolition or renovation to understand the asbestos requirements and follow them to the letter.”
Pfizer to Pay $975,000 for Alleged Clean Air Violations at Connecticut Facility
Pfizer Inc. has agreed to pay a $975,000 civil penalty to resolve alleged violations of the Clean Air Act (CAA) at its former manufacturing plant in Groton, Conn., the Justice Department and EPA announced last week. The settlement is the first of its type in federal court under regulations that are designed to control the emissions of hazardous air pollutants from pharmaceutical manufacturing operations.
The consent decree filed in U.S. District Court in Connecticut settles government claims that Pfizer violated the “National Emission Standards for Pharmaceuticals Production” and the “National Emission Standards for Organic Hazardous Air Pollutants for Equipment Leaks,” (PharmaMACT regulations) under the CAA. The PharmaMACT regulations impose “Maximum Achievable Control Technology” (MACT) standards, which are industry-specific measures that must be implemented to control hazardous air pollutants in order to prevent harm to human health or the environment.
The alleged violations, which occurred between October 2002 and December 2005, resulted from a failure of Pfizer’s leak detection and repair (LDAR) program at its former manufacturing plant in Groton. Under the PharmaMACT regulations, the LDAR program set forth various equipment, testing, and recordkeeping requirements to ensure that any leaks of air pollutants from equipment used in the manufacture of pharmaceutical products are timely detected and repaired. The specific violations, associated with the production of bulk pharmaceutical materials, included a failure to properly conduct pressure tests to identify leaks, repair leaks before start-up, equip open-ended lines with a cap or other seal, and document leak tests to establish full compliance with the LDAR requirements.
During its production of pharmaceutical-grade chemicals, Pfizer used substances such as methanol, hydrogen chloride, methylene chloride, MTBE, hexane, toluene, and many others, which are classified by EPA as hazardous air pollutants under Section 112 of the CAA.
“This significant penalty, the first in federal court under the PharmaMACT regulations, should send a strong message to the pharmaceutical industry that they must be diligent in detecting and repairing leaks of hazardous substances,” said Ronald J. Tenpas, Assistant Attorney General for the Justice Department’s Environment and Natural Resources Division. “We will not wait to enforce the law until after a catastrophe occurs. Penalties such as this one compel the industry’s close attention and rigorous implementation of the leak-detection requirements to prevent the escape of harmful air pollutants that can endanger the public.”
“All facilities that produce hazardous air pollutants must carefully adhere to all provisions of EPA’s Clean Air requirements to ensure that we are taking every necessary step to protect human health and our environment,” said Robert W. Varney, regional administrator of EPA’s New England office.
Under the agreement, Pfizer certifies that the violations have been corrected. However, the violations undermined EPA’s ability to determine compliance, which presented the risk of excess emissions of hazardous air pollutants for leaks that were not timely detected and repaired. The Groton facility itself ceased pharmaceutical manufacturing in January 2008.
Pfizer, a publicly traded corporation, incorporated in Delaware, operates about 80 manufacturing plants worldwide where it makes healthcare products relating to human and animal health.
Erie Coke Fined $6.1 Million for Air Permit Violations
Citing chronic air quality violations and a lack of response to previous enforcement actions, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) announced a more than $6.1-million penalty against Erie Coke and ordered the company immediately to begin operating in compliance with the state’s Air Pollution Control Act and its air quality permit.
“Erie Coke has shown a flagrant disregard for the well-being of its neighbors and, indeed, the entire community by operating the facility in a manner that is totally unacceptable,” DEP Regional Director Kelly Burch said. “Other facilities in the Erie area operate responsibly, going about their business within their permit requirements and environmental regulations. Erie Coke will be held to the same high environmental standard.”
The $6,145,748 penalty is in response to repeated violations at the facility along the Lake Erie waterfront, a lack of cooperation in correcting violations, and the financial benefit Erie Coke enjoyed by neglecting to replace and repair old equipment.
The company was also found to have violated Pennsylvania’s Air Pollution Control Act by exceeding the prescribed limits for visible emissions, fugitive emissions, and fugitive particulate matter. Erie Coke has 58 coke ovens at the facility that were installed in the 1940s and 1950s.
The facility has been operating out of compliance with its permit and environmental regulations on a consistent basis since early February 2007. Prior to that, Erie Coke had regular violations, but those were corrected.
Over the past year and a half, the violations have increased and persisted. In early 2007, following multiple complaints regarding smoke and dust from Erie Coke, DEP implemented near-daily visits and inspections through April 2008 that identified more than 60 violations by the company.
“After the notices of violations failed to result in substantive progress, we met with company officials on a number of occasions,” Burch said. “This spring, we attempted to bring Erie Coke into a legally binding schedule of activities that would address the causes of the ongoing violations. The company’s response fell significantly short of our expectations, which compelled us to issue this order.”
The order requires Erie Coke to:
- Comply with Pennsylvania’s Air Pollution Control Act, air quality regulations, and permit conditions
- Install and operate a certified opacity monitor on the main combustion stack
- Submit maintenance, repair, and daily operational records
- Submit quarterly progress reports
DEP has taken other enforcement action in the past. On March 14, 2006, DEP and Erie Coke signed a consent assessment of civil penalty for $51,000. As part of that settlement, Erie Coke agreed to develop and follow a maintenance plan that was designed to reduce emission violations significantly and upgrade or repair a number of control devices to improve permit compliance.
While those control devices were repaired and the maintenance was in place, the facility’s compliance record continued to deteriorate.
DEP is coordinating enforcement actions with the U.S. EPA, which conducted its own inspections in May.
The penalty is based in part on the length of time the violations occurred, the repetitiveness of violations that were the same or similar to previously settled enforcement actions, a lack of cooperation by Erie Coke, and associated costs incurred by DEP, as well as the savings to Erie Coke for not complying with the law.
Erie Coke has 30 days to appeal the order and penalty to the Environmental Hearing Board, a body of administrative law judges that render decisions about DEP legal actions.
According to EPA Documents: Global Warming a Danger, Vehicle Emissions Should Be Regulated
The EPA was on its way towards finding global warming emissions to be a danger to public welfare and that these emissions should be regulated in vehicles and fuels, according to a review of subpoenaed global warming documents by the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming. The document review follows a lengthy process of negotiation with the EPA and the White House, which started in January 2008.
The documents are the draft regulatory recommendations from Dec. 5 and 14, 2007, and were sent to the White House and to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) for approval before reports indicate all work was stopped on the recommendations. The White House is now in the process of completing an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR), which would be a step backwards in what the Select Committee has found to be an already advanced process towards regulating global warming emissions.
The letter outlines how the documents reviewed by the committee indicate that, along with global warming being a danger to public welfare and in need of regulation:
- EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson determined that man-made global warming is unequivocal, the evidence is both compelling and robust, and the administration must act to prevent harm rather than wait for harm to occur before acting.
- EPA found that global warming risks include severe heat waves, sea level rise, reduced availability of water, increased wildfire and insect outbreaks, an increase in heavy precipitation events, an increase in regional ground-level ozone pollution, and changes in the range of vector-borne diseases.
- EPA proposed regulations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles be implemented in order to achieve the equivalent of a 35 mpg car and light truck fleet average by 2018 (with the car fleet averaging 38.4 mpg by 2018 and the truck fleet averaging 29.5 mpg by 2017).
- When EPA used the EIA 2007 high gasoline price projections of $2.75 in 2017 to $3.20 in 2030 to calculate standards, it found that the car fleet could achieve a standard of 43.3 mpg by 2018 and light trucks could achieve a standard of 30.6 mpg by 2017.
EPA is set to release its draft ANPR soon, and the letter makes clear that any future regulations from the administration on global warming will be measured against the standards put forward by its own environmental and energy experts.
The regulations reviewed were created in response to the Supreme Court decision in Massachusetts vs. EPA, which directed the administration to make a determination on the danger posed by global warming and to propose regulations for reducing global warming emissions from motor vehicles and fuels. On May 14, 2007, the President directed EPA, along with other agencies, to prepare a regulatory response by the end of 2007 and to complete it by the end of 2008. According to reports, EPA staff spent about six months developing this proposal and transmitted both a positive finding of endangerment to the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and a draft regulatory proposal to require the equivalent of a 35 miles per gallon (mpg) fuel economy standard from the fleet of cars and light trucks by 2018 to NHTSA in early December 2007.
Mayors Challenge Use of Tar Sands Oil and Other High Carbon Fuels
The resolution calls for the creation of guidelines and purchasing standards to help mayors understand the lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions of the fuels they purchase.
These unconventional and synthetic fuels are derived from difficult-to-access, lower-grade raw materials, and production can emit two-to-five times more global warming pollution than conventional oil.
"In the last few years, U.S. mayors have come out as leaders on environmental initiatives, specifically in the fight to stop global warming," said Susan Casey-Lefkowitz, a senior attorney at the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). "Mayors see their residents' needs every day, and they see the impact that global warming is going to have on their cities. That’s why over 850 mayors across the nation already have taken action on climate change. This resolution will help implement their commitment to fight global warming by giving mayors the information they need about dirty fuels such as tar sands oil.”
The resolution:
- Encourages fuel lifecycle emissions analyses that include emissions from production, not just from burning the fuel
- Supports federal and state guidelines for tracking the origin of various types of fuel
- Encourages mayors to track and reduce life-cycle emissions from their cities’ municipal vehicles, paying special attention to the use of unconventional and synthetic fuels.
"We don't want to spend taxpayer dollars on fuels that make global warming worse," said Mayor Kitty Piercy, of Eugene, Ore., who submitted the resolution. "Tar sands oil emits up to three times the greenhouse gases in the production process per barrel as conventional oil production. Our cities are asking for environmentally sustainable energy and not fuels from dirty sources such as tar sands."
The High Carbon Fuels Resolution was submitted by Mayor Piercy and cosponsored by 10 other mayors: Mayor Gavin Newsom of San Francisco, Calif.; Mayor Frank Cownie of Des Moines, Iowa; Mayor Marty Blum of Santa Barbara, Calif.; Mayor Jennifer Hosterman of Pleasanton, Calif.; Mayor Larry Nelson of Waukesha, Wis.; Mayor Douglas Palmer of Trenton, N.J.; Mayor Roy Buol of Dubuque, Iowa; Mayor Christopher Cabaldon of West Sacramento, Calif.; Mayor Dan Co
