data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/5506b/5506b43e737c4807336c11e346b9093d2c16c079" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/e5e1e/e5e1e138071390e8f155e06d4b14c154f893c84e" alt=""
The rule is carefully tailored to apply to only the largest sources – those from sectors responsible for nearly 70 percent of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions sources. These large facilities would include power plants, refineries, and factories. Small businesses such as farms, restaurants and many other types of small facilities would not be included in these requirements. If the proposed fuel-economy rule to regulate GHGs from cars and trucks is finalized and takes effect in the spring of 2010, Clean Air Act permits would automatically be required for stationary sources emitting GHGs.
This proposed rule focuses these permitting programs on the largest facilities, responsible for nearly 70 percent of U.S. stationary source greenhouse gas emissions. With the proposed emissions thresholds, EPA estimates that 400 new sources and modifications to existing sources would be subject to review each year for GHG emissions. In total, approximately 14,000 large sources would need to obtain operating permits that include GHG emissions. Most of these sources are already subject to clean air permitting requirements because they emit other pollutants. The proposed tailoring rule addresses a group of six greenhouse gases: carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6).
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/fb064/fb064a12ce55db676dcafa860b845167cdad21fc" alt=""
Critics complain that the Clean Air Act specifically states that any facility emitting more than 250 tons per year of a regulated pollutant is a "major source." This would cover more than a million buildings, including schools, churches, and hospitals that emit more than 250 tons of CO2 every year. The question is can EPA modify the regulation by changing the 250 ton number to 25,000 tons without an act of Congress?
No comments:
Post a Comment