Billions in Budget Cuts Proposed in 2012 Budget

Harold Rogers

House Appropriations Committee Chairman Harold Rogers (R-Ky.) is proposing to cut $74 billion from President Obama's pending 2012 Budget reqeust.

Republicans are proposing to defund President Obama's high-speed rail initiative, slash clean energy programs and cut the Office of Science by 20 percent.

They would also cut the Environmental Protection Agency by 17 percent.

In the budget request President Obama will deliver to Congress on Monday, he plans to include a five-year freeze in non-security spending that would save an estimated $400 billion over the next decade. It is also being reported that Obama is proposing to halve funding for low-income heating assistance, or put it back at its regular funding level. Obama will request $2.57 billion for the program, its level in 2008, before Congress doubled its funding to account for a spike in the price of fuel. (Wash Post, 2/9/2011)

Global Warming Depression

PRESIDENT'S CORNER

By Norris McDonald

How did we get here? To the point where a Cap & Trade Program is reduced to some sort of alien tax monster and job killer instead of the innovative mechanism it has always been.  Congress would not pass a greenhouse gas (GHG) law and EPA is running from Cap & Trade too.  The Republicans loved Cap & Trade until two years ago.  Remember the Clear Skies Initiative?  I supported it.  The Democrats opposed it.  Now the script has flipped but I remain committed to Cap & Trade.  Thus, the source of my depression.

The Obama administration, Congress and EPA now all run from Cap & Trade.  Yet it is the appropriate market mechanism to reduce GHG emissions.  We delayed aggressive implementation of our GHG initiatives (CMX, GCB, CDR & EARP) because we were hoping for a federally mandated national program that would complement the international initiatives.  Now we do not know exactly what to do.  We have been registered in EPA's Acid Rain and NOx allowance trading programs for years.  We are also registered in the Northeastern Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI).  If California can ever get its program operating, we will register in that program too.  We really did not anticipate participating in multiple regional and federal programs.  We are a small but powerful organization.

The buzz is completely gone from the Kyoto Protocol and the accompanying meetings to enhance and renew the program.  President Obama did not even go to Cancun.  And where is the buzz about Durban later this year?  Crickets.  This when the world was abuzz and Al Gore was ascending on climate change mitigation fever just three years ago. 

Now the climate change mitigation ball is in EPA's court.  EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson was raked over the coals today by the Republicans in the energy subcommittee hearing.  And this was over about the most watered down climate change mitigation regs the agency could come up with.

I'm depressed.

Energy Tax Prevention Act of 2011

The House Energy and Commerce Committee Subcommittee on Energy and Power held a hearing today (February 9) on “H.R. ___, the Energy Tax Prevention Act of 2011,” which  amends the Clean Air Act to prohibit the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency from promulgating any regulation concerning, taking action relating to, or taking into consideration the emission of a greenhouse gas due to concerns regarding possible climate change, and for other purposes.  House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton is the sponsor of the bill.

EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson testified at the hearing.

Ed Whitfield

 Subcommittee on Energy and Power: Chair - Ed Whitfield (R-KY)

Jurisdiction: National energy policy generally; Fossil energy, renewable energy resources and synthetic fuels; energy conservation; energy information; energy regulation and utilization; Utility issues and regulation of nuclear facilities; Interstate energy compacts; Nuclear energy and waste; The Clean Air Act; All laws, programs, and government activities affecting such matters; and, Homeland security-related aspects of the foregoing.

For the purposes of this act, the term ‘greenhouse gas’ means any of the following:

(1) Water vapor.
(2) Carbon dioxide.
(3) Methane.
(4) Nitrous oxide.
(5) Sulfur hexafluoride.
(6) Hydrofluorocarbons.
(7) Perfluorocarbons.
(8) Any other substance subject to, or proposed to be subject to, regulation, action, or consideration under this Act due to concerns regarding possible climate change.

(House Energy & Commerce Committee,)

EPA Administrator To Testify in House on Clean Air Act

U.S. EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson, right, will testify before the U.S. House Committee on Energy and Commerce’s Subcommittee on Energy and Power on Wednesday, February 9 on the Clean Air Act.

Hearing details:

WHO: EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson

WHAT: Testifying before the U.S. House Energy and Commerce Committee’s Subcommittee on Energy and Power

WHEN: 10:00 a.m., Wednesday, February 9, 2011 (The hearing begins at 9:30 a.m.)

WHERE: 2123 Rayburn House Office Building, Washington, D.C.

The Center will be there.

Massachusetts Climate Action Network Activities & Conference

The Massachusetts Climate Action Network (MCAN) is a coalition of locally organized groups in Massachusetts fighting the climate crisis. They do this by promoting carbon-reducing practices in their homes and communities; supporting MCAN chapters and allied organizations to grow a focused statewide movement; and communicating policy to members and leveraging our collective voice at the state level.

Climate activism and all manner of environmental activism, will be front and center at the annual Environmental Action 2011 conference held by the Toxics Action Center, Environment Massachusetts, and MCAN. This year’s conference will be held March 12th at Bentley University in Waltham.

EPA Submits Draft Hydraulic Fracturing Study for Review

Independent Scientists will Review

Draft Plan is Open to Public Comment

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) today submitted its draft study plan on hydraulic fracturing for review to the agency’s Science Advisory Board (SAB), a group of independent scientists. Natural gas plays a key role in our nation’s clean energy future and the process known as hydraulic fracturing is one way of accessing that vital resource. EPA scientists, under this administration and at the direction of Congress, are undertaking a study of this practice to better understand any potential impacts it may have, including on groundwater.

EPA announced its intention to conduct the study in March 2010 and use the best available science, independent sources of information, a transparent, peer-reviewed process and with consultation from others. Since then, EPA has held a series of public meetings across the country with thousands attending and the agency has developed a sound draft plan for moving forward with the study. The Center presented testimony at those public meetings.

The scope of the proposed research includes the full lifespan of water in hydraulic fracturing, from acquisition of the water, through the mixing of chemicals and actual fracturing, to the post-fracturing stage, including the management of flowback and produced or used water and its ultimate treatment and disposal.

The SAB plans to review the draft plan March 7-8, 2011. Consistent with the operating procedures of the SAB, stakeholders and the public will have an opportunity to provide comments to the SAB during their review. The agency will revise the study plan in response to the SAB’s comments and promptly begin the study. Initial research results and study findings are expected to be made public by the end of 2012, with the goal of an additional report following further research in 2014.

Hydraulic fracturing is a process in which large volumes of water, sand and chemicals are injected at high pressures to extract oil and natural gas from underground rock formations. The process creates fractures in formations such as shale rock, allowing natural gas or oil to escape into the well and be recovered. Over the past few years, the use of hydraulic fracturing for gas extraction has increased and has expanded over a wider diversity of geographic regions and geologic formations. (EPA)

Copy of the draft study plan and additional information

More information on hydraulic fracturing

California Cap-and-Trade Program Under Attack

The South Coast Air Quality Management District (AQMD) voted 10-1 on February 4th to approve Rule 1315, which allows industry to expand in the Los Angeles region by tapping into a public fund of free pollution credits. This sounds like a rule the Center can support if it will enhance the ability of small businesses and public services agencies to participate in the cap and trade program.  The Center is registered in EPA's Acid Rain and NOx allowance trading programs and the Northeastern Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI).

Some environmentalists and environmentalist justice activists, who generarlly oppose cap and trade systems, contend that a proposal by known as Rule 1315, will lock in a phony accounting system that will count years-old pollution reductions as offsets, thus allowing businesses to build new facilities that pollute.

The AQMD believes the free credits to be created by the board would go to small businesses and public service agencies such as police and fire departments, water treatment plants and landfills. The AQMD believes the  environmentalists' proposal would severely limit growth or place a moratorium on growth. AQMD's proposal allows for some growth and at the same time allows us to meet clean-air standards. The AQMD notes that the new rule would not allow the credits to be used for power plants.

The fight over the trading system has ricocheted through state and federal courts for years. In the waning hours of its 2009 session, the California Legislature enacted two laws to circumvent a state court ruling that had suspended the region's trading system. One of those laws explicitly authorized a proposed power plant in Palm Desert to use AQMD offsets that had been banked for use by hospitals and other public facilities.

In a parallel battle, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Wednesday that the EPA violated the Clean Air Act by failing to hold the South Coast district accountable for meeting federal health standards. The district's plan to achieve safe levels of ozone by Nov. 15, 2010 should have been rejected by the federal government, the court said. Specifically, measures to enforce air pollution from pesticides and to control vehicle emissions through mass-transit projects were inadequate.

Another judges opinion has concluded that:

* Alternatives to cap-and-trade not well analyzed-court
* Tentative ruling could face objections, then appeals
* California cap-and-trade plan due to start in 2012

San Francisco Superior Court Judge Ernest Goldsmith has tentatively ruled that California did not adequately consider alternatives to creating a carbon market, a decision that clouds the premier U.S. climate change program's outlook. California's so-called cap-and-trade plan is seen as the vanguard of U.S. climate change policy after the U.S. Congress failed to pass a federal system. The ruling, if finalized, could potentially delay implementation of the cap-and-trade carbon market due to start next year. The tentative ruling does not say precisely what happens to the cap-and-trade program and can also be appealed.

The cap and trade plan establishes state-wide limits on emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases but lets power plants and industry trade rights to emit, which could lead to different emissions in different regions.

The judge denied the attempt by the Association of Irritated Residents environmental justice group to force regulators to rewrite its blueprint for specific measures to combat global warming, known as the Scoping Plan of the 2006 climate change law. But he tentatively ordered regulators to set aside the environmental certification for the Scoping Plan and to stop the Scoping Plan's implementation until regulators come into compliance, saying an analysis of alternatives was needed. He did not specify what steps were required, or what that meant for cap-and-trade, but indicated regulators should have analyzed existing data more carefully. The case is Association of Irritated Residents vs. California Air Resources Board, CPF-09-509562.

The Center would like to see the cap and trade program implemented as soon as possible.  These challenges are simply attempts to delay the program to death or kill it outright.  (L.A. Times, 2/3/2011, Reuter, 2/2/2011)

CLEAN AIR for Construction Workers: Respirators

You wear a respirator to prevent breathing dangerous dusts, fumes or gases — like silica, welding fumes, or carbon monoxide. Respirators come in different styles and with different filters or cartridges, depending on what you’re protecting against and how much is in the air.

Types of respirators

There are two kinds of respirators — supplied air and air purifying.

1) Supplied-air respirators give you clean breathing air from a compressor or compressed-air cylinder. These respirators are used in some of the most dangerous conditions. There are self-contained breathing apparatuses (SCBAs) like firefighters wear on their backs or air-line respirators connected to a hose. If there is not enough oxygen or no one is sure what is in the air where you’re working, OSHA says you must use an SCBA or air-line respirator with a small compressed-air cylinder for backup. If you use a supplied-air respirator without the right training, you can be killed. (Most construction jobs that require breathing protection use air-purifying respirators.)

2) Air-purifying respirators clean the air you breathe. Some have a blower to make it easier to breathe. But they do not provide oxygen. Air-purifying respirators are disposable or rubber or rubber-like masks. One may cover your whole face or part of your face. Each mask has 1 or 2 filters or cartridges that get changed. You must have the right filter or cartridge for each hazard.

Filters

Filters can protect against tiny particles, dusts, mists, or fumes. Filters have the letters “HEPA” or have a letter and number like P-100 or N-95. A bigger number after the letter means the filter protects better. (For dusts like asbestos, lead, and silica, you must use a HEPA or a 100 filter.) You must change a filter when it is hard to breathe through.

Cartridges

Cartridges can protect against solvents, acid gases, or other gases and vapors. A cartridge for acid gases will not protect you if you are exposed to solvents. Some combination cartridges can protect against dusts and gases, but no cartridge can protect against all hazards. You and your employer must learn when to change the cartridges, depending on the type and amount of toxic gases or vapors in the air.

Protect yourself

You may need a respirator if, for instance:

You are working around asbestos or lead-based paint
You are chipping or cutting concrete or drilling rock that contains silica
You are sanding, cutting, torching, or welding — or using a generator — in a space without good ventilation.
The toxics in the air are above the permissible exposure limit (PEL) set by OSHA — or you don’t know they are not above the PEL
There is no other way to keep down the exposure levels. Local-exhaust ventilation, new tools, and changes in the way you do the work (such as wet methods) do not take care of the problem.

OSHA says the employer must choose the right respirator for you, depending on the hazard. If a respirator is required, OSHA says the employer pays for the respirator and parts.

Before you use a respirator, OSHA says:*

Your employer must have tried to use other controls, like ventilation or safer materials.
To make sure it is safe for you to wear a respirator, your employer must pay for you to have a medical evaluation (unless you’re using a disposable dust respirator that is not required). You may be asked to fill out a questionnaire for a doctor or health care practitioner to check. Or you may need a physical exam if you work around some materials like lead or asbestos.
You must be trained to use a respirator.
A mask must be fitted to your face. A quantitative fit test is best.
Your employer must have a written respirator program.
You must use a respirator that is approved by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, NIOSH. (A NIOSH-approved respirator says “NIOSH” and/or 42 CFR on the box and on filters or cartridges.) Read the NIOSH-approved instructions for the respirator.

Every time you use a respirator:

Check for worn, damaged, or missing parts.
Check the face seal. Use a negative and positive seal check.
Follow the manufacturer’s guidelines for care. After you use a respirator:
Clean it: Put on surgical gloves. Remove filters or cartridges. Wash the mask in 110° F water using the manufacturer’s recommended cleaner or mild detergent. Rinse, then dry.
Store the respirator in a rigid plastic container away from heat and light.
Dispose of used parts properly.
Take care of the respirator so it can take care of you.

This article is a Hazard Alert card produced by CPWR — The Center for Construction Research and Training. This information and 24 more Hazard Alert cards, in English and Spanish, can be found on CPWR’s website.

Reprinted courtesy CPWR-The Center for Construction Research and Training (formerly the Center to Protect Workers’ Rights) [Industrial Safety & Hygiene News -ISHN, 1/5/2011]

*OSHA’s respiratory protection standard for general industry and construction is 29 CFR 1910.134.

U.S. Exports of Wood To China Increase

The U.S. timber industry has been hurt by a depressed housing construction market, but increased timber exporting to China is helping.  Companies in the $30 billion U.S. timber industry, such as Weyerhaeuser Company and Plum Creek Timber Company are also benefiting because Russia increased tariffs on its wood exports in 2007, leading Chinese buyers to turn increasingly to the U.S. and Canada for wood. Weyerhaeuser turned a fourth-quarter profit from a loss a year earlier due to tripling its Chinese log exports in 2010.  Wood exports to China helped offset a 10% drop in its total logging volume in the same period.

U.S. lumber production peaked at 40.5 billion board feet in 2005 and plunged to 23.4 billion in 2009, according to Western Wood Products Association and Southern Forest Products Association estimates. According to some estimates, roughly 35% of the U.S. timber industry's lumber mills remain closed and exports to China aren't a long-term solution for the U.S. timber industry. According to Wood Resources, the number of U.S. logs shipped to China increased more than 10 times from 256,000 cubic meters in 2007—or less than 1% of the total logs produced, to an estimated 2.4 million in 2010, or about 7% of the region's total log production.

Prices for wood products are continuing to climb. Prices for hemlock logs destined for sawmills in the U.S. Northwest jumped 43% to $66 a board foot in 2010 from $46 in 2009, according to Wood Resources. The export surge also doesn't include wood from other regions. Prices for southern pine, for example, rose just 4.8% in the period, to $65 from $62. (WSJ, 2/7/2011, photo: WSJ)

The Hamptons

PRESIDENT'S CORNER

By Norris McDonald

I went to The Hamptons this past weekend and had a chance to walk on the beach and think.  It was Egypt Beach and I saw a one legged seagull.  And it didn't have one leg stuck up into its body either because I can tell the difference.  It was hopping with one leg and you could only see only leg when it started flying.  The Atlantic Ocean was magnificent, as usual.  It was warm even though much of The Hamptons was still covered in a lot of snow.  The mega mansions along Egypt Beach were impressive.  Thus, the thrust of my thoughts.

I could not help but feel that I would like to have one of those mansions overlooking the Atlantic Ocean.  It made me think about the type of environmentalist I would like to be.  My conclusion was that I would like to be an environmentalist in the tradition of Al Gore, Robert Kennedy, Jr. and Barbara Streisand - - super rich and pro-environment.  Seriously, I could have more freedom to do what I do and to apply practical solutions to environmental problems.  But I would not oppose wind farms off the Atlantic coast.  I would have a 65 foot house boat like the one Al Gore has.  I would also have two jet skis on it.  Just like Gore.  Just as we can have economic growth with environmental protection, so too can I be very very rich and promote environmental protection.

Rand Paul Wants To Cut EPA Budget By 29%

Rand Paul, left, wants to cut the budget of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency from $7.939 billion to $3.238 billion, a 29% cut.

According to Paul:

"Since 2008, the Environmental Protection Agency has worked to enforce greenhouse gas regulations on business without Congressional approval. We have seen EPA’s budgets significantly increase in administrative costs to process and handle the regulations they write. Even with the budget increases, EPA process for assessing and controlling toxic chemicals has continued to stay on GAO’s High-Risk List for potential waste, fraud, and abuse.

From the High Risk List of 2009,

“GAO recently reported that EPA’s Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) – a database that contains EPA’s scientific position on the potential human health effects of exposure to more than 540 chemicals – is at serious risk of becoming obsolete because the agency has not been able to complete timely, credible assessments or decrease its backlog of 70 ongoing assessments. Overall, EPA has finalized a total of only 9 assessments in the past 3 fiscal years.”

Toxic chemicals are not the only areas EPA is falling behind. Their delay on approving mining and drilling permits has costs thousands of jobs across our country."

(Rand Paul)

Rand Paul Wants To Cut Department of Energy Budget

With a third consecutive year of greater than $1 trillion deficits (CBO), Senator Rand Paul has introduced legislation to significantly cut spending by over $500 billion over one year.

Rand Paul

Paul's proposal would first roll back almost all federal spending to 2008 levels, then initiate reductions at various levels nearly across the board.

Cuts to the Departments of Agriculture and Transportation would create over $42 billion in savings each, while cuts to the Departments of Energy and Housing and Urban Development would save about $50 billion each. Removing education from the federal government's jurisdiction would create almost $80 billion in savings alone. Add to that my proposed reductions in international aid, the Departments of Health and Human Services, Homeland Security and other federal agencies, and you arrive at over $500 billion.

Senator Paul sites examples of what he considers to be federal waste:

"The Department of Energy's nuclear-weapons activities should be placed under the purview of the Department of Defense. Many of its other activities amount to nothing more than corporate handouts. It provides research grants and subsidies to energy companies for the development of new, cleaner forms of energy. This means nearly all forms of energy development here in the U.S. are subsidized by the federal government, from oil and coal to nuclear, wind, solar and biofuels. These subsidies often go to research and companies that can survive without them. This drives up the cost of energy for all Americans, both as taxpayers and consumers."

He concludes:

"For 19 months, unemployment has hovered over 9%. After a nearly $1 trillion government stimulus and $2 trillion in Federal Reserve stimulus, the Washington establishment still believes that we can solve this problem with more federal spending and the printing of more money."

Many evidently believe the deficit and debt are irrelevant.  In such case, we can keep spending and printing money until 'something bad' happend. (WSJ, 2/7/2010)

EPA Supports Sustainable Community Goals

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) today announced the formation of Sustainable Communities Building Blocks, a program designed to help interested communities adopt sustainable planning methods. Sustainable planning helps safeguard the environment and spur economic development while also improving Americans’ health. Interested communities are invited to apply to receive technical assistance during a day-long session that will help them achieve their sustainable planning goals. The application period opens on February 3 and ends on February 23, 2011.

EPA will work with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) to select 20 participating communities through a competitive process. During the day-long session, participants will explore proven sustainability tools, including zoning code reviews, walkability assessments, parking policy analysis, climate action planning, and commuter benefits. Each community will select a specific tool to focus on and also learn about general smart growth development strategies.

Sustainable Communities Building Blocks is being coordinated through the Partnership for Sustainable Communities, a joint effort between the EPA, HUD, and DOT to coordinate federal actions on housing, transportation, and environmental protection. This interagency collaboration achieves efficient federal investments in infrastructure, facilities, and services that meet multiple economic, environmental, and community objectives.  (EPA)

More information and submission instructions for the Sustainable Communities Building Blocks Program
More information on the Partnership for Sustainable Communities

EPA To Develop Regulation For Perchlorate

And Toxic Chemicals in Drinking Water

U.S. Environmental Protection today announced the agency’s decision to move forward with the development of a regulation for perchlorate to protect Americans from any potential health impacts, while also continuing to take steps to ensure the quality of the water they drink. The decision to undertake a first-ever national standard for perchlorate reverses a decision made by the previous administration and comes after Administrator Jackson ordered EPA scientists to undertake a thorough review of the emerging science of perchlorate.

The Senate Environment & Public Works Committee held a hearing on the issue today.  EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson testified at the hearing.

Perchlorate is both a naturally occurring and man-made chemical, and scientific research indicates that it may impact the normal function of the thyroid, which produces important developmental hormones. Thyroid hormones are critical to the normal development and growth of fetuses, infants and children. Based on this potential concern, EPA will move forward with proposing a formal rule. This process will include receiving input from key stakeholders as well as submitting any formal rule to a public comment process.

In a separate action, the agency is also moving towards establishing a drinking water standard to address a group of up to 16 toxic chemicals that may pose risks to human health. As part of the Drinking Water Strategy laid out by Administrator Jackson in 2010, EPA committed to addressing contaminants as a group rather than one at a time so that enhancement of drinking water protection can be achieved cost effectively. Today’s action delivers on the promise to strengthen public health protection from contaminants in drinking water.

Action on Perchlorate:

Scientific research indicates that perchlorate may disrupt the thyroid’s ability to produce hormones that are critical to developing fetuses and infants. Monitoring data show more than 4 percent of public water systems have detected perchlorate and between 5 million and 17 million people may be served drinking water containing perchlorate. The science that has led to this decision has been peer reviewed by independent scientists and public health experts including the National Academy of Sciences. Perchlorate is both a naturally-occurring and man-made chemical that is used in the manufacture of rocket fuel, fireworks, flares and explosives, and may be present in bleach and in some fertilizers. This decision reverses a 2008 preliminary determination by the previous administration, and considers input from almost 39,000 public comments.

EPA will continue to evaluate the science on perchlorate health effects and occurrence in public water systems. The agency will also now begin to evaluate the feasibility and affordability of treatment technologies to remove perchlorate and will examine the costs and benefits of potential standards.

More information on perchlorate

Action on Drinking Water Strategy:

EPA will also be developing one regulation covering up to 16 chemicals that may cause cancer. This group of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), which are chemicals such as industrial solvents, includes trichloroethylene (TCE) and tetrachloroethylene (PCE) as well as other regulated and some unregulated contaminants that are discharged from industrial operations. The VOC standard will be developed as part of EPA’s new strategy for drinking water, announced by the administrator in March 2010. A key principle of the strategy is to address contaminants as groups rather than individually in order to provide public health protections more quickly and also allow utilities to more effectively and efficiently plan for improvements.

More information on drinking water strategy:

Administrator Jackson’s 2010 Speech on EPA’s New Drinking Water Strategy

EPA also held a stakeholder briefing today on the Decision to Regulate Perchlorate and Other Toxic Contaminants in Drinking Water. The purpose of the call was to give stakeholders a chance to ask questions about EPA’s decision to develop a regulation for perchlorate that will ensure the quality of the water Americans drink. (EPA)

Background:

The EPA placed perchlorate on its contaminant candidate list in 1998. The following year, the EPA began requiring drinking water monitoring for perchlorate and, in 2002, issued a draft assessment of perchlorate. Titled Perchlorate Environmental Contamination: Toxicological Review and Risk Characterization, the report recommended a 1 ppb safety standard for perchlorate in drinking water – in other words, a level four times more restrictive than the current California action level. Though it has gone through extensive peer review, the EPA report has not yet been publicly released.

There is no national drinking water regulation for perchlorate, and it appears unlikely that there will be one anytime soon. On July 15, 2003, the U.S. EPA announced that it would not formulate safety standards for perchlorate or any of the other chemicals on its “contaminant candidate list.” This means that perchlorate will not come up for review again for at least another three to five years, unless “emergency” procedures are followed to expedite the process.

In March 2003, the White House Office of Management and Budget referred perchlorate to the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) for six to 18 months of review. The EPA banned public discussion of perchlorate by its employees until the NAS delivered its opinion. However, the federal EPA and DOD still widely differ in their assessments of what level of perchlorate is safe in drinking water. Today's action reactivates the regulatory process.(Draft Perchlorate Summary Report, Santa Ana River Watershed Area, California, 2003)

The National Academy of Sciences' (NAS) report released in 2005 (Health Implications of Perchlorate Ingestion (2005)) concluded that a higher exposure level to the toxic rocket fuel ingredient perchlorate than recommended by the Environmental Protection Agency is not harmful, could threaten the health of millions of American children. The NAS report recommended a level that is about 23 times higher than the one proposed by EPA and several states.

Inhofe & Barrasso Unveil Bill To Prevent GHG Regulation

Senator John Barrasso’s (R-Wyom), left, is the lead sponsor of a new bill that would prevent the federal government from regulating greenhouse gases or or applying them to laws, such as the Clean Air Act, the National Environmental Policy Act and the Endangered Species Act. His 10 co-sponsors thus far include Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), chairman of the Senate Republican Policy Committee and a potential 2012 White House contender, and Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), the top Republican on the Environment and Public Works Committee.

The Center opposes this legislation and the Inhofe/Upton Legislation.  The Center believes the EPA regs will improve the economy by opening up innovative entrepreneurial solutions to GHG reductions. We believe EPA is using a moderate approach to stem emissions.  The Center is calling for a much faster and broader approach.  We would like to see an aggressive cap-and-trade program implemented.  The Center is registered in EPA's very successful Acid Rain and NOx cap-and-trade programs.  The Center is also registered in the Northeastern Regionional  Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI).  The Center has a CO2 trading house ready to participate in a Congressional mandated or regulatory required cap-and-trade program via our Carbon Mercantile Exchange (CMX)

The bill’s findings claim that controlling emissions would harm the economy, and also include a nod to skepticism about climate science, noting that Earth’s climate is “dynamic” and that changes stem from a “complex combination of factors.”

The bill is broadly written in an effort to not only block the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from directly regulating greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act, but also to prevent federal agencies from considering climate change when implementing statutes such as the Endangered Species Act and the National Environmental Policy Act.  The bill would not upend existing joint standards for vehicle fuel economy and greenhouse gas emissions that the EPA and the Transportation Department jointly administer. But those rules would only be managed by the Transportation Department. (The Hill, 1/31/2011)

Inhofe & Upton Seek To Block EPA GHG Rules

Senate Environment & Public Works Committee ranking minority member James Inhofe (R-Okla.), left, and House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.), right, unveiled draft legislation today that would prohibit the Environmental Protection Agency from regulating greenhouse gases (GHG) under the Clean Air Act.  EPA is acting under its existing Clean Air Act powers to begin phasing in rules to slow emissions from sources like power plants and refineries. Republicans and many fossil fuel industry groups believe that regulating greenhouse gas emissions under the air law will harm the economy and eventually impose burdensome requirements on scores of facilities.

The Center disagrees and believes the regs will improve the economy by opening up innovative entrepreneurial solutions to GHG reductions. We believe EPA is using a moderate approach to stem emissions.  The Center is calling for a much faster and broader approach.  We would like to see an aggressive cap-and-trade program implemented.  The Center is registered in EPA's very successful Acid Rain and NOx cap-and-trade programs.  The Center is also registered in the Northeastern Regionional  Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI).  The Center has a CO2 trading house ready to participate in a Congressional mandated or regulatory required cap-and-trade program via our Carbon Mercantile Exchange (CMX). (The Hill, 2/1/2011)

Center at National Academy of Sciences Oil Spill Session

Dr. Frank Hall at NAS

Dr. Frank R. Hall represented the Center for Environment, Commerce, and Energy at the National Academy of Sciences public session (January 24, 2010) for the study ”Effects of the Deepwater Horizon Mississippi Canyon-252 Oil Spill on Ecosystem Services in the Gulf of Mexico”. Congressional support for the sum of $1 million is funding this multi-year study through the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. The public session allowed non-committee members to provide recommendations on specific issues and methodologies that the study committee should explore.

Further information on this study

EPA Partners Continue Large Green Power Purchases

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released its list of the top 50 partner organizations using the most renewable electricity to help reduce harmful greenhouse gas emissions and protect people’s health. Green power is generated from renewable resources such as solar, wind, geothermal, biogas, biomass, and low-impact hydropower. Purchases of green power help accelerate the nation’s voluntary green power market and help reduce greenhouse gas emissions and other harmful pollutants that threaten Americans’ health from the power sector.

EPA’s Green Power Partnership’s largest single purchaser of green power, Intel Corporation, increased its commitment by nearly doubling its annual green power usage to more than 2.5 billion kilowatt-hours (kWh). This is the largest green power purchase to date in the partnership, and is equivalent to avoiding the carbon dioxide emissions (CO2) emissions from the electricity use of more than 218,000 average American homes.

Kohl’s, second on the national top 50 list, joined Intel as the only two partners using more than 1 billion kWh of green power. Kohl’s increased its green power purchase to more than 1.4 billion kWh of green power annually. Staples more than doubled its green power commitment and Sony Corporation of America nearly doubled its green power purchase. Best Buy, Suffolk County, N.Y., and Drexel University are all making first time appearances on the national top 50 list. Collectively, these top 50 partner organizations are using more than 13.5 billion kWh of green power annually, equivalent to the CO2 produced from the electricity use of more than 1.1 million average American homes.

EPA’s Green Power Partnership works with more than 1,300 partner organizations to voluntarily purchase green power to reduce the environmental impacts of conventional electricity use. Overall, partners are using more than 19.2 billion kWh of green power annually, equivalent to avoiding the CO2 emissions from the electricity use of nearly 1.7 million average American homes.

More information on the top 50 list

More information on EPA’s Green Power Partnership

PEPCO, Washington Gas and Maryland Governor O'Malley

Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley (D) is supporting legislation that would impose fines on PEPCO and other utilities that fall short of new state "reliability standards," including ones laying out how quickly power should be restored after snowstorms. O'Malley is reacting to the large number of Pepco customers left in the dark for days after a January storm. Reliability standards would spell out expectations for utility companies.

PEPCO doesn't object to standards, as long as the standards are fair. PEPCO believes that if fines are utilized, the state should also provide incentives for superior performance.

Several other states, including New York, have similar initiatives in place. The Maryland legislation, which is being drafted, would direct fines collected from the utilities to affected customers in some cases. A draft of the bill leaves it to the Public Service Commission, which regulates utilities in Maryland, to develop a schedule of fines.

PEPCO, which serves 778,000 customers in Montgomery and Prince George's counties and the District of Columbia.

And while PEPCO is dealing with the governor, legislators, regulators and their customers, Washington Gas is competing with them for those very customers.  Washington Gas is mailing out the advertisement below:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear ______________   _________________,


Choose Washington Gas Energy Services, Inc. (WGES) as your electricity supplier and lock in a price that's 10% lower than Pepco's current rate. Your price will remain the same for 12 solid months.

Thousands of your neighbors are served by WGES. They shopped for their electricity and chose an independent supplier that allows them to PAY LESS without sacrificing an ounce of convenience or reliability. You can, too! Enrolling is quick and easy!

This is limited to the first 2,000 customers, so don't delay!

* Pepco’s current price (8.90 ¢/kWh) for Standard Offer Service electricity for rate class R is 9.885¢/kWh effective through May 31, 2011. Please see www.pepco.com for more information on Pepco’s other rate schedules.

WGES prices are for electricity generation and transmission only, are not regulated by the Maryland Public Service Commission, and do not include utility distribution, taxes or other utility charges.

Washington Gas Energy Services, Inc (WGES) is not the same company as Washington Gas, a regulated utility. WGES is a subsidiary of WGL Holdings, Inc. and an affiliate company of Washington Gas. (MD PSC License No. IR-227)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Although the Center supports 'real' electricity deregulation and competition, we are not endorsing any one utility over another.

(Wash Post, 2/1/2011, Washington Gas Energy Services Email)

EPA Proposes To Retain Carbon Monoxide Standard

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing to keep the current national air quality standards for carbon monoxide (CO). EPA has preliminarily concluded that the current standards will protect people, especially those susceptible to health problems associated with breathing CO from the outdoor air. CO can cause harmful health effects by reducing oxygen delivery to the body’s organs (like the heart and brain) and tissues. At extremely high levels, CO can cause death.

The current health standards are 9 parts per million (ppm) measured over 8 hours, and 35 ppm measured over 1 hour. The proposed changes would require a more focused monitoring network with CO monitors placed near highly trafficked roads in urban areas with populations of 1 million or more. The data from these sites would be available for scientific studies that could help inform future reviews of the standard.

EPA estimates that the proposal would require approximately 77 CO monitors in 53 urban areas. EPA expects that states would not need to purchase new monitoring equipment. They could relocate some of their existing CO monitors to the near-road monitoring stations already required in connection with the revised nitrogen dioxide standards issued in January 2010. CO monitors at the new locations would be required to be operational by January 1, 2013.

CO is a colorless, odorless gas emitted from combustion processes. Nationally and, particularly in urban areas, the majority of CO emissions come from motor vehicles.

EPA will accept comments for 60 days after the proposed rule is published in the Federal Register. If requested, the agency will hold a public hearing on the proposed rule on Feb. 18, 2011. EPA will take final action by Aug. 12, 2011.

More information

Life Force: Body Balance with SeaNine

PRESIDENT'S CORNER

By Norris McDonald

I met Karen Jones when I was on a scoping visit to Santa Catalina Island. In chatting about my asthma, she mentioned a liquid food supplement that she said could possibly help in mitigating my asthmatic condition.  When she contacted me, I decided to try the supplement.  Interestingly, it evidently helped in significantly improving my asthma.  I no longer have to take a theophylline tablet every day (for the past 20 years). Of course, I've been walking 4 miles a day and doing 100 stomach crunches a day too.  What interested me about the supplement was the implication of 'drinking' aloe vera.  I already knew about the external uses of the plant, but the thought of drinking it never occurred to me.  Drinking the sea vegetables appealed to me too. Anyway, the results have been good enough for me to personally recommend the product.

Body Balance with SeaNine: a phytonutrient-rich blend of aloe vera and nine sea vegetables: Fucus vesiculosus, Chondrus crispus, Ascophyllum nodosum, Laminaria digitata, Porphyra yezoensis, Palmaria palmata, Ulva lactuca, Alaria esculenta, Gigartina chamissoi.  Other ingredients include honey, citric acid, Potassium Benzoate, Potassium Sorbate (to preserve freshness) and purified Stevia Extract (leaf).  (Lifeforce)

EPA To Hold 5 Listening Sessions on Power Plants, Refineries

EPA to Hold Five Listening Sessions on Updating the Clean Air Act’s Pollution Standards for Power Plants, Refineries

Sessions seek input to design common-sense, cost-effective greenhouse gas standards for largest polluters

Center Note: The sessions will provide additional input before a court order forces EPA to finalize regs

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will hold five listening sessions to help the agency update the Clean Air Act pollution standards to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution from fossil fuel power plants and petroleum refineries. The listening sessions will be open to the public and will help EPA develop a common-sense approach to reduce GHGs from two of the largest industrial pollution sources, which are responsible for nearly 40 percent of the GHG pollution in the United States. Reducing greenhouse gas pollution can also result in reductions to other harmful air pollutants emitted by these facilities.

The agency is in the process of gathering information and seeking important input and, as part of a settlement agreement announced December 23, 2010, will propose GHG standards based on existing technologies for power plants in July 2011 and for refineries in December 2011. The agency will issue final standards in May 2012 and November 2012, respectively.

In addition to these GHG New Source Performance Standards the agency is also addressing other pollutants, including mercury and particle pollution, in separate, coordinated actions.

The feedback from these sessions will play an important role in helping EPA develop smart, cost-effective and protective standards that reflect the latest and best information available. The agency will solicit additional public comment during the usual notice and comment period – including the opportunity for a formal public hearing – after the proposals have been published and before they go into effect.

Each listening session is scheduled to last two hours and will feature a facilitated round table discussion among stakeholder representatives who have been identified and selected for their expertise in the Clean Air Act standard-setting process. The agency has asked key stakeholder groups to identify these round table participants.

Registration is not required to attend the sessions. There will be a short period of time at the end of each session for the public to provide comments. The March 4 session will allow additional time for the public to provide feedback. To speak during these times, please notify EPA when signing in to the session. If you do not have the opportunity to speak during these times or you cannot make it to the sessions, written comments on these planned rulemakings may also be submitted. The agency requests that written comments be submitted by March 18, 2011.

For interested persons who are not able to attend the sessions, each session will be webcast and recorded for later viewing via the EPA website.

More information and instructions for submitting written comments

Listening Sessions

Session 1: Electric Power Industry Representatives
Date: Feb. 4
Time: 1 p.m. to 3 p.m.
Session Location: Washington, D.C.

EPA Ariel Rios East Building
1301 Constitution Avenue, N.W.
Room 1153
Washington, D.C.

Session 2: Environmental and Environmental Justice Organization Representatives
Date: Feb. 15
Time: 1 p.m. to 3 p.m.
Session Location: Atlanta, Ga.
Sam Nunn Atlanta Federal Center
61 Forsyth Street, S.W.
Atlanta/Augusta Room
Atlanta, Ga.

Session 3: State and Tribal Representatives
Date: Feb. 17
Time: 1 p.m. to 3 p.m.
Session Location: Chicago, Ill.
Ralph Metcalfe Federal Building
77 West Jackson Blvd.
Lake Michigan Room
Chicago, Ill.

Session 4: Coalition Group Representatives
Date: Feb. 23
Time: 10 a.m. to 12 p.m.
Session Location: Washington, D.C.
EPA Ariel Rios East Building
1301 Constitution Avenue, N.W.
Room 1153
Washington, D.C.

Session 5: Petroleum Refinery Industry Representatives
Date: March 4
Time: 10 a.m. to 12 p.m. and public comments 1 p.m. to 2:30 p.m.
Session Location: Washington, D.C.
EPA Ariel Rios East Building
1301 Constitution Avenue, N.W.
Room 1153
Washington, D.C.

(EPA)

Good Jobs, Green Jobs National Conference

Now in its fourth year, the 2011 Good Jobs, Green Jobs National Conference — February 8-10 at the Marriott Wardman Park Hotel in Washington, D.C. — is a forum for sharing ideas and strategies to build a green economy that creates good jobs, reduces global warming and confronts other environmental problems, and preserves America’s economic and environmental security.

The 2011 Conference — brought together thousands of labor, environmental, business, elected and community leaders — and focused putting into practice the ideas and strategies for a new green economy — and creating good green jobs — around the country.

This year’s Conference featured plenary sessions focused on generating a clean energy agenda that creates good jobs and revitalizes the middle class, building the movement between union members and environmentalists, and securing safe, clean and sustainable cities and communities across America.

Speakers include EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood, White House Council on Environmental Quality Chair Nancy Sutley, U.S. Congressman Keith Ellison, National Economic Council Director Gene Sperling, Vice President Biden’s Chief Economic and Economic Advisor Jared Bernstein, Center for American Progress President and CEO John Podesta, AFL-CIO Executive Vice President Arlene Holt Baker, National Radio Talk Show Host and Author Bill Press, and WAMU’s Kojo Nnamdi.

The Good Jobs, Green Jobs National Conference is presented by the BlueGreen Alliance Foundation, a non-profit, 501 (c)(3) organization that conducts research and educates the public and media about solutions to environmental challenges that create economic opportunities for the American people.

The BlueGreen Alliance Foundation works with the BlueGreen Alliance — a national partnership of labor unions and environmental organizations dedicated to expanding the number and quality of jobs in the green economy — to achieve its mission. More information about the BlueGreen Alliance.

Casey Trees Sustainable Sites Initiative

New White House Press Secretary: Jay Carney

Jay Carney

President Obama has appointed former journalist Jay Carney to replace White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs.  The White House will also name two new deputy chiefs of staff: Nancy-Ann DeParle, director of the Office of Health Reform, and Alyssa Mastromonaco, White House director of scheduling and advance.

Carney, now the communications director for Vice President Biden, came to the White House in 2009 after a long career in journalism that included serving as Washington bureau chief of Time magazine.  Gibbs will open his own consulting firm, appear on television as a prominent surrogate for the president and be involved in Obama's reelection bid.

Sierra Club Moving Uptown In Washington, DC

According to the Washington Business Journal, the Sierra Club signed a 10-year deal for 27,238 square feet at 50 F St. NW and plans to move in May from current offices at 408 C St. NE and 555 11th St. NW.  So the Sierra Club is leaving Capitol Hill (Senate side) to take up residence in the heart of downtown Washington, DC.  Must be nice.  Lots of room too. Oh, and we're sure it is a 'green' building too.(Washington Business Journal, 1/27/2011)

Graham and Reilly Report to Congress on Deepwater Horizon

The Co-Chairs of the National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling (Bob Graham & William Reilly) testified (attachments) before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee on Wednesday, January 26 at 9:30 a.m. to discuss the Commission Report, which concluded that:

 The explosive loss of the Macondo well could have been prevented.

 The immediate causes of the Macondo well blowout can be traced to a series of identifiable mistakes made by BP, Halliburton, and Transocean that reveal such systematic failures in risk management that they place in doubt the safety culture of the entire industry.

 Deepwater energy exploration and production, particularly at the frontiers of experience, involve risks for which neither industry nor government has been adequately prepared, but for which they can and must be prepared in the future.

 To assure human safety and environmental protection, regulatory oversight of leasing, energy exploration, and production require reforms even beyond those significant reforms already initiated since the Deepwater Horizon disaster. Fundamental reform will be needed in both the structure of those in charge of regulatory oversight and their internal decision-making process to ensure their political autonomy, technical expertise, and their full consideration of environmental protection concerns.

 Because regulatory oversight alone will not be sufficient to ensure adequate safety, the oil and gas industry will need to take its own, unilateral steps to increase dramatically safety throughout the industry, including self-policing mechanisms that supplement governmental enforcement.

 The technology, laws and regulations, and practices for containing, responding to, and cleaning up spills lag behind the real risks associated with deepwater drilling into large, high-pressure reservoirs of oil and gas located far offshore and thousands of feet below the ocean’s surface. Government must close the existing gap and industry must support rather than resist that effort.

 Scientific understanding of environmental conditions in sensitive environments in deep Gulf waters, along the region’s coastal habitats, and in areas proposed for more drilling, such as the Arctic, is inadequate. The same is true of the human and natural impacts of oil spills.
 
The purpose of the hearing was to review the report and recommendations, including any recommendations for legislative action, issued by the National Commission on the BP Deepwater Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling.  The hearing was held in Room 325 of the Russell Senate Office Building. (U.S. Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources).
 
View Senate Archive Webcast
 
They testified before the House Natural Resources Committee (1324 Longworth HOB) at 2 p.m.
 
View House Archive Webcast

Environment America Report Says Mercury Is Big Threat

Mercury Pollution from Power Plants a Major Threat to Americans’ Health, Environment

Power plants in America emitted 134, 365 pounds of mercury pollution in 2009, according to the new Environment America report, Dirty Energy’s Assault on our Health: Mercury. The report found that power plants in just four states—Texas, Pennsylvania, Ohio, and West Virginia—are responsible for over 35 percent of all mercury pollution from power plants in the United States. The report comes as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is set to propose a standard by March to limit mercury and other toxic air pollution from power plants.

Coal-fired power plants, which are the largest source of mercury pollution in the United States, emit mercury into our air. The mercury then falls into our waterways from rain or snow, where it builds up in fish then the animals—and people—that consume the fish. Even very small amounts of mercury can have significant impacts -- studies suggest that a gram-sized drop of mercury can contaminate an entire 20 acre lake.

Environment America’s research found that:

· Mercury pollution is a widespread health risk. The Environmental Protection Agency estimates that one in six women of childbearing age has enough mercury in her bloodstream to put her child at risk from the health effects of mercury pollution, including learning disabilities, developmental disorders, and lower IQs, should she become pregnant. This means that more than 689,000 of the 4.1 million babies born every year could be exposed to dangerous levels of mercury pollution.

· Mercury pollution harms our environment. Fish, and animals that consume fish, suffer from reproductive failure and mortality as a result of mercury pollution. More U.S. waters are closed to fishing because of mercury contamination than because of any other toxic contamination problem. The EPA has found that large parts of the Potomac and Shenandoah rivers are contaminated by mercury which poisons fish in those waterways.

· Power plants in the United States are responsible for 134,365 pounds of mercury spewed into our air and water in 2009. The top 25 worst polluters, out of 451 power plants, were responsible for nearly 28 percent of all mercury pollution from power plants.

The report comes as the EPA is set to propose a standard to limit mercury and other toxic air pollution from power plants in March, with a plan to finalize the standard by November. Environment America was joined by the American Nurses Association in calling on the EPA to issue a strong standard that will significantly reduce these harmful pollutants from power plants, and specifically cut mercury pollution by more than 90%.

Unfortunately, while the EPA is undertaking this rulemaking, Congress and industry lobbyists are working to prevent the EPA from doing its job, by threatening to introduce legislation to block this and other rules from limiting dangerous air pollution. (EPA)

President Obama's State of the Union

THE WHITE HOUSE

Office of the Press Secretary
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
January 25, 2011

Remarks of President Barack Obama – As Prepared for Delivery
State of the Union Address
Tuesday, January 25, 2011

Washington, DC

As Prepared for Delivery

FULL SPEEECH

Excerpts:

At the California Institute of Technology, they’re developing a way to turn sunlight and water into fuel for our cars. At Oak Ridge National Laboratory, they’re using supercomputers to get a lot more power out of our nuclear facilities. With more research and incentives, we can break our dependence on oil with biofuels, and become the first country to have 1 million electric vehicles on the road by 2015.

We need to get behind this innovation. And to help pay for it, I’m asking Congress to eliminate the billions in taxpayer dollars we currently give to oil companies. I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but they’re doing just fine on their own. So instead of subsidizing yesterday’s energy, let’s invest in tomorrow’s.

Now, clean energy breakthroughs will only translate into clean energy jobs if businesses know there will be a market for what they’re selling. So tonight, I challenge you to join me in setting a new goal: by 2035, 80% of America’s electricity will come from clean energy sources. Some folks want wind and solar. Others want nuclear, clean coal, and natural gas. To meet this goal, we will need them all – and I urge Democrats and Republicans to work together to make it happen.

(The White House)