Wind Industry Proposes Solution To Wind Tax Credit Expiration

Dec 12: The American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) released a plan to address the current controversy over the wind Production Tax Credit (PTC) which is scheduled to expire at the end of they year. Conservative organizations are urging Congressional members to let the credit expire saying it has "far outlived its usefulness." [See WIMS 12/12/12 and WIMS 9/7/12]. 

 

    AWEA, the national trade association of America's wind industry, with 2,000 member companies, described what a future phase-out of the PTC could look like, saying "we're already showing we're a leader in innovation. Now we're showing we're a leader in addressing the country's fiscal issues." Denise Bode, AWEA's CEO stressed that, "At the same time, our number one priority right now is not putting the wind industry over its own fiscal cliff."

 

    She said, "Congress must extend the wind energy Production Tax Credit for projects that start next year, to save an entire U.S. manufacturing sector and 37,000 jobs that we'll otherwise lose by early 2013. Specifically we urge Congress to extend the wind tax credit for all projects that commence construction in 2013, as adopted by the Senate Finance Committee on Aug. 2, on a bipartisan 19-5 vote."

 

    The PTC, a policy with long-standing bi-partisan support, has succeeded in incentivizing an average of $15.5 billion a year in private investment in U.S. wind farms over the past five years. It works by providing a tax credit of 2.2 cents a kilowatt-hour once the electricity is generated, for the first 10 years that a U.S. wind farm is in operation. AWEA said, led by Members of Congress who worked to help build a domestic wind industry, to the benefit of local economies and energy customers, the PTC has become an American manufacturing and innovation success story.

 

    The result of AWEA's analysis specifies that the tax credit would start at 100% of the current 2.2 cents a kilowatt-hour for projects started in 2013, and be phased down to 90% of that value for projects placed in service in 2014; 80% in 2015; 70% in 2016; and 60% in both 2017 and 2018, ending after that. Bode said the analysis indicates that would allow wind energy to establish a stable base market in the U.S. that the industry can build on, with further market and technology innovation. The process of developing it started last spring, included detailed economic analyses and high-level discussions with industry leaders, and culminated in approval by the AWEA Board of Directors.

 

    She said, "We began this process in order to be a part of the solution on our nation's fiscal challenges, while creating needed stability for wind industry development, both of which are concerns for our industry. We wanted to take this head-on, as part of our patriotic duty as well as our duty to the industry. We completed the analysis, and this is what it identified as necessary for at least a minimally viable industry."

 

    The resulting proposal is described in a letter that AWEA sent to leaders on Capitol Hill. It is addressed to Sen. Max Baucus (D-MT), Chairman of the Senate Finance Committee; Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-UT), ranking Republican on that committee; Rep. Dave Camp (R-MI), Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee; and Rep. Sander Levin (D-MI), ranking Democrat on that committee. Copied are House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) and Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi D-CA); and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY). 

 

    The letter says in part, "The wind industry recognizes that our country is facing significant fiscal challenges and is supportive of all energy technology incentives being reviewed and even phased down when Congress considers tax reform. However, the PTC has supported the wind industry in its efforts to significantly reduce the cost of producing electricity, and its continued availability for a reasonable period of time will allow the industry to invest in the cost-saving technologies required to finish the job. . . With the policy certainty that accompanies a stable extension, the industry believes it can achieve the greater economies of scale and technology improvements that it needs to become cost-competitive without the PTC." Bode said that the letter addresses separate parallel conversations that have been going on between the industry and Capitol Hill, about extending the PTC in the short term, and the vision for the long-term future of the PTC.

 

    Access a release from AWEA (click here). Access the complete letter (click here). [#Energy/Wind]

 

Want to know more about WIMS? Check out our LinkedIn company website (click here).

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS (click here)
32 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

GAO Report On U.S. Mineral Volume, Value, & Revenue

Dec 122: The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) released a report entitled, Mineral Resources: Mineral Volume, Value, and Revenue (GAO-13-45R, Nov 15, 2012). The report was requested by Representative Raúl Grijalva (D-AZ), the Ranking Member Subcommittee on National Parks, Forests, and Public Lands Committee on Natural Resources and Senator Tom Udall (D-NM).

 

    GAO indicates that The Department of the Interior (DOI) administers minerals found in over 700 million acres of Federal lands, 57 million acres on Indian lands, and 1.8 billion acres below offshore waters. Operators who lease these lands and extract these minerals pay billions of dollars annually that are shared among Federal, state, and Indian tribal governments and are one of the largest nontax sources of revenue to the Federal government. Some of these minerals, such as oil, gas, and coal, are available through leases requiring payments in the form of rents and bonuses, which are required to secure and maintain a lease, and royalties, which are based on the value of the minerals that are extracted. These minerals are generally known as leasable minerals. The Department of the Interior's Office of Natural Resources Revenue (ONRR) is responsible for compiling data on the volume and value of leasable minerals produced from all Federal and Indian lands where there is a trust responsibility, and collecting the appropriate payments. In contrast, other minerals, such as gold, silver, and copper, are governed by the General Mining Act of 1872, which makes these minerals available to operators through a Federal claim-patent system that provides the right to explore, extract, and develop the federal mineral deposit without having to pay a royalty. These minerals are generally known as hardrock minerals.

    Congress asked us to review minerals extracted from Federal lands. Our objectives were to provide information on the: (1) volume and dollar value of leasable minerals extracted from Federal lands and waters in fiscal years 2010 and 2011; (2) amount the Federal government collected for leasable minerals in royalties, rents, bonuses, and other revenue and how this amount was calculated; and (3) availability of data on the volume and dollar value of hardrock minerals extracted from federal lands in fiscal years 2010 and 2011.

    GAO found that in summary, there were nearly 70 different types of leasable minerals extracted from Federal lands and waters in fiscal years 2010 and 2011, but their volume cannot be aggregated because they use different units of measure. For example, the volumes of the four most valuable of these minerals -- oil, gas, natural gas liquids, and coal -- are measured in barrels, million cubic feet (mcf), gallons, and tons, respectively. According to ONRR data, the total value of all leasable minerals extracted from Federal and Indian land and sold in fiscal years 2010 and 2011 was $92.3 billion and $98.6 billion, respectively.

    The resulting revenue to the Federal government from mineral leasing activity on Federal and Indian land in fiscal years 2010 and 2011 was $11.3 billion and $11.4 billion, respectively. Of this amount, oil, gas, and natural gas liquids accounted for the majority of the revenue -- $10.1 billion in each fiscal year. The bulk of this revenue comes from royalties, which accounted for 92.8 percent of total revenue in 2011.

    The mechanisms used to calculate the three types of leasable mineral revenue -- bonus bids, rents, and royalties -- vary widely. For example, for oil and gas leases, bonus bids -- up-front payments to obtain a lease -- are determined by a competitive bidding process, with leases going to the highest bidder. Prior to the competitive bidding, Interior sets a minimum acceptable bonus bid for each offshore parcel and a minimum per acre bid amount for each onshore parcel offered for lease. Rent is charged annually for a lease until production begins or the lease is terminated or relinquished. Royalty rates depend on the mineral and are generally calculated based on a proportion of sales value, less allowable deductions, such as transportation and processing allowances.

    Regarding the availability of data on hardrock minerals, GAO found that Federal agencies generally do not collect data from hardrock mine operators on the amount and value of hardrock minerals extracted from Federal lands because there is no Federal royalty that would necessitate doing so. Furthermore, while many western states collect data on the hardrock minerals produced in their state for purposes of assessing a state royalty, they generally do not collect data on the volume of those minerals extracted from Federal land within those states. The Department of the Interior is now working to implement an international initiative to promote openness and accountability in the oil, gas, and mining sectors called the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative [See WIMS 10/11/12]. This initiative is currently in the beginning stages of implementation -- consequently it is unclear what affect, if any, it will have on reporting requirements for operators of hardrock mines on Federal lands. Interior officials told us that they expect to finish implementing this initiative in about 4 years.

    Senator Udall commented saying, "This report confirms what we've been saying all along -- that we need to reform the mining law of 1872. Hardrock minerals are natural resources that belong to the American people, and we need to make sure we are getting the best return on what should be an investment -- not a giveaway." Representative Grijalva said, "We've been hearing from conservatives that we need fewer hours at national parks, less reclamation of valuable lands, fewer services for park visitors and a whole gamut of supposedly necessary cutbacks. Well, now we know we've been leaving a huge pot of money on the table that could change all that. There's no reason to keep these extraction and royalty laws out of date. At the very least we need disclosure so American taxpayers know what is being taken from their lands. Keeping the public and Congress in the dark any longer about what's going on with Federal property doesn't serve any public purpose, and it should end."

    Grijalva added, "There's a simple legislative fix for this big hole in the Federal government's revenue stream, and it's only fair that companies benefiting from access to public lands pay their fair share. The Department of Interior should continue to implement the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative and Congress should make sure disclosure [is] a priority, and then we can talk about how to make sure the American people financially benefit from the sale of public minerals the way they should have been all along."

    Grijalva is a cosponsor of H.R.3446, formally known as the Fair Payment for Energy and Mineral Production on Public Lands Act, which would set a 12.5 percent royalty rate on hardrock minerals. He has said he looks forward to supporting and strengthening an updated version in the upcoming Congress. Senator Undall added, "I hope this report can be a catalyst for discussion about reform, but at a minimum it shows we need better disclosure on extraction of our natural resources. Both parties want to solve our economic challenges and make government more efficient for the taxpayers - here's an opportunity to do both. We should be able come together on this issue, and I look forward to making that case to my colleagues in the next Congress."

    Sierra Club Executive Director Michael Brune issued a statement saying, "This report provides an answer to anyone wondering why big polluters are so eager to get their hands on our public lands: big oil and mining companies get bargain basement deals to destroy the mountains, valleys, and rivers owned by everyone else while raking in billions in profits. These big companies are the worst possible tenants American taxpayers could have, devastating the property they have been trusted with by sacrificing our lands and poisoning our water – and then getting rewarded for it. . . it's time for Congress to act to not just ensure taxpayers get a square deal, but to protect the lands that belong to all of us from exploitation at the hands of just a few companies who deserve to be evicted."

    Access the complete 50-page report from GAO (click here). Access the release from the Members (click here). Access the Sierra Club statement (click here). Access legislative details for H.R.3446 (click here). [#Land, #Energy]

Want to know more about WIMS? Check out our LinkedIn company website (click here).

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS (click here)
32 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

Agencies Collaborate On Potential Impacts Of Nanomaterials

Dec 11: U.S. EPA and the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) are collaborating in a worldwide research effort to assess any potential impacts of nanomaterials on people's health and the environment. Nanomaterials appear in many household products ranging from clothing to building materials. For example, one ongoing study evaluates the potential human and environmental effects from exposure to copper nanomaterials, an ingredient in wood treatment products used on wood for building decks and fences.

    The emerging field of nanotechnology has led to substantial advances in energy, medicine, electronics, and clean technologies. The field relies on using materials at the nanoscale level, these nanomaterials are made up of very small particles, which are about 100,000 times smaller than the width of a human hair. Because of the unique properties of these materials, it is important to conduct research to identify methods that will allow manufacturers and other stakeholders to ensure that products containing these materials do not harm people or the environment. This research is a part of the U.S. government's efforts to assess the potential risks of nanomaterials. These efforts are coordinated by the U.S. National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI). NNI is a collaborative project comprised of 25 agencies, including EPA and CPSC.

    Dr. Tina Bahadori, national program director for EPA's Chemical Safety for Sustainability Research said, "Nanotechnology and nanomaterials used in the development of these products improve our everyday lives, but it is important that we understand how humans are exposed to nanomaterials and to assess the risks they may pose to people's health and the environment. This innovative research greatly improves what is known about nanomaterials and will inform the future design of more sustainable, effective nanomaterials." 

    Dr. Treye Thomas, program manager for the CPSC Nanotechnology program said, "These tiny nanomaterials are widely used in products ranging from clothing to sunscreen, but the need for additional research and knowledge on how they affect consumers is great. The CPSC staff is working diligently to meet the challenges involved in regulating this emerging technology and is pleased to be collaborating with staff at EPA to develop test methods and exposure data to adequately address health and safety concerns."

    EPA's collaborative research with CPSC is part of a larger international effort that focuses on:

• Identifying, characterizing and quantifying the origins of nanomaterials
• Studying biological processes affected by nanomaterials that could influence risk
• Determining how nanomaterials interact with complex systems in the human body and the environment
• Involving industry to develop sustainable manufacturing processes
• Sharing knowledge through innovative online applications that allow for rapid feedback and accelerated research progress

CPSC, in working with other Federal agencies, ensures that common public health concerns are met and will use research findings to inform:

• Protocol development to assess the potential release of nanomaterials from consumer products
• Credible rules for consumer product testing to evaluate exposure
• Determination of the potential public health impacts of nanomaterial used in consumer products

    In a related matters, on November 30, the Danish Consumer Council and the Danish Ecological Council has, in cooperation with DTU Environment, announced the development of a database that can help consumers identify more than 1,200 products that may contain nanomaterials. In the U.S. the Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies (PEN) established in April 2005 as a partnership between the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars and the Pew Charitable Trusts, also has a database, which they say is not comprehensive, but gives the public the best available look at the 1,000+ manufacturer-identified nanotechnology-based consumer products currently on the market.

 

    Access a release from the agencies and link to EPA, CPSC and NNI (click here). Access a release on the Danish database and link to more information and the database (click here). Access information on the PEN database (click here). [#Toxics]

 

Want to know more about WIMS? Check out our LinkedIn company website (click here).

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS (click here)
32 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

UN Puts Positive Spin On "Doha Deal"; But Others Doubt

Dec 8: Amid last minute, through the night negotiations and confusion, the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) is saying that the Countries have successfully launched a new commitment period under the Kyoto Protocol; agreed to a firm timetable to adopt a universal climate agreement by 2015; and agreed a path to raise necessary ambition to respond to climate change. They also endorsed the completion of new institutions and agreed ways and means to deliver scaled-up climate finance and technology to developing countries.

 

    Despite the positive spin from UNFCCC, they fail to mention the some major parties like Russia, Canada and Japan have withdrawn from the Kyoto Protocol which will further weaken the international climate change agreement. Some 35 industrialized nations including Australia, the European Union nations, Ukraine, Switzerland and Norway are under the agreement to cut their emissions. The United States has never ratified the agreement and the major emitters of China and India are developing countries and not part of the agreement to cut emissions. Many environmental organizations like Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) are describing the COP18/CMP8, "Doha Deal" with words like "modest," "minimal," and "the best we can hope for." Others, like Greenpeace were much more negative and "condemned politicians. . . following the failure of the UN Climate talks in Doha. While they agreed to a second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol, it was judged so full of loopholes as to have little or no effect on carbon emissions." Also, in the U.S. with media outlets consumed with coverage of the "fiscal cliff" issue, there was hardly any recognition that the Doha climate change conference was taking place.

 

    The COP President Abdullah bin Hamad Al-Attiyah of Qatar said, "Doha has opened up a new gateway to bigger ambition and to greater action -- the Doha Climate Gateway. Qatar is proud to have been able to bring governments here to achieve this historic task. I thank all governments and ministers for their work to achieve this success. Now governments must move quickly through the Doha Climate Gateway to push forward with the solutions to climate change."

    The UNFCCC Executive Secretary Christiana Figueres, called on countries to swiftly implement what has been agreed in Doha so that the world can stay below the internationally agreed maximum two degrees Celsius temperature rise. She said, "I congratulate the Qatar Presidency for managing a complex and challenging conference. Now, there is much work to do. Doha is another step in the right direction, but we still have a long road ahead. The door to stay below two degrees remains barely open. The science shows it, the data proves it. The UN Climate Change negotiations must now focus on the concrete ways and means to accelerate action and ambition. The world has the money and technology to stay below two degrees. After Doha, it is a matter of scale, speed, determination and sticking to the timetable." 

    UNFCCC said that in Doha, governments also successfully concluded work under the Convention that began in Bali in 2007 and ensured that remaining elements of this work will be continued under the UN Climate Change process. The next major UN Climate Change Conference -- COP19/ CMP9 -- will take place in Warsaw, Poland, at the end of 2013. UNFCCC itemized four major accomplishments from the COP18/CMP8 meeting as follows:

• (1) Amendment & Continuation of the Kyoto Protocol: The Kyoto Protocol, as the only existing and binding agreement under which developed countries commit to cutting greenhouse gases, has been amended so that it will continue as of January 1, 2013; the length of the second commitment period will be 8 years; legal requirements will allow a smooth continuation of the Protocol; valuable accounting rules of the protocol have been preserved; countries that are taking on further commitments under the Kyoto Protocol have agreed to review their emission reduction commitments at the latest by 2014; the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), Joint Implementation (JI) and International Emissions Trading (IET) will continue; and Australia, the EU, Japan, Lichtenstein, Monaco and Switzerland have declared that they will not carry over any surplus emissions trading credits (Assigned Amounts) into the second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol.
• (2) Time table for the 2015 global Agreement: Governments have agreed to speedily work toward a universal climate change agreement covering all countries from 2020, to be adopted by 2015, and to find ways to scale up efforts before 2020 beyond the existing pledges to curb emissions so that the world can stay below the agreed maximum 2 degrees Celsius temperature rise. Governments have agreed to submit to the UN Climate Change Secretariat, by March 1, 2013, information, views and proposals on actions, initiatives and options to enhance ambition. Elements of a negotiating text are to be available no later than the end of 2014. World leaders will be convened in 2014 to mobilize the political will to help ensure the 2015 deadline is met.
• (3) Completion of New Infrastructure: Governments significantly advanced the completion of new infrastructure to channel technology and finance to developing nations and move toward the full implementation of this infrastructure and support. Most importantly, they have: endorsed the selection of the Republic of Korea as the location of the Green Climate Fund and the work plan of the Standing Committee on Finance. The Green Climate Fund is expected to start its work in Sondgo in the second half of 2013, which means that it can launch activities in 2014. Governments also confirmed a UNEP-led consortium as host of the Climate Technology Center (CTC), for an initial term of five years. The CTC, along with its associated Network, is the implementing arm of the UNFCCCs Technology Mechanism. Governments have also agreed the constitution of the CTC advisory board.
• 4) Long-term Climate Finance: Developed countries have reiterated their commitment to deliver on promises to continue long- term climate finance support to developing nations, with a view to mobilizing $100 billion USD both for adaptation and mitigation by 2020. The agreement also encourages developed countries to increase efforts to provide finance between 2013-15 at least to the average annual level with which they provided funds during the 2010-2012 fast-start finance period. This is to ensure there is no gap in continued finance support while efforts are otherwise scaled up. Germany, the UK, France, Denmark, Sweden and the EU Commission announced concrete finance pledges in Doha for the period up to 2015, totaling approximately $6 billion USD.

    Other key outcomes identified by UNFCCC include: a review the long-term temperature goal; identify adaptive capacities, institutional arrangements and ways to implement National Adaptation Plans for least developed countries; support of developing country action; further elaborate the new market-based mechanism; measurement of deforestation and fighting deforestation; integrate Carbon Capture and Storage into Clean Development Mechanism; development and transfer of technologies that can help developing countries adapt and curb their emissions; and avoiding potentially negative consequences of climate action (e.g.negative economic or social consequences).

 

    Access a lengthy release from UNFCCC with further details (click here). Access a release and link to further information from Greenpeace (click here). Access a release from EDF (click here). Access a release and link to more information from NRDC (click here). Access the Negotiations Update website (click here). Access the UNFCCC COP18 website for complete information including agenda, documents, statements, and much more (click here). Access on-demand webcasts including briefings and statements from individual countries and organizations (click here). Access daily reporting from the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) (click here). Access the U.S. Department of State COP18 website (click here). [#Climate]

 

Want to know more about WIMS? Check out our LinkedIn company website (click here).

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS (click here)
32 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

New Report Says LNG Exports Would Yield Net Economic Benefits

Dec 5: As part of a broader effort to further inform decisions related to LNG exports, the Department of Energy (DOE) commissioned NERA Economic Consulting to conduct a third party study in order to gain a better understanding of how U.S. LNG exports could affect the public interest, with an emphasis on the energy and manufacturing sectors. The Department is releasing that study and making it available for public review and comment. As this is not a Department of Energy product, the Department will be conducting its own review of the study as well as consideration of relevant comments made throughout the process prior to making final determinations.

    DOE indicates that Federal law generally requires approval of natural gas exports to countries that have a free trade agreement with the United States. For countries that do not have a free trade agreement with the U.S., the Department of Energy is required to grant applications for export authorizations unless the Department finds that the proposed exports "will not be consistent with the public interest." Factors for consideration include economic, energy security, and environmental impacts.

    On December 5, 2012, the Department of Energy's Office of Fossil Energy posted the final NERA report into the 15 pending export application dockets, and invites the public to provide comment. The report and resulting comments will be taken into consideration as the Department makes its public interest determinations in each case. The Department will accept initial comments on the report for 45 days after the official notice of the study appears in the Federal Register. Reply comments will be accepted for a period of 30 days, beginning on the day after the conclusion of the initial comment period. All comments received need only be submitted once as they will be placed in the administrative record for each of the 15 currently pending export application dockets.

    Following the closing of the reply comment period, DOE will begin to act on the 15 applications on a case-by-case basis. The study released will be one of the inputs considered during evaluation of those applications. The Energy Department expects to act first upon applications for which the applicants have commenced the pre-filing process at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) as of December 5, 2012, in the general order in which the Department received them. Following disposition of those applications that have pre-filed with FERC, the Energy Department expects to act upon the rest of the pending applications – and any others submitted - in the order received.

    The NERA report contains an analysis of the impact of exports of LNG on the U.S. economy under a wide range of different assumptions about levels of exports, global market conditions, and the cost of producing natural gas in the U.S. The report concludes, "Across all these scenarios, the U.S. was projected to gain net economic benefits from allowing LNG exports. Moreover, for every one of the market scenarios examined, net economic benefits increased as the level of LNG exports increased. In particular, scenarios with unlimited exports always had higher net economic benefits than corresponding cases with limited exports."

 

    Additionally, the report indicates, "Net benefits to the U.S. would be highest if the U.S. becomes able to produce large quantities of gas from shale at low cost, if world demand for natural gas increases rapidly, and if LNG supplies from other regions are limited. If the promise of shale gas is not fulfilled and costs of producing gas in the U.S. rise substantially, or if there are ample supplies of LNG from other regions to satisfy world demand, the U.S. would not export LNG."

 

    Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK), Ranking Member on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee commented on the report saying, "The administration should be commended for commissioning such a comprehensive and transparent review of the potential impacts of exporting natural gas. It's clear from the study that exporting LNG would be beneficial to the U.S. economy, and the greater the level of exports, the greater the benefit." She said, DOE is required to approve exports to countries with free trade agreements with the United States, but it can limit or block exports to non-FTA countries if it finds they are not in the public interest.

    Sen. Murkowski explained that DOE put a hold on reviewing export license applications until two studies on LNG exports were finalized. The Energy Information Administration released the first one in January. Today's report is the second study. She said that based on the findings of the most recent study, it may be time to revisit the approval process for exporting LNG to non-FTA countries. She said, "The conclusions in this report on the benefits to the economy should inform the DOE approval process regarding exports. This is a really good report and it really does provide guidance as we move forward."

    On November 29, Sierra Club released a report highlighting what they called "the significant risks of exporting liquefied natural gas (LNG)," and called on DOE to take a "careful look at the dangerous effects of increased fracking on Americans' water, air, land and health." The report, titled Look Before the LNG Leap, cautions against the rubber stamp approval of proposed liquefied natural gas export facilities, and refutes DOE's claim that it cannot predict where new fracking will occur as a result of approved LNG exports [See WIMS 11/29/12].

    Sierra Club Executive Director Michael Brune issued a statement on the latest NERA report saying, "The law requires the Department of Energy to determine if more natural gas exports are in the public interest -- so it is baffling that this report omits the serious threats increased fracking and gas production pose to our water, our air, and the health of our families. Even if we consider what's actually included in this analysis, increased gas exports are expected to result in higher gas prices and lower wages for American families, meaning we pay the price here while the companies shipping gas overseas rake in the profits."

    The American Petroleum Institute (API) Group Director of Upstream and Industry Operations Erik Milito welcomed the NERA report and said, "Today's DOE report highlights the game changing benefits of exporting energy. This is a big opportunity for the administration to bolster job creation and economic growth and to address the backlog of LNG export applications. The U.S. is at a historical turning point with energy due to the nation's abundant natural gas resources. With the right policies, exports can help grow the country's economy, help reverse our trade deficit and help bring back millions of U.S. jobs in engineering, manufacturing, construction and facility operations."

    Access a notice from DOE and link to the FR notice of availability; the EIA analysis; the NERA analysis; and a summary of LNG export applications (click here). Access a release from Sen. Murkowski (click here). Access the complete 44-page Sierra Club report (click here). Access the statement from Sierra Club(click here). Access the statement from API (click here). [#Energy/LNG]

Want to know more about WIMS? Check out our LinkedIn company website (click here).

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS (click here)
32 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

Carbon Storage & GHG Fluxes In Ecosystems Of The Western U.S.

Dec 5: A Department of the Interior (DOI) report indicates that forests, grasslands and shrublands and other ecosystems in the West sequester nearly 100 million tons (90.9 million metric tons) of carbon each year. Carbon that is absorbed or "sequestered" through natural processes reduces the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. The 100 million tons sequestered in western ecosystems is an amount equivalent to -- and counterbalances the emissions of -- more than 83 million passenger cars a year in the United States, or nearly 5 percent of EPA's 2010 estimate of the nation's total greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.

    Deputy Secretary of the Interior David Hayes said, "This important study confirms the major role that our natural landscapes have in absorbing carbon and helping to counter-balance the nation's carbon emissions. This kind of groundbreaking science not only will help us be more effective stewards of our lands, but it also helps reveal how our forests, wetlands and rangelands in the West -- and throughout the nation -- are positively impacting the carbon cycle."

    The report, authored by U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) scientists, is part of a congressionally mandated national assessment of carbon storage and sequestration capacities by ecosystems. This assessment estimates the ability of different ecosystems in the West to store carbon -- information that will be vital for science-based land-use and land-management decisions. The first report, on the Great Plains, was released in December 2011; reports on the eastern United States, Alaska, and Hawaii will follow.

    The area studied extends from the Rocky Mountains to the Pacific coastal waters, and totals just over 1 million square miles. It includes well-known ecosystems, such as the Rocky Mountains and the Sierra Nevada Mountains, the Mojave and Sonoran deserts, the Pacific Northwest forests and the vast grasslands and shrublands of the Great Basin. The study's results point out that, among their many other ecosystem services, these lands are immensely valuable because of their ability to store carbon.

    USGS Director Marcia McNutt said, "This report contains 12 original chapters of new science that will enable land managers to track and calculate carbon storage and greenhouse gas fluxes over time for the American West's varied ecosystems. With more than 300 references of the latest work relevant to how biological systems cycle carbon, this report is a scientific tour de force."

    The fine level of detail in the report means that decision-makers can examine their region of interest, whether that is a national park, an ecosystem or an entire state. For example, the data in the report allow resource managers to evaluate effects of land-management practices on carbon storage and sequestration in and near Yellowstone and other national parks. It also could be used to understand how the rate of carbon sequestration increases as forests regrow following a large wildfire. The major ecosystems USGS evaluated were terrestrial – forests, wetlands, agricultural lands, and shrublands and grasslands – and aquatic – rivers, lakes, estuaries and coastal waters.

    Although the ecosystems of the West serve as a strong carbon sink now, the study estimates that by 2050 the region could experience a decline of the storage potential, depending on future changes in land-use, climate and wildfires. Future carbon stocks, the USGS authors noted, will be inextricably linked to these drivers because as ecosystems, forests or agricultural lands are converted for other uses, their ability to capture and store carbon is affected. Other major findings of the report included:

• Wildland fires generated significant amounts of greenhouse gas emissions in the West, with such emissions equivalent to 13 percent of the estimated rate of the recent annual carbon sequestration by terrestrial ecosystems in the West. This amount could increase to up to 31 percent in the future.
• Water bodies in the western United States emitted even more CO2 than fires. Emissions from water bodies are equivalent to more than 30 percent of the recent annual carbon sequestration rate of terrestrial ecosystems in the West.
• Land-use and land-cover change will continue in the future, but the USGS authors projected a much slower rate of change on an annual basis over the next 45 years than occurred between 1992 and 2005. Such change, one of the primary drivers of regional climate change and the ability of ecosystems to sequester carbon, is mostly the result of demands for forest products, urban development and agriculture.
• The West sequesters nearly one and a half times as much carbon as the Great Plains, the focus of the first DOI carbon sequestration report.

    The report, Baseline and Projected Carbon Storage and Greenhouse Gas Fluxes in the Ecosystems of the Western United States, was congressionally mandated by the 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act. It was peer-reviewed by some of the top USGS, U.S. Department of Agriculture, and university scientists in the country on carbon cycling, land use, land cover and wildland fires. The western report is the second in a series of reports produced by USGS for a national assessment of carbon storage and flux, and fluxes of other greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide).

    Access a release from DOI (click here). Access links to the complete 191-page report (22mb) or individual chapters including an executive summary (click here). Access the first 40-page assessment report for the Great Plains (click here). [#Climate]

Want to know more about WIMS? Check out our LinkedIn company website (click here).

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS (click here)
32 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

NRDC Proposes New Method To Control Power Plant GHG Emissions

Dec 4: The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) unveiled what they say is a "groundbreaking proposal to sharply cut carbon pollution from America's power plants," featuring a unique Federal-state partnership and flexibility for plant owners that will hold down costs and improve Americans' health. NRDC's innovative proposal calls for U.S. EPA to use its authority under the Clean Air Act to set standards for existing power plants -- America's largest source of carbon emissions that fuel climate change -- that will cut millions of tons of carbon pollution, save thousands of lives and create thousands of clean energy jobs.

    According to a release, the proposal enables states and electricity plant owners to use a wide range of existing technologies, including energy efficiency and renewable energy sources, to meet carbon pollution standards in the most cost-effective way. States would also have broad flexibility to design their own plans to meet the standards. NRDC said its proposal shows how the United States can dramatically reduce pollution from power plants that are responsible for 40 percent of the nation's carbon pollution.

    Peter Lehner, NRDC's Executive Director said, "The President put climate change on the national agenda, and NRDC's plan shows how the United States can make big reductions in carbon pollution that drive climate change, with a flexible approach that promotes clean energy investments and delivers big benefits for Americans' health. This year's ravaging heat waves, drought, wildfires and Superstorm Sandy underscore why the nation must tackle head-on the biggest source of dangerous carbon pollution now."

    Dan Lashof, NRDC's Director of Climate and Clean Air programs, and a principal author of the plan said, "We are overturning the conventional wisdom that reducing carbon pollution through the Clean Air Act would be ineffective and expensive. We show that the EPA can work with states and power companies to make large pollution reductions, by setting system-wide standards, rather than smokestack-by-smokestack ones, and by giving power companies and states the freedom to choose the most cost-saving means of compliance. The impact is huge: our proposal would eliminate hundreds of millions of tons of carbon pollution, save thousands of lives and stimulate a surge in clean energy and energy efficiency investments. all at a lower cost than many would expect."

    NRDC outlined its proposal at the National Press Club in Washington. Joining Lehner and Lashof to discuss the power plant plan was Dallas Burtraw, who is Darius Gaskins Senior Fellow at Resources for the Future. Also participating in the event was Franz Litz, Executive Director of the Energy & Climate Center at Pace Law School. Litz advises states on climate change and energy policy matters, and was instrumental in creating the northeast states' Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative.

    Using the same sophisticated analytical tools relied on by both industry and EPA, the NRDC analysis shows the plan would:

• Cut carbon pollution from the nation's existing power plants 26 percent by 2020 and 34 percent by 2025.
• Make large reductions in other dangerous pollutants, such as sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides, from existing power plants.
• At a cost of about $4 billion in 2020, save Americans between $25 billion and $60 billion in lives saved, avoided illnesses and reduced climate change.
• Save 3,600 lives, prevent more than 23,000 asthma attacks, avoid more than 2,300 emergency room visits and prevent nearly 1.2 million restricted activity and lost work days.
• Stimulate investments of more than $90 billion in energy efficiency and renewable energy sources in the next eight years.
• Create thousands of jobs, boost local and state economies, and move America toward a clean energy, clean air future.

    NRDC commissioned ICF International to analyze the proposal using the company's proprietary Integrated Planning Model (IPM®). The utility industry and the EPA often use the IPM® model to determine cost-effective ways of meeting the nation's electricity needs, and to assess the effects of new standards. NRDC provided the depiction of the plan and other assumptions required for the analysis.

    Specifically, under NRDC's proposal, the EPA would use Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act to set state-specific carbon emission rates that reflect the diversity of the nation's electricity sector and fuel mix. Broad compliance flexibility would enable power plant owners and states to reduce emissions through cost-effective means that could be accomplished by:

• Reducing an individual plant's carbon emissions by improving combustion efficiency, burning cleaner fuels or installing carbon capture and storage.
• Shifting generation from high-emitting to lower- or zero-emitting plants. Lower emitting sources such as gas, wind and solar would earn credits that other plants could use, to reduce average emissions rates.
• Expanding energy efficiency. State energy-efficiency programs could earn credits for avoiding power generation and its pollution. Generators could purchase those credits to use toward their emissions targets.
• States would have additional freedom to adopt alternative approaches -- such as those already adopted by California, the Northeast states, and Colorado -- as long as they are equally effective in cutting emissions.

    NRDC said it developed its proposal on the heels of two U.S. Supreme Court rulings, in 2007 and 2011, that determined it is EPA's job under the Clean Air Act to curb dangerous carbon pollution from the nation's vehicles and power plants. To date, the Administration has taken important steps by setting fuel efficiency standards for mobile sources such as cars and trucks, and proposing standards for new power plants. But the biggest pollution source remains the hundreds of existing power plants.

    Access a release from NRDC (click here). Access an overview, issue brief and the complete 90-page NRDC report proposal (click here). [#Climate, #Air, #Energy/EGU]

---

House Passes "Modest" Energy Efficiency Bill 398-2 - Dec 4: The U.S. House of Representatives passed by an overwhelming vote of 398-2, H.R.6582, the American Energy Manufacturing Technical Corrections Act, introduced by Representative Robert Aderholt (R-AL). H.R. 6582 amends the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, providing what Rep. Aderholt said were "important and necessary technical corrections to the law, ultimately increasing domestic competitiveness, supporting more efficient and innovative technologies, and promoting job growth here at home." He said, "Too often bureaucratic red tape and needless federal regulations keep America's innovators and small businesses from creating jobs. This legislation passed by the House today is a common sense solution to what never should have never been a problem to begin with, but unfortunately became another bureaucratic nightmare further stifling job creation."

    He continued, "If we want to see economic growth in this country, it is critical that our nation's policy and laws create a regulatory environment that fosters innovation and job creation. Due to an increase in overreaching, burdensome and unnecessary regulations over the past few years, too many small businesses have had to layoff employees, reduce production or even shut their doors. This is precisely what happened to HH Technologies, an innovative manufacturing company in Cullman County, Alabama. The federal government's embrace of outdated technology prohibited a new and innovative solution to improved energy efficiency."

    "Through House Republicans continued efforts to streamline and eliminate bureaucratic red-tape in Washington, like the legislation passed today, we can begin to jumpstart our nation's economic growth and reinvigorate job creation. I thank my colleagues for supporting H.R.6582 and look forward to seeing the bill become law."

    Back in June, the House passed H.R.4850, the Enabling Energy Savings Innovation Act similar legislation also sponsored by Representative Aderholt, amending the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 to allow for the inclusion of walk-in cooler and freezer technologies that are more energy efficient than systems that are currently required in the law's narrow definition. In addition to including the previously passed provision, H.R.6582 makes additional technical corrections to the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 that would reduce regulatory burdens by correcting clerical errors made and eliminating any problems caused by the errors. These corrections include updating the uniform efficiency descriptor for covered water heaters, clarifying language regarding regulatory treatment for small duct high velocity systems made by U.S. manufacturers, coordinating research and development of energy efficient technologies for the industry, and establishes a separate,less stringent standard for over the counter commercial refrigerators, that due to large glass windows are inherently less energy efficient than other commercial refrigeration products.

    The American Chemistry Council (ACC) issued a statement in response to the House passage saying, "Today's action by the House of Representatives is an important step toward reducing barriers to improved industrial energy efficiency, and provides common-sense, bipartisan fixes for federal energy efficiency technical standards. The bill calls for collaborative research and development partnerships across various programs within the Department of Energy (DOE) to promote early-stage energy efficiency technology development. This includes support for the use of innovative manufacturing processes and applied research for development, demonstration and commercialization of new technologies and processes to improve efficiency.

    "Importantly, H.R. 6582 also calls for the study of the legal, regulatory and economic barriers to the deployment of industrial energy efficiency in all electricity markets. Since 31 percent of energy in the United States is used in industry applications, removing barriers to the deployment of energy efficiency technologies will lead to significant energy savings. Chemical makers and many other manufacturers primarily use natural gas to create steam for industrial processes and electricity that can power their facilities. This energy is generated close to where it is needed, so little is lost in transmission, and the process of combined heat and power (CHP) captures excess energy that can then be sold back to the grid as electricity. As a result, CHP generates surplus electricity without requiring any additional energy, while also reducing energy consumption from the grid to meet on-site demand. ACC commends the House for taking an important step toward greater energy efficiency, and encourages the Senate to advance the bill before the end of the year."

    American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) pointed out that H.R.6582 modifies legislation that passed the Senate last month and now returns to the Senate for final approval. Steven Nadel, ACEEE Executive Director said, "At a time that Washington is grid-locked, it is notable that the only energy bill with enough bipartisan support to pass is one that targets energy efficiency. This bill is a modest but bipartisan step forward, one we hope the next Congress can build upon." The bill is the result of negotiations between Republican and Democratic members and builds upon two pieces of legislation that were previously reported out on a strong bipartisan basis by the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee -- S.1000 and S.398.

    ACEEE indicated in a release that the bill makes a number of technical corrections to equipment efficiency standards previously enacted by Congress, helping to make the program function better. In addition, the bill includes provisions to better coordinate industrial research and development activities among government agencies, reduce barriers to deployment of industrial energy efficiency, promote best practices for advanced metering among government agencies, and improve data collection for federal energy and water management efforts. 

    Access a release from Rep. Aderholt (click here). Access the statement from ACC (click here). Access the statement from ACEEE (click here). Access legislative details for (click here). [#Energy/Efficiency]

Want to know more about WIMS? Check out our LinkedIn company website (click here).

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS (click here)
32 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

UN Secretary-General Kicks Off High-Level Climate Change Talks

Dec 4: United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon urged countries to act decisively to tackle the "growing crisis" of climate change, as the negotiations kicked into high gear at the Doha, Qatar 18th Conference of the Parties (COP18) to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). At the start of the high-level segment (CMP8) Ban said, "Let us be under no illusion. This is a crisis. A threat to us all. Our economies. Our security. And the well-being of our children and those who will come after.

 

    Pointing to the unprecedented melting of icecaps [See WIMS 11/30/12], rising sea levels, and land degradation and drought in various parts of the world, Ban said, "The danger signs are all around. No one is immune to climate change -- rich or poor. It is an existential challenge for the whole human race -- our way of life, our plans for the future. We must take ownership. We, collectively, are the problem. Then we should have the solutions."

    COP18/CMP8 brings together 195 Parties to the UNFCCC, the parent treaty of the 1997 Kyoto Protocol. Under the Protocol, 37 States -- consisting of highly industrialized countries and countries undergoing the process of transition to a market economy -- have legally binding emission limitation and reduction commitments. Delegates at the two-week conference -- that ends this Friday -- will, among other goals, try to extend the Kyoto Protocol, whose first commitment period expires at the end of 2012.

    Ban said, "I urge all Parties to work with a spirit of compromise -- to take the long view and avoid getting bogged down in minutiae. Let us ensure that we stay on track for an effective, fair, ambitious and universal climate agreement by 2015." He said he hoped for five key "deliverables" by Governments in Doha this week, beginning with the adoption of a ratifiable second commitment period of the Kyoto Protocol.

    Additionally he said he also expected progress on long-term climate finance, and ensuring that the institutions set up in Cancun and Durban to support mitigation and adaptation by developing countries -- including the Green Climate Fund and the Climate Technology Centre and Network -- are fully equipped and effective. Also, he expected governments to demonstrate, with no ambiguity, that negotiations on a global and legally binding instrument remain on track, and to show how they intend to act on the gap between mitigation pledges and what is required to achieve the two degrees target [See WIMS 11/26/12].  He said, "The gap can be bridged. But time is not on our side." 

    The President of the General Assembly, Vuk Jeremic, told the meeting that addressing the problem of climate change must become a core national interest of every UN Member State. He said, "The window of opportunity to prevent the effects of climate change from spiraling out of our control is closing. When future generations look upon the choices we made, let them not be forced to exclaim that we failed to act in time. Let them not have to suffer the consequences of the inability to answer the clarion call to act with conscientious foresight."

    COP President Abdullah bin Hamad Al-Attiyah said, "I welcome all ministers arriving for the final, high-level segment of the Doha climate change conference. The Qatar Presidency of COP 18/CMP 8 will continue to work with all countries in an open, transparent and inclusive process that must reach a timely and successful conclusion." Revised texts from all negotiating groups have now been issued and ministers are beginning to provide guidance to reduce the number of options on outstanding political issues.  At a stock-taking plenary meeting on 3 December, the President announced a series of ministerial outreach consultations to help find the political space that will allow countries to reach common ground on the remaining key issues.

    The COP Presidency invited Ministers and heads of delegation to participate in an Informal Ministerial Round Table on 5 December on the issue of how mitigation, adaptation and means of implementation can be strengthened now and in the future.  The Presidency also announced a series of regular, informal, open plenaries so negotiators are able to assess comprehensive progress and it is providing regular updates on the negotiations on the UNFCCC website (See link below). 

    Access a release from the UN and link to the complete Ban statement (click here). Access a CMP8 update news release (click here). Access the Negotiations Update website (click here). Access the UNFCCC COP18 website for complete information including agenda, documents, statements, and much more (click here). Access on-demand webcasts including briefings and statements from individual countries and organizations (click here). Access daily reporting from the International Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD) (click here). Access the U.S. Department of State COP18 website (click here). [#Climate]

Want to know more about WIMS? Check out our LinkedIn company website (click here).

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS (click here)
32 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

UNEP Guide To Measuring Progress On Policies For A Green Economy

Dec 3: A new report from the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) provides countries with a practical guide on how indicators can measure progress towards an inclusive, resource-efficient, green economy, and support new national policies to assess human well-being and quality of life. The report -- Measuring Progress towards an Inclusive Green Economy -- was released as experts from major institutions and governments meet in Geneva at the first major gathering since Rio+20. Almost 200 delegates are set to explore how they can measure their green economy policies as they shift from supporting carbon-intensive economies to more resource-efficient, sustainable societies.  

    The conference is responding to Rio+20's call for green economy measures to achieve sustainable development and poverty eradication, and is the first step in the process to widen the use of existing metrics and measures and create new ones at a national level. Government officials from Barbados, China, Denmark, Ecuador, Germany, Ghana, Indonesia, Morocco, Thailand and Uruguay, all of whom are engaged in developing a comprehensive set of indicators to inform their national green economic policies, are attending the meeting, along with representatives from academia, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), World Bank, UN agencies and non-government organizations.

    Achim Steiner, UN Under-Secretary General and UNEP Executive Director said, "Green economy indicators provide a mirror on the journey to an environmentally stable, economically sound and equitable society. This publication is intended to help policymakers understand how useful such measurements are for informing policy decisions and advancing their green economy agendas at a national level."

    Indicators can be used at all stages of policy interventions: from identifying the key environmental issues; assessing the potential cost and performance of various policy options to understand which investment will yield the highest return in environmental, social and economic terms; and tracking the impact of the policies on human well-being and equity. Steven Stone, Chief of UNEP's Economics and Trade Branch said, "When we put in place a framework to account for and value environmental goods and services, we are making the contribution of nature to our collective well-being more visible, and acknowledging the fact that investing in natural capital is necessary for our continued economic prosperity."

    According to the report, indicators are important for policy implementation because they help determine policy outcomes and measure their impact. This means focusing on policy interventions that result in improved human well-being and social equity, as well as reduced environmental risks and ecological scarcities. UNEP says that currently, most countries concentrate too heavily on Gross Domestic Product (GDP) as a measure of economic performance, and policy makers do not factor in depreciation of fixed assets such as forests, clean air or water resources. Sheng Fulai, co-author of the new report said, "The idea is to supplement GDP, which monitors macroeconomic activity with other measures that better reflect the multidimensional nature of human well-being and quality of life." The report details a number of indicators that policymakers can use to formulate, focus and track the impact of their green economy policies at the three stages of development, including:

• Indicators for environmental issues and targets - Climate change - Carbon emissions and renewable energy share; Ecosystem management - Forestland and water stress; Resource efficiency - Energy, material and water productivity; and Chemicals and waste management - Waste collection, recycling and reuse
• Indicators for policy interventions - Green investment - R&D investment; Green fiscal reform - Fossil fuel, water and fishery subsidies, and fossil fuel taxation; Pricing externalities and valuing ecosystem service - Carbon price, value of ecosystem services; and Green procurement - Expenditure in sustainable procurement
• Indicators for policy impacts on well-being and equity - Employment - Construction, operation and management, income generated; Total wealth - Value of natural resource stocks, literacy rate; Access to resources - Access to modern energy, water and sanitation; and Health - Level of harmful chemicals in drinking water, number of people hospitalized due to air pollution.

    The report notes there are already several indices and indicators available for countries interested in promoting sustainable development, such as the new UN System of Environmental and Economic Accounting (SEEA), which sets new statistical standards for collecting and integrating economic and environmental data. 

    The report is intended to contribute to discussions at the three-day conference Measuring the Future We Want, which is the first opportunity post-Rio+20 for experts to identify existing indicators available to countries and discuss how they can be further developed and used to facilitate the transition to a green economy. The Rio+20 Conference, held in June, called on the UN and its partners to advance the work on developing methodologies to evaluate green economic policies.

    The Measuring conference aims to learn from countries and businesses that have developed green economy/green growth related indicators, and provide advice on how to harmonize these approaches, as well as identify the knowledge gaps and research priorities to advance this work. The final day of the conference will focus on the Green Growth Knowledge Platform (GGKP), a partnership between UNEP, the Global Green Growth Institute, OECD and the World Bank, which has identified green growth indicators as one of its priority areas for research. Consisting of a network of researchers and development experts, the GGKP aims to help countries design and implement their green growth policies.

    Access a release from UNEP and link to the complete report (posted soon), and more information on the conference and green economy initiatives (click here). [#Sustain, #Climate, #Energy] 

Want to know more about WIMS? Check out our LinkedIn company website (click here).

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS (click here)
32 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

Cutting-Edge Study Finds Ice Sheet Loss At Both Poles Increasing

Nov 29: As negotiators meet in Doha, Qatar at COP18/CMP8 [See WIMS 11/26/12] to craft an international response to the issue of climate change and a warming planet, an international team of experts supported by NASA and the European Space Agency (ESA) has combined data from multiple satellites and aircraft to produce the most comprehensive and accurate assessment to date of ice sheet losses in Greenland and Antarctica and their contributions to sea level rise.

    In a landmark study published Thursday (November 29, 2012) in the journal Science, 47 researchers from 26 laboratories report the combined rate of melting for the ice sheets covering Greenland and Antarctica has increased during the last 20 years. Together, these ice sheets are losing more than three times as much ice each year (equivalent to sea level rise of 0.04 inches or 0.95 millimeters) as they were in the 1990s (equivalent to 0.01 inches or 0.27 millimeters). About two-thirds of the loss is coming from Greenland, with the rest from Antarctica.

    According to a release, this rate of ice sheet losses falls within the range reported in 2007 by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). The spread of estimates in the 2007 IPCC report was so broad, however, it was not clear whether Antarctica was growing or shrinking. The new estimates, which are more than twice as accurate because of the inclusion of more satellite data, confirm both Antarctica and Greenland are losing ice. Combined, melting of these ice sheets contributed 0.44 inches (11.1 millimeters) to global sea levels since 1992. This accounts for one-fifth of all sea level rise over the 20-year survey period. The remainder is caused by the thermal expansion of the warming ocean, melting of mountain glaciers and small Arctic ice caps, and groundwater mining.

    The study was produced by an international collaboration -- the Ice Sheet Mass Balance Inter-comparison Exercise (IMBIE) -- that combined observations from 10 satellite missions to develop the first consistent measurement of polar ice sheet changes. The researchers reconciled differences among dozens of earlier ice sheet studies by carefully matching observation periods and survey areas. They also combined measurements collected by different types of satellite sensors, such as ESA's radar missions, NASA's Ice, Cloud and land Elevation Satellite (ICESat) and the NASA/German Aerospace Center's Gravity Recovery and Climate Experiment (GRACE). 

    Tom Wagner, NASA's cryosphere program manager in Washington said, "What is unique about this effort is that it brought together the key scientists and all of the different methods to estimate ice loss. It's a major challenge they undertook, involving cutting-edge, difficult research to produce the most rigorous and detailed estimates of ice loss from Greenland and Antarctica to date. The results of this study will be invaluable in informing the IPCC as it completes the writing of its Fifth Assessment Report over the next year."

    Professor Andrew Shepherd of the University of Leeds in the United Kingdom coordinated the study, along with research scientist Erik Ivins of NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, CA. Shepherd indicated that the venture's success is because of the cooperation of the international scientific community and the precision of various satellite sensors from multiple space agencies. Shepherd said, "Without these efforts, we would not be in a position to tell people with confidence how Earth's ice sheets have changed, and to end the uncertainty that has existed for many years," .

    The study found variations in the pace of ice sheet change in Antarctica and Greenland. Ivins said, "Both ice sheets appear to be losing more ice now than 20 years ago, but the pace of ice loss from Greenland is extraordinary, with nearly a five-fold increase since the mid-1990s. In contrast, the overall loss of ice in Antarctica has remained fairly constant with the data suggesting a 50-percent increase in Antarctic ice loss during the last decade."

 

    Access a release from NASA (click here). Access more information from ICESat (click here). Access more information from GRACE (click here). Access the IMBIE website which is under development and should contain more documents soon (click here). [#Climate]

 

Want to know more about WIMS? Check out our LinkedIn company website (click here).

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS (click here)
32 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

EPA On Notice For Suit On GHG Cap-And-Trade Program

Nov 28: The Institute for Policy Integrity (IPI) at New York University School of Law submitted a notice of intent to file suit against U.S. EPA unless the Agency institutes a cap, or limit, on greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions from cars, boats, and planes. IPI indicated that over the past four years, EPA has put several regulations in place to decrease greenhouse gas emissions, which contribute to climate change. But none are as comprehensive and cost-effective as placing a cap on emissions. IPI said, "According to almost all economists, that means companies pay more than necessary to comply."

 

    Richard Revesz, dean of the New York University School of Law said, "The benefits of protecting the public from the threats of climate change outweigh the costs. A cap is the cheapest, best way to address climate change. Why pay more than we must to make necessary cuts to our emissions?"

 

    IPI indicates that the damage caused by Superstorm Sandy was widely linked with the increased risks associated with climate change of intense storms and the particular exposure of low lying areas. The storm, which came at the end of a presidential election in which climate change was not emphasized by either major party candidate, highlighted the policy gridlock on the issue.

 

    Michael Livermore,IPI  Executive Director said, "Climate change must remain on the national agenda. Though legislative action is preferable, if Congress is stalled, EPA has the authority to move forward with a cap, reducing emissions and giving businesses flexibility to comply at the lowest possible price tag."

 

    The filing of the "intent to sue" follows a formal petition by IPI submitted in July 2009 making the same request. The Clean Air Act and Administrative Procedure Act require EPA to respond to petitions within a reasonable amount of time, and allow public petitioners to sue for unreasonable delay. The filing submission serves as the required notice that, unless EPA give[s] the petition prompt consideration, IPI will file suit in 180 days to compel action on the petition. The petition and the potential suit request that EPA regulate greenhouse gases from cars, boats, and planes under Sections 211 and 231 of the Clean Air Act. These sections give EPA broad authority to use a flexible compliance tool like cap-and-trade to rein in GHG emissions.

 

    Access a release from IPI (click here). Access the intent to sue notice (click here). Access the original petition (click here). Access links to a detailed legal analysis of the Clean Air Act, and fact sheets on the legal background and using cap-and-trade(click here). [#Climate, #Air]

 

Want to know more about WIMS? Check out our LinkedIn company website (click here).

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS (click here)
32 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals