eNewsUSA

Transportation News

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS

You can review recent issues of eNewsUSA (click here)
Access subscription information (click here)

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

33 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

Monday, April 01, 2013

EPA & Enviros Request Supreme Court Hearing On CSAPR

Mar 29: U.S. EPA and a coalition of health and environmental organizations appealed separately to the U.S. Supreme Court to reconsider a controversial appeals court ruling in a lawsuit over the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR).

On March 29, U.S. EPA announced that the U.S. Solicitor General has petitioned the Supreme Court to review the D.C. Circuit Court's decision on CSAPR. In its brief, the Solicitor General indicates: The questions presented in the case are as follows:

1. Whether the Court of Appeals lacked jurisdiction to consider the challenges on which it granted relief

2. Whether states are excused from adopting SIPS prohibiting emissions that "contribute significantly" to air pollution problems in other states until after the EPA has adopted a rule quantifying each state's interstate pollution obligations.

3. Whether the EPA permissibly interpreted the statutory term "contribute significantly" so as to define each upwind state's "significant" interstate air pollution contributions in light of the cost-effective emission reductions it can make to improve air quality in polluted downwind areas, or whether the Act instead unambiguously requires EPA to consider only each upwind state's physically proportionate responsibility for each downwind air quality problem.

Also, the American Lung Association, Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), Sierra Club, and the Clean Air Council filed their appeal -- officially called a petition for writ of certiorari -- with the Supreme Court. EDF counsel Sean Donahue said, "The Cross-State Air Pollution Rule is vital for the health and well-being of hundreds of millions of Americans. We have asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review the lower court's decision given the profound public interest in ensuring healthier, longer lives for the 240 million Americans afflicted by power plant pollution and given the appeals court's sharp deviation from settled legal principles."

On January 24, 2013 the U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit, Case No. 11-1302, EME Homer City Generation, L.P v. U.S. EPA, consolidate with 44 additional cases denied a request by EPA and others for an en banc (full panel) rehearing of the case [See WIMS 1/25/13]. In this high-profile case, on August 21, 2012, the Appeals Court, in a split 2-1 decision, vacated EPA's CSAPR Transport Rule and the Transport Rule FIPs and remand this proceeding to EPA [See WIMS 8/21/13]. The opinion expressly left in place the existing Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) pending EPA's further action.

EDF and the environmental groups indicated in a release that the CSAPR is a historic pollution reduction measure that would protect air quality for 240 million Americans across the Eastern United States and save up to 34,000 lives each year. The rule was created by EPA under the "good neighbor" provision of the Clean Air Act, which is intended to ensure that the emissions from one state's power plants do not cause harmful pollution levels in neighboring states. Opponents of the clean air standards sued to block them. In August 2012, a divided three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated and remanded the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule to EPA. Judge Judith Rogers, who dissented in the case, argued that the ruling represented a "trampling on this court's precedent on which the Environmental Protection Agency ('EPA') was entitled to rely in developing the Transport Rule rather than be blindsided by arguments raised for the first time in this court."

The groups said CSAPR would reduce the sulfur dioxide pollution (by 73%) and oxides of nitrogen (by 54%) from 2005 levels emitted from coal-fired power plants across 28 eastern states. Those emissions, and the resulting particulate pollution and ozone -- more commonly known as soot and smog -- drift across the borders of those states and contribute to dangerous, sometimes lethal, levels of pollution in downwind states.

The Cross-State Air Pollution Rule would reduce power plant sulfur dioxide emissions by 73 percent and oxides of nitrogen by 54 percent from 2005 levels. While no one is immune to these impacts, children and the elderly in downwind states are especially vulnerable. They cited EPA estimates saying the CSAPR would: Save up to 34,000 lives each year; Prevent 15,000 heart attacks each year; Prevent 400,000 asthma attacks each year; and Provide up to $280 billion in health benefits for America each year.

Access the 157-page brief filed by EPA (click here).Access a release from EDF with links to a history of the case, legal briefs and more information on CSAPR (click here). Access EPA's CSAPR website for background and further details (click here). [#Air, #MIAir, #SupCt, #CADC]

WIMS 24/7 News Blogs

(click to access)

Transportation News

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS

You can review recent issues of eNewsUSA (click here)
Access subscription information (click here)

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

33 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

Friday, March 29, 2013

EPA Proposes Major Tier 3 Low Sulfur Air Rules

Mar 29: U.S. EPA released what it called "proposed sensible standards for cars and gasoline that will significantly reduce harmful pollution, prevent thousands of premature deaths and illnesses, while also enabling efficiency improvements in the cars and trucks we drive." EPA said the proposed regulations were based on extensive input from auto manufactures, refiners, and states. Starting in 2017, the new Tier 3 rules would set new vehicle emissions standards and lower the sulfur content of gasoline. Once published in the Federal Register, the proposal will be available for public comment and EPA will hold public hearings to receive further public input.

    Additionally, the Agency said the "cleaner fuels and cars standards" are an important component of the Administration's national program for clean cars and trucks, which also include "historic fuel efficiency standards that are saving new vehicle owners at the gas pump today. Once fully in place, the standards will help avoid up to 2,400 premature deaths per year and 23,000 cases of respiratory ailments in children."

    In a release, EPA said that following a proven systems approach that addresses vehicles and fuels as an integrated system, the 885-page proposed rules will enable the greatest pollution reductions at the lowest cost. The proposal will "slash emissions of a range of harmful pollutants that can cause premature death and respiratory illnesses," including reducing smog-forming volatile organic compounds and nitrogen oxides by 80 percent, establish a 70 percent tighter particulate matter standard, and reduce fuel vapor emissions to near zero. The proposal will also reduce vehicle emissions of toxic air pollutants, such as benzene and 1,3-butadiene, by up to 40 percent.

    EPA indicated that the proposal supports efforts by states to reduce harmful levels of smog and soot and eases their ability to attain and maintain science-based national ambient air quality standards to protect public health, while also providing flexibilities for small businesses, including hardship provisions and additional lead time for compliance. EPA Acting Administrator Bob Perciasepe said, "The Obama Administration has taken a series of steps to reinvigorate the auto industry and ensure that the cars of tomorrow are cleaner, more efficient and saving drivers money at the pump and these common-sense cleaner fuels and cars standards are another example of how we can protect the environment and public health in an affordable and practical way. Today's proposed standards – which will save thousands of lives and protect the most vulnerable -- are the next step in our work to protect public health and will provide the automotive industry with the certainty they need to offer the same car models in all 50 states.

    By 2030, EPA estimates that the total health-related benefits in 2030 will be between $8 and $23 billion annually. The program would also reduce exposure to pollution near roads. More than 50 million people live, work, or go to school in close proximity to high-traffic roadways, and the average American spends more than one hour traveling along roads each day. EPA's proposal is estimated to provide up to seven dollars in health benefits for every dollar spent to meet the standards. The proposed sulfur standards will cost refineries less than a penny per gallon of gasoline on average once the standards are fully in place. The proposed vehicle standards will have an average cost of about $130 per vehicle in 2025. The proposal also includes flexibilities for small businesses, including hardship provisions and additional lead time for compliance.

    The proposed standards will reduce gasoline sulfur levels by more than 60 percent -- down to 10 parts per million (ppm) in 2017. Reducing sulfur in gasoline enables vehicle emission control technologies to perform more efficiently. This means that vehicles built prior to the proposed standards will run cleaner on the new low-sulfur gas, providing significant and immediate benefits by reducing emissions from every gas-powered vehicle on the road.

    EPA said the proposed standards will work together with California's clean cars and fuels program to create a harmonized nationwide vehicle emissions program that enables automakers to sell the same vehicles in all 50 states. The proposal is designed to be implemented over the same timeframe as the next phase of EPA's national program to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from cars and light trucks beginning in model year 2017. Together, the Federal and California standards will maximize reductions in GHGs, air pollutants and air toxics from cars and light trucks while providing automakers regulatory certainty and streamlining compliance.

The proposed fuel sulfur standards include an averaging, banking, and trading (ABT) program that would allow refiners and importers to spread out their investments through an early credit program and rely on ongoing nationwide averaging to meet the sulfur standard. EPA is also proposing flexibilities such as hardship provisions for extenuating circumstances, as well as flexibility provisions for small businesses (small manufacturers of Tier 3 vehicles and small refiners), small volume manufacturers, and small volume refineries.

In response to proposed new "Tier 3" standards for clean fuels and cars, the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers released a statement saying, "Automakers have already reduced vehicle emissions by 99%, and we're working to go further while also delivering high quality, affordable vehicles to our customers. Our goal is a rule that harmonizes with California's Low Emission Vehicle (LEV III) program finalized in 2012. Eliminating differing timelines, regulatory procedures and test methods at the federal and state levels will help reduce emissions and avoid extra costs to consumers. For future progress, our advanced emission-control technologies that are necessary to meet the challenging 2017-2025 greenhouse gas and fuel economy standards will require cleaner, low-sulfur fuels similar to those available today in Europe and Asia." [See WIMS 3/27/13].

The Alliance represents 77% of all car and light truck sales in the United States, including the BMW Group, Chrysler Group LLC, Ford Motor Company, General Motors Corporation, Jaguar Land Rover, Mazda, Mercedes-Benz USA, Mitsubishi Motors, Porsche, Toyota, Volkswagen Group of America and Volvo Cars North America.

House Energy and Commerce (E&C) Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-MI) commented on the proposal saying, "Increases in gas prices disproportionately hurt the nation's most vulnerable individuals and families -- with $4 dollar a gallon gas the norm in many parts of the country, we cannot afford policies that knowingly raises gas prices. Instead of raising gas prices, the Obama administration should focus on bringing stability and greater supplies to our energy markets by green-lighting projects like the Keystone XL pipeline, which will carry approximately one million barrels per day of oil from a close ally to the United States."

Representative Ed Whitfield (R-KY), Chairman of the Energy and Power Subcommittee said, "The Obama administration cannot be more out of touch. With hard-pressed families already struggling to afford each fill-up, Congress needs to take a hard look at any new EPA regulation that may raise the price at the pump. We will review this new proposal to make sure that it delivers air quality benefits at the least cost to the driving public while preserving auto and refining industry jobs. This is just another example of an overzealous EPA." Last year, the House passed H.R.4480, the Domestic Energy and Jobs Act, which would have deferred the finalization of Tier 3 pending an inter-agency analysis of its impact, along with other pending regulations, on energy prices, jobs, and American competitiveness.

E&C Committee Ranking Member Henry Waxman (D-CA) issued a statement saying, "This proposal makes sense and should be finalized as soon as possible. When we clean up the fuel supply, our air gets cleaner and lives are saved. This proposal will also allow the automakers to bring innovative technology to market, creating jobs, saving consumers money, and keeping the U.S. on the leading edge of global manufacturing."

The American Petroleum Institute (API) issued a statement saying EPA's proposed Tier 3 fuel regulations "could raise refiners' costs, provide little or no environmental benefit, and actually increase carbon emissions." API Downstream Group Director Bob Greco said, "There is a tsunami of federal regulations coming out of the EPA that could put upward pressure on gasoline prices. EPA's proposed fuel regulations are the latest example. Consumers care about the price of fuel, and our government should not be adding unnecessary regulations that raise manufacturing costs, especially when there are no proven environmental benefits. We should not pile on new regulations when existing regulations are working."

API indicated in a release that, "EPA's Tier 3 proposal would increase the cost of gasoline production by up to nine cents per gallon, according to an analysis by energy consulting firm Baker & O'Brien. If EPA adds a vapor pressure reduction requirement in a separate regulation, it would push the cost increase up to 25 cents a gallon, according to Baker & O'Brien. Separately, gasoline costs would also rise 30 percent by 2015 unless changes are made to federal ethanol mandates, according to a newly-released study by NERA Economic Consulting. Greco also cited EPA's upcoming proposal for new ozone standards that could further increase manufacturing costs."

Greco said, "Implementing the new requirements would actually increase greenhouse gas emissions because of the energy-intensive equipment required to comply. We urge the administration to bring common sense back into the regulatory process. Unnecessary regulations just mean higher costs and lost jobs."

The American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM), formerly the National Petrochemical & Refiners Association indicated it was concerned about EPA's proposal to require further reductions in sulfur levels in gasoline. AFPM President Charles Drevna said, "While we haven't had the opportunity to review the report, EPA's decision to move forward with Tier 3's gasoline sulfur reduction program is completely without merit given that the Agency has not previously offered any cost/benefit analysis to justify this onerous rulemaking. The Agency's failure until today to provide any information on the need for this discretionary rule, despite repeated requests from American fuel manufacturers, strongly suggests the lack of a credible case."

Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) praised the long-awaited proposal of updated standards to reduce soot, smog and other dangerous types of tailpipe pollution from cars and light trucks. EDF's Mark MacLeod said, "The new Tier 3 standards will make our cars cleaner, and that means we'll have cleaner air to breathe. Reducing tailpipe pollution will provide healthier, longer lives for millions of Americans for less than a penny per gallon of gas. That's why updating the standards has such broad support from U.S. auto makers, state health commissioners, and health advocates." Luke Tonachel, senior vehicles analyst at the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) said, "These common-sense standards will save lives, save money and clean up our air -- all at a minimal cost. Big Oil companies want us to believe these benefits aren't worth it. But that's because they care about profits above all else."

The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS) issued a statement saying, "The proposal enjoys support from a broad range of industry and advocacy groups while the oil industry alone fights to block these important steps to protect public health. The oil industry stands alone in opposition to the new rules, while a plethora of health, consumer, labor, manufacturer, scientific and environmental groups support these standards." Michelle Robinson, director of UCS's Clean Vehicles program said, "The path from a car's tailpipe to our lungs is surprisingly short, and more than 1 in 3 Americans live in areas where air pollution levels exceed at least one federal limit. Today's proposal is a common-sense step that will protect our health while growing our economy. This is a stellar encore to the fuel efficiency main act. Together, these standards represent the largest step in our nation's history toward reducing harmful emissions from the vehicles we drive every day. The chorus of support for these new standards is as widespread as it is unprecedented. Obviously, oil companies work for their own best interests, but when it comes to Tier 3, it's only a solo act."

Access a release from EPA (click here). Access EPA's "Tier 3 Vehicle Emission and Fuel Standards Program" website for complete details including summaries, the complete prepublication Federal Register announcement, regulatory impact analysis, technical support documents and more (click here). Access the statement from the Alliance (click here). Access a release from the House E&C Committee Republicans (click here). Access a release from the House E&C Committee Democrats (click here).Access the API statement with links to the cited studies (click here). Access a release from AFPM (click here). Access a release from EDF (click here). Access a release from NRDC (click here). Access a release from UCS (click here). [#Air, #Climate, #Energy #Transport]

WIMS 24/7 News Blogs

(click to access)

Transportation News

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS

You can review recent issues of eNewsUSA (click here)
Access subscription information (click here)

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

33 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

Thursday, March 28, 2013

Groups Petition For Moratorium & New Pipeline Regs

Mar 27: A coalition of landowners, former and current government officials, environmental, renewable energy and sportsmen's groups filed a petition today with the U.S. Department of Transportation's (DOT's) Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) and the U.S. EPA asking the agencies to develop stronger safety standards for tar sands oil pipelines.

Beth Wallace with the Great Lakes Regional Center said, "Three years after the largest inland oil spill in U.S. history, little has been done to improve pipeline safety. This disaster should have been a wake-up call to industry, regulators and public officials. Instead industry is being allowed to expand pipelines across the region and even under the Great Lakes themselves, which will continue to put communities, wildlife and our economy at risk."

The petition effort is spearheaded by the National Wildlife Federation (NWF) and includes 29 national, state and local organizations as well as 36 landowners from states across the country impacted by existing and proposed tar sands pipelines. It requests a halt to new or expanded tar sands pipelines until adequate rules are in place.

Jim Murphy, Senior Council at NWF said, "This petition is an exercise of citizens' rights to request that government live up to its charge to follow the law, and protect us from the harms and risk of a tar sands pipeline spill. Until the right standards are put into place, we shouldn't be exposing more communities and resources to tar sands risks. We expect the government to answer our request and live up to its charge to properly address the unique risks of tar sands transportation."

According to a release from the groups, current pipeline regulations were issued long before tar sands oil production ramped up and do not cover the unique aspects of tar sands. Tar sands oil poses more acute risks than conventional fuels shipped through pipelines because the oil is a volatile mix of raw bitumen – an asphalt-like substance – diluted with gas condensates. Diluted bitumen is a toxic, viscous, corrosive substance with the consistency of gritty peanut butter that must be moved at much higher pressures and temperatures than conventional oil. Strong evidence indicates tar sands oil threatens pipeline integrity.

Jeff Inkso, writer of the Line 6B citizen blog and landowner impacted by the Enbridge expansion project said, "Even after what happened in Marshall, pipeline companies have continued to run roughshod over the state of Michigan while regulatory agencies and elected officials have stood by idly and allowed it to happen."

Between 2007 and 2010, pipelines in North Dakota, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Michigan -- the main states with a history of tar sands oil pipelines -- spilled almost three times more crude oil per mile of pipeline when compared to the U.S. national average. In a scathing report on the Kalamazoo River spill near Marshall, MI, the National Transportation Safety Board pointed blame at current regulations, calling them "weak" and "inadequate." The petition requests new standards tightening several aspects of oil transport and pipeline safety:

Stronger safety requirements than those for conventional crude oil;

Industry disclosure of products carried through pipelines and their conveyance schedules;

Stronger industry spill response plans;

Shut-down requirements upon the first indication of a leak or other pipeline failure;

Repair of pipelines as soon as defects are discovered;

Transparent pipeline inspection reporting; and

Pipeline inspection and monitoring by independent entities unaffiliated with pipeline or energy companies;

A moratorium on building new or expanded tar sands pipelines until new regulations are final.

Supporters of the petition will be seeking cosigners over the next few months. Under the U.S. Constitution and the Federal Administrative Procedure Act, citizens can file a formal petition requesting that a Federal agency take specific actions required by law or change existing regulations. The petition requests a change in existing regulations. Federal agencies are required to respond.

Access a release from NWF with a complete list of petition signers (click here). Access the complete 54-page petition with links to referenced documents and information (click here). [#Energy/Pipeline, #GLakes]

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS

You can review recent issues of eNewsUSA (click here)
Access subscription information (click here)

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

33 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

Wednesday, March 27, 2013

NRDC: Pesticides Are Approved By Flawed EPA Process

Mar 27: A two-year investigation by the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) has found that the Federal government has potentially threatened the public's health by improperly using a regulatory loophole to approve many untested or under-tested toxic pesticides. NRDC has found that U.S. EPA used this loophole to approve 65 percent of 16,000 pesticides for use in consumer products and agricultural processes. NRDC released its report on the investigation, Superficial Safeguards: Most Pesticides are Approved by Flawed EPA Process, that calls for major reforms in the government's approval process for toxic pesticides.

The report outlines how the EPA has used what is known as conditional registration -- which Congress intended to be used sparingly -- to grant approval for the majority of pesticides. It also reveals that the EPA cannot easily track the history of conditionally approved pesticides to determine whether required toxicity data was submitted, whether that caused a dangerous use of a pesticide to be cancelled, or whether the uses or restrictions should be modified based in such data. The NRDC report follows an announcement on March 21, of a lawsuit filed by beekeepers, as well as Beyond Pesticides, Center for Food Safety, Pesticide Action Network North America, Sierra Club, and the Center for Environmental Health that challenges EPA's ongoing handling of pesticides as well as the agency's practice of "conditional registration" and labeling deficiencies [See WIMS 3/22/13].

Jennifer Sass, NRDC senior health scientist and co-author of the report said, "The American public may think all pesticides receive rigorous health and safety testing before they hit the shelves for sale. But our investigation shows their trust is misplaced. The EPA has casually approved more than 10,000 pesticides for use in consumer products and in agriculture through this loophole. They've done so without transparency or public comment, and, in some cases, without toxicity tests to determine safety guidelines for public use." Co-author Mae Wu, NRDC attorney said, "For the sake of our health, the EPA should cancel conditional pesticide registrations with overdue toxicity tests and those that pose a risk to the public. And EPA needs to clean up its abysmal pesticide database to provide more transparency and accountability, and safeguards for public health."

NRDC's report, which outlines the EPA's pesticide approval process, highlights two case studies on conditionally approved pesticides. The first one, nanosilver -- which may damage cells in the brain, liver and other organs, and pass from mother to fetus --is widely used as an antimicrobial agent in clothing. The second one, clothianidin -- which is in a family of pesticides connected to widespread deaths of bees in the United States and beyond -- was approved based on a flawed bee field test. Both remain on the market today.

In 1972, Congress amended the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) to impose more stringent testing requirements to register pesticides. Registrants subsequently struggled to meet the new data requirements by the law's deadlines. To address this problem, in 1978 Congress created the conditional registration procedure. Congress intended for the EPA to use its conditional registration process only under certain circumstances to allow some pesticides onto the market to serve the public interest, or while required data is produced and submitted. But NRDC examined the pesticide registry database and determined the EPA has abused this authority to send onto the marketplace the majority of pesticides.

NRDC determined that the EPA is not tracking conditional registrations to assess whether toxicity or other required health or environmental impact data is submitted. Nor does the Agency track what submitted data shows regarding a pesticide's potential for harm, or what, if any, changes were made in their recommended use. In fact, conditional registrations can last for as many as 15 years with no trigger to force the EPA to assess their status. Based on those findings, NRDC is calling on EPA to take six corrective actions:

Review all previously conditional registrations to ensure they comply with the law.
Immediately cancel pesticide registrations with overdue studies or those that pose a risk to the public, including nanosilver and clothianidin.
Properly track conditional registrations to provide transparency for the public.
Establish a public comment process for conditional pesticide registrations.
Make all submitted data accessible to public review.
Return to Congressional intent and grant conditional pesticide registrations only in rare cases.

NRDC said that taking these steps would close the wide loophole that exists today that allows pesticide manufacturers to get many products onto the market before they are thoroughly assessed, and would restore integrity to the government's duty to provide proper oversight of pesticides.

On March 21, one year after groups formally petitioned the U.S. EPA, four beekeepers and five environmental and consumer groups filed the lawsuit mentioned above in Federal District Court against the Agency for its failure to protect pollinators from dangerous pesticides. The coalition, represented by attorneys for the Center for Food Safety (CFS), seeks the suspension of the registrations of insecticides that have repeatedly been identified as highly toxic to honey bees, clear causes of major bee kills and significant contributors to the devastating ongoing mortality of bees known as colony collapse disorder (CCD) [See WIMS 4/4/07]. The pesticides involved -- clothianidin and thiamethoxam -- are "neonicotinoids," a newer class of systemic insecticides that are absorbed by plants and transported throughout the plant's vascular tissue, making the plant potentially toxic to insects.

Access a release from NRDC and link to an OnEarth Magazine article on the report and a blog posting on the issue (click here). Access an overview and link to the 6-page NRDC Issue Brief (click here). [#Toxics]

WIMS 24/7 News Blogs

(click to access)

Transportation News

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS

You can review recent issues of eNewsUSA (click here)
Access subscription information (click here)

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

33 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

Tuesday, March 26, 2013

DOE Launches Clean Energy Manufacturing Initiative

Mar 26: The Department of Energy (DOE) launched the Clean Energy Manufacturing Initiative (CEMI), a new Department initiative focused on growing American manufacturing of clean energy products and boosting U.S. competitiveness through major improvements in manufacturing energy productivity. The initiative includes private sector partnerships, new funding from the Department, and enhanced analysis of the clean energy manufacturing supply chain that will guide the Department's future funding decisions.

Assistant Secretary for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy David Danielson said, "We are at a critical moment in the history of energy in our nation. Over just the last seven years, global investment in the clean energy sector has grown nearly five-fold to over $260 billion and these markets will grow into the trillions of dollars in the years to come. Our nation faces a stark choice: the energy technologies of the future can be developed and manufactured in America for export around the world, or we can cede global leadership and import these technologies from other nations. As part of President Obama's plan to revitalize American manufacturing, the Clean Energy Manufacturing Initiative will seize this opportunity to ensure U.S. leadership in the clean energy sector and advance the global competitiveness of American manufacturers."

The announcement was made at the ribbon cutting of the Department's Carbon Fiber Technology Facility in Oak Ridge, Tennessee, a new advanced manufacturing facility to reduce the cost of carbon fiber -- a critical material for efficient lightweight vehicles, next generation wind turbines, and a wide array of other consumer and industrial products. Building on its existing manufacturing investments in efforts like the Carbon Fiber Technology Facility, DOE said the key elements of the new CEMI initiative include:

Increasing funding for clean energy manufacturing research and development that will accelerate U.S.-based manufacturing of cost-competitive clean energy technologies, from wind, solar, and geothermal to batteries and biofuels. DOE said it was awarding over $23 million in innovative manufacturing research and development projects. Additionally, DOE indicated it had also released a $15 million funding opportunity to reduce the manufacturing costs of solar energy technology, including photovoltaics and concentrated solar power, and demonstrate cost-competitive innovative manufacturing technologies that can achieve commercial production in the next few years (closing date 4/26/13). DOE also said that in the coming months it plans to issue another new funding opportunity that supports a new manufacturing innovation institute. This step supports President Obama's call for a National Network of Manufacturing Innovation (NNMI), as discussed in the State of the Union last month [See WIMS 2/13/13].
Providing additional energy productivity training and technical assistance for manufacturers that build on current efforts like the Industrial Assessment Centers that offer no-cost energy efficiency assessments for manufacturers and the Better Plants Challenge.
Leveraging the capabilities of the DOE National Laboratories to conduct targeted analysis that evaluates the U.S. competitive position in manufacturing and prioritizes strategic investments that strengthen American competitiveness in the global energy market.
Hosting a series of regional and national summits to gather input on manufacturing priorities, identify barriers and opportunities for growing clean energy manufacturing competitiveness and showcase national and regional models that address these priorities.
Launching new public-private partnerships focused on improving U.S. clean energy manufacturing competitiveness. For example, the U.S. Council on Competitiveness is partnering with the Energy Department to convene a series of dialogues among government, small business, industry, research institutions and labor leaders to help develop and recommend strategies for growing the U.S. clean energy manufacturing sector.

Access a release from DOE with more information on the Carbon Fiber Technology Facility (click here). Access the CEMI website for complete information (click here). Access details on the $15 million funding opportunity for Solar Manufacturing Technology (SolarMat) (click here). Access more information on the NNMI (click here). [#Energy/Green]

WIMS 24/7 News Blogs

(click to access)

Transportation News

GET THE REST OF TODAY'S NEWS

You can review recent issues of eNewsUSA (click here)
Access subscription information (click here)

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

33 Years of Environmental Reporting for serious Environmental Professionals

Monday, March 25, 2013

Presidential Advisors Issue Report On Climate Change Options

Mar 22: The President's Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) released a letter report to the President describing six key components the advisory group believes should be central to the Administration's strategy for addressing climate change. The 9-page letter responds to a November request from the President for advice as the Administration prepares new initiatives to tackle the challenges posed by Earth's changing climate. The letter calls for a dual focus on mitigation -- reducing the pace and magnitude of climate-related changes -- and adaptation -- minimizing the unavoidable damage that can be expected to result from climate change.

The letter states, "Both approaches are essential parts of an integrated strategy for dealing with climate change. Mitigation is needed to avoid a degree of climate change that would be unmanageable despite efforts to adapt. Adaptation is needed because the climate is already changing and some further change is inevitable regardless of what is done to reduce its pace and magnitude." The six key components identified by PCAST are:

Focus on national preparedness for climate change, which can help decrease damage from extreme weather events now and speed recovery from future damage;
Continue efforts to decarbonize the economy, with emphasis on the electricity sector;
Level the playing field for clean-energy and energy-efficiency technologies by removing regulatory obstacles, addressing market failures, adjusting tax policies, and providing time-limited subsidies for clean energy when appropriate;
Sustain research on next-generation clean-energy technologies and remove obstacles for their eventual deployment;
Take additional steps to establish U.S. leadership on climate change internationally; and
Conduct an initial Quadrennial Energy Review.

On the matter of decarbonizing the economy, PCAST indicates the Administration could:

"Support continuing expansion of shale-gas production, ensuring that environmental impacts of production and transport do not curtail the potential of this approach. Continuing substitution of gas for coal (and in some instances for oil) will remain an effective short- and middle-term decarbonization measure and an economic boon only insofar as methane leakage from production and transport is held to low levels and drinking water is not adversely impacted. The Federal Government has an important role to play in both of these respects, through collecting and distributing reliable data and through strengthened regulation where the data indicate this is required.
"Continue implementation of Clean Air Act requirements on criteria pollutants (such as SO2 and NOx) and hazardous air pollutants (such as mercury) to include creating new performance standards for CO2 emissions from existing stationary sources, which would follow the performance standards for new plants released in March 2012.
"Accelerate efforts to reduce the regulatory obstacles to deployment of CCS, and continue political support for the large CCS projects currently underway. Successful demonstration of CCS will provide a role for coal in a carbon-constrained future. CCS will eventually be necessary for other large, stationary sources of CO2, including natural gas power plants and biofuel refineries. In February 2010, you created the Interagency Task Force on Carbon Capture and Storage, charging it with proposing "a plan to overcome the barriers to the widespread, cost-effective deployment of carbon capture and storage within 10 years, with a goal of bringing 5 to 10 commercial demonstration projects online by 2016." The Task Force issued a report in August 2010, recommending reforms including better Federal coordination and several possible approaches to managing long-term liability. We recommend that these findings be the basis for a directive to the relevant officials. There are several commercial CCS projects underway in the United States that have received grants from the Department of Energy (DOE). Continued support for these projects is important not only for the purpose of establishing the technical and regulatory basis for CCS in the United States, but also because U.S. support for and success with this technology will likely be influential in moving other countries such as China and India toward CCS use."

Access a blog posting announcing the report from Rick Weiss Assistant Director for Strategic Communications and Senior Policy Analyst at the Office of Science and Technology Policy (click here). Access the complete letter report (click here). Access more information about PCAST (click here). [#Climate]

WIMS 24/7 News Blogs

(click to access)