.jpg)
On February 19th, eight Democrat Senator’s wrote a letter to EPA regarding its plans for issuance of greenhouse gas regulations for vehicles, factories and power plants. This from the Wall Street Journal:
The lawmakers, including prominent Senators Max Baucus, (D., Mont.), Carl Levin, (D., Mich.) and John Rockefeller, (D., W.V), warned EPA chief Lisa Jackson
The twists and turns in the saga of regulation greenhouse gases (GHGs) continue. After the State of the Union and release of the President’s budget, there is speculation that President Obama has abandoned Cap & Trade legislation.
Meanwhile, businesses face greater risk as a result of new and impending regulatory action. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has issued guidance telling companies
.jpg)
I was giving a speech to a trade association last night regarding Cap and Trade legislation in Congress. The sentiment of most participants in this manufacturing group was that they had dodged a major bullet because passage of a bill looks very unlikely. While that is true, I told the audience don’t lose sight of
Today, a day that will likely live in environmental law infamy….the EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson finalized the "endangerment finding" in response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in EPA v. Massachusetts which was issued way back in April 2, 2007. While the Supreme Court found that greenhouse gases were air pollutants covered by the Clean Air Act, it
Two federal appeal courts (Fifth and Second Circuits) have issued decisions that will allow lawsuits to proceed that assert common law tort claims based on business contribution to climate change. Comer v. Murphy Oil USA Inc. is the second decision in the last two months to allow claims to proceed. Earlier in October, the
The past two days I have been in Houston at the Environmental Markets Association (EMA) fall conference. If you are not familiar with the EMA, it is an organization that supports the use of market-based solutions to environmental issues. The members are largely made up of consultants, traders of environmental credits and project developers.
Many
.jpg)
U.S. EPA has initiated the process for determining what controls it will require should it finalize its proposal to regulate large industrial sources of greenhouse gases (GHGs). As discussed in a prior post, the first phase of the program would cover sources emitting more than 25,000 tons of CO2 or equivalent emissions. In subsequent phases of the program smaller sources would likely be covered.
Under EPA’s proposal GHGs would become a pollutant covered under its New Source Review (NSR) program. NSR requires new or modified sources that emit over established thresholds to install Best Available Control Technology (BACT). The question is…what are the "best available" controls for reducing GHG emissions?
I was interviewed for a story appearing in Climatewire that discussed the complexities involving in determining BACT for GHGs. Unlike many mainstream media newspaper articles, the Climatewire article does an excellent job of providing an analysis of the issues related to implementation of this complex regulatory program.
Two major issues:
Efficiency improvements co-firing biomass are the two most likely candidates for utility sources. But less analysis is known regarding potential methods to reduce GHGs emissions from other potentially covered sources like cement and steel production facilities.
The preamble to U.S. EPA’s proposed NSR GHG regulations makes clear the Agency believe the rules must be finalized by March 2010 because they must coincide with the rule regulating GHGs from light duty vehicles. It seems like an impossible task to determine BACT for the range of sources that will be potentially covered in less than six (6) months. Without established BACT standards, there is likely to be massive uncertainty and delays in permitting.
[A complete re-printing of the Climatewire article is available in the extended entry with their permission]
photo: everystockphoto- cjohnson7
Continue Reading EPA Begins Process of Determining BACT for CO2
On September 30th, U.S. EPA announced the release of its proposed rule regulating emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs) from large industrial sources. The proposal represents a risky move by U.S. EPA in the event climate change legislative efforts fail and U.S. EPA is forced to move forward with the rules. The risk is two fold: 1)
.gif){kind=logo}
The first step to establishment of a comprehensive climate change regulatory program has been completed by U.S. EPA . On September 22nd, the Agency finalized its rule on mandatory reporting of greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs). The rule give the initial glimpses into what the potential overall control program will look. The most important insight- which industries
.jpg)
The Federal Court of Appeals (2nd Circuit) issued a major decision in the ever growing debate regarding action on climate change. The court is allowing states to proceed with a suit against power companies that calls for a court order to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases which contribute to global warming.
Eight states (California, Connecticut