EnviroPolitics Blog

EPA transport rule targets deep cuts in SO2, NOx

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is proposing regulations to cut air pollution for people living downwind of power plants.
The so-called “transport rule” is expected, by 2014, to reduce power plant emissions of sulfur dioxide (SO2) by 71 percent over 2005 levels and nitrogen oxides (NOx) by 52 percent.
SO2 and NOx react in the atmosphere to form fine particle pollution and ground-level ozone (smog), which are linked, the EPA says, to thousands of asthma cases and heart attacks, and almost 2 million lost school or work days.
The agency estimates that the regulations will yield more than $120 billion in annual health benefits in 2014, including avoiding an estimated 14,000 to 36,000 premature deaths, 23,000 nonfatal heart attacks, 21,000 cases of acute bronchitis, 240,000 cases of aggravated asthma, and 1.9 million days of missed school or work due to ozone and particle pollution-related symptoms.
The agency puts the expected annual cost of compliance to power plant operators at $2.8 billion in 2014.

The proposal replaces the 2005 Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), which the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit ordered EPA to revise in 2008. The court allowed CAIR to remain in place temporarily while EPA works to finalize the replacement rule proposed today. EPA will take public comment on the proposal for 60 days after the rule is published in the Federal Register. The agency also will hold public hearings. Dates and locations for the hearings will be announced shortly. More information: http://www.epa.gov/airtransport

Our most recent posts:
New York sued over Long Island Sound pollution
Legislation puffs up NJ’s offshore wind prospects
Natural Gas as Panacea? This prof’s not so sure
Appalachian power line PATH misses another deadline
Environmental bills up for votes Monday in NJ

————————————————————————–
Like this post? You’ll love our daily newsletter
EnviroPolitics – Try it free for 30 days!
No obligation. Cancel anytime with a single click

————————————————————————–

EPA transport rule targets deep cuts in SO2, NOx Read More »

New York sued over Long Island Sound pollution

The Connecticut-based environmental organization, Soundkeeper, has filed a lawsuit alleging that the NY State Department of Environmental Conservation isn’t doing enough to control stormwater dumped into Long Island Sound and other water bodies. Based in Norwalk, Conn., Soundkeeper filed the suit on June 28 in state Supreme Court in White Plains this week along with the New York City based National Resources Defense Council and several local environmental groups such as Riverkeeper in Tarrytown and Waterkeeper Alliance in Irvington. The suit alleges the state is violating pollution regulations outlined by the federal Clean Water Act. “Summer is here. New Yorker’s are headed to the beaches to fish, swim and boat. Yet the water’s of Long Island Sound and hundreds of lakes and rivers continue to be polluted from urban run off. The permit’s requirements issued by New York State in April fall far short of protecting and improving our waters” said Soundkeeper Terry Backer. “Green roofs and other smart water practices are available today and will provide environmental and economic benefits that are simply not possible if we continue business as usual." A DEC spokesperson said the agency does not comment on issues that are the subject of law suits. More more on the lawsuit:
State sued over Long Island Sound stormwater pollution by environmental groups
Soundkeeper sues New York State Our most recent posts:
Legislation puffs up NJ’s offshore wind prospects
Natural Gas as Panacea? This prof’s not so sure
Appalachian power line PATH misses another deadline
Environmental bills up for votes Monday in NJ
Shale gas drilling controversy no longer local

————————————————————————–
Like this post? You’ll love our daily newsletter
EnviroPolitics – Try it free for 30 days!
No obligation. Cancel anytime with a single click

————————————————————————–

New York sued over Long Island Sound pollution Read More »

Legislation puffs up NJ’s offshore wind prospects

Governor Chris Christie is expected soon to sign into law a bill written to boost New Jersey’s chances of developing the nation’s first offshore wind energy farms. The Garden State is competing with Delaware, Rhode Island, New York and Massachusetts to become the first to break waves on a sizable offshore wind energy facility. And the race to be the Number One is not just for bragging rights. The real prize is the ability to attract the financial investment to support not only the at-sea installation of wind turbines but also the on-land plants to manufacture turbine blades and other equipment essential for such projects. Also standing to benefit are port facilities with the berths and loading facilities for ships ferrying equipment and workers to and from the ocean construction sites. New Jersey not only has plenty of old manufacturing and port properties but it also has four serious developers vying for the chance to build one.

The legislation, (S-2036), establishes a program of Offshore Renewable Energy Certificates (ORECs) that wind energy developers say are necessary to attract financial investors to the expensive projects. The ORECs would be purchased by utilities who are required by state law to supply a certain percentage of their electricity from alternative energy sources like wind and solar. The bill anticipates that at least 1,100 megawatts of that electricity would be generated by qualified offshore wind projects. The legislation allows developers to earn the credits for each megawatt of electricity the turbines produce over 20 years.

It also authorizes the state’s Economic Development Authority to provide up to $100 million in tax credits to wind energy support businesses, like wind turbine manufacturers, that set up shop in New Jersey.

Estimates of the cost for a New Jersey offshore wind farm range from $7 billion to as high as $20 billion. It’s the size and unpredictability of project costs that had some business lobbyists asking questions as the bill sped through both houses of the state Legislature. The state’s heavy energy users already pay the highest energy bills in the nation. But advocates like Matt Elliott, a clean-energy advocate for Environment New Jersey, predict that renewable energy will become more competitive with fossil fuels over time. “There is a myth that fossil fuels are cheap. The only reason they cost less is that we subsidized them for decades and we don’t consider any of the environmental or public-health costs they create,” he said. Related:
Offshore Wind Bill Sails Through the Legislature
Bill would require utilities to purchase a portion of their energy from offshore wind farms
New Jersey paving path for offshore wind
Offshore Wind Energy Gets Double-Barreled Boost Our most recent posts:
Natural Gas as Panacea? This prof’s not so sure
Appalachian power line PATH misses another deadline
Environmental bills up for votes Monday in NJ
Shale gas drilling controversy no longer local
NJ Chamber of Commerce elects new directors
What’s in fracking fluid? Wyoming wants to know

————————————————————————–
Like this post? You’ll love our daily newsletter
EnviroPolitics – Try it free for 30 days!
No obligation. Cancel anytime with a single click

————————————————————————–

Legislation puffs up NJ’s offshore wind prospects Read More »

Natural Gas as Panacea? This prof’s not so sure

Writing in the latest issue of Yale Environment 360, Daniel B. Botkin, professor emeritus of the University of California, Santa Barbara, says the fact that shale gas exists in abundance is beyond question. But what is the reality behind the optimistic claims for shale gas?

The U.S. Geological Survey, Botkin writes, lists natural gas “reserves” — the amount believed to be in the ground — in four categories: readily available with current technologies, which accounts for only 1 percent of the known natural gas in U.S. territorial limits; technically recoverable (5 percent); marginal targets for accelerated technology (6 percent); and unknown but probable (84 percent). Shale gas shares the fourth category with coal gas and methyl hydrates. The latter are a kind of water ice with methane embedded in it and occur only where it is very cold, in Arctic permafrost and below 3,000 feet in the oceans.
In researching how best to make the transition to the green energy future, one of the first calculations Botkin made was to find out how long the natural gas in each of the four categories would last if we obtained it independently — that is, only from U.S. territory.

He says he was shocked by the result:

“Just using our 2006 rates of use of natural gas consumption — not including any major transition to fueling our cars and trucks — the “readily available” gas within the United States would be exhausted in just one year. That, plus what is called “technically recoverable” gas, would be gone in less than a decade. What is termed ‘unknown but probable’ would last about a century.”
“This means that any significant increase in our consumption of natural gas will have to come from the ‘unknown but probable’ reserves, much of which will be from formations of shale, a sedimentary rock formed from muds in which bacteria released methane. Most of this gas is so deep underground or otherwise not very accessible that nobody is really sure that we can get at a lot of it, or of how high an environmental price we must pay to retrieve it.”

Click here to read the entire article

Is it just me or are you also hearing the echoes of issues associated with deep-sea oil drilling?

To share your thoughts or pose your questions, use the comment box below.
Our most recent posts:
Appalachian power line PATH misses another deadline
Environmental bills up for votes Monday in NJ
Shale gas drilling controversy no longer local
NJ Chamber of Commerce elects new directors
What’s in fracking fluid? Wyoming wants to know

————————————————————————–
Like this post? You’ll love our daily newsletter
EnviroPolitics – Try it free for 30 days!
No obligation. Cancel anytime with a single click

————————————————————————–

Natural Gas as Panacea? This prof’s not so sure Read More »

Appalachian power line PATH misses another deadline

The in-service date for Allegheny Energy Inc.’s expansive transmission build-out has been postponed again, until June 2015. This is the fourth time the date has been moved, beginning with the original launch date of 2012 and inching up year by year. Greensburg, Pa-based Allegheny Energy is partnering with Ohio-based American Electric Power to develop a 275-mile, high-voltage transmission line that will run through Virginia, West Virginia and Maryland.

PATH has held 24 public open houses in communities in Maryland, Virginia and West Virginia at which more than 2,500 people have attended to seek information about the overall project, transmission line routing and engineering, property owner outreach and energy conservation.

The Potomac-Appalachian Transmission Highline, or PATH project, is intended to help relieve the growing electricity congestion occurring on the East Coast. Allegheny Energy has been working to make the project a reality since 2007, but has faced several delays due to changing forecasts predicting future electricity demand and regulatory hurdles. Even so, Allegheny Energy is under a time squeeze. It is balancing a slew of regulatory approval applications for PATH, with preparing to get more than 1,485 right-of-way easements from landowners along the route of the proposed project. At the same time, the project’s latest cost estimate, $1.8 billion, is being revised upward, partly because of the delays, according to spokesman Doug Colafella. Meanwhile, Allegheny Energy’s legal minds and its management are appealing to some of the same regulatory agencies to approve folding the company into Ohio-based FirstEnergy Corp. The two utilities announced in February they were initiating an $8.5 billion stock swap merger, which they expect will close late next year. “Clearly, now with the 2015 in-service date, considering the regulatory approvals that you need to get, and the lengthy construction (time) table, we need to move ASAP,” Colafella said. See the full Pittsburgh Business Times story

Our most recent posts:
Environmental bills up for votes Monday in NJ
Shale gas drilling controversy no longer local
NJ Chamber of Commerce elects new directors
What’s in fracking fluid? Wyoming wants to know
SRPL nominees before NJ Judiciary panel today

————————————————————————–
Like this post? You’ll love our daily newsletter
EnviroPolitics – Try it free for 30 days!
No obligation. Cancel anytime with a single click

————————————————————————–

Appalachian power line PATH misses another deadline Read More »

Environmental bills up for votes Monday in NJ

A major alternative energy bill designed to spur the financing of wind energy farms off New Jersey’s coast is one of several environmental bills scheduled for a vote Monday in the state Senate. Co-sponsored by the Senate’s Democratic and Republican leaders, Steve Sweeney and Tom Kean Jr., S-2036 would establish a program of Offshore Renewable Energy Certificates (ORECs) that wind energy developers say are necessary to attract financial investors to the expensive projects. The bill would allow developers to earn the credits for each megawatt of electricity the turbines produce over 20 years. It also authorizes the state’s Economic Development Authority to provide up to $100 million in tax credits to wind energy support businesses, like wind turbine manufacturers, that set up shop in New Jersey. The ORECs would be purchased by utilities who are required by state law to supply a certain percentage of their electricity from alternative energy sources like wind and solar. The bill anticipates at least 1,100 megawatts of electricity generated by qualified offshore wind projects. An economist for the New Jersey Business and Industry Association estimates the cost of such an offshore wind farm at $7 billion. Other estimates run as high as $20 billion. It’s the size and unpredictability of project costs that has some business leaders questioning the wisdom of such legislation in a state where manufacturers and other heavy energy users already pay the highest energy bills in the nation. But advocates counter that offshore wind energy will offset its higher costs by generating new jobs in construction, turbine- manufacturing and supplies. They also say it’s an opportunity that New Jersey can’t afford to lose to competing projects in Delaware and New York.
[UPDATE: A2873, the Assembly companion to the Senate offshore wind bill, S2036 (above), was added late Friday to the Assembly voting list for Monday. If the bills are merged and approved in both houses on Monday, the combined bill can be sent to Governor Chris Christie before the Legislature’s summer recess which begins after Monday’s sessions]

Other environmental legislation up for a Senate vote:

S1977 (Smith) Revises the “Electronic Waste Management Act” S2006 (Smith) Prohibits municipal zoning ordinances from regulating solar panels under certain circumstances; limits fees for certain renewable energy installations. S2089 (Pennacchio) Abolishes the Department of the Public Advocate and transfers certain functions, powers and duties A2217/S1004 (McKeon/Oroho) Extends expiration date of special appraisal process for Green Acres and farmland preservation programs from 2009 to 2014 for lands in Highlands Region. A2927/S2002 (Moriarty/Gordon) Authorizes New Jersey Environmental Infrastructure Trust to expend certain sums to make loans for environmental infrastructure projects A2928/S2003 (Johnson/Bateman) Appropriates funds to DEP for environmental infrastructure projects. A2929/S2004 (McKeon/Smith) Makes certain changes to the New Jersey Environmental Infrastructure Trust Financing Program ACR135/SCR106 (Wisniewski/Beach) Makes certain changes to the New Jersey Environmental Infrastructure Trust Financing Program
In the Assembly on Monday [Updated at 8:30 p.m.]

A1683/S1181 (Burzichelli/Van Drew) Changes perimeter for bow and arrow hunting around occupied building. A-2873 (Chivukula) The "Offshore Wind Economic Development Act"; establishes offshore wind renewable energy certificate program, and authorizes EDA to provide tax credits for qualified wind energy facilities in wind energy zones. Related: S-2036 (See Senate list above) A-2939 (Wagner) "Meadowlands Regionalization, Efficiency and Property Tax Relief Act of 2010." A-3055 (Coutinho) Extends suspension of Statewide non-residential development fee to October 30, 2010.
Related:
The US, Saying YES to Offshore Wind farms
Our most recent posts:
Shale gas drilling controversy no longer local
NJ Chamber of Commerce elects new directors
What’s in fracking fluid? Wyoming wants to know
SRPL nominees before NJ Judiciary panel today
‘Gasland’ – Do the pictures tell the fracking story?
Lawmakers in NY and PA weigh a gas-drilling moratorium

————————————————————————–
Like this post? You’ll love our daily newsletter
EnviroPolitics – Try it free for 30 days!
No obligation. Cancel anytime with a single click

————————————————————————–

Environmental bills up for votes Monday in NJ Read More »

EPA transport rule targets deep cuts in SO2, NOx

New York sued over Long Island Sound pollution

Legislation puffs up NJ’s offshore wind prospects

Natural Gas as Panacea? This prof’s not so sure

Appalachian power line PATH misses another deadline

PATH has held 24 public open houses in communities in Maryland, Virginia and West Virginia at which more than 2,500 people have attended to seek information about the overall project, transmission line routing and engineering, property owner outreach and energy conservation.

Environmental bills up for votes Monday in NJ

Subscribe For Latest Updates