Good news for the majority of Americans

I have some good news or some bad news for you.  It all depends on your political disposition.

If you are in favor of severe austerity measures to shrink the evil national budget deficit or if you believe that the Environmental Protection Agency has overused its powers to control greenhouse gasses, this is a doubly bad news day for you.

The Congressional Budget Office says that the federal budget deficit last month shrank by $25 billion compared to January of 2012.  The reason was not cutting government spending but a 15% increase in revenue from a little higher income tax on the wealthy and expiration of the payroll tax holiday.  Plus there are new restrictions on tax deductions this year.  We still will have a sizeable budget deficit in 2013 but it will be a lot lower than it has been in many years.

A new Duke University survey is out showing that 64% of the public support government (i.e. the EPA) “regulating greenhouse gas emissions from power plants, factories and cars and requiring utilities to generate more power from ‘clean’ low-carbon sources.” However this poll has some bad news for proponents of a carbon tax to reduce carbon emissions…the public doesn’t like the idea.

So if you aren’t a climate denier or austerity proponent, you can go into the weekend smiling.

Fracking Seen by EPA as No. 2 Emitter of Greenhouse Gases

Bloomberg News
February 6, 2013

By Mark Drajem

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-02-05/greenhouse-gas-emissions-fall-in-u-dot-s-dot-power-plants-on-coal-cuts

Natural gas and oil production is the second-biggest source of U.S. greenhouse gases, the government said, emboldening environmentalists who say tighter measures are needed to curb the emissions from hydraulic fracturing.

In its second-annual accounting of emissions that cause global warming from stationary sources, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for the first time included oil and natural- gas production. Emissions from drilling, including fracking, and leaks from transmission pipes totaled 225 million metric tons of carbon-dioxide equivalents during 2011, second only to power plants, which emitted about 10 times that amount.

Gas and oil production "is an area where we have technological answers to our problems," Michael Levi, a fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York, said in an interview. "We know how to fix many of these problems; we just need to make the decision to do it."

The EPA yesterday released on its website details of emissions from about 8,000 factories, power plants and refineries. Two coal-fired power facilities owned by Atlanta- based Southern Co (SO). topped the list, followed by one owned by Energy Future Holdings Corp (TXU). of Dallas.

In total, power plants emitted 2,221 million metric tons of carbon dioxide in 2011, down 4.5 percent from 2010, according to the agency. The EPA report showed the benefits of fracking, as it attributed the reduction to cuts in coal use and increased use of gas as fuel by electricity generators. There was also an increased use of power from renewable sources such as solar and wind, the agency said.

Top Emitters

"This report confirms that major carbon reductions from power plants wouldn't be possible without a reliable and affordable supply of domestically produced natural gas," Simon Lomax, research director at Energy in Depth, an industry group, said in an e-mail.

The EPA report on oil and gas looked at emissions from basins, or large production areas, not individual wells. Among the top emitters were ConocoPhillips (COP)' operations in the San Juan basin in New Mexico, and Apache Corp (APA).'s operations in the Permian basin in Texas. Both companies are based in Houston.

"ConocoPhillips continues to seek out ways to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions," Daren Beaudo, a spokesman for the company said in an e-mail. The company is working to cut methane venting with gas conservation and waste-heat recovery, he said.

Apache has been growing rapidly in the Permian basin, where it's now the second-largest producer, Bill Mintz, a spokesman for the company, said in an interview. "We have done some infrastructure projects that improved our emissions performance in 2012."

Proposed Regulations

The EPA has already proposed regulations to curb emissions from new power plants, setting a standard that would preclude the construction of new coal-fired facilities that don't capture and sink underground the carbon coming from their smokestacks. Once those rules are finished in the coming weeks, the EPA must move to establish similar rules for existing power plants.

Environmental groups have asked the agency to establish standards to prevent methane leakages from the drilling, fracking and transport of oil and gas. The boom in that production in states such as Pennsylvania and North Dakota means that those rules are necessary, according to environmental groups.

Methane's lifetime in the atmosphere is much shorter than carbon dioxide, but it's more efficient at trapping radiation, making its short-term impact 20-times greater than carbon dioxide, according to the EPA.

"Reducing fugitive methane emissions is a top priority because they are so powerful" a force for global warming, said Mark Brownstein, managing director of the Environmental Defense Fund in New York. "You want to make sure the goose is laying what approximates golden eggs."

To contact the reporter on this story: Mark Drajem in Washington at mdrajem@bloomberg.net

 

Time for the power sector to get to work

The Hill's Congress Blog 
December 22, 2011

By John Arensmeyer, Small Business Majority, and Mindy Lubber, Ceres 

 

The word on the street is the recession is behind us, but times are still tough. The economy is stagnant and businesses of all sizes are still trying to weather the economic storm that forced many to close their doors and left countless workers unemployed. 

For these reasons, every other word out of politicians’ mouths is “jobs,” and how we can protect them and create more. Unfortunately, the rhetoric has reached a fever pitch and “job killing” labels are put on everything from tax cuts to sensible standards that protect our communities and us.

This has happened with new standards announced Dec. 21 that would protect Americans from breathing mercury, lead, arsenic, and acid gases from outdated power plants. Twenty years in the making, these new standards are finally moving into the implementation phase, though there will likely be pushback from some claiming they’ll stifle job growth. That opposition is misguided. In fact, the new rules will create jobs and are supported by Americans and business owners—also known as job creators—across the political spectrum.

A recent Small Business Majority poll found that small business owners’ greatest concern is economic uncertainty about the future, with 46 percent citing it as their top worry. Only 13 percent of small business owners said government regulation is their biggest concern.

If we are to tackle what is really worrying small business owners—economic uncertainty—we should encourage actions that spur economic growth. Allowing the Environmental Protection Agency the ability to regulate harmful emissions such as toxics from power plants is something small business owners believe will do just that.

Small Business Majority’s national poll found 76 percent of small employers support the EPA’s regulation of greenhouse gas emissions from power plants, refineries and other major emitters. Adding to that is a recent poll by Ceres—a coalition of businesses, investors, and public-interest groups—that found 77 percent of Americans specifically support the newly announced limits on lead, mercury and other toxic emissions that are being released from power plants.

Those standards—known as the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards—will require power companies to clean up or close their dirtiest, oldest plants, including many built more than half a century ago.

The nation’s utilities will still earn an appropriate return on their investments. Meanwhile, the EPA estimates that new rules will pay back $5 to $13 in health benefits for every dollar power companies spend in complying, so broader communities will benefit, as well.

What’s more, a recent report by the Political Economy Research Institute (PERI) at the University of Massachusetts found the Mercury and Air Toxics Standard is part of a suite of clean-air standards that will create 1.4 million new jobs over the next five years. These include professional positions, construction and manufacturing jobs, for both large and small companies, from the suppliers’ manufacturing centers all the way to the actual construction sites.

For example, retrofitting a coal-fired power plant with $200 million worth of air pollution control equipment would result in 2,200 jobs, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics. Many of those jobs go to local companies, who supply the concrete services, the excavation and demolition work, or the cranes and trucks. These benefits ripple further through local economies when workers spend their wages.

It’s time that power companies do their part. Other major contributors to mercury-air pollution—including medical and municipal incinerators—have already reduced their emissions, cutting mercury by 95 percent since 1990. And steel and cement makers have also made great strides.

America and its job creators are behind the new power plant rules, and the EPA has acted. Now it’s time to get to work.

Arensmeyer is the founder and CEO of Small Business Majority, an advocacy group founded and run by small business owners. Lubber is President of Ceres, a coalition of investors, public interest groups, businesses, and environmental groups working on sustainability challenges.