EPA PLANS TO REVISE 2008 NATIONAL OZONE STANDARDS
EPA announced the agency is considering revising the 2008 national ozone
standards (both the primary and secondary ozone standards) to ensure they
are scientifically sound and protective of human health and to cut healthcare
costs and make cities healthier and safer places. The primary air quality
standards protect public health (including the health of sensitive groups
such as asthmatics, children and the elderly), and the secondary standards
protect public welfare and the environment, (including against visibility
impairment, damage to animals, crops, vegetation, and buildings). The Clean
Air Act requires EPA to review the national standards for ozone and
scientific information every five years. The Agency will propose any revisions to
the ozone standards by December 2009 and will issue a final decision by
August 2010.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
EPA REVISES RULES FOR WASTEWATER DISCHARGES FROM POWER PLANTS
EPA plans to revise the existing standards for water discharges from
coal-fired power plants to reduce pollution and better protect the nation's
water. Wastewater discharged from coal ash ponds, air pollution control
equipment, and other equipment at power plants can contaminate drinking water
sources, cause fish and other wildlife to die and cause other detrimental
environmental effects. Once the new rule for electric power plants is finalized,
EPA and states would incorporate the new standards into wastewater
discharge permits. More information about EPA's study is provided in an interim
report published in August 2008 with a final study to be published later this
year. For more information on wastewater discharges from power plants, go
to _http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/guide/steam/_
(http://www.epa.gov/waterscience/guide/steam/)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
EPA ANNOUNCED NEW STANDARDS FOR AIR TOXICS EMISSIONS FROM MEDICAL WASTE
INCINERATORS NATIONWIDE
About 50 medical waste incinerators nationwide will have to reduce their
air pollution under new regulations announced by EPA's Office of Air and
Radiation. The new rules require better monitoring and tighter emissions limits
to reduce toxic pollution from burning medical waste by 390,000 pounds
annually. Medical waste incinerator emissions is a particularly toxic mix of
dioxins/furans, heavy metals (lead, cadmium, and mercury), acid gases and
other contaminants from the burning of biological waste, needles, plastic
gloves, batteries and many other items. Based on Region 3's current source
inventory, 13 facilities located in Maryland, Pennsylvania, and West
Virginia will be affected by the new rules, expected to be published in the
Federal Register within the next two weeks. Details on the new rules can be
found at the following EPA website
_http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/129/hmiwi/rihmiwi.html_ (http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/129/hmiwi/rihmiwi.html)
Here is a press release that I received for a tour of Solar houses in
and around Morgantown sponsored by American Solar Energy Society and
Eco-Structures, LLC (John Garlow) on Saturday October 3 between 10:00
a.m. - 2:00 p.m.
-Jonathan
On Monday, September 21, in the Morgantown area a special opportunity
exists to watch the one-night-only premiere of an important new film called The
Age of Stupid.
The film is a powerful "docudrama" set in the year 2055, after global
warming has done massive damage to humanity. Oscar-nominated actor Pete
Postlethwaite stars as a historian who "looks back" on real footage from 2008 to
try to answer the question, "why didn't we stop climate change while we had
the chance?"
In addition to the movie, the theater will simulcast a Hollywood-style
premiere event from New York City.
You can purchase advance tickets by clicking here:
_http://www.moveon.org/r?r=56749_ (http://www.moveon.org/r?r=56749)
You'll get so much more than just a great movie. The premiere event,
simulcast live from a solar-powered tent in New York City to over 700 theaters
in the U.S. and 50 other countries, will feature such celebrities as Gillian
Anderson, Heather Graham, and Moby.
Also, MTV's Gideon Yago will interview Nobel Peace Prize recipient Kofi
Annan, environmental scientist James Hansen, and The Age of Stupid director
Franny Armstrong. Ending the night will be a special, acoustic performance by
Radiohead's Thom Yorke.
The Age of Stupid was number one at the box office in the U.K. this
spring, and this one-night event is poised to break the Guinness World Record for
biggest simultaneous film screening. You can watch the trailer here:
(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m0xtPKjmnaA)
_http://www.moveon.org/r?r=51921&id=17229-1764041-LC7ppKx&t=1_
(http://www.moveon.org/r?r=51921&id=17229-1764041-LC7ppKx&t=1)
Check out what critics are saying about this film:
* "A captivating and constantly surprising film."—George Monbiot, The
Guardian1
* "Think An Inconvenient Truth but with a personality."—Gary
Goldstein, Los Angeles Times2
* "Political incompetence and inaction can usher in disaster... Rome
is burning, and Franny Armstrong is fiddling the right tune."—Peter
Bradshaw, The Guardian3
The Age of Stupid looks us right in the eye and asks what kind of future
we want for our kids. Be one of the first to see this important film and
help spread the word so that as many Americans as possible hear its message.
We hope to see you at the theater.
Thank you for all you do.
–Anna, Laura, Steven, Ilyse, and the rest of the team at _www.moveon.org_
(http://www.moveon.org)
P.S. When you see this movie, you're really going to be inspired to act.
The cool thing is that our friends at Avaaz, an international MoveOn-like
organization, are putting together a "Global Wake-Up Call" day of action on
September 21, the same day as the premiere of The Age of Stupid. Check out
_http://www.avaaz.org/tcktcktck/_ (http://www.avaaz.org/tcktcktck/) to get
plugged in locally.
Sources:
1. "What are we not talking about now that we will be—or should be—in
2009?," The Guardian, December 27, 2008
_http://www.moveon.org/r?r=51923&id=17229-1764041-LC7ppKx&t=2_
(http://www.moveon.org/r?r=51923&id=17229-1764041-LC7ppKx&t=2)
2. "The Age of Stupid," Los Angeles Times, July 17, 2009
_http://www.moveon.org/r?r=51922&id=17229-1764041-LC7ppKx&t=3_
(http://www.moveon.org/r?r=51922&id=17229-1764041-LC7ppKx&t=3)
3. "The Age of Stupid," The Guardian, March 20, 2009
_http://www.moveon.org/r?r=51926&id=17229-1764041-LC7ppKx&t=4_
(http://www.moveon.org/r?r=51926&id=17229-1764041-LC7ppKx&t=4) For more information go
to: _http://www.ageofstupid.net/_ (http://www.ageofstupid.net/)
Upcoming Events!
September 25 – 27: 20th WVEC Fall Conference
Holly Gray Park, Sutton WV
20th Anniversary of WVEC Celebration & Program, setting 2010 legislative
priorities, workshops on enviro issues, silent auction, live music, booths,
nature outings & recreation Key-note address- by Jim Hightower, nationally
known progressive commentator and co-editor of America's hottest
newsletter, the Hightower Lowdown. There will be a Friday evening reception for Jim
and he will give Saturday morning keynote address. Please visit
_www.wvecouncil.org_ (http://www.wvecouncil.org/) , for complete agenda and updates!
September 26 – ACLU Civil Rights Dinner
Enjoy yourself with friends and like minded people at the Clay Center in
Charleston. Jim Hightower, a funny, irreverent, intelligent populist, is
the speaker. He is a New York Times bestselling author and America's
funniest activist who gives the lowdown on how to put up-not shut up-in the fight
for our future. Get a taste of Jim and a review of his new book Swim
Against the Current; Even a Dead Fish Can Go with the Flow. For tickets or
more information, please call the WV-ACLU at 304-345-9246.
October 2 and 3 – Trail Design Workshop
Coonskin Park, Charleston, WV
Free but please register by September 20—class is limited to 30
participants
Each session combines interactive learning, hands-on trail work, and
topnotch instructors to develop skilled trail workers and crew leaders.
The workshop will focus on the art and science of trail building through
topics such as: Sustainable trail design, Basic construction and much more.
For registration information, contact Betty Michael at
_betty.michael(a)canaanvi.org_ (mailto:betty.michael@canaanvi.org) or 800-922-3601 ext. 252,
or visit _www.canaanvi.org/events_ (http://www.canaanvi.org/events)
October 18: Good Jobs, Green Jobs Workshop
1:00-4:00 PM, Big Sandy Arena, Huntington, WV. Sponsored by the WV Center
on Budget and Policy. What are “green jobs,” and how can they help shape
a vibrant future for West Virginia? Join us for a stimulating afternoon of
ideas and discussion about green strategies for economic growth and jobs
that support families. For more information, visit _www.wvpolicy.org_
(http://www.wvpolicy.org/) or call 304-720-8682.
October 20: An Evening with Gloria Steinem
WV Cultural Center, 7:00 PM. Produced by WV FREE. Tickets are $25 and
available by calling 304-342-9188 or visit _www.wvfree.org_
(http://www.wvfree.org/) .
EPA questions mountaintop removal permits
Permits for new mountaintop removal mines (such as the one pictured above
in southern West Virginia) could be in jeopardy.
_Joe Lovett explains new EPA announcement_
(http://www.wvpbmedia.com/news/2009/joelovett.mp3)
By Erica Peterson, Jessica Lilly and Scott Finn
_Download MP3 _ (http://www.wvpbmedia.com/news/2009/0914epapermits.mp3)
September 11, 2009 · The Obama Administration said Friday it has serious
concerns with dozens of pending permits for mountaintop removal mines in
Appalachia.
The federal Environmental Protection Agency released a list of 79 permits
which it says poses environmental problems and won’t comply with the Clean
Water Act.
The 79 permits on _the list_
(http://www.epa.gov/owow/wetlands/guidance/mining-screening.html) are scattered throughout Appalachia, and 23 are in
West Virginia.
The announcement is part of an EPA campaign to subject mountaintop removal
permits to greater scrutiny.
These tentative steps towards cracking down on surface mines have made
environmentalists cautiously optimistic, and the coal industry increasingly
nervous.
One of the EPA’s primary concerns is valley fills, where waste rock is
dumped from mountaintop removal mines. That’s because selenium and other heavy
metals have been found at high levels running off the mines.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers issues the permits which allow coal
companies to fill streams and valleys.
After fighting mountaintop removal for more than a decade, Joe Lovett of
the _Appalachian Center for the Economy and Environment_
(http://www.appalachian-center.org/) says Friday’s announcement signifies a real shift.
“We hope this is the beginning of the end of mountaintop removal and valley
fills,” he said.
“I don’t think modifications will work. I think the permits are so
destructive that even with modifications they won’t comply with the Clean Water
Act.”
But for an already-beleaguered coal industry worried about climate change
legislation, this is further proof that the Obama Administration will take
steps to curtail mountaintop removal.
Roger Horton, a surface miner and founder of _Citizens for Coal_
(http://www.wvpubcast.org/newsarticle.aspx?id=10862) , says curtailing mountaintop
removal in America will force the U.S. to import coal from other countries.
“They’re going to look elsewhere. Coal is going to be a big part of the
energy mix in this country for some time to come,” Horton said.
“And if they don’t mine it locally, they’re sure as heck going to import
it from some other source, perhaps an unfriendly source to our country,” he
said.
Next, the EPA will meet with the Army Corps to discuss each permit. Lovett
says they will look at possible water quality problems, whether the
mitigation is actually making up for the impacts of the mining, and the
cumulative impacts this mining is having on watersheds.
Some of the EPA’s concerns may be resolved by discussions with the Army
Corps of Engineers, which has the final say over permits. Some permits might
require changes in order to be approved, and others may not be approved at
all.
Coal industry officials say the new review process isn’t transparent, and
it’s hard for mining companies to submit permits when they aren’t sure by
what criteria they’ll be judged.
Bill Raney is the president of the _West Virginia Coal Association_
(http://www.wvcoal.com/) . He’s calling for compromise.
“Let’s sit down and work out whatever those concerns are. The answer is
not to stop it, so that you punish people in that process,” Raney said.
“And if there are concerns, let’s address them in a very timely way, and
let’s address them in a way that allows the companies and people to continue
to work to meet the market demands of today,” he said.
This is the third announcement about stricter mountaintop removal
regulations since Obama’s taken office, and comes after a decade of court decisions
regarding mountaintop removal.
So far, little has changed. But Lovett says it may be different this time.
“One thing that encourages me is, not only does the EPA have new
leadership, but the _Corps does as well_
(http://www.nan.usace.army.mil/blog/pdf/NR_CoC09.pdf) ,” Lovett said.
“So I expect that the Corps will be looking at these permits differntly in
the future from the way they looked at them in the past,” he said.
Horton says that coal supporters plan to be vocal in their opposition to
the EPA’s policies.
“Without giving away my tactics at this point in time, there are going to
be direct actions, that are lawful, to let the administration know we aren’t
going to be taking this lying down,” Horton said.
Friday’s announcement regards permits which had not yet been approved by
the Corps. But it comes after news that the EPA is also opposing a 2,300 acre
mountaintop removal permit in Logan County the Corps already approved.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Thanks goes out to John Gever for providing the web site to the above
article:
EPA Questions Mountaintop Removal Permits
_http://www.wvpubcast.org/newsarticle.aspx?id=11237_
(http://www.wvpubcast.org/newsarticle.aspx?id=11237)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
John Gever, MedPage Today, tel. 1-304-243-0826
cell 1-304-780-9772, Skype 1-412-567-2949 (pre-arranged interviews only)
_j.gever(a)medpagetoday.com_ (mailto:j.gever@medpagetoday.com) or
_jgever(a)gmail.com_ (mailto:jgever@gmail.com)
_http://www.medpagetoday.com_ (http://www.medpagetoday.com/)
Assessing the Arctic
The Arctic is experiencing some of the most rapid climate change currently
under way across the globe, but consequent ecological responses have not
been widely reported. At the close of the Fourth International Polar Year, Post
et al. (p. _1355_
(http://www.info-aaas.org/l.jsp?d=2455.289855.654.4uN8ldid5) ) review observations on ecological impacts in this sensitive region.
The widespread changes occurring in terrestrial, freshwater, and marine
systems, presage changes at lower latitudes that will affect natural
resources, food production, and future climate buffering.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
Blowing Away Coal
China is the world's largest carbon dioxide producer and the world's
second-largest producer of electrical power, 80% of which it generates by burning
coal. An affordable, carbon-free source of electrical power generation would
thus constitute an important way for China to reduce its CO2 emissions and
other environmental impacts of fossil-fuel burning. McElroy et al. (p.
_1378_ (http://www.info-aaas.org/l.jsp?d=2455.289849.654.4uN8ldid5) , see the
cover) show that there is enough wind in China to generate electricity to
supply the nation's entire projected demand for 2030 (about twice what is
used now) at reasonable prices per kilowatt-hour.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
Cycling Around
Water vapor is the most important greenhouse gas, and clouds are one of
the most important components of climate, but the global hydrological cycle
is still poorly-enough understood that the atmospheric cycling of water and
cloud formation are inadequately represented in global climate models. As
the transformation from liquid into vapor tends to deplete water of the
isotope deuterium, Frankenberg et al. (p. _1374_
(http://www.info-aaas.org/l.jsp?d=2455.289846.654.4uN8ldid5) ) were able to use satellite measurements of
global "heavy" water abundances to provide a deeper understanding of
atmospheric water dynamics.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Note: Electric generating stations having an overall thermal efficiency
of less than 37% are
very good cloud makers, because the waste heat is mostly used to evaporate
"cooling" water.
When the Longview power plant comes on-stream with its 14 cooling tower
units, we will see
plenty more clouds in the Morgantown area, and slick roads in
winter........... Duane Nichols
Economic View..............
Carbon Offsets:
A Small Price to Pay for Efficiency
By ROBERT H. FRANK
Published: May 30, 2009 in the New York Times
ARE carbon offsets a good thing?
They are intended to reduce the environmental impact of consumption.
Traveling by plane, for example, causes carbon dioxide to be emitted into the
atmosphere, so travelers can pay a specialist to offset those emissions some
other way — perhaps by planting vegetation or installing renewable-energy
technologies. It all sounds reasonable.
Yet carbon offsets have drawn sharp criticism, even ridicule. A British Web
site called Cheat Neutral (_www.cheatneutral.com_
(http://www.cheatneutral.com/) ) parodies the concept — by offering a service under which someone
who wants to cheat on his partner can pay someone else who will refrain from
committing an act of infidelity. The site’s founders say they wanted to
use humor to demonstrate why the market for carbon offsets is a moral
travesty.
But the criticism is misguided. If our goal is to reduce carbon emissions
as efficiently as possible, offsets make perfect economic sense.
Consider the decision of whether to buy a hybrid car. Because of the
expensive batteries and other complex equipment in such cars, they can cost much
more than similar vehicles powered by standard combustion engines. Many
people drive so little that they wouldn’t save enough on gasoline to recoup
the higher cost. Yet many such people buy hybrids anyway, because they think
they are helping the environment. Well and good, but they could help even
more by buying a standard car and using the savings to buy carbon offsets.
The same goes for someone who wonders whether it’s O.K. to eat foods grown
far from home. A New Yorker may worry, for example, that the diesel fuel
burned to ship California-grown tomatoes to him in winter will accelerate
_global warming_ (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/ne
ws/science/topics/globalwarming/index.html?inline=nyt-classifier) . But suppose he would be happy to pay
$10 more than the cost of shipping those tomatoes rather than eat locally
grown root vegetables nine months a year. That would buy more than enough
carbon offsets to neutralize the greenhouse gases emitted by shipping the
tomatoes. So it would be much better, for him and the planet, if he bought
offsets and ate winter tomatoes.
Of course, carbon offsets alone won’t eliminate global warming. People also
need stronger incentives to take into account the environmental
consequences of their actions.
_President Obama_
(http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/o/barack_obama/i…) has proposed attacking the
problem with a carbon cap-and-trade system. The government would first set a
limit on annual carbon emissions, then auction emissions permits to the
highest bidders. Companies could still use processes or sell products that
emit carbon, but only by first buying a permit for each unit of carbon
released. If the government wanted to limit carbon emissions to five billion tons
a year, for example, it would auction that many tons of annual carbon
permits.
This approach was first used in the United States to address acid rain,
when the _Clean Air Act_
(http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/subjects/c/clean_air_ac…) established a
market for permits to emit sulfur dioxide. Compared with more traditional
regulatory measures, the auction method substantially reduced the cost of
achieving the law’s air-quality target.
As people learn more about such an approach, they seem less likely to
oppose it. Although several environmental groups once bitterly opposed pollution
permit auctions, they now endorse them enthusiastically.
A carbon cap-and-trade system is functionally similar to a carbon tax. Both
approaches would raise the cost of activities that generate carbon dioxide
emissions, giving people a powerful incentive to reduce their carbon
footprints. Carbon offsets are no substitute for the stronger incentives
inherent in carbon taxes or cap-and-trade, but they can reinforce their effects.
Both carbon taxes and permit auctions would also generate revenue that could
be used to buy additional carbon offsets.
Dozens of companies, nonprofit and for-profit, sell carbon offsets, and
some critics question how their work can be verified. But with various
certification programs now in place — including the Gold Standard and Green-e
Climate, to name two — there is no reason that fraud should be harder to curb
in carbon-offset markets than in other domains.
At last count, Cheat Neutral, the British infidelity neutralization Web
site, said it had offset 65,768 cheats, and had recruited a roster of “9,002
faithful people ready to neutralize your misdemeanors.” The Web site draws
out the parallel this way: “When you cheat on your partner you add to the
heartbreak, pain, and jealousy in the atmosphere.” Cheat Neutral claims that
its plan “neutralizes the pain and unhappy emotion and leaves you with a
clear conscience.”
Actually, no. Only you will know whether your conscience is clear, but it
is certain that higher rates of marital fidelity in London do nothing to
eliminate the anguish caused by straying spouses in Manchester. In contrast,
one person’s reduction in carbon dioxide emissions anywhere on the planet
fully offsets anyone else’s contribution to the total.
Carbon offsets, though much maligned, are an excellent idea. If you want to
help reduce carbon emissions, consider buying some.
Robert H. Frank, a Cornell University economist, is a visiting faculty
member at the Stern School of Business at New York University. He is the author
of “The Economic Naturalist’s Field Guide: Common Sense Principles for
Troubled Times,” which will be published on Monday. (That's Monday June
1st).
Climate Reversal [Science, September 4, 2009]
CREDIT: KAUFMAN ET AL.
The climate and environment of the Arctic have changed drastically over the
short course of modern observation. Kaufman et al. (p. _1236_
(http://www.info-aaas.org/l.jsp?d=2403.285504.654.2bqZKHifm) ) synthesized 2000 years
of proxy data from lakes above 60° N latitude with complementary ice core
and tree ring records, to create a paleoclimate reconstruction for the Arctic
with a 10-year resolution. A gradual cooling trend at the start of the
record had reversed by the beginning of the 20th century, when temperatures
began to increase rapidly. The long-term cooling of the Arctic is consistent
with a reduction in summer solar insolation caused by changes in Earth's
orbit, while the rapid and large warming of the past century is consistent
with the human-caused warming.