States Can Pursue Their Own Emissions Standards, says Federal Court

In the continuing saga of whether California, and 15 other states, can set their own emissions standards, a Federal Court gave a win to environmentalists and threw out a suit brought on by 10 automakers. The lawsuit was an attempt to block implementation of a California law. The California law under question requires an average mileage rating of 41 mpg by 2015 (the recent federal law requires 37 mpg by 2015).

In Monday's decision, the judge took what environmental lawyers described as an unusually strident tone in denying appeals by the automakers to delay implementation of the California law until 2017 in the event that a Clean Air Act waiver from the EPA was granted.
The judge also rejected the automakers' interpretation of a federal statute -- revolving around the word "or" -- that would make California's law unenforceable.

"The interpretation requested is without support in law, logic, or grammar," the judge wrote, denying all the motions filed by the auto industry and calling for the case to be wrapped up within 30 days.

Remember, California requested a waiver from the Clean Air Act in order to set their own emissions standards. The EPA declined the waiver, for one of the few times in EPA history and its rationale has been shady, at best.

As a side note, Congress asked the EPA for documents related to the December 2007 Clean Air Act waiver denial be handed over in an investigation, but the White House refused and cited 'executive privilege'. Both Senators Obama and McCain support the waiver.

The Little Solar Guys May Lose in the Long Run

A New York Times article today outlines the growing pains of the nation's solar market. When states, such as New Jersey and California, offer solar rebates they find that the rebate program lags too far behind to satisfy customers, the State, and small installers.

New Jersey's answer is to phase out the rebate program in favor of an energy credit market. Larger companies would gain a distinct advantage and would force smaller companies out of business merely because of their size and access to capital. They can purchase energy credits and/or gain credits through new installations. Small companies will be squeezed out of this market because of their lack of working capital.

Large companies are already working with customers through power purchase agreements. These agreements give customers lower rates on electricity and the installation company finances and owns the equipment.

The agreements are a good plan for many residential customers and they will become more commonplace in years to come. Energy credit markets are also inevitable. The question remains: do we allow the small installers to survive in spite of these initiatives or are they fallout from the solar industry's growing pains?

Bush Will Seek to End Offshore Oil Drilling Ban

President Bush, reversing a longstanding position, will call on Congress on Wednesday to end a federal ban on offshore oil drilling, according to White House officials who say Mr. Bush now wants to work with states to determine where drilling should occur.

The move underscores how $4-a-gallon gas has become a major issue in the 2008 presidential campaign, and it comes as a growing number of Republicans are lining up in opposition to the federal ban.

The party’s presumptive presidential nominee, Senator John McCain of Arizona, used a speech in Houston on Tuesday to say he now favors offshore drilling, an announcement that infuriated environmentalists who have long viewed him as an ally. Florida’s governor, Charlie Crist, a Republican, immediately joined Mr. McCain, saying he, too, now wants an end to the ban.
Even before the disclosure of Mr. Bush’s decision, the drilling issue caused a heated back-and-forth on the campaign trail on Tuesday, as Mr. McCain sought to straddle the divide between environmentalists and the energy industry, while facing accusations from his Democratic opponent, Senator Barack Obama, that he had flip-flopped and capitulated to the oil industry.
In Washington, the White House press secretary, Dana Perino, said Mr. Bush would urge Congress to “pass legislation lifting the Congressional ban on safe, environmentally friendly offshore oil drilling,” adding, “The president believes Congress shouldn’t waste any more time.”

Click here for the full NY Times article.

Latest Honda Runs on Hydrogen, Not Petroleum

On Monday, Honda Motor celebrated the start of production of its FCX Clarity, the world’s first hydrogen-powered fuel-cell vehicle intended for mass production. In a ceremony at a factory an hour north of Tokyo, the first assembly-line FCX Clarity rolled out to the applause of hundreds of Honda employees wearing white jump suits.

Honda will make just 200 of the futuristic vehicles over the next three years, but said it eventually planned to increase production volumes, especially as hydrogen filling stations became more common.

Honda said even the small initial production run represented progress toward a clean-burning technology that many rejected as too exotic and too expensive to gain wide acceptance.

But the technology has faced many hurdles, not the least of which has been the prohibitive cost of the fuel cells themselves. Honda says it has found ways to mass produce them, which promises to drive down costs through economies of scale. On Monday, it showed reporters its fuel-cell production line, which resembled a semiconductor factory more than an auto plant with its humming automated machinery and white smocked workers in dust-free rooms.

Click here for the full NY Times article.

China Pulls Ahead in the Great Carbon Race

For awhile it was neck and neck, but China has now clearly pulled ahead of the United States and become the world’s dominant source of carbon dioxide emissions. Elisabeth Rosenthal reports Friday on the results of a new analysis of emissions trends by the Dutch government. Here’s the lede:

China has clearly overtaken the United States as the world’s leading emitter of carbon dioxide, the main heat-trapping gas, a new study has found, its emissions increasing 8 percent in 2007. The Chinese increase accounted for two-thirds of the growth in the year’s global greenhouse gas emissions, the study found.

The report, released Friday by the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, found that in 2007 China’s emissions were 14 percent higher than those of the United States. In the previous year’s annual study, the researchers found for the first time that China had become the world’s leading emitter, with carbon emissions 7 percent higher by volume than the United States in 2006. Many experts had been skeptical of the earlier study, whose results were less clear-cut than those released Friday. The International Energy Agency had continued to say only that China was projected to overtake the United States by the end of 2007. Now there is little doubt.

“The difference had grown to a 14 percent difference, and that’s indeed quite large,” said Jos Olivier, a senior scientist at the Dutch agency. “It’s now so large that it’s quite a robust conclusion.”

Click here for the full NY Times article.

Running in Circles Over Carbon

Cutting carbon dioxide emissions is a fine idea, and a lot of companies would be proud to do it. But they would prefer to be second, if not third or fourth.

This is not a good way to get started in fighting global warming.

As efforts to pass a global warming bill collapsed in the Senate last week, companies that burn coal to make electricity were looking for a way to build a plant that would capture its emissions. There is a will and a way — several ways, in fact — to do just that.

Capturing carbon from these plants may become a lot more important soon. Emissions from coal-fired power plants already account for about 27% of American greenhouse emissions, but as prices for other fuels rise, along with power demand, utilities will burn more coal. And if cars someday run on batteries, a trend that $4-a-gallon gasoline will accelerate, then the utilities will burn even more fuel to generate the electricity to recharge those batteries.

This could be good news, because controlling emissions from a few hundred power plants is easier than controlling them from tens of millions of house chimneys, or hundreds of millions of tailpipes. And in the laboratory, at least, there are three very promising systems for capturing carbon dioxide before pumping it underground.

But supplying electricity is not like most other businesses. Unlike the companies that make microchips, clothing for teenagers or snack foods, the companies that make electricity can see no advantage in going first. This is true for the traditionally regulated utilities that can charge everything to a captive class of customers (if regulators approve), and it is also true for the “merchant generators,” who build power plants and sell their output on the open market.

Click here full the full NY Times article.

The Truck Stops Here

The Price of Diesel Is Forcing Truckers Out of Business

Newspapers across the country are leading with coverage of new, record-breaking gas prices, which hit the $4 mark for the first time this weekend. Even more worrisome is the price of diesel, which in addition to squeezing the pockets of truck drivers across the country, is beginning to drive up the cost of all consumer goods transported by trucks, which in the United States is 70 percent. What’s more, 80 percent of communities receive all of their freight by truck, which means that these primarily rural areas, which are already hit the hardest by rising gas prices, will also be squeezed the most as prices of other consumer goods rise with the cost of diesel.

With 8.5 million Americans employed in the trucking industry, and an increasing number of truckers being forced out of business every quarter, it’s time that we find effective solutions to combat rising gas and diesel prices in the short term—such as the Center for American Progress’ proposed “reliefbate”—and make the system more efficient and sustainable in the long term.

Click here for the full Center for American Progress article.

Industrial Nations Vow to Cut Oil Use

The world’s leading economies and oil consumers are pledging greater investment in energy efficiency and green technologies to curtail petroleum use.

In a joint statement on Sunday, energy ministers from the Group of 8 countries, the United States, Japan, Russia, Germany, France, Britain, Italy and Canada, joined by China, India and South Korea, also urged oil producers to increase output, which has stalled at about 85 million barrels a day since 2005.

They also called for cooperation between buyers and producers. But with little prospect for a surge in production anytime soon, the focus of Sunday’s meeting was on what wealthy nations should do to rein in consumption, while reducing carbon emissions blamed for global warming.

Click here for the full NY Times article.

US EPA Report on the Environment

Recently the US EPA released the Agency's 2008 Report on the Environment, also referred to as the EPA 2008 ROE. This provides the American people with an important resource from which they can better understand trends in the condition of the air, water, land, and human health of the United States.

The report discusses environmental indicators by region, such as air, water, land, etc

Click here to view the report.

Los Angeles' carbon footprint is a light one -- sort of...

According to the Brookings Institution, a prestigious Washington think tank, the Los Angeles metropolitan area emits less planet-warming carbon per capita than any big city except Honolulu, at least by some criteria.

In a report to be released today on energy use in residential buildings and highway transportation, Brookings ranks Los Angeles as greener than New York, with its network of subways; more virtuous than Portland, Ore., with its smartgrowth greenbelt, and, yes, even better than San Francisco, its eco-vain rival."We are not at all surprised," said Nancy Sutley, L.A.'s deputy mayor for energy and environment, citing the city's "moderate climate, with fewer heating and air-conditioning days, and its relatively newer, less drafty housing stock" than in many parts of the U.S.Moreover, she added, "sprawl is a lot worse in other parts of the U.S."But before the boasting starts, some words of caution: The calculations did not account for the fact that half the city's electricity comes from coal-fired power plants.

Instead, Brookings used a state-wide average that included the hydroelectric and nuclear plants in Northern California. Omitted from the data are emissions from industries and commercial buildings, and from local roads apart from federal highways.The researchers also chose metropolitan statistical areas, as defined by the U.S. Census Bureau. Those areas may allow for a uniform geographical comparison, but in the case of the Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana area, that omitted commutes from as far as Ventura, San Bernardino or Riverside counties.

"The data is fuzzy," said Andrea Sarzynski, a senior research analyst at Brookings. "We do the best we can."The 83-page report gives much of the credit to California's overall carbon-saving plans, including a stringent state building code and strict utility pricing rules for energy conservation.

Three other Golden State cities -- San Jose, San Francisco and San Diego -- rank among Brookings' top 10 in small per-capita footprints.By contrast, the report highlights the heavy carbon footprints of Southern, Midwestern and Northeastern regions of the country.

Click here for the full LA Times article.