IN THIS ISSUE |
A LOT OF HOT AIR FINAL BOILER MACT, FOR NOW CARBON COUNTING BEHIND Jay Says |
A LOT OF HOT AIR |
by Roy Bigham
Posted: February 1, 2011 Despite threats from a less hospitable Capitol Hill, EPA's ability to create and enforce its regulations is still drawing breath
Let's be honest: being green does not always bring a positive return to the bottom line. We should admit too that environmental regulation is, under the accepted definition of a very loaded word, "socialist," i.e. regulations are written with the express intent of creating an artificial market impetus for businesses to control their emissions. And finally, since we're being candid, EPA is a truly massive executive agency that gives the White House far more power over American businesses. See the chart: EPA publishes an astonishing 1,700 to 2,000 documents in the Federal Register each calendar year, with more regulatory actions under review than any other agency.
Incoming House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Fred Upton, R-Mich., has made little secret of his plans to haul EPA's leaders before his committee to block the agency's efforts on greenhouse gas (GHG) emission controls. Meanwhile, Michael Burgess, R-Texas, told a local radio station over the holidays that the new Republican Congress will use the House's strongest tool, its control over the budget, to force its will on the federal agency.
The extent of EPA power was reiterated right before Christmas as the agency used a national press conference to announce its plans for setting GHG-related New Source Performance Standards for fossil fuel-burning power companies and petroleum refineries. One of the reporters asked if the agency thought Congress would stand in the way of these regulations, and was reminded that the third branch of government, the Supreme Court, declared that it was the obligation of EPA to regulate GHGs under authority of the Clean Air Act. The White House is prepared to keep the momentum going by way of the executive order without wasting a breath.
If you're going to argue that EPA's potency in directing the U.S. regulatory agenda is overwhelming, I would agree. To argue that EPA forces businesses to make economic choices, which they wouldn't otherwise, I again agree. But if you're expecting some hot air from new House leadership to scare this agency into redirecting U.S. environmental policy, don't hold your breath. 
|
Final Boiler MACT, For Now |
February 23, 2011 The EPA has established four new standards under the Clean Air Act (CAA) for boilers and incinerators in order to meet deadlines established by the courts. The new rules will impact large boiler systems, small area boiler system, solid waste incinerators and sewerage incinerators.
The EPA on Wednesday, Feb. 23, 2011, finally released its long-expected standards for boilers and incinerators. The agency was under a federal court order to produce the regulation on time, and was basically denied in a request to delay the standards until 2012. The agency had hoped to delay the release in order to re-propose new rules and have a chance for more public input.
Emission reductions will be required for mercury and soot, but the agency said the cost of implementation for businesses will be only about half of that from its April 2010 proposal. The lower costs were mostly because the agency decided that unless coal was the fuel source, the emissions were not so high. If a boiler burns natural gas or a similar clean fuel, the requirements are basically an annual tune up but if coal is burned, there will be additional requirements. Solid waste and sewerage sludge incinerators will also have additional monitoring requirements.
The agency received more than 4,800 comments from businesses and communities across the country in response to the proposed rules. Public input included a significant amount of information that industry had not provided prior to the proposal.
Because the final standards significantly differ from the proposals, the agency said it still believes further public review is required. The EPA is thus planning to reconsider the final standards in the near future and provide additional opportunity for public comment.
http://www.pollutionengineering.com/Articles/Industry_News/BNP_GUID_9-5-2006_A_10000000000001000328 CARBON COUNTING BEHIND
ormal survey at EUEC shows most power companies still are not measuring their GHG output A poll of energy and utility executives at this month's EUEC Energy & Environment conference in Phoenix shows an alarming 58 percent of those surveyed have no system in place to measure their greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
The survey, conducted by Enviance Inc. asked 143 attendees from energy and utility plants if their companies had emissions recording systems in place to meet current regulations, and over half said no. The agency at the last minute (Dec. 28 ) deferred some of the data that utilities must report until late August of this year, but the power industry is still responsible under the EPA's current regulations for reporting accurate GHG emissions for all of 2011 at the end of this year. Last year a similar poll by Enviance found nearly the same number - 61 percent - of respondents were not monitoring their CO2 or other GHGs. The Pollution Engineer -- PE's E-Monthly Newsletter - February 2011 Edition |
|
JAY SAYS Dear reader, As recently as 2002 the United States Geological Survey in its Assessment of Undiscovered Oil and Gas Resources of the Appalachian Basin Province, calculated that the Marcellus Shale contained an estimated undiscovered resource of about 1.9 trillion cubic feet of gas. [1] That's a lot of gas but spread over the enormous geographic extent of the Marcellus it was not that much per acre. In early 2008, Terry Englander, a geoscience professor at Pennsylvania State University, and Gary Lash, a geology professor at the State University of New York at Fredonia, surprised everyone with estimates that the Marcellus might contain more than 500 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. Using some of the same horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing methods that had previously been applied in the Barnett Shale of Texas, perhaps 10% of that gas (50 trillion cubic feet) might be recoverable. That volume of natural gas would be enough to supply the entire United States for about two years and have a wellhead value of about one trillion dollars! http://geology.com/articles/marcellus-shale.shtml Best regards,
Jay Klaus
JKlaus@KlausEquipment.com
Klaus Equipment Company, Inc.
President |
Klaus Equipment Company
Phone: 724-444-3420
Fax: 724-444-3425
2866 West Bardonner Road,
Gibsonia, PA 15044
|
|
|
