IN THIS ISSUE |
FINAL BOILER, INCINERATOR RULES CUT COMPLIANCE COSTS IN INITIAL PROPOSALS REPORT CHARGES EPA WITH FALSE BENEFIT-COST ESTIMATES FOR GHGs EPA UPDATES AIR TOXICS' ASSESSMENT WITH 2005 DATA JAY SAYS ______________________________________________________________ |
FINAL BOILER, INCINERATOR RULES CUT COMPLIANCE COSTS IN INTIAL PROPOSALS |
| EPA says it is proposing "sensible standards" that will provide significant public health benefits while cutting costs by nearly 50 percent; the agency is offering these standards for additional public review and comment. · Feb 28, 2011 The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency issued final Clean Air Act (CAA) standards for boilers and certain incinerators that reduce toxic air emissions, including mercury and soot, but cut the cost of implementation by about 50 percent (or $1.8 billion) from an earlier proposal issued last year. This action is in response to federal court orders, according to an EPA press release. Mercury, soot, lead, and other harmful pollutants released by boilers and incinerators can lead to developmental disabilities in children, as well as cancer, heart disease, aggravated asthma, and premature death in Americans. EPA said these standards will avoid between 2,600-6,600 premature deaths, prevent 4,100 heart attacks and avert 42,000 asthma attacks per year in 2014. In April 2010, EPA issued proposed rules in response to a September 2009 court order, prompting significant public input. The proposed rules followed a period that began in 2007, when a federal court vacated a set of industry-specific standards proposed during the Bush Administration. Based on the public input received following the April 2010 proposal, the agency made extensive revisions, and in December 2010 requested additional time for review to ensure the public’s input was fully addressed. The court granted EPA 30 days. Based on input from key stakeholders including the public, industry, and public health communities, the final standards represent "a dramatic cut in the cost of implementation, while maintaining maximum public health benefits," an EPA press release states. As a result, the agency estimates that for every dollar spent to cut these pollutants, the public will see between $10 and $24 in health benefits, including fewer premature deaths. The agency received more than 4,800 comments from businesses and communities. Public input included a significant amount of information that industry had not provided prior to the proposal. Based on this feedback and in keeping with President Obama’s executive order on regulatory review, EPA revised the draft standards based on the requested input to provide additional flexibility and cost-effective techniques. Because the final standards significantly differ from the proposals, The agency said it believes further public review is required and will reconsider the final standards under a CAA process that allows the agency to seek additional public review and comment to ensure full transparency. EPA’s reconsideration will cover the emissions standards for large and small boilers and for solid waste incinerators. The agency will release additional details on the reconsideration process in the near future to ensure the public, industry, and stakeholders have an opportunity to participate. About 200,000 boilers are located at small and large sources of air toxic emissions across the country. The final standards require many types of boilers to follow practical, cost-effective work practice standards to reduce emissions. To ensure smooth implementation, EPA is working with the departments of energy (DOE) and agriculture (USDA) to provide the diverse set of facilities impacted by the standards with technical assistance that will help boilers burn cleaner and more efficiently. DOE will work with large coal and oil-burning sources to help them identify clean energy strategies that will reduce harmful emissions and make boilers run more efficiently and cost-effectively. USDA will reach out to small sources to help owners and operators understand the standards and their cost and energy saving features. The types of boilers and incinerators covered by these updated standards include: · Boilers at large sources of air toxics emissions: There are about 13,800 boilers located at large sources of air pollutants, including refineries, chemical plants, and other industrial facilities. These standards (pdf) will reduce emissions of harmful pollutants including mercury, organic air toxics, and dioxins at some of the largest pollution sources. EPA estimates that the costs of implementation have been reduced by $1.5 billion from the proposed standard. Health benefits to children and the public associated with reduced exposure to fine particles and ozone from these large source boilers are estimated to be $22 billion to $54 billion in 2014. · Boilers located at small sources of air toxics emissions: There are about 187,000 boilers located at small sources of air pollutants, including universities, hospitals, hotels, and commercial buildings that may be covered by these standards (pdf). Due to the small amount of emissions these sources are responsible for, EPA has limited the impact of the final rulemaking on small entities. The original standards for these have been dramatically refined and updated to ensure maximum flexibility for these sources, including for some sources, revising the requirement from maximum achievable control technology to generally available control technology. The cost reduction from the proposed standard to the final is estimated to be $209 million. · Solid waste incinerators: There are 88 solid waste incinerators that burn waste at a commercial or an industrial facility, including cement manufacturing facilities. These standards, (pdf) which facilities will need to meet by 2016 at the latest, will reduce emissions of harmful pollutants including mercury, lead, cadmium, nitrogen dioxide, and particle pollution. The cost reduction from the proposed standard to the final is estimated to be $12 million. In separate but related actions, EPA is finalizing emission standards for sewage sludge incinerators (pdf). While there are more than 200 sewage sludge incinerators across the country, the agency said it expects that more than 150 are already in compliance. These standards will reduce emissions of harmful pollutants including mercury, lead, cadmium, and hydrogen chloride from the remaining 50 that may need to leverage existing technologies to meet the new standards. EPA has identified which non-hazardous secondary materials are considered solid waste when burned in combustion units. This distinction determines which CAA standard is applied when the material is burned. The non-hazardous secondary materials that can be burned as non-waste fuel include scrap tires managed under established tire collection programs. This step simplifies the rules and provides additional clarity and direction for facilities. To determine that materials are non-hazardous secondary materials when burned under the final rule, materials must not have been discarded and must be legitimately used as a fuel. The emissions standards for sewage sludge incinerators and the definition of solid waste are not part of this reconsideration. Source: EPA Copyright 2010, 1105 Media Inc |
REPORT CHARGES EPA WITH FALSE BENEFIT-COST ESTIMATES FOR GHGs |
| The report says EPA does not consider capital expenditures of manufacturers to meet regulatory deadlines or the basic law of demand „Ÿ that higher prices will reduce demand and economic output. · Mar 23, 2011 According to a Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) report, The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is relying on accounting tricks and gimmicks in its claims that clamping down on greenhouse gas emissions will produce more financial benefit than harm. In “Clearing the Air on the EPA's False Regulatory Benefit-Cost Estimates and Its Anti-Carbon Agenda,” author Garrett A. Vaughn has a number of criticisms: · EPA is claiming inflated benefits for clean air regulations, totaling $1.3 trillion net benefit or nearly twice the amount of U.S. military spending. However, EPA’s report does not consider capital expenditures of manufacturers to meet regulatory deadlines or the basic law of demand „Ÿ that higher prices will reduce demand (thus reducing economic output). · EPA claims that its past clean air enforcement has provided more than $30 of benefits for every dollar of cost, but unjustifiably implies future regulations of carbon dioxide (and other greenhouse gas) emissions under the Clean Air Act will have such benefits, too. In fact, EPA has also contradicted its own claim of enormous net benefits (gross benefits less costs) from its direct regulations already on the books, by supporting “cap-and-trade” legislation as a more efficient way to restrict emissions. · EPA’s anti-carbon campaign threatens to greatly undermine future U.S. economic growth and job creation, while doing virtually nothing to restrict global carbon dioxide emissions. In fact, the EPA’s campaign may actually stimulate global CO2 emissions by handing a competitive advantage to the more carbon-intensive economies of China, India, and several other countries. Vaughn is an independent economic consultant specializing in energy and the environment, according to the CEI press release. “The EPA is now trying to dress up the even more expensive alternative of direct regulation with the same inflated net benefit estimates prepared for true [Clean Air Act] pollutants such as particulate matter and nitrous oxides,” Vaughn said. “Congress and the administration understand well that EPA regulations actually impose costs far in excess of benefits, the EPA’s official claims to the contrary notwithstanding,” he said. Source: Competitive Enterprise Institute http://eponline.com/articles/2011/03/23/report-charges-epa-with-false-benefit-cost-estimates-or-ghgs.aspx?admgarea=ht.air EPA UPDATES AIR TOXIC' ASSESSMENT WITH 2005 DATA The assessment shows that between 1990 and 2005, air toxic emissions were reduced by about 42 percent from industrial and mobile sources.
Mar 14, 2011
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has released the fourth update of a computer tool that helps federal, state, local governments, and other stakeholders better understand the potential health risks from exposure to air toxics. The National Air Toxics Assessment (NATA) contains 2005 emissions data submitted primarily from the states for 178 pollutants. Models are used to make broad estimates of health risks for areas of the country. The tool is not designed to determine actual health risks to individuals living in these areas. Because the data submitted varies from state to state, it is also not possible to use the data to compare risks between different areas of the country. The assessment shows that EPA, the states, and industry are continuing to make progress to reduce air toxic emissions. Between 1990 and 2005, air toxic emissions were reduced by about 42 percent from industrial and mobile sources. NATA is used to identify which geographic areas, pollutants, and types of emission sources might need closer investigation to more fully characterize potential risks and determine if actions may need to be taken to protect public health. EPA can also use the assessment to work with communities to design their own local assessment, improve the agency’s emissions inventories, and identify priorities for expanding the air toxics monitoring network. Once risks are fully characterized, state air agencies can decide if steps should be taken to reduce air toxics emissions. In its summary (pdf), EPA identified the following compounds and their risks: National cancer risk driver: Formaldehyde, "likely carcinogenic to humans."
Regional cancer risk drivers: Benzene: "carcinogenic to humans," polyaromatic hydrocarbons: "likely carcinogenic to humans," and naphthalene: "suggestive evidence of carcinogenicity."
National cancer risk contributors: 1,3-butadiene, arsenic compounds, chromium compounds, coke oven emissions: all “carcinogenic to humans.”
Acetaldehyde, acrylonitrile, carbon tetrachloride; ethylene oxide, tetrachloroethylene: all “likely carcinogenic to humans.” 1,4-dichlorobenzene: “suggestive evidence of carcinogenicity.”
Ethylbenzene.
Regional cancer risk contributors: Nickel compounds: "carcinogenic to humans."
1,3-dichloropropene; methylene chloride: both "likely carcinogenic to humans.
National noncancer hazard drivers: Acrolein
Regional noncancer hazard drivers: 2,4-toluene diisocyanate, chlorine, diesel PM, hexamethylene diisocyanate, hydrochloric acid, and manganese compounds. Source: U.S. EPA http://eponline.com/articles/2011/03/14/epa-updates-air-toxics-assessment-with-2005-data.aspx |
JAY SAYS Dear reader, Global stocks weighed by oil price fears, Japanese quake ahead of US earnings season By Associated Press, Monday, April 11, 10:42 AM
LONDON — High oil prices and another strong earthquake in Japan kept a lid on stocks Monday despite optimism over the upcoming U.S. corporate earnings results season. One consequence of high oil prices is a reassessment of when interest rates will be lifted — last week, the European central bank became the first major central bank to hike borrowing costs, partly because high energy costs have pushed up inflation to uncomfortable levels. Sentiment was further weighed down by another strong aftershock in Japan, on the one month anniversary of the earthquake and tsunami that devastated the northeastern coast and triggered a still unresolved nuclear crisis. The aftershock struck after Asian markets had closed. “Another earthquake in Japan this morning is unnerving markets...it was a reminder how unstable the situation in Japan is,” said Jennifer Lee, an analyst at BMO Capital Markets. As well as monitoring corporate news, investors will have a raft of economic data to assess this week, with inflation figures set to take center stage in the U.S., Britain, the eurozone and China. They are expected to show that price pressures remain elevated, partly because energy and commodity costs continue to rise for a variety of reasons, not least the battle for control of Libya, an OPEC member. Other economic data this week includes U.S. retail sales and industrial production figures and China’s first estimate for economic growth in the first quarter of the year. 2011 is expected to be a growth year for the global economy. 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
|
|
|
