By ROBERT UKEILEY
robert ukeiley (rukeiley
@ igc.org) is a lawyer
who represents environmental nonprofits in
clean air act litigation
affecting energy issues.
EPA Launches Greenhouse Gas Regulation
On April 1, the United States formally began regu- lating greenhouse gases. While state and regional regulations have existed for years, April 1 marks
the signing of the first nationwide regulation. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued final regulations,
under the Clean Air Act, limiting greenhouse emissions
from cars and light trucks. The rules apply to model year
2012 vehicles, which manufacturers can begin selling on
Jan. 2. The Department of Transportation issued companion regulations the same day that essentially achieve the
same results. The regulations are nowhere as protective as
they could and should be.
For example, requirements are stricter in China and
Europe. Nevertheless, this is a major step forward both in
actual greenhouse gas emission reductions and as a statement by the United States that we are committed to actually
dealing with the climate crisis.
Under the Clean Air Act as it has existed for decades, if
a pollutant such as carbon dioxide is subject to regulation
in cars and trucks, then it must also be regulated at station-
ary sources such as power plants, coal mines, refineries and
oil and gas production fields. Thus, on March 29, the EPA
issued an official interpretation of the Clean Air Act that
effectively subjects new or modified major stationary sourc-
es to regulation of their greenhouse gas emissions. Sadly,
the EPA let major sources that get their final air pollution
permits prior to Jan. 2 continue to emit as much greenhouse
gas as they want. This nine-month delay may seem short
compared to the years and years we have been waiting for
greenhouse gas regulation. But thousands of megawatts
of coal-fired power plants and Powder River Basin mines,
containing hundreds of millions of tons of coal, will sneak
in under the deadline. The EPA is on shaky legal ground in
letting these massive sources of greenhouse gas pollution
take a pass. Hopefully, a court will overturn this so that all
proposed or recently permitted stationary sources will be
subject to greenhouse gas pollution regulation.
In any event, after Jan. 2, stationary sources of greenhouse gases will have to use “best available control technology” (BACT). This term includes cleaner fuels and clean
production processes. So, for example, a proposed coal-fired power plant will have to justify why it isn’t going to
burn switchgrass rather than coal and why it isn’t using the
most efficient technology to generate its electricity, even if
that would cause an increase in capital costs. This is something very different from the proposed “cap-and-trade”
programs being proposed in Congress, although some
congressional proposals would remove this requirement
in exchange for the cap-and-trade provisions. Unfortunately, BACT decisions are usually made by state agencies
on a very subjective basis. In this context, especially in the
South and Midwest, politics often trump science. Stationary sources will also be required to conduct an analysis of
how their greenhouse gas emissions will affect soils and
vegetation, as well as special places like national parks and
wilderness areas.
The stationary source regulations are different from
the car and light truck rules. Vehicles must meet defined,
numeric limits. Requiring BACT for greenhouse gases provides citizens and environmental nonprofits with another
tool to challenge dirty sources of energy. It also provides
potential investors with another uncertainty they must consider before gambling on antiquated technology to meet
our energy needs.
Navy on Fast Track to Veggie Jet Fuel
After four months of ground testing, the Navy launched an unmodified F/A- 18 “Green Hornet” shipboard fighter burning a 50/50 blend of JP- 5
petroleum-based fuel and camelina-derived biofuel. The supersonic flight
demonstration, at Naval Air Station Patuxent River in Maryland, on Earth
Day, is part of a plan to certify the fuel blend for regular use roughly by the end
of this year. By 2015, the Navy expects to reduce petroleum purchases by half,
with at least half its diesel and aviation fuel derived 100 percent from camelina
sativa, a weedy plant that can be grown on marginal non-agricultural land.
This isn’t greenwashing. The Pentagon is serious about operating at full
strength during any future oil embargo or petroleum shortage. In the April
issue of SOLAR TODAY (see the “Electric Rail” sidebar, page 35), we
reported on a Defense Department proposal to electrify 32,421 miles of U.S.
railways for the same reason: The military needs to ship equipment, goods
and personnel coast-to-coast in an oil crisis and must assume that the Panama
Canal may be inoperable. ST
Copyright © 2010 by the American Solar Energy Society Inc. All rights reserved.
The Navy’s F/A- 18 “Green Hornet” runs on a blend of
traditional and plant-derived fuels.
u.S. Navy photo By Kelly SchiNdler
