I said Texas was the tip of iceberg way back this past summer.
Press release last week claimed GHG rules went into effect in 2012/13. I tried shouting on those threads that was a falsehood. Here it it black and white for 2011.
EPA Proposes Updates to GHG Reporting Program
EPA is proposing actions ( http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/emissions/CBI.html ) under the GHG reporting program to address issues about the public availability of certain data that some businesses may consider to be confidential. The total emissions for each facility are still required to be reported to EPA and released to the public.
In July 2010, EPA proposed to determine that information included in emissions equations are emissions data and cannot be protected as confidential business information under the CAA. Under the proposed determination, EPA would have to make these data available to the public once they are submitted to the agency.
EPA is soliciting comments from stakeholders seeking more specific information about claims of business sensitivity regarding inputs to emissions equations and proposing to defer the deadline for reporting that data until March 2014. The new information and reporting deferral would allow EPA to assess the issue and make final decisions on how to treat the data elements in question. The proposals will not change the requirement that facilities retain these data so that EPA may directly follow up with facilities through on-site audits.
EPA is taking comment on the proposal to delay reporting of sensitive data for 30 days after publication in the Federal Register, or 45 days if a hearing is requested, and is accepting comments in response to EPA’s request for information for 60 days after publication in the Federal Register.
EPA’s GHG reporting program, launched in October 2009, requires the reporting of GHG emissions data from large emission sources and fuel suppliers across a range of industry sectors. The data will help guide the development of programs to reduce these emissions.
EPA to Set Modest Pace for GHG Standards
EPA issued its plan for establishing GHG pollution standards under the CAA in 2011. http://www.epa.gov/airquality/ghgsettlement.html The agency looked at a number of sectors and is moving forward on GHG standards for fossil fuel power plants and petroleum refineries—two of the largest industrial sources, representing nearly 40% of the GHG pollution in the United States. The schedule provides a clear path forward for these sectors and is part of EPA’s common-sense approach to addressing GHGs from the largest industrial pollution sources.
“We are following through on our commitment to proceed in a measured and careful way to reduce GHG pollution that threatens the health and welfare of Americans, and contributes to climate change,” Administrator Lisa Jackson said. “These standards will help American companies attract private investment to the clean energy upgrades that make our companies more competitive and create good jobs here at home.”
Several states, local governments, and environmental organizations sued EPA over the agency’s failure to update the pollution standards for fossil fuel power plants and petroleum refineries, two of the largest source categories of GHG pollution in the United States. Under the agreement, EPA will propose standards for power plants in July 2011 and for refineries in December 2011, and will issue final standards in May 2012 and November 2012, respectively.
This schedule will allow the agency to host listening sessions with the business community, states, and other stakeholders in early 2011, well before the rulemaking process begins, as well as to solicit additional feedback during the routine notice and comment period. Together this feedback will lead to smart, cost-effective, and protective standards that reflect the latest and best information.
The CAA requires EPA to set industry-specific standards for new sources that emit significant quantities of harmful pollutants. These standards, called New Source Performance Standards (NSPS), set the level of pollution new facilities may emit and address air pollution from existing facilities. The Act allows flexible and innovative approaches that take into account cost, health and environmental impacts, and energy requirements. EPA must also periodically update these standards to reflect improvements in control technologies.
Earlier this year, EPA issued what it described as a common-sense approach to GHG permitting for the largest industrial sources. This approach, the GHG permitting guidelines issued in November, and these standards will give power plants and refineries a clear and sensible path for addressing GHG pollution.
The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) issued a statement applauding the EPA announcement, “In New York, we have taken action to combat the unacceptable threat posed by climate change, with the knowledge that well-designed climate policies provide diverse societal benefits ranging from economic development and job creation to energy security and better air quality.” Acting Commissioner Peter Iwanowicz said. “EPA and the states can leverage these successful efforts to build a federal-state partnership that achieves maximum emission reductions in a cost-effective, efficient and non-duplicative manner.”
Earthjustice represented the Environmental Defense Fund and Sierra Club in a 2006 lawsuit challenging EPA’s most recent power plant standards and represents Sierra Club, Natural Resources Defense Council, and the Environmental Integrity Project in a 2008 lawsuit that led to the agreement on the timetable for refinery standards. Earthjustice attorney Tim Ballo said, “The EPA has a legal duty to respond to the very real dangers of global warming pollution by setting strong limits on carbon pollution from power plants and refineries. These are the nation’s biggest industrial sources of global warming pollution and deserve top priority.”
California Attorney General Jerry Brown said, “While California has been aggressive in regulating such emissions, until recently, the federal government has not. This is a tremendous achievement that will help the state reach its GHG emission goals under the state’s climate law, AB 32.”
EPA will accept public comment on these two agreements for 30 days following publication of notice in the Federal Register.
Here goes the price of energy.......out the window. Don’t be surprised if your heating bill for your house doubles. EPA is in control now, not Congress. Congress needs to step in and defund the EPA. This should be the first thing they take up when the 112th Congress starts up.
I have only one rule: Those pushing this scam are not allowed to exhale.
the benevolent federal government moves to ensure private companies will graciously be given sufficient permits to operate until state bureaucrats can develop rules to strangle them
Ain’t fascism grand
A Great big ole pingeroo...
wash your hands...it’s over.
Unconstitutional; this is regulating commerce interstate and an executive agency instituting LAW by fiat.
Where is the lawsuit and why is our Judicial branch always silent? Is the SCOTUS covered by free speech?
Those who will vote to overturn this (the 5) should grab a microphone and/or a Facebook page.
It’s time for outside the box thinking, not traditions. SCOTUS needs to be ahead of the curve.
Holy Cow!!!
EPA & ‘common sense’ in the same sentence!!!
What a joke.
Involves more than the seven states in the Press release...
Page 3 of the summary:
• In the second “narrowing rule” signed today, EPA is limiting its previous approval of title
V operating permit programs in 33 states including:
Alabama,
California,
Colorado,
District of Columbia,
Georgia,
Hawaii,
Illinois,
Iowa,
Kansas,
Louisiana,
Maine,
Maryland,
Minnesota,
Mississippi,
Missouri,
Nebraska,
Nevada,
New Hampshire,
New York,
Ohio,
Oklahoma,
Pennsylvania,
Rhode Island,
South Carolina,
South Dakota,
Tennessee,
Utah,
Vermont,
Virgin Islands,
Virginia,
Washington,
West Virginia,
and Wisconsin
And we can’t figure out why manufacturing has fled this country for less-restrictive, less-costly places??
Democrats have been outforcing jobs for 35 years, and this will outforce even more.
Like the CEO of Emerson Electric said last year, Why should he created jobs in AMERICA, when the government isn’t interested in any way in making it profitable for him?
how long does this gorebal warming crap have to be dead before it gets buried?
Global Warming Hoax Deniers are destroying jobs!
Yet another violation of the 1st Amendment’s Establishment Clause...
THE ILLEGAL POWER GRAB BEGINS
More ref data from a previous posting:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2646907/posts
U.S. EPA’s new rules for power plants, refineries and other large industrial facilities will “deprive Texas of its right to manage its air resources,” the state says in a petition filed last week with the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The plea to the New Orleans-based court, which has jurisdiction over Texas but doesn’t usually review challenges to Clean Air Act programs, is the state’s last-ditch effort to stop the regulations from taking effect in two weeks.
Petition (PDF)(29 PAGES)
http://www.eenews.net/assets/2010/12/20/document_gw_01.pdf
court filing Friday, the Obama administration urged the 5th Circuit to throw out Perry’s new petition, saying that the D.C. Circuit is responsible for weighing these types of requests. Texas’ request is “an improper attempt to re-litigate before this court its unsuccessful arguments,” the Justice Department argued in its response.
Court Filing
(PDF)(26 PAGES)
http://www.eenews.net/assets/2010/12/20/document_gw_02.pdf
Source:
EPA: Texas seeks home-court edge in bid to block climate rules
http://www.eenews.net/public/Greenwire/2010/12/20/2
Possibly Related
U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit Opinions
Released on December 21, 2010
Argued September 17, 2010 Decided December 21, 2010
NATIONAL PETROCHEMICAL & REFINERS ASSOCIATION,PETITIONER v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, RESPONDENT
(PDF)(40 PAGES)
http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/201012/10-1070-1284126.pdf
Source:
http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/bin/opinions/allopinions.asp
Ping