GHG Regs Must Be Top Priority
January 9th, 2012 by Ann Weeks, Senior Counsel and Legal DirectorThis posting originally appeared in the National Journal’s Energy and Environment Expert Blog.
Setting greenhouse gas performance standards for new and existing coal-fired power plants has to be THE environmental, energy, and climate policy priority for 2012. Given the carbon footprint of this industry, building a new coal fired power plant without some level of carbon dioxide control is simply not justifiable technically, politically, or even economically. Cleaning plants up later costs more than building them with clean technology now.
The first of these U.S. EPA rules is now under review at the Office of Management and Budget, and EPA must finalize the rule in the late spring, under a consent decree with environmental groups. This rule is critical because coal-fired power plants are the largest stationary sources of carbon dioxide air pollution – and there is now available control technology permitting deep reductions, as we are seeing with the first applications for plants that capture and sequester carbon dioxide.
Read the rest of this entry »
Methane from Oil and Gas: Low-hanging Fruit that EPA Must Pick
December 5th, 2011 by David McCabe, Atmospheric Scientist
November 30th was the last day for public comments on EPA’s proposal to significantly update air emissions limits for most of the oil and natural gas industry. The proposal makes much-needed revisions to existing requirements, which in some cases are over 25 years old, and in expanding the coverage of these rules, recognizes the significant changes and expansion in the industry that has taken place since the rules were issued. The proposed rules make real progress in advancing cleanup for some of the biggest sources of pollution from the industry, but they do not go anywhere near far enough to curb the wholesale dumping of methane and other pollutants into the air.
Read the rest of this entry »
Underground Coal Gasification – Coming Soon to Wyoming?
November 2nd, 2011 by Mike Fowler, Director, Advanced Technology
After years of talk, things are starting to get real: developers are looking at pioneering underground coal gasification (“UCG”) projects in Wyoming. Some may see these projects as first steps to finally producing truly clean energy from coal, while others may perceive them as unnecessary, risky experiments. What’s the truth? Let’s explore the issues.
First, some unpleasant facts. Fossil fuel use has increased dramatically across the globe (China’s coal power plant fleet, most of it built in the last 10 years, is now more than twice the size of ours in the US) and appears likely to continue to mushroom (in South Asia alone there are 600 million people – roughly twice the population of the US – waiting for access to electricity). Even in the center of Europe, Germany, in its rush to move away from nuclear power, is considering building more coal power instead. And in the US, where coal usage has declined slightly, another plain fossil fuel – natural gas – has taken up the slack, with limited greenhouse gas advantages.
Read the rest of this entry »
Rethinking The Clean Energy “Race”
October 26th, 2011 by Armond Cohen, Executive DirectorThis posting originally appeared in the National Journal’s Energy and Environment Expert Blog.
For the last five years, the Clean Air Task Force has been working with companies in China and the United States on joint ventures to develop and market clean energy technologies in both countries and around the world. Based on that experience, we believe that the metaphor of a zero-sum China-US race on clean energy is misplaced and drives us to the wrong conclusions. Here are some perspectives that may make for a more productive discussion:
China is a critical ally in moving forward low-carbon energy development. CATF is working in China not only because it is the world’s largest carbon-emitting country, set to double its emissions by 2050, but also because China is a can’t-miss place to demonstrate new clean technologies at scale. Why?
Read the rest of this entry »
Ice and Oil; Oil and Ice
October 17th, 2011 by Ellen Baum, Senior ScientistThis posting originally appeared in the National Journal’s Energy and Environment Expert Blog.
Last month, U.S. scientists confirmed that the Arctic has lost the second highest annual amount of ice since monitoring began. Of the remaining ice, much more is thinner, single-year ice resulting from melting and refreezing during the year. Older, thicker multi-year ice has declined by 60% over the past 30 years.
If Arctic summer sea ice continues to melt at its current rate, we will be presented with significant opportunities to harvest more oil and gas from new sources in the Arctic. Indeed, 13% of the world’s undiscovered oil might be under Arctic ice, as might 30% of undiscovered natural gas. So, Arctic nations are lining up to get at those reserves. So the formula looks simple: less ice = more oil and more gas. And, as those resources are harvested and consumed, we expect the resulting rise in CO2, methane and other climate-forcing emissions will mean even less sea ice.
Read the rest of this entry »
Making Sense of Gas vs. Coal and Climate: A Look at the Recent Paper by Tom Wigley
September 14th, 2011 by David McCabe, Atmospheric ScientistThe last few months have seen a flurry of academic papers investigating whether using natural gas for power generation creates more global warming than using coal for power generation. A few have reached the startling conclusion that using gas for power is just as bad, or worse, than coal. The most recent of these is by Tom Wigley, a global leader in climate science, and therefore bears special examination. As we’ll argue below, natural gas is no climate panacea, especially over the time scales that Wigley examines. We need zero-carbon energy. But it is also important to consider how we get to that future, and natural gas – coupled with carbon capture and storage and tight controls on methane leaks – will likely have a big role to play there in the next few decades. It is critical that we accurately account for the climate impacts of gas, and we don’t agree with Wigley’s approach in two key areas.
Read the rest of this entry »
No More Fossil Energy Without Carbon Capture
July 19th, 2011 by Kurt Waltzer, Carbon Storage Development Coordinator, and Conrad Schneider, Advocacy DirectorThis posting originally appeared in the National Journal’s Energy and Environment Experts blog.
We have no choice but to develop low carbon coal technology. By 2015 China will have more than 950GW of coal power – three times the level in the U.S. Unlike plants in the U.S. though, the vast majority of the Chinese coal plants are brand new and will likely be around for half a century or more. India is right behind. If these new coal plants do not capture and store their carbon emissions, it’s game over for having any hope of fighting climate change.
Read the rest of this entry »
Natural Selection in the Energy Industry: Demise of the Dinosaurs
June 22nd, 2011 by Conrad Schneider, Advocacy DirectorLast week, amid great fanfare, American Electric Power Company (AEP) announced it would close twenty-one of its coal-fired electrical units in order to comply with proposed Clean Air Act regulations on the emissions of air toxics. Such compliance, AEP asserted, would be financially prohibitive. AEP claimed in a front-page article in the Chicago Tribune that such closures would result in higher monthly electricity bills for its customers. AEP’s proposed “solution” has been to call for a bill that would weaken the Clean Air Act, by providing more time to comply with laws that have been on the books since 1990.
Read the rest of this entry »
Subsidizing conventional biofuels: an idea whose time is over
June 20th, 2011 by Jonathan Lewis, Senior Counsel - Climate Policy, and Conrad Schneider, Advocacy DirectorThis posting originally appeared in the National Journal’s Energy and Environment Experts blog.
Finally, policies that prop up biofuels production are in the crosshairs, and not a moment too soon. Because over the last decade, the biofuels industry has grown accustomed to getting whatever it wants, with no questions asked. Those days, at long last, appear to be over.
Last week, the U.S. House of Representatives voted 283-128 to prohibit the federal government from using taxpayer dollars to pay for the new ethanol pumps, storage tanks, and other infrastructure the industry needs (but would prefer not to pay for). Hours later the Senate voted by nearly a three-to-one margin to pull the plug on a tax credit that benefits ethanol makers. The legislative developments came on the heels of a report by international agencies including the United Nations, the World Bank, and the World Trade Organization urging G20 member countries to repeal national-level measures “that subsidize (or mandate) biofuels production or consumption.” In Europe, meanwhile, the European Commission finally acknowledged that research it requested (but then attempted to hide) indicates that an expansion of EU biofuels policy will exacerbate deforestation and other climate-harmful land use practices.
Read the rest of this entry »
EPA Fiddles While Forests Burn
May 16th, 2011 by Ann Weeks, Senior Counsel and Legal DirectorEPA is fiddling while forests burn when it proposes to do nothing for the next three years to regulate “biogenic CO2” – including the CO2 emissions produced by burning forest biomass. Instead, it will convene a panel of experts to review whether or not there are carbon benefits to be gained from using wood and other biofuels for energy production. This decision is taken in response to complaints received from the National Alliance of Forest Owners (“NAFO”), and from its Senate and House champions, after intense lobbying.
NAFO claims that forest biomass is “carbon neutral:” the amount of CO2 emitted when forest biomass is burned is equal to the amount of CO2 taken up, or ‘sequestered’ by the biomass during its growth. Forest biomass sounds so harmless – humans have burned wood for centuries.
Read the rest of this entry »
