By Rachel Fullmer

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is refusing to move forward with the implementation of health-based standards that protect Americans from dangerous ground-level ozone pollution — more commonly known as smog.

That’s why Environmental Defense Fund, along with a broad coalition of public health and environmental groups, sent a letter to EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt informing him that we will take legal action if he does not carry out his mandatory duty to begin implementing our nation’s 2015 health-based smog standard.

Smog is a caustic pollutant that irritates the lungs, exacerbates lung conditions like asthma, and is linked to a wide-array of serious heart and lung diseases.

It is particularly harmful for children, seniors, people with lung impairments like asthma, and anyone active outdoors.

Under the Clean Air Act, October 1, 2017 was the deadline for identifying the communities that meet our nation’s health-based smog standard, and for identifying those that are violating the standard. Administrator Pruitt missed this mandatory deadline to begin implementing the smog safeguards.

The Clean Air Act’s statutory deadlines are not merely suggestions – they are of critical importance to achieving better air quality. When EPA shirks mandatory deadlines, the Clean Air Act’s mechanisms to improve air quality fail to engage and American families suffer the harmful effects of breathing polluted air for longer.

Administrator Pruitt unlawfully attempted to extend this same deadline, by one year, earlier this summer. However, he was forced to withdraw this extension and reinstate the October 1, 2017 deadline in response to legal challenges filed by EDF and our public health partners, and by a coalition of 16 state Attorneys General.

Now Pruitt has failed to meet the deadline – adding to his concerning pattern of delay, and undermining these important public health safeguards.

Here’s more on the consequences of ignoring our national health-based smog standards:

By delaying implementation of the standards, EPA is allowing vulnerable communities to suffer the consequences of polluted air while Administrator Pruitt stalls.

For instance, delaying the standards will mean that residents of the Uintah Basin in Northeastern Utah will potentially be faced with more and longer exposure to pollution levels that at times can rival smoggy Los Angeles.

This is truly unacceptable when there are clear solutions for reducing smog and protecting public health, such as reducing the pollution emitted from the thousands of oil and gas wells that dot the basin – common sense solutions that would be helped along if the 2015 health-based smog standard was properly and timely implemented.

Administrator Pruitt’s failure to identify which communities have air quality that violates the health standard obscures Americans’ basic right to know whether the very air we breathe meets the level that EPA has determined to be healthy.

The health-based national air quality standard for deadly air pollutants like smog form the foundation of the Clean Air Act — a bedrock public health statute that has provided for extraordinary, bipartisan progress in protecting Americans’ health and the environment for more than 40 years.

These consensus-backed health standards save lives and protect American families. By EPA’s own estimate, compliance with the 2015 smog standard will save hundreds of lives, prevent 230,000 asthma attacks in children, and prevent 160,000 missed school days for children each year.

Failure to carry out his responsibilities under our nation’s clean air laws also demonstrates Administrator Pruitt’s disregard for the recommendations of EPA’s own public health experts and scientists.

The 2015 health-based standard for smog was developed through a rigorous and extensive rulemaking process over the course of several years, and the science on smog’s health impacts is well-established.

EPA finalized a revised, strengthened standard of 70 parts per billion after engaging in a transparent, public process and relying on well-established scientific information and the recommendations of an independent committee of scientific advisors.

Administrator Pruitt has a legal duty to carry out the health standard to ensure healthier, longer lives for millions of Americans afflicted by dangerous smog pollution. That’s why EDF joined so many others in telling him we’ll go to court if he doesn’t.

Those joining us on the notice of intent to sue are the American Lung Association, American Public Health Association, American Thoracic Society, Appalachian Mountain Club, Earthjustice, Environmental Law & Policy Center, National Parks Conservation Association, Natural Resources Defense Council, Sierra Club and West Harlem Environmental Action.

The Attorneys General of New York, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Mexico, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and Washington D.C. sent a similar letter.

We urges Administrator Pruitt to “expeditiously” carry out his responsibility under our nation’s clean air law to protect the health of our families and communities. There is no time to waste.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is refusing to move forward with the implementation of health-based standards that protect Americans from dangerous ground-level ozone pollution — more commonly known as smog. That’s why Environmental Defense Fund, along with a broad coalition of public health and environmental groups, sent a letter to EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt informing […]

Governor Wolf claims he is protecting the health of Pennsylvanians and their environment, but his actions since taking office tell a different story. We need the Pennsylvania legislature to step up. MCAF. Regional. C4.

Governor Wolf claims he is protecting the health of Pennsylvanians and their environment, but his actions since taking office tell a different story. We need the Pennsylvania legislature to step up. MCAF. Regional. C4.

Governor Wolf claims he is protecting the health of Pennsylvanians and their environment, but his actions since taking office tell a different story. We need the Pennsylvania legislature to step up. MCAF. Regional. C4.

Written by Lisa Bennett

For the 15 million of us who live in Northern California, life changed two weeks ago.

It was not only the horrifying loss of lives, homes, communities, landscapes and the ravaging of Wine Country, a tourist destination more popular than Disney World.

It was the shock of how suddenly life can change—and on such a massive scale.

It was the unavoidable proof that we are interconnected in this climate-changing world. Some experience supersized hurricanes, some drought and unprecedented wildfires, some sea level rise.

And it was the awful feeling of being powerless to protect one’s children from the most fundamental thing in the world: the air we breathe.

In a matter of days, the wildfires created as many carbon emissions as are emitted in a year from all the cars on the road in California, which already suffered from the worst air pollution in the nation.

Bay Area Wake Up

Nearly 40 percent of Americans—125 million people—live where the air is unhealthy to breathe everyday.

Yet in Bay Area, an admittedly privileged place, we haven’t been confronted with severely poor air quality before. And many of us are big outdoor people: We live here for the spectacular natural offerings. We socialize on hikes, while rock climbing, or surfing.

Then, in a matter of days, our air quality was as bad as Beijing’s. Schools were closed. Outdoor activities canceled. People were wearing ask masks, and stores could not keep them in stock.

Those communities most directly affected, in Napa, Sonoma, and Mendocino counties, were declared severe health hazards.

But the fires were so vast that if you lived in San Francisco, Berkeley, or Oakland, you could have thought they were in your own relative backyard. The sky was bluish, the evening sun red, the smell unavoidable. We were repeatedly on the “highest five” list for the worst air quality in the nation. And we were staying indoors, windows closed.

Another Hit to the American Dream

The reality of what has happened—above all, for those most directly affected—is indescribable. It is, as Gov. Brown said, the worst tragedy in our state’s history.

And while influenced by a number of factors, including high winds, climate change, as the Governor and fire officials have said, has made these fires much worse. Years of severe drought will do that.

The symbolism is also hard to miss. California, in some ways, epitomizes the American Dream—a dream that, across the nation, has recently suffered many slings and arrows. And, now, in the Golden State, it has suffered this one.

So What Happens Now?

Like the hurricanes that devastated Puerto Rico, Houston, and parts of Florida, the catastrophic fires in California point to some important things that we could allow to change us for the good. For example:

• We really are all connected in this.
  One of the reasons that we face some of the environmental crises we do, as my co-authors and I wrote in Ecoliterate, is because our complex global society has created a vast collective blind spot about the effects of human behavior on natural systems.If a small indigenous society farmed unsustainably one year, for example, the people would directly experience the consequences of it the next year—and likely change their ways. But with our food, production, and other systems spread across the planet, consequences are a lot harder for us to grasp.Still, the reality is that we are interconnected in the causes as well as the consequences of climate change, as these fires have so dramatically shown. A wealthy community can be wiped out as quickly as a poor one. And there are no borders on the air.
• It’s OK to get mad as hell about the unconscionable failure to protect people—children, especially—from climate change.
  As parents, we all want to protect our children from harm. Some things we can’t protect them from, and that’s always a hard pill to swallow. But the science on climate change has been clear for decades; so have the solutions.The only thing that has ever been lacking is the political will. And if you want to understand why, you only need, as they say in journalism circles, to follow the money. It leads right back to oil and coal interests, as The New Yorker writer Jane Mayer chronicles in Dark Money.Should we quietly if grudgingly accept this—knowing unprecedented tragedies such as those we have seen this year are the result? Hell no. We need to marshal a political will stronger than that of those who lobby for the self-destructive status quo. As mothers, we can do this. If you need inspiration, just look to the Grandmothers of Plaza de Mayo.
• In difficult times, humans are capable not only of radical hope but of great kindness and ordinary heroism.
  In Rebecca Solnit’s book, Paradise Built in Hell, she reveals that people often respond to calamity not with chaos, greed, and violence but with spontaneous altruism, self-organization and mutual aid. The 1906 San Francisco earthquake is one of her examples. What we have seen in response to the Wine Country wildfires is no different.And while only some can be as brave as the firefighters who have been risking their lives for others, many more of us are capable of ordinary heroism. We can rise above our usual ways, even put ourselves at risk for the benefit of others. We’re parents. This is what we do. And this is what we must do now in more forcefully demanding bold climate action—not the unjustifiable backsliding we’ve seen from Washington, D.C., this year.

So imagine if after the shock of California’s wildfires, we put some of these things into action—for the sake of everyone’s children, now and to come? It would, perhaps, be one good thing to rise from the ashes.

TELL CONGRESS: NOBODY VOTED TO MAKE AMERICA DIRTY AGAIN

SaveSave

SaveSave

SaveSave

SaveSave

SaveSave

SaveSave

Written by Molly Rauch

When Michael Dourson, Trump’s nominee to head EPA’s chemical safety office, was grilled by the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee earlier this month, I sat in the hearing room thinking about what, exactly, was at stake. Next to me were families who had traveled to DC from Indiana because their groundwater is contaminated with TCE, an industrial solvent linked to cancer. One of those families has a child in treatment for cancer. Another lost their child to cancer.

Last year, with your help, Congress—with rare bipartisan spirit—passed a law to better regulate toxic chemicals. That law is meant to protect children from chemical exposures that may cause cancer. It should go without saying—but not these days: The bill must be implemented by someone who wants to protect children’s health.

Dourson has built his career as a consultant for chemical companies. Paid by the chemical industry, he has dangerously downplayed the health risks of TCE, the carcinogen that contaminated groundwater in Indiana and many other states; 1,4-dioxane, established by scientists and medical researchers to be a likely carcinogen; flame retardants; and PFOA, a stain resistant chemical made by DuPont that harms the developing brains of babies and children.

PFOA has contaminated water supplies in New York, Ohio, and West Virginia. In West Virginia, Dourson helped the state environmental protection department set a safety level for PFOA that was 150 times higher than the maximum level DuPont’s own scientists had set. This standard, more than 2,000 times less stringent than the one the EPA now recommends, stayed in place for four years, and determined which families DuPont was required to supply with clean water.

For decades, if you were a big company facing health challenges from EPA, you knew just what to do: Ask Dourson for a review of your toxic product. What you would get in return: A recommendation that the government weaken health standards for that chemical.

In the Senate hearing room, I was shocked at Dourson’s reluctance to acknowledge the health harms of a range toxins, from petcoke to PFOA. He also boldly refused to recuse himself from deliberations about the very chemicals he has been paid to champion. Watching the emotional reaction of those families next to me was physically painful.

Let’s get one thing straight. When moms talk about protecting children from chemical exposures, we are talking about cancer, birth defects, and other devastating issues.

Dourson has built a career supporting industry polluters. He has worked for Dow Chemical, Koch Industries, DuPont, and Chevron to whitewash the impact of chemicals linked to a range of health problems.

Dourson even took money from Big Tobacco to downplay the health effects of breathing second hand cigarette smoke.

This is the wrong guy for the job.

Tell your Senator: Dourson should not be responsible for protecting our children from toxic chemicals.

SaveSaveSaveSave

SaveSaveSaveSave

Each year, $330 million dollars of natural gas is wasted on our public lands through the harmful practices of venting and flaring. MCAF. C3. Regional.

Each year, $330 million dollars of natural gas is wasted on our public lands through the harmful practices of venting and flaring. MCAF. C3. Regional.

Each year, $330 million dollars of natural gas is wasted on our public lands through the harmful practices of venting and flaring. MCAF. C3. Regional.

Clean energy is on the rise in America, and there’s no denying it. Each year, investments in renewable sources of power continue to increase, bringing with it economic and job growth. In fact, it’s on track to deliver an increasing share of total energy supply, putting traditional energy sources to the side. That’s why organizations […]

By Daniel Hill

Clean energy is on the rise in America, and there’s no denying it. Each year, investments in renewable sources of power continue to increase, bringing with it economic and job growth. In fact, it’s on track to deliver an increasing share of total energy supply, putting traditional energy sources to the side. That’s why organizations across the country are turning to renewable energy as a way to meet their sustainability goals and cut energy costs.

We’re at a time when corporate America is stepping up to the plate on climate leadership. Bigger, more ambitious commitments are being set and bolder targets announced. And renewable energy can be the tool to meet them. But it means the scale and sophistication of clean energy projects must grow. Small-scale, on-site solar installations are not always large enough to generate the quantity of power necessary. So businesses are turning to another route: wholesale renewable energy procurement.

Companies often want to increase their amount of renewable energy, but are limited by facility, land or regulatory constraints. Navigating the various options and becoming familiar with the specifics can be a challenging and time consuming process. To get around some of these operational hurdles, an increasing number of companies are turning to larger volume wholesale procurement—taking advantage of industry economies of scale—as a way to add renewable energy to their portfolio.

Companies turn to larger volume wholesale procurement as a way to add renewable energy to their…
Click To Tweet

The most common type of wholesale procurement is a power purchase agreement (PPA). A PPA is a long-term contract that enables developers to secure financing for renewable energy projects, allowing companies to save money on their energy costs by locking in predictable prices.

What’s so great about wholesale power procurement? The ability to construct large systems in locations best suited for optimization allow companies to benefit from greater scale and lower costs. It’s a lower-risk option, providing a reliable, predictable supply and cost for energy, and they typically require no upfront capital expenditure with a PPA. By having the systems off-site, facilities won’t be impacted and there will be greater flexibility in project design. And it’s continuously evolving with new models created, becoming a suitable option for even more businesses.

How it works: In a PPA, a third-part provider arranges for the design, permitting financing and installation of a system, and sells the power generated to the host customer at a fixed rate that is usually lower than the utility’s retail rate. Keep in mind the state pricing for PPA’s can vary widely. Through either a “physical” or “virtual” PPA, companies have the opportunity to scale nearly a limitless amount of electricity.

Earlier this fall, Anheuser-Busch, one of the country’s largest beer producers, announced a new PPA for 152.5 MW of renewable electricity, representing 50 percent of the company’s annual electricity use, up from the current amount of less than 2 percent of total supply. This is the company’s first utility-scale project, and it’s expected to significantly reduce overall emissions from its operations.

Make it right for you

For companies looking to pursue any type of PPA, internal preparation is key. It’s important that all necessary stakeholders are involved (facility management, legal, financing, accounting, etc.) to be aware of all the ins-and-outs of the process. Understanding how your company uses energy will have a big impact on the design of your procurement plan. Ensure there’s a good match for your site and identify all potential barriers that could interfere with the project before moving forward with it. Because not surprisingly, there’s no one-size-fits-all approach that will solve your energy problems.

But PPAs might not always be what’s best for your organization. Depending on the geographic location and site characteristics, on-site renewable energy or other financial instruments might represent the best savings opportunity, especially in states with high electricity tariffs, retail net metering programs, and good solar insolation (or access to the sun).

EDF’s Supply Chain Solutions Center is hosting a webinar on renewable energy procurement and how it can benefit your company. An expert from Forefront Power will lead the conversation.

Stay on top of the latest facts, information and resources aimed at the intersection of business and the environment. Sign up for the EDF+Business blog. [contact-form-7]

 

Clean energy is on the rise in America, and there’s no denying it. Each year, investments in renewable sources of power continue to increase, bringing with it economic and job growth. In fact, it’s on track to deliver an increasing share of total energy supply, putting traditional energy sources to the side. That’s why organizations […]

Clean energy is on the rise in America, and there’s no denying it. Each year, investments in renewable sources of power continue to increase, bringing with it economic and job growth. In fact, it’s on track to deliver an increasing share of total energy supply, putting traditional energy sources to the side. That’s why organizations […]

By John Finnigan

Studies show that customers with access to energy-use data can save up to 18 percent on their energy bills every month. Based on a typical monthly bill of $120, households could save nearly $360 every year – a substantial chunk of change.

This type of energy data is gathered by advanced metering infrastructure (AMI), specifically smart meters. Yet collecting the data isn’t enough to see those savings – customers need access to the information and new products and services, like cell phone apps, to help understand it.

That’s why Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), along with our partners Ohio Environmental Council and Mission:data, recommend that the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio require Duke Energy to release customers’ energy-use information, specifically through the implementation of the Green Button Connect My Data program.

Duke is currently asking Ohio for $143 million to replace its smart meters. The utility wants its Ohio customers to foot the bill for the new meters without giving them access to their meter data. Sharing the data would give customers a chance to enjoy significant potential savings from their investment in AMI. Sharing anonymized electricity data with third-parties would enable businesses to develop new products and services, too.

These Ohio customers pay for their smart meters, and they should have access to the benefits
Click To Tweet

Benefits of data

AMI offers considerable operational benefits for utilities, like the ability to read meters remotely and quickly assess usage and pinpoint problem sites.

Additionally, smart meters open the door for benefits beyond energy savings for consumers. One study estimates between 33 and 66 percent of the potential benefits of AMI may be customer benefits. In addition to saving money, people can better diagnose when appliances aren’t running efficiently or compare the costs and benefits of installing solar panels, for example.

Green Button

Customers with access to this information typically save 6 to 18 percent on their energy bills every month.

Duke should unlock these customer benefits by implementing the Green Button Connect My Data program, part of standards developed by the U.S. Departments of Energy and Commerce to grant customers “easy and secure access to their energy-usage information.” Basically, Green Button uses a software language that would allow Duke’s smart meters to interface with customers’ home energy monitors and appliances, as well as third-party energy-savings products and services. As mentioned above, customers with access to this information typically save 6 to 18 percent on their energy bills every month – or approximately $10 to $30 per month (based on a typical monthly bill of $120). For comparison, installing Green Button Connect is a one-time cost of less than $2.00 per customer.

Customers pay 100 percent of the cost for their smart meters in their monthly utility bills, and they should have the opportunity to receive 100 percent of the available benefits. By implementing Green Button Connect My Data, Duke can make that happen – opening the door to more efficient, smarter energy use.

Studies show that customers with access to energy-use data can save up to 18 percent on their energy bills every month. Based on a typical monthly bill of $120, households could save nearly $360 every year – a substantial chunk of change. This type of energy data is gathered by advanced metering infrastructure (AMI), specifically […]

Studies show that customers with access to energy-use data can save up to 18 percent on their energy bills every month. Based on a typical monthly bill of $120, households could save nearly $360 every year – a substantial chunk of change. This type of energy data is gathered by advanced metering infrastructure (AMI), specifically […]

Studies show that customers with access to energy-use data can save up to 18 percent on their energy bills every month. Based on a typical monthly bill of $120, households could save nearly $360 every year – a substantial chunk of change. This type of energy data is gathered by advanced metering infrastructure (AMI), specifically […]

The post These Ohio customers pay for their smart meters, and they should have access to the benefits appeared first on Energy Exchange.

The U.S. Department of Energy is asking FERC to undermine the integrity of competitive electricity markets.

The U.S. Department of Energy is asking FERC to undermine the integrity of competitive electricity markets.