Complete list of press releases

(RALEIGH, NC) Producers of wood pellets in the United States will need to meet or exceed sustainability standards set by the European Union and individual European countries to protect the health of forests, while accessing expanding export markets, according to studies released today by Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) and the Pinchot Institute for Conservation (Pinchot Institute). The growing European demand for U.S. wood biomass requires buyers to demonstrate enhanced sustainability of North America’s forest resources.

Some European utilities depend on trees grown in the United States to make electricity. Processed wood is shaped into small wood pellets that are shipped to the E.U., mainly the Netherlands, United Kingdom, Denmark and Belgium. The pellets are burned with coal or in biomass boilers to produce energy. This video explains the journey from forestlands to power plants.

The new reports examine economic, environmental and policy implications of the expanding wood pellet market. European Power from U.S. Forests [PDF] documents how the E.U. policy is shaping the transatlantic trade in wood biomass. Pathways to Sustainability [PDF] evaluates the programs and practices available to U.S. pellet producers to meet European buyers’ sustainability expectations and policy requirements, concluding that few of the pathways completely meet the standards.

“The E.U. has a strong renewable energy policy, but countries don’t have enough forest or agricultural land to meet the increasing demand for wood biomass,” said Will McDow, EDF forestry conservation manager. “The U.S. has the biomass resources and sustainable forest management programs. The two must be linked. Landowners and biomass producers on both sides of the Atlantic can encourage market development and meet environmental objectives.”

“Expanding wood pellet export markets present new opportunities for landowners, but meeting the expectations of buyers overseas can be a significant hurdle,” said Brian Kittler, project director with the Pinchot Institute. “While there appears to be a call for sustainability from Europe, it’s not necessarily a straight line between policy level guidance in the E.U., and the supply chain decisions of U.S. biomass producers. As markets grow, investments are made, and terms of delivery negotiated. Dialogue on what the many approaches to sustainability offer is essential.”

A webinar will be held July 17, 2012 at 12 pm EST. Please join Will McDow (EDF), Brian Kittler (Pinchot Institute) and Jamie Joudrey (University of Toronto) for a discussion of E.U. policies, the growing demand for wood pellet exports and options to meet Europe’s sustainability requirements.

 
(Boulder, CO) July 3, 2012 – Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) is praising a new proposal that would help clear the air and protect public health in Arizona and across the Southwest.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has proposed protective limits on smog- and haze-inducing pollution from three aging coal plants in Arizona. The proposal will provide important health and tourism benefits while clearing the air at iconic national parks such as the Grand Canyon.

“EPA’s plan provides critical health protections for Arizona’s citizens, and moves us towards Congress’ goal of providing crisp, clear views for families discovering the Grand Canyon, Petrified Forest and Saguaro National Park,” said EDF Attorney Pamela Campos.

The coal plants covered by EPA’s plan — Cholla, Coronado, and Apache — have dramatic impacts on visibility, impairing the air quality in these revered national parks. Cholla, in particular, has the biggest cumulative impact on clear views in a national park of any facility in the American West.

Today’s proposal ensures protective limits on pollution from these plants. That in turn ensures smog- and haze-forming nitrogen oxides pollution is reduced by 17,000 tons per year, reduces the health burden on the nearly five million people who visit the Grand Canyon each year, and provides crisper views at this iconic American site.

Eleven million tourists visit Arizona’s national parks each year, providing $700 million in economic benefits to the state.

In today’s action, EPA also proposed to approve Arizona’s plan for reducing haze-inducing sulfur dioxide and particulate pollution. Under EPA’s proposed plan, Cholla and Apache would be required to install state-of-the-art modern pollution controls for nitrogen oxides, already in common use in other parts of the country.

For Cholla, the proposal builds on voluntary emissions reductions measures implemented several years ago by Arizona Public Service. Coronado, already required to install modern equipment, would have to adhere to a protective emission limit met by a number of other plants nation-wide.

Today’s action is part of a nation-wide effort to implement, after much delay, air quality protections for national parks and wilderness areas. EPA’s proposal will clear the air in parks from the Petrified Forest and Superstition Wilderness in Arizona to the Gila Wilderness in New Mexico.

The proposal also provides an opportunity to transition older power plants, such as Cholla, to cleaner sources of energy. A bipartisan and broadly supported plan in Colorado is accomplishing just that, and the Arizona Corporation Commission has already called on Arizona’s largest utility to undergo an integrated review of economic and environmental risks associated with its coal fleet.

“Arizona’s citizens deserve clean air, clear views and safe, clean energy. Today’s announcement takes an important step in that direction,” said Campos.

(Baton Rouge, La. – June 29, 2012) Today, local and national conservation groups praised the passage of the Surface Transportation Extension Act that includes the RESTORE Act, a measure that will dedicate 80 percent of Clean Water Act fines from BP and other parties responsible for the 2010 gulf oil disaster to restoring the Gulf Coast environment and economy. In praising the RESTORE Act, the groups also encouraged the federal government and the State of Louisiana to ensure the fines are spent on the coastal projects laid out in the state’s 2012 Coastal Master Plan.  

“We applaud the leaders from both houses whose tireless efforts have seen the RESTORE Act to this point, especially Senators Mary Landrieu and David Vitter and Representatives Steve Scalise and Cedric Richmond,” said the Coalition to Restore Coastal Louisiana, Environmental Defense Fund, Lake Pontchartrain Basin Foundation, Louisiana Wildlife Federation, National Audubon Society, National Wildlife Federation and The Nature Conservancy in a joint statement.

“The BP oil disaster devastated an already degraded coastal region, one that is suffering from a decades-long coastal land loss crisis. Fortunately, through Louisiana’s Coastal Master Plan, we have the solutions in hand to repair ecosystems, increase resiliency and ensure the long-term sustainability of coastal communities. We encourage state and federal officials to do the right thing and ensure RESTORE Act funds go towards jumpstarting the critical restoration projects needed to ensure our coast’s survival.”

Since the 1930s, Louisiana has lost more than 1,900 square miles of wetlands, an area roughly equivalent in size to the state of Delaware. A recent study by researchers at the University of Florida shows that the BP oil disaster accelerated land loss by killing the marsh grasses that hold the marsh together, doubling the rate of erosion in some areas.

Over the decades, the decline of the Mississippi River Delta’s wetlands has dramatically impaired protection from hurricanes and wiped out much of the buffer against future storms and disasters. The loss of wetlands also threatens:

• One of our nation’s most important fisheries
• One of our nation’s most significant port complexes and navigation systems
• Wildlife, including tens of millions of migratory birds and waterfowl
• Domestic energy production and processing
• Communities all along the central Gulf Coast

Earlier this year, the Louisiana State Legislature unanimously approved the 2012 Louisiana Coastal Master Plan, a 50-year blueprint for restoring Louisiana’s rapidly disappearing coastal wetlands and protecting the state’s natural resources and communities. Funding from the RESTORE Act could be used to implement Coastal Master Plan projects, which is expected to cost $50 billion over the next fifty years. A study by Mather Economics also demonstrates the potential job benefits of using RESTORE Act fines for restoration. The study estimates that a $25 billion investment could create as many as 57,000 jobs through restoration.

Without the RESTORE Act, fines from the spill would automatically be deposited into the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund to cover future spills elsewhere and into the Federal Treasury for unspecified general spending. With today’s vote and the President’s signature, this measure will ensure that Louisiana and the other Gulf Coast states struck by this historic disaster receive the funding necessary to make a full recovery.

“The RESTORE Act will not just help restore Louisiana’s ecosystems – the restoration projects it funds will also create new jobs and boost the state’s economy. This is a win-win for coastal communities along the delta,” the statement continued. “We look forward to working with the State and Administration to make sure these funds are used to revive the critical ecosystems and local economies that our nation depends on.”

(Washington, D.C. – June 29, 2012) A coalition of six Gulf Coast restoration advocacy groups praised Congress today for passing the RESTORE Act as part of the Surface Transportation Extension Act. The RESTORE Act dedicates 80 percent of the Clean Water Act fines from BP and other parties responsible for the 2010 gulf oil spill to restoring the Gulf Coast environment and economy.

“The passage of this critical legislation reflects both the importance of restoration to Gulf states and broad nationwide support for revitalizing the ecosystems, communities and economies of the region,” said a joint statement by Environmental Defense Fund, National Audubon Society, National Wildlife Federation, The Nature Conservancy, Ocean Conservancy and Oxfam America.

“We commend Senators Barbara Boxer, Mary Landrieu, Richard Shelby, Bill Nelson, Senate leadership, conferees and cosponsors for their tireless effort in seeing the RESTORE Act to the finish line,” the groups added. “We also thank Representatives Steve Scalise, Jo Bonner, Steve Palazzo and Cedric Richmond as well as House leadership and conferees for making Gulf Coast restoration a priority and including the RESTORE Act in the transportation bill conference report.”

“Passage of the RESTORE Act will not only help the ailing Gulf Coast but also the entire nation by restoring treasured natural landscapes, creating new job and training opportunities for local workers and repairing communities,” the statement continued. “The Gulf ecosystems are a unique and incredibly valuable natural resource and we applaud Congress for prioritizing their restoration.”

“We look forward to working with the Gulf states and the Administration to make sure the funds help restore these critical ecosystems, vulnerable communities and local economies.”

Today, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled in favor of clean air protections in four major cases involving climate pollution.

The court upheld the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) science-based finding that greenhouse gas emissions endanger public health and welfare (the Endangerment Finding) and the Clean Car Standards that will save families money at the gas pump, reduce American dependence on imported oil, and cut dangerous climate pollution.

The court also dismissed petitions challenging the requirement for large industrial sources to install modern cost-effective solutions to address greenhouse gases, and EPA’s common sense approach to shield small sources from liability (the Timing and Tailoring Rules).

“The court’s decision is unanimous, thorough, strong, and emphatic in affirming EPA’s historic clean air standards addressing climate pollution in America,” said Vickie Patton, General Counsel for Environmental Defense Fund.

We realize not everyone wants to read the entire 82 page decision (although you can read the PDF here). So here are our choices for some of the best and most pertinent quotes from the court:

Summary of the Decision

But for the reasons set forth below, we conclude: 1) the Endangerment Finding and Tailpipe Rule are neither arbitrary nor capricious; 2) EPA’s interpretation of the governing CAA provisions is unambiguously correct; and 3) no petitioner has standing to challenge the Timing and Tailoring Rules. We thus dismiss for lack of jurisdiction all petitions for review of the Timing and Tailoring Rules, and deny the remainder of the petitions. (Page 16)

Re: The Climate Pollution Endangerment Finding

EPA properly relied on comprehensive scientific assessments by authorities such as the National Academies of Science and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change:

This is how science works. EPA is not required to re-prove the existence of the atom every time it approaches a scientific question.(Page 27)

The record also supports EPA’s conclusion that climate change endangers human welfare by creating risk to food production and agriculture, forestry, energy, infrastructure, ecosystems, and wildlife. Substantial evidence further supported EPA’s conclusion that the warming resulting from the greenhouse gas emissions could be expected to create risks to water resources and in general to coastal areas as a result of expected increase in sea level. (Page 30)

Re: The Clean Car Standards

Furthermore, the Tailpipe Rule provides benefits above and beyond those resulting from NHTSA’s fuel economy standards. (Page 42)

Re: Carbon Pollution Limits for Big New Power Plants and Industrial Sources (the Timing and Tailoring Rules)

Congress made perfectly clear that the PSD program was meant to protect against precisely the types of harms caused by greenhouse gases. (Page 58)

Given this, neither the Timing nor Tailoring Rules caused the injury Petitioners allege: having to comply with PSD and Title V for greenhouse gases… Indeed, the Timing and Tailoring Rules actually mitigate Petitioners’ purported injuries. (Page 77)

NEWS RELEASE                                                                                                   

 Contacts: Jocelyn Gibbon, (602) 510-4619-c, jgibbon@edf.org

Steve Pawlowski, (602) 254-9330, steve.pawlowski@sierraclub.org

Nikolai Lash, (928) 266-5606, nlash@grandcanyontrust.org

Ian Wilson, (520) 290-0828, x.1106, iwilson@sonoraninstitute.org

Linda Stitzer, (520) 488-2436, linda.stitzer@westernresources.org

(Phoenix, Ariz.—June 26, 2012) The Santa Cruz River was honored today as the fourth “River of the Month” in a year-long series celebrating Arizona’s centennial year. Five conservation groups are working to raise awareness about rivers in Arizona, a state not often thought of for its river resources. 

The River of the Month series profiles one of Arizona’s rivers each month, detailing the ecology, geology, use and threats to the river. It also encourages people to get involved by joining a local watershed group or by communicating with elected officials about the value of the state’s water resources. The series is produced by Environmental Defense Fund, Sierra Club, Grand Canyon Trust, Sonoran Institute, and Western Resource Advocates. The first River of the Month featured the Colorado River, the second profile focused on the Salt River, the third on the Little Colorado River, and today’s profile features the Santa Cruz River.

The 210-mile Santa Cruz originates in the San Rafael Valley of southeastern Arizona, where it flows south through one of the last remaining expanses of a unique grassland ecosystem, interspersed with oak woodlands.  By the time it crosses into Mexico, 15 miles south of its headwaters, the river supports abundant streamside vegetation surrounded by mesquite bosques (forests). The river’s north-south orientation forms an important flyway for migratory birds and bats, and its lush vegetation, in contrast to the surrounding desert, allows some subtropical species to extend their ranges north from Mexico into Arizona—including species such as jaguars and ocelots. Efforts are underway to protect habitat for these endangered cats on both sides of the border. 

“Although it is highly imperiled, the preservation of the river’s remaining resources has motivated people with diverse priorities to transcend their differences in order to protect and restore the Santa Cruz,” say the five conservation organizations in the Santa Cruz River profile. 

Diverse efforts to restore and protect the Santa Cruz include promotion of water harvesting and other practices  to reduce groundwater pumping, community conservation programs in Mexico, monitoring of water quality and river health, habitat and stream restoration projects, and Pima County’s Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan, which guides urban development away from sensitive river ecosystems and restores river habitat. 

Today, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit affirmed the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) clean air measures to protect Americans’ health and well-being from climate-disrupting pollution.

The court ruled in favor of clean air protections in four major cases, denying petitions against the Climate Pollution Endangerment Finding and the Clean Car Standards and dismissing petitions against the Timing and Tailoring Rules (see below for details on the cases).

In the ruling, the court says, “But for the reasons set forth below, we conclude: 1) the Endangerment Finding and Tailpipe Rule are neither arbitrary nor capricious; 2) EPA’s interpretation of the governing CAA provisions is unambiguously correct; and 3) no petitioner has standing to challenge the Timing and Tailoring Rules. We thus dismiss for lack of jurisdiction all petitions for review of the Timing and Tailoring Rules, and deny the remainder of the petitions.”

“Today’s ruling by the court confirms that EPA’s common sense solutions to address climate pollution are firmly anchored in science and law,” said Fred Krupp, President of Environmental Defense Fund. “This landmark decision will help secure a healthier and more prosperous future for all Americans. Today is a good day for climate progress in America and for the thin layer of atmosphere that sustains life on Earth.”

In February, the court heard arguments in a group of lawsuits challenging EPA’s authority to take steps to reduce climate pollution. The lawsuits were brought by major industrial polluters and states such as Texas.

Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), together with a large coalition of states and environmental organizations, intervened in defense of the vital clean air protections. Those protections include:

• The Climate Pollution Endangerment Finding, in which EPA – following the Supreme Court’s order in Massachusetts v. EPA – determined that climate pollution endangers human health and welfare on the basis of a rigorous review of the extensive body of climate science.
• The Clean Car Standards, which establish cost-saving fuel efficiency and greenhouse gas emissions standards for passenger cars and light trucks. The standards are supported by U.S. auto makers and the United Auto Workers union, among others. They will save Americans thousands of dollars at the gas pump by enabling families to get more mileage out of each gallon of gas. They will also help break our nation’s addiction to imported oil and will cut the amount of dangerous pollution from vehicles.
• Carbon Pollution Limits for Big New Power Plants and Industrial Sources (the Timing and Tailoring Rules), in which EPA is phasing-in requirements for use of the best available cost-effective pollution controls, starting with new, large industrial emitters (like power plants) while shielding smaller emitters.

The U.S. auto makers and a dozen states (California, Delaware, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington) intervened in defense of EPA’s clean car standards (the second case listed above).

“EPA’s reasonable steps to reduce climate pollution will benefit our environment, our economy, our health and our national security,” said EDF’s outside legal counsel Sean Donahue, who presented oral arguments to the court in defense of these protections. “Today’s court ruling will help our country move forward toward a clean energy future.”

The following three judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit decided the cases: Chief Judge David Sentelle and Circuit Judges Judith Rogers and David Tatel.

EDF has compiled detailed information about the cases. You can read more about the cases and the parties involved, find the court briefs, and get more information on our website.

WASHINGTON (June 21, 2012) – The U.S. Senate passed the 2012 Farm Bill today, meaning the measure is a big step closer to enactment. The Farm Bill, renewed every five years, is the largest source of funding for conservation on America’s working farmland, ranchland and private forestland. In addition to funding federal conservation and nutrition programs, the bill also authorizes risk management and other programs that influence the decisions of land managers across the country.  

“The Farm Bill is the United States’ primary means for engaging farmers, ranchers and foresters in stewardship of America’s natural resources,” said Sara Hopper, agricultural policy director of Environmental Defense Fund. “The continuing economic prosperity of agriculture is critical to the nation. But it is also true that agriculture has a significant environmental footprint. It affects – and is affected by – soil health, reliable supplies of clean water, and healthy ecosystems.”  

As part of an effort to reduce the federal deficit, the Senate voted to cut more than $23 billion from the Farm Bill budget over the next 10 years, including $6.4 billion from conservation programs. While these cuts will hurt conservation efforts on the ground, senators made an effort to mitigate the impact of the loss in conservation funding by including policies that will make conservation programs more effective.  

Specifically, the Senate bill consolidates some conservation programs and creates a stronger emphasis on leveraging additional resources from local and state governments and other partners who can assist producers in voluntary, cooperative efforts to address local, state and regional conservation priorities.  

In order to qualify for new crop insurance premium subsidies under the bill, farmers will have to comply with some basic conservation standards – the same requirement that has long applied to other farm assistance programs. Farmers of some environmentally sensitive lands must currently meet these conservation standards in order to receive government assistance. 

“With increasing pressures to feed a growing global population, America’s natural resources are under more demand and stress than ever before,” said Hopper. “Demand for conservation assistance for farmers already outstrips available conservation dollars. Congress must maintain and strengthen its commitment to conservation in this Farm Bill and one way to do that is through innovate partnership programs that bring conservation dollars to local communities.”

“Today the House continued its long-running assault on clean air by passing H.R. 4480, the Strategic Energy Production Act of 2012. This name is a misnomer – there is nothing strategic about gutting common-sense clean air protections. In fact, it would be more honest if this bill were named the Gutting Air Standard Protections Act (GASP), because it undermines vital protections for our children’s health.
 
“The GASP Act jeopardizes public health in America. This bill won’t help our economy, won’t create jobs, and won’t lower our summer gas prices – but it will harm the health of our kids.
 
“The GASP Act passed today includes provisions that would change how we set health standards for smog, and also delays new standards that would cut sulfur pollution from gasoline. Instead of basing clean air standards solely on the best available health science, the bill forces the Environmental Protection Agency to focus on corporate profits instead. It’s a move that overturns the basis of 40 years of clean air protections in America.
 
“The Clean Air Act already factors in cost and feasibility when implementing the pollution control strategies that protect our air. Stronger sulfur pollution standards alone would provide huge economic benefits — up to $6 billion and the creation of almost 30,000 jobs. That’s why they’re supported by a broad coalition of industry groups, along with health and environmental advocates.
 
“The Clean Air Act has been incredibly successful for decades. Keeping a strong, health and science-based standard for clean air regulations will save thousands of American lives and prevent tens of thousands of asthma attacks every year. By undermining that, the GASP Act puts us all at risk.”

• Mandy Warner, Climate and Air Policy Specialist for Environmental Defense Fund

“Today, a bipartisan group of 53 Senators voted against S. J. Res 37. That means they voted for cleaner, healthier, safer air for all Americans. They voted to let EPA do its job, and reduce the mercury and other toxic pollution emitted from power plants into the air we breathe. They voted to save up to 11,000 lives each year, to help prevent neurological damage in babies, and to make it safer to eat fish caught in American waters.

S.J. Res 37 would not only have killed the new Mercury and Air Toxics Standards for power plants, it would also have prevented EPA from issuing a rule that is “substantially the same” in the future. It was a “scorched earth” policy that would have left us all with scorched lungs. We should all be grateful to the 53 Senators from both parties who stopped this unconscionable attack on cleaner, healthier air for America’s children.”

Fred Krupp, President of Environmental Defense Fund

NEWS RELEASE

Contact:
Mica Odom, 512-691-3451, modom@edf.org

(Washington, DC – June 19, 2012)  New air standards for hydraulically fractured natural gas wells and oil and natural gas storage rules from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are an “important step forward, one that has been commended by a broad variety of interests and is an example of smart, cost-effective regulation,” Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) President Fred Krupp said in his testimony before the Senate today.

“These common sense measures are a win-win-win: they reduce pollution, conserve valuable domestic energy resources, and in some cases, actually save producers money. As a result, representatives of the public health community and business community commended EPA’s action. It is critical that we build on these clean air measures if our nation is to fulfill the President’s promise in his State of the Union to develop natural gas without putting the health and safety of our citizens at risk,” Krupp said in his testimony.

With this action, the EPA finalized vital clean air measures to reduce harmful pollutants discharged from a variety of oil and natural gas activities. The standards limit harmful ozone precursors and air toxics, and as a co-benefit limit methane emissions, a potent climate forcer. They build on leadership from states like Colorado and Wyoming, utilizing cost-effective, proven technologies that, in many cases, plug leaks throughout the system.

EPA’s standards will achieve these essential reductions through the implementation of proven and highly cost-effective practices and technologies. This results in saving both a domestic energy resource and saving producers money. EPA estimates that the combined rules will yield a cost savings of $11 to $19 million in 2015, because the value of natural gas and condensate that will be recovered and sold will offset costs.

Though these clean air measures are a win-win-win for a healthier environment, for our economy, and for our energy security, they also leave important issues unaddressed and are only a starting point in the nation’s efforts to address the serious air pollution burdens associated with oil and natural gas development. The nation must also address methane emissions directly, put in place rigorous protections for already-existing sources of air pollution and address the extensive emissions from wells that co-produce oil and natural gas. These and other solutions are necessary to address the range of public health and environmental impacts. It is critical that we build on these clean air measures if our nation is to fulfill the President’s promise in his State of the Union address to develop natural gas without putting the health and safety of our citizens at risk.

MEDIA ADVISORY: Tuesday, June 19, 10 A.M. EDT

CONTACT
Mica Odom, 512-691-3451, modom@edf.org

WHAT
Fred Krupp, President of Environmental Defense Fund, will be testifying tomorrow before the Subcommittee on the Clean Air and Nuclear Safety to review the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) new air standards for hydraulically fractured natural gas wells and oil and natural gas storage.  The oversight hearing of the Environmental Protection Agency’s rule will be held in the Senate’s Environment and Public Works Subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Safety.

Fred Krupp will be available to speak to reporters in-person after the hearing. Additional EDF experts are available to comment. 

WHEN
Tuesday, June 19, 2012, 10:00 A.M. EDT

WHERE
406 Dirksen Senate Office Building or watch online here

WHO
Fred Krupp, President, Environmental Defense Fund

BACKGROUND
The Senate Subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Safety, under the Environment and Public Works Committee, is conducting an oversight review of EPA’s new air standards for hydraulically fractured natural gas wells and oil and natural gas storage.

With this action, the EPA finalized important clean air measures to reduce harmful pollutants discharged from a variety of oil and natural gas activities.  The standards limit harmful ozone precursors and air toxics, and as a co-benefit limit methane emissions, a potent climate forcer.  They build on leadership from states like Colorado and Wyoming, utilizing cost-effective, proven technologies that, in many cases, plug leaks throughout the system.

EPA’s standards will achieve these important reductions through the implementation of proven and highly cost-effective practices and technologies.  This results in saving both a domestic energy resource and saving producers money.  EPA estimates that the combined rules will yield a cost savings of $11 to $19 million in 2015, because the value of natural gas and condensate that will be recovered and sold will offset costs.

These common sense clean air measures are a win-win-win for a healthier environment, for our economy, and for our energy security.  But they also leave important issues unaddressed and are only a starting point in the nation’s efforts to address the serious air pollution burdens associated with oil and natural gas development.  The nation must also address methane emissions directly, put in place rigorous protections for already-existing sources of air pollution and address the extensive emissions from wells that co-produce oil and natural gas.  These and other solutions are necessary to address the range of public health and environmental impacts.  It is critical that we build on these clean air measures if our nation is to fulfill the President’s promise in his State of the Union address to develop natural gas without putting the health and safety of our citizens at risk. 

(Washington, D.C. – June 15, 2012) Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) is welcoming today’s announcement of proposed new standards to reduce a lethal form of air pollution.
 
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced its long overdue proposal to strengthen America’s health protections for particulate pollution, commonly known as soot – a dangerous air pollutant associated with thousands of deaths each year.
 
“Particulate pollution is deadly, and it puts the health of our families and communities at high risk,” said Elena Craft, Health Scientist for EDF. “Reducing it will prevent tens of thousands of deaths each year and ensure healthier, longer lives for millions of Americans.”
 
Particle pollution, or soot, is one of the most deadly types of airborne contaminants. It’s made up of microscopic bits of matter that can penetrate people’s lungs and get into their bloodstreams, and it causes heart attacks, strokes, asthma attacks, acute bronchitis and – in some cases – death.
 
Particulate pollution also has serious environmental impacts, including impairing visibility at treasured national parks like the Great Smoky Mountains. Sources of particulate pollution include diesel engines and equipment and coal-fired power plants.
 
EPA’s proposal would strengthen the annual health standard for harmful fine particle pollution to a level within a range of 13 micrograms per cubic meter to 12 micrograms per cubic meter. The current annual standard is 15 micrograms per cubic meter.
 
Today’s proposal is long overdue in taking corrective action to protect human health from deficiencies identified several years ago by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. 
 
In 2006, EPA rejected the recommendations of its own Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee on the level of protection necessary to protect Americans from particulate pollution in accordance with science and the law. The resulting standards were successfully challenged in the federal court of appeals for the D.C. Circuit by the American Lung Association, Earthjustice, Environmental Defense Fund, and the National Parks Conservation Association.  The court instructed EPA to take corrective action in light of the extensive scientific evidence of human health harms.   
 
The standards will be finalized no later than December 14th of this year, after a public comment period.