Complete list of press releases

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE 

Media Contacts:
Jennifer Witherspoon, 415-293-6067; jwitherspoon@edf.org
Lori Sinsley, 415-293-6097; lsinsley@edf.org

EDF Supports Appointment of Matt Rodriquez as California EPA Secretary

SAN FRANCISCO, CA (July 12, 2011) – Governor Jerry Brown appointed Matt Rodriquez as secretary of the California Environmental Protection Agency today.

Below is a statement by EDF West Coast Vice President David Festa on the appointment.

“Governor Brown’s appointment of Matt Rodriquez to lead the California Environmental Protection Agency is a solid choice. Matt’s reputation and record suggest that he can be counted on to lead the agency in a sound and effective manner. We look forward to working with him to protect public health and ensure that we can continue to enjoy this state’s inherent natural beauty and quality of life.”

###

Environmental Defense Fund (edf.org), a leading national nonprofit organization, creates transformational solutions to the most serious environmental problems. EDF links science, economics, law and innovative private-sector partnerships. For more information, visit www.edf.org/california. Follow us on Twitter at EDF_CA and read our blog at http://blogs.edf.org/californiadream/.

NEWS RELEASE

(July 12, 2011) A new study just published in the journal Environmental Science & Technology shows that reducing nitrogen pollution generated by wastewater treatment plants can come with “sizable” economic benefits, as well as the expected benefits for the environment.

The study was authored jointly by five scientists from around the U.S.: James Wang of NOAA’s Air Resources Laboratory and formerly of Environmental Defense Fund (EDF); Steve Hamburg, Chief Scientist for EDF; Kartik Chandran of Columbia University’s Engineering School; Donald Pryor of Brown University; and Glen Daigger of CH2M Hill, a global environmental engineering firm based in Englewood, Colorado.

The study found that adding available technology to the existing infrastructure at a common type of wastewater treatment plant could create a trifecta of reductions in aquatic nitrogen pollution, greenhouse gas pollution, and energy usage. It also found that creating an emissions crediting system for the wastewater treatment sector could make the addition of new technologies much more affordable.

“Our study shows that there’s a win-win-win situation out there waiting to be realized,” said James Wang, the chief author of the paper. “The creation of an emissions trading market could provide the needed incentive for wastewater treatment plants to adopt technologies that would reduce climate pollution, help clean up our waterways, and even save energy and money.”

The majority of wastewater treatment plants already have systems to reduce ammonia levels in effluent, but pay relatively little attention to overall nitrogen pollution reduction, especially in the form of nitrous oxide (N2O), a potent greenhouse gas. Using emissions credits to address the problem could create an economic incentive of up to $600 million per year for U.S. plants to reduce nitrogen pollution, with the added benefit of up to $100 million per year in electricity savings if they do so.

“Additionally, based on recent N2O monitoring studies conducted by us and research groups across the globe, it has been found that meeting wastewater treatment objectives actually decreases biogenic N2O emissions,” added co-author Kartik Chandran. “Thus, designing and adopting better process technologies for improving water quality could actually have a synergistic impact on reduced N2O emissions.”

You can read the full study here.

###

Environmental Defense Fund (edf.org), a leading national nonprofit organization, creates transformational solutions to the most serious environmental problems. EDF links science, economics, law and innovative private-sector partnerships. See twitter.com/EnvDefenseFund; facebook.com/EnvDefenseFund

News Release

Contacts:
Steven Peyronnin, Coalition to Restore Coastal Louisiana, 225.413.6924, stevenp@crcl.org
Sean Crowley, Environmental Defense Fund, 202.550-6524-c, scrowley@edf.org  
John Lopez, Lake Pontchartrain Basin Foundation, 504.421.7348, johnlopez@pobox.com
Chris Macaluso, Louisiana Wildlife Federation, 225-344-6707, chris@lawildlifefed.org
David J. Ringer, National Audubon Society, 601.642.7058, dringer@audubon.org  
Emily Guidry Schatzel, National Wildlife Federation, 225.253.9781, guidrye@nwf.org  
Karen Gautreaux, The Nature Conservancy, 225-788-4525, kgautreaux@tnc.org

(New Orleans–July 11, 2011) Conservation groups today expressed support for Louisiana’s swift action to identify and propose potential restoration projects that qualify for BP’s $1 billion down payment toward the Natural Resource Damage Assessment (NRDA) stemming from the unprecedented Deepwater Horizon oil spill. Louisiana’s release of its project list today is an important step toward getting restoration projects underway, but BP, federal and state trustees must approve the projects before the state can proceed.

“We applaud the state of Louisiana’s efforts to move swiftly in assessing a long and complex list of restoration project proposals against early NRDA criteria,” said a joint statement by 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. “We don’t have time to wait for restoration, so it’s imperative to expedite the evaluation of these projects to determine if they begin addressing damages from the unprecedented Deepwater Horizon oil spill. We’re very hopeful that the pace set by the state of Louisiana will continue as the selection process moves forward with the Natural Resource Trustees and other parties.”

“We support efforts to use early NRDA funding to advance projects that are ready to be implemented, as long they are based upon tested techniques that have had proven successful in achieving restoration goals for the Mississippi River Delta and for addressing damages caused by the spill,” the groups concluded.

###

NEWS RELEASE

Contact:
Matt Smelser, msmelser@edf.org, (202) 572-3272

Today the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency finalized the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule. The rule will provide healthier, longer lives for Texas families and families downwind in other communities afflicted by the pollution from Texas coal plants. Limits on sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxide (NOx) in Texas have been included in the final rule. These new regulations will save up to 1,704 lives and provide $14 billion in human health benefits to Texas each year.

Statement from Elena Craft, Health Scientist with Environmental Defense Fund:

“The Cross-State Air Pollution Rule will save lives in Texas and across the country and mean fewer hospital visits for asthma patients. In the last month a number of Texas elected officials as well as Chairman Bryan Shaw of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality have spoken out against addressing Texas smokestack pollution as part of these vitally important clean air protections. The development of these clean air standards began under the administration of President George W. Bush.

Texas power plants collectively are the nation’s largest emitter of NOx and the second largest emitter of SO2; not to mention Texas’ number one ranking in benzene, mercury and carbon pollution. It’s time for politics to get out the way of progress and for Texas officials to work with EPA to clean Texas’ air and protect the health of Texas families. We cannot continue to make those who suffer from the health complications caused by these dangerous pollutants wait any longer.”

NEWS RELEASE

(Washington, D.C. – July 7, 2011) Millions of Americans will be protected from invading smokestack pollution under the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule that was announced today, according to Environmental Defense Fund (EDF).

EDF praised the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)’s landmark clean air standards, which will provide longer and healthier lives for 240 million people across the eastern half of the U.S. who are afflicted by the power plant pollution that pours across their borders.

“These clean air standards for power plant pollution will provide some of the greatest human health protections in our nation’s history,” said EDF President Fred Krupp. “Millions of Americans live downwind from this deadly pollution — from the communities that live in the shadows of these smokestacks to those afflicted by the pollution that drifts hundreds of miles downwind. Today’s clean air protections will help eastern states restore healthy air in communities hard hit by air pollution, and will help all of us live longer and healthier lives.”

The Cross-State Air Pollution Rule tightens the limits on the amount of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide pollution that power plants in 27 eastern states are allowed to emit. That pollution drifts across the borders of those states and the District of Columbia, contributing to dangerous – and sometimes lethal – levels of particulate and smog pollution in downwind states.

The Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, which has been in the works for six years, will reduce sulfur dioxide levels from eastern power plants by 73 percent, and nitrogen oxide levels by 54 percent from 2005 levels when it goes into effect. The rule will phase in beginning on January 1, 2012.

EPA issued the rule under the “Good Neighbor” provision of the Clean Air Act, which ensures that the emissions from one state’s power plants don’t cause harmful pollution levels in neighboring states.

The health and economic benefits of the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule are enormous and will deliver extensive health protections enabling millions of Americans to live healthier, longer lives. Starting in 2014, the rule will:

• Save up to 34,000 lives per year
• Prevent 400,000 asthma attacks per year
• Avoid 1.8 million sick days per year
• Provide benefits of $120 to $280 billion per year

Today’s Cross-State Air Pollution Rule replaces the earlier Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR), which was rejected by the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington D.C. in 2008 for deficiencies in protecting human health. The new rules strengthen protections for millions of Americans.

Using today’s EPA data, EDF has created a map to show the health benefits in individual states. You can find the map and more information here.

###

Environmental Defense Fund (edf.org), a leading national nonprofit organization, creates transformational solutions to the most serious environmental problems. EDF links science, economics, law and innovative private-sector partnerships. See twitter.com/EnvDefenseFund; facebook.com/EnvDefenseFund

NEWS RELEASE

(Luxembourg — July 5, 2011) The European Union (EU) — backed by six of its member states, by Norway, and by an international coalition of environmental organizations — robustly defended the law integrating aviation into the EU emissions trading system (EU-ETS) at a hearing today at the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg.

EU countries including France, Spain, Sweden, Poland, and Denmark, and led by the United Kingdom (UK), strongly rejected the airlines’ contention that aviation emissions can only be addressed by the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) and that the system amounts to a unilateral tax.

Lawyers for the UK compared the system to existing EU rules on the working hours of truck drivers crossing into the EU from foreign countries, which require the time already driven outside EU borders to be counted. It was also pointed out that most legislation affecting international transport has indirect effects beyond the borders of the legislator. The lawyer for the European Parliament noted that EU rules accelerating the phasing in of a double-hull requirement for oil tankers docking at EU ports are similar to the aviation ETS in only requiring compliance when arriving or departing the EU.

The environmental organizations pointed out that the ETS fully respects other nations’ sovereignty as it neither mandates nor prohibits actions outside of European boundaries, but merely requires airlines to comply with the system when taking off or landing at an EU airport.

Pamela Campos of Environmental Defense Fund said: “Today we heard powerful support from a wide range of governments and NGOs in favor of the legality of the ETS. This is a moderate system that spurs innovation. The broad consensus presented to the court today shows that it’s time to stop arguing and start doing the real work of reducing the airlines’ greenhouse gas pollution.”

Bill Hemmings of Transport & Environment said: “The American airlines have a long history of actively seeking to disrupt any and all measures to cut climate changing emissions. This legal case is another cynical attempt to derail a modest and cost effective climate initiative that would add little more than EUR 6 to the price of a transatlantic flight. Environmental organisations strongly support the EU-ETS which is a welcome first step towards dealing with aviation’s growing climate impact.”

The advocate general will deliver her opinion on the case on October 6, 2011. That will be followed by a final judgement of the court at a later date.

The environmental organizations intervening in the case are: the Aviation Environment Federation, EarthJustice (on behalf of the Center for Biological Diversity), Environmental Defense Fund, Transport & Environment and WWF UK. They were represented in Court by Jon Turner QC and Laura Elizabeth John, instructed by Harrison Grant.

###

Environmental Defense Fund (edf.org), a leading national nonprofit organization, creates transformational solutions to the most serious environmental problems. EDF links science, economics, law and innovative private-sector partnerships. See twitter.com/EnvDefenseFund; facebook.com/EnvDefenseFund; http://blogs.edf.org/climatetalks/

NEWS RELEASE

(Luxembourg, July 5, 2011) Leading environmental organizations will make their case at the European Court of Justice today emphasizing that all airlines should be included in the E.U. Emissions Trading System (ETS).

WWF-UK, the Aviation Environment Federation (AEF), the European Federation for Transport and Environment (T&E), Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), and Earthjustice will give evidence to support the U.K. Government and E.U. Member States in a case against the Air Transport Association of America (ATA), which is questioning the legality of including non-European Union airlines within the ETS.

The five E.U. and U.S. NGO’s are urging policymakers to resist pressure from the ATA and leading U.S. airlines to undermine the system. The E.U. move to include aviation in the ETS is the only multi-country system that now exists to reduce aviation emissions, which are doubling every decade.

Keith Allott, Head of Climate Change at WWF-UK, said: “The ETS is a modest but important start in reducing international aviation emissions and its benefits will be even greater if Member States use the revenues to support action on climate change, as suggested under the ETS Directive. The European Court of Justice needs to back the inclusion of all flights in the ETS and the EU needs to stand firm against political pressure and industry lobbying that will take us back to square one.

“US officials have said that ETS plans to include aviation emissions are ‘the wrong way to pursue the right objective’ and they would prefer an international agreement instead. But efforts to strike such an agreement have moved with glacial slowness for more than a decade. The US is the world’s biggest emitter of aviation greenhouse gases, and supporting the EU ETS would help it to reduce emissions and raise finance for developing countries to tackle climate change.”

Pamela Campos, attorney at Environmental Defense Fund said: “We are disappointed that U.S. airlines have taken this action to challenge what is a pioneering and moderate effort by Europe to reduce carbon pollution from this strategic sector. Compliance with the E.U. system can be a driver for finding solutions. Airlines should be racing to comply with this law and deliver cleaner low-carbon travel to the flying public, instead of racing to the courthouse to try to block a reasonable and well-designed law.”

Tim Johnson, Director of Aviation Environment Federation said: “Including aviation in the EU emissions trading scheme is consistent with the approach adopted by the UN’s International Civil aviation Organisation (ICAO). Last year, ICAO reinforced that countries should select the most appropriate measures, including market-based instruments, to contribute towards emissions reductions to meet the sector’s global goals. The aviation industry, like ICAO, has recognised emissions trading as the most cost-effective way to reduce its carbon emissions. But this action by US carriers, if successful, would hamper the EU’s ability to tackle climate change and could wind up costing the airlines even more if alternative measures are introduced to reduce emissions.”

Bill Hemmings, Transport & Environment (T&E) said: “The EU’s carbon trading scheme gives international aviation an opportunity to start addressing its carbon footprint, which is ten times greater than other modes of transport. The cost, equivalent to a cent on a litre of kerosene, is very modest. Instead of flying planeloads of lawyers to Europe, the aviation industry should face up to its future and get on with the job of cutting emissions.”

Background

• Air industry lobbyists claim that including non-E.U. airlines in the ETS amounts to an ‘unlawful tax’ on non-E.U. countries and that this therefore contravenes their sovereignty. However, as stated by the E.U., the ETS is a market-based environmental measure, not a tax, which simply uses emissions of flights into or out of the E.U. as the basis for carbon trading within the system. As it has no extra-territorial application beyond E.U. Member States, it does not affect sovereign rights and is entirely compatible with international law. U.S. airlines say they would prefer a global agreement on aviation emissions. However, talks to include aviation emissions through the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) have been stalled for 14 years. Failure to implement ETS as planned would delay action on reducing emissions even longer.

• Plans to include aviation in the ETS were introduced because of the rapid rise in aviation emissions - 110% growth between 1990 and 2008 compared to 34% growth in transport emissions — http://www.aef.org.uk/uploads/EmIncTandE.pdf

• The Commission estimates that, between 2005 and 2020, the aviation sector in Europe will grow by 142%. The ETS itself does not impact growth significantly: with ETS, the growth will still be 135-7% but it importantly puts a price on carbon and caps the industry’s emissions at below 2005 levels, either by encouraging airlines to reduce their emissions or to pay for emission cuts in other sectors where reduction costs are lower.

###

On NC Governor Bev Perdue’s veto of S 781 Regulatory Reform:
“The veto sends a clear signal to legislators that rolling back regulations that protect the state’s environment is not a viable business plan for economic recovery or the well being of families. Instead of cutting red tape, this bill creates mountains of new red tape that handcuff the state’s environmental watchdogs. The veto sends the strong message that North Carolina puts out the welcome mat to industries that both create good jobs and respect our natural resources. Hats off to Governor Perdue for the veto.”

On NC Governor Bev Perdue’s veto of S 709 Energy Jobs Act:
“The veto prevents a headlong rush into dirty fossil fuel sources that could dramatically change the face of North Carolina. No one wants that. The risks of offshore drilling to the coast and fracking to water supplies are well documented. Lawmakers should not repeat the mistakes made by other states. Three cheers for Governor Perdue for the veto.”

Background on S 781 Regulatory Reform
S 781 is a direct assault on environmental regulations. It will bury North Carolina in red tape, slowing down environmental protections, and could strip regulations safeguarding air and water down to the bare minimum.

Background on S 709 Energy Jobs Act
It would move North Carolina away from clean energy and increase reliance on fossil fuels. It fails to recognize the role of energy efficiency as the most cost-effective way to a clean energy future. It promotes offshore drilling and opens the door to fracking. It hijacks the NC Energy Policy Council, restructuring it into a one-sided panel of industry representatives.

The following statement can be attributed to Derek Walker, EDF’s director of strategic climate initiatives.

“CARB’s suggested course of action is prudent and will give the cap-and-trade program its best chance of success. 

“The recommended schedule will help California maximize economic and environmental benefits and increase the program’s overall effectiveness.

“This is a smart and responsible step that also ensures that the greenhouse gas pollution reductions required by the program remain unchanged.

“EDF co-sponsored AB 32 and continues to support cap-and-trade because it limits and cuts climate change pollution at the lowest possible cost. We remain committed to working with CARB to develop a successful program that benefits all Californians.

“By getting this right, California will once again serve as a model that other states and countries can follow.”

###

Environmental Defense Fund (edf.org), a leading national nonprofit organization, creates transformational solutions to the most serious environmental problems. EDF links science, economics, law and innovative private-sector partnerships. For more information, visit www.edf.org/california. Follow us on Twitter at EDF_CA and read our blog at http://blogs.edf.org/californiadream/.

NEWS RELEASE

Contact:
EDF Contact: Mica Odom, (512) 691-3451 or modom@edf.org
CRT Contact: James Jack, (916) 813-0839 or execdir@responsibletrans.org

(Charleston, SC - June 28, 2011) - The Coalition for Responsible Transportation (CRT), Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) today announced the launch of the EPA SmartWay Drayage Program, a new goods movement initiative designed to clean up the air in and around our nation’s ports. The announcement came at a press conference held earlier today at the Port of Charleston, S.C..

The new SmartWay Drayage Program builds a partnership between a numerous goods movement stakeholders including major national retailers, trucking companies, port communities, environmental groups and the U.S. EPA to solve a critical health and environmental challenge: how to reduce harmful air emissions from port drayage trucks.

Rick Gabrielson, who serves as CRT President and Target’s Director of Import Operations, said, “We at Target, along with the members of the Coalition for Responsible Transportation (CRT), are proud to have partnered with the US EPA and the Environmental Defense Fund to create a program to reduce diesel pollution at ports across the country. This partnership will generate private sector investment in clean technology, improve the environmental quality of our nation’s port communities and demonstrate the commitment we have made as the shipping industry’s leaders to emissions reductions.”

Drayage trucks, typically older and more polluting than long-haul trucks, operate in and around port areas and represent one of the largest sources of diesel emissions associated with ports. This program was designed to specifically address the unique environmental issues associated with port trucking, to incentivize the deployment of newer, cleaner port trucks across the nation, and to recognize SmartWay Drayage Partners for reducing diesel emissions from those trucks.

“This program offers great incentives for independent owner operators and trucking companies to replace their older drayage trucks with cleaner, less polluting models,” said Marcia Aronoff, Senior Vice President for Programs at EDF. “With the rise in population and the growth of the freight transportation industry, we must be vigilant, forward thinking and creative in finding solutions that reduce toxic emissions and embrace market-based sustainability efforts.”

The SmartWay Drayage Program is based on the tremendously successful SmartWay Transport Partnership, which is an innovative collaboration between U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and goods movement stakeholders, which provides a framework to assess transportation-related emissions and energy efficiency, and recognize superior environmental performance.

“U.S. ports generate jobs and are critical to our nation’s economy,” said Gina McCarthy, assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation. “EPA’s SmartWay dray truck initiative will help ports contribute to their local economies – while protecting the air quality, environment and public health of nearby communities.”

Through the SmartWay Drayage program, port trucking companies and independent owner-operators sign a partnership agreement and commit to track diesel emissions, replace older dirtier trucks with cleaner, newer ones, and achieve at least a 50% reduction in particulate matter (PM) and 25% reduction in nitrous oxide (NOx), below the national industry average, within three years.

Similarly, SmartWay retailers sign a partnership agreement where they commit to ship at least 75% of their port cargo with SmartWay trucking carriers within three years. By giving business priority to SmartWay drayage carriers, the program creates a market-driven approach to incentivize emissions reductions at port communities across the country. In addition to the financial support provided to trucking companies and owner operators by participating retailers, today’s press conference highlighted a variety of U.S. EPA, state, regional and local programs that provide low interest loans and down payment assistance for transitioning to clean port trucks.

CRT’s SmartWay Drayage Charter Partners include the following retailers: Best Buy; Hewett Packard; The Home Depot; JC Penney; Lowe’s; Nike; Target; Walmart; and the following port trucking carriers: California Cartage Express, LLC; California Multimodal, LLC; Container Connection; Evans Delivery Company, Inc.; GSC Logistics; PDS Trucking Inc.; Performance Team/GaleTriangle; Total Transportation Services, Inc.; and Western Ports Transportation.

###

The Coalition for Responsible Transportation is a national coalition of leading importers, exporters, trucking companies, clean truck manufacturers and ocean carriers dedicated to reducing port truck pollution at our nation’s ports. For more information, visit http://www.responsibletrans.org/.

MEDIA ADVISORY

Contact:
Jennifer Andreassen, 202-572-3387, jandreassen@edf.org
Tim Johnson, +44 (0) 7710-381742, tim@aef.org.uk

WHEN
Wednesday, June 29
2 p.m. Washington (EDT) 7 p.m. London (BST) 11 a.m. Sacramento (PDT)

WHAT
Oral arguments begin in Europe’s highest court next Tuesday, July 5, as two U.S. airlines sue the European Union to gut the “Aviation Directive,” the only program in the world that sets enforceable limits on carbon pollution from aviation.

U.S. and European environmental groups who have intervened in the lawsuit in support of the EU law will host a media briefing to cover the case’s background, and its potential implications for efforts to limit greenhouse gas emissions from the aviation sector and more broadly.

WHO
Tim Johnson, Director, Aviation Environment Federation
Annie Petsonk, International Counsel, Environmental Defense Fund
Pamela Campos, Attorney, Environmental Defense Fund

WHERE
Within U.S.: 800-681-1608
International callers: +1 303-223-4376
A recording of the conference will be available, please contact Jennifer Andreassen for more information: jandreassen@edf.org

BACKGROUND
United/ Continental and American Airlines and their trade group are suing in the European Court of Justice to block a new law that holds airlines accountable for their global warming pollution resulting from flights to, from and within the European Union. The law takes effect Jan. 1, 2012.

United/ Continental and American Airlines have also been lobbying the U.S. Congress to unilaterally declare the EU law invalid. Last week at talks with the European Union on aviation, the Obama administration asked the EU to exempt U.S. airlines from the law.

The airlines have also been criticized by environmental groups for working to gut the anti-pollution program while simultaneously bragging about their environmental performances.

The oral argument will be held Tuesday, July 5th in Luxembourg before a 15-judge panel that is Europe’s highest judicial authority, roughly comparable to the U.S. Supreme Court. The hearing is expected to last most of the day. The court will then deliberate; an Advocate General is expected to issue an advisory memorandum in approximately two months, with the full court’s decision coming later.

From Annie Petsonk, International Counsel, Environmental Defense Fund, who attended today’s Oslo U.S-EU bilateral meetings on aviation:

“Europe has taken the lead. While the United States raised objections to having the EU Emissions Trading System cover American carriers, Europe responded by inviting the U.S. to discuss equivalent measures that could exempt flights between Europe and the United States.

“The Obama Administration has a choice: it can stand in the way of the only program in the world that sets enforceable limits on carbon pollution from aviation, or it can begin to craft a program that taps the ingenuity of this dynamic sector to cut pollution, lower costs, and reduce America’s dependence on imported oil.

“Today’s meeting marks the first time the environmental community has been invited to observe US-EU negotiations under the air travel agreements, and we appreciate the invitation of the United States Government to attend.”

–

From Pamela Campos, Attorney, Environmental Defense Fund, who represented EDF at the Paris Air Show this week:

“The airline industry is ripe with innovation, and American companies stand to gain by providing solutions.”

NEWS RELEASE

Contact:
Tony Kreindler, 202-445-8108, tkreindler@edf.org
Mandy Warner, 202-572-3247, awarner@edf.org

(Washington, D.C. – June 21, 2011) The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) today reiterated its commitment to finalizing new limits on toxic air pollution from coal-fired power plants by November, while extending the public comment period on the new regulations for an additional 30 days.

The rules must be completed by November 16, 2011, under a court-supervised deadline negotiated by Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), the American Nurses Association, and other organizations. The 30-day extension of the comment period was requested by industry, which already has had 98 days to review the proposed rules.

“The deadline remains unchanged, even with the additional time for comment,” said Mandy Warner, policy specialist at EDF. “At stake are some of the most important protections for Americans yet to be implemented under the 1990 Clean Air Act. These crucial rules have been in the works for decades.”

EPA’s upcoming regulations will put in place new limits on the most toxic pollutants from the power sector, including mercury, arsenic, chromium, and acid gases. Once in place, these clean air standards will annually prevent up to 17,000 early deaths, 11,000 heart attacks, 120,000 asthma attacks, 12,200 hospital and emergency room visits, 4,500 cases of chronic bronchitis, and 5.1 million restricted activity days.

American Electric Power and other companies requesting the extension have been slow to invest in new technology to comply with the rules, but other major utilities say they are well-positioned to meet the new standards, including Constellation, Exelon, Wisconsin Energy, PSEG, Calpine, PPL, and NextEra. Some have urged EPA to stay the course on the rules to protect investments and electric reliability decisions made in anticipation of their finalization.

“Utilities have been on notice for decades that the new air toxics rules will be put in place,” said Warner.” It’s been 7,524 days since the 1990 law was signed by President George H.W. Bush, and 3,836 days since EPA made its determination that the updated standards are necessary.”

NEWS RELEASE

Contact:
Suzanne Struglinski, Natural Resources Defense Council, 202-289-2387 (office) or 202-423-6004 (cell), sstruglinski@nrdc.org
Jennifer Andreassen, Environmental Defense Fund, 202-572-3387, jandreassen@edf.org

(Washington – June 21, 2011) As U.S. and European Union officials prepare to meet Wednesday the EU’s pioneering anti-pollution program for aviation, major environmental groups urged airlines to drop their attempts to gut that program. A full-page ad published in Tuesday’s POLITICO calls on United (now merging with Continental) to live up to its avowed “focus on protecting the environment.”

Last month, six major environmental groups sent letters to the CEOs of American Airlines and United, denouncing the airlines for bringing suit in a European court to block a law that holds all airlines accountable for their global warming pollution from flights to, from and within Europe. The law takes effect Jan. 1, 2012. Both American Airlines and United are touting their environmental initiatives, American Airlines in its in-flight magazine (“AA Reduces Environmental Footprint”) and United in its “Eco-Skies” campaign. But behind the scenes, the companies are suing to try to block the world’s only law that holds them accountable for actually reducing their pollution.

A recent Wall Street Journal story quoted unnamed “people familiar with the U.S. position” who suggested that, in next week’s U.S.-EU talks, the U.S. will oppose the EU law.

“It’s disappointing that some parties are apparently trying to align the U.S. government with the airlines against the world’s only enforceable program to reduce carbon pollution from airplanes,” said Jake Schmidt, International Climate Policy Director at Natural Resources Defense Council. “But we’re confident that within the administration, cooler heads will recognize that President Obama needs to fight carbon pollution, rather than allowing some in his administration to fight anti-pollution initiatives.”

The groups’ May 11 letters noted that if American and United are committed to reducing their environmental impact, “it makes no sense to spend [their] customers’ money on lawyers and lobbyists in an effort to thwart a crucial anti-pollution program.” The environmental groups urged the airlines to drop the lawsuit, saying “Innovation, not obstruction, is what’s needed now… [J]oin the future of low-carbon aviation by making your actions consistent with your words.”

The letters were signed by the CEOs of Environmental Defense Fund, Center for Biological Diversity, Earthjustice, Environment America, Natural Resources Defense Council, and Sierra Club. EDF, CBD and Earthjustice have intervened in the litigation, in which oral argument is expected in Fall 2011.

Environmental Defense Fund had previously submitted the POLITICO ad to United/Continental’s Hemispheres in-flight magazine. A United spokesperson verbally refused to publish it.

For more information, visit edf.org/aviation

###

Environmental Defense Fund (edf.org), a leading national nonprofit organization, creates transformational solutions to the most serious environmental problems. EDF links science, economics, law and innovative private-sector partnerships. See twitter.com/EnvDefenseFund; facebook.com/EnvDefenseFund; edf.org/ClimateTalks

The Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) is an international nonprofit environmental organization with more than 1.3 million members and online activists. Since 1970, our lawyers, scientists, and other environmental specialists have worked to protect the world’s natural resources, public health, and the environment. NRDC has offices in New York City, Washington, D.C., Los Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago, Livingston, Montana, and Beijing. Visit us at www.nrdc.org

NEWS RELEASE

Contact:
Tony Kreindler, 202-445-8108, tkreindler@edf.org
Vickie Patton, 720-837-6239, vpatton@edf.org

(Washington, D.C. – June 20, 2011) The U. S. Supreme Court today in American Electric Power v. Connecticut firmly underscored the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) congressionally mandated responsibility to address global warming pollution from power plants and other major pollution sources.

The Court’s opinion holds that a 2007 Supreme Court decision “made plain that emissions of carbon dioxide qualify as air pollution subject to regulation under” the Clean Air Act, and that the Act ” ‘speaks directly’ to emissions of carbon dioxide from the defendants’ plants.” Power plant smokestacks are the single largest source of carbon pollution in our nation, responsible for nearly 40 percent of all U.S. emissions.

“The most important thing about this decision is that it buttresses the foundation for EPA to do its job,” said Environmental Defense Fund President Fred Krupp. “The Supreme Court strongly underscored EPA’s responsibility under the law to address climate pollution that threatens the health and well-being of our nation.”

The High Court ruled today in American Electric Power Company v. Connecticut that federal common law nuisance claims brought by the states of California, Connecticut, Iowa, New York, Rhode Island, and Vermont to abate the extensive pollution discharged by the nation’s five largest emitting power companies (AEP, Southern Company, Xcel Energy, Cinergy and TVA) are displaced by EPA’s responsibility under the Clean Air Act to address global warming pollution that endangers human health and welfare.

The Court describes at length the EPA’s development of greenhouse gas New Source Performance Standards for new and existing power plants, a major source of global warming pollution, under the nation’s Clean Air Act and its commitment to complete action by May 2012:

“EPA is currently engaged in a [Clean Air Act] rulemaking to set standards for greenhouse gas emissions from fossil-fuel fired power plants. *** [T]he agency agreed to complete that rulemaking by May 2012. [citation omitted]. The Act itself thus provides a means to seek limits on emissions of carbon dioxide from domestic power plants – the same relief the plaintiffs seek by invoking federal common law. We see no room for a parallel track.”

Environmental Defense Fund is a party to the settlement agreement requiring EPA action to address power plant pollution under the Clean Air Act.

The Court also relies on EPA’s expertise in addressing these vitally important air pollution problems: “It is altogether fitting that Congress designated an expert agency, here, EPA, as best suited to serve as primary regulator of greenhouse gas emissions.”