Photo courtesy of: Texas House of Representatives
(In Part 1 of our series on the Texas Emissions Reduction Plan, we provided an overview to the unique approach that Texas has taken to incentivize clean air under a voluntary program that “pays” participants to modernize their older engines and equipment. Today, in Part 2, we’ll consider whether the program has been a good investment in clean air for the state.)
What would you do with $2.4 billion dollars?
In Texas, we dedicated those funds to a program that would reduce emissions – the Texas Emissions Reduction Plan (TERP). That’s a serious investment in clean air by the Lone Star State (consider, for example, the cost of the Dallas Cowboys football stadium that came in at a mere $1.2 billion).
This year marks the program’s fifteen year anniversary, so it seems timely to take a look at whether TERP has returned a good investment for the State of Texas.
What makes an investment “good”? A standard answer is that a good investment is one that achieves your goals, whether they are financial, health-related, or some other goal. TERP was created with five statutory objectives, summarized in the Texas Health and Safety Code: Read More
Photo courtesy of: Texas House of Representatives
Texas is home to many unique things – from the iconic Cadillac Ranch in Amarillo to the Eiffel Tower in Paris (Texas), we tend to do things a little differently from the rest of the country.
The same is true with how the state has decided to deal with an air pollution problem that was affecting many areas in the state years ago. Instead of requiring specific actions from businesses and others whose operations create air pollution, our business-friendly state took another tactic – we created a voluntary incentive program to pay for emission reductions.
It’s called the Texas Emissions Reductions Plan – or TERP for short. And it has worked surprisingly well. Read More
EPA just announced the winners of the 2016 SmartWay Excellence Award for sustainable freight transport.
44 companies — out of more than 3,500 partners in the program – were honored for their accomplishments in freight supply chain environmental performance and energy efficiency.
This year’s well-deserved accolades went to 43 truck carriers, seven shippers and one barge carrier – including some SmartWay partners in Texas.
The awards demonstrate that environmental stewardship and economic success go hand in hand, and are an example of EPA’s commitment to recognizing companies that achieve those “win-wins.” Read More
The classic “chicken or the egg dilemma” is often used to talk about cause and effect. Although this question is usually posed as a philosophical examination of some obscure topic, we now have a clear case for true causality: port clean truck programs result in cleaner trucks at ports.
Last week, the Port of New Orleans joined the growing list of ports who have launched formal clean truck programs to encourage trucking companies to replace older, more polluting trucks with newer trucks with fewer emissions. Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) supported the Port of New Orleans’ efforts to develop their “Clean Truck Replacement Incentive Program” (Clean TRIP), which will be funded from the EPA’s Diesel Emissions Reduction Act Program. The funding will assist 20 truck operators in replacing their dirtier diesel trucks by offering up to $35,000 or 50 percent of the cost of a 2012 or newer truck. In addition to the immediate opportunity to reduce emissions from the first 20 trucks, the port will also be able to incentivize more truck replacements in the future, by pursuing additional grants or developing other innovative funding approaches.
The Port of New Orleans joins the Port of Houston as the only two ports on the Gulf Coast with clean truck programs. The efforts in Houston have been successful (and cost-effective, according to a peer-reviewed scientific study conducted by EDF authors) in reducing smog-forming pollution and cancer-causing diesel particulates, but we estimate there are still more than 2,500 trucks operating at the Port of Houston that would benefit from replacement. Read More
Panama Canal — Photo by Antonio Zugaldia, from Flikr
Everything is bigger in Texas, they say. Now, with the expansion of the Panama Canal this summer, we may start to see bigger ships in some Texas ports, too. These bigger ships would represent more business for Texas, but there could be a downside. Since these ships have huge engines that emit dangerous pollutants, we could see – and breathe – dirtier air. That’s why it’s so important for us to carefully manage these changes.
In late June, the first post-Panamax ship traveled through the newly-expanded Panama Canal, signaling a new era for mega-containerships and other super-sized vessels that can carry up to three times as much cargo as before. (“Panamax” was the term for the Panama Canal Authority’s size limit for ships traveling through the canal, The new mega-ships are sometimes called “Neopanamax” vessels.)
The expansion of the Panama Canal means that the near monopoly held by west coast ports, like the Ports of Los Angeles/Long Beach and others, on container trade from Asia may be ending. Instead of offloading cargo in southern California and relying on trains and trucks to transport goods to inland regions in the U.S., shippers will now be able to offload containers from Asia at U.S. ports on the Gulf or East Coast — taking advantage of potentially lower shipping costs and improved economies of scale. Read More
(This post was written by Grace Tee Lewis, EDF’s Kravis Postdoctoral Science Fellow)
August in Texas is not for the weak of heart or lung.
As temperatures rise, so do levels of air pollutants such as ground-level ozone – better known as smog. For those with asthma, being outside on high ozone days can lead to asthma attacks. Children, older adults and people who work outside are the most susceptible.
In Texas, asthma affects roughly 1 in 13 adults and 1 in 11 children. In 2014, this represented 1.4 million Texans aged 18 years or older and 617,000 children according to the Texas Department of State Health Services.