Energy Exchange

New EPA/DOT Vehicle Standards – The Reality Behind The ‘Job Killing’ Sound Bite

Last week, I wrote about energy efficiency’s role in greenhouse gas standards for power plants and the reality behind the “Job killing EPA regulations” sound-bite.  The recently announced new fuel economy and greenhouse gas standards for light vehicles provides further evidence that the reality of Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations is job creation, not job destruction.

According to the government, the “proposed program for model year 2017-2025 passenger cars and trucks is expected catalyze demand for currently-available, innovative technologies including advanced gasoline engines and transmissions, vehicle weight reduction, lower tire rolling resistance, improvements in aerodynamics, diesel engines, more efficient accessories, and improvements in air conditioning systems. The standards should also spur manufacturers to increasingly explore electric technologies such as start/stop, hybrids, plug-in hybrids, and electric vehicles [and] … includes a number of incentive programs to encourage early adoption and introduction of “game changing” advanced technologies, such as hybridization for pickup trucks.”

U.S. auto companies are already investing in these new technologies as the best bet to gain market share in the world economy.  The Energy Department’s battery program (an investment of $2.4 billion in 48 advanced battery and electric drive projects) is ensuring that the U.S. supply chain is ready so that we don’t just buy batteries from Japan and others.  According to the Department of Energy (DOE), the United States is on track to achieve a 40% share of global capacity to produce lithium-ion batteries for vehicles by 2015.  An assessment of the battery value chain by Duke University shows at least 50 U.S.-based firms are involved to date, with 119 locations in 27 states performing manufacturing and research and development (R&D). 

We have leading material science experts in Dow, Dupont and 3M that can help design new composite materials to help meet the need for less weight.  The 70,000 tire workers would love to have a chance to make the most efficient, low rolling resistant tires- and then sell those tires to the rest of the world.  A second value chain assessment of hybrid vehicle technology shows U.S. firms dominating the hybrid market for medium and heavy-duty trucks, putting the U.S. in a great position to develop hybrid light duty pick-up trucks. 

At every turn, there are job creation possibilities.  What the EPA and Department of Transportation (DOT) proposal does is ensure that the market for efficient vehicles is a strong and vibrant market, one that grows jobs at every turn.  Furthermore, ensuring that U.S. firms have enough customers today – the key ingredient to growing a healthy business – is the only way to compete in the global markets of tomorrow.   EPA regulations maintain auto jobs and create new jobs in sectors such as battery manufacturing.  Now, the new battery plant by A123 Systems lithium ion in Livonia, Michigan won’t have to fire the 300 new workers it just hired. 

For consumers, these improvements would save an average of up to $6,600 in fuel costs over the lifetime of a model year 2025 vehicle for a net lifetime savings of $4,400 after factoring in related increases in vehicle cost. Overall, the net benefit to society from this rule would total more than $420 billion over the lifetime of the vehicles sold in model year 2017-2025.  No lost jobs here.

In sum, this is what “job killing EPA regulations” look like in the real-world.

Posted in Washington, DC / Read 1 Response

DOE Roadmap Toward Cleaner Natural Gas Development – Sign Reads “Still Under Construction”

Today the Department of Energy’s Shale Gas Production Subcommittee released a final report that follows up on its earlier recommendations for increased oversight and transparency, assesses their implementation to date and lays out a roadmap for improvement.  The report proposes a focused set of steps for strengthening environmental management in the shale gas industry and developing this abundant energy source in ways that safeguard public health and the environment.  

The report is a call to action, stating “Americans deserve assurance that the full economic, environmental and energy security benefits of shale gas development will be realized without sacrificing public health, environmental protection and safety” and the Subcommittee believes that these recommendations, if implemented, would make real progress toward meeting these goals.  Time is of the essence, though, as the ramifications of inaction pose more risk every day.  

While much more remains to be done to ensure shale gas development is safe for people and the environment,  important progress is currently underway on federal, state and local levels.  The EPA, for example, has proposed rules to reduce air pollution from oil and gas development activities that, while needing improvement, are a critical first step.  Likewise, we’ve seen that states can move very quickly to update their oil and gas rules when they have a mind to.  For example, in only the past eleven months Arkansas, Texas, Montana and Louisiana have adopted requirements mandating the disclosure of chemicals found in hydraulic fracturing fluid.  And Colorado, New York, New Mexico and North Dakota have recently proposed requirements relating to fracturing fluid chemical disclosure.  In Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Ohio, legislatures have passed, or are in the process of debating, more stringent regulations on the exploration and production of natural gas.  

EDF is actively engaged across the country to further the safety and environmental protection of our natural resources wherever the production of natural gas is occurring.  It’s a long, cross-country road trip on highways still under construction.  We’re prepared for the long haul.

Also posted in Natural Gas / Comments are closed

It Makes Dollars & “Sense” To Capture Air Emissions

Oil and gas exploration and production is rapidly expanding across the U.S. due to technological developments that have made extraction of previously untapped unconventional resources such as shale gas feasible.

In fact, shale gas production “has gone from a negligible amount just a few years ago to being almost 30% of total U.S. natural gas production.” 

But national clean air standards covering these activities have not been updated since 1985 in one case and 1999 in another. They are limited, inadequate, and out of date, particularly given recent technological advances in this area. 

This poses a serious problem, since exploration and production activities emit numerous hazardous air pollutants and other airborne contaminants that threaten human health and the environment. Communities across the country are paying the price, suffering from air pollution in the absence of protective, comprehensive standards. 

In July, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed new nationwide safeguards to reduce air pollution from upstream oil and gas production activities.  Recently, the public was given a chance to express their opinions on the issue at three hearings held in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, Denver, Colorado, and Arlington, Texas. EDF testified at all three. (Public written comments will be accepted through November 30th and EPA is required to issue a final rule by February 2012. You can submit comments online, via fax or through the mail. In your correspondence, please be sure to reference Docket Number EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0505; FRL–9456–2.)

I testified at the EPA hearing in Pittsburgh where compelling concerns were raised by many in the communities hard hit by air pollution impacts.  People in communities across Pennsylvania expressed concern that adequate protection from dangerous pollution in their home state is simply not in place. Some pleaded with the EPA to finalize new standards, others expressed anger that EPA has not done so already, and many fear that the new standards won’t be tough enough to keep their families safe.   

The individual who testified before me declared that when it comes to our health and that of our children, the costs of cleaning up harmful pollution should not factor into EPA’s decision-making. He got a standing ovation.

Of course, the hearing also featured industry representatives, some of whom echoed the position of the American Petroleum Institute (API) calling for more time to comment on the proposed standards and to delay their implementation.

Yet, the truth is that the proposed EPA rules will standardize many practices and technologies already being used in states such as Colorado and Wyoming, and elsewhere by natural gas companies. Further, these practices and technologies reduce gas losses, which results in greater recovery and sale of natural gas, and thus increased economic gains. The return on the initial investment for many of these practices is sometimes as short as a few months and almost always less than two years.  In these tough economic times, it would seem wise to eliminate waste, save money, and reduce environmental impact.

Based on EPA estimates of natural gas losses, industry lost more than $1 billion in profits in 2009 due to venting, flaring and fugitive emissions.  The U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), with supporting data from EPA, estimates that around 40% of natural gas estimated to be vented and flared on onshore federal leases could be economically captured with currently available control technologies. Recouping these losses could increase federal royalty payments by $23 million annually, at a time when revenue is desperately needed.

The industry can demonstrate their commitment to bringing natural gas to market in an environmentally sound way by using best practices, acknowledging the benefits of these safeguards, and being proactive in helping them get adopted.

And, while EPA’s proposed rules are a great start, there is room for improvement (for more details, see EDF’s preliminary analysis of the regulations). Bottom line: it is critical that stronger clean air standards move forward.  They are vitally important to protect human health and the environment.

At the EPA hearing in Pittsburgh, the public demanded that EPA require industry to be more vigilant about health and safety, and reduce their environmental impact.  Considering the potential increased revenue of capturing more gas, advocating for strong clean air rules makes both dollars and “sense.”

Also posted in Natural Gas / Comments are closed

The Price We Pay For Outdated Clean Air Standards

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is in the process of updating national safeguards to better protect Americans from the health impacts of natural gas and oil emissions. The standards address the emissions discharged during gas and oil drilling and development practices, known in the industry as ‘upstream’ activities.  

Residents around the growing number of drilling, processing and transmission sites will be relieved to hear this because while industry activity has increased dramatically in the U.S., the Clean Air Act standards that regulate the related air pollution are outdated.  Current standards are limited and fail to adequately protect public health.

These industrial activities discharge a host of air pollutants. Drilling rigs, wells and equipment emit hazardous air pollutants such as benzene, a known human carcinogen.  

A number of other airborne contaminants contribute to ground-level ozone or “smog” pollution, elevated levels of which can lead to:

  • decreased lung function, particularly in children who are active outdoors;
  • respiratory-related hospital admissions and emergency room visits  among both children and adults; and
  • lung inflammation, possible long-term damage to the lungs and premature mortality.

Upstream drilling activities were the single largest source of ozone precursor pollutants in Colorado in 2008. The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality reports that storage tanks used in the exploration and production of natural gas in Texas are the largest source of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) in the state. These contaminants contribute to smog and also are comprised of hazardous air pollutants. And according to a recent inventory, oxides of nitrogen and VOC emissions produced from gas production in the Barnett Shale are comparable to the combined emissions from all the cars and trucks in the Dallas Forth-Worth metro area.

Oil and natural gas activities also are the single largest source of U.S. methane emissions.  Methane is both a potent greenhouse gas and a contributor to smog.   In 2009, methane emitted from these activities was roughly equivalent to the carbon dioxide emissions from 60 coal-fired power plants. 

The media is starting to cover the plights of individuals and families who are suffering from exposure to these pollutants. National Public Radio did a story on a family in Pennsylvania that had a number of health symptoms due to drilling. “First Pam, her husband and two grown kids started getting headaches, and then fatigue set in. They’ve also had dizziness, nausea and nosebleeds. I’ve had a sore throat so long that I don’t know what it would be to not have a sore throat,” Pam says. For a week last summer, Pennsylvania state officials monitored the air at the Judys’ house and the compressor station. They found…toxic chemicals they say almost surely came from the compressor station.”

It is vitally important that EPA strengthen national emission standards. Improved emission standards will help protect millions of Americans, urban and rural, who live in the vicinity of oil and gas air pollution discharges.

Rigorous federal guidelines will also foster industry innovation and emerging technologies, and increase profits by using available best practices to capture saleable gas that’s otherwise released into the atmosphere.   

Updated safeguards are long overdue but there is no guarantee that they will be the strong standards that are essential to protect the public’s health. You can help ensure that they are.

We encourage everyone who wants to breathe cleaner air to let the EPA know you support strong and comprehensive standards for the natural gas and oil industry.

Please get involved by writing to the EPA in favor of updated protections. We also invite you to join us and share your thoughts with the EPA at the upcoming public hearings in: Pittsburgh, Sept. 27; Denver, Sept. 28; and Arlington, Texas on Sept. 29. If you can’t make the hearings, you can submit comments online, via fax or through the mail until Oct. 24. In your correspondence, please be sure to reference Docket Number EPA–HQ–OAR–2010–0505; FRL–9456–2.

Also posted in Natural Gas / Read 1 Response

The Solyndra Panic

Source: Solyndra / BusinessWire

Bad news from Solyndra has set off a bit of a panic around everything from the future of solar in the U.S., the role of government in supporting innovative technologies, and prospects for clean energy jobs.  Caution is advised and perspective is needed lest we walk away from a pivotal new global market.  Let’s start with the big picture on solar.  I believe it is critical that we focus on the full value chain for energy and environmental solutions to better understand the economic growth inherent in the clean energy market.  In the case of solar, an analysis released last month by GTM Research examined the entire value chain – from raw material inputs and capital equipment needs to panel assembly and installation and maintenance.  The results show that the U.S. has a trade SURPLUS with rest of the world AND with China in the solar sector defined across the entire value.

Let me highlight some of the key findings: 

  • The U.S. was a significant net exporter of solar energy products with total net exports of $1.9 billion in 2010.
  • The U.S. solar industry had a positive trade balance with China with net exports of $247 million – $540 million.
  • The largest solar energy export product is polysilicon, the feedstock for crystalline silicon photovoltaics, of which the U.S. exported $2.5 billion in 2010.
  • 2010 U.S. solar energy installations created a combined $6.0 billion in direct value, of which $4.4 billion (75%) accrued to the U.S.

This is a good news story, and not surprisingly to me as over the past several years we’ve heard positive stories from companies like Komax Solar, an equipment supplier.  Six years ago, Komax took a risk and transitioned itself from medical technology and electronic machines to supplying the equipment needed in the assembly plants for solar panels.  Komax is exporting, has tripled its workforce, and has leveraged its expertise in precision machining to move into new solar markets.

What role the government played in the larger solar story is hard to pinpoint, but many solar companies had real and critical capital needs during the recession that the American Recovery & Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) filled.  Project Sunburst, a Maryland Energy Administration (MEA) initiative that benefitted greatly from the ARRA funding, created demand for solar panels installation on public buildings and triggered $36 million private investment.  In addition, while the primary goal was making it easier for public entities to go solar, “It had an additional goal or larger goal to encourage the growth of solar energy generation in the state as a resource,” MEA spokesperson Ian Hines said. The investment helped give the industry the extra push that put it over the tipping point as a maturing industry in Maryland.

This leads me to believe that ARRA has indeed been an important ingredient.  The government has also taken a portfolio approach that includes companies like Nanosolar, which received almost $44 million as a 48C tax credit (one of the ARRA programs) and is currently hiring.  This is a company whose prospects excite me.   

At the end of the day, experience shows that the private sector is better at picking winners and losers, and the government is much better at “setting the table” – for example, investing in core, enabling innovations such as developing a well-designed, open-platform smart grid that enables new entrants such as solar power to compete with old electricity providers (the value chain for smart grid solutions, by the way, is extremely promising for US firms and job creation).  And, equally as important, the government must put into place energy policies that provide a level playing field and ensure that the full costs to society of energy products and services are accounted for, policies that ultimately put a price on carbon.

Also posted in Grid Modernization, Renewable Energy / Tagged , , | Read 1 Response

Jobs For Today AND Tomorrow

 The President’s response to the call for jobs now is necessarily focused on short-term triggers.  But, we must simultaneously seed the jobs for the next two to five years, or we will just keep putting ourselves back into the same hole.  These so-called “medium term jobs” must come from growth sectors in the global economy where the U.S. has skills and ideas to offer.  To me, the most promising of those sectors are health care and clean energy & resource management.

Source: Veterans News Now

It is in the latter area that the U.S. needs to, as David Brooks recently described, “set the table” with policies that create customers for the many small to large businesses that are striving to participate in this new sector.  In our survey of clean energy businesses, 73% are small businesses with less than 50 employees.  Of these, according to market research by Frost & Sullivan, one third believed that the failure to pass clean energy legislation last year had an effect on their business and 7 out of 10 thought their sales would increase if the U.S. passed new policies to reduce greenhouse gases.

When business of all sizes know that they are going to have customers – not just today from a short term stimulus or other plan, but customers derived from a long term commitment by our country to move to clean energy and less air pollution – they can  hire permanent employees.   In California, where the state has been slowly but steadily setting the table with rules for cleaner vehicles, a renewable portfolio standard, the Global Warming Solutions Act and energy efficient building codes, the clean energy sector is a growing source of jobs.  For example, according to Next 10 report from May 2011, jobs in manufacturing of clean energy and resource management activities grew 19% between 1995 and 2008 while total manufacturing employment in the state dropped 9%.

Without creating customers, “clean energy jobs” workforce training programs become a bridge to nowhere, the promise of clean energy jobs falters and businesses remain faced with lots of uncertainty and a natural reluctance to permanently hire new people.  The National Infrastructure Bank and rebuilding schools will hopefully create customers for some of these firms.  But what businesses really need to hire people is the prospect of customers over the medium-term.  We need Presidential leadership on federal clean energy policies to help deliver a steady-stream of customers and seed the jobs of tomorrow.

Also posted in Energy Efficiency, Grid Modernization, Jobs, Renewable Energy / Read 2 Responses