Kentucky Coal Blog

U.S. EPA will need increased funding for climate programs in future years as the agency moves forward on efforts to curb greenhouse gas emissions, Administrator Lisa Jackson said yesterday.

President Obama’s fiscal 2011 request would allot $56 million — including $43 million in new funding — for regulatory programs to curb greenhouse gas emissions. The climate funding was increased even as EPA’s total budget was trimmed to $10 billion — about $300 million lower than 2010 enacted levels.

The proposed increase in funding is aimed at aiding states as they begin to implement forthcoming greenhouse gas regulations and for EPA to develop new standards and pollution control guidance. EPA is expected to roll out its first greenhouse gas regulations next month for cars and

light duty vehicles; those rules will also trigger stationary source regulations.

Despite the increased funding request, Jackson and other Obama administration officials continue to voice a preference for comprehensive energy and climate legislation over EPA regulation.

While Jackson predicted that EPA will need even more cash for climate programs, the top Republican on the House panel questioned the proposed spending levels.

“I agree with you, Administrator Jackson, that using the Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gas is not the best way to address climate change,” said Rep. Mike Simpson (R-Idaho). “That is why I question whether the nearly $50 million in EPA’s FY ’11 budget for greenhouse gas regulation is prudent.”

Simpson expressed concern that the rulemaking staff at EPA, buoyed by receiving the largest budget in history last year, “are sprinting like thoroughbreds out of the starting gate.”

“Some people will say that these actions are long overdue,” Simpson added, “but I can’t help feeling wary about the rapid pace at which the EPA is implementing broad regulatory changes and the impact these changes are having on our struggling economy.”

Subcommittee Chairman Norm Dicks (D-Wash.) applauded the administration’s climate policies and the $43 million requested boost for greenhouse gas regulatory programs. “As you know, we in the House passed our version of a climate bill last June,” Dicks said. “We recognize the need for action, I’m glad to see the administration does too.”

Another Democrat, however, detailed concerns about inequalities that could arise for coal-dependent regions and other areas as EPA moves forward with regulations.

“While there are many of us who live in some of these areas who think that this is a problem that has to be addressed, the whole climate change problem … we’re also concerned that it be done in such a way that some regions of the country are not disadvantaged unfairly,” said Rep. Ben Chandler (D-Ky.), who last year voted for the House climate bill.

That legislation attempted to address those inequalities, Chandler said, “But when the EPA goes about its business of regulating emissions, is there any thought being put into what happens to certain jurisdictions that burn coal, for instance?”

Jackson acknowledged that a climate bill would offer more flexibility than regulations. “Through legislation, there are many more opportunities to address geographic differences, industrial differences, international differences, as well as provide market incentives,” she said.

But the Clean Air Act also provides opportunities to mitigate regional disparities, Jackson said. “There are certainly tools under the Clean Air Act,” she said. “It is a powerful and effective tool for addressing air pollution and it has a proven history over many years.”

Great Lakes

Jackson also faced criticism for the Obama administration’s proposal to slash funding for the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative to $300 million in fiscal 2011, a $175 million drop from 2010.

“You understand what concerns those of us in the Great Lakes,” said Rep. Steven LaTourette (R-Ohio). “It looks like $175 million for something that is really needed has taken a walk.”

That program — aimed at cleaning up contaminated sediments and toxic chemicals and fending off invasive species — still has money left over from this year, Jackson said.

“This one was one of management and of pragmatic ability to put the money on the street,” she told the panel. By the time the money was authorized so EPA could solicit grant proposals for the $475 million, it was close to the end of calendar year 2009.

“The $300 million is simply a reflection — for this year only — that we have quite a chunk still to spend,” Jackson said.

By James Bruggers

FRANKFORT, Ky — The House passed a resolution on Tuesday that calls on Congress to block the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency from regulating heat-trapping gases.

A similar resolution was introduced Monday in the Senate by Sen. Brandon Smith, R-Hazard. Neither would have the force of law.

The Kentucky action comes the same week the EPA laid out its timetable for regulating greenhouse gasses if Congress doesn’t pass legislation to help reduce risks from potentially catastrophic consequences of climate change.

The Obama administration says the science is clear that greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide from coal-fired power plants endanger public health and welfare, and that it is compelled to regulate them under a 2007 Supreme Court decision.

However, Rep. Jim Gooch, D-Providence, the lead sponsor of House Resolution 132, argued that “the science is not settled” and called on lawmakers to “stand up and say, ‘Wait a minute’.”

He said EPA action would “totally disrupt the American economy.” Gooch, who chairs the House Natural Resources and Environment Committee, is the vice president of a construction company that works with coal companies and is among the staunchest supporters of the coal industry in Frankfort.

Kentucky depends on coal for more than 90 percent of its electricity, and is the nation’s third leading coal-producing state.

The vote was 76-16, with eight members not voting. Among those dissenting in House were some of the Democratic legislators from Louisville and Lexington.

Rep. Jim Wayne, D-Louisville, said hundreds of millions of people in the world are already affected by floods, droughts and wind storms brought on by climate change.

“We know from scientific research that we need to do something about this,” he said, making a case for moving forward with “green jobs” through renewable and alternative energy sources.

“We’ve got to be thinking about our children and our grandchildren,” said Tom Burch, D-Louisville.

Rep. Harry Moberly, D-Richmond, voted against the resolution and said something must be done someday about global warming, but that Kentucky’s coal-based economy is not ready for change.

But Gooch’s argument won the day. “We can’t allow the EPA to usurp Congress,” he said, adding that any regulations would be detrimental to Kentucky’s economy.

The resolution comes amid growing unease over whether the nation can afford to curb greenhouse gas emissions during a recession.

Several Democratic senators in Washington recently sent a letter challenging EPA authority on greenhouse gas emissions to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson. It was signed by Democrats Mark Begich of Alaska, Robert Byrd of West Virginia, Sherrod Brown of Ohio, Bob Casey of Pennsylvania, Claire McCaskill of Missouri, Carl Levin of Michigan and Max Baucus of Montana.

The Democrats said they did not object to EPA regulation of emissions from cars and light trucks, but questioned the agency’s ability to do anything further under the Clean Air Act.

Kentucky Attorney General Jack Conway, who is running for a U.S. Senate seat, supports an effort by U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, to get Congress to pass a resolution curbing EPA authority over greenhouse gases.

Jackson, in a letter dated Feb. 22, to Rockefeller, said she shares his goal of “ensuring economic recovery” and that the EPA was working on “addressing greenhouse-gas emissions in sensible ways that are consistent with the call for comprehensive energy and climate legislation.”

She said the EPA anticipates phasing in requirements for large industrial sources like power plants in 2011 and that the EPA does not intend to regulate the smallest sources of greenhouse gas emissions any sooner than 2016.

If Congress were to block the EPA, Jackson wrote that it “would be viewed by many as a vote to move the United States to a position behind that of China on the issue of climate change, and more in line with the position of Saudi Arabia.”

Virginia’s attorney general, Ken Cuccinelli, filed a petition Tuesday asking the Environmental Protection Agency to reconsider its finding that global warming poses a threat to people.

Mr. Cuccinelli, seeking to block the decision, also filed a petition with a federal appeals court for a review of the December E.P.A. finding, in which the agency asserted that carbon dioxide and five other greenhouse gases emitted from automobiles, power plants and factories “threaten the public health and welfare of the American people.”

To Read More click here:  http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/18/virginia-files-challenge-to-e-p-a-greenhouse-gas-regulation/