Advanced Search
August 18, 2014
EPA Appoints New Deputy Director
On August 5, Lisa Feldt was appointed acting deputy administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Bob Perciasepe, who served as acting deputy administrator since 2009, is starting a new job as director of the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, an advocacy group. Gina McCarthy, administrator of EPA, commented, "Bob’s amazing leadership as the head of Office of Air and Radiation made him a tough act to follow. Under his direction, we made huge gains in reducing sulfur in fuels which no doubt saved countless lives, putting together regional haze regulations, and expanding light duty emissions standards to include vans and SUVs.” Lisa Feldt was previously the deputy assistant administrator for EPA’s Solid Waste and Emergency Response Office, where she focused on policies covering methane emissions, according to National Journal. In addition, on August 7 more staff changes were announced. Nancy Stoner at EPA’s Office of Water and Craig Hooks at the Office of Administration and Resources Management are leaving. Ken Kopocis, who was nominated by the President in 2011 to lead EPA’s Office of Water, will take over as deputy assistant administrator there, and may be able to bypass Senate confirmation to take over Nancy Stoner’s vacated position as assistant administrator. Perciasepe said, “Although we’re losing leaders with tremendous skills, we’re excited for the incredibly capable people that will take the reins.”
For more information see:
The Hill, National Journal
Texas May Not Follow EPA’s Power Plant Greenhouse Gas Rules
On August 7, the top environmental regulator of Texas, Bryan Shaw, suggested the state will not follow the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Clean Power Plan, a proposed regulation to limit carbon emissions from currently operating power plants. Shaw, chairman of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, said, “I’m concerned that if this is not contested, if we don’t dispute this, if we don’t win, the implications . . . are only the camel’s nose under the tent.” Texas can either file a lawsuit against EPA’s rules, or simply ignore the rules and take no actions. However, Texas has not so far chosen to join a suit filed by 12 states against the EPA’s Clean Power Plan (see Climate Change News August 11.) Texas previously chose not to follow a federal greenhouse gas permit rule in 2010, and filed suit against the EPA. As a result, EPA took over the permitting process, which caused years of delays for industries in Texas to receive permits, and led to millions of dollars in economic losses. In addition, Texas lost the lawsuit, and spent about $350,000 of Texas taxpayer money.
The Hill, Texas Tribune
CEQ Will Not Amend NEPA to Consider Climate Change
On August 8, the White House Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) denied a 2008 legal petition from the International Center for Technology Assessment (ICTA), Sierra Club, and the National Resources Defense Council (NRDC), which asked that the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) be amended to require federal agencies to consider climate change impacts in all environmental analyses. Mike Boots, acting CEQ Chair, explained CEQ’s response in a letter, writing that CEQ “does not believe that revising its existing NEPA regulations is necessary because they already encompass consideration of climate effects and it is not the best use of CEQ's resources at this time.” CEQ released its decision on the 2008 petition in response to a court deadline imposed by a federal court after ICTA and the Center for Food Safety (CFS) filed suit for CEQ’s response in April 2014. Following the denial, CEQ released a formal interpretation of NEPA which said the act requires federal agencies to study climate change impacts. Andrew Kimbrell, executive director of ICTA and CFS, said, “Victory is about advancing policy. While we are disappointed the agency technically denied our petition, we are gratified that in the denial the agency stated that it actually completely agrees with our fundamental legal argument: namely, climate impacts are important environmental impacts that cannot be ignored and must be analyzed and considered by every federal agency in its decision-making processes.”
Politico, eNews Park Forest, Center for Food Safety
Medical Scientists Call on Australia’s Prime Minister to Address Climate Change
On August 11, twelve Australian medical scientists issued an open letter to Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott urging him to include climate change on the agenda of the G20 conference arguing, “adverse health outcomes related to climate change are already evident in many regions of the world.” Published in the Medical Journal of Australia, the letter stated the health of present and future generations of Australian citizens are at risk from a variety of stressors resulting from rising global temperatures, including: extreme heat waves, forest fires, water shortages, an increase in pest borne illnesses, food shortages and the increase of mental health conditions and chronic illnesses. Though climate change is not included in the G20 forum’s agenda, Abbott said the topic might come up in conversation. Tanya Plibersek, Deputy Leader of Australia’s Labor Party, further explained Abbott’s statement in an earlier meeting with U.S. business leaders, stating that while “nobody expects the G20 to be the meeting where people make binding commitments or talk about how exactly each country is going to reduce its climate emissions, [ . . . ] the G20 can be a statement [about climate change] that the G20 members understand -- that this is a pressing economic issue.”
The Guardian, The Australian, Letter
America’s Largest Public Relations Firm Will No Longer Represent Climate Change Deniers
On August 7, Edelman, the largest public relations (PR) firm in America, issued a formal statement saying they would refuse to accept any new clients or campaigns that are backed by climate skeptics. According to the company website, Edelman “fully recognises the reality of, and science behind, climate change, and believes it represents one of the most important global challenges facing society, business and government today. To be clear, we do not accept client assignments that aim to deny climate change.” Kert Davies, the founder of Climate Investigators, an organization that works with PR firms, referred to Edelman’s formal statement as a ‘big step’ in the right direction. Davies said, “It might pull the rest of the industry along to take a firm stance on climate change.”
The Guardian
Study Says Keystone XL Pipeline Will Produce Four Times the Greenhouse Gases Estimated by State Department
On August 10, the Stockholm Environment Institute published a study, “Impact of the Keystone XL pipeline on global oil markets and greenhouse gas emissions,” written by scientists in the journal Nature Climate Change. This study concluded that the carbon dioxide emissions from the Keystone XL pipeline could be around 121 million tons per year, four times higher than previous estimates from the State Department. Peter Erickson and Michael Lazarus, study co-authors, explained, “The sole reason for this difference is that we account for the changes in global oil consumption resulting from increasing oil sands production levels, whereas the State Department does not.” The study finds that when the Keystone XL produces one extra barrel of oil, world consumption increases by 0.6 barrels, which in turn increases greenhouse gas emissions. This is attributed to the study’s estimate that the price of oil will drop $3 a barrel if the Keystone XL pipeline is approved, providing incentives to use more oil than before. Furthermore, Ken Caldeira, an atmospheric scientist at the Carnegie Institute for Science in Stanford, California, also pointed out, “My concern is not so much the increase in emissions caused by Keystone XL, but that Keystone XL is part of a broader pattern of behavior.” He stated that a disapproval of Keystone XL project could be a signal to the market, implying that future projects with heavy greenhouse gas pollution might be disapproved as well.
Washington Post, LA Times, Nature, Study
Antarctic Ice Melt Could Accelerate Sea Level Rise
Published on August 14, a recent study found that melting ice in the Antarctic region could increase sea levels worldwide by up to 37 centimeters (14.6 inches) this century. The Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research led the study, which used climate models and observational data of the Antarctic to find the results. Lead author Anders Levermann said, “If greenhouse gases continue to rise as before, ice discharge from Antarctica could raise the global ocean by an additional 1 to 37 centimeters in this century already.” Co-author Robert Bindschadler of the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center added, ““Rising sea level is widely regarded as a current and ongoing result of climate change that directly affects hundreds of millions of coastal dwellers around the world and indirectly affects billions more that share its financial costs.”
For additional information see:
Press Release, Bloomberg Business Week, Study
Other Headlines
1. EPA Chief Says Climate Change Science Should Be Taught in Schools
2. China and Brazil Taking Positions for United Nations Climate Talks
Top-Rated Climate Nonprofit – 4-Star Charity