Category Archives: carbon sequestration

Oklahoma, where the denial comes right before the drought

I lived in Oklahoma, a half-hour’s commute from Tinker Air Force Base, where I was assigned, for nearly three years in the 80s. When I saw and read this article, I just had to share it here. So read it and then remember that Oklahoma is represented by denier-in-chief James Inhofe in the U.S. Senate. Whatta champ. Well isn’t he?

Carbon dioxide level reaches milestone

This Associated Press article appeared in many papers across the country this morning; I saw it on the Web sites of at least a dozen a few minutes ago. In any case, the world has indeed reached a milestone in the parts-per-million ranking of carbon dioxide, the main global warming gas. And, guess what? Humans are responsible (no matter what the Cato Institute might say). The Cato, by the way, is referenced in this reporting as the journalist attempts to include the “balance” thingee, no matter how inane that “balance” source may be. It’s the old he said, she said style of reporting. Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Dr. James Hansen: Game over for world’s climate

The director of NASA’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies is plain spoken and we’d all better believe what he says and writes. There is no getting around it. We either deal with our fossil fuel addiction now, or we make the planet uninhabitable for generations to come. Dr. Hansen’s op-ed essay from today’s NY Times can be read here.

EPA sets carbon standard for new coal-fired power plants

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:
March 27, 2012

EPA Proposes First Carbon Pollution Standard for Future Power Plants

Achievable standard is in line with investments already being made and will inform the building of new plants moving forward

WASHINGTON – Following a 2007 Supreme Court ruling, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) today proposed the first Clean Air Act standard for carbon pollution from new power plants. EPA’s proposed standard reflects the ongoing trend in the power sector to build cleaner plants that take advantage of American-made technologies, including new, clean-burning, efficient natural gas generation, which is already the technology of choice for new and planned power plants. At the same time, the rule creates a path forward for new technologies to be deployed at future facilities that will allow companies to burn coal, while emitting less carbon pollution. The rulemaking proposed today only concerns new generating units that will be built in the future, and does not apply to existing units already operating or units that will start construction over the next 12 months.

“Today we’re taking a common-sense step to reduce pollution in our air, protect the planet for our children, and move us into a new era of American energy,” said EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. “Right now there are no limits to the amount of carbon pollution that future power plants will be able to put into our skies – and the health and economic threats of a changing climate continue to grow. We’re putting in place a standard that relies on the use of clean, American made technology to tackle a challenge that we can’t leave to our kids and grandkids.”

Currently, there is no uniform national limit on the amount of carbon pollution new power plants can emit. As a direct result of the Supreme Court’s 2007 ruling, EPA in 2009 determined that greenhouse gas pollution threatens Americans’ health and welfare by leading to long lasting changes in our climate that can have a range of negative effects on human health and the environment.

The proposed standard, which only applies to power plants built in the future, is flexible and would help minimize carbon pollution through the deployment of the same types of modern technologies and steps that power companies are already taking to build the next generation of power plants. EPA’s proposal is in line with these investments and will ensure that this progress toward a cleaner, safer and more modern power sector continues. The proposed standards can be met by a range of power facilities burning different fossil fuels, including natural gas technologies that are already widespread, as well as coal with technologies to reduce carbon emissions. Even without today’s action, the power plants that are currently projected to be built going forward would already comply with the standard. As a result, EPA does not project additional cost for industry to comply with this standard.

Prior to developing this standard, EPA engaged in an extensive and open public process to gather the latest information to aid in developing a carbon pollution standard for new power plants. The agency is seeking additional comment and information, including public hearings, and will take that input fully into account as it completes the rulemaking process. EPA’s comment period will be open for 60 days following publication in the Federal Register.

More information: http://epa.gov/carbonpollutionstandard/
R045

The carbon value of a swamp

Interesting thesis put forth in this article, but it all seems like too little too late to me. The real arch enemy of a cool-temperature future for the planet lies in making people stop their wasteful habits – especially with the single-family motor vehicle.

Toward healthier air

That’s the headline the NY Times gave this article about the Obama administration’s (finally!) action to approve new emissions standards for mercury and others from coal-fired power plants and such. Of course, the best thing for Americans and the world-at-large would be to shut down all coal-burners.

Obstacles to capturing, storing carbon dioxide

Yes, carbon dioxide is the principle greenhouse gas. Yes, most Republicans could apparently care less. And yes, it does make a lot of sense to simply make less of it in the first place. Like turning off the car’s engine and walking or bicycling instead. Many Americans would not dream of doing so, however, as the car-centric society demands that they drive their personal cars. It’s all very sad.

Read about the difficulties in capturing and storing the greenhouse gas.