Press Release: Secretary of Transportation Nominee Urged to Adopt Green Transportation Agenda
| Too Many Leaves? Recycle Them! Leaves and other yard wastes account for more than 20 percent of Denver’s landfill waste. Try mulching and composting them instead, then recycle any excess leaves at one of five LeafDrop locations on Sundays in November (2, 9 & 16), from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. Bagged leaves will be accepted at two additional sites on weekdays from 7 a.m. to 2:30 p.m. through December 5. The program is open to Denver residents only. |
| Hydrogen Fuel Cell Cars Arrive Hydrogen fuel cell-powered cars are now in the hands of consumers, with more on the way. These custom-made cars from Chevrolet, Honda and BMW are paving the way for production models of the future. |
| Californians to Bush: the feeling’s mutual President Bush once remarked at a White House party that in the famously liberal enclave of San Francisco, his supporters were so rare that “you could probably fit them all in one room.”He wasn’t exaggerating, and he would do little to alter his standing. He never once set foot in San Francisco during his two terms, and he was hardly much chummier with California as a whole, the nation’s most populous state and the world’s eighth-largest economy. |
| Asbestos Use Today: information from a reader Asbestos is still imported and used in the U.S. According to the U.S. Geological Survey, the U.S. imported and used an estimated 1,820 tons of asbestos in 2007; see this PDF file from the USGS, please click only if you want to download the PDF. Also, the U.S. House of Representatives is considering a [.] |
| Japan races to build a zero-emission car “Please erase your image of electric cars being like golf carts,” a spokesman for Japan’s fourth-biggest automaker said before taking a zero-emission vehicle out for a spin. As mass-produced electric cars come closer to reality, their makers are trying to polish the image of what experts say could be a hard sell in the current recession. |
| Press Release: Secretary of Transportation Nominee Urged to Adopt Green Transportation Agenda FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: “We’re are encouraged that Secretary-designate LaHood said President-elect Obama’s ‘agenda for the Department of Transportation is my agenda’ and we look forward to working with Transportation Secretary-designate LaHood to carry out that agenda. “We also commend him for highlighting his priorities as mass transit, light rail, Amtrak, then roads; acknowledging that ‘local folks know best their transportation needs;’ and his commitment to working with governors, mayors and local officials.” “We urge Secretary-designate LaHood to lead the Obama Administration’s efforts to adopt new transportation policies to help solve the critical economic, climate and environmental problems facing our country. It is vital that the economic recovery package and the next transportation bill focus investment on expanding low-carbon transportation options, repairing existing infrastructure, and improving freight and passenger transportation system performance. “Secretary-designate LaHood has an opportunity to shape transportation policy for a generation in a way that cuts traffic, global warming and toxic pollution, and helps us achieve energy independence. We hope he will work closely with Obama’s strong environmental team of Carol Browner, Steven Chu, and Lisa Jackson. We look forward to working with Secretary-designate LaHood to make these important changes a reality.” |
| Responses to plastic pollution After seeing through the dreadful negative effects, movements have already been launched against plastic pollution. For instance, a United States law, implementing an international agreement called MARPOL Annex V, became effective on December 31, 1988. It prohibits the disposal of plastics into the marine environment and requires ports to provide reception facilities for ship-generated plastic wastes. More recently, in response to increasing public concern over environmental hazards caused by plastic, many countries are conducting various solid waste management programmes including plastic waste reduction by development of bio-degradable plastic materials. |
| Power from Trees Currently a team of MIT researchers are using platinum electrodes and ficus plants to discover the truth of feeble electric currents from trees. They have come up with an answer. They state that the pH difference between the soil and the living tree is the cause of creating electric currents. Now scientists are debating [.] Posted in: Environment, Future Energy, inventions |
| Take 5 for the Environment Change five simple habits today and make a positive impact! Pledge to do your part and help Denver become the most environmentally friendly city in the nation. We’ll send you a free residential toolkit with resources and tips to help green your home. Make the pledge! |
| LDK shares slide after issues revenue warning. Solar wafer maker LDK Solar Co Ltd warned on Monday of lower-than-expected fourth quarter and 2009 revenue, saying the global economic crisis and tight credit markets have weakened demand for solar power, sending its shares down nearly 14 percent. |
| Press Release: EPA’s Latest Chemical Proposals Get It Half Right, Recent EPA Toxics Advisor Says
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Jennifer Andreassen, 202-572-3387, jandreassen@edf.org ( EDF strongly opposed the latter proposal to initiate yet another "phased, multi-year" voluntary program for high-production-volume (HPV) inorganic chemicals. “We know from the failure of both EPA’s HPV Challenge and the industry’s half-hearted Extended HPV Program to deliver the quality data sets needed to make sound decisions that a voluntary approach doesn’t work,” said Dr. Richard A. Denison, a senior scientist at EDF, who until recently was a member of the National Pollution Prevention and Toxics Advisory Committee (NPPTAC) that advises EPA’s toxics office. "To extend such a flawed model to inorganic chemicals is simply throwing good money after bad." Despite a decade of effort under the HPV Challenge, final data sets have yet to be submitted for nearly half of the chemicals sponsored, and remaining gaps have been identified in at least a third of those data sets that have been submitted. Several hundred HPV chemicals were not sponsored at all under the program. And since the launch of the Challenge, many hundreds of additional chemicals have reached HPV production levels, yet most of those have not been sponsored under the Extended HPV program, and data sets have been submitted for fewer than two dozen.[1] Instead of pursuing yet another voluntary program, EDF urged EPA to immediately proceed to issue mandatory test rules using its TSCA Section 4 authority for as many inorganic HPV chemicals as possible. Only for those chemicals for which it cannot make the requisite findings to support a test rule should EPA consider other approaches, including vigorously supporting an expansion of its data generation authorities through legislative reform of TSCA. In contrast, EPA has offered a sound proposal setting forth the rules under which it plans to remove from the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) Inventory chemicals that companies indicate they are no longer producing or importing. "EPA should be commended for thinking through the implications of ‘resetting’ the Inventory," ###
Additional comments and needed enhancements to EPA’s proposal to reset the TSCA Inventory -Any Inventory resetting must be done using a reporting mechanism that tracks production/import over a significant period. EPA’s experience with reporting of production and import data under its Inventory Update Rule (IUR) – which entails the reporting of only one year’s volume once every five years (recently raised from every four years) – shows that there is enormous fluctuation from one reporting cycle to the next that must reflect underlying changes in chemical supply and demand dynamics and production and use patterns.[2] These data demonstrate that infrequent and time-limited reporting yields a highly inaccurate picture of which chemicals are in commerce, as well as their actual manufacturing levels over time. -Given experience with IUR reporting, EDF is concerned that use of only a 3-year window as suggested by EPA could significantly underestimate the number of chemicals in commerce. -EPA needs to carefully consider the length of the reporting period it uses to reset the Inventory, and should require reporting of any production or import that has taken place at any time during the reporting window. -While we are concerned that some companies might be able to "game the system" if a too-short reporting window is employed, this concern will be alleviated considerably as long as EPA requires (as it has proposed) that any chemicals removed from the Inventory be subject to PMN notification prior to their reintroduction. -We support EPA’s proposal to conduct a reset on a periodic basis, a measure that would also help to alleviate our concerns that a reset with too short a window could miss many chemicals in commerce. -No lower threshold should apply to the reporting used to reset the Inventory. Production or import of a chemical in any amount at any time during the reporting window should trigger its retention on the Inventory if its original purpose is to be retained. -Exemptions available from reporting conducted under TSCA Section 8(a) should not apply. Numerous classes of chemicals have been granted full or partial exemptions from IUR reporting by EPA, some of which are based on presumptions of low environmental or health concern. Because the purpose of the Inventory is to list chemicals in commerce independent of any sort of risk consideration, such exemptions are wholly inappropriate. Specifically, EPA should not provide Inventory reset exemptions for: -Polymers (exempted from IUR reporting under CFR 710.46(a)(1)) -Microorganisms (CFR 710.46(a)(2)) -Naturally occurring substances (CFR 710.46(a)(3)) -Certain forms of natural gas (CFR 710.46(a)(4)) -Petroleum process streams (CFR 710.46(b)(1)) -Specific exempted chemical substances (CFR 710.46(b)(2)) Also inconsistent with the Inventory’s purpose would be providing exemptions for small manufacturers; for this reason, EDF supports EPA’s proposal to conduct the Inventory reset using its Section 8(b) rather than Section 8(a) authority. -A publicly available list of all chemicals removed from the Inventory must be maintained. Many such chemicals, even if not in active production, may nevertheless still be stockpiled, present in products as ingredients, byproducts or residuals, or present as pollutants in air, water, soil, sediment or waste sites. And of course, they may return to active production in the future. Maintenance of a public list of all chemicals removed from the Inventory would serve as a compliance tool (see more on compliance below). It is critical, therefore, that EPA retain — and the public still have access to — an inventory of, and any and all information available on, any chemicals removed from the Inventory. -Any chemicals removed from the Inventory must be subject to TSCA Section 5 notification requirements. As discussed at length in our May 2008 comments and noted above, we strongly support EPA’s proposal in this regard. We support EPA’s "clean" reset option, under which EPA would set forth this requirement as unambiguous policy via a Federal Register notice: As has been the case historically, any chemical not on the Inventory is subject to Section 5 requirements. We do not support the alternative EPA discusses of seeking to issue a Significant New Use Rule (SNUR) to cover such chemicals. This approach would be more cumbersome and not offer any advantages over the more direct proposed approach. -Processors should be included in the Inventory reset. The language of Section 8(b) is unambiguous: EPA is required to "compile, keep current, and publish a list of each chemical substance which is manufactured or processed in the -EPA should not allow companies to certify "future" manufacture or production as a means to retain a chemical on the Inventory. Such an approach would necessarily be based on speculative or uncertain information that could easily change, leaving chemicals listed on the Inventory that are not actually in commerce, thereby frustrating the entire purpose of the reset. This approach could also create a perverse incentive for companies to seek to retain listings for chemicals not currently in production so as to avoid Section 5 notification and review requirements, thereby frustrating what we see as a key advantage to the core element of EPA’s proposed approach.
-EPA needs to require, not merely invite, certification and take additional steps to ensure compliance. We are troubled by EPA’s statement that it would merely "invite" companies to certify their production or import (73 FR 70642; paragraph 3 of the Inventory reset background document). Elsewhere EPA more appropriately refers to "requiring certification" (paragraph 9(a) of the Inventory reset background document). If the Inventory reset exercise is to be – and be perceived as – credible, it must include all reasonable steps to ensure compliance by all companies that produce, import or process chemicals: -EPA must require companies to certify as to which chemicals they produce, import or process. Such a certification should be signed by a senior officer and be legally binding. -EPA should also require that a company certification indicate that the chemicals it identifies are the only chemicals listed on the Inventory that it produces, imports or processes. -EPA should commit to undertake additional steps to assess the extent of compliance achieved under the reset, and to promptly initiate actions, including robust enforcement, to address any non-compliance. EPA should cross-check its reset Inventory chemical lists with other sources of reported information (e.g., IUR and other Section 8 reporting; PMN submissions, etc.) as one means to identify discrepancies. It should use its enforcement authorities (access to company records, audits, inspections, etc.) on at least a spot basis to ensure full compliance. -EPA should provide public access to up-to-date versions of both the reset Inventory and the list of removed chemicals. As proposed by EPA, these lists should also include entries for any chemicals with identities claimed as confidential business information, providing as much identifying information as possible consistent with allowed protections for legitimate CBI. [1] USEPA, National Pollution Prevention and Toxics Advisory Committee (NPPTAC), Broader Issues Work Group, “Initial Thought-Starter: How can EPA more efficiently identify potential risks and facilitate risk reduction decisions for non-HPV existing chemicals?” Draft dated October 6, 2005, pp. 3-4, at [1] USEPA, National Pollution Prevention and Toxics Advisory Committee (NPPTAC), Broader Issues Work Group, “Initial Thought-Starter: How can EPA more efficiently identify potential risks and facilitate risk reduction decisions for non-HPV existing chemicals?” Draft dated October 6, 2005, pp. 3-4, at www.epa.gov/oppt/npptac/pubs/finaldraftnonhpvpaper051006.pdf; and Environmental Defense comments on Proposed Rule, TSCA Inventory Update Reporting Revisions (70 Fed. Reg. 3658, 26 January 2005), Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OPPT-2004-0106, accessible at www.regulations.gov (search for docket number). [2] See EDF’s recent report on the HPV Challenge and Extended HPV Program, High Hopes, Low Marks, available at [2] See EDF’s recent report on the HPV Challenge and Extended HPV Program, High Hopes, Low Marks, available at www.edf.org/hpvreportcard.
|