New Fuel Economy Rules Win Broad Support

Excerpt from January 18 New York Times article with the above title.

Not everyone is so enthused about the new mileage standards.  See the January 10 post.

New Fuel Economy Rules Win Broad Support

By NICK BUNKLEY

DETROIT — Writing new regulations that will require cars and trucks to have significantly higher fuel economy by 2025 prompted years of fighting among automakers, environmentalists, regulators and consumer groups.

But now that the standards have been proposed, nearly everyone involved in the process is on board with the results, as a public hearing held Tuesday in Detroit showed.

More than 90 people who spoke throughout the day asserted that the stricter fuel economy requirements would create jobs, reduce oil consumption, create cleaner air and save drivers money, all while helping automakers increase their profits.

“We’re celebrating something that has taken a long time to reach,” said Representative John D. Dingell, a Michigan Democrat who helped quash previous efforts to impose higher mileage standards. “There appears to be no significant opposition amongst responsible persons.”

The National Automobile Dealers Association, however, did speak out against the idea of setting requirements for vehicles made more than a decade from now until more is known about the strength of consumer demand for more fuel-efficient vehicles.

Don Chalmers, a Ford dealer in New Mexico and the group’s government relations chairman, said he worried that vehicles would become too expensive for some consumers to afford. “Before rushing headlong into a set of new mandates aimed at doubling today’s fleet fuel economy, we need to understand better the potential ramifications,” Mr. Chalmers said. “If our customers do not purchase these products, we all lose.”

The proposed new standards call for automakers to increase the average, unadjusted fuel-economy rating of their vehicles to 54.5 miles per gallon by 2025, up from about 27 miles per gallon today. Because of the way testing is done, the 2025 requirement correlates to a window-sticker rating of about 36 miles per gallon, according to the automotive information Web site Edmunds.com, or roughly what Toyota’s tiny new Scion iQ car achieves today.

==========

Wanted or Not: Alternative-Fuel Cars Flood Auto Show

The following is an excerpt from a January 10 New York Times article with the above title.  It highlights a real problem as the U.S. tries to cope with GHG emissions through greater vehicle efficiency.  That problem is that Americans love their big cars.  Muscle cars from the '60s and '70s are still considered glamorous.  Try picking up chicks in a Smart car or hybrid and see how far you get.

The New York Times

Tuesday, January 10, 2012

Wanted or Not: Alternative-Fuel Cars Flood Auto Show

By NICK BUNKLEY

DETROIT — In the race to claim ever-higher fuel-economy numbers and keep up with government regulations, automakers are rolling out hybrids and electric cars aplenty at this week’s Detroit auto show.

If only buyers were arriving as fast as the cars.

Hybrid sales waned as gasoline prices ebbed in 2011, declining to 2.2 percent of the market from 2.4 percent a year earlier, according to the research firm LMC Automotive. Meanwhile, sales of the Nissan Leaf electric car and the Chevrolet Volt plug-in each fell short of expectations.

Analysts do not expect the segment to grow significantly this year: the combination of gas prices below $4 a gallon and higher upfront costs for the cars is not attracting consumers.

 But that is not deterring Toyota, Honda, Ford Motor and several European carmakers from introducing new hybrid and plug-in models.

“The market is going in one direction and fuel-economy regulations are going the other direction,” said Jeremy Anwyl, vice chairman of the automotive information Web site Edmunds.com. “Just because people start building more of something doesn’t mean the segment grows.”

Regardless, the automakers have little choice but to develop and try to push more hybrids as they prepare for fuel-efficiency requirements that call for significant increases later this decade. Advances such as Ford’s EcoBoost technology have increased mileage for gas-powered engines — the new Fusion midsize sedan it unveiled Monday can get 37 miles to the gallon, Ford said — but bigger gains are needed.

==========

KCP&L Plan Shifts to Efficiency

The following excerpt is from an article in today's Kansas City Star about a local electric utility, Kansas City Power and Light (KCP&L), that is making energy efficiency a part of its business model.  Previously, KCP&L's energy efficiency efforts were done primarily for public relations.  But a new Missouri law makes it profitable for KCP&L to pursue energy efficiency seriously.

The following excerpt gives an idea of what the article is about.  More details are available in the complete article.

KCP&L plan shifts to efficiency, seeks payback for saving energy

By STEVE EVERLY

The Kansas City Star

Friday, December 23, 2011

Kansas City Power & Light, in a historic shift for the utility, filed plans Thursday with Missouri regulators to sell less electricity.

The company, like other utilities in the region, has depended on selling electricity to recover its costs and earn a profit. Building more power plants was the gauge for its success. Its conservation efforts, such as rebates to customers for buying energy-efficient air-conditioners, were pilot programs and not part of KCP&L’s long-term plans.

But the company says it’s time for a change, for energy efficiency to take on a more serious role. So its latest plan takes advantage of new Missouri regulations that make it possible for utilities to curb consumption and not be penalized financially.

And customers, though they might pay higher rates initially to help cover the upfront costs of conservation efforts, are expected to eventually see lower rates after the efficiencies start paying off.

The combination, say the utility’s officials, convinced them that for the first time energy efficiency should have an official place in its business plans.

The plan, as conceived, would ensure a sustained program that includes rebates for commercial and residential customers who buy energy-efficient equipment and lighting. There would also be rebates for disposing of inefficient air-conditioners and refrigerators. Other programs include telling residential customers how their electric usage compares with others in similarly sized homes, and what can be specifically done to reduce consumption.

KCP&L would give the program $25 million a year, which would be expected to eventually save the utility much more than that. The rule of thumb is that it costs one-fifth as much, or less, to eliminate the need for a kilowatt of electricity as it does to produce that much electricity. So the savings could amount to hundreds of millions of dollars over a few years.

A problem in the past has been figuring out how to encourage utililty convervation efforts, because they reduce electricity sales and thus cut into revenue. In addition, utilities haven’t always been able to build the costs of conservation efforts into their electricity rates.

But in 2009, state legislators passed the Missouri Energy Efficiency Investment Act, which called for treating investments in curbing consumption in the same way as investments to deliver electricity. It took a couple of years to work out the regulations to put the law into effect, including how to measure energy savings.

EPA News Release on New Air Pollution Standards

The previous post contains an excerpt from an article published by The Hill describing how dozens of electrical power plants, most of them coal-burning, will close down, rather than upgrade, to meet new air pollution regulations.  In this post, I am presenting an EPA news release to provide that agency's perspective on the matter.  I would recommend reading the EPA news release and the article from The Hill in its entirety before forming an opinion.

EPA Issues First National Standards for Mercury Pollution from Power Plants/ Historic ‘mercury and air toxics standards’ meet 20-year old requirement to cut dangerous smokestack emissions

Release Date: 12/21/2011

Contact Information: Enesta Jones (News Media Only,jones.enesta@epa.gov, 202-564-7873, 202-564-4355 Doretta Reaves (Non Press Inquiries), Reaves.doretta@epa.gov, 202-564-7829 En español: Lina Younes, younes.lina@epa.gov, 202-564-9924, 202-564-4355

EPA estimates that the new safeguards will prevent as many as 11,000 premature deaths and 4,700 heart attacks a year. The standards will also help America’s children grow up healthier – preventing 130,000 cases of childhood asthma symptoms and about 6,300 fewer cases of acute bronchitis among children each year.

"By cutting emissions that are linked to developmental disorders and respiratory illnesses like asthma, these standards represent a major victory for clean air and public health– and especially for the health of our children. With these standards that were two decades in the making, EPA is rounding out a year of incredible progress on clean air in America with another action that will benefit the American people for years to come," said EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. "The Mercury and Air Toxics Standards will protect millions of families and children from harmful and costly air pollution and provide the American people with health benefits that far outweigh the costs of compliance."

“Since toxic air pollution from power plants can make people sick and cut lives short, the new Mercury and Air Toxics Standards are a huge victory for public health,” said Albert A. Rizzo, MD, national volunteer chair of the American Lung Association, and pulmonary and critical care physician in Newark, Delaware. “The Lung Association expects all oil and coal-fired power plants to act now to protect all Americans, especially our children, from the health risks imposed by these dangerous air pollutants.”

More than 20 years ago, a bipartisan Congress passed the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments and mandated that EPA require control of toxic air pollutants including mercury. To meet this requirement, EPA worked extensively with stakeholders, including industry, to minimize cost and maximize flexibilities in these final standards. There were more than 900,000 public comments that helped inform the final standards being announced today. Part of this feedback encouraged EPA to ensure the standards focused on readily available and widely deployed pollution control technologies, that are not only manufactured by companies in the United States, but also support short-term and long-term jobs. EPA estimates that manufacturing, engineering, installing and maintaining the pollution controls to meet these standards will provide employment for thousands, potentially including 46,000 short-term construction jobs and 8,000 long-term utility jobs.

Power plants are the largest remaining source of several toxic air pollutants, including mercury, arsenic, cyanide, and a range of other dangerous pollutants, and are responsible for half of the mercury and over 75 percent of the acid gas emissions in the United States. Today, more than half of all coal-fired power plants already deploy pollution control technologies that will help them meet these achievable standards. Once final, these standards will level the playing field by ensuring the remaining plants – about 40 percent of all coal fired power plants - take similar steps to decrease dangerous pollutants.

As part of the commitment to maximize flexibilities under the law, the standards are accompanied by a Presidential Memorandum that directs EPA to use tools provided in the Clean Air Act to implement the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards in a cost-effective manner that ensures electric reliability. For example, under these standards, EPA is not only providing the standard three years for compliance, but also encouraging permitting authorities to make a fourth year broadly available for technology installations, and if still more time is needed, providing a well-defined pathway to address any localized reliability problems should they arise.

Mercury has been shown to harm the nervous systems of children exposed in the womb, impairing thinking, learning and early development, and other pollutants that will be reduced by these standards can cause cancer, premature death, heart disease, and asthma.

The Mercury and Air Toxics Standards, which are being issued in response to a court deadline, are in keeping with President Obama’s Executive Order on regulatory reform. They are based on the latest data and provide industry significant flexibility in implementation through a phased-in approach and use of already existing technologies.

The standards also ensure that public health and economic benefits far outweigh costs of implementation. EPA estimates that for every dollar spent to reduce pollution from power plants, the American public will see up to $9 in health benefits. The total health and economic benefits of this standard are estimated to be as much as $90 billion annually.

The Mercury and Air Toxics Standards and the final Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, which was issued earlier this year, are the most significant steps to clean up pollution from power plant smokestacks since the Acid Rain Program of the 1990s.

Combined, the two rules are estimated to prevent up to 46,000 premature deaths, 540,000 asthma attacks among children, 24,500 emergency room visits and hospital admissions. The two programs are an investment in public health that will provide a total of up to $380 billion in return to American families in the form of longer, healthier lives and reduced health care costs.

More information: http://www.epa.gov/mats/

Dozens of Power Plants Closing

The following is an excerpt from an article by The Hill.  I am not sure that imposing tough new environmental regulations in a fragile economy with high unemployment is the smartest thing that we could be doing as a nation. But no one asked me for my opinion.

Dozens of Power Plants Closing Due to New EPA Rules

December 21, 2011

The Hill

BRIAN KOENIG

Due to new federal air pollution regulations, more than 32 power plants across the country will be forced to close their doors, according to a recent Associated Press survey. Those plants, which are mostly coal-fired, discharge enough electricity to supply more than 22 million households, the survey notes, and their closure will lead to job layoffs, depleted tax revenues, and a considerable hike in electric bills. The areas that will be hit hardest are the Midwest and in the coal belt (Virginia, West Virginia, and Kentucky), where dozens of plants will likely be retired.

Two regulations are in question: One aims to curb air pollution in states downwind from pollutant-heavy power plants; and the second, which was finalized last week, would enact the first standards for mercury, acid gas, and other pollutants from plant smokestacks. In total, the new regulations could eliminate more than eight percent of coal-fired generation nationwide.

AP’s survey, the first of its kind, looked at the analyses by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of plant retirements and interviewed 55 power plant operators about the effects on power supply and about their plans to deal with the new regulations.

Basing their assertions on energy analyses, congressional reports, and government regulators, critics have predicted that the new EPA regulations will lead to widespread blackouts, and possibly the retirement of coal as a power source altogether. However, proponents of the rules claim that those studies inflate closure numbers by considering plants shutting down for reasons other than the EPA’s new restrictions.