About Janet McCabe

Posts by Janet McCabe:

Oct 27, 2015

EPA Honors 2015 Green Power Leaders

energy, Green Power Leadership Awards, renewable electricity 0 Comments

By Janet McCabe

On October 19th, I had the honor of presenting EPA’s 15th Annual Green Power Leadership Awards to 25 organizations that are leading the charge in using renewable energy and setting an example for their peers, helping to accelerate development of a strong clean energy portfolio nationwide. The awards honor a range of organizations for innovative achievements in acquiring and using renewable electricity as well as commitments to responding to climate change.

In addition to large corporations, nonprofit and educational institutions were also highlighted. From Northwestern University, to Crossroads School for Arts & Sciences, Tucson Unified School District, and the Phipps Conservatory and Botanical Gardens, these groups educate students and the public about the environment. For instance, Crossroads School (K-12) in Santa Monica, California sourced 100 percent of their electricity use from wind, biomass, and biogas resources through a collective procurement and includes green power in its academic curriculum. And at Phipps, a public garden in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania with 100 percent of its electricity sourced from renewable resources, its 350,000+ visitors annually get an in-depth look at photovoltaic arrays, a wind turbine, geothermal wells, and many, many other sustainable energy features—all within a single accessible site. In addition, Tucson Unified School District (TUSD) installed one of the largest on-site solar generation projects at a K-12 school system in the nation last year, and shares the lessons it learned far and wide. TUSD also is working closely with a local Native American tribe on developing its own solar project.

As we’ve seen in the past few years, local governments are doing more with green power. This year’s government winners—Government of the District of Columbia, Ulster County, NY, and the City of Hayward CA Water Pollution Control Facility (WPCF)—are leading the way in innovative approaches. For instance, Hayward WPCF’s new cogeneration facility uses the methane produced from the digesters as fuel. Waste heat from the new cogeneration system is captured and used to heat the city’s anaerobic digesters, further reducing reliance on natural gas formerly used to heat the sludge during colder months of the year. This cogeneration facility, along with the facility’s solar array, produces more renewable electricity than it needs, so it exports the excess renewable electricity to other city facilities.

The Sustained Excellence category winners – Intel, Kohl’s, and TD Bank – continue to uphold their outstanding work in driving the green energy market, and first-time winners like Traditional Medicinals and National Hockey League have been investing in sustainable operations, including clean energy and electricity use, for years. What a tremendous inspiration for all!
The Green Power Leadership Awards are sponsored by EPA’s Green Power Partnership Program in collaboration with the Center for Resource Solutions. See the award list for more about all the green power leaders.

Editor's Note: The views expressed here are intended to explain EPA policy. They do not change anyone's rights or obligations. You may share this post. However, please do not change the title or the content, or remove EPA’s identity as the author. If you do make substantive changes, please do not attribute the edited title or content to EPA or the author.

EPA's official web site is www.epa.gov. Some links on this page may redirect users from the EPA website to specific content on a non-EPA, third-party site. In doing so, EPA is directing you only to the specific content referenced at the time of publication, not to any other content that may appear on the same webpage or elsewhere on the third-party site, or be added at a later date.

EPA is providing this link for informational purposes only. EPA cannot attest to the accuracy of non-EPA information provided by any third-party sites or any other linked site. EPA does not endorse any non-government websites, companies, internet applications or any policies or information expressed therein.

Oct 8, 2015

New Greenhouse Gas Data for Large Facilities Now Available

Air, climate change, emissions, greenhouse gas, pollution 0 Comments

By Janet McCabe

This week, the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program released its fifth year of detailed, facility-level data for over 8,000 large-emitters, representing approximately 50% of total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. Why is this important? High-quality, long-term environmental data are essential to protecting human health and our environment. Environmental data are the foundation of practically everything we do, and detailed greenhouse gas emissions data are essential in guiding the steps we take to address the problem of climate change.

We have been providing national-level greenhouse gas emissions data since the early 1990s through the U.S. Inventory of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks. Submitted every spring to the Secretariat of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), the GHG inventory is the official U.S. government estimate of annual greenhouse gas emissions. The GHG inventory is calculated using national-level data sets and provides an estimate of overall emissions for every sector.

Established by Congress in 2008, the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program complements the GHG inventory with additional detail on large emitters of greenhouse gases. While the inventory provides a bird’s-eye view of emissions sources and trends, since 2010 the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program has provided a ground-level view with a rich dataset of facility-level emissions that was previously unavailable.

The Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program is the only program that collects facility-level greenhouse gas data from major industrial sources across the United States, including power plants, oil and gas production and refining, iron and steel mills and landfills. The program also collects data on the production and consumption of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) predominantly used in refrigeration and air conditioning. While the reporting program does not cover every source, it provides an unprecedented level of information on the largest stationary sources of emissions.

The reporting program’s online data publication tool, called FLIGHT, is amazing—even if you’re not a veteran number-cruncher. It brings detailed emissions data to users in an intuitive, map-based format. This tool allows states, communities, businesses, and concerned citizens to view top GHG-emitters in a state or region; see emissions data from a specific industry; track emissions trends by facility, industry, or region; and download maps, list and charts.

The data can be used by businesses and others to track and compare facilities’ greenhouse gas emissions, identify opportunities to cut pollution, minimize wasted energy, and save money. States, cities, and other communities can use our greenhouse gas data to find high-emitting facilities in their area, compare emissions between similar facilities, and develop common-sense climate policies.

I encourage you to take a look at the data and learn more.

See key facts and figures and explore Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program Data:
GHGRP Home Page: www2.epa.gov/ghgreporting/
FLIGHT: http://ghgdata.epa.gov/ghgp/main.do

Learn more about climate change, and EPA actions to address it:
www.epa.gov/climatechange

Aug 21, 2015

Energy Efficiency and the Clean Power Plan

Clean Power Plan 0 Comments

The Clean Power Plan is a historic and important step in reducing carbon pollution from power plants that puts energy efficiency front and center as an important strategy for meeting state goals. For years, energy efficiency strategies have been widely used by states because they can substantially and cost-effectively lower energy demand and carbon dioxide emissions from the power sector. The Clean Power Plan will not only expand these practices – it offers flexible compliance options, providing states a wide array of ways to use energy efficiency to meet their state goals, regardless of the state plan approach chosen.

Energy efficiency programs make perfect sense for states; they have low costs and large potential. Our analysis projects that, in every state, demand-side energy efficiency programs will be a significant component of state compliance plans under the Clean Power Plan. Because energy efficiency is not assumed as part of each state’s goal, it can serve as kind of a “bonus” strategy for compliance – as many comments suggested.

And the energy savings achieved by these programs will not only help cut emissions, they will save consumers money on their electric bills. We project that the Clean Power Plan will spur a 7 percent reduction in electricity demand, reducing electricity bills by, on average, $7 per month for American families and businesses in 2030. The way we’ll get there is through energy efficiency.

Here are ten ways that the Clean Power Plan encourages energy efficiency:

The Clean Power Plan encourages states to select energy efficiency as a compliance path to meet their goals, leading to cost savings for consumers.

With the final Clean Power Plan, EPA also proposed model rule text describing how states could credit energy efficiency.

Draft Evaluation, Measurement and Verification (EM&V) Guidance is available to help states effectively credit demand-side energy efficiency.

The final Clean Power Plan simplifies interstate accounting for energy efficiency compared to the proposal.

The Clean Power Plan’s Trading-Ready concept facilitates interstate trading of Emissions Reductions Credits (ERCs) – including those issued for energy efficiency – without requiring formal agreements between states.
Under a mass-based approach, energy efficiency automatically “counts” toward compliance and states can use an unlimited amount to help achieve their state goals.

Under a rate-based approach, the final Clean Power Plan enables states to get credit for all eligible energy efficiency projects installed after 2012, a longer time frame than what was proposed.

Under a state measures approach, the Clean Power Plan allows state energy efficiency policies and programs to be used to meet the emissions guidelines, without requiring the state measures to be federally enforceable.
The Clean Energy Incentive Program (CEIP) provides additional incentives for early investment in demand-side energy efficiency in low-income communities.
The Clean Power Plan Toolbox offers resources to help states implement proven, cost-effective energy efficiency strategies.

A more detailed explanation of each item on this list can be found on our Energy Efficiency Fact Sheet.

Aug 5, 2015

What’s Next for the Clean Power Plan?

Air, carbon pollution, Clean Power Plan, emissions, power plants 4 Comments

On Monday, President Obama announced a huge step to fight climate change and protect our kids’ health: EPA’s Clean Power Plan. By 2030, the plan will drastically cut carbon pollution from power plants – our nation’s biggest driver of climate change – as well as the other harmful air pollutants that come along with it.

The release of the final Clean Power Plan is a historic step forward for our country, and with its launch, we begin a new chapter as we take action against climate change.

Among the many commenters, states provided critical feedback to help EPA build a final Clean Power Plan that works for everyone. And starting now, states are in the driver’s seat of putting the plan into action.

The Clean Power Plan sets uniform emissions rates for power plants across the country. They’re the same in every state for similar types of fossil fuel plants, ensuring fairness and consistency across the board. Using these rates, EPA’s plan then sets state-specific goals for cutting carbon pollution based on each state’s unique energy mix.

That’s where flexibility and a host of options come in. States can decide how best to achieve pollution reductions from power plants. The Clean Power Plan explains the state options, and EPA has also proposed a Federal Plan and Model Rule that states can adopt as a ready-made, cost-effective path forward. But states don’t have to use the EPA’s approach; they can pursue a range of other approaches. And compliance strategies are wide open, too. Utilities can improve plant efficiency, run cleaner plants more, shift toward cleaner fuels, use renewables, and take advantage of energy efficiency and interstate trading.

So, what’s next? Here are a few important milestones to look for.

2016: States have until September 6, 2016, to build and submit their customized plans for cutting carbon pollution and meeting their goals. They’ll send those plans to EPA for review. If a year isn’t enough time, states can request an extension.

2022: This is the first year that states are required to start meeting interim goals for carbon pollution reduction. But investments and plans underway now can help states get closer to their goals even sooner, and to help them, we’ve created a Clean Energy Incentive Program to help states get a head start on reducing carbon emissions as soon as 2020.

2022 – 2029: Because we know pollution reductions won’t happen overnight, EPA is providing a path to help states make a smooth transition to clean energy future. State pollution reductions can be achieved gradually, over an interim step-down period between 2022 and 2029, before states are required to meet their final goals.

2030: This is the year that states are required to meet their full carbon pollution reduction goals under the Clean Power Plan—and the year we’ll see its full benefits to our health and our pocketbooks. In 2030, when states meet their goals, carbon pollution from the power sector will be 32 percent below 2005 levels. That’s 870 million fewer tons of carbon pollution, with even less over time. And because of reductions to other harmful air pollutants that come packaged with carbon pollution, we’ll avoid thousands of premature deaths and have thousands fewer asthma cases and hospitalizations in 2030 alone. What’s more, 2030 is the year the nation will see up to $45 billion in net benefits from the clean power plan, and the average American family will see up to $85 a year in savings on their utility bills.

The good news is, we don’t have to wait until 2030 to start seeing the Clean Power Plan’s benefits. Communities will start seeing tangible health and cost benefits as states make progress toward cutting carbon pollution and increasing efficiency.

Starting now, state planning will begin in earnest. And we hope you will get engaged. The Clean Power Plan requires states to work with communities and stakeholders to make sure the plans they build reflect your needs. And EPA will be looking to see how states are taking stakeholder input into account.

We urge you to be part of the process, get informed, and get involved. EPA received more than 4.3 million public comments on its initial proposed Plan, and we listened to your concerns. The final Clean Power Plan is stronger, more flexible, and more achievable because of your feedback. Here are some upcoming ways to get involved:

August 20, 2015: Join us for a webinar designed to provide communities with an overview of what is in the Clean Power Plan and how to participate. More details available soon HERE.

Fall 2015: EPA will hold public hearings around the country for the proposed Federal Plan and Model Rules. More details will be posted on www.epa.gov/cleanpowerplan soon.

As Administrator McCarthy has said, “climate change is personal.” It affects you no matter who you are or where you come from. That’s why we need you to be involved and have your voice heard.

Learn more about how the Clean Power Plan affects your state HERE.

Aug 4, 2015

Clean Power Plan: Power Plant Compliance and State Goals

Air, Clean Air Act, Clean Power Plan, climate change, emissions 2 Comments

EPA’s historic Clean Power Plan, is a first-of-its-kind step to cut the harmful carbon pollution fueling climate change from our nation’s power plants based on more than two years of extensive outreach, plus the 4.3 million public comments we received. Compared with last year’s proposal, our final plan cuts over 70 million more tons of carbon pollution, making it more ambitious, more achievable and more affordable, too.

There are two key reasons our final rule works: 1) it follows a more traditional Clean Air Act approach to reduce air pollution, and 2) it gives states and utilities even more options and more time to reach their pollution reduction goals than our proposal did.

Uniform Performance Rates

At the heart of our plan are its uniform emission rates – one for fossil steam units (coal, oil, and gas) and one for natural gas combined cycle (NGCC) units. The standards limit the amount of carbon pollution released for every power plant covered by the rule – and they are the same standards for every coal plant and for every NGCC plant in every state.

The rates are achievable because no power plant has to meet the rates on its own. It can use the fact that it operates on an interconnected grid to access a range of low- or zero-emitting energy resources to come into compliance.

The important point to keep in mind is that power plants do not operate in isolation. Utilities have bought, sold and transmitted electricity across state lines for decades, and regional power grids are a major reason electricity is affordable and reliable. Pollution doesn’t stop at state lines either. With the Clean Power Plan, we’re cutting pollution in the same way we generate and distribute electricity—through an interconnected grid.

In fact, relying on the performance rates is one way that a state can put its power plants in a position to use emissions trading between and among power plants in different states to access those clean energy resources – and to integrate emissions reduction strategies with the way the grid moves electricity back and forth across broad multi-state regions.

State Goals

Each state’s goal represents a blend of the performance rate for coal and the performance rate for gas weighted by the number of coal and gas plants in the state. States can choose to comply simply by applying the performance rates to each unit operating within their respective borders, especially if they include emissions trading as a compliance option for their units. States can also comply with the law by using their overall emissions goals and adopting a portfolio of measures that result in emissions reductions.

While the utilities are responsible for reducing emissions, the state plans are the means of accounting for and ensuring that the reductions take place in line with the national standards and timing established by the Clean Power Plan. And the state rate- and mass-based goals are a way of giving states additional options and flexibility for implementing the two performance standards.

Emissions Trading
When we hold power plants of the same type to the same standards, it means that their reductions are interchangeable – creating a system that’s ready for trading. The built-in ability to trade emissions gives states even more flexibility in how they achieve their carbon pollution reduction goals.

A Glide Path

Further ensuring that the standards are achievable is that the final rule does not require any power plant to meet the standards – or whatever equivalent measure the state imposes – all at once. Instead, states can determine their own emissions reduction trajectories over the period between 2022 and 2029, provided that overall they meet their interim targets “on average” over that period. The final rule ensured this important flexibility by initiating the mandatory compliance period in 2022, rather than 2020 as at proposal, and phasing in the two performance standards and the accompanying state goals. This phase-in is reflected in the performance rates and in the state goals that correspond to those rates, again calculated as a weighted blend

Final Goals in 2030
Ultimately, by 2030, power plants across the country must meet the performance standards using the tools and methods available and within the context of the interconnected grid. Because some states’ power plant fleet includes more coal plants, some states 2030 goals appear more stringent than others. Some states have adopted policies or seen changes in their energy markets that have already put them on a path to lower emissions in 2030. These states’ reduction requirements are relatively smaller. Either way, every state will be achieving emissions reductions along the timeline between 2012 and 2030. States that have already seen their emissions decline thanks to either policy choices or market shifts will have to take action to make sure that those trends continue.

These two tables tell the Clean Power Plan’s story on a state by state basis, and they provide a good sense of what states and the power system will accomplish by 2030 under the program.

With our final rule, we are setting smart, uniform targets for power plants across the country, but that’s nothing new. It’s a proven approach that EPA has used to reduce air pollution under the Clean Air Act for decades. We’re following long-standing legal precedent to create smart, achievable standards and facilitate trading among plants so the cheapest reductions come first.

More information about how and why goals changed is available at http://www.epa.gov/airquality/cpp/fs-cpp-key-changes.pdf.

Aug 3, 2015

The Final Clean Power Plan: More Ambitious, More Achievable for States

0 Comments

Today, President Obama announced EPA’s historic Clean Power Plan, a first-of-its-kind step to cut the harmful carbon pollution fueling climate change from our nation’s power plants. Climate change threatens our health, our economy, and our way of life with impacts like more intense heat, cold, droughts, floods, fires, and storms. And power plants are our nation’s largest driver of climate change, making up a third of our carbon pollution emissions.

Compared with last year’s proposal, the final Clean Power Plan cuts over 70 million more tons of carbon pollution, making it more ambitious. And based on more than two years of extensive outreach, plus the 4.3 million public comments we received, we made changes to improve the proposal, so that the final Clean Power Plan is more achievable and more affordable, too.

At the heart of the final Clean Power Plan are its uniform emission rates for fossil fuel power plants. These standards limit the average amount of carbon pollution released for every unit of energy generated – and the standards are now the same in every state for similar types of fossil fuel plants. Based on those standards, EPA’s plan sets state-specific carbon pollution reduction goals that reflect each state’s unique energy mix.

Carbon reductions can begin now, and each state needs to hit its interim target by 2022 and its final target by 2030—but no individual plant has to meet the standard alone or all at once. Instead, power plants can work within the electricity grid to meet the standards over time. That means, even though the standards are fair and consistent, they’re not cookie-cutter. States are in the driver’s seat to design approaches that work for them, and the final plan gives utilities more options to reach the interim and final goals.

When we hold power plants of the same type to the same standards, we also make sure their reductions are interchangeable – creating a system that’s ready for trading. The built-in ability to trade emissions gives states even more flexibility in how they achieve their carbon pollution reduction goals.

States don’t exist in isolation, and neither do power plants. Utilities have bought, sold and transmitted electricity across state lines for decades, and regional power grids are a major reason electricity is affordable and reliable. Pollution doesn’t stop at state lines either. With the Clean Power Plan, we’re cutting pollution in the same way we generate and distribute electricity—through an interconnected grid.

Because states requested it, we’re also proposing a model rule they can adopt right away: one that’s cost-effective and guarantees they meet EPA’s requirements, and will let their power plants use interstate trading. But they don’t have to use our plan; they can cut carbon pollution in whatever way makes the most sense for them.
Our final rule sets smart, uniform targets for power plants across the country, but that’s nothing new. It’s a proven approach that EPA has used to reduce air pollution under the Clean Air Act for decades. We’re following long-standing legal precedent to create smart, achievable standards and facilitate trading among plants so the cheapest reductions come first.

Cutting carbon pollution from power plants is about tackling the challenge of climate change. This is an opportunity to protect public health, cut pollution from our energy system, and energize our clean economy. Now is the time to build a future that we’ll be proud to leave behind for our children and future generations.

Jun 30, 2015

In Perspective: the Supreme Court’s Mercury and Air Toxics Rule Decision

Air, Clean Air Act, Clean Power Plan, emissions, mercury, power plants, toxic emissions, Toxics 9 Comments

The Supreme Court’s decision on EPA’s Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) was disappointing to everyone working to protect public health by reducing emissions of mercury and other toxic air pollutants from coal- and oil-fired power plants. But as we take stock of what this decision means, there are some important factors that make me confident we are still on track to reduce this dangerous pollution and better protect America’s children, families and communities.

Most notably – the Administration remains committed to finalizing the Clean Power Plan this summer and yesterday’s ruling will have no bearing on the effort to reduce carbon pollution from the largest sources of emissions.

Second – this decision is very narrow. It did not invalidate the rule, which remains in effect today. In fact, the majority of power plants are already in compliance or well on their way to compliance. The Court found that EPA should have considered costs at an earlier step in the rulemaking process than it did. The court did not question EPA’s authority to control toxic air pollution from power plants provided it considers cost in that step. It also did not question our conclusions on human health that supported the agency’s finding that regulation is needed. And its narrow ruling does not disturb the remainder of the D.C. Circuit decision which unanimously upheld all other aspects of the MATS rule and rejected numerous challenges to the standards themselves.

Third – this decision does not affect other Clean Air Act programs that address other sources and types of air pollution. It hinged on a very specific section of the Act that applies exclusively to the regulation of air toxics from power plants. This is important to understand because it means that rules and programs that reduce other types of pollutants under other sections of the Clean Air Act—like ozone and fine particles (smog and soot) can continue without interruption or delay.

The decision does not affect the Clean Power Plan, which EPA will be finalizing later this summer and which will chart the course for this country to reduce harmful carbon from its fleet of existing power plants. That’s worth repeating: The Court’s conclusion that EPA must consider cost when determining whether it is “appropriate” to regulate toxic air emissions from utilities under section 112 of the Act will not impact the development of the Clean Power Plan under section 111. Cost is among the factors the Agency has long explicitly considered in setting standards under section 111 of the Act.

Fourth – America’s power sector is getting cleaner year after year by investing in more modern technologies. Since President Obama took office, wind energy has tripled and solar has grown ten-fold. The Clean Power Plan will build on these current positive trends. That means cleaner air in communities across the country, as well as a boost to our economy as we build the clean energy system of the future.

Finally – What’s next for MATS? From the moment we learned of this decision, we were committed to ensuring that standards remain in place to protect the public from toxic emissions from coal and oil-fired electric utilities. We will continue to work to make that happen. There are questions that will need to be answered over the next several weeks and months as we review the decision and determine the appropriate next steps once that review is complete. But as I’ve already noted, MATS is still in place and many plants have already installed controls and technologies to reduce their mercury emissions.

After nearly 45 years of implementing the Clean Air Act, there have been many more victories than defeats as we’ve worked together to clean the air and raise healthier children and families. Despite the Supreme Court’s MATS decision, the agency remains confident that the progress we’ve made so far in improving air quality and protecting public health will continue.

May 29, 2015

Driving responsible growth in biofuels

Air, Biofuel, E10, E15, ethanol, renewable fuels standards, RFS 4 Comments

The renewable fuels standards (RFS) program, established by Congress in 2007, aims to increase the volumes of renewable biofuels that are used in our transportation system, helping the United States move away from fossil fuels to less carbon-intensive fuels. The program seeks to reduce the pollution that contributes to climate change and improve energy security. When Congress passed the RFS, it set annual targets for biofuel use that increase every year through 2022. Congress also gave EPA the authority to adjust those target volumes downward in certain situations.

Today we proposed renewable fuel volume standards that establish a path for ambitious yet responsible growth in biofuels. These standards would provide the certainty the marketplace needs to further develop low-carbon fuels over the coming years. The proposed volumes reflect two realities:

One – that Congressional intent is clear that renewable fuel production and use should grow over time. We have already seen success – renewable fuels are being produced and used in increasing volumes. This is true for both ethanol and biodiesel, and recently we have seen important developments in cellulosic biofuels (produced from sources like corn stover), which result in the lowest greenhouse gas emissions.
And two – that there are real limits to the actual amounts of biofuels that can be supplied to consumers at this time. These limits include lower than expected demand for gasoline and constraints in supplying ethanol at greater than 10 percent of gasoline.

You may often hear of the “E10 blendwall.” This term refers to the amount of ethanol that could be used if all gasoline contains 10 percent ethanol and there are no higher-level ethanol blends, such as E15 or E85. Today, nearly every gallon of gasoline sold in the United States contains 10 percent ethanol. Providing more ethanol in the system will require blends of fuel with more than 10 percent ethanol, such as E85 (fuel with up to 85 percent ethanol) or E15. While these options are growing, they are not yet available widely. So this proposal will push the renewable fuel market beyond the E10 blendwall, as Congress intended, but in a responsible manner. In developing the proposed standards, EPA considered a range of scenarios that would enable the market to achieve the proposed standards, including ones where use of E85 increases substantially.

Because of the limitations that exist today, we are using the authority Congress gave the agency to adjust the volumes below the annual targets set in the original 2007 legislation. These proposed volumes are achievable in the timeframes under consideration. At the same time, the volumes steadily increase every year, reflecting Congress’s clear intent to drive up the nation’s use of renewable fuel.

Indeed, the proposed 2016 numbers will incentivize real growth in the market.

The proposed 2016 standard for cellulosic biofuel – those fuels with the lowest GHG emissions profile – is more than 170 million gallons higher than the actual 2014 volumes. That’s six times higher than actual 2014 volumes.
The proposed 2016 standard for total renewable fuel is nearly 1.5 billion gallons more, or about 9 percent higher, than the actual 2014 volumes.
The proposed 2016 standard for advanced biofuel is more than 700 million gallons27 percent – higher than the actual 2014 volumes.
Biodiesel standards grow steadily over the next several years, increasing every year to reach 1.9 billion gallons by 2017. That’s 17 percent higher than the actual 2014 volumes.

We are committed to increasing the use of renewable fuels through the RFS. At the same time, the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the U.S. Department of Energy are building programs that support biofuels, biofuel infrastructure and the many U.S. companies leading the way in this industry. We know that opportunities lie ahead for the biofuels sector as we work through the challenges we face in transforming the nation’s fuel supply. These proposals reflect the Administration’s confidence that renewable fuels can continue to steadily advance and grow.

May 22, 2015

It’s Don’t Fry Day– Protect Your Skin Today and Every Day

National Environmental Education Foundation, Radiation and Radioactivity, skin cancer, sunwise, SunWise Program, uv index 3 Comments

Today is Don’t Fry Day, a day designated to remind Americans about the dangers of skin cancer and how to protect themselves. As we enter the summer season, we join with the National Council on Skin Cancer Prevention to remind Americans that each year more people are diagnosed with this largely preventable disease. Today, skin cancer is the most common cancer in the United States, affecting nearly five million Americans annually with a price tag of $8.1 billion. Most skin cancers are caused by overexposure to ultraviolet (UV) radiation from the sun.

The SunWise program works to educate Americans about the simple steps they can take to stay safe in the sun all year long. These tips include checking the UV Index to plan outdoor activities when the sun is less intense. Our free UV Index app gives you an hourly forecast from your smartphone. Seek shade during the sun’s peak hours between 10 a.m. and 4 p.m. And, my personal favorite: Slip, Slop, Slap, and Wrap: Slip on a shirt. Slop on SPF 30+ sunscreen. Slap on a wide-brimmed hat, and wrap on sunglasses.

This month marks the 15th anniversary of SunWise. Since 2000, more than 58,000 educators have joined SunWise and used its educational resources to teach children about stratospheric ozone, UV radiation, and the health effects of overexposure to UV radiation. These educators represent more than 34,000 schools and over 7,000 other partners from state and local health departments, non-profits, science and children’s museums, camps, scouts, 4-H clubs, and universities.

I’m proud of what we, together with our partners, have achieved. As we celebrate SunWise’s anniversary, I am pleased to announce a new collaboration between EPA and the National Environmental Education Foundation (NEEF) that will extend the reach of SunWise and keep the momentum going. In working with health professionals, weathercasters, land managers, teachers and others, NEEF connects with millions of people and will be able to bring important SunWise messages and actions to a new and broader audience.

Today, we formalized this collaborative relationship with NEEF in a Memorandum of Understanding. I’m looking forward to a bright future for SunWise but some shade for me this weekend!

May 5, 2015

Community-Based Programs are Key to Addressing Asthma Triggers

Air, asthma, ground level ozone, particulate matters, power plants 3 Comments

Did you know that May is Asthma Awareness Month? If you or a family member are among the nearly 23 million Americans who are affected by this chronic respiratory disease, you probably already knew. Each year, in May, we increase our public awareness efforts, further strengthen our partnerships with community–based asthma organizations, and recognize exceptional asthma programs.

The chart below shows the prevalence of asthma, its cost to us as a society and what is called the “asthma disparity.” As you can see, poor and minority children suffer a greater burden from asthma and we need to work together to ensure everyone has access to the care they need to get their asthma under control.

What’s the best way to address the asthma disparity? The medical and public health communities have found that the key is a comprehensive, community-based approach that incorporates medical treatment and the management of environmental triggers like secondhand smoke, mold, dust mites and pet dander. This approach can lead to fewer asthma episodes and better quality of life for children and families struggling with asthma.

1 2 3 4 5