About Janet McCabe

Posts by Janet McCabe:

Jul 18, 2014

Moisture Control: A Key Factor for a Healthy Indoor Environment

Air, air quality, climate change, moisture, mold, public health 0 Comments

EPA’s mission is to protect public health and the environment. While a large part of this mission involves protecting the air and water outdoors, we also need to make sure that people have the tools and information they need to keep the air clean in the areas where they spend up to 90 percent of their time – indoors. And the agency is doing that through voluntary actions and information sharing, not regulations.

Some of the biggest threats to indoor air quality stem from moisture issues. Leaking roofs, plumbing problems, condensation issues, poor indoor humidity control, and lack of drainage around the base of buildings are commonly reported causes of moisture problems in the United States. Not only does excess moisture damage the structural integrity of buildings, it can increase people’s exposure to mold and other biological contaminants. Such exposure is associated with increases in the occurrence and severity of allergies, asthma and other respiratory illnesses. And, climate change will only worsen these issues as we see an increase in the frequency and intensity of severe storms and flooding that damages homes and buildings.

The good news is moisture problems in buildings can be controlled with steps that can be taken to make buildings more moisture resilient. For example, design landscaping to slope away from building foundations. Doing simple steps like this can prevent economic losses on multiple fronts by avoiding building damage as well as negative health impacts as it makes our indoor spaces healthier and more comfortable.

That’s why EPA pulled together experts from across the country to develop new, practical, state-of-the-art guidance for controlling moisture in buildings. EPA recently published the result of that work, entitled, “Moisture Control Guidance for Building Design, Construction and Maintenance.” Encouraging voluntary actions to control moisture and other indoor contaminants will be a critical part of our climate adaptation strategy for ensuring healthy buildings as we continue to address our changing climate.

The key to controlling mold and many other indoor contaminants is moisture control. It’s a simple concept, but it takes attention to detail to get it right. That’s why this practical guidance will be helpful to people who design, build or keep buildings working. Building professionals who incorporate the principles provided in this guide can enhance the health and productivity of Americans and the sustainability and resiliency of our communities. While this guidance is primarily for building professionals, EPA also offers mold and moisture control guidance for homeowners and residents at epa.gov/mold.

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.

Jul 7, 2014

Hundreds of ideas, one proposal: How EPA developed the Clean Power Plan

0 Comments

With all the coverage of EPA’s Clean Power Plan, I wanted to take a few minutes or a few hundred words to tell you about the process we followed to write our 645-page proposal. The bottom line is that it is the product of many months of hard thinking and data analysis by EPA staff and substantial input from literally thousands of thoughtful stakeholders.

President Obama Announces His Climate Action Plan

On June 25, 2013, President Obama announced his Climate Action Plan and issued a Presidential Memorandum directing EPA to use section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act to cut carbon pollution from existing power plants. This wasn’t the first time the agency had considered using section 111(d). Since the 2007 Supreme Court decision in Mass vs. EPA, the agency has been considering its authorities to address carbon pollution under the Clean Air Act. In fact, a 2008 advanced notice of proposed rulemaking examined a number of regulatory approaches including section 111. And using Section 111d made a lot of sense, since the Clean Air Act established it for addressing existing sources of pollution not covered by other parts of the Act.

What We Heard

Immediately following the President’s announcement and at his direction, the agency embarked on an extensive public outreach process—one that reached thousands of people through hundreds of meetings, listening sessions, video conferences, phone calls, conference calls, and almost two thousand emails from individuals across the country. We talked to states, power companies, local communities, environmental groups, associations, labor groups, Tribes, and many more. This process was a critical component in developing this rule because it helped focus our attention on what was going on—on the ground—in states and communities across the country, and it generated public discussion and ideas from numerous groups and individuals that helped inform our thinking.

So, What Did We Hear?

We heard that flexibility is key, so we maximized flexibility in our proposal letting states chart their own course that builds on the progress they’ve already made.
We heard that states could cut pollution more cost-effectively if we, and they, looked at the energy system as a whole, so we allowed states to look across the system to find reductions.
We heard that the power sector is interconnected and it crosses state lines, so in addition to proposing that each state develops its own plan, we also proposed to allow states to work together to develop plans, depending on what suits their situation.

We didn’t just hear these ideas from one group or even one sector; we heard them from just about everyone. And what emerged was a collection of ideas—or threads—that guided us as we crafted our proposal.

Weaving it All Together

Over the past year, dozens of EPA scientists, lawyers, economists, health experts, policy analysts, and many others wove the threads we heard along with our own extensive analysis, data, and information into the proposal we announced on June 2. If you look closely you may see some of the threads you contributed or heard throughout the outreach process.

One of the great values of the transparent process we used, and will continue to use, to collect input from the public is that no one person or group has the only, or best, idea. It takes all of us contributing our information and suggestions to fashion a good, workable rule that meets the requirements of the law and achieves meaningful public health and environmental benefits. And EPA’s proposal does just that. It is a proposal that is based on what’s going on in the real world, cuts carbon pollution, protects public health and moves us toward a cleaner, healthier environment for future generations, while supplying the reliable affordable power needed for economic growth.

More info: www.epa.gov/cleanpowerplan

Jun 10, 2014

The Clean Power Plan – Following a Consistent Approach to Setting State Goals

Air, carbon intensity, carbon pollution, Clean Air Act, Clean Power Plan, emissions 3 Comments

The Clean Power Plan – following a consistent approach to setting state goals
EPA’s proposed Clean Power Plan is continuing to get plenty of attention and lots of good questions. That’s great because it means people are digging into the proposal to see how it works. We have heard a number of questions about the proposed state goals – and rightly so. The proposed state goals are fundamental to how the program will cut pollution, so it’s important that you understand how we developed them, why they are different from state to state, and how states can meet them. So let me provide a little more information.

How did EPA calculate the state goals?
As I mentioned last week, the Clean Power Plan works by setting state goals that gradually reduce each state’s carbon intensity rate, or “pollution-to-power ratio.” To do that, the state goals are determined by using a formula that takes the amount of CO2 emitted and divides it by the megawatt-hours of electricity generated (lbs/MWh). This is what we call a rate-based approach. Many other Clean Air Act rules have used emissions rates in the past to reduce other pollutants from power plants and many other types of facilities.

Jun 4, 2014

Understanding State Goals under the Clean Power Plan

Act on Climate, Air, carbon, Clean Power Plan, Climate Action Plan 14 Comments

The Clean Power Plan is about getting all the power we need, with less of what we don’t need: pollution. Many people are now looking more closely at the plan and want to know a little more about how it all works, especially about what role their state will play in reducing carbon pollution.

Because the agency is looking for well-informed comments and input on the proposed plan, I wanted to explain a few key aspects of the proposal. By answering a few questions such as – 1) what’s the baseline? 2) how is EPA using the Clean Air Act? 3) how can the power sector cut carbon pollution? 4) how did EPA set goals for each state? and 5) what flexibilities do states have? – I hope you’ll come away with a better understanding of the Clean Power Plan and how it will achieve significant air pollution reductions. As more questions come up, we’ll use this space and epa.gov/cleanpowerplan to answer them. Now, on to the questions!

What baseline did EPA use to determine how much pollution must be reduced?

EPA did not set a baseline. Remember, the plan is about generating the power we need, but with less pollution. So instead of setting a baseline, the Clean Power Plan works by setting state goals to reduce the “pollution-to-power ratio” of the covered fossil-fuel fired power plants in a given state. EPA projects that by 2030, when states meet these goals, the U.S. power sector will emit 30 percent less carbon pollution than it did in 2005. But 2005 – or any other year – is not used as a “baseline” year for a fixed percentage of reductions. We are using that statistic only because people need to know how much pollution we’ll reduce by when and compared to what, so we’re just comparing where we will be in 2030 to where we were in 2005.

How does the Clean Air Act work to cut carbon pollution from existing power plants?

EPA is proposing carbon pollution guidelines using section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act. Basically, this part of the law requires EPA to identify the best and cheapest ways to reduce pollution from a given source – in this case, power plants that burn fossil fuels. The key to reducing carbon pollution from the power sector is to generate and use power more efficiently. Put another way, the goal is to reduce the carbon pollution emitted for each megawatt-hour of electricity generated. That provides power with less pollution. The amount of carbon pollution per megawatt-hour produced is called an emission rate. It is the rate at which pollution is emitted per unit of power generated. If a source emits a lot of carbon dioxide but produces relatively little energy, then its “carbon intensity” is considered high. Using section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act, EPA is proposing that states develop plans to reduce the carbon intensity of the power sector. The goal is not to limit the amount of power we produce. It’s about reducing the overall amount of carbon pollution from power plants, while still producing the energy we need.

How can the power sector reduce carbon emissions?

EPA found that there are a wide variety of commercially available, technically feasible, and cost-effective ways that states, cities and businesses across the country are already using to reduce carbon pollution from the power sector. EPA identified four measures–that are the commonly used, technically sound, affordable, and that result in significant reductions in carbon intensity. They are – 1) improving efficiency at existing coal-fired power plants, 2)increasing utilization of existing natural gas fired power plants, 3) expanding the use of wind, solar, or other low- or zero-emitting alternatives, and 4) increasing energy efficiency in homes and businesses. By applying some or all of these measures a state can reduce the carbon intensity of its power system. These aren’t the only approaches that states can use, but EPA determined that—taken together—they are the best system of emission reduction, as that term is defined in the Clean Air Act.

How did EPA set goals for each state?

By looking at the mix of power sources and the ability of each state to take advantage of any of the four carbon pollution reduction measures, the EPA calculated goals for each state. The proposed state goals are based on a consistent national formula and calculated using specific information about the state or its region’s individual power profile. The result of the equation is the state goal. Each state goal is a rate – a pollution-to-power ratio – for the future carbon intensity of covered existing fossil-fuel-fired power plants in a given state. States can meet their goal using any measures that make sense to them—they do not have to use all the measures EPA identified, and they can use other approaches that will work to bring down that carbon intensity rate. I hope this explanation makes clear that EPA is not setting goals based on percentage reductions against a baseline year. But when states meet their goals in 2030, EPA projects that the increased efficiency and reduced carbon intensity will result in a 30 percent less carbon pollution when compared with 2005 levels.

How do the state goals give states flexibility?

EPA has set a goal for each state based on an analysis of the best system of reductions, based on estimates of the potential in each state for efficiency improvements and increased utilization of cleaner generation. Once the state has a goal, however, it is free to meet that goal in the way that works best for that state. It can rely more or less heavily on specific measures such as efficiency or renewable energy, or even pursue others such as increases in transmission efficiency or new gas generation. The state can also choose the policy or portfolio of policies that works best to achieve the goal.

Learn more about the Clean Power Plan

The Clean Air Act and the state planning process offer enough time and flexibility for every state to cut wasted energy, improve efficiency, and reduce pollution – while still having all the reliable and affordable power we need to grow our economy and maintain our competitive edge. In the coming months, we’ll be seeking comments and feedback on the proposed Clean Power Plan, and I encourage you to learn more and join the discussion: http://www2.epa.gov/carbon-pollution-standards

May 1, 2014

Recognizing Exceptional Asthma Programs

Air, asthma, chronic respiratory disease, Human Health, national environmental leadership award in asthma manag 1 Comment

May is Asthma Awareness Month! Did you know that nearly 26 million Americans, including seven million children, are affected by this chronic respiratory disease? And, did you know that low income and minority populations have the highest asthma rates? Each year, EPA takes this opportunity to ramp up our public awareness campaign, strengthen our partnerships with community–based asthma organizations and highlight exceptional asthma programs.

This year we’re recognizing health plans, health providers and community-based programs with our National Environmental Leadership Award in Asthma Management for their important contributions to close the gap in asthma disparities. It is the only national award program that recognizes organizations for exceptional leadership in developing and delivering environmental asthma management as a key component of asthma care. I am proud to recognize the organizations from Georgia, Massachusetts and Oregon for the impact that they are having on their communities:

Apr 30, 2014

Check Your AQI IQ: It’s Air Quality Awareness Week

Air, air quality, Air Quality Awareness Week, Air Quality Index, AQI, Clean Air Act, emissions 0 Comments

After the winter that felt like it would not end, the weather is finally warming up in many parts of the country. And now that we can get outside without freezing, many of us are exercising more and sending our children out to play, a step that’s great for improving our health. But there’s another step we can take to protect our health, and this week is the perfect time to start: That’s paying attention to air quality.

This week is Air Quality Awareness Week – the week each spring when we join with our partners at the CDC, NOAA and at state, local and tribal air agencies to remind people to use the Air Quality Index (AQI) to reduce their exposure to air pollution. Even for those of us who check air quality regularly, this is a good time to refresh our knowledge of how to use the AQI to plan our outdoor activities. When air quality is good – get outside and play or exercise. When it’s not, change the type or length of your activity, or plan it for a day or time when air quality is expected to be better. More

Apr 30, 2014

In Communities across America, Buildings Save Money and Cut Carbon Pollution with Energy Star

Earth Month, energy, energy star, greenhouse gas emissions, waste 1 Comment

Did you know that the energy used in commercial buildings accounts for nearly 20 percent of total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions? That adds up to more than $100 billion in energy costs per year! More companies across America are recognizing that energy efficiency is a simple and effective way to save money and reduce greenhouse gas pollution. With help from Energy Star, facility owners and managers are improving the energy efficiency of their buildings and businesses, while at the same time increasing their property value, providing better service, and making their communities more desirable places to live. In fact, since 1999, ENERGY STAR certified buildings have saved more than $3.1 billion on utility bills and prevented greenhouse gas emissions equal to the annual electricity use from 2.2 million homes.

April is Earth Month, a great time to showcase the importance of energy-efficient buildings by announcing EPA’s Top Cities for Energy Star certified buildings and the winners of our annual National Building Competition.

Apr 25, 2014

Earth Day and the President’s Climate Action Plan

Air, climate, Climate Action Plan, climate change, earth day, energy, Fuel Economy, Human Health 0 Comments

The arrival of Earth Day is the perfect opportunity to reflect on the work EPA does to protect the health of Americans and the environment. Early last summer, the President announced his Climate Action Plan calling on the federal government to work together with states, tribes, cities, industries, consumers and the international community to address one of the greatest challenges of our time.

Over the past year, one of our top priorities has been addressing our changing climate, so let me fill you in on our progress so far on the many important steps we are taking to cut harmful greenhouse gas pollution.

Power Plants – Last September, EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy signed the proposed Carbon Pollution Standards for New Power Plants . Based on current trends in the power sector and available pollution control technology, the proposal will protect public health and address climate change while ensuring reliable, affordable, and clean power for American businesses and families. It will also ensure that power companies investing in new fossil fuel-fired power plants – which often operate for more than 40 years – will use technologies that limit emissions of harmful carbon pollution. The agency is now taking public comment on the proposal until May 9. More

Apr 21, 2014

Showcasing Community Efforts to Clean the Air and Safeguard Health

Air, Clean Air, Clean Air Excellance Awards 0 Comments

What do the following projects have in common: A solar photovoltaic system built by a small community in Tennessee; indoor air quality training for 200 tribes in the Northwest; cleaner buses for 115 school districts across North Carolina; and incentives for ocean-going vessels to use low-sulfur fuels at the Port of Seattle? The answer is that all of them are making a difference in air quality across the country … and they are just a few of the winners of EPA’s 2014 Clean Air Excellence Awards.

“Clean School Bus NC: Kids Breathe Here” program has significantly improved air quality through retrofits, reducing idling, and other steps, benefiting the 800,000 children who travel by bus across the state.

The Clean Air Excellence Awards Program, started in 2000, honors outstanding and innovative efforts to help make progress in achieving cleaner air. On April 2, I had the pleasure of recognizing one individual and twelve different organizations for their commitment and on-the-ground results in improving the air we breathe. More

Feb 20, 2014

Empowering the Public through Power Plant Emissions Data

Air, data, emissions, janet, power plant 1 Comment

We’ve all heard that “Knowledge is Power.” I think about this phrase a lot in my work here in the Office of Air and Radiation because having access to good, scientifically robust, and relevant data is essential to our work. And because science and transparency are two of our core values, EPA is committed to providing the public with access to reliable data.

So, it is always gratifying to highlight good data on the EPA web site that is both accessible and useful. I encourage you all to check out our newly redesigned and interactive Power Plant Emission Trends page. On this page you’ll find the most recent 2013 sulfur dioxide (SO₂), nitrogen oxides (NO_X) and carbon dioxide (CO₂) emissions data from power plants, as well as emission data from previous years.

These data show how power plant emissions have changed over time and where those changes have occurred, both geographically and at what power plants. For example, in 2013 SO₂ emissions decreased by two percent, NO_X emissions were unchanged, and CO₂ increased by one percent from 2012 levels, while electricity generation remained generally stable. More

1 2 3 4 5