RNG NEWS
Stay up to date with the latest stories, insights, and announcements.Senate Confirms Scott Pruitt as E.P.A. Head
By Coral Davenport, The New York Times.
WASHINGTON — The Senate confirmed Scott Pruitt on Friday to run the Environmental Protection Agency, putting a seasoned legal opponent of the agency at the helm of President Trump’s efforts to dismantle major regulations on climate change and clean water — and to cut the size and authority of the government’s environmental enforcer.
Senators voted 52 to 46 to confirm Mr. Pruitt, the Oklahoma attorney general who has built a career out of suing to block the E.P.A.’s major environmental rules and has called for the dissolution of much of the agency’s authority. One Republican, Susan Collins of Maine, crossed party lines to vote against Mr. Pruitt, while two Democrats, Joe Manchin III of West Virginia and Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota, both from coal-rich states where voters generally oppose environmental rules, voted for him.
By Coral Davenport, The New York Times.
WASHINGTON — The Senate confirmed Scott Pruitt on Friday to run the Environmental Protection Agency, putting a seasoned legal opponent of the agency at the helm of President Trump’s efforts to dismantle major regulations on climate change and clean water — and to cut the size and authority of the government’s environmental enforcer.
Senators voted 52 to 46 to confirm Mr. Pruitt, the Oklahoma attorney general who has built a career out of suing to block the E.P.A.’s major environmental rules and has called for the dissolution of much of the agency’s authority. One Republican, Susan Collins of Maine, crossed party lines to vote against Mr. Pruitt, while two Democrats, Joe Manchin III of West Virginia and Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota, both from coal-rich states where voters generally oppose environmental rules, voted for him.
Democrats railed all night on the Senate floor against Mr. Pruitt and urged Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the majority leader, to delay the confirmation vote until after next Tuesday, when the Oklahoma attorney general’s office is under order to release about 3,000 of Mr. Pruitt’s emails related to his communications with the fossil fuel industry.
But the effort did little but deprive Democrats of sleep.
Democrats, environmental groups and even current E.P.A. employees have harshly criticized Mr. Pruitt’s record of fighting the mission of the agency he will now lead, as well as his close ties with the fossil fuel industry he will now regulate. Both opponents and supporters of Mr. Pruitt’s say he is well positioned to carry out Mr. Trump’s campaign trail promises to dismantle the agency and slash its ranks of employees. Mr. Trump vowed to “get rid” of the agency “in almost every form.”
Comment periods on 2 EPA RFS proposals to close in mid-February
By Erin Voegele, Ethanol Producer Magazine.
The comment periods on two U.S. EPA proposals that impact the renewable fuel standard (RFS) close later this month. Members of the public have until Feb. 16 to weigh in on the agency’s proposed Renewable Enhancement and Growth Support rule, and until Feb. 22 to submit comments on its proposed denial of petitions that seek to change the point of obligation under the RFS.
By Erin Voegele, Ethanol Producer Magazine.
The comment periods on two U.S. EPA proposals that impact the renewable fuel standard (RFS) close later this month. Members of the public have until Feb. 16 to weigh in on the agency’s proposed Renewable Enhancement and Growth Support rule, and until Feb. 22 to submit comments on its proposed denial of petitions that seek to change the point of obligation under the RFS.
The original 60-day comment period on the REGS rulemaking was set to close Jan. 17. On Dec. 20, the EPA announced it would extend the comment period for 30 days. On the same date, the agency also announced a 30-day extension of the comment period on the proposed point of obligation ruling. That comment period was originally scheduled to close Jan. 23.
The EPA released its proposed REGS rule on Oct. 3. The proposal includes an updated regulatory structure to allow biofuels producers to partially process feedstock at one facility and convert the resulting material into fuels at another using existing pathways. It also updates fuel regulations to allow expanded availability of high-ethanol fuel blends for use in flex fuel vehicles (FFVs) and includes new feedstock approvals for cellulosic biofuels produced from short-rotation poplar and willow, cellulosic diesel produced from compressing of cellulosic feedstocks and petroleum, and renewable diesel and biodiesel produced from non-cellulosic portions of separated food waste. In addition, the EPA said the proposal addresses a variety of other issues, including renewable identification number (RIN) generation for renewable electricity used as transportation fuel and requirements for facilities that could use carbon capture and storage (CCS) to reduce carbon in the production of renewable fuels in the future.
Louisville Waste Management to use landfill methane as fuel
By Jessica Bard, WDRB.
LOUISVILLE, Ky. (WDRB) - The owner of the only landfill in Jefferson County, Waste Management, will start to put the trash to use.
"When trash is disposed of, over the span of 15 to 20 years, it biodegrades, and it gives off gasses,” said Andy Reynolds, public sector manager for Waste Management.
The gas is mostly methane, which is a greenhouse gas that warms the atmosphere.
“We actually burn it off,” Reynolds said.
Waste Management reduces greenhouse gas emissions by burning it in a flare. The company says it’s working on a way to use the methane for fuel by investing $30 million in new technology to take the gas out of the ground and put it directly back into a natural gas pipeline.
“The emissions rate will go down quite a bit,” Reynolds said.
The amount of natural gas taken out of the landfill in one day could power 800 Waste Management trucks or run 12,000 homes, according to the company.
U.S. Conservatives Unveil Plan to Fight Climate Change
By Michael Greshko, National Geographic.
In an effort to address the threat of climate change, a group of conservative U.S. statesmen has outlined a plan that, by 2030, could cut the United States’s carbon emissions by up to two-fifths below 2005 levels.
At a Wednesday press conference, the newly established “Climate Leadership Council”— a consortium of Republican Party stalwarts including officials from the Reagan and both Bush administrations—unveiled their plan for a gradually increasing, revenue-neutral tax that puts a price on carbon dioxide emissions.
By Michael Greshko, National Geographic.
In an effort to address the threat of climate change, a group of conservative U.S. statesmen has outlined a plan that, by 2030, could cut the United States’s carbon emissions by up to two-fifths below 2005 levels.
At a Wednesday press conference, the newly established “Climate Leadership Council”— a consortium of Republican Party stalwarts including officials from the Reagan and both Bush administrations—unveiled their plan for a gradually increasing, revenue-neutral tax that puts a price on carbon dioxide emissions.
The Climate Leadership Council’s proposal calls for a $40 tax on each metric ton of carbon dioxide emissions, with the tax steadily increasing on an annual basis. All proceeds—an estimated $200 to $300 billion per year—would be distributed back to American citizens in the form of dividend checks. Carbon taxes on foreign imports and rebates for U.S. exports would then keep U.S.-made goods competitive, the authors claim.
In return for implementing the tax, the plan calls for cutting many current U.S. regulations on carbon emissions. In particular, the plan calls for axing the Clean Power Plan, an Obama-era EPA rule that aimed to slash CO2 from power plants, which generate 37 percent of the country’s total carbon emissions. (Legal challenges have stayed the rule’s implementation.)
“If you look at the priorities of President Trump, our plan ticks every one of his boxes,” says Ted Halstead, the group’s founder and CEO. “It is pro-growth. It is pro-jobs. It is pro-competitiveness linked with balanced trade. And last, but hardly least, it would be good for working-class Americans.”
“THE CHEAPER APPROACH”
The plan comes on the heels of polling showing that increasing numbers of Americans—including Trump voters—see the value of solving climate change. Just 28 percent of Trump voters think that the U.S. should back away from the Paris Agreement. More than six in ten of Trump voters support taxing or regulating the pollution that causes global warming. (The poll, conducted by Yale and George Mason University, has a 5-point margin of error.)
To limit climate change’s worst effects, economists have long advocated for putting a price on carbon emissions. The tax would bake fossil fuels’ long-term costs on the climate and public health into the short-term price, pressuring markets toward adopting carbon-efficient energy sources. The result, according to supporters? An elegant decrease in emissions.
“It’s hard to imagine reducing emissions enough to limit dangerous climate change without carbon pricing,” said Helen Mountford, program director for the climate initiative New Climate Economy, in a previous interview. She called the general idea a “vital piece of the puzzle.” (Read more about carbon taxes and their use around the world.)
Even fossil fuel companies have thrown their support behind gradually increasing carbon taxes, since they would provide stable, predictable regulatory costs. As recently as October 19, 2016, U.S. Secretary of State and former ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson endorsed carbon taxes.
Sioux City WWTP to upgrade biogas to renewable natural gas
By Katie Fletcher, Biomass Magazine.
Earlier this year in Iowa, Sioux City Council members unanimously approved a project that will allow the city to capture, clean and compress gas at its wastewater treatment plant (WWTP), then sell it as renewable natural gas (RNG). The council voted 4-0 on Jan. 9 to award West Des Moines-based engineering firm Bartlett & West $1.29 million to perform all services leading up to construction on the project, as well as the engineering construction administration and observation services necessary during construction, startup and commissioning.
By Katie Fletcher, Biomass Magazine.
Earlier this year in Iowa, Sioux City Council members unanimously approved a project that will allow the city to capture, clean and compress gas at its wastewater treatment plant (WWTP), then sell it as renewable natural gas (RNG). The council voted 4-0 on Jan. 9 to award West Des Moines-based engineering firm Bartlett & West $1.29 million to perform all services leading up to construction on the project, as well as the engineering construction administration and observation services necessary during construction, startup and commissioning.
“Bartlett & West has been a key ally during the development of this concept and will act as our design consultant going forward,” said Mark Simms, Sioux City’s utilities director.
Since the plant’s original construction in 1961, anaerobic digestion (AD) technology has served as an integral component of the facility to reliably stabilize biosolids and produce biogas. The facility consists of eight digesters, two sets of four in the East and West complexes, which consist of two primary digesters and two secondary in each set. According to Simms, two of the digesters are not currently operating, but the intention is to eventually convert the two unused into primary digesters in order to maximize biogas production.
Until this most recent announcement, the last upgrade the plant received was in 2008 when measures to improve mixing and digester covers were put in place. Currently, some of the digested sludge is brought to the landfill or is used for land application. According to Simms, the city just recently entered into an agreement with a local land applicator and is now applying digested biosolids to fields that are owned by Sioux City as well as other farm fields in the area that can benefit from the application.
Methane gas is also used within the WWTP as a fuel for building heat and to heat the primary digesters. “The plant currently uses as much of the biogas as possible,” Simms said. “In the winter, the building heat and primary digester heating demands represent a relatively small fraction of the biogas produced, and the remainder is currently flared. They flare even more during summer months when heating of the facilities isn’t necessary.”
According to Philip Gates, PE with Bartlett & West, they plan to make all of the RNG available for vehicle fueling and will buy natural gas from the local utility as needed in order to maximize the generation of environmental credits. “At this time, we believe it is important to connect to the existing natural gas pipeline infrastructure,” Gates said. “This allows us the flexibility to contract anywhere in the country and to seek the best terms available for the city.”
Capito to continue to chair EPA oversight committee
By WDTV.com.
WASHINGTON, D.C. (WDTV) - U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), chairman of the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works (EPW), announced that U.S. Senator Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.) will continue serving as chairman of the Clean Air and Nuclear Safety Subcommittee during the 115th Congress.
The subcommittee, which Senator Capito also chaired in the 114th Congress, oversees EPA regulations established under the Clean Air Act, including rules to curb carbon emissions from coal-fired power plants.
Alberta backing provincial bioenergy programs
By Daniel J. Graeber, UPI.
Feb. 10 (UPI) -- The provincial government of Alberta said it was creating new jobs by offering funding to support bioenergy and a low-carbon future.
The government said it was offering up to $45 million to support a bioenergy producer program aimed at deriving fuels from crops and livestock waste.
By Daniel J. Graeber, UPI.
Feb. 10 (UPI) -- The provincial government of Alberta said it was creating new jobs by offering funding to support bioenergy and a low-carbon future.
The government said it was offering up to $45 million to support a bioenergy producer program aimed at deriving fuels from crops and livestock waste.
The industry already powers the equivalent of 200,000 average households in Alberta and contributes around $600 million to the provincial economy on top of curbing greenhouse gas emissions. About 500 new jobs will come from projects supported by the short-term funding offer.
"Bioenergy producers are job creators and technology innovators," provincial Environment Minister Shannon Phillips said in a statement. "The Alberta government is committed to supporting them, their employees and local economies as we diversify our energy sector, boost our economy and reduce emissions in Alberta."
The International Energy Agency describes bioenergy as the largest source of renewable energy available currently on the global stage, providing about 10 percent of the world's primary energy supply.
Here's what you should know about this year's debate over California's cap-and-trade program
By Chris Megerian, Los Angeles Times.
Battles over climate change policies have become an annual fixture at the state Capitol, and this year appears to be no different. Lawmakers are preparing to decide the future of the cap-and-trade program, the centerpiece of California’s battle against global warming.
Cap and trade is extremely complex, and so are the politics involved. Here’s a guide to the program and the brewing debate.
What is cap and trade, and how does it work?
The program is intended to provide a financial incentive for companies to clean up their operations. The “cap” refers to an overall limit on greenhouse gas emissions, which becomes tighter over time. Before releasing emissions into the atmosphere, companies such as oil refiners and food processors must obtain permits. Some permits are given out for free by regulators and others are sold in state-run auctions. Revenue from the auctions is spent by California lawmakers on additional initiatives to further reduce emissions, such as on public transit.
By Chris Megerian, Los Angeles Times.
Battles over climate change policies have become an annual fixture at the state Capitol, and this year appears to be no different. Lawmakers are preparing to decide the future of the cap-and-trade program, the centerpiece of California’s battle against global warming.
Cap and trade is extremely complex, and so are the politics involved. Here’s a guide to the program and the brewing debate.
What is cap and trade, and how does it work?
The program is intended to provide a financial incentive for companies to clean up their operations. The “cap” refers to an overall limit on greenhouse gas emissions, which becomes tighter over time. Before releasing emissions into the atmosphere, companies such as oil refiners and food processors must obtain permits. Some permits are given out for free by regulators and others are sold in state-run auctions. Revenue from the auctions is spent by California lawmakers on additional initiatives to further reduce emissions, such as on public transit.
Permits are also bought and sold on a market — that’s where the “trade” comes in. In addition, companies can comply with the rules by investing in offsets, which are projects designed to reduce emissions by preserving forests or other strategies.
The state law that provides the foundation for the program was enacted in 2006, cap and trade was approved by California regulators in 2011 and the first permits were auctioned off in 2012.
Why are lawmakers debating this now?
State regulators at the Air Resources Board designed cap and trade to help California reduce greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels. Because the original law set a 2020 deadline to hit the target, there are legal questions about whether the program can continue past that date. Gov. Jerry Brown wants to clear that up by having the Legislature reauthorize cap and trade.
The program is also facing a lawsuit over whether the permits that must be bought to pollute amount to an unconstitutional tax. Reaffirming the program with a two-thirds vote in both houses of the Legislature, the legal threshold for approving taxes, could help eliminate that threat.
Two measures have been introduced so far, one more narrowly focused on extending cap and trade, the other seeking to refocus the state’s efforts on social justice.
USDA Renewable Energy Program Forecast
By Taite R. McDonald, Nathaniel T. Kron, and Isabel C. Lane, Holland & Knight.
HIGHLIGHTS:
As President Donald Trump's nominee for U.S. Secretary of Agriculture, former Georgia Gov. Sonny Perdue would also be in charge of the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Rural Development Office and renewable energy programs. During his time as governor, Perdue was no stranger to initiatives that emphasized energy efficiency.
Although conservative publications have put forth proposals to eliminate the USDA's rural development programs, given the commitments that Trump made during his presidential campaign to increase rural broadband access and rural infrastructure, the Rural Development Office is likely to continue to play an important role in the USDA's mission.
In addition, the Agricultural Act of 2014 (2014 Farm Bill) statutorily set funding levels for the Title IX programs through 2018. Regardless of the change in administration, this funding provides a degree of certainty for these programs through this fiscal year and next.
Dane County, Wisconsin Eyeing Landfill Gas to Energy System Upgrade
By Arlene Karidis, Waste 360.
Wisconsin’s Dane County has made electricity from waste for the local utility for decades, but may soon shift to a new plan—new to Dane and novel for the disposal niche at large. The county board is considering an $18 million upgrade to produce pipeline quality gas for the grid.
It’s hard to say how the project will pencil out financially because of an uncertain regulatory environment and energy market price fluctuations. So the county is taking a long look before spending the approved $18 million for the gas cleanup technology and pipeline injection equipment that would enable it to tap into an interstate pipeline. But it is anything but risk adverse, says John Welch, solid waste manager at Dane County Public Works.
By Arlene Karidis, Waste 360.
Wisconsin’s Dane County has made electricity from waste for the local utility for decades, but may soon shift to a new plan—new to Dane and novel for the disposal niche at large. The county board is considering an $18 million upgrade to produce pipeline quality gas for the grid.
It’s hard to say how the project will pencil out financially because of an uncertain regulatory environment and energy market price fluctuations. So the county is taking a long look before spending the approved $18 million for the gas cleanup technology and pipeline injection equipment that would enable it to tap into an interstate pipeline. But it is anything but risk adverse, says John Welch, solid waste manager at Dane County Public Works.
Depending on the market, there could be a complete return on the investment within five years, and then the county could start turning a profit. On its current contract, the utility is losing money, with a bigger hit anticipated if it is renewed at its current terms.
“Our agreement with the utility ends in two years and we will be offered 3.5 or 4 cents per kilowatt rather than 7 or 9 cents. It costs us about 3.5 cents per kilowatt to produce the power,” Welch says. “And while capital costs vary, they are generally several million dollars.”
The biggest payback to upgrade would likely come from two sources: the value from federally allocated renewable energy credits, known as RINs (renewal identification number), and revenue from selling fuel to companies that own compressed natural gas (CNG) stations.
Don’t miss an update—join our weekly newsletter below.