Main Feed - Environmental Defense

Mixed Bag Out Of Pennsylvania On Hydraulic Fracturing Chemical Disclosure

Thu, 09 Feb 2012 15:29:32 +0000

By Matt Watson

Last night the Pennsylvania (PA) General Assembly passed legislation on fracturing fluid chemical disclosure that, on the whole, isn’t half bad – particularly considering where they started. Unfortunately, the bill contains a major flaw that prevents us from being able to hold it up as a model for other states to follow. Still, there’s quite a bit to be liked. More on that below.

I should also point out that the disclosure legislation was part of a much larger bill that addresses a broad range of issue related to shale gas development in PA. The overall bill has been the target of quite a bit of criticism from local environmental groups – particularly for eliminating much of the discretion of local jurisdictions to manage and plan for oil and gas activities within their borders. We didn’t work on those provisions, so I’ll leave it to those who did to offer up their assessments and, for now, just give a run-down on the disclosure piece.

As originally drafted, the disclosure provisions in this bill were, quite frankly, useless. All they would have done is codify current rules at the PA Department of Environmental Protection (DEP). Under those rules, companies only reveal the chemicals that have to get reported on material safety data sheets – which leaves out maybe half the chemicals used in fracturing fluids. And there was no requirement for posting disclosures on an easily accessible website for the public to see. That kind of regime comes nowhere close to what EDF calls “disclosure,” and it’s way behind the times in terms of where the national conversation is today. So, EDF teamed up with the Pennsylvania Environmental Council to improve the draft.

The Good

The first thing to understand is that PA will require two kinds of reporting. Operators will disclose chemical information on the well completion reports they turn in to the DEP after drilling, fracturing and beginning production on a well. And then, certain operators will be required to also post their disclosures on Frac Focus, the disclosure website run by the Ground Water Protection Council and the Interstate Oil and Gas Compact Commission.

As for the well completion reporting requirements, they’re quite good. Operators will have to disclose all the chemicals they use, along with chemical concentrations. They’ll also disclose the trade-name additives they use and the purposes they serve. Taking it a step further than what other states have done, PA will also require operators to report their water sources and how much recycled wastewater they use in hydraulic fracturing treatments – an important step forward in disclosure requirements.

As with every other state disclosure rule, PA will allow operators to claim trade secret protections to keep certain chemical identities confidential. These claims will be governed by PA’s “Right to Know” law, which means PA will be on the leading edge of how states are currently dealing with trade secrets in fracturing chemical disclosure rules. Companies will be required to actually submit their trade secret information to the DEP (instead of completely withholding it, as some states allow). Citizens will have broad standing to challenge trade secret claims at the PA Office of Open Records; and when there are challenges, the burden will be on the DEP and operators to prove why a trade secret claim is legitimate. We’re aware that some in industry repeatedly tried to gut the Right to Know provisions in the bill, and credit is due to Governor Corbett’s office for fending off those attacks.

As we’ve mentioned before, we support the recommendation of the DOE Secretary of Energy Advisory Board that “the barrier to shield chemicals based on trade secrets should be set very high.”

Finally, the PA bill gives added emphasis to the need for making information available in formats that are useful and user friendly. Mirroring the language that was pioneered in the Colorado rule, PA is now the second state to call for improving the search functions on Frac Focus.

The Bad (and Ugly)

Unfortunately, the bill took a major wrong turn on one key point. While operators of all oil and gas wells will be required to disclose chemical information on their well completion reports, only operators of “unconventional” wells will be required to post their disclosures on Frac Focus. The bill defines unconventional wells as those that are drilled and fractured below the Elk Sandstone formation in PA. We’re not sure yet how many wells this will leave out, but it’s a fair guess it will be a lot. So, we’re really only getting partial public disclosure here.

That’s a shame. Public concern about fracturing chemicals doesn’t have anything to do with geologic stratigraphy. Spills, bad casing and cementing jobs, loss of well control and failures in waste containment facilities can happen regardless of the depth of your target formation. The potential pathways for contamination are there for all wells (and arguably, they’re even higher for shallower wells). So, there’s no rational reason why all wells shouldn’t be required to post their disclosures on Frac Focus.

PA is the only state that’s made this bizarre differentiation between conventional and unconventional wells. We’ll be looking to fix that problem in the future. And in the meantime, we’ll be working overtime to make sure no other state repeats this mistake.

FirstEnergy blames its business decisions on clean air rules

Wed, 08 Feb 2012 22:03:53 +0000

Company hides behind rules that will protect Americans from toxic air pollution

FirstEnergy blames its business decisions on clean air rules

Publication Date:

Wed, 2012-02-08

Contact:

Mark MacLeod, 202-270-0798, mmacleod@edf.org

Sharyn Stein, 202-572-3396, sstein@edf.org

(Washington, DC – February 8, 2012) – Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) criticized FirstEnergy, today, for blaming its decision to close old coal-fired power plants on the Clean Air Act rules that will protect Americans from mercury, acid gases and other toxic air pollution.

FirstEnergy announced today that it will close three old plants in West Virginia. EDF sharply disputed its claim that EPA regulations make the closures necessary.

“These plants are closing because they’re old and inefficient, and because they are facing competition from natural gas -- not because of clean air regulations,” said Mark MacLeod of EDF. “The fact is these plants were built when Presidents Roosevelt, Truman and Eisenhower were in office.”

Many utilities are making a business decision to shut down aging and inefficient coal plants – and clean air rules are only the smallest part of the story.

EDF outlines the main reasons for these business decisions on a new fact sheet. They include:

Age – 59% of America’s coal fired power plants are over 40 years old, with many over 60 years old. In this case, the three plants FirstEnergy will close were built between 1943 (while we were still fighting World War II) and 1960. According to former Senate Majority Leader George Mitchell, “In 1970, the [Clean Air Act] required that new sources meet tight emissions standards. At that time, it was assumed that electrical utility units had an average lifetime of 30 years.”

Competition from Natural Gas – with increasing natural gas supplies and lower prices, the market is shifting to more efficient combined cycle natural gas generators over old, inefficient coal plants.

Low utilization –the older units are often small, inefficient, and operated only part-time. From a business perspective, it is not cost effective to keep paying the fixed costs needed to maintain them for limited operation. Energy efficiency and demand response programs are far more efficient ways of meeting these energy needs. In its press release, First Energy itself points out that, “these plants served mostly as peaking facilities, generating, on average, less than 1 percent of the electricity produced by FirstEnergy over the past three years.”

Health and the Environment – it is not surprising that these old, inefficient power plants are also disproportionately higher emitters of pollutants, and often have not had modern pollution control equipment installed.

First Energy recently announce the retirement of six other coal-fired power plants in Ohio, Pennsylvania and Maryland; it also blamed those closures on EPA regulations. Undercutting that assertion is the fact that the compliance deadline for new EPA rules is 2015, with possible extensions to 2017. FirstEnergy will retire its plants by September 1, 2012.

What’s more, FirstEnergy announced a decision to switch some of those six units from full-time to seasonal operation, and to temporarily mothball others, more than 16 months ago -- before EPA even issued its proposal for the new rule.

“Many factors contribute to the new utility investment cycle,” said MacLeod. “Don’t let plant owners use health protections as a scapegoat for retirements.”

###

Environmental Defense Fund (edf.org), a leading national nonprofit organization, creates transformational solutions to the most serious environmental problems. EDF links science, economics, law and innovative private-sector partnerships. See twitter.com/EnvDefenseFund; facebook.com/EnvDefenseFund

Do You Know How to Read Your Electricity Bill?

Wed, 08 Feb 2012 19:44:48 +0000

By: Koji Kitazume, 2011 EDF Climate Corps fellow at REI, MBA/MEM Candidate at Duke University’s Fuqua School of Business and Nicholas School of the Environment

Distribution centers get me excited – the massive space with inventory shelves high up to the ceiling, forklifts honking horns and crisscrossing the floor, conveyors and sorters in sync –the whole scene is fascinating to watch. So I was thrilled when my supervisor at REI offered me the opportunity to work on energy management for its LEED Silver-certified, 525,000-square-foot distribution center in Bedford, Pennsylvania.

My primary task as an EDF Climate Corps fellow at the outdoor retail co-op this summer was to develop an energy management roadmap for its eastern region distribution center, ranging from identifying energy saving opportunities for the immediate term to exploring potential business continuity solutions in the long run. With this scope, I got to work on various parts of the facility with providers of cutting-edge energy-related technologies such as advanced lighting controls, material handling systems, demand response applications, solid oxide fuel cells, etc.

While gaining insights into such distribution center operations and energy technologies was certainly a rewarding experience, the biggest learning for me came from where I least expected: the electric utility. The Bedford distribution center is served by the local electric co-op which belongs to the PJM (Pennsylvania-New Jersey-Maryland) Interconnection zone, the largest competitive wholesale electricity market in the world. This landscape has an impact on the electric co-op’s rate schedule – highly sophisticated with multiple types and tiers of energy and demand charges.

When you have such a complex rate schedule, it’s not easy to figure out what’s driving your electricity bill. What’s more, working with averaged per-kWh rates (even for near-term future projections) could be risky, since that could completely change depending on your electricity usage and demand patterns. This becomes particularly critical when you’re doing your energy project investment analysis and basing your project revenue on future energy cost savings.

So it turned out that in addition to identifying energy saving opportunities and investigating potential solutions, a large part of my work involved analyzing the distribution center’s historical electricity usage and demand patterns, projecting future usage, and modeling how this would translate into electricity costs, given the electric co-op’s rate schedule. I know models can often be incorrect, but this one presented a more accurate picture of how costs behave rather than using averaged per-kWh rates. Hopefully, this will help REI make better-informed decisions on its future energy saving efforts and investments.

With my summer experience, I’ve become somewhat obsessed with electricity bills and now know exactly how the rate schedule for my own home works. Do you know how to read your electricity bill?

EDF Climate Corps places specially-trained MBA and MPA students in companies, cities and universities to develop practical, actionable energy efficiency plans. Sign up to receive emails about EDF Climate Corps, including regular blog posts by our fellows. You can also visit our Facebook page or follow us on Twitter to get regular updates about this project.

Subscribe to receive our blog updates by email, like our page on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.

HRH the Prince of Wales launches his Marine Programme with a Message of Hope

Wed, 08 Feb 2012 14:41:52 +0000

In a speech marking the launch of his International Sustainability Unit (ISU) Marine Programme, HRH the Prince of Wales struck an optimistic note. His message was clear and simple "if managed properly our seas could still provide us with profitable harvest for years to come. However, if we are not careful we may end up breaking the bank."

<a href="http://blogs.edf.org/edfish/2012/02/08/hrh-the-prince-of-wales-launches-his-marine-programme-with-a-message-of-hope-%E2%80%9Cgood-practice-can-translate-into-bigger-catches-of-fish-higher-earnings-and-more-secure-jobs%E2%80%9D/"" />Read the full post »

California’s On-Bill Repayment Program Takes Two Steps Forward

Tue, 07 Feb 2012 23:56:25 +0000

By Brad Copithorne

This commentary was originally posted on the EDF California Dream 2.0 Blog.

Last month, the California Public Utilities Commission released for comment EDF’s proposal to create the first statewide on-bill repayment (OBR) program that pays for energy efficiency and renewable energy upgrades for residential and commercial properties using third-party financing. The proposal is taking two important steps forward this week.

The first step: Senator Kevin de Leon (D-LA) and Senator Lou Correa (D-Orange County) today introduced enabling legislation for the program. Based on preliminary conversations, we are optimistic that this proposal will receive support from members of both political parties. This bill is designed to deal with questions regarding the agency’s authority to develop an OBR program. It also provides a mechanism for property owners to disclose OBR projects to prospective renters or buyers. This disclosure will enable a building occupant to see how the money saved by the efficiency project will be used to pay back the OBR investment tied to their property.

The second step: the CPUC is hosting workshops in San Francisco on February 8-10 to discuss the OBR proposal and other aspects of energy efficiency finance. More than 200 stakeholders and other members of the public are expected to participate in the workshops, including several contractors, lenders, Energy Services Agreement (ESA) companies and building owners that see an attractive economic opportunity in the program.

EDF looks forward to working with all interested parties, to construct a successful program that can begin financing projects early next year.

California’s On-Bill Repayment Program Takes Two Steps Forward

Tue, 07 Feb 2012 23:24:21 +0000

By Brad Copithorne

EDF looks forward to working with all interested parties, to construct a successful program that can begin financing projects early next year.

REDD+ finance, indigenous rights protections move forward in 2012 with boost from Durban negotiations

Tue, 07 Feb 2012 21:39:21 +0000

By Gus Silva-Chavez

This is a joint post by Gus Silva-Chávez, EDF's Climate & Forests specialist and REDD+ project manager, and Chris Meyer, who coordinates EDF’s REDD+ activities with Indigenous Peoples.

The most recent UN climate negotiations wrapped up in December with a better-than-anticipated outcome, but the preparations for the next set — this year in Qatar — are already underway.

Policies to reduce emissions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+) and to protect the rights of indigenous peoples who live in the forests made important progress in the recent UN climate negotiations in Durban.

We've spent some time reflecting on the outcome of the 2011 talks in Durban, South Africa, especially on progress on policies to Reduce Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation, known in the UN world as REDD+. REDD+ was a huge winner in the 2010 negotiations, when the UN put its seal of approval on the policy, and this year made some additional progress, most importantly in finance and in ensuring rights for indigenous peoples.

We were recently invited to write about the REDD+ negotiations in Durban for the Governor’s Climate and Forests Task Force (GCF), a coalition of -collaboration of 14 states and provinces in the U.S., Brazil, Indonesia, Mexico and Nigeria that was formed in 2008 at the first Governor’s Global Climate Summit.

Below is our analysis of where REDD+ negotiations ended in Durban, and what we're likely to see as countries gear up for the Qatar negotiations. You can find additional analysis of Durban negotiations by EDF's International Climate Program Director Jennifer Haverkamp in her blog post In Durban, world's major economies show will to address climate change.

The Durban REDD+ Outcome

Cross-posted from the Governor’s Climate and Forests Task Force Newsletter (January 2012)

In an annual ritual, government negotiators, NGOs and journalists attended the December 2011 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) negotiations in Durban, South Africa. Negotiators in Durban approved technical guidelines for ensuring that reference levels — benchmarks for measuring progress in reducing emissions from deforestation — have environmental integrity. EDF had been eagerly anticipating this technical decision going into Durban, these new guidelines will provide a framework and necessary guidelines on how to establish reference levels that are based on science and that can serve as a measuring stick for environmental performance and financial compensation.

REDD+ policies got a major boost in Durban when countries agreed that all sources of funding, including carbon markets, are eligible to pay for REDD+ activities. After years of exploring how to pay for all three stages of REDD+ (capacity building, early implementation and national-level pay-for-performance), the UN has put its seal of approval on the use of markets. Estimates indicate that while public financing is needed, especially for the capacity building stage, only large-scale, sustainable funding from carbon markets will generate sufficient funding. EDF applauds this decision.

The decision on REDD+ finance, in the “Long-term Cooperative Action” (LCA) negotiations, included a clear endorsement of all sources of finance, a call for a REDD+ finance workshop and a technical paper in 2012.

Looking forward to next year’s climate negotiations in Qatar, countries will start deciding on the details of reference levels, and some will begin to calculate their reference levels using the guidance decided in Durban. As more specific REDD+ financing methods are developed, countries will hold a REDD+ finance workshop and produce a technical paper that will attempt to answer some of the questions around financing REDD+.

Indigenous peoples & REDD+

Negotiators in Durban approved critical provisions for ensuring the rights of Indigenous Peoples are respected and will be safeguarded in the implementation of REDD+ programs. Parties also outlined the protections for Indigenous Peoples prominently in the LCA’s financing sections. Still, negotiators only developed a framework for systems of reporting on the implementation of REDD+ safeguards and decided to continue working on the content of these REDD+ systems next year.

Durban resulted in a positive step forward in providing preliminary guidance for the reporting on the implementation of safeguards as countries launch REDD readiness initiatives already being financed through the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility, UN-REDD program, and other bilateral initiatives. More importantly, we’re seeing indigenous peoples in many countries developing their own consultation and information gathering processes that will feed information into these systems.

The Durban conference as a whole produced surprisingly good results, given our modest expectations. However, it is important to note that there are a lot of concrete actions taking place outside of the UNFCCC forum, including efforts to open a path for REDD+ credits from Brazil, Mexico and beyond to flow into California’s emerging carbon market. Top-down efforts at the international level can only succeed if bottom-up actions like these are being successfully implemented.

For additional information on EDF’s international work, please visit edf.org/international.

Take Action: Tell legislators to uphold the veto of S 709

Mon, 06 Feb 2012 20:53:52 +0000

Gov. Perdue's veto sent a clear signal that weakening our state's environmental standards & promoting a dangerous over-reliance on fossil fuels is not a viable business plan for economic recovery or the well being of families. Regional.

Matagorda County: The Debate over the Non-Attainment Designation for Ozone

Mon, 06 Feb 2012 19:58:24 +0000

By Elena Craft, PhD

(Source: http://flagspot.net/flags/us-tx-mg.html)

In December of last year, EPA issued a federal register notice recommending a non-attainment status for a number of counties around the country that do not meet the federal standard for ozone, a harmful air pollutant. These areas represent counties where concentrations of ozone exceed the health-based standard for ozone set by EPA or where emissions from the county have been shown to contribute to non-attainment in a nearby county.

The issue has become a hot topic in the Houston area because of EPA’s recent proposal to include Matagorda County as a non-attainment county.

Arguments used by the EPA to include Matagorda contend that emissions from the county are contributing to Houston’s non-attainment status include:

Emissions inventory from Matagorda County
Air modeling data indicates that air over the Matagorda County region does end up in Houston some portion of the time

Arguments used by state and local officials that Matagorda County should not be listed as a non-attainment area include:

The emissions inventory information used by EPA does not match the inventory collected by the TCEQ
Air modeling data indicates that air over the Matagorda County region ends up in Houston only a small portion of the time

A recent radio interview on KTRH featured Dr. Matthew Tejada, Executive Director of Air Alliance Houston and Matagorda County Judge Nate MacDonald provided insight into the opposing views of this contentious issue.

The broadcast suggested that the non-attainment issue is another example of over-reach by the federal government and that the EPA designation of Matagorda County as non-attainment would simply be used as a back-stop to prevent the proposed White Stallion Coal Plant from being built in Matagorda County.

While much time was dedicated to debating conspiracy theories during the broadcast, it was unfortunate that the heart of the issue was not discussed nor any thought-leadership provided on the critical issue. Ozone is an air pollutant that is regulated by the EPA because of its negative impact on human health. The EPA is mandated to set standards for pollutants, like ozone, as part of the Clean Air Act. The state of Texas spends over $700 million dollars a year to treat asthma, just one of the tragic diseases known to be exacerbated by ozone.

Ultimately, EPA is the final authority on the issue of non-attainment. Instead of playing into conspiracy theories and political shenanigans promoted by broadcasters, I think time would be better spent discussing how we can clean the region’s air from toxic pollution, not fighting about who is or is not responsible.

While TCEQ hasn’t officially announced a comment period, you can send your input to the agency regarding the Matagorda non-attainment issue; TCEQ will provide its final comments to the Governor at the end of February.

Regional industry, national impact: Duke University survey finds that firms from 37 states participate in Gulf Coast restoration efforts

Mon, 06 Feb 2012 18:19:41 +0000

By Seyi Fayanju

Take a look at the map below from the Duke University study on linkages between Gulf Coast ecosystem rehabilitation and the American economy. It shows the geographical distribution of companies participating in dredging, machinery manufacturing, site design, and other industries related to restoration efforts in the region.

Geographers from Duke University's Center on Globalization, Governance, and Competitiveness (CGGC) mapped out the headquarters of 140 firms involved in wetland rehabilitation in Louisiana and other Gulf Coast states. They also pinpointed satellite offices specializing in equipment repair, construction, and site design, bringing the total number of unique locations focused on ecosystem restoration to nearly 400. Note that the number of work sites (391) is less than the total number of places surveyed (449) because of category overlap (Source: Duke University)

What’s impressive is the breadth of Gulf Coast wetland regeneration’s impact on the wider national economy. Take a look at states like Maine and Minnesota. Each one is located hundreds of miles away from the Mississippi River Delta, yet companies like the Bath, Maine-based Bath Iron Works, which manufactures marine vessels, and the Winona, Minnesota-based Badger Equipment, which builds cranes, are both employing workers and generating jobs in their communities because of contracts for restoration work in coastal Louisiana.

Over the next few weeks, we plan to look at some of the regions shown above to see how their businesses are involved in, and could benefit from, Mississippi River Delta restoration efforts. If you happen to work for a firm engaged in beach restoration, habitat cleanup, or some other sector related to environmental work on the Gulf Coast, please let us know in the comments section below. You might just earn a profile spot on our blog.

Related Links

Ecosystem restoration a growing source of jobs [The Spokesman-Review (Spokane, WA)]

How the RESTORE Act could kickstart job growth along the Gulf Coast [Restoration and Resilience]

RESTORE Act fines could provide job opportunities in Gulf Coast, 32 other states [Delta Dispatches]

Restoring the Gulf Coast: New Markets for Established Firms [Duke University Center on Globalization, Governance, and Competitiveness]

Sustainability Boosts Returns for Private Equity Funds

Fri, 03 Feb 2012 19:27:03 +0000

By Guest Author

By Andrew Malk, Founder and Managing Partner of Malk Sustainability Partners (MSP)

Part I: Introduction to Environmentally-Driven Value Creation for General Partners

With the recent presidential campaign attention paid to Bain Capital, it seems likely that 2012 will be the year that Americans become better acquainted with the private equity sector. Despite managing hundreds of billions of dollars of capital, the practices and often the very existence of fund managers such as TPG and the Carlyle Group are largely unknown to the general public. However, as election buzz ramps up in a year where the economy is the primary focus we can expect this to change. As Charles Riley of CNNMoney noted, “…The new hot-button campaign issue is private equity.”

As private equity fund managers or general partners (often referred to as GPs) become better known to the public, now is an opportune time for these investment professionals to consider sustainability initiatives as a driver of value creation. But while private equity sustainability strategies will improve the public image for the sector, more importantly these actions drive returns for GPs and have the potential to accelerate deployment of sustainability practices.

Click here to read the full article on Environmental Leader.

Subscribe to receive our blog updates by email, like our page on Facebook and follow us on Twitter.

Brazil's president and Congress could avoid backslide for Amazon protection

Fri, 03 Feb 2012 18:15:33 +0000

By Steve Schwartzman

Whether Brazil continues to reduce its deforestation could depend on the outcome of a vote on its forest protection law in Brazil's lower house in March and sign-off from the president. Above: the home of Brazil's Congress, Congresso Nacional do Brasil (Photo credit and thanks to Flickr user JorgeBRAZIL)

Brazil has made great strides in reducing Amazon deforestation in recent years, bringing rates down about 80% over the last six years. But President Dilma Rousseff is already showing signs of backsliding on her environmental commitments in just her first year in office.

It’s a trend environmental groups have been following since Rousseff was sworn in last January, and one New York Times reporter Alexei Barrionuevo captures well in his recent story, "In Brazil, Fears of a Slide Back for Amazon Protection."

With global emissions from deforestation contributing about 15% of greenhouse gas emissions – as much as all the world’s cars, trucks, ships and airplanes combined – a lot is at stake in next month’s vote on a forest protection law in Brazil’s House of Representatives.

Whether Brazil, home to about 40% of the world’s remaining tropical forests, continues to reduce deforestation or not could depend on the outcome of the vote, and President Rousseff’s sign-off.

Forest Code enforcement and new protected areas slashed deforestation in 2000s under Marina Silva

Brazil’s law regulating deforestation on private land, the Forest Code, has been around since 1965; until relatively recently, it was hardly enforced and rarely obeyed.

That changed under former Environment Minister Silva. In 2003 she launched a national Plan for the Prevention and Control of Amazon Deforestation that ramped up law enforcement and established 600,000 square kilometers – an area the size of France – of new protected areas. These indigenous lands, parks, and forest-land reserves were located in the areas most affected by the expansion of agriculture.

Coupled with a temporary decline in agriculture commodity prices, the Plan brought deforestation way down, and persuaded policy makers that Brazil could commit not only to a national deforestation target, but to an overall national emissions reduction target as well.

Brazil made just such a commitment at the 2009 Copenhagen climate conference, pledging to reduce its emissions 36–39% below business-as-usual emissions by 2020 — the first emissions reductions target taken by any major developing country. And Brazil is ahead of schedule to meet this 2020 target, having already reduced about 1 billion tons of carbon dioxide below its 1996–2005 baseline – on the order of what the EU has pledged to do by 2020.

However, while the deforestation plan was supposed to have a carrot (positive incentives for conservation) in addition to the stick (cracking down on illegal deforestation), so far it’s pretty much been all stick and no carrot: lots of law enforcement, but no incentives to keep the forests standing.

Farmers lash back

Many large-scale farmers in Brazil historically had railed against the Forest Code as being too restrictive, but were too busy cutting down trees to plant cattle pasture and soybeans to do much about it. Since the Code was rarely enforced, they didn’t much care.

An aerial view of Mato Grosso shows the stark distinctions between protected forests and land that has been cleared for cattle pasture or agriculture.

But they started to take notice when government, under Minister Marina Silva, began enforcing the Code and fining them for violations.

They also noticed when the environmental group Greenpeace mobilized big European soy importers to declare a moratorium on soy imports from land deforested after 2006, and when national supermarket chains, prodded by Brazil’s Attorney General, called for deforestation-free beef in 2009. Most people in urban Brazil agree that Amazon deforestation should stop, and support such measures.

For many of the large-scale farmers in Brazil and their powerful block of congressional representatives – the “ruralistas” – the solution to their not being in compliance with the law when government started enforcing it was to weaken the law.

So for the past two years, the ruralistas have been making a concerted push to radically weaken the Forest Code.

Last June, the ruralistas pushed a revised Forest Code through the lower house of Congress that amounted to a license to deforest. The bill, sponsored by a ruralista-friendly member of the Communist party, would fix the ruralistas’ problem by giving an amnesty for past illegal deforestation, and could open up new land for clearance.

Environmentalists and the Brazilian scientific community strongly contested the House bill. President Rousseff had promised during the presidential campaign to veto a new Forest Code that would increase deforestation or amnesty past illegal deforestation, but her administration was a belated and ineffective participant in the House debate.

In December, the Senate passed somewhat improved amendments to the Code, which, however, still includes an amnesty for some past illegal deforestation.

This bill now returns to the House for a final vote in March.

The amnesty for deforestation that has plagued these bills is unfair to the few farmers who made the effort to comply with the law, and could give all farmers the bad idea that if one new law granting amnesty for illegal deforestation is good, two – or more – are better. If farmers think that an amnesty now means that future illegal deforestation will eventually be amnestied too, they will take the new Code as a license to deforest. Penalties for scofflaws, and a clear pathway to legality with positive incentives, especially for small famers, would be much better.

Environmentalists are calling on Dilma to keep her campaign promise and veto the amnesty.

Deforestation: the price of progress? Not really.

For years, the ruralistas have insisted with increasing vehemence that the current Forest Code is an enormous, unfair obstacle to the growth of Brazilian agriculture. (They also often claim that environmentalists who support the Forest Code are no more than a front for foreign agriculture interests trying to protect themselves against Brazilian competition).

But there is solid evidence that while deforestation rates were falling to the lowest levels on record, Brazil and Amazon states were getting richer and agriculture production was growing to record levels.

A vivid example is Brazil’s biggest agricultural state, Mato Grosso.

Deforestation (red line in Fig. 1 above) in Brazil's state of Mato Grosso plummeted as production of soybeans (green) and cattle (blue) increased substantially from 2001-2010. (PNAS)

The state had the highest deforestation rate in the Amazon from 2000–2005, but over the next five years (2006-2010) saw deforestation fall more than 70% below historic levels. At the same time, agriculture production reached an all-time high, according to a recent article in the leading scientific journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. In “Decoupling of deforestation and soy production in the southern Amazon during the late 2000s,” Marcia Macedo, Ruth DeFries and others also show in great detail that in recent years, while soy prices and production picked up substantially, deforestation kept going down.

Ruralista rhetoric to the contrary, Brazil and Amazon states have shown decisively that, so far, they have the wherewithal to reduce deforestation substantially while they grow their economies and their agriculture sectors.

Brazil should encourage – not undercut – global action against climate change

However, as the Times story correctly notes, Forest Code amendments threaten to usher in open season on forests. The government has watered down environmental licensing for big infrastructure projects like dams and roads and has rolled back protected areas in the Amazon by a form of executive fiat. Brazil’s Congress is also considering a bill that would give it a veto over recognizing new indigenous lands.

Brazil is home to about 40% of the world's tropical forests and a pioneer in policies to Reduce Emissions from Deforestation and forest Degradation (REDD+), which could provide the positive economic incentives needed to maintain Brazil's progress in continuing to curb deforestation.

Perhaps most critically, there has been little progress on providing the carrot – positive economic incentives to keep deforestation going down and to restore degraded forests – that Brazil needs in order to sustain the progress it made during the last decade into the future.

One candidate for the carrot is Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD) – the concept that reducing deforestation is good for the atmosphere and needs international compensation. Brazil was one of the pioneers of this idea in the international climate talks, and consequently created the Amazon Fund, to which Norway has committed $1 billion if the country continues to meet its 2020 target.

Brazil’s National Climate Change Policy also calls for the creation of a Brazilian emissions reductions market. But the federal government has made little headway on creating its own carbon market and has been reluctant to look at linking up with international carbon markets to pay for reducing deforestation. Both could go a long way to creating the incentives needed to grow the economy and sustainably expand agriculture and forestry, while stopping deforestation and restoring degraded forests.

What all of this means is that Brazil still leads the world in reducing carbon emissions because of its success in reducing Amazon deforestation – but risks reversing the trend if it approves a general amnesty for illegal deforestation. President Rousseff should listen carefully to Brazil’s world-class scientific community on how to balance environmental protection and development priorities, in the Forest Code and more broadly.

As Brazil prepares to host the Rio+20 Conference on Sustainable Development, it will find no lack of major developed countries to criticize for foot-dragging, omission, or outright obstruction on global environmental issues. Ambitious new commitments on environment and development are unlikely under the specter of economic crisis in the EU and anemic growth in the U.S. Blaming richer countries for tepid results is one possible outcome.

But if President Rousseff musters the political will to kill the deforestation amnesty and save the Forest Code, Brazil could do much better in Rio+ 20. It might find ways to use its world-leading achievement in reducing emissions from deforestation to chart the way to both more ambitious commitments and effective actions from other major economies going forward, and for funding for a sustainable low-carbon development strategy.

Thank Obama for Clean Air & Fuel Efficiency Rules

Fri, 03 Feb 2012 17:30:40 +0000

President Obama & his administration have stood up for our kids and our communities with stronger clean air and fuel economy rules. C4. Regional.

Mercury and Air Toxics Rule

Thu, 02 Feb 2012 22:16:23 +0000

For the first time, EPA has proposed a new Mercury and Air Toxics rule that would limit mercury and other hazardous air emissions from America's coal-fired power plants. Please take action to support this life-saving rule.

Creating Energy Champions

Thu, 02 Feb 2012 21:01:03 +0000

By Kristen Coracini

This commentary was originally posted on Duke Energy's Shedding A Light Blog.

In late January, I had the great pleasure of joining a group of Charlotte, N.C. city employees at an "Energy Champions" training hosted by Duke Energy and Charlotte Center City Partners. The city workers were bursting with enthusiasm, inventing creative ideas on the spot about how to motivate people to reduce energy use in the workplace. Many involved "friendly" competitions, around things like turning off monitors and lights: I for one would not want to be the recipient of the “Dim Bulb Award.”

Participants were excited to help Charlotte shine as a leader in innovation and to be part of Envision Charlotte, an initiative to make their city the most sustainable urban core in the country. Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) is pleased to be part of this innovative public-private partnership, along with Duke Energy, Charlotte Center City Partners, Bank of America and others.

One goal of Envision Charlotte is to reduce energy use in more than 60 large commercial and government buildings in Uptown Charlotte by 20 percent within a five-year timeframe. Why target buildings? Because buildings account for more than 30 percent of total energy use, and 65 percent of electricity consumption. Reducing energy use in buildings, especially the large buildings participating in Envision Charlotte (more than 10,000 square feet each), can have a huge impact and presents an enormous opportunity to cut costs and greenhouse gas emissions.

One of the ways Envision Charlotte will accomplish this goal is through Duke’s Smart Energy Now program. Duke and its partners Cisco Systems and Verizon Wireless have already installed smart meters and information kiosks in participating buildings. These displays show in real-time how much energy is being used in the city’s center every day, and provide tips on how to reduce that use. Information is also available through a secure portal, accessible to building owners and managers, which shows how much energy each individual building is using. This information will help employees, building owners and facilities managers make smart decisions about how they use energy every day of the week.

As a smart grid expert, I’m particularly interested to see what role smart technologies will play in making these buildings more efficient, and in shifting demand away from times of peak electricity use, when energy is most expensive and most polluting, and (ideally) to times when renewable energy is available on the grid.

Duke and its partners will host more Energy Champions trainings over the next few months, targeted specifically to different segments of building users: executives, workers and facilities managers. There is already palpable excitement in the city with the Democratic National Convention coming in the fall, which will place Charlotte in national, and even international, spotlights. Only these spotlights will be energy efficient. And please turn them off when you’re done.