Janet McCabe

About Janet McCabe

Posts by Janet McCabe:

Technical Report Highlights Auto Industry’s Success Meeting Fuel Economy and GHG Standards

By Janet McCabe and Dr. Mark Rosekind, Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

In 2010, the Obama Administration took a historic step to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and decrease carbon pollution by putting in place fuel economy standards and greenhouse gas standards for cars and light trucks for model years 2012 through 2016.  A second round of standards finalized in 2012, expanded the program through Model Year 2025.  These standards – what we call the National Program – are already making a big impact: reducing carbon pollution from the atmosphere while saving consumers money at the pump.

The auto industry has responded to the program with continual innovation – showing that a common sense approach to regulation that provides lots of flexibility can help drive American ingenuity. We are seeing fuel efficiency technologies enter the market faster than nearly anyone anticipated. In fact, auto manufacturers over-complied with the standards for each of the first three years of the National Program. All of this has taken place during a period of record vehicle sales.

The National Program reaches out nearly a decade into the future – to 2025. When the Environmental Protection Administration (EPA) and the Department of Transportation (DOT) developed the program, we agreed to do a “mid-term evaluation” to assess the standards for the 2022-2025 model years (MY).  We said back in 2012 that the mid-term evaluation would be a rigorous assessment of these standards, and would look at the best available data on emission control and fuel economy-improving technologies, costs, market developments, and other factors.

Today, we took the first step in that process. EPA, DOT, and California’s Air Resources Board (CARB) jointly put out an in-depth draft Technical Assessment Report (TAR). This comprehensive and robust report, informed by extensive stakeholder outreach and substantial technical work by the three agencies over the past several years, will inform EPA’s future determination on whether the standards are appropriate for MY 2022-2025 and NHTSA’s future rulemaking for those years. The report itself is not a rulemaking or decision document and does not change any of the existing legal requirements under the existing National Program—but it shows how much progress has already been made.

Here are some highlights:

Automakers are innovating in a time of record sales and fuel economy levels.  We are seeing technologies that reduce emissions and improve fuel economy entering the fleet at faster rates than originally expected.  These technologies include turbo charging, engine downsizing, more sophisticated transmissions, vehicle weight reduction, aerodynamics and idle stop-start, along with improved accessories and air conditioning systems.  Vehicle sales are strong (six straight years of increasing sales through 2015 for the first time since the 1920s, leading to an all-time high in 2015), and the auto firms overall are over-complying with the standards. Every single vehicle category, from subcompacts to pickup trucks, offers cleaner choices for consumers.

Manufacturers can meet the standards at similar or even a lower cost than we had anticipated in the 2012 rulemaking. Automakers have a wide range of technology pathways to choose from, but the TAR shows that manufacturers can meet the current standards for MY 2022-2025 primarily with conventional gasoline vehicles that use internal combustion engines with well-understood technologies.  This finding is consistent with what the National Academy of Sciences found in a comprehensive 2015 study.

Many manufacturers are meeting future standards with today’s vehicles. There are many vehicles – from many manufacturers – meeting future standards several years ahead of schedule.  In fact, there are over 100 car, SUV and pick-up truck versions on the market today that already meet 2020 or later standards.

The National Program is designed to enable consumers to choose the vehicle they want, from compact cars to larger trucks suitable for carrying and towing heavy loads, while helping owners enjoy improved fuel economy with a reduced environmental footprint. Rather than setting a single fuel economy target number for all vehicles, the National Program establishes separate standards for passenger cars and light trucks, with standards for trucks being generally less stringent than the standards for cars.  This approach protects consumer choice, and at the same time, it improves efficiency and emissions for all types of vehicles.  Even with lower than expected gas prices, which has resulted in a shift in consumer choice, the draft report shows that the standards mean more fuel efficient options no matter type or size vehicles consumers choose to buy.

Today’s report demonstrates that the program is working – reducing oil consumption and protecting the environment while saving consumers money. We are taking comment on the report and look forward to hearing from all interested stakeholders.

More information on the midterm evaluation, including the new report, can be found at https://www3.epa.gov/otaq/climate/mte.htm and http://www.nhtsa.gov/fuel-economy.

Editor's Note: The views expressed here are intended to explain EPA policy. They do not change anyone's rights or obligations.

Please share this post. However, please don't change the title or the content. If you do make changes, don't attribute the edited title or content to EPA or the author.

EPA Partners Leading the Way On Climate Action

By Janet McCabe

Climate change is one of the most critical challenges of our time. We are committed to partnering with industry, communities, and government at all levels to reduce the greenhouse gas emissions that drive climate change, and to prepare for the changes that are already underway.

Some important collaborations are our voluntary climate partnership programs. For decades, we have been partnering with the private sector to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, promote the use of cleaner energy sources, and improve energy efficiency efforts. These voluntary programs have achieved significant environmental benefits: in total, more than 19,000 organizations and millions of Americans have participated in our climate partnerships and, together in 2013 they prevented greenhouse gas emissions equal to the annual electricity use of more than 57 million homes.

Today, we launched a new voluntary program to reduce harmful methane emissions from the oil and gas sector and 41 companies have stepped up as founding partners. Our Natural Gas STAR Methane Challenge Program builds on the success of our Natural Gas STAR Program and encourages partner companies to make company-wide commitments to cut emissions from sources within their operations by implementing a suite of best management practices.

We expect program participation to grow over time and are actively working to expand the options for participation by finalizing an additional Emissions Intensity Commitment option through the ONE Future Coalition. The ONE Future coalition is a group of companies from across the natural gas industry focused on increasing the efficiency of the natural gas supply chain.

To understand the potential of this program, let’s look at the successes of the Natural Gas STAR Program. When Gas STAR began in 1993, it promoted six best management practices that companies could take to reduce methane emissions; that list has increased to over 50 mitigation best practices. In 2015, a total of 103 oil and gas companies from across the natural gas value chain were U.S. Natural Gas STAR Partners. Since the Natural Gas STAR program started, our partners have collectively achieved over 1.2 trillion cubic feet of methane emission reductions, equivalent to the emissions savings associated with the use of over 1.4 million barrels of oil or reducing over 606 million metric tons of C02 equivalent emissions.

Our other voluntary programs are making similar strides. Since 1992, ENERGY STAR has helped consumers save $362 billion on their utility bills while significantly reducing their greenhouse gas emissions at the same time. Since the Green Power Partnership was introduced in 2001, more than 1,200 organizations have committed to using about 33 billion kilowatt-hours of clean, renewable green power each year. Through the Combined Heat and Power Partnership, more than 480 partners have installed nearly 6,800 megawatts of new combined heat and power since 2001. And in 2013 alone, our methane and fluorinated greenhouse gas program partners used our tools and resources to prevent emissions equal to the annual electricity use from more than 12 million homes in 2013.

Our country has been building momentum towards a cleaner energy economy for quite a while, and with the help of our voluntary programs, our partners have been helping to pave the way. To address the global challenge of climate change, we need to use all the tools in our toolbox, and voluntary programs are an important complement to regulatory action. Through the innovation and leadership of our partners, our voluntary climate partnership programs have proven to be an important lever for change.

Editor's Note: The views expressed here are intended to explain EPA policy. They do not change anyone's rights or obligations.

Please share this post. However, please don't change the title or the content. If you do make changes, don't attribute the edited title or content to EPA or the author.

A New Chapter in the Fight against Radon Exposure

By Janet McCabe

Nearly five years ago, we launched an ambitious and far-reaching radon action plan with eight other federal agencies to help save lives and create heathier indoor environments in government-influenced buildings like housing, schools, and childcare facilities. Why? Each year an estimated 21,000 Americans die from radon-induced lung cancer, which is unacceptable. Radon exposure is preventable.

So far our shared efforts have reached an estimated 1.6 million homes, schools and childcare facilities and led to testing for and mitigation of high radon when necessary in nearly 200,000 of those units. And we’ve nearly completed all of our Federal Radon Action Plan (FRAP) commitments like the General Services Administration’s goal to test its 103 childcare facilities for radon and the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s goal to establish radon testing and mitigation requirements for participants in its multifamily housing mortgage insurance programs. You can view the progress we made by visiting our FRAP Scorecard.

While we have made significant progress — in 2013 and 2014 we saw the highest rates of radon mitigation and radon resistant new construction ever recorded in the United States — there’s still more work to do. Elevated radon is still a serious challenge in an estimated 1 out of 15 homes across the United States. The good news is that we have help. Led by the American Lung Association, twelve organizations representing government, nonprofit and industry sectors have crafted and launched an expanded game plan known as the National Radon Action Plan (NRAP).

NRAP builds on, leverages, and accelerates the momentum we created at the federal level. The new and improved strategy aims to incorporate radon testing, radon mitigation and radon-resistant construction into the systems that govern the purchase, financing, and construction and renovation of homes and other buildings. It will have a huge impact on improving public health and in cutting health care costs. Our near-term goal is to reduce the radon risk in a total of five million homes and save 3,200 lives annually by 2020. Our ultimate goal is to eliminate avoidable radon-induced lung cancer in the United States.

As we close the chapter on the Federal Radon Action Plan, I’m excited to see what we will accomplish through our National Radon Action Plan.

I also encourage you to test your home for radon. Affordable do-it-yourself radon test kits are available online, at many home improvement and hardware stores, or you can hire a qualified radon professional. For more information on how to test your home, visit http://www.epa.gov/radon. Test. Fix. Save a Life.

Editor's Note: The views expressed here are intended to explain EPA policy. They do not change anyone's rights or obligations.

Please share this post. However, please don't change the title or the content. If you do make changes, don't attribute the edited title or content to EPA or the author.

For peace of mind, add “test for radon” to your 2016 to-do list.

By Janet McCabe

If I told you that there was an invisible, odorless air pollutant that was responsible for an estimated 21,000 lung cancer deaths in America every year, I bet you’d want to know that something was being done about it.

The fact is, you can do something about it – by testing your home for radon.

We take radon very seriously at EPA. Only smoking causes more lung cancer deaths per year than radon, making it the second leading cause in the United States. As one staff member in the EPA air office said to me recently, “The statistics on radon are no joke.”  I couldn’t agree more.

Where does it come from? Radon is a naturally occurring radioactive gas that comes from uranium deposits in the soil. As uranium breaks down, it gives off radon gas, which then rises and can enter homes through their foundations. If that happens, then radon levels can reach dangerously high levels. There’s no way to predict if your home has high or low levels, though some areas of the country are more prone to high radon levels than others.

Testing is the only way to know for sure if your home is safe. Nationally, one in 15 homes has radon above the level at which the U.S. Surgeon General and EPA recommend taking action, which is four picocuries per liter (pCi/L) of air.

January is National Radon Action Month, when EPA joins with states and a number of national organizations to spread the word about the importance of testing for radon. January is a great time to test because that’s when doors and windows are shut to keep out the cold, leading to test results that are likely to show a home’s maximum radon level.

Testing is nothing to be intimidated by. Reliable, low cost, do-it-yourself kits have easy to follow instructions and are available online and at many hardware stores. There’s also the option of hiring a qualified tester. Whichever way you choose, a great place to start is your state’s radon office.

There’s no reason to delay. I should know; I’ve tested two homes. One had high levels that we were easily able to fix, and the other was safe, which was a huge relief.

If tests show elevated radon levels, the fixes are straightforward and affordable – comparable in cost to replacing a few windows or a garage door.  Like what happened with my homes, the peace of mind that you get in return is priceless.

Questions about radon? Join me and the American Lung Association for a twitter chat on Thursday, January 21 at 3:00pm ET to learn more about radon and what you can do to protect your family. Use the #TestForRadon hashtag to participate.

Editor's Note: The views expressed here are intended to explain EPA policy. They do not change anyone's rights or obligations.

Please share this post. However, please don't change the title or the content. If you do make changes, don't attribute the edited title or content to EPA or the author.

Moving Forward on the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards

By Janet McCabe

Today, we are proposing a notice that supplements the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS). Specifically, we are proposing to find that including a consideration of cost does not change the agency’s determination that it is appropriate to regulate air toxics, including mercury, from power plants.

Power plants are the largest source of mercury in the United States. Mercury is a neurotoxin that can damage children’s developing nervous systems, reducing their ability to think and learn.  Three years ago, we issued MATS, which requires power plants to reduce their emissions of mercury and other toxic air pollutants as well, protecting Americans from a host of avoidable illnesses and premature death. All told, for every dollar spent to make these cuts, the public is receiving up to $9 in health benefits. The vast majority of power plants began making the pollution reductions needed to meet their MATS requirements in April of this year and the rest will begin doing so in April of 2016.

After MATS was issued, the federal Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia and the Supreme Court both upheld the standards in the face of a host of challenges – but in a narrow ruling the Supreme Court ruled that the EPA should have considered costs when determining whether to regulate toxic air emissions from the power sector.

With today’s proposal, we are addressing the Supreme Court’s decision: we have evaluated several relevant cost metrics, and we are proposing to find that taking consideration of cost into account does not alter our determination that is appropriate to set standards for toxic air emissions from power plants.

In the proposed supplemental finding, we considered the power industry’s ability to comply with MATS and maintain its ability to perform its primary and unique function – the generation, transmission and distribution of electricity—at reasonable costs to consumers. These analyses demonstrate that the costs and impacts of MATS are reasonable and that the power sector can cut mercury and other toxics while continuing to provide all Americans with affordable, reliable electricity. And with MATS still in place today, the steps that many plants across the country have already taken to reduce toxic air emissions and comply with the final standards show that the standards really are achievable.

For 45 years the Clean Air Act has been working to clean up the air that we breathe while our economy has grown. MATS is an important step in our progress towards cleaner air and healthier children, as today’s proposal confirms. We will be accepting comments for 45 days after the proposed supplemental notice is published in the Federal Register. A copy of the proposed notice and a fact sheet are available on our website. We look forward to hearing from you.

Editor's Note: The views expressed here are intended to explain EPA policy. They do not change anyone's rights or obligations.

Please share this post. However, please don't change the title or the content. If you do make changes, don't attribute the edited title or content to EPA or the author.

Recognizing the 25th Anniversary of the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments

By Janet McCabe

November 15 marked the 25th anniversary of the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990. A lot can change over a quarter of a century, and air quality is a good example. Our nation can be proud that we have improved our air quality dramatically during the last 25 years. This success is due to the combined efforts of state, local, tribal and federal government, regulated industries and businesses, environmental and citizen groups, and scientists and technological innovators.

In 1990, prominent environmental issues like acid rain and ozone layer depletion were frequently in the headlines. Forests, lakes and the creatures that depend on them were dying because of acid rain, and the depletion of the ozone layer was a global problem that seemed almost too big to fix. Thanks to the Clean Air Act and a lot of innovation and commitment, there has been great progress. Power plants have cut sulfur dioxide emissions from power plants dramatically, reducing acid rain and ecosystem damage, with tremendous public health benefits from cleaner air. At the same time, we have phased out the most damaging ozone-depleting substances, and the ozone layer is making a gradual recovery. Over a period of decades, this will save millions of lives by avoiding skin cancers caused by dangerous ultraviolet radiation, while also preventing hundreds of millions of cases of eye cataracts.

In 1990, many more Americans were breathing unhealthy air compared to today. For example, as Congress deliberated on the 1990 amendments, there were 41 areas of the country, home to 30 million people, with unhealthy levels of carbon monoxide (CO) pollution, which is linked to heart attack risks and other health effects. Today, there are none — all of the areas that were identified in the 1990s as having unhealthy levels of CO now meet our health-based air quality standards. Additionally, since 1990, particle pollution and ground-level ozone smog, which are associated with premature death and other serious health effects, are down by 36 percent and 23 percent respectively. As a result, millions of Americans are breathing cleaner, healthier air. And today, thanks to the AirNow program, people can get daily updates on air quality forecasts in their area; there is even an app for it.

The cars that we drove to the movie theater to see “Home Alone” (which was released 25 years ago this week) are a lot different than cars being sold today. Not only did they lack backup cameras and Bluetooth connectivity, they were a lot dirtier. Thanks to the Clean Air Act amendments almost all vehicles and engines – including passenger cars, trucks, locomotives, ships, and engines used in construction, industrial, farm and recreational equipment – have become significantly cleaner through improved performance standards. You couldn’t buy an electric or hybrid in 1990; today there are dozens of models to choose from. Cleaner fuels and vehicle emission control technologies have had a dramatic impact in cutting particle pollution and smog, especially in urban areas, cut our oil use and save money.

The scenic vistas in our national parks and wilderness areas are clearer due to reductions in pollution-caused haze. Clean Air Act programs have cut pollution over broad regions, and further visibility improvements are taking place through state regional haze plans mandated by the 1990 amendments that are now in place for virtually all the states. Toxic pollutants were another focus of the 1990 amendments. Since 1990, as a result of toxic emissions standards for industrial facilities, there are about 1.5 million fewer tons of toxic air pollution released each year, as well as large reductions due to vehicle and fuels standards. This trend will continue as we implement newer programs like our Mercury and Air Toxics Standards and the Tier 3 Vehicle and Fuel Standards to further reduce toxic pollution.

As we work to reduce today’s health and environmental risks from air pollution, including risks from climate change and other major environmental issues, it is encouraging to look back and see how far we have come. I imagine that our 1990 selves would be impressed by the internet, smartphones and electric vehicles. I hope that 25 years from now an EPA official will write a blog post – or whatever they write in 2040 – to commemorate how much more progress has been made. As Congress overwhelmingly agreed in 1990, clean air is a public health issue, not a political one. We all deserve to breathe clean air and to live in a safe environment.

For more information on progress cleaning the air, remaining air pollution and climate protection challenges, and the Clean Air Act, see the EPA’s CAA Overview web site.

Editor's Note: The views expressed here are intended to explain EPA policy. They do not change anyone's rights or obligations.

Please share this post. However, please don't change the title or the content. If you do make changes, don't attribute the edited title or content to EPA or the author.

The Role of Biomass in Achieving Clean Power Plan Goals – A 2016 Workshop to Foster a Constructive Discussion

By Janet McCabe

Since issuing the Clean Power Plan (CPP), states and stakeholders have shown a strong interest in the role biomass can play in state plans to reduce carbon emissions under the rule. Many states are seeking to better understand how maintaining and building on their existing approaches to sound carbon- and greenhouse gas (GHG)-beneficial forestry and land management practices can yield biomass resources that will help them meet their CPP goals, and how to craft plans that will be federally approvable under the final CPP guidelines. To respond to this interest and to support state and stakeholder efforts to incorporate bioenergy in their CPP plans, we will be holding a public workshop in early 2016 for stakeholders to share their successes, experiences and approaches to deploying biomass in ways that have been, and can be, carbon beneficial.

The president’s Climate Action Plan and a range of the administration’s policies recognize that America’s forests and other lands must continue to play an essential role in mitigating the effects of carbon pollution. Biomass derived from land that is managed under programs that ensure the long-term maintenance of healthy forests can serve as an integral part of a broader forestry-based climate strategy, so the CPP expressly includes bioenergy as an option for states and utilities in CPP compliance.  It reflects the fact that, in many cases, biomass and bioenergy products in the power system can be an integral part of state programs and foster responsible land management and renewable energy.

State flexibility is a key component of the CPP. It recognizes the unique circumstances of each state’s energy mix and approaches to energy efficiency and renewable energy.  Many states already have extensive expertise in sound carbon- and GHG-beneficial forestry and land management practices, and the CPP’s flexibility will give states the ability to build in approaches to biomass and bioenergy unique to their forests and land management programs and policies.  It recognizes the importance of forests and other lands for climate resilience – in addition to the carbon benefits of biomass – fostered by a variety of land use policies, renewable energy incentives and standards, and GHG strategies. Working with stakeholders, these states promote viable forestry and agricultural product markets, which help protect and preserve healthy and productive lands and contribute to the continued and improved management of these lands.

That is why the CPP creates a pathway for states to use biomass as part of their plans to meet their emission reduction guidelines, and we expect many states to include biomass as a component in their state plans. We look forward to reviewing plans that incorporate well-developed forestry and other land management programs producing biomass that can qualify under the guidelines laid out in the CPP, and we are confident that the CPP offers sufficient lead time and flexibility for states to develop approvable programs.

So a key goal of the workshop we’ll be holding is to provide an opportunity for states with well-developed forestry and land management practices to share their experiences.  Another is to foster a constructive dialogue about how states can best include biomass in their compliance plans if that is a path they choose to follow.  The workshop will showcase the constructive compliance approaches many states are already implementing or developing.  And to prepare for the workshop, our first step is to reach out to key stakeholders to get ideas on the agenda.

We look forward to working with states and stakeholders to ensure that biomass continues to play an important role in accomplishing our climate change goals. Open lines of communication and sharing information helped shape the final Clean Power Plan, and continued constructive engagement will be vital for us to achieve significant climate and health benefits as we implement the CPP.

Editor's Note: The views expressed here are intended to explain EPA policy. They do not change anyone's rights or obligations.

Please share this post. However, please don't change the title or the content. If you do make changes, don't attribute the edited title or content to EPA or the author.

EPA Honors 2015 Green Power Leaders

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.

Please share this post. However, please don't change the title or the content. If you do make changes, don't attribute the edited title or content to EPA or the author.

New Greenhouse Gas Data for Large Facilities Now Available

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

Editor's Note: The views expressed here are intended to explain EPA policy. They do not change anyone's rights or obligations.

Please share this post. However, please don't change the title or the content. If you do make changes, don't attribute the edited title or content to EPA or the author.

Energy Efficiency and the Clean Power Plan

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:

  1. The Clean Power Plan encourages states to select energy efficiency as a compliance path to meet their goals, leading to cost savings for consumers.
  1. With the final Clean Power Plan, EPA also proposed model rule text describing how states could credit energy efficiency.
  1. Draft Evaluation, Measurement and Verification (EM&V) Guidance is available to help states effectively credit demand-side energy efficiency.
  1. The final Clean Power Plan simplifies interstate accounting for energy efficiency compared to the proposal.
  1. 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.
  2. Under a mass-based approach, energy efficiency automatically “counts” toward compliance and states can use an unlimited amount to help achieve their state goals.
  1. 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.
  1. 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.
  2. The Clean Energy Incentive Program (CEIP) provides additional incentives for early investment in demand-side energy efficiency in low-income communities.
  3. 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.

Editor's Note: The views expressed here are intended to explain EPA policy. They do not change anyone's rights or obligations.

Please share this post. However, please don't change the title or the content. If you do make changes, don't attribute the edited title or content to EPA or the author.