Skip to main content

EPA: The Way It Was


August 26, 2013 – Time was when I thought of the EPA as the good guys.  Industry – the bad guys – would once again imperil the water we drink, or the air that we breathe, and the EPA would ride to the rescue.  Something happened ( I believe it’s described as the Bush II administration), and the EPA began to excel at twiddling their thumbs, and little else.  Though twiddling may have lost its luster, I’m still not sure their hearts are really into protecting the environment.

Case in point: the new regulations issued by the EPA last week that will reduce air pollution created by “fracked” wells.  But, you say, isn’t it the EPA’s job to issue those very regulations?  Indeed it is, I reply.  Everyone knows that’s their job, except – apparently – the EPA.  Otherwise, why did the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia have to order them to take action?  Yup.  You see, the Environmental Protection Agency is tasked by law with reviewing pollution standards once every eight years.  I know you’ll find this hard to believe, but in 2009 (notice the date), environmental groups sued the agency, alleging it hadn’t done its job.  Now why might that have happened?

For the record, the new regulations will require gas producers to capture the burst of emissions that takes place when a well is being brought online.  They will, among other things, reduce methane emissions.  Because methane is 25x more toxic to humans than carbon dioxide, this is an important benefit of the new rules.

The process used to reduce methane, and a host of other polluting gases emitted by fracked wells, is known as “green completion.”  Truck-mounted equipment captures the effluent given off for about three to ten days after water, sand and chemicals are injected into a well.  The captured gas and liquid hydrocarbons can be separated, treated, and sold.   Green completions reduce the volatile organic compounds placed into the atmosphere by nearly 95 percent.   As rightly observed by Gina McCarthy, newly-designated head of the EPA, green completions promote responsible production of natural gas while protecting the public, and “do it in a way that more than pays for itself.”

There can be no question that green completion forces gas producers to limit the amount of damage they inflict on the environment.  Unfortunately, the new rules don’t impact the pollution created by compressor stations, storage tanks and other equipment essential to the production of natural gas.  Nevertheless, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) said it welcomes the new regulations, but voiced disappointment regarding their delayed implementation.  They won’t be in full force until 2015, in order to allow gas producers to design/procure the necessary equipment.  The NRDC argues this can be accomplished more quickly.

In any case, “hip, hip, hooray” for an imperfect solution that is badly needed.  While we can all rejoice in taking this significant step forward, only time will tell if this turns out to have been a step in the direction of the EPA remembering why it was brought into existence in the first place.  Perhaps it will feel so good to help people, they’ll want to do more of it.  The proud history of the EPA should remind present-day environmentalists that they stand on the shoulders of giants.

That helps, when part of your job requires seeing far into the future.
 
 

With thanks to the miamiherald.com.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Wildfires

March 20, 2017 - Happy Spring, everybody. Today's post will be brief: the ten-year average for number of wildfires during January through mid-March is 8,687 fires that burned 216,894 acres per year in the United States. This year there have been 10,829 fires during that period, burning 2,062,012 acres. You read that right.

Monsanto and the EPA

April 2, 2017 - The following was sent to me by Credo by email today. Please read and take action: Stunning new documents unsealed by a federal judge suggest that Monsanto worked directly with  federal regulators to hide the health risks of and manipulate the science behind its best-selling herbicide, RoundUp. The documents reveal that Monsanto pressured Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) officials to not publicly release information on the cancer risks of glyphosate, the main ingredient in RoundUp, ghost- wrote research for the EPA and worked with a senior official at the agency to quash a federal review of the chemical. These documents suggest an unprecedented level of collusion between the EPA and Monsanto  to cover up evidence that RoundUp is a likely carcinogen. The Office of Inspector General of the  EPA, an independent office tasked with investigating fraud and abuse in the agency, must immediately launch an investigation to hold Monsanto and all EPA employees involved accounta…