Natural Gas Appliances and Global Warming

For several years the U.S. Department of Energy has been promoting the use of induction for home cooking. Conventional residential cooking tops typically use gas or resistance electric heating elements, (the ubiquitous coil) to heat food.  The government estimates that gas stoves are approximately 32% efficient in their energy use and electric stoves are 75-80% efficient.  Residential induction burners consist of an electromagnetic coil that creates a magnetic field when turned on. Compatible cookware is heated when it is within the magnetic according to the DOE induction cooking 85% efficient. Less heat is lost to the surrounding air, providing an additional energy efficiency benefit by reducing the workload for air conditioning equipment. A cooler cooking top surface also makes induction cook tops safer to work with than other types of cooking tops. Finally, because the cookware itself is the source of heat, it reaches desired temperatures more quickly and provides faster cook times.

I had always dreamed of a kitchen with a commercial or commercial style stove. When I had saved up the money to upgrade my kitchen, I realized that the kitchen centerpiece stove was not my best choice. First of all, it is a warming world and those stove throw off lots of heat, second I live in a rural area where natural gas (methane) is not available, instead we have a propane tank and third commercial stoves are simply not good at low simmer, my preferred cooking style. I make lots of sauces, gravy, stews and soups. Gas burners (especially propane with its three carbons) burn too hot. So, in 2018 when I updated my kitchen I installed an induction cook top. I have been amazingly happy with that choice. The cooking is all I had hoped. What I had not anticipated is how easy and fast it is to clean, and the bad kitty cannot accidentally turn it on.

Now scientists are taking a closer look at cooking with gas. Natural gas is a popular fuel choice for home cooking and has always been considered better than conventional electric. It has the reputation that “real cooks” use natural gas. Nationally, over 40 million homes (about a third) cook with gas. Natural gas appliances release methane and other pollutants through leaks and incomplete combustion. These appliances warm the planet in two ways: generating carbon dioxide by burning natural gas as a fuel and leaking unburned methane into the air. A recent Stanford University study found that the methane leaking from natural gas-burning stoves emit up to 1.3 % of the gas they use as unburned methane.

According to the U.S. EPA, methane is the second most prevalent greenhouse gas and accounted for about 10% of all U.S. greenhouse gas emissions from human activities. Methane is emitted by natural sources such as wetlands and the breakdown of organic material, as well as from leakage from natural gas systems, growing rice, waste disposal and the raising of livestock. Methane is a powerful greenhouse gas and is 25 times more effective than carbon dioxide at trapping heat over a 100-year period. While it does occur naturally, major human-generated sources include landfills, refineries, oil and gas fields, natural gas infrastructure, dairies and wastewater treatment plants.

This work came out of Dr. Jackson’s lab at Stanford University where they are working to measure and reduce greenhouse gas emissions through the Global Carbon Project (globalcarbonproject.org), which Jackson chairs. Some of their work is directly aimed at measuring and reducing methane emissions from oil and gas wells, city streets, and homes and buildings. According to Dr. Jackson and his colleagues, curbing methane emissions will require reducing fossil fuel use and controlling fugitive emissions such as leaks from pipelines and wells, as well as changes to the way we feed cattle, grow rice and eat. “We’ll need to eat less meat and reduce emissions associated with cattle and rice farming,” Dr. Jackson said, “and replace oil and natural gas in our cars and homes.”

The scientists measured methane and nitrogen oxides released in 53 homes in California- not the biggest of sample. Their sample group included 18 brands of gas cooktops and stoves ranging in age from 3 to 30 years old .Measurements were taken during combustion, ignition, extinguishment, and also while the appliance was off.  

The scientist found no relationship between the age or cost of a stove and its emissions. What they did find that more than three-quarters of methane emissions occurred while stoves were off, suggesting that gas fittings and connections to the stove and in-home gas lines are responsible for most emissions, regardless of how much the stove is used. They should have probably examined the age of the interior piping and fittings in the home, but that was not part of the study. California does not require a building permit when you replace gas appliances the way we do here. So the fittings in California are not tested regularly over time.

The scientists found the highest emitters were cooktops that used a pilot light instead of a built-in electronic sparker. Methane emissions from the puffs of gas emitted while igniting and extinguishing a burner were on average equivalent to the amount of unburned methane emitted during about 10 minutes of cooking with the burner.

Larger stoves (those trophy kitchen appliances )tended to emit higher rates of nitric oxides. The scientists estimated that people who don’t use their range hoods or who have poor ventilation can surpass the EPA’s guidelines for 1-hour exposure to nitrogen dioxide outdoors (there are no indoor standards) within a few minutes of stove usage, particularly in smaller kitchens.

Dr. Jackson encourages switching to electric stoves to cut greenhouse gas emissions and indoor air pollution. I switched to induction to get fabulous cooking,  easy cleanup and energy efficiency. I  maintain propane in my home to power my backup generator, a propane furnace, a gas fireplace (I'm thinking about it) and hot water heater. Without electricity I have no water-my well pump does not work, my air heat pumps do not work, and all my kitchen appliances and freezer go down. We have lost power for several days after a storm in the winter and once in the summer. Because I have the generator and  backup systems, my pipes did not burst, my septic pump continued to operate and life went on.

COP27 Opens in Egypt

 This week the 27th Conference of the Parties (COP27) opened its meeting in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt. The conference will run until November 18th 2022. The prospects for significant progress appear dim.

If you recall, in December 2015 at the 21st Conference of the Parties in Paris, Delegates from 196 countries reached an agreement that we all hoped put the nations on a course to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from the combustion of fossil fuel.

Under the Paris Agreement, every country agreed to work together to limit global warming to “well below 2 degrees” and aim for 1.5 degrees, to adapt to the impacts of a changing climate and to make money available to deliver on these aims to countries not able to afford the costs of adapting to a changing climate. The parties to the agreement committed to create national plans setting out how much they would reduce their emissions called Nationally Determined Contributions (NDC). Furthermore, they agreed that every five years they would come back with an updated plan that would reflect their highest possible ambition at that time.

The Covid-19  pandemic forced the delay of the COP 26 meeting and it was held last year in Glasgow, Scotland. However, only a limited number of countries and political organizations including the European Union, Japan, the UK and the United States submitted strengthened NDCs ahead of the Glasgow meeting.  Only 23 countries have submitted updated NDCs by the deadline for this meeting and that list includes only one major economy, Australia. Their NDCs now bring them in line with their peers.

The United States (by executive order and administrative action) has set a goal to reach 100% carbon-free electricity by 2035 and net zero emissions throughout the economy by 2050. The problem is that the reduction in emissions pledged so far are nowhere near sufficient to hold temperature change to 2 degrees Celsius according to the climate models. China in 2021 is the largest CO2 emitter at about 30% of the total- dwarfing the United States at 14%. China has only agreed to stop growing their CO2 emissions by 2030. The goals of the Paris Agreement cannot be met without reductions in China and the other nations still growing their emissions. Egypt's NDC submitted this year would increase their CO2 emissions 50% by 2030. 

Sadly, CO2 emissions from fuel have continued to grow year after year with the exceptions of a brief respite during the global financial crisis and the Covid-19 lockdowns. Now, European Countries have been buying coal to use for electricity generation to replace the natural gas unavailable due to the war in Ukraine, China is finally showing signs of opening up their economy and CO2 emissions are expected to resume their climb. Coal plants that were scheduled to shut down will continue to operate and several recently shut down coal fired turbines have be restarted. Coal fired electricity generation emits about twice the CO2 as natural gas. 

Prior to the Paris Agreement the world was heading for a 3.6 degree Celsius warming. The policies in place today would lead to a warming of about 2.7 degrees Celsius by 2100. If countries fully implement their NDC’s it would be around 2.4 degrees Celsius by 2100. The increase in extreme weather promised by the climate models appears to be in our future. 

Global Carbon Project

The Global Carbon Project (GCP) is this organization that has fantastic infographics about our atmosphere, carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide and methane. They use their graphics to integrates all the knowledge of greenhouse gases, human activities and the Earth system. They were founded in 2001 to fully understand the carbon cycle on our planet. Their projects include global budgets for the three dominant greenhouse gases (carbon dioxide, methane, and nitrous oxide) and track growth in and source of emissions, performance against the Paris Accord commitments and efforts in urban, regional, cumulative, and negative emissions.

GCP also produces the Global Carbon Atlas to visualize all their research. Both sites are a wonder to peruse and truly understand where we are as a planet. I recommend that you follow the links and take a look at some of their offerings. Below I have picked out some of their recent highlights, I am a little more discouraged than they appear to be.

After a significant drop in emissions in 2020 due to Covid-19 shutdowns, fossil CO2 emissions in 2021 appear to have just about  returned to pre-COVID levels. CO2 emissions were 36.4 billion tonnes in 2021 compared to 36.7 billion tonnes in 2019.  CO2 emissions for the United States and the European Union (EU27) though higher than 2020 are still below 2019. However, the CO2 emissions for India and China are above the 2019 levels. , the response to the COVID-19 pandemic has sparked further growth in CO2 emissions, pushed by the power generation and manufacturing sectors.

From the GCP infographic

China, the United States, European Union and India are the major emitters of CO2 from fossil fuels in 2021. All  appear to be returning to their pre-COVID emissions trends- a decreasing trend in CO2 emissions for the USA and European Union and an increasing trend in CO2 emissions for China and India. For China, the response to the COVID-19 pandemic has sparked an increased growth rate in CO2 emissions, pushed by the power and industry sectors.

CO2 emissions from China in 2021 are projected to be 5.5% above 2019 levels, reaching 11.1 billion tonnes- over 30% of total world emissions. India's CO2 emissions are projected to grow even faster than China's this year at 12.6%, after a 7.3% fall last year. This resulted in an increase of 4.5% from 2019. Emissions from both the US and European Union are projected to rise 7.6% in 2021. USA and EU, respectively, accounted for just over14% and 7% of global emissions in 2021. Emissions in the rest of the world (including all international transport, particularly aviation) are projected to rise 2.9% this year, but remain 4.2% below 2019 levels. Together, these countries and transport represent 59% of global emissions.

from the GCP

CO2 Emissions Increased in 2021

On January 11th 2022 the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) and the Rhodium Group released their updates and estimate for year ending December 31, 2021 performance of the economy and CO2 emissions for the year. The EIA forecast that; “Energy-related carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions rose by 6.2% in 2021 relative to 2020…” Though Energy-related CO2 emissions are sensitive to changes in weather, economic growth, energy prices, and fuel mix this was during a mild winter while the U.S. real GDP grew by 5.7% in 2021, the extent of the rebound in CO2 was more than hoped. 

If you recall the U.S. GDP fell 7.2% during the first year of the pandemic when states instituted lockdowns while CO2 emission fell even more. During 2020, as the country responded to the COVID-19 pandemic shutting down much of the economy for extended periods of time, CO2 emissions from energy consumption in the United States fell to the lowest level since 1983. The 4.6 billion metric tons of CO2 emitted in 2020 was 11% lower than 2019 levels. 

Although we will need to wait for final economic growth estimates and carbon dioxide equivalent emissions numbers, greenhouse gas emissions (or CO2 equivalent emissions) appear to have rebounded significantly despite the Delta and Omicron surges in the COVID-19 pandemic. In 2021, GDP bounced back 5.7%. Overall, the net CO2 equivalent emissions for the united states grew 6.2% with the transportation and electric power sectors CO2 equivalent emissions growing 10% and 6.6%, respectively from 2020 levels.

from EIA

The 10% increase in CO2 emissions from the transportation sector, reflect the high demand for  consumer goods transported to a large extent by truck and a modest recovery of passenger travel. The transportation sector that normally accounts for 31% of net US CO2 emissions had fallen over 15% (283 million metric tons of CO2e) below 2019 levels during 2020.

from the Rhodium Group 

In the electric power generation sector CO2 equivalent emissions grew 6% above 2020 levels to 95 million metric tons CO2 equivalents. Electricity accounts for 28% of net CO2 equivalent emissions. Despite the bounce back from 2020, CO2 emissions for the electric sector remained 4% lower than 2019 levels.

The increase in electric power generation sector CO2 emissions was only partially caused by increased generation of electric power.  Overall, electric power demand in 2021 was up 3% from 2020, the more robust growth in power sector CO2 emissions  was due in part to an increase in the use of coal to generate power in 2021. This was the first time in seven years that coal use had increased. Coal’s rebound was driven largely by a run-up in natural gas prices, which more than doubled since 2020. The demand curve for natural gas is relatively inelastic. In our plans for decarbonizing society have gotten ahead of reality. We have reduced supply of natural gas faster than the demand for natural gas. 

In their January 2021 report the Rhodium Group says that “Industry, which saw the most modest drop in CO2 emissions in 2020 at 6.2%, rebounded 3.6%in 2021—making up just over half the difference from 2019 levels. Buildings saw the smallest rise in CO2 emissions in 2021, growing only 1.9% from 2020,returning only a quarter of the drop in emissions from 2020.” For this one it is clear appears that there are still a lot of empty commercial buildings waiting for us to return. After our Omicron winter I am looking forward to (once again) returning to live prayer services and getting back out in the world.

2018 World CO2 Emissions

Global CO2 emissions were stable from 2014 to 2016 but grew by 1.4% in 2017 and 2.1% in 2018 to 36.58 billion tonnes of CO2 equivalents. Despite some progress in expanding use of low carbon sources of energy, renewable fuels, and increased efficiency, growth in energy use from fossil fuel sources is still outpacing the rise of low-carbon sources and activities.(Jackson, R.B. 2019)

from Global Carbon Project

Global emissions of CO2 from fossil fuels and industry increased by 2.2% per year on average between 2005 and 2015 (Le Quere C 2018). In order to achieve the goals of the Paris Climate Agreement global emissions need to peak and decline rapidly to limit climate change to below 2 °C of warming.

Scientists once hoped that CO2 emissions could be held below the “tipping point,” now the plan is to quickly reach peak emissions and then reverse course reducing global net human-caused CO2 emissions by about 45 % from 2010 levels by 2030 and reaching ‘net zero’ emissions around 2050. (Forbes, 2019). Peak emissions will occur when improvements in the CO2 emitted per unit energy overcome the growth in global energy use. This requires that fossil fuels are replaced by low or no-carbon technologies and we further decouple global GDP from CO2 emissions.

The IPCC 2018 report tells us that climate change has arrived. Average global temperatures have already risen 1.1°C above preindustrial levels and, at current rates of warming, are projected to reach 1.5°C within two decades. A generally growing global economy (when not in Covid-19 shutdowns), insufficient emission reductions in developed countries, and a vast expansion in CO2 emitting energy use in developing countries where per capita emissions remain far below those of wealthier nations will continue to put upward pressure on CO2 emissions. The trajectory of growth in CO2 emission put the planet on a path of warming that is currently well beyond 1.5°C and, potentially, 2°C goals of the Paris Agreement.

Despite the President’s talking points to coal miners and the rollback of several environmental regulations over the past three years, the U.S. CO2 emissions have continued to fall as natural gas has replace coal as the primary fuel in electric supply. In 2019 CO2 emissions declined by about 1.7% after growing 2.8% in 2018, the Global Carbon Project finds that on average U.S. CO2 emissions have decreased about 1% each year for the last 15 years. During that same period China’s CO2 emissions have more than doubled

The above is a summary of the latest report of the Global Carbon Project and its contributors:

Jackson RB, Le Quéré C, Andrew RM , Canadell JG, Korsbakken JI , Liu Z, Peters GP , Zheng B, Friedlingstein P (2019) Global Energy Growth Is Outpacing Decarbonization. A special report for the United Nations Climate Action Summit September 2019. Global Carbon Project, International Project Office, Canberra Australia

Graphs and Data for my pie charts are from:

Hannah Ritchie and Max Roser (2017) - "CO₂ and Greenhouse Gas Emissions". Published online at OurWorldInData.org.

CO2 Emissions in the U.S. are Rising

As delegates gathered for the United Nations Climate Summit, both the U.S. Energy Information Agency and the Global Carbon Project released their carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions data for the first half of 2014. The data from the Global Carbon Project projects that for 2014 37.0 ± 1.9 Giga metric tons of CO2 , will be released into the earth’s atmosphere. That is a 2.5% increase over last year and a 65% increase over 1990 CO2 emission levels. The top four emitters of CO2 in 2014 are expected to be the same as in 2013 when the share of emissions was: China at 28%, the United States at 14%, the European Union at 10% and India at 7%.

data from EIA

The EIA data shows that for the first half of 2014 carbon dioxide (CO2) released into the atmosphere in the United States increased by 2.7% over last year continuing the upward trend in CO2 emissions which were at their lowest in 2012. As can be seen in the graph above and chart below, there has been a general downward trend in CO2 emissions since 2007 in all sectors of the economy. (Please note that both the residential sector and industrial sector include part of the electrical generation emissions so that the parts add up to more CO2 than the total emission from the economy. The chart includes the commercial sector and removes the mixed sector electrical category.) Though overall emissions of CO2 in the United States have fallen 10.4% since 2007 and that is generally true in all sectors of the economy; the largest share of reduction in CO2 emissions was from reduction in emissions from electrical generation which have fallen 15% over the period. Over the same period, CO2 emissions from burning coal in manufacturing, transportation, and industry are down 21%. However, CO2 emissions from burning coal are up 3.25% in the first 6 months of this year and emissions from burning natural gas are up 4.9%. The increase in natural gas appears to be divided fairly evenly among the commercial, industrial and residential sectors.

data from EIA

Electricity generation accounts for approximately 38% of the CO2 emission in 2013 down from 40% in 2007. In 1990 electricity generation accounted for only 36% of the total U.S CO2 emissions. In 2013 the industrial sector accounted for 28% of all CO2 emissions, but back in 1990 industry accounted for 34% of total CO2 emissions. Back in the days when I was a plant engineer, the industrial sector accounted for 40% of all CO2 emissions. Over this period the industrial output has not shrunk, but the labor and energy inputs to industry have shrunk and production has surged and fallen with  recessions as can be seen in the chart from the Federal Reserve.

US industrial production from the Federal Reserve

 As you can see in the chart to the left the CO2 emissions from the generation of electricity have fallen since 2005. A portion of the reduction in CO2 emissions was from the reduction in power generation, the rest was due to a change in the mix of fuels used to produce the electricity and the increase in power produced by renewable energy. As can be seen in the chart below power generation from renewable sources increased by 241% since 2007, but represent only 6% of the power generated in the united states. The big change was the move away from coal to natural gas. Coal fell from 48% of generation in 2007 to 39% of generation in 2013. While natural gas increased from producing  22% of  electricity in 2007 to 27% in 2013.

from EIA

The EPA Puts the Nation on a CO2 Diet

On Monday, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Gina McCarthy announced new regulations that the EPA is proposing to put in place under the Clean Air Act to cut carbon emissions from existing power plants under President Barak Obama’s Climate Action Plan. The details described in the news release summaries were not an entirely accurate reflection of what I read in the proposed regulation.

Power plants are the largest single source of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States accounting for about 33% of greenhouse gas release (and slightly more of carbon dioxide). Greenhouse gases are: carbon dioxide (CO2), fluorinated gases, nitrous oxide and methane (CH4). According to the EPA CO2 represents 84% of mass of greenhouse gas emissions and that the climate models indicate to be the cause of climate change. The proposed regulations will require power plants to cut their CO2 emissions by 30% from 2005 levels or 18% from 2013 levels by using a combination of approaches.

data from EIA

One of the main goals of this proposed regulation is reducing the amount of electricity generated from coal fired power plant and reducing the total number of coal fired power plants in the United States. In the past few years the EPA has implemented tougher regulations for these power plants. The Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) and the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) are two of the latest regulations to address power plants. MATS regulates mercury, arsenic, acid gas, nickel, selenium, and cyanide and slashes emissions of those pollutants from coal fired electrical generation plants. The CSPR is aimed at coal fired electrical generation plants, too. It slashes smokestack emissions of SO2 and NOX that can travel into neighboring states. Those pollutants react in the atmosphere to form fine particles and ground-level ozone and are transported long distances, making it difficult for other states to achieve their particle requirements under the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) which have also recently been tightened. Until now there has been no federal rule to prevent power plants from releasing as much CO2 as they want, though several states already have some sort of limitation on CO2; and CO2 generation in the United States has been falling in the past seven years.

President Obama has directed the EPA to create national CO2 emissions standards for new and existing power plants with the goal of reducing CO2 emissions. Last September the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) revised their proposed Clean Air Act standards to cut carbon pollution from new power plants. Under the revised proposal, new large natural gas-fired turbines would need to meet a carbon dioxide (CO2) limit of 1,000-1,100 pounds of CO2 per megawatt-hour depending on size, while new coal-fired units would need to meet a limit of 1,100 pounds of CO2 per megawatt-hour. Existing coal –fired electrical generation turbines emit about 2,080-2,180 pounds of CO2 per megawatt-hour of power produced. Natural gas produces about 1,170 pounds of CO2 per megawatt-hour.

With Monday’s announcement the EPA is proposing regulation for the existing power plants requiring a reduction in the overall CO2 emitted by the nation. If these regulations if implemented and in effect today, the effect would be to reduce overall CO2 emissions of all the nations on earth by less than 1% and by the time they are actually implemented the impact will be a fraction of a percent. So, these regulations are not going to change the impact of CO2 on the climate.

The approach the EPA is taking is to allocate to each state a CO2 limit. The basic formula for the limit assigned to each state is:

CO2 emissions from fossil fuel-fired power plants) divided by (state electricity generation from fossil-fuel fired power plants plus certain low- or zero-emitting power sources).

It is to be noted that existing hydropower is excluded from the base calculation, but additional hydropower will be included in the denominator. EPA lists the interim and final goal for each state on pages 346-348 of the proposed regulation preceded by the explanation of how they arrived at these goals. According to the EPA, their approach factors in megawatt hours from fossil fuel power plants plus other types of power generation like renewables and nuclear, as well as megawatt-hour savings from energy efficiency in the state. The final goal for Virginia is 810 pound of CO2 emitted per net megawatt hours of electricity produce in the state, for Maryland it is 1,187 and for West Virginia 1,620. The EPA expects the regulations to result in a reduction in the electricity used per capita and in the CO2 generated per megawatt hour of electricity produced, and details how each state will achieve it in the 645 page regulation.

There are expected to be comments and legal challenges to the regulation, since it appears to be an expansion of the scope of existing laws and there are significant fiscal implications of the regulation across the economy. Nonetheless the EPA will mandate the limit and the states must provide a plan for achieving that limit that is acceptable to the EPA by June 30, 2016. States must determine a mix of four overall strategies that the EPA “helps” them pick:

• Make fossil fuel power plants more efficient. Though, it is estimated by the EPA that many coal plants can be upgraded to become slightly more efficient; this will be very cost dependent. Efficiency gains are expected to be 6%.
• Use lower CO2 emitting power plants more. This strategy both encourages the increase in utilization of the existing natural gas fired power plants (as well as construction of gas fired power plants). EPA considers increase utilization of low CO2 emitting power generation in the base load the preferred option of achieving the goal. 
• Use more zero- and low-emitting power sources by expanding renewable energy programs. The EPA is requiring the expansion of states’ Renewable Portfolio Standards, RPS, which require that a portion of energy produced to be by renewable. Within the prosed regulation EPA has assigned each state (with the exception of Vermont) a renewable energy generation goal (pages 202-204 of the proposed regulation). Virginia which currently supplies 3% of electricity from renewable sources is required to supply 16% of electricity from renewable sources. (Maryland currently supplies 2% from renewables and is also required to supply 16% from renewable sources in 2030.) Texas will be required to supply 20% of their electricity from renewable sources and currently supplies 8%. You get the picture. 
• Use electricity more efficiently. EPA is also requiring each state to establish energy savings programs and the amount of savings that utilities must achieve through customer energy efficiency programs. See page 229 of the regulation for each states goal. 
• Utilization of programs such as state cap and trade to put pressure on the CO2 generation and encourage the investment into energy saving and greenhouse gas reducing technologies. EPA looks for expansion of the various cap and trade programs that exist in 10 states. The states can develop a state-only plan or collaborate with other states to develop plans on a multi-state basis and EPA supplies the states your home state is grouped with. Delaware, District of Columbia (despite having no goals), Maryland, New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West Virginia are grouped together in the East Central group. 

Though a national cap and trade law to address CO2 failed to pass the senate in 2009 and died, cap and trade law and regulations for CO2 exist in California and a program exists among nine northeastern states. In addition, cap and trade was used successfully to address the acid rain problem in the 1990’s. That program served as a way to cut pollution without heavy-handed regulations, allowing each business to choose how to reach the mandated goal. Each year the cap would ratchet down, allowing less pollution while market forces drove up the price for permits, creating an incentive for industries to invest in air scrubbers and pollution removal technology. However, that program was a permit trading program among regulated plants and not effectively covering the entire economy. The proposed CO2 regulation covers all electrical generation, its cost and availability in the United States.

One of the challenges in reducing CO2 emissions in the United States has been that there is no economically feasible carbon capture technology that can be retrofitted to a coal fired power plant and too much of the CO2 generated nationally comes from coal fired power plants- almost 13%. In addition, power companies are utilities that are limited by layers of regulations that control pricing and limit flexibility due to technical, business and jurisdictional constraints. The U.S. is the largest producer of natural gas, so we have alternatives. With this regulation the EPA is now taking control of the power generation sector of the economy to remake that industry in a less carbon intensive and more efficient vision. These regulations are likely to increase the cost and possibly limit the availability of electricity, but are also intended to reduce the use of electricity. These regulations will mark the end of the era of using coal to generate electricity in power plants. This era began with the oil crisis in 1972 and will end with the EPA issuing CO2 “budgets” and potentially creates a regional or national carbon trading market for “carbon credits."

I should admit that I am one of the many who prefer a carbon tax to EPA's command and control regulations. Taxing the carbon content of products might be a more direct method to control CO2 generation and more effective method of reducing CO2 production without regulators taking control of a significant segment of the economy and could be applied to imports. However, a direct tax must come from the legislature, not regulation, and would have to be negotiated and vetted by the elected representatives of the people. It would certainly generate badly needed revenue for our government that is running at a deficit.  

Carbon Dioxide Limit for New Power Plants

On Tuesday the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed the first Clean Air Act standard for carbon dioxide. Under the new rule, new power plants will have to emit no more than 1,000 tons of carbon dioxide per megawatt-hour of energy produced. That standard effectively changes the fuel of choice for all future power capacity additions to natural gas, nuclear, or the renewable category (with government subsidies). All existing plants and currently permitted and built in the next 12 months will be grandfathered and exempt from this new rule. According to the EPA a coal plant currently produces about 1,800 pounds of carbon dioxide per megawatt-hour of electricity. EPA says the rule that requires new plants to produce no more than 1,000 pounds of carbon dioxide per megawatt-hour as creating “a path forward for new technologies to be deployed at future facilities that will allow companies to burn coal, while emitting less carbon pollution.” Nonsense, there is no proven commercial technology that can meet this carbon standard for coal fired plants. EPA intends that the current crop of coal fired power plants will be the last.

During the past year, EPA finalized two regulations that were specifically targeting coal fired power plants. The Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) regulates mercury, arsenic, acid gas, nickel, selenium, and cyanide. MATS was finalized on December 21. 2011. The Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, CSAPR, which requires reductions of sulfur-dioxide and nitrogen-oxide emissions in coal fired plants, was made final in July but at the end of last year, the U.S. Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit granted a stay to the implementation of the CSAPR pending resolution of the legal challenges. The case is scheduled to be heard in mid-April 2012. CSAPR, if eventually implemented will reduce SO2 emissions by 73% from 2005 levels and NOx emissions by 54% at the approximately 1,000 coal fired electrical generation plants in the eastern half of the country.

Our modern society requires power and the new regulation by grandfathering the existing power plants ensures that we will not be sitting in the dark any time soon. In the U.S. in 2010 over 90% of electrical power was produced by steam turbines powered by coal, oil, gas, and bio fuels. Wind and water may be used to spin the turbines as well. In 2010 Coal produced 45 % of electricity, nuclear power generated 20% of the electricity used, natural gas generated 24% of the electricity used, hydroelectric generated 6%, wind 1% and oil, wood, biomass, geothermal solar and other generated the rest. The Mercury and Air Toxics Standards and the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule will reshape the industry reducing coal fired plants. The new source carbon dioxide rule will ensure that any additional electrical capacity built will not be coal and MATS and CASPR will reduce the existing capacity of coal produced electricity. There will be impacts to the economy and our society to the reduction in demand for coal in the United States, the costs to convert, replace and upgrade power plants, and increasing the demand for natural gas which appears to be at this moment the fuel of choice.

In 2010, U.S. coal production was 1,050 million metric tons with 92.5% of the coal used to generate electricity. Without electrical generation there is little demand for coal and coal miners. The EPA’s MATS and CSPAR regulation and the greenhouse gas regulations will reduce and possibly someday eliminate the economic feasibility of coal fired electrical generation plants. However our nation requires power, and the current coal fired power plants will continue to need coal for the short term. The use of coal to generate electrical power has an interesting history. There was a time when petroleum was widely used for electrical generation. In an attempt to regain energy independence after the gas rationing and oil shortages of the 1973 Oil Embargo, the nation turned to its vast coal reserves. Between 1973 and 1976, coal production increased by 14.4%. In 1978, the Power Plant and Industrial Fuel Use Act mandated conversion of most existing oil-burning power plants to coal or natural gas. Thought the act was repealed in 1987, the impact on our nation and its economy extends to today, though the goals and values of our government have changed. Now the EPA is reshaping the future, clearly away from coal though the impacts on our environment and economy intended and any unintended are yet to be seen.

Looking at the economy as a whole and not just the electrical power sector, in 2010 the major energy sources in the United States are petroleum-gas and oil (37%), natural gas (25%), coal (21%), nuclear (9%), and renewable energy primarily biomass and hydro power generation (8%). The United States only produces about 75% of the energy we consume, the shortfall is imported petroleum. The major users of energy in the United States are heating of residential and commercial buildings (11%), industry (20%), transportation including cars, trucks, trains, planes and ships (27.4%), and electric power generation (40%).

Natural gas appears to be the current fuel of choice. It is the source of 25% of the energy consumed in the United States and in 2010 was used almost equally for industry, electrical generations and residential and commercial heating. Most, but not yet all, of the natural gas consumed in the United States is produced in the United States. Domestic natural gas production and consumption were nearly in balance through 1986, though U.S. production of natural gas peaked in 1973. From 1986 to 2006 consumption of natural gas outpaced domestic production, and imports rose. Then in 2006 U.S. production of natural gas began to increase as a result of the development of more efficient and cost effective hydraulic fracturing techniques. In 2010 natural gas production in the United States reached the highest recorded annual total since 1973 and continues to climb. Regulation and control of hydraulic fracturing will impact the cost of natural gas production in the United States, the availability of gas and the environmental impact to our natural resources.

The earth’s atmosphere is interconnected. The EPA has estimated that just one-quarter of U.S. mercury emissions from coal-burning power plants are deposited within the contiguous U.S. The remainder enters the global cycle. Conversely, current estimates are that less than half of all mercury deposition within the United States comes from American sources. Worldwide CO2 emissions are up 6%, to over 30 billion tons, in 2010 40% above the 1990 level. As you can see above the increase in CO2 emissions in the United States was far more modest, increasing 8% over 19 years. The worldwide level of CO2 is higher than the worst-case scenario outlined by climate experts just five years ago, but temperatures have not (yet) risen as projected by the climate models. The relationship of climate change to worldwide CO2 levels may not be the one assumed in the climate models. Nonetheless, the EPA continues to work diligently to achieve President Obama’s commitment in Copenhagen to reduce United States emissions of CO2 17% by 2020.

Emissions of Carbon Dioxide in the United States

Last Wednesday, the U.S. EPA released the list of facilities that emitted the most carbon dioxide in 2010. This is in preparation for later this year when the U.S. EPA is expected to promulgate new carbon dioxide standards for power plants. Power plants accounted for more than half of the greenhouse-gas emissions by the major emitters on the list, with refineries and chemical facilities also contributing large shares. Of the 100 largest emitters—defined by the EPA as facilities emitting more than 7 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent—96 of them are power plants. Two are refineries and two are iron and steel mills. (Using government respiration data for mine collapse survival, the population of the United States emitted 170 million metric tons of CO2 by breathing last year.)

According to the United States the US Energy Information Administration that collects and reports the energy statistics, U.S. energy related carbon dioxide emissions in the United States totaled 5,426 million metric tons in 2009 (the most recent year available) down from a peak of 6,022 million metric tons in 2007. For the past ten years electrical generation accounted for approximately 40% of the carbon dioxide emissions in the United States, up from 36% in 1990 when industrial sources accounted for a larger share of the economy and significantly higher share of CO2 emissions.

EPA launched the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program in October 2009, requiring the reporting of carbon dioxide data from large stationary emission sources, as well as suppliers of fuel that would emit GHGs if used. This is the first year that data was reported. Though EPA uses the term greenhouse gasses in their press release and program title they are only talking about carbon dioxide, though the main greenhouse substances in the earth's atmosphere are water vapor and clouds. Carbon dioxide represents less than 0.04% (386 parts per million) of the atmosphere and its significant increase over the past hundred years or so is attributed to man’s impact on earth. The other greenhouse gasses are methane (1.8 parts per million), nitrous oxide (0.3 parts per million), hydrofluocarbons (0.00025 parts per million), Perfluorocarbons (0.00086 parts per million), and sulfur hexafloride (0.000006 parts per million). The Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program (GHGRP) does not represent total U.S. emissions, only the major point sources, what EPA calls stationary sources.

The largest carbon dioxide generators on the U.S. EPA list are generally speaking the largest stationary combustion sources, the largest electrical generation plants followed by large industrial furnaces (iron and steel making and refineries that flair excess gas) that were built during the era of massive size plants and do not necessarily reflect how efficient, clean or dirty a plant is. The amount of carbon dioxide released is a function of the size of facility and the type of fuel used. According to a combined report from the U.S. EPA and the Department of Energy, coal generates 2.1 pounds of CO2 per kWh while natural gas generates 1.3 pounds of CO2 per kWh. The major users of fuel are heating of residential and commercial buildings (11%), industry (20%), transportation including cars, trucks, trains, planes and ships (27.4%), and electric power generation (40%).

The largest stationary sources of CO2 are large power plants. Coal fired power plants are with the exception of nuclear power the largest electrical generation plants, and coal which generates 38% more carbon dioxide when burned than natural gas. Ninety-two and a half percent of the coal mined in the United States is used to generate 45% of the electricity produced in the United States. To protect the environment and meet the President Obama’s pledge to reduce U.S greenhouse gas emissions to 17% below the 2005 levels by 2020 the U.S. EPA wants to eliminate coal as a fuel source for electrical power plant generation through increasing regulation of coal fired electrical generation plants and new millage and emission standards mandated for the automobile industry.

The Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) regulates mercury, arsenic, acid gas, nickel, selenium, and cyanide. MATS was finalized on December 21. 2011. This regulation will slash emissions of these pollutants primarily from coal fired electrical generation plants. According to the EPA it will cost $9.6 billion annually to comply with the MATS regulations and Industry analysts believe that 10% to 20% of U.S. coal-fired generating capacity will be shut down by 2016. The combined benefit of MATS and the Cross State Air Pollution Rule was estimated by the U.S. EPA to total over decades up to $380 billion in the form of longer, healthier lives and reduced health care costs.

The Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, CSAPR, which requires reductions of sulfur-dioxide and nitrogen-oxide emissions in coal fired plants and is estimated to cost $2.4 billion in annual costs. CSAPR was made final in July but at the end of last year, the U.S. Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit granted a stay to the implementation of the CSAPR pending resolution of the legal challenges. CSAPR, if eventually implemented will reduce SO2 emissions by 73% from 2005 levels and NOx emissions by 54% at the approximately 1,000 coal fired electrical generation plants in the eastern half of the country.

Now the U.S. EPA is preparing for the release later this year of CO2 regulations for power plants by releasing the list of industrial CO2 emitters. Electrical generation and automobiles and trucks account for 74% of the carbon dioxide emissions in the United States. Last summer the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Transportation’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) finalized the new millage and emission standards for automobiles and light trucks for model year 2012 through 2016. The EPA GHG standards require these vehicles to meet an estimated combined average emissions level of 250 grams of carbon dioxide (CO2) per mile in model year 2016, equivalent to 35.5 miles per gallon (mpg).

Since 1990 global CO2 emissions have gone from 21 billion tons of CO2 to 29 billion tons of CO2 in 2009 according to data from the International Energy Agency (IEA). Global emissions of CO2 increased 38% despite a 14.7% decrease below their 1990 level for the Kyoto Participants and the United States increased of about 7% above 1990 levels. The bulk of the increase has come from China, Africa, Middle East, India and the rest of Asia. The United States and 35 Kyoto participants represent less than half the world CO2 emissions and that is shrinking every year. Now the United States appears on track to reduce their CO2 emissions over 1% below their 1990 levels and fulfill the promise that President Obama made at the Copenhagen meeting in 2010 when the President pledged to reduce U.S greenhouse gas emissions to 17% below the 2005 levels by 2020.

World CO2 Emissions and Durban

More than 10,000 ministers, officials, activists and scientists from 194 countries are meeting in Durban in what appears to be a last ditch attempt to extend the Koyoto treaty and to try and to try to tax all the developed nations to pay for climate impacts on poorer nations through the Green Fund for climate assistance. Durban, the 17th annual Conference of the Parties (COP17) to be held since the United Nations' first began to coordinate an attempt to control global warming through carbon dioxide control has reached the final stretch. At this point it appears that the conference will close without any agreement. The European Union refuses to extend without the United States and China committing and neither country appears likely to make any legally binding commitment. The Climate Change movement has lost its urgency. The failure to get any binding international agreement in Durban may be caused by the global economic problems or by the failure of the Global Warming/ Climate Change models to predict temperatures. Levels of greenhouse gases are higher than the worst-case scenario outlined by climate experts just four years ago, but temperatures have not risen as projected by the climate models.

The 1997 Kyoto Protocol bound developed countries to cuts of about 5-6% from 1990 levels in global emissions of greenhouse gases as represented by carbon dioxide by 2012. President George W. Bush rejected Kyoto in 2001, saying it did not impose emissions limits on emerging industrialized nations – chiefly China and India, and now China has surpassed the United States as the world largest emitter of greenhouse gases. China (6.9 billons tons in 2009), the United States (5.2 billion tons 2009), India, the Russian Federation (1.5 billion tons in 2009) and the European Union (3.0 billion tons in 2009) were the largest contributors to global emissions growth to a total of almost 30 billion tons of CO2 in 2009 (the specific breakout for 2010 was unavailable from the International Energy Agency, IEA, but the increase worldwide was about 6% 2010). Canada, who signed the Koyoto pact blew through their CO2 levels exceeding their 2000 levels and joined the United States as among the highest per capita emitters on the planet. Canada had agreed to cut emissions 6% below 1990 levels by 2012 as part of the Kyoto Protocol, but Canada’s emissions (0.7 billion tons in 2009) are now 17 % above 1990 levels, largely because of increased emissions related to the development of the Canadian oil industry. Canada failed to meet its Kyoto targets because they refused to take the large economic hit necessary for a big, cold, northern, sparsely populated, oil and natural gas producing nation to achieve them. There are no meaningful penalties for missing a Kyoto emission target. Even the most cooperative countries are missing their Kyoto targets.

However, Japan has been faithful to their word. Japan's Trade Ministry said on Tuesday emissions of CO2 fell 5.6 % to 1.075 billion tons in the year ended March 2010, bringing the Japanese below their Kyoto goal of 1.186 billion tons a year, when taking into account the volumes of carbon offsets Japan has bought from abroad. However, Japan announced that they are reconsidering plans to cut carbon-dioxide emissions by 25% by 2020 due to closing of a significant portion of its nuclear power generation, and the costs of the carbon-credit programs that cost the county almost $11 billion to purchase the carbon offsets by investing in carbon abatement programs in other countries.

The failure to get a binding international agreement in Durban has the Climate Model believers in a frenzy as CO2 emissions are up 6%, to over 30 billion tons, in 2010 40% above the 1990 level. This level of CO2 is higher than the worst-case scenario outlined by climate experts just four years ago. Securing a commitment from major polluters such as China and India to sign up to a Kyoto II in the future – a move spearheaded by the British and European Union Energy Secretaries appear doomed to failure. The failure to get a binding international agreement in Durban may be caused by the continuing steep rises in annual global CO2 emissions without an accompanying significant rise in global temperatures. Levels of greenhouse gases are higher than the worst-case scenario outlined by climate experts just four years ago, but temperatures have not risen as projected by the climate models. The relationship of climate change to worldwide CO2 levels may not be the one assumed in the climate models. In addition, the difficulty in reducing CO2 levels worldwide can be seen in the diagram above. Canada, Russia, and Japan withdrawing from the Koyoto Treaty and the United States not making a binding commitment despite President Obama’s commitment in Copenhagen to reduce United States emissions of CO2 17% by 2020 has doomed Durban.