Tag Archives: Pollution & Waste

GM wants to help shape the EPA’s next clean car standard

Posted on by

GM wants to exclusively sell electric vehicles by 2035, and it's now trying to nudge the US government toward the same goal. The automaker has teamed up with an advocacy group, the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), to develop recommended principles for the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) car emissions standards from the 2027 model year onward. The guidelines are meant to accelerate EV adoption in a socially conscious way — and, of course, help GM's bottom line.

The brand wants standards that ensure at least half of new vehicles sold by are zero-emissions by 2030, with a 60 percent reduction in emissions across a lineup compared to 2021. They need to address multiple pollution sources (such as CO2, nitrogen oxides and particles) and be "performance-based," GM argues. The company also believes there should be an optional pathway to speed up the launch of breakthrough emissions-reducing technology, and that standards should ensure the benefits of reduced pollution apply to everyone (such as vulnerable communities). Not surprisingly, GM hopes for tight coordination between the public and private realms, including complementary investments.

GM and the EDF want a quick decision process. They'd like the standards to be proposed this fall, and completed by fall 2023. The standards should last until 2032 at a minimum, the partners said, but they also hoped the EPA would extend that to 2035.

There might not be much opposition to the basic concept. President Biden already wants half of new vehicles to be emissions-free by 2030, and the EPA reversed Trump-era standards rollbacks in December. Meanwhile, California, Massachusetts and New York State expect to ban sales of new gas-powered cars by 2035 and frequently push for stricter standards than the federal government. The principles and resulting EPA standards would theoretically help politicians reach these targets sooner by encouraging manufacturers to electrify their fleets quickly.

Whether or not GM and the EDF get their way isn't clear. The EPA isn't guaranteed to take the principles to heart, and a change of presidents could lead to weaker rules. We'd add that GM has altered its stance on emissions reductions depending on who's in office. The firm backed the Trump administration's efforts to revoke waivers letting California set tougher requirements, only to change its tune after Biden won the 2020 election. Still, we wouldn't expect GM to back out any time soon. The company has staked its future on EVs, and it stands to profit if the market shifts to eco-friendly vehicles a little sooner.

Amazon’s emissions increased dramatically last year despite carbon neutrality goal

Posted on by

Despite the company's commitment to decrease its carbon footprint, Amazon's emissions grew by 18 percent last year, according to the annual sustainability report it released today. While online shopping increased during the pandemic’s second year, the company also rapidly expanded its number of warehousing operations — faster than consumer demand could support. For the entirety of 2021, the company’s activities emitted the equivalent of more than 71.54 million metric tons of carbon dioxide (for comparison, that's one and a half times the amount the U.S. government emitted in 2019.)

But this figure is undoubtedly a drastic undercount. While Amazon does include emissions from its warehouses and logistics network, as Revealreported this year, the company employs a sort of loophole. While other retailers, like Walmart and Target, account for pollution related to any goods they sell, Amazon only counts carbon emissions for Amazon-branded products, which make up around one percent of total sales. Third-party sellers (that is, the entities responsible for the other 99 percent of what's sold through its online marketplace) are left to perform their own carbon emissions accounting independently — regardless of whether those sales are fulfilled through Amazon's warehousing or not. Many of these businesses, however, likely do not meet the minimum threshold for mandatory emissions reporting

Environmental experts have long voiced concerns over the immense climate toll of Amazon’s operations, especially its rush and two-day shipping options. Despite the lack of progress, Amazon’s goal of reaching net-zero carbon emissions by 2040 was noted in the report.

The company doubled its network of fufillment centers during the pandemic to keep up with the spike in demand, at a rate that outpaced consumer sales. Amazon reported a $3.8 billion net loss in the first quarter of 2022, the bulk of which came from an investment in more warehouses and staff. But the company now appears to be scaling back its building efforts amidst a decline in orders. USA Todayreported today that Amazon has paused or delayed the building of 18 warehouses in 12 states.

Supreme Court ruling guts the EPA’s ability to enforce Clean Air Act

Posted on by

In yet another historic reversal of long standing precedent, the US Supreme Court on Thursday ruled 6 - 3 along ideological lines to severely limit the authority of the Environmental Protection Agency in regulating carbon emissions from power plants, further hamstringing the Biden administration's ability to combat global warming. 

The case, West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency, No. 20-1530, centered both on whether the Clean Air Act gives the EPA the power to issue regulations for the power industry and whether Congress must "speak with particular clarity when it authorizes executive agencies to address major political and economic questions," a theory the court refers to as the “major questions doctrine.”

In short, the court holds that only Congress, not the EPA, has the power to regulate emissions. “Capping carbon dioxide emissions at a level that will force a nationwide transition away from the use of coal to generate electricity may be a sensible solution to the crisis of the day,” Chief Justice Roberts wrote in the majority opinion. “But it is not plausible that Congress gave EPA the authority to adopt on its own such a regulatory scheme... A decision of such magnitude and consequence rests with Congress itself, or an agency acting pursuant to a clear delegation from that representative body.”

“Hard on the heels of snatching away fundamental liberties, the right-wing activist court just curtailed vital climate action,” Jason Rylander, an attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity’s Climate Law Institute, responded in a press statement Thursday. “It’s a bad decision and an unnecessary one, but the EPA can still limit greenhouse gases at the source under Section 111 and more broadly through other Clean Air Act provisions. In the wake of this ruling, EPA must use its remaining authority to the fullest.”

The EPA case grew out of the Trump administration's efforts to relax carbon emission regulations from power plants, what it called the Affordable Clean Energy Rule, arguing that the Clean Air Act limited the EPA's authority to enact measures "that can be put into operation at a building, structure, facility or installation." A divided three-judge appeals court struck down the rule on Trump's last full day as president, noting that it was based on a "fundamental misconstruction" of the CAA and gleaned only through a “tortured series of misreadings.” 

Had it gone into effect, the Affordable Clean Energy Rule would have replaced the Obama administration's Clean Power Plan of 2015, which would have forced the energy industry further away from coal power. The CPP never went into effect as the Supreme Court also blocked that in 2016, deciding that individual states didn't have to adhere to the rule until the EPA fielded a litany of frivolous lawsuits from conservative states and the coal industry (the single-circle Venn diagram of which being West Virginia).   

“The E.P.A. has ample discretion in carrying out its mandate,” the appeals court stated. “But it may not shirk its responsibility by imagining new limitations that the plain language of the statute does not clearly require.”   

This decision doesn't just impact the EPA's ability to do its job, from limiting emissions from specific power plants to operating the existing cap-and-trade carbon offset policy, it also hints at what other regressive steps the court's conservative majority may be planning to take. During the pandemic, the court already blocked eviction moratoriums enacted by the CDC and told OSHA that it couldn't mandate vaccination requirements for large companies. More recently, the court declared states incapable of regulating their own gun laws but absolutely good-to-go on regulating women's bodily autonomy, gutted our Miranda Rights, and further stripped Native American tribes of their sovereignty.  

“Today, the court strips the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of the power Congress gave it to respond to the most pressing environmental challenge of our time,” Justice Elena Kagan wrote in the minority. Kagan was joined by Justices Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor in her dissent. 

Supreme Court ruling guts the EPA’s ability to enforce Clean Air Act

Posted on by

In yet another historic reversal of long standing precedent, the US Supreme Court on Thursday ruled 6 - 3 along ideological lines to severely limit the authority of the Environmental Protection Agency in regulating carbon emissions from power plants, further hamstringing the Biden administration's ability to combat global warming. 

The case, West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency, No. 20-1530, centered both on whether the Clean Air Act gives the EPA the power to issue regulations for the power industry and whether Congress must "speak with particular clarity when it authorizes executive agencies to address major political and economic questions," a theory the court refers to as the “major questions doctrine.”

In short, the court holds that only Congress, not the EPA, has the power to regulate emissions. “Capping carbon dioxide emissions at a level that will force a nationwide transition away from the use of coal to generate electricity may be a sensible solution to the crisis of the day,” Chief Justice Roberts wrote in the majority opinion. “But it is not plausible that Congress gave EPA the authority to adopt on its own such a regulatory scheme... A decision of such magnitude and consequence rests with Congress itself, or an agency acting pursuant to a clear delegation from that representative body.”

“Hard on the heels of snatching away fundamental liberties, the right-wing activist court just curtailed vital climate action,” Jason Rylander, an attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity’s Climate Law Institute, responded in a press statement Thursday. “It’s a bad decision and an unnecessary one, but the EPA can still limit greenhouse gases at the source under Section 111 and more broadly through other Clean Air Act provisions. In the wake of this ruling, EPA must use its remaining authority to the fullest.”

The EPA case grew out of the Trump administration's efforts to relax carbon emission regulations from power plants, what it called the Affordable Clean Energy Rule, arguing that the Clean Air Act limited the EPA's authority to enact measures "that can be put into operation at a building, structure, facility or installation." A divided three-judge appeals court struck down the rule on Trump's last full day as president, noting that it was based on a "fundamental misconstruction" of the CAA and gleaned only through a “tortured series of misreadings.” 

Had it gone into effect, the Affordable Clean Energy Rule would have replaced the Obama administration's Clean Power Plan of 2015, which would have forced the energy industry further away from coal power. The CPP never went into effect as the Supreme Court also blocked that in 2016, deciding that individual states didn't have to adhere to the rule until the EPA fielded a litany of frivolous lawsuits from conservative states and the coal industry (the single-circle Venn diagram of which being West Virginia).   

“The E.P.A. has ample discretion in carrying out its mandate,” the appeals court stated. “But it may not shirk its responsibility by imagining new limitations that the plain language of the statute does not clearly require.”   

This decision doesn't just impact the EPA's ability to do its job, from limiting emissions from specific power plants to operating the existing cap-and-trade carbon offset policy, it also hints at what other regressive steps the court's conservative majority may be planning to take. During the pandemic, the court already blocked eviction moratoriums enacted by the CDC and told OSHA that it couldn't mandate vaccination requirements for large companies. More recently, the court declared states incapable of regulating their own gun laws but absolutely good-to-go on regulating women's bodily autonomy, gutted our Miranda Rights, and further stripped Native American tribes of their sovereignty.  

“Today, the court strips the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) of the power Congress gave it to respond to the most pressing environmental challenge of our time,” Justice Elena Kagan wrote in the minority. Kagan was joined by Justices Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor in her dissent. 

Automotive giant Stellantis pleads guilty to diesel emissions fraud

Posted on by

As expected, Stellantis, the parent company of Dodge and Jeep, has pleaded guilty to criminal conspiracy charges related to its efforts to conceal the amount of pollution produced by its diesel engines. The world’s fifth-largest automaker agreed this week to pay $300 million in penalties to end a multi-year investigation by the US Justice Department, Reutersreported on Friday.

Federal prosecutors accused Stellantis of violating the Clean Air Act, alleging the automaker attempted to deceive US regulators by selling vehicles it knew did not meet national emissions standards. The Justice Department said Fiat Chrysler Automobiles, which merged with Peugeot parent company PSA to form Stellantis in 2021, installed illegal software designed to cheat government emissions tests.

According to the agency, the company “purposely” programmed its cars to produce fewer emissions during testing than under normal circumstances. The settlement covers approximately 100,000 vehicles sold in the US between 2014 and 2016, including SUVs and pickup trucks produced by the automaker for its Jeep and Ram brands.

In addition to paying a fine, Stellantis has agreed to submit Clean Air Act compliance reports to the Justice Department as part of a three-year probation period. Additionally, three Stellantis employees are awaiting trial for criminal charges related to the case. The deal comes five years after Volkswagen famously pleaded guilty to its own emissions scandal. “Dieselgate” saw the German automaker eventually pay more than $20 billion in fines and legal settlements.

Lung Association report suggests zero-emission vehicles could save 110,000 US lives

Posted on by

The American Lung Association has released a report detailing the public health benefits of a complete national shift to zero-emission vehicles from 2020 to 2050. Apparently, if all new passenger and heavy-duty vehicles sold by 2035 and 2040, respectively, are zero-emission models, 110,000 deaths could be avoided in the United States over the next 30 years. That figure came from the association's analysis, which also projects that the Biden administration will achieve its target of having 100 percent carbon pollution-free electricity by 2035.

With no air pollution affecting people's health, up to 2.79 million asthma attacks could also be avoided. And perhaps to convince companies to get onboard with the transition, the association also made it a point to mention that up to 13.4 million lost workdays could be avoided with cleaner air. 

Harold Wimmer, National President and CEO of the American Lung Association, said in a statement:

"Zero-emission transportation is a win-win for public health. Too many communities across the U.S. deal with high levels of dangerous pollution from nearby highways and trucking corridors, ports, warehouses and other pollution hot spots. Plus, the transportation sector is the nation’s biggest source of carbon pollution that drives climate change and associated public health harms. This is an urgent health issue for millions of people in the U.S."

The widespread transition to zero-emission vehicles would generate up to $1.2 trillion in public health benefits, the report noted, and $1.7 trillion in climate benefits. Communities and counties with the highest percentage of lower-income families and People of Color in the US would benefit greatly from the shift, since they have areas with highly concentrated doses of pollution from diesel hotspots, power plants and other fossil fuel facilities. The top metro locations that would benefit the most include Los Angeles, New York, Chicago, San Jose, Washington, Miami, Houston, Detroit and Dallas Fort-Worth. 

To be able to ensure that all new vehicles sold by 2040 are zero-emission and that the grid can supply the country with pollution-free electricity within 15 years, the association has listed a series of recommendations. They include a call for increased funding for non-combustion electricity generation and transportation, extending and expanding incentives for zero-emission vehicle purchases and "converting public fleets to zero-emission vehicles immediately." The association is also urging the Congress to pass legislation that would accelerate the transition and for the EPA to adopt standards that would require lower carbon emissions from vehicles before the shift is complete. 

Tesla settles with EPA over Clean Air Act violations in California

Posted on by

The US Environmental Protection Agency has reached a settlement with Tesla after the agency found that the automaker violated the Clean Air Act at its factory in Fremont, California. In particular, the EPA determined that Tesla violated the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants for Surface Coating of Automobiles and Light-Duty Trucks from October 2016 to September 2019.

Tesla, the EPA said, failed to develop and implement a work practice plan to minimize air pollutants emissions from the storage and mixing of materials used in vehicle coating. It also failed to correctly perform the monthly calculations needed to prove that its coating operations complied with the federal standards for hazardous air pollutants. Finally, Tesla apparently failed to keep required records of the calculations for its air pollutants emissions rate. "People living in communities that are near sources of hazardous air pollutants may face significant risks to their health and environment," the agency wrote in its announcement. 

According to CNBC, the paint shop at Tesla's factory in Fremont suffered several fires within that period. The news organizations talked to employees back in 2018 who claimed that the company pushed to hit production goals at the expense of fire and environmental considerations. (If you'll recall, Tesla was struggling to hit Model 3 production goals at the time.) Those employees claimed that months before a fire in April that year, the shop's sprinkler heads were clogged and were coated with at least an inch of thick paint. Exhaust systems that were supposed to carry clean air in and out of the building were allegedly coated with thick paint, as well. 

"Today's enforcement action against Tesla reflects EPA's continued commitment to ensure compliance with federal clean air laws," EPA Pacific Southwest Regional Administrator Martha Guzman said in a statement. Tesla will only have to $275,000 to settle its violations, however, which is a drop in the ocean for a company that reported a $5.5 billion in net income last year.

US greenhouse emissions increased by 6.2 percent last year

Posted on by

Over the last year, US greenhouse emissions increased by 6.2 percent compared to 2020 levels, according to a new report from the Rhodium Group. The jump puts the country further behind meeting the reduction targets put forward by the Paris climate agreement. Under the deal, the US has pledged to reduce its greenhouse emissions between 50 percent and 52 percent below 2005 levels by 2030. As of last year, they were 17.4 percent below that benchmark. That’s a step back from the 22.2 percent reduction the country had achieved the year prior.

Behind the increase in overall emissions were corresponding jumps in pollution generated by the country’s transportation and power sectors. Compared to 2021, those sectors generated an additional 10 percent and 6.6 percent of greenhouse emissions. Driving those increases was a 17 percent increase in reliance on coal-generated power and more people driving after a pandemic-related downturn.

The report underscores how important is it is for the US to clean up its power grid and transportation sector. Another recent study found that wind and solar could meet 85 percent of the country’s current electricity needs. So much of whether the US will meet its Paris Agreement commitments will depend on if the country can mobilize investment as part of policies like President Biden’s Build Back Better Plan. The fate of the bill is uncertain, but what is clear is that the technology is there to enable a clean transition. Until recently, natural gas had never been more affordable, and yet it was still more expensive than renewable sources of energy. 

US greenhouse emissions increased by 6.2 percent last year

Posted on by

Over the last year, US greenhouse emissions increased by 6.2 percent compared to 2020 levels, according to a new report from the Rhodium Group. The jump puts the country further behind meeting the reduction targets put forward by the Paris climate agreement. Under the deal, the US has pledged to reduce its greenhouse emissions between 50 percent and 52 percent below 2005 levels by 2030. As of last year, they were 17.4 percent below that benchmark. That’s a step back from the 22.2 percent reduction the country had achieved the year prior.

Behind the increase in overall emissions were corresponding jumps in pollution generated by the country’s transportation and power sectors. Compared to 2021, those sectors generated an additional 10 percent and 6.6 percent of greenhouse emissions. Driving those increases was a 17 percent increase in reliance on coal-generated power and more people driving after a pandemic-related downturn.

The report underscores how important is it is for the US to clean up its power grid and transportation sector. Another recent study found that wind and solar could meet 85 percent of the country’s current electricity needs. So much of whether the US will meet its Paris Agreement commitments will depend on if the country can mobilize investment as part of policies like President Biden’s Build Back Better Plan. The fate of the bill is uncertain, but what is clear is that the technology is there to enable a clean transition. Until recently, natural gas had never been more affordable, and yet it was still more expensive than renewable sources of energy. 

EPA announces strictest fuel efficiency standards ever, reversing Trump-era rollback

Posted on by

On Monday, the Biden administration finalized new fuel efficiency standards designed to limit greenhouse gas emissions put out by passenger vehicles. By 2026, the Environmental Protection Agency will require that automaker fleets travel an average of about 55 miles per gallon, up from the 37 miles per gallon standard they’re held to as of this year.

The agency estimates the policy will save American drivers between $210 billion and $420 billion through 2050 on fuel costs. Over the life of a model year 2026 vehicle, that will translate to about $1,080 in individual consumer savings after factoring in the higher initial cost of a more efficient vehicle. The EPA estimates the policy will also prevent the release of about 3.1 billion tons of carbon dioxide over the same time frame.

“We followed the science, we listened to stakeholders, and we are setting robust and rigorous standards that will aggressively reduce the pollution that is harming people and our planet – and save families money at the same time,” EPA Administrator Michael Regan said.

The new standards effectively mirror those put forward by the Obama administration in 2012. Had former President Trump not weakened those in 2018, they would have required automakers to make vehicles that could travel about 51 miles per gallon by 2025.

Jeff Alson, a former EPA senior engineer, told The New York Times, the new standards recapture the emissions cuts carved out by the Trump administration. “That’s good, but it’s not going to get us anywhere near the level we’ve got to get to reduce vehicle emissions enough to protect the planet,” he said.

We've reached out to Ford, General Motors, Honda, Toyota and Stellantis for comment on today's rulemaking. 

The new standards mark the most significant climate action taken to date by President Biden. As of 2019, the transportation sector has been the single largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the US. However, the announcement comes just one day after Senator Joe Manchin of West Virginia said he would not support the Democratic party’s Build Back Better plan. Among other items, the approximately $2 trillion plan includes a proposal for up to $12,500 in individual tax subsidies for Americans who buy an EV as their next car.