New EPA Rule Will Require Use of Best Technologies to Reduce Greenhouse Gases from Large Facilities/Small businesses and farms exempt


From the EPA:

Contact Information: Cathy Milbourn 202-564-7849 202-564-4355

LOS ANGELES– U.S. EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson announced today in a keynote address at the California Governor’s Global Climate Summit that the Agency has taken a significant step to address greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions under the Clean Air Act. The Administrator announced a proposal requiring large industrial facilities that emit at least 25,000 tons of GHGs a year to obtain construction and operating permits covering these emissions. These permits must demonstrate the use of best available control technologies and energy efficiency measures to minimize GHG emissions when facilities are constructed or significantly modified.

The full text of the Administrators remarks is available at

“By using the power and authority of the Clean Air Act, we can begin reducing emissions from the nation’s largest greenhouse gas emitting facilities without placing an undue burden on the businesses that make up the vast majority of our economy,” said EPA Administrator Jackson. “This is a common sense rule that is carefully tailored to apply to only the largest sources — those from sectors responsible for nearly 70 percent of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions sources. This rule allows us to do what the Clean Air Act does best – reduce emissions for better health, drive technology innovation for a better economy, and protect the environment for a better future – all without placing an undue burden on the businesses that make up the better part of our economy.”

These large facilities would include power plants, refineries, and factories. Small businesses such
as farms and restaurants, and many other types of small facilities, would not be included in these requirements.

If the proposed fuel-economy rule to regulate GHGs from cars and trucks is finalized and takes effect in the spring of 2010, Clean Air Act permits would automatically be required for stationary sources emitting GHGs. This proposed rule focuses these permitting programs on the largest facilities, responsible for nearly 70 percent of U.S. stationary source greenhouse gas emissions.

With the proposed emissions thresholds, EPA estimates that 400 new sources and modifications to existing sources would be subject to review each year for GHG emissions. In total, approximately 14,000 large sources would need to obtain operating permits that include GHG emissions. Most of these sources are already subject to clean air permitting requirements because they emit other pollutants.

The proposed tailoring rule addresses a group of six greenhouse gases: carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6).

In addition, EPA is requesting public comment on its previous interpretation of when certain pollutants, including CO2 and other GHGs, would be covered under the permitting provisions of the Clean Air Act. A different interpretation could mean that large facilities would need to obtain permits prior to the finalization of a rule regulating greenhouse gas emissions.

EPA will accept comment on these proposals for 60 days after publication in the Federal Register.

The proposed rules and more information:

33 Responses to New EPA Rule Will Require Use of Best Technologies to Reduce Greenhouse Gases from Large Facilities/Small businesses and farms exempt

  1. Rob N. Hood October 2, 2009 at 9:02 am #

    The liberals are exempting small business and farms?? What the heck?! Next thing you know Paul will be voting for these sneaky slime balls!

  2. Neil F. AGWD October 2, 2009 at 8:12 pm #

    An unproven hypothesis with no concrete evidence to back it up is what this is all about. It is a complete waste of time and money. And it is you and I who will pay for it.

  3. Rob N. Hood October 3, 2009 at 5:31 pm #

    So that glass is half empty and not half full? You guys are hard to please, that’s for sure.

    What we must demand — and this is enormously important, very few people are talking about it — is a new Wall Street. A Wall Street not designed to make hundreds of millions of dollars for their CEOs, but a Wall Street designed to help increase manufacturing in the United States, create decent jobs, help small businesses do something for the productive economy. Another area that we need to return to is our disastrous trade policies which allow Corporate America to throw American workers out on the street, move to China, pay people 50 cents an hour, bring those products back into this country. So there is a lot of work in front of us in terms of the economy. Let’s stay focused on this issue, and don’t believe anybody who is telling you, “the recession is over.”

  4. paul wenum October 4, 2009 at 2:41 am #

    The “bottom line.” If you are to match workers in China for example getting say, $500.00 to $1,000.00 per month in China versus $5,000.00 per month in the US, it is a “no brainer.” 56%, if not more of american workers salaries/benefits come out of every dollar earned. Which if you outsource to China, could be 20-30%. It is a no brainer, Economists know it but the labor unions will not acknowledge as well as the government backing labor unions will not allow a change. The last report I read was GM’s average cost per employee is/was over $88.00 per hour. Toyota in Lexington, Ky was $44,00 and they are non-union. I’m not anti-union Bottom line is to match competition. If we don’t we will be a third world country. Companies are desperate to make a profit to STAY in business to keep their employees getting paid ! It is pure economics. What am I missing here????

  5. Neil F. AGWD October 4, 2009 at 8:28 am #

    You are right. But there are those like our friend Rob who would rather see companies go out of business than make a profit. Economics is a code word for Capitalism. And Capitalism is EVIL!!!!!

  6. Hal Groar October 4, 2009 at 10:11 am #

    I will never understand how people tie CEO pay to companies laying off people. If the govt. would leave business alone I think you would see a quicker recovery from unemployment. California keeps shooting itself in the foot with all their eco-friendly mandates. I guess just sit back and watch them implode and all their business move west. So much for the third largest economy….that’s what liberal policys will do to a state.

  7. Neil F. AGWD October 4, 2009 at 3:09 pm #

    That’s what their goal is. If you destroy all economic opportunity what is left is a fertile feild to plant socialism and communism. They want it so people have no other option than to turn to the government for a solution.

  8. Rob N. Hood October 4, 2009 at 3:45 pm #

    We already have corporate socialism- problem is the average person doesn’t benefit from this, and probably never will- not in right-wing America. You are simply paranoid, brainswashed, and too biased to see reality.

  9. Neil F. AGWD October 4, 2009 at 6:57 pm #

  10. Paul Wenum October 4, 2009 at 7:03 pm #

    Reality might hit you in the arse when they off-shore your job due to the expense to keep you employed. Hal is right. Let free capitalism work, not social engineering. Maybe if Mexico takes over California things may change? Just kidding.

  11. Neil F. AGWD October 4, 2009 at 7:10 pm #

    That is your problem right there. You don’t see us as equals. You think we are “simply paranoid, brainswashed, and too biased to see reality.”
    I really get tired of your arrogance, as if no other opinion than your own has merit.
    It’s called a point of view. Everybody has a slightly different one which makes them all unique. Some are much like yours, and some are the exact opposite of yours.
    Would you please stick to your point of view, and stop attacking those that diverge from your views? It is childish. Grow up.

  12. Rob N. Hood October 4, 2009 at 9:57 pm #

    America needs to grow up. GM did go out of business or did you not notice that?? The unions took a big hit and now nobody makes that kind of money anymore and that IS free-enterprise working. So I dont’ know what the heck you both are talking about. You are very confused about reality.

  13. paul wenum October 5, 2009 at 12:00 am #

    Realty is,we can no longer compete in the global market with salaries that are paid to unions. Talk about health care? They have better cadillac care than people in the Senate!. I picked rock at $1.00 and hour. If I were union, It would be $12.00. That’s our problem. More off-shore, less employment. Simple economics my friend.

  14. Neil F. AGWD October 5, 2009 at 12:12 am #

    America needs to grow up? It was doing fine until you showed up.

  15. Rob N. Hood October 5, 2009 at 8:19 am #

    Unions only comprise a very small segment of the employed in case you would like to know (and in it’s hay-day more Americans lived the American dream than ever before or since). Your statement another silly but very harmful piece of right-wing propaganda (an oldy but a goody!). As if we need another example of how stupidly paranoid people can be check out the history of pinball on today. Even I was surprised by how stupid small-minded people can be. It is an example of how we as a Nation are “growing up” but alas, we still have a long way to go. Paul, you sound like someone stuck in the 70’s. Evolve, man. It is the salaries of CEO that are obscene, not workers. Jeez you guys are really something. Blind and paranoid.

  16. Dan October 5, 2009 at 10:02 am #

    GM went out of business? Really? It seems to me that the government poured heaps of money into GM and though they are restructuring and cutting lines, they are still in business, propped up by the feds, employing lots of expensive union workers to make cars that nobody wants. Doesn’t seem very “free market” to me. GM should have ceased to exist.

  17. Rob N. Hood October 5, 2009 at 10:32 am #

    They went out of business yes and then the govt revived them, just like they did to all the big banks. You people aren’t really paying attention to what I’m saying- you simplify everything, it’s really annoying. We have corporate socialism in this county, mainly thanks to the “Reagan Revolution.” I agree they and those big banks should have failed. Do you really thnik if we had a Repbulican president now he or she would have done ANYTHING differently?? Really? How naive are you people?? And No Dan they don’t make the kind of money they used to- that was the whole point really. Quit making crap up. Wake up and wise up. God it’s depressing…

    The United States is resigned as a nation to having socialized responsibility for privatized capitalism, therefore the U.S. government should move to having Socialized-Capitalism, rather than Privatized-Capitalism, so that the masses of the population of the United States receive benefit from Socialized-Capitalism, rather than only a select minority of privatized interests being subsidized by socialized responsibility for the privatized benefit of Privatized-Capitalism.
    Socialized Capitalism can provide both jobs for the masses of the population of the United States and socialized benefit to the masses of the United States beyond jobs and a paycheck; the obscene profits of capitalism when returned to the interests of the masses of the population, rather than a few greedy, self-serving private interests will reduce taxes for the masses of the population and provide a monetary resource for funding the government and maintaining the infrastructure of the United States.

    The time is past for the “smash and grab greed” of Privatized-Capitalism in the United States.

    The fact is, America is a plutocracy, run by corporate powers. The government is lobbied, financed and controlled by these powers (mostly, the Military Industrial Complex, the Oil companies and the Insurance companies). The US government is not afraid of the people, it is afraid of the Corporate bosses………… who pull ALL the strings.

    The time has come for socially responsible “Socialized-Capitalism” in the United States that will provide benefit for the many, rather than benefit for the few at the expense of the many.

  18. Neil F. AGWD October 5, 2009 at 6:52 pm #

    Then make it happen cap’n. Run for office and start making those changes. Stop crying about it and do it. I think you’ll find that the vast majority of the American people will disagree with you. So put up or shut up.

  19. Picotrain October 5, 2009 at 8:49 pm #

    Didn’t expect to see someone schooling everyone here RobN, nice work.

    To all of you that are falling for this and want to continue living in denial, I just want to remind you that history will be laughing at you and your grandchildren will hate you.
    Thanks, Thats all.

  20. paul wenum October 5, 2009 at 11:49 pm #

    Robbie Boy, GM is in bankruptcy due to lack of due diligence. They got fat and happy and with pressure from the unions made concessions to the unions that came back to haunt them as well as other companies. It is what happens to any corporation, LLC in America that does not listen to their CUSTOMERS as well as spending more than they take in. It is apparent that there is still that entitlement chip on your shoulder. Get rid of it and take that monkey off your shoulder and put it on someone’s shoulder other than ours.

    I don’t want my children and my children’s children working for the government for the next 50 years. Robbie Boy, you may have to work four jobs! Start thinking out of your liberal box. Enough said.

  21. Rob N. Hood October 6, 2009 at 8:07 am #

    Blame the unions. Good one, never thought of that before. Very innovative thinking youself. It was bad mangement plain and simple for many many years. You are the knee jerk conservative not thinking outside anything let alone a box. The unions made concessions as they always do, and then got screwed. Same thing happened with the airline industry and many others too. The GM bankruptcy didn’t hurt the company, and was actually the best thing for them and they knew it. Why? The worker’s now are paid much less and have fewer benefits. So who won, the workers? Nope, the company as usual. This had probably been planned for some time- conservatives have wanted to break the back of the last union stronghold, the auto indutry and now they’ve done it. Well done, another in the win column for corporate fascism. Unionism is practically dead in this country after being under attack for decades. Conservatives are singel-minded and tenacious. Your logic and reasoning, like most conservatives, is as usual incomplete and biased.

  22. Paul Wenum October 6, 2009 at 9:49 pm #

    Three of my close friends walked the line at NWA and I kepttelling them that they were making a good income with Full benefits, excellent pay etc but they said the unions told them to strike and they did. They did not want to, and now they have no job? Gee whiz where’s their benefits now Robbie???? Another friend at Whilpool back in the late/early 90’s had an excellent job. The company said they would invest millions to upgrade the plant if they made some conessions. My friend was against the strike and strikev they did. 280+ out of a job and they went to Kentucky. Don’t tell me about unions. You know nothing other than what the left spews in your ear. If you don’t “Follow the leader in the union” they know your name. Robbie boy, you have never been there. You read nothing but propaganda. Put the book down and join reality!!!!!

  23. Neil F. AGWD October 7, 2009 at 12:04 am #

    And this has what to do with AGW? Maybe we can get all of those out of work union folks some green jobs!!!
    Like, um, what excatly is a green job? Is that like gardening, or landscaping, arborists, or barnicle scraping? Or maybe we can get them jobs on wall street trading carbon credits!!!! Yeah right.

  24. Rob N. Hood October 7, 2009 at 8:04 am #

    They would have gotten screwed either way, and they had to at least try and fight for themselves- that’s the whole point of having a Union in the first place. And friends of yours thinking the same way you do doesn’t surprise me at all- that is extremely silly to base any kind of argument on that Paul. Utterly ridiculous. There were many others who wanted to strike I’m sure. The airline pilots surely did, every time. They foten vote on it you simple person, depending on the Union. I belonged to a union for five years so yes I know a little something aobut it, but I don’t go around and pretend I’m some kind of omniscient expert like you guys do. I can’t even begin to express my distaste for that kind of “logic” even if you can call it that.

  25. Rob N. Hood October 7, 2009 at 8:07 am #

    And Neil, green jobs will help our future economy, just as it is already doing in other countries who aren’t as stubborn and stupid as we seem to be. Your description of green jobs is very droll and inane, and I know you know better than that. Why you want ot fight new technology and a new kind of economy that is based upon consumer demands and other realities is funny since you guys worship the free-market etc. Why are you guys so confused all of the time?

  26. paul wenum October 7, 2009 at 11:04 pm #

    Neil, Rob’s comment on consumer demands?? Consumers like you, Ron and I want energy that is cost efficient etc. Rob’s a contradiction. Wind, Solar etc. is five-ten times nuclear. I say drill baby drill and lift all restrictions. Boy is “Robbie Boy” going to have a field day. So be it!!

  27. Rob N. Hood October 9, 2009 at 7:58 am #

    There have always been narrow-minded greedy people in the world and always will be unfortunately.

    Meanwhile, most of the world is continuing business as usual. In northern Canada developers are investing billions and clearing an area of the Boreal forest the size of Florida to access the oil sands. The oil is of poor quality, uses a great deal of water for extraction, and produces two barrels of toxic waste for every barrel of not very good oil. The effect is that we are destroying the carbon sink of the forest in order to access more carbon fuel. In Indonesia tropical forests are being cut and burned in order to plant palm oil plants to produce biofuels. In the Amazon the forests are being destroyed to grow soybeans for cattle feed.

    Here in the United States, we still allow developers to pave over good agricultural land for homes and malls. We are bulldozing the tops of mountains to access coal and burning trainloads of it every day to feed our electrical generators. We are decades behind Europe and Japan in the development of high speed rail that could replace some of the jet planes thrusting tons of CO2 into our skies.

  28. Rob N. Hood October 9, 2009 at 10:11 am #

    Another example of creative business opportunity in the good ol’ USA:

    Top American corporations are taking out “dead peasant insurance” on their workers without the workers even knowing it—and cashing in hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars on their employees, even though often times they don’t even offer those same employees decent health insurance coverage to allow them to survive illnesses. To top it off, these “dead peasant insurance” payouts are tax-free for the corporation that cashes in. It was a revelation so revolting that even ABC’s News’ mannequins admitted they were “stunned.”

    They shouldn’t be stunned. It’s part of an ongoing pattern for our ruling class and their view of America and Americans. It’s time we faced up to this grim fact. Too many of them are against us and against this country, weakening America to the point where it threatens to be permanently crippled, much like how the communists deformed Russia for decades. They had their bolsheviks; we have our billionaire-bolsheviks. The effect of these two rapacious ruling elites is the same: the state and the people serve the tiny ruling class; and when we’re not serving them, we can f—k off and die. Literally. Because that serves them too.

    The gap between wealthiest 10 percent and the rest of America is worse than at any time on record. Two-thirds of all income gains from 2002-7 went to the top 1 percent. The Walton family alone is worth more than the bottom 100 million Americans combined. Wal-Mart, among other big companies, is a major player in the “dead peasants insurance” game; it’s alleged that dead peasant insurance payouts are used for executive bonuses.

  29. paul wenum October 9, 2009 at 8:45 pm #

    You mean all corporations are out to get the “little Guy.”? Sam Walton got rich by giving people like you and I what we want at a reasonable cost. Is that a sin? Do I purchase my goods there?, no. I buy from local vendors that I know. Others with a limited income obviously go for the less expensive and they should. My immediate family does. I still do today with a coupon. You continue to blame successful businesses for your problems. Without small business, we would have unemployment at 25%. Yes, they make money. Is that a bad thing??? I pay my own health care insurance and it is not cheap. That said, I get what I pay for. Excellent care, yes, for an expensive price.

  30. Rob N. Hood October 11, 2009 at 11:07 am #

    Paul- I am 100% for small business and have said that MANY times. What is it about mutual conversation protocol you don’t understand? So, just becasue a corporation is successful, it can do whatever the hell it wants? What would get you upset about a corporation, anything at all? For crying out loud- the “dead peasant” thing (yes, that is really what they call it) doesn’t bother you??? Really?????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  31. paul wenum October 11, 2009 at 11:47 pm #

    Forget the “dead person” thing. Get on with reality.

  32. Rob N. Hood October 13, 2009 at 4:21 pm #

    That is reality Paul, I didn’t just make that up. You really can’t seem to accept let alone participate in any real discourse about anything. So odd.

  33. Paul Wenum October 13, 2009 at 9:01 pm #

    I have key man insurance for my business if I should die etc. and I do not believe in insurance of this type that you outline if the employee has no knowledge and benefit at death. As stated, all corporations are not evil, it is the Officers bhind that piece of paper that are. Just like any venture. I admit there are injustices in the business world. No different than other problems. There are always people after the “brass Ring.” On to Climate Scam!!

A project of Minnesota Majority, hosted and maintained by Minnesotans for Global Warming.