As the last days of the year wind down, Congress scurries around to finish its unfinished business, almost always with "surprises" for the regulated community. 

The House appropriations committee issued a final version of the 2012 Omnibus spending bill last week.  It has, of course, significant implications for energy and environment spending, particularly spending related to climate change.

The omnibus bill cuts spending on climate change programs, prohibits the appointment of a Federal "Climate Change Czar" and cuts spending on climate change research.

Most stunning, of course, are changes to EPA funding.  The summary of the omnibus bill issued by the House appropriations committee states that EPA funding has been reduced by almost 19% in 2011:

The conference agreement funds EPA at $8.4 billion, which is a $233 million reduction below the FY 2011 enacted level and $524 million below the President’s request. Overall, funding for EPA has been reduced by $1.8 billion (-18.4%) in calendar year 2011.

The conference agreement cuts $14 million (-6%) in clean air and climate research programs; $12 million (-9.5%) in EPA’s regulatory development office; and $14 million (-5%) to air regulatory programs. In addition, the bill includes:

• A 33% reduction to the EPA Administrator’s immediate office;
• A $101 million reduction for the Clean Water and Drinking Water State Revolving Funds, which received $6 billion in “stimulus” funding;
•  A $78 million reduction for EPA operations/administration, which includes $41 million
• (-5%) in cuts to EPA’s regulatory programs;
• A $14 million (-6.2%) reduction for uncoordinated climate and other air research; and
•  An elimination of $4 million in funding that EPA has used to delay the processing of Appalachian mining permits.

These are some other provisions in the omnibus bill that impact the green building community:

1. Funding for CBECS may be restored–Funding for the Commercial Building Energy which was defunded this year may be restored, paving the way for updating the baseline building energy data at the heart of Energy Star. Division B, Title III on page 44 provides $105,000,000 for the Energy Information Administration. 
2. New energy efficient lighting standards won’t go into effect– The omnibus bill includes a rider which would prevent the new energy efficient lighting standards from going into effect on January 1st, and actually rolls back standards in effect since 2008 for floodlights. 
3. Innovative Technology Loan Guarantee Program has $0.00 appropriated for 2012.  The loan guarantees are for eligible clean energy projects (i.e., agreeing to repay the borrower’s debt obligation in the event of a default), and by providing direct loans to eligible manufacturers of advanced technology vehicles and components. 
4. Appointment of Administration “Czars” for climate change and urban affairs prohibited.

A full version of the final bill is available here, a summary from the appropriations committee is here.

Related posts:

• Low-Cost Solar in Nevada
• Tax Relief Act Provides Critical Extensions for Cleantech
• The Solar Northeast: Connecticut
• Energy Programs Brace for Deep Spending Cuts After Debt Deal
• China is World Leader In Clean-Tech Investments, Report Says

On Dec. 16, the Obama administration is expected to finally release new standards for protecting us from mercury and other toxic heavy metals from power plant emissions. All of us have reason to be glad, but parents (and anyone who might ever want to be a parent) should especially welcome this long overdue protection. My wife Mary and I co-authored a column for Sierra magazine that explains why:

It started before we even brought our first child home from the hospital. Electrical sockets needed to be covered, cabinet doors secured, knives stowed out of the reach of tiny hands. We live in earthquake country, so we finally got around to bolting our bookshelves to the wall.

Like any parents, we’ll do anything in our power to keep our kids safe. We know that our power has its limits, but that doesn’t stop us from trying.

Getting the house ready was just the beginning. We were also determined to protect our daughter from less-obvious dangers. Well aware of the toxic chemicals that increasingly find their way into our bodies, we shopped for the healthiest foods we could find — and still do.

Of course, not all Americans have the same easy access to fresh, organic, and healthy foods that we do. In lots of neighborhoods it can be hard to find decent produce. But even so, you’d think there’d still be plenty of nutritious alternatives to fast food, like the humble tuna sandwich.

Not anymore. Tuna, like many types of fish, is often contaminated with mercury, a neurotoxin that damages the brain and nervous system, particularly in fetuses and young children. Mercury in the bloodstreams of pregnant and nursing women can result in birth defects like learning disabilities, reduced IQ, and cerebral palsy.

We’ve known about the dangers of mercury for a century. (It’s what made the Mad Hatter mad.) We’ve also known how the fish get contaminated: primarily via coal-fired power plants, whose smokestacks spew almost 50 tons of mercury annually into the air we breathe.

A heavy metal like mercury does not stay in the atmosphere for long. It eventually falls to Earth, inexorably working its way up the food chain until it winds up in the tuna sandwich in some kid’s lunch box — or on the sushi platter ordered by a young woman who’s just become pregnant.

And that’s where we get mad — both as environmentalists and as parents: There is absolutely no reason our kids should be exposed to this poison. The EPA was first charged with limiting toxic air pollutants like mercury more than 20 years ago, during the George H. W. Bush administration. The technology to filter mercury from coal-plant smokestacks is widely available. But there’s still no national limit on how much mercury a coal-fired power plant can release into the air. It’s like debating what kind of childproof latches to put on the cabinets while the kids are playing with the knives.

This past March, the EPA finally proposed a standard that would require coal plants to keep more than 90 percent of their mercury emissions out of the atmosphere. The new rule would also apply to such cancer-causing metals as arsenic, chromium, and nickel. Filtering out these poisons would prevent hundreds of thousands of illnesses and up to 17,000 premature deaths each year. It would be the single biggest measure to save American lives in a generation.

Incredibly, it might not happen. As we write this, the EPA is under attack by politicians whose first allegiance is not to American children but to the polluters who don’t want to clean up their dirty power plants. Possible reason: The polluters shelled out nearly $30 million to these members of Congress who continue to vote for dirty air.

We know that it’s impossible to protect our children from every possible harm. Inevitably, knees will get scraped and probing fingers will get pinched in cabinet doors, and that giant leap off the porch might end in a tumble. But to endanger our kids solely for the sake of polluters’ bottom line? As parents, and as Americans, that’s something we can never accept.

Article by Michael Brune, appearing courtesy ecopolitology.

Related posts:

• Mercury rising, controls next
• We Can Clean the Air, Create Jobs and Power the Economy at the Same Time
• Protecting Historic Progress on Clean Air
• EPA Proposes Transport Rule to Aid Downwind States
• EPA Finalizes Greenhouse Gas Reporting Requirements

As part of Toyota's commitment to our nation's environment and public lands, today we announced that we have made a $3 million grant to the National Environmental Education Foundation to improve the capacity of community-based organizations, often called "friends groups", who are helping to protect and preserve our public lands. We made our announcement today at Baltimore's Fort McHenry National Monument and Historic Shrine, joined by EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, CEQ Chair Nancy Sutley, NEEF President Diane Wood and Baltimore students and residents who are proud to have this public land in their city.

The organizations that support parks and other public lands are invaluable to maintaining and promoting them in their hometowns, but they often lack the resources they need for this critical work. The Toyota grant will support these local organizations in becoming as effective as possible in their work on public lands, whether it's a small city green space or one of our treasured national parks.

Supporting these groups' efforts in communities across the country makes us proud. Their dedication and initiative are tremendous. We have seen this interest in protecting our public lands grow with more than 170,000 volunteers participating in NEEF's annual National Public Lands Day, of which Toyota has been the national sponsor for what will be the 14th consecutive year in 2012.

The public-private partnership that this grant represents echoes President Obama's America's Great Outdoors Initiative, which encourages grassroots, community-based conservation. We hope other members of the business community will join us in supporting the great work of these groups and their volunteers, who exemplify the spirit of this nation.

For more information about the Toyota grant and NEEF's Every Day Grants program for these organizations, please visit www.neefusa.org.

Article by Michael Rouse, Vice President, Philanthropy and Community Affairs at Toyota Motor Sales, USA, Inc.

Related posts:

• Value of Conserving Habitats Could be Worth $500B Annually to World’s Poor
• The First Large-Scale Solar Energy Plants on Public Lands
• Salazar: Bush Offered Oil and Gas Industry Candy Store
• Standing Up Renewable Energy on America’s Lands and Oceans
• Why Clean Energy on Tribal Land isn’t Excess-it’s Essential

Greenhouse gases are such materials as Carbon Dioxide and Methane that are implicated in global warming. From a permitting point of view it is a new phenomena. Today, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued the first Texas Greenhouse Gas (GHG) permit for the Lower Colorado River Authority (LCRA) Thomas C. Ferguson Power Plant in Llano County, Texas. LCRA is modernizing and expanding its plant by replacing its 37 year old unit with a new more efficient and reliable natural gas powered unit.

The Lower Colorado River Authority or LCRA is a nonprofit public utility that was created in November 1934 by the Texas Legislature. LCRA’s mission is to protect people, property and the environment by providing public services for more than one million people in Central and Southeast Texas. These services include electricity, water, flood management, water and wastewater utilities, public parks along the Highland Lakes and lower Colorado River, and community and economic development services to rural and suburban communities.

“The new LCRA plant will use improved environmental controls and install modern high efficiency equipment,” said EPA Regional Administrator Al Armendariz. “LCRA is leading the way by providing Texans an efficient and reliable source of clean power.”

LCRA is the first company in Texas to complete the GHG permit process and obtained a final permit in about 8 months. Earlier this year, the company proposed to replace an old 440 megawatt electricity generating boiler with a new reliable 590 megawatt combined cycle gas-fired plant. The new plant relies on an advanced electric power generation system that reduces nitrogen oxide emissions and also includes advanced environmental monitoring of GHG emissions.

“We appreciated EPA’s work on our project,” said LCRA General Manager Becky Motal. “We believe that replacing our aging Thomas C. Ferguson Power Plant with this new combined-cycle natural gas plant benefits everyone. The region will benefit from the latest environmental controls and our customers will benefit from our ability to better manage costs with a plant that will use about 35 to 40 percent less fuel than traditional gas-fired plants.”

The Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, the state agency that should be responsible for issuing such permits, said it was pleased the Lower Colorado River Authority’s would now be able to move forward.

But “we see no need for — or any environmental benefit from — EPA’s greenhouse gas permit,” said Andy Saenz, a TCEQ spokesman. “The TCEQ authorized the project on Sept. 1, 2011 after careful review that determined the permit was protective of the environment and fully compliant with all state environmental regulations.”

The EPA took over the state’s greenhouse gas permitting program after Texas refused to comply with new regulations designed to decrease air pollution believed to contribute to climate change. Texas, the biggest emitter of greenhouse gases and industrial pollution in the nation, was the only state that refused to comply, arguing among other things that the regulations would be too costly for businesses in a weak economy.

Article by Andy Soos, appearing courtesy Environmental News Network.

Related posts:

• The Facts on Domestic Oil and Gas Production
• Greenhouse Gas Permitting System Powers Forward
• Using Ocean Temperature Differences to Create Renewable Energy
• USPTO Announces Extension and Expansion of Green Technology Pilot Program
• Permit Process in PV Installations

President Obama believes that American families should never be asked to choose between the health of their children and the health of the economy. That is a false choice. Four decades of success under the Clean Air Act have shown clearly that strong environmental protections and a strong economy can go hand in hand. 

To build on the tremendous success of the Clean Air Act, the Obama Administration has taken the most significant steps in a generation to reduce harmful pollution and promote public health. The new standards that we have issued or proposed – to curb interstate pollution, reduce mercury exposure, and make our cars more fuel efficient, just to name a few – will result in significant economic and health benefits each year. 

Just over forty years ago, the Senate did something that would be almost unthinkable today: It passed major legislation by a unanimous vote. That legislation was the Clean Air Act of 1970, signed by President Richard Nixon. Two decades later, the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 were passed, again with large bipartisan majorities in both houses of Congress, and signed by President George H. W. Bush. 

But today, Republicans in Congress are trying to use our current economic climate as an excuse to roll back clean air protections that Americans have counted on for decades. Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) is currently leading an effort to block the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR) that would save tens of thousands of lives each year. In doing so, Senator Paul is using the Congressional Review Act to repeal this important rule and prohibit the Environmental Protection Agency from protecting American families from cross-state pollution in the future. 

Let’s be clear – this brazen effort doesn’t just undermine the public health, it also undermines the judgment of the courts. In 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Washington, D.C. Circuit found critical flaws in the Bush Administration’s efforts on interstate air pollution and directed the EPA to issue a replacement rule as quickly as possible. After seeking and incorporating extensive input from the public, the states, environmental and public health groups, as well as industry, the EPA finalized the Cross-State Air Pollution rule in July of this year. 

What does the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule Do?

This rule is designed protect the health of millions of Americans by helping states reduce harmful air pollution through the deployment of readily available technologies that are already in use at many facilities across the country. By reducing dangerous pollution emitted by power plants, the rule protects residents in dozens of states who are unknowingly subjected to toxic emissions from plants often hundreds of miles away.

What benefits will the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule provide for American Families?

The emission reductions from this final rule will have significant and immediate public health benefits, each year preventing:

* 13,000 to 34,000 premature deaths,
* 19,000 cases of acute bronchitis,
* 15,000 nonfatal heart attacks,
* 19,000 hospital and emergency room visits,
* 1.8 million days when people miss work or school,
* 400,000 cases of aggravated asthma, and
* 420,000 cases of upper and lower respiratory symptoms.

In addition, the benefits of this rule are expected to far outweigh its costs, producing over $100 billion in net benefits each year.

We will continue to take smart sensible steps that ensure we protect the health of our families, while also opposing efforts to undermine the Clean Air Act.

Article by Heather Zichal, Deputy Assistant to the President for Energy and Climate Change.

Related posts:

• Why Are Investors Bearish on Clean Energy?
• New Orleans Tells Resident Not to Install Solar Panels
• Nations Meet on Climate Cash, U.N. Sees Long Haul
• Developing vs. Developed Nations — A Climate Negotiations Dilemma
• Building Partnerships, Conserving Lands

Over the last two and half years the Obama Administration, under the leadership of EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, has taken some of the strongest actions since the enactment of the Clean Air Act four decades ago to protect our environment and the health of our families from air pollution.

On Friday, President Obama asked Administrator Jackson to withdraw the draft Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards at this time, as work is already underway to update a 2006 review of the science that will result in the reconsideration of the ozone standard in 2013.

Several state and local officials spoke out about the President’s announcement and commitment to working with state and local governments.

Michigan Governor Rick Snyder:

“The President made the right decision to stop this move by the EPA.  The present ozone standard was last reviewed a mere three years ago.  Michigan companies have worked hard to meet the standard, because we all support a healthy environment. It is important to balance environmental goals with the need for economic development, particularly as Michigan and the rest of the nation work to recover from the recession”

Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa:

“In our current economic climate, we must do everything we can to stimulate the economy short of taking a step back in the unprecedented environmental gains this administration has already made. This is the sort of balanced approach we need to create jobs and also improve the quality of air, health and life for countless Americans.”

East Moline, Illinois Mayor John Thodos:

“We in the Quad Cities are very happy with the President’s announcement.  We take clean air very seriously, but it’s difficult enough to create jobs without these new standards.  I fully support the President’s decision.”

Texas State Representative Garnet Coleman:

“I want to thank President Obama and his administration for listening and working with state and local governments. Withdrawing the new standard allows an update of the science and the reconsideration of the ozone standard in 2013 while granting our state and local governments and businesses more regulatory certainty and flexibility. President Obama and his administration are strong partners with those of us on the state and local level of government in the fight for clean air and public health.” 

Bettendorf, Iowa Mayor Mike Freemire:

“The standards are quite rigorous as they are, and the threat of new standards from a manufacturing standpoint aren’t helpful for the economy or growing jobs.  It’s a prudent move.  Everything is a balancing act.  I applaud the President for his decision.”

Scott County, Iowa Board of Supervisors Chair Tom Sunderbruch:

“I certainly support the President's move to withdraw the draft Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards at this time…I think delaying the standard change is the right thing to do.  I also believe making sure you have the right science to know what to do next is important.  I believe those responsible for setting the regulations should continue to research the issue.”

Article by Cecilia Muñoz, Deputy Assistant to the President and Director of Intergovernmental Affairs

Related posts:

• The Case for National Security: Clean Energy
• Winning the Clean Energy Future in Communities Across America
• PV Production Follows Policy In Illinois
• Victory for the Jersey Shore: Governor Vetoes Offshore LNG Port
• White House Backs $5 Billion Clean Energy Tax Credit

Am I average?

That’s the question that often hits me when someone quotes an ‘average’ statistic. The ‘average’ business or household seems almost mythological. Few of us fall right on that point on the line.

The same is true when it comes to often quoted energy efficiency savings statistics. For example, the US Environmental Protection Agency says that replacing one old-fashion incandescent light bulb with a compact fluorescent light will save on average $69 over the product’s lifetime.

Will your business save that much by installing new light bulbs?

Several factors come into play, some that you can control, the most obvious being how much you turn on the light.

Another important dynamic, not often discussed, is your electric rate. Rates vary dramatically through the United States. In coming up with the $69 savings figure, the EPA assumed an electric rate of 11.3 cents/kWh. If you operate a business in North Dakota, you’re paying a lot less than that for electricity, about 6.8 cents/kWh, so your savings from a CFL will be lower. If you’re in Hawaii, you are paying a lot more, about 28 cents/kWh, so your savings will be greater.

Take a look at this frequently updated chart of electricity rates in the 50 states. Is your business in one of the pricier states? If so, an investment in new lighting may quickly pay back. After you’ve found your electricity rate, you can go to this calculator and gauge what you’ll save if you switch from old-fashioned incandescent light bulbs to CFLs. This will give you a closer idea of your savings, although even with this calculation we still are dealing to some degree with averages. The electricity rate in the chart is the average for utilities in your state. Your utility can provide your specific rate.

Businesses are increasingly contemplating saving energy – and costs – by installing efficient lighting, not only CFLS, but LEDs and lighting controls. This is partly because lighting accounts for somewhere between 20 percent and 50 percent of the electricity commercial enterprises use, so the savings can be substantial. On a larger societal level, efficient lighting for businesses is important because US commercial buildings represent 47 percent of the total growth in energy expected in the US between 2010 and 2020.

Elisa Wood is a long-time energy writer whose work appears in many of the industry’s top magazines and newsletters. She is publisher of the Energy Efficiency Markets podcast and newsletter.

Related posts:

• Help Consumers Save Money by Saving Energy
• New Web App To Save Electricity
• Get Your Energy Plan in Order to Increase Efficiency and Save Money
• Time To Get Energy Efficient
• Changes to T12 Fluorescent Lighting Coming Soon

24 million American children ride school buses daily. On average, these students spend an hour and a half each day in a school bus. School buses drive more than 4 billion miles each year. School buses are the safest way for children to get to school. However, pollution from older diesel vehicles have health implications for everyone, especially children.

Clean School Bus USA (EPA based) brings together partners from business, education, transportation, and public-health organizations to work toward the goals of reducing the potential health impact on children. School districts, with the help of federal grants (and state grants in some cases) have been working to replace the oldest, most polluting buses, and to upgrade others with better pollution control equipment. (The Diesel Reduction Act was reauthorized for five years in December 2010, but it’s unclear how much money Congress will appropriate to continue the program.) The way drivers operate the buses can also have a big impact on the air quality for kids.

School buses are a necessary evil despite some issues such as diesel pollution fumes.

Unnecessary school bus idling pollutes the air, wastes fuel, and causes excess engine wear. Fortunately, it’s easy to implement practices that reduce school bus idling. This also applies to all of those people who drive their kids to school and let their cars idle in lines.

Idling school buses can pollute air in and around the bus. Exhaust from buses can also enter school buildings through air intakes, doors, and open windows. Diesel bus exhaust from excessive idling can be a health concern.

Idling buses waste fuel and money. When idling, a typical school bus engine burns approximately half a gallon of fuel per hour. School districts that eliminate unnecessary idling can save significant dollars in fuel costs each year.

Any bus built before 1998 should be considered a prime candidate for replacement because older vehicles are designed with higher air emission standards in mind. The ideal current goal is to have a fleet of buses built since 2007, when a new law went into effect requiring closed crankcases and advanced emissions controls to limit the emissions of soot and other harmful pollutants. On older buses, having drivers close the crankcase reduces pollution inside buses significantly.

Despite the air quality problems that persist in older buses, the bus is still the most efficient and least-polluting way to get most kids to school as well as the safest. If everybody drove to school there would be fifty vehicles for every bus spewing fumes and blocking traffic flow.

Article by Andy Soos, appearing courtesy Environmental News Network.

Related posts:

• So What Does the Clean Air Act Do?
• Solar Powered Schools for Small Town America
• Air Pollution Costs Billions to the European Union
• A Shining Example from the Sunshine State
• Air Pollution in China Contributing to Drought — Food Shortages Possible

E-waste is the largest growing waste stream in the country. Americans generate 2.5 million tons of e-waste a year— more than enough to fill a line of dump trucks from our Nation's capital to Disney World. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates 140 million cell phones – 65,000 tons – are discarded in the U.S. each year. Some are shoved into drawers, others end up in landfills. Today, only about 10 percent are collected for reuse or recycling.
 
On July 20 the EPA invited Sprint, along with Dell and Sony, to Austin, Texas to be among the first corporations to publicly commit to follow a new national e-waste strategy. We were honored to join EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, General Services Administrator Martha Johnson, and White House Council on Environmental Quality Chair Nancy Sutley as they issued the National Strategy for Electronic Stewardship.
 
The collaborative work of the EPA, General Services Administration (GSA), Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) and the dozen additional agencies represented on the e-waste task force that developed the National Strategy over the past eight months is an example to all who manufacture and distribute electronic products. Sprint commends the Federal Government's commitment to ensure that all electronics it uses are reused or recycled at a certified recycler. An e-waste solution will require on-going collaboration, shared commitment, accountability and meaningful action from companies in all sectors. I am proud that Sprint – along with Dell and Sony – has implemented sustainable business practices early on.

Sprint's Electronics Stewardship Policy sets aggressive e-waste goals, including the collection of nine phones for reuse or recycling for every 10 sold by 2017. To date, Sprint has collected more than 25 million mobile phones— keeping them out of landfills, helping to conserve resources, reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and preventing air and water pollution.
 
For the second year, Sprint received the Sustainability Leadership Award from the International Electronics Recycling Conference for our full-lifecycle product approach. On the design end, we have more environmentally-friendly devices and accessories than any other carrier. We recently launched our fourth green device and first eco-friendly Android phone – the new Samsung Replenish. It's made with 82 percent recyclable materials, and is the first phone in the U.S. with a solar battery cover.  And it's the first mobile device to receive UL Environment's Platinum certification. 
 
At the other end of the lifecycle, Sprint's industry-first Electronics Stewardship Policy gave us the opportunity to work with environmental organizations like BSR, Basel Action Network and ABI Research to develop goals. The new national e-waste policy will enhance progress in the area of sustainable electronics management. Sprint's commitment to the new national strategy will boost our goals in several areas including greater transparency in our operations.
 
Sprint is honored to be among the first companies to sign the new sustainable electronics management policy and to make our commitment public.

Article by Dan Hesse, CEO of Sprint

---

Related posts:

• The Greening of NASCAR
• Are Auto Telematics the New iPhone?
• Waste Could Provide 7 Percent of Spain’s Electricity, Study Says
• EU Lawmakers Seek Stricter Rules for Electronic Waste
• LanzaTech Produces Important Chemical Component from Industrial Waste Gases

---

Copyright © 2008-2010 CleanTechies, Inc. and Partners
This feed is for personal, non-commercial use only.
Written by The White House Blog. To the comments
(Digital Fingerprint: b008bf120fbd682ffd7ee5812c495c9a)

Rating: 5.0/5 (1 vote cast)

]]> http://blog.cleantechies.com/2011/08/22/sprint-declares-commitment-as-e-waste-impacts-grow/feed/ 0 http://blog.cleantechies.com/2011/08/09/obama-announces-fuel-economy-standards-commercial-vehicles/ http://blog.cleantechies.com/2011/08/09/obama-announces-fuel-economy-standards-commercial-vehicles/#comments Tue, 09 Aug 2011 17:30:56 +0000 The White House Blog 65377 at http://www.whitehouse.gov

Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)

]]>

President Obama today will announce new fuel efficiency standards that will save American businesses that operate and own commercial vehicles approximately $50 billion in fuel costs over the life of the program. These work trucks, buses, and other medium- and heavy duty vehicles will be required to meet fuel efficiency and greenhouse gas emission standards for the first time ever beginning in 2014.

The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) developed the standards in close coordination with the companies that met with the President today as well as other stakeholders, following requests from companies to develop this program.

“While we were working to improve the efficiency of cars and light-duty trucks, something interesting happened,” said President Obama.  “We started getting letters asking that we do the same for medium and heavy-duty trucks.  They were from the people who build, buy, and drive these trucks.  And today, I’m proud to have the support of these companies as we announce the first-ever national policy to increase fuel efficiency and decrease greenhouse gas pollution from medium-and heavy-duty trucks.”

Under the comprehensive new national program, trucks and buses built in 2014 through 2018 will reduce oil consumption by a projected 530 million barrels and greenhouse gas (GHG) pollution by approximately 270 million metric tons. Like the Administration’s historic car standards, this program – which relies heavily on off-the-shelf technologies – was developed in coordination with truck and engine manufacturers, fleet owners, the State of California, environmental groups and other stakeholders. 

The joint DOT/EPA program will include a range of targets which are specific to the vehicle types and purposes.  Vehicles are divided into three major categories: combination tractors (semi-trucks), heavy-duty pickup trucks and vans, and vocational vehicles (like transit buses and refuse trucks).  Within each of those categories, even more specific targets are laid out based on the design and purpose of the vehicle. This flexible structure allows serious but achievable fuel efficiency improvement goals charted for each year and for each vehicle category and type. 

The standards are expected to result in significant long-terms savings for vehicle owners and operators.  A semi-truck operator could pay for the technology upgrades in under a year and realize net savings of $73,000 through reduced fuel costs over the truck’s useful life.  These cost saving standards will also reduce emissions of harmful air pollutants that can lead to asthma, heart attacks and premature death.

Beyond the direct benefits to businesses that own and operate these vehicles, the program will also benefit consumers and businesses by reducing costs for transporting goods, and spur growth in the clean energy sector by fostering innovative technologies and providing regulatory certainty for manufacturers.

Read more about the new standards on EPA’s web site  and on NHTSA’s web site

Related posts:

• Major Fuel Economy Boost Envisioned by Obama Administration
• Obama Rolls Out New Fuel Standards for Trucks
• Toward a Generation of Green Vehicles: 60 MPG is Next Step
• US Agencies Move to Green Heavy Vehicles
• DOT, EPA Propose Nation’s First-Ever Emissions, Fuel-Efficiency Standards for Trucks and Buses