EPA Issues New GHG Permitting Guidelines

EPA today announced it is making available guidance and tools to help state and local air permitting authorities identify pollution reduction options for greenhouse gases (GHGs) under the Clean Air Act. These tools are part of EPA’s common sense approach to GHG permitting of the largest emissions sources outlined this spring in the tailoring rule. GHG pollution threatens the health and welfare of all Americans, and contributes to climate change, according to EPA.

“EPA is working closely with its partners at the state and local levels to ensure permitting for greenhouse gases runs smoothly,” said Gina McCarthy, assistant administrator for EPA’s Office Air and Radiation. “To identify GHG reduction options, EPA and the states are now ready to apply the same time-tested process they have used for other pollutants.”

EPA recommends that permitting authorities use the best available control technology (BACT) process to look at all available emission reduction options for GHGs. After taking into account technical feasibility, cost and other economic, environmental and energy considerations, permitting authorities should narrow the options and select the best one. EPA anticipates that, in most cases, this process will show that the most cost effective way for industry to reduce GHG emissions will be through energy efficiency.

The guidance does not define or require a specific control option for a particular type of source because BACT is determined on a case-by-case basis. Instead, the guidance and resources provide the basic information that permit writers and applicants need to address GHGs. The guidance also provides examples of how permitting requirements could apply.

Starting Jan. 2, 2011, industries that are large emitters of GHGs, and are planning to build new facilities or make major modifications to existing ones, will work with permitting authorities to identify and implement BACT to minimize their GHGs. This includes the nation’s largest GHG emitters, such as power plants, refineries and cement production facilities. Emissions from small sources, such as farms and restaurants are not covered by these GHG permitting requirements.

EPA is accepting public feedback on the guidance for the next few weeks on any aspect that contains technical or calculation errors or where the guidance would benefit from additional clarity.

Information on EPA’s guidance: http://www.epa.gov/nsr/ghgpermitting.html.

Comments

Thu, Dec 2, 2010

Isn't using "EPA", "common sense", and GHG in the same sentence the definition of insanity? This administration's approach to this issue shows once again its arrogance and lack of objective scientific support for its goals.

Tue, Nov 30, 2010 Eric Downey Alaska

Scary. Americans will continue to consume, so the EPA is merely shifting America's means of production away to developing countries with few environmental standards. I bet the net effect on global GHG is an increase. And as a bonus, we lose the wealth-creating mfg. and energy jobs. What happens when the economy loses it's engine? Will your children be better off?

Tue, Nov 30, 2010 Allen

Yeah, let's not regulate GHG and continue to cook the earth. As long we get ours forget future generations.

Tue, Nov 16, 2010 Mike Manassas

Our newly elected Congress needs to realize that cap and trade may be dead but the USEPA is capable of inflicting significant damage to the economy with these dangerous regulations. All GHG regulations need to be stopped, either through repeal or defunding USEPA programs.

Tue, Nov 16, 2010 Tom Maryland

Before fleecing corporate America, wouldn't it make sense for EPA to clearly show the American people how this regulation has actually affected the environment in places where it has been used previously - like Europe? Oh - that's because there is no correlation between the regulation and "improving environmental quality."

Tue, Nov 16, 2010 PC Missouri

So, when the cost of the 'control technology' is more than the facility, who gains? Follow the money.

Tue, Nov 16, 2010 Rapid City

Hold on to your wallet. These new rules are designed to take more and more of your dollars, at absolutely no gan for you, or the planet. It is a shame such a scam can be pulled on the United States.

Tue, Nov 16, 2010 Frank Brunner Erie Pa.

This will killl the economy. Better solutions are needed before we charge ahead.

Add your Comment

Your Name:(optional)
Your Email:(optional)
Your Location:(optional)
Comment:
Please type the letters/numbers you see above