Refining Community Logo

Texas Ranks #1 Greenhouse Emissions

Home Forums Refining Community Energy Texas Ranks #1 Greenhouse Emissions

This topic contains 1 reply, has 1 voice, and was last updated by  Charles Randall 11 years ago.

  • Author
  • #1956

    basil parmesan

    Texas ranks No. 1 in greenhouse emissions

    EPA says state’s level is more than next two states’ combined.

    Matthew Tresaugu, Express-NewsCopyright 2012 Express-News. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

    By Matthew Tresaugue, Updated 02:15 a.m., Thursday, January 12, 2012

    Steam rises from towers at ExxonMobils Baytown refinery in April 2010. The refinery ranked among Americas top 50 emitters of greenhouse gases, EPA data shows.
    Photo: Associated Press File Photo / SA

    As the nation’s light switch and gas pump, Texas releases far more greenhouse gases into the air than any other state, according to federal data released Wednesday.Texas’ coal-fired power plants and oil refineries generated 294 million tons of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases in 2010, more than the next two states Pennsylvania and Florida combined, the data shows.
    The Environmental Protection Agency released the data by industrial facility for the first time as part of a broader effort to reduce emissions linked to global warming.
    The agency collected data from more than 6,700 industrial facilities that release at least 25,000 tons of greenhouse gases into the air a year.
    The threshold is comparable to the emissions from burning 131 railcars of coal, the EPA said.
    While industry-heavy Texas’ ranking did not surprise, environmental groups said data shows the need for federal regulation of greenhouse gases. The EPA said new rules for emissions of heat-trapping gases from power plants and other major sources could be released by the end of the month.It highlights the need to take action, especially considering the extreme weather we have seen lately, said Luke Metzger, director of Environment Texas, an advocacy group.
    The American Petroleum Institute, a leading industry trade group, said the federal data proves that there is no reason to include oil refineries in any new rules because they generate a small fraction of the nation’s greenhouse gas emissions, compared to coal-fired power plants.

    Air quality continues to improve, and we’re doing our part, said Howard Feldman, API’s director of regulatory and scientific affairs. The last thing we need now are more burdensome or unnecessary regulations that will create a drag on business efforts to invest, expand and put people back to work.
    Texas has become a key front in the battle over federal regulation of greenhouse gases.
    The state, with more facilities in the new EPA database than any other, has filed several legal challenges to block the agency from imposing the rules, but has yet to win in court.
    Gov. RickPerry and other Texas officials have said the federal efforts are based on faulty data and will harm the state’s economy.
    In Texas alone, 673 power plants, refineries and other large industrial facilities reported their greenhouse gas emissions to the EPA.
    California had the second-most facilities in the new database with 456.
    Of the Texas facilities, six power plants and ExxonMobil’s Baytown refinery ranked among America’s top 50 emitters of greenhouse gases, the data shows.Luminant’s Martin Lake coal-fired power plant in Rusk County was the state’s leader in 2010, emitting nearly 19 million tons of carbon dioxide and other heat-trapping gases.
    It ranked fourth nationally.
    Coal-fired power plants accounted for 61 percent of the state’s greenhouse gas emissions.
    Oil refineries and chemical producers contributed 15 percent and 13 percent, respectively.
    This is another reality check for the state, said Elena Craft, a scientist for the Environment Defense Fund. The data shows that power plants and refineries are mostly responsible for these emissions, and it’s time for the state to accept responsibility.
    Gina McCarthy, the EPA’s air quality chief, said the information would help federal and state governments and industry to cut emissions of greenhouse gases, just as the agency’s annual inventory of toxic releases does.
    The emissions data is reported by the facilities.
    McCarthy said she believes the emissions data is reliable.
    Industry has done a very good job, she said. This is robust, reliable and consistent data.

    Read more:

  • #4730

    Charles Randall

    Here is news item on industry emissions fed into EPA database – which is as expected just feed into liberal environmental groups who are already miss-using data and making false negative statements. It is also appropriate that EPA’s Air Quality Chief is named “McCarthy” who’s EPA trojan horse data was touted as a tool to “help” government and industry cut emissions. The EPA has morphed into another Administration Czar-like group which gets circumvent approval by Congress and the people they represent to enforce growing regulations that are at their core liberal environmental anti-business positions that are more about wealth redistribution than the environment (otherwise they would be taking action against China imports from the worlds leading polluter whose contaminated (lead, ect) products have actually been killing Americans).

    It was already a given that Texas, California and any of the other 4 states that now supply the nation with 75% of its gasoline & diesel would have higher greenhouse emissions than the 39 states that have little or no refining plants and have outsourced their production to the “Sensible Six”.
    Texas and other 5 states should “Reallocate” a portion of their emissions back to the “Nimbi” states they supply with fuel and put surcharge on its true source generators.

    But some real truth is here – if you catch it …. like the one line that says Refining & Chemical plants account for only 13-15% of emissions from 6700 plants whee 61% emissions come from coal plants (whose major emission is really just CO2 – Environmentalist have wrongly labeled a pollutant since it compromises 1/5th of Earths atmosphere and life would not exist without it).

    And in consistent comment on the ignorance environmentalist/journalist about all things in Oil industry – they still capture pictures of plants steam release and use as though its emission – Nice picture of XOM Baytown Delayed Coker behind trees however.

    Under the Obama administration & its new directives the EPA really has finally and totally crossed over to the “Dark Side” where it has become an agent for liberal environmental anti-oil & industry regulations that take marching orders and feed forced collected data back into groups like: the Environmental Defense Fund, Environmental Texas, National Resource Defense Council, and Serria Club to name just few (none of these are despite names are official government scientific groups to study the environment – despite names that try portray that false assumption).

    The blocking of Keystone XL pipeline, California Carbon Tax, EPA Clean Water, new NRC interpretations are just few of runaway regulations that are killing US jobs before they have chance to be reborn. The Environmentalist are of course despite in 2012 as their beloved and failed Kyoto is set to die as the treaty comes up for renewal – in light of real scientific conclusions about “man-made Greenhouse” emissions limited impact and global rejection of allowing developing nations to avoid emission regulations. These “Developing Nations” have globally stole jobs from responsible Western producers whose markets they have taken on thier road to become current world leaders in pollution. Canada, Japan and others have announced preemptive veto’s of treaty renewal – in the past US has been alone in its rejection & pursued its own “Blue Skies” program which unlike Kyoto did achieve its goals. The current EPA program allows little doubt that if this was not election year for Obama administration – he would be leading the parade to join Kyoto pact and knowing it would cost more US jobs that current EPA programs have.

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Refining Community