Comments Charlie Peters has made

Catching a (ethanol) waiver

California CalEPA Secretary Linda Adams, signed a MOU with the UN in China on earth day. China gets about 50% of the world carbon tax and the China government gets a 50% tax of the credits.

* China goods and services may increase

* We pay the carbon tax and EXXON, GE, Wal-Mart, BP, DuPont, GM, IBM, Microsoft, SHELL and friends may all share in the public/private partnership of corporate and NGO welfare
On US EPA opens public comment period on California emissions waiver posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago 3 Responses

Catching a (ethanol) waiver

A random "Smog Check" inspection & repair audit, ethanol cap and elimination of dual fuel CAFE credit can cut CA car impact over 50% in 2009. (Over 2000 tons per day HC, NOx & CO2.) Improved performance of AB32.On US EPA opens public comment period on California emissions waiver posted 9 months, 3 weeks ago 3 Responses

Cellusic ethanol: It might be a bust

Who is BP/DuPont, what is biobutanol?

 * Clean Air Performance Professionals  On Thus spake Chairman Peterson of the House Ag Committee posted 1 year, 10 months ago 10 Responses

Schwarzenegger's nominee to fight global warming h

Schwarzenegger's nominee to fight global warming has a checkered past

By Nicholas Miller, Sacramento News & Review, 07.18.2007

When Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger fired California Air Resources Board chairman Robert Sawyer last month, he set off a chain reaction that exposed an agency badly shaken. Within weeks, ARB executive director Catherine Witherspoon resigned, and Capitol testimony by her and Sawyer revealed unprecedented interference by the governor's staff over the ARB's implementation of last year's Global Warming Solutions Act.

Schwarzenegger tapped Mary Nichols to head the board. Her nomination was seen as a shrewd recovery; Nichols' qualifications--chairwoman of the ARB under Governor Jerry Brown and administrator with the U.S. EPA under President Bill Clinton--seemed beyond doubt.

But while some critics question whether Nichols will be able to effectively curb emissions within the industry-beholden Schwarzenegger administration--"I don't think anybody should be under the illusion that appointing Mary Nichols completely solves all of the problems at ARB," offered Sierra Club's Bill Magavern, who gingerly supports her nomination. "It's a first step."--others fear she'll be part of the problem.

Their evidence? Nichols' performance at the U.S. EPA and her role in enforcing 1990's Clean Air Act amendments, which they contend casts doubts on her ability to effectively fight global warming in California.

"I am under the impression that Mary has been wired to the major corporate agenda for decades," argued Charlie Peters, a longstanding smog-check and environmental activist who heads up the New Jersey-based Clean Air Performance Professionals. "She's being put in there because she does what the corporate agenda wants."
Nichols' tenure at the national EPA marked a decided shift in U.S. policy for establishing and enforcing emissions reductions. A June 2000 report by D.C.-based nonprofit Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility documents that Nichols, then-EPA assistant administrator for air and radiation, played an instrumental role in undermining regulations and compliance.

According to the PEER report, Nichols in 1995 touted open-market trading as the "new paradigm for market-based control," referring to a paper by attorney Richard Ayres of the O'Melveny and Myers law firm as inspiration for the new direction.

But there was a conflict of interest: Nichols' husband, attorney John Daum, who represented Exxon in the infamous Exxon Valdez oil spill case Baker v. Exxon, was an employee of O'Melveny and Myers.

In July 1994, Nichols had issued a permanent recusal that forbid her to participate "in any EPA matter in which the law firm of O'Melveny and Myers is providing representational services." Her support for the Ayres concept of open-market trading in 1995 seemingly violated the recusal, but the EPA ignored the apparent conflict.

In 1995, the report says Nichols "directed EPA regional administrators to de-emphasize the Clean Air Act's deadlines for attainment plans [or emissions-reductions goals] and instead shift to an emphasis on what she described as 'market-based alternatives.'" This gave states the green light to initiate carbon-credit-trading programs without a national cap on overall emissions or "quantification protocols," which would have established a common currency for trading.

The Clean Air Act Corporation, an O'Melveny and Myers client, later would become the nation's largest broker of these open-market-trading credits.

A 1996 EPA inspector general report challenged the validity of Nichols' plan, citing "invalid credits or weaken[ed] enforcement." But Nichols and fellow EPA officials were unconcerned. "Mary Nichols and I remain committed to developing a model rule which minimizes the federal government's involvement in the day-to-day operation of the market for these trades," stated John Seitz, director of the EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards.

In 1997, Nichols testified before Congress that greenhouse-gas emissions are "especially well-suited to be addressed through emissions trading because the problem is caused by cumulative emissions well mixed in the atmosphere."

PEER executive director Jeffrey Ruch explained the folly of this approach to SN&R: "You were trading one type of pollutant for another, and you didn't have any kind of way to ensure you were getting apples for apples," he said. "In many cases you were trading apples for the promise of a future guava." Essentially, the carbon credits being traded were illusory; they didn't necessarily have any net environmental benefit.

Nichols left the EPA in 1997, but her "new paradigm" de facto policy remained--and proved disastrous.

"She was a midwife to a stillborn in a sense that she wasn't around when [the open-market trading] collapsed," beginning in New Jersey in 2002, Ruch explained. A 2003 Department of Environmental Protection report observed that New Jersey's Open Market Emissions Trading program failed to establish an emissions cap, did not verify the validity of credits and allowed facilities to build compliance strategies entirely on the prospect of using emission credits without the guarantee of finding a seller.

"Instead of being a trial balloon, it turned into a trial buffoon," Ruch quipped. "This was sort of looked upon as the next new wave in air-pollution control, and it collapsed under its own weight."

Experts are conflicted as to what this means for California and the implementation of last year's Global Warming Solutions Act.

"I'm not sure that I had high expectations to begin with," Ruch admitted. "In a sense, you have a governor that's just cleaned out the Air Resources Board under circumstances that seem highly unusual and controversial." He views Nichols as "somebody who's promising independence but certainly understands that there's some requirement of flexibility."

"I think her appointment helps bring some stability back to the agency" and alleviates a "major problem" for the governor, said Sierra Club's Magavern.

"To me, the cornerstone of [the global-warming act's] implementation is direct emissions reductions," Magavern continued. "You can't put market mechanisms in place just by having the governor's office, through back channels, dictate that to the Air Board."

The question now is whether Nichols will share this priority--and take a stand against Schwarzenegger's interference.

http://www.newsreview.com/sacramento/Content?oid=353445

Clean Air Performance Professionals
On How progressive can legislation be if it's never allowed to make progress? posted 2 years, 4 months ago 7 Responses

ethanol/oil partnership

Saturday, July 14, 2007

 NO on AB118

• Currently $0.51 per gallon goes to oil refiners for adding 5.6% ethanol to California gasoline. That is about $500,000,000.00 per year corporate welfare.

• AB118 may add over $1.00 per gallon to additional gasoline profits in California

• This is about the money from your pocket

• The corn ethanol waiver in the 2005 federal energy bill will lower gasoline prices, improve miles per gallon, lower oil use and improve the air.

• NO on AB118. Contact your elected officials and share your opinion

Clean Air Performance ProfessionalsOn Interviews and info on the presidential candidates' environmental positions posted 2 years, 4 months ago 53 Responses

ethanol stinks

NO on AB118

Corn ethanol policy is good for gasoline refiners

Corn ethanol policy increases oil use and increases oil profit

The proposed car tax of AB 118 Nunez is an oil company welfare program

Italy used public/private partnerships as a business model in the early '40s

In my opinion the corn ethanol waiver allowed in the 2005 fed energy bill would lower gas prices, improve miles per gal, lower oil use and improve the air.

Your phone book lists your elected officials, sharing your opinion with the folks that make our rules might help

Clean Air Performance Professionals
On Interviews and info on the presidential candidates' environmental positions posted 2 years, 4 months ago 53 Responses

Ethanol & Climate Change

Does corn ethanol policy for California gas result in more oil use and profit?

Some folks think so

Another Arnold appointee up for Senate conformation, Chief Sherry Mehl, DCA/BAR, has never found out if what is broken on a Smog Check failed car gets fixed, never

Clean Air Performance ProfessionalsOn How progressive can legislation be if it's never allowed to make progress? posted 2 years, 4 months ago 7 Responses

Taking the long way home: What's wrong with H2

CAPP supports a Smog Check inspection & repair audit, gasoline oxygen cap and elimination of dual fuel CAFÉ credit to cut car impact over 50% in 1 year.

 * A Smog Check audit would cut toxic car impact in ½ in 1 year  

 * An oxygenate (ethanol) waiver would stop $ billions in refinery welfare.

* About 1/3 of the gasoline used by new cars nationwide is allowed by the "renewable fuel" CAFE credit
On Warning: techno-engineering speak ahead posted 2 years, 11 months ago 43 Responses