Ex-Secretary of California EPA Argues for Poop Power
According to Tamminen, this is a valuable energy source. (image: personal.psu.edu)
One man’s trash is another’s treasure, so the saying goes. According to Terry Tamminen, former secretary of the California Environmental Protection Agency, one man’s poop may be another’s power supply. In an op-ed for CNBC this week, Tamminen argues for a sustainable energy policy that includes making use of waste products of many kinds—including human and animal ones. At issue is the question of renewable portfolio standards (RPS), which set legal thresholds for how much alternative energy—wind, solar, geothermal—must be included in the power supply. RPS systems are currently in place in 27 states and D.C, and California’s are the most comprehensive, calling for 33 percent of the state’s total energy consumption to be sustainably generated by 2020. To avoid creating a competitive market based in practices that should really be eliminated, as in energy derived from burning trash or even co-generation using heat from traditional power plants, RPS legislation does not currently allow for waste products of any kind to be included as “renewable” resources. Elimination isn’t going to be eliminated anytime soon, though, which leaves agricultural areas and municipalities overburdened with sewage and manure that currently isn’t worth….well, you know.
The average cow generates 18 gallons of waste per day—that’s just one cow, now think of all the hundreds of thousands of cows (and pigs, and sheep, and chickens) in farms and feedlots all across this country. Many such operations are so oversupplied with manure that they wind up funneling it into fetid ponds that stink up the surrounding countryside, contaminate groundwater, and release pounds of greenhouse gases. So, not only would repurposing all that poop create a steady stream of available energy, but it would also remove a fairly major contributor to climate change. Converting human sewage systems to a no-waste model would also save countless gallons of water every year, as well as the energy required to transport, treat and dispose of it.
Of course, entrepreneurs all over have already realized the potential of this unlikely market. There are scores of projects already underway across the country, many of which we’ve covered here on HeatingOil.com: Some of the most promising technologies include methane capture, fuel made from manure, and sewage used as a growth medium for algae that can be converted into biofuel. There is also the looming possibility of federal EPA regulation of methane from farming, under the EPA’s new endangerment finding that allows for greater policing of gases that contribute to global warming. Tamminen’s argument is that reclassifying human and animal waste as renewable would open up the possibility of tax credits to help develop existing programs, and to generate hundreds of others. Think of it as the fertilizer that will grow our new, greener, energy grid.
EPA Regulation of Greenhouse Gases Challenged by Beef Industry
Cattle, a significant source of methane, could be affected by EPA regulation. (image: BugMan50 via flickr.com)
The Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) December announcement that it intends to regulate emissions greenhouse gases has received its first official challenge from special interests. Perhaps surprising to some, the challenge has not come from the usual or more predicable suspects such as big oil, gas, or refining industries. Rather, the first salvo in what could prove to be numerous battles was launched by the beef industry. On Friday, Edmunds.com reported that the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association became the first industry to legally challenge the EPA’s authority in regulating greenhouse gases. Filing their suit on December 24, the Beef Association claims that the science of global warming is weak and therefore the federal government has no right to regulate emissions based on such supposedly fragile claims.
The Beef Association’s concern with EPA regulation of greenhouse gases stems from the fact that cattle produce immense amounts of methane, one of the most dangerous of greenhouse gases and one that the EPA will likely attempt to regulate. Some scientists have asserted that, while carbon dioxide emissions have received the most attention by policymakers attempting to mitigate climate change, methane should be given even more attention. Evidently the Beef Association believes that any attempt to regulate methane emissions will seriously damage the beef industry.
Final Product of Copenhagen Conference is Informal, Non-Binding Agreement
UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon at the Copenhagen conference. (image: deccanherald.com)
After a long two weeks in Copenhagen, an uneasy accord was reached early Saturday morning, after the official end of the conference. According to the New York Times, the final agreement came in the way of a 12-paragraph statement of intent, not the legally binding pledge many hoped to walk away with. Almost every country was said to have approved the final agreement, even though it was largely seen as a flawed compromise that left many bitterly disappointed.
Among the details missing from the accord were firm targets for emissions reductions and any kind of deadline for enacting a binding treaty. President Obama himself said the accord was only a “modest step” towards real progress. The deal does call for major emitters to curb greenhouse gases and help developing nations with much-needed aid. However, since it is non-binding, there is no telling how effective the pledge will be.
The process of tackling global warming using the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change, recently seen to be the best way of handling the problem, seems to be falling apart. As seen in Copenhagen, it is increasingly difficult to reach a global consensus when so much bad blood and hostility exists between rich and poor nations. As the world moves forward, it may be time to try a new tactic.
For much of the world, the outcome of the Copenhagen talks was disappointing. However, if and when a deal is reached in the future, it will largely be due to the hard work that was done in Denmark. Here’s hoping next time is more fruitful.
This Week in Heating Oil: December 18
The second week of the UN climate conference in Copenhagen has wound down, and there’s not a lot to get excited about. Disorganization, conflict, and mistrust marred the conference from beginning to end. President Obama’s speech to the conference today failed to bring about any last-minute breakthroughs, and although some sort of eleventh-hour deal could come out of Copenhagen tonight or even tomorrow, it doesn’t appear very likely. For more details on what happened there over the last two weeks, take a look at Kristy Kershaw’s daily reports on the happenings in Denmark.
President Obama’s “Cash for Caulkers” program will not be implemented any time soon, if at all–last Friday, the House of Representatives passed a jobs-creation legislation that did not include Cash for Caulkers or any similar program. Hopefully, the program will get the support it needs some day, but it looks like that day is at least months away.
Some progress was made this week–also last Friday, the US House passed the Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2009, which included limitations on how commodities contracts, including crude oil and heating oil, could be traded. The intended effect of the provisions is a reduction of oil price volatility to make budgeting easier on businesses and individuals who rely on heating oil and other energy products.
From Copenhagen: Sea Levels Could Rise Up to 29 Feet Over the Next Few Hundred Years
(image: dailymail.co.uk)
A new study emerged out of Copenhagen on Wednesday, claiming that global sea levels could rise by up to 9 meters (roughly 30 feet) in the next few hundred years, even if the world manages to stave off a temperature raise above 2 degrees Celsius. This new estimate is higher than any other that has been predicted so far, and would mean low-lying coastal areas like New Orleans, areas of Southern Florida, Bangladesh, and most of the Netherlands would be severely affected.
Perhaps ironically, the head of the African group of nations proposed a deal today that would cut aid to poor countries by more than half of what has been discussed thus far. Meles Zenawi, the prime minister of Ethiopia, called for $50 billion a year by 2015 and $100 billion per year by 2020, saying that they have more to lose, and therefore must be flexible. The amount of aid due to poor nations has been the subject of intense debate in Copenhagen, with the European Union pledging several billion in the short term, and the United States having yet to pledge anything at all.
While the aid will undoubtedly help poor nations as they attempt to deal with climate change, if no deal is struck at Copenhagen, the news for rising seas levels is not good. Hopefully as more world leaders make their way to Copenhagen over the next few days, negotiations will un-stall and begin to make some real progress forward.
Copenhagen Day 4: Island Nations Reject 2ºC Temperature Rise, and the U.S. Pushes For Emissions Cuts From China, Other Developing Nations
The tiny island nation of Tuvalu. (image: travel.nationalgeographic.com)
Tensions continued between the rich and poor nations of the world today at day 4 of the Copenhagen Climate Summit. According to the U.K. Guardian, the Alliance of Small Island States (Aosis) formally rejected the proposed goal of limiting a global temperature rise to 2 degrees Celsius. The grouping of 43 of the smallest world nations, and those most vulnerable to the effects of climate change, said any rise more then 1.5 degrees Celsius is not acceptable coming out of these negotiations.
The group has the backing of 48 of the developed nations of the world, and includes Tuvalu, the nation that inspired a walkout at yesterday’s talks over their desire to come to a legally binding agreement with more ambitious targets for everyone.
The proposal to limit the rise in global average temperature to 1.5 degrees Celsius would require massive and near-immediate cuts in greenhouse gas emissions, as well as removal of CO2 already in the atmosphere. Technology for a large-scale removal of CO2 does not yet exist and according to the International Energy Agency, such cuts would require up to $10.5 trillion in investments in energy-related technology by 2030.
Copenhagen Day 2: Outrage From Developing Nations, The Warmest Decade on Record, and the Effects of the EPA Decision
(image: krakowpost.com)
It’s day 2 of the Copenhagen Climate Conference and things are really heating up (no pun intended). Negotiations hit a serious roadblock today, after a secret draft agreement, apparently coming from the U.S., U.K., and Denmark, was leaked.
According to the UK Guardian, developing nations are furious as the so-called Danish Text is calling for unequal emissions caps for rich and poor nations.
More specifically, the agreement suggests allowing rich countries to emit 2.67 tons of carbon per person, while limiting poor countries to just 1.44 tons per person.
The agreement is a complete about-face from the Kyoto Protocol, which called for rich nations to shoulder much of the burden to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Developing countries have balked at the secret nature of the draft agreement, the unequal policies proposed, and the inherent weakened role of the U.N. suggested by the text.
Carbon Dioxide Injections Offer Hope of Carbon-Neutral Oil
Denbury’s pipelines bring naturally occurring carbon dioxide, but that could be supplanted by carbon capture and sequestration technology. (image: scientificamerican.com)
Denbury Resources has paid handsomely for a large oil field in Texas. Reporting on Denbury’s $420 million purchase of Wapiti Energy’s Conroe Field, Christopher Helman at Forbes said it initially looked like Denbury had overpaid for the patch of land. But, as Helman pointed out, that was before you took into account that Denbury is hoping to reinvigorate the field, and significantly up its output, by injecting it with heavy doses of carbon dioxide, a process Helman says has “big implications for the capture and sequestration of carbon emissions from power plants across the country.” If this approach works, Denbury could have a tenfold production jump in Conroe’s production in as little as five years.
Conroe Field, which is north of Houston and has been active since 1931, was once, as Helman put it, a “gusher,” producing nearly 60,000 barrels per day at its height. Although Wapiti Energy was able to increase the field’s output after purchasing it from ExxonMobil in 2006—under Exxon it was yielding only 1,200 barrels per day and Wapiti got it up to 2,500—Denbury thinks it can do much better with its new, high-tech approach.
