Welcome To Our Best Deals For Xmas Gifts Outlet Online Store Orders Over $150 , Enjoy Free Shipping,save $20 shipping cost!

parka canada goose expedition

Published: Monday 26 August, 2013

parka canada goose expedition parka canada goose expedition EPA Cries Foul on Keystone

Two news items surrounding greenhouse gas emissions moved over the past week. One on the trajectory of said emissions from government numbercrunching. The other on what the proposed Keystone pipeline might mean for emissions.

We start with Keystone. On Monday the Environmental Protection Agency weighed in pdf on the Keystone XL pipeline project. Gulf Coast refineries? Prepared for the State Department, which must OK the proj parka canada goose expedition ect because it crosses an international border, the draft statement concluded with music to the ears of the pipelines proponents: The proposed project . would pose no significant impacts to most resources along the proposed Project route. See my post for more on the draft statement.

After it was released on March 1, interested parties and agencies had 45 days to submit comments on the draft and the pipeline, which has become one of the most contentious environmental issues in Obamas presidency. That public comment period ended at midnight on Monday, and among the reported tens of thousands of comments some say over a million that poured in during the comment period was a sevenpage reaction from the Environmental Protection Agency submitted just under the wire.

The agencys assessment in short: Based on our review, we have rated the draft supplemental environmental impact statement DSEIS as E02 Objections Insufficient Information help on the governmentspeak? E02 or Environmental Objection 2 refers, as indicated, to an objection on environmental grounds because of information or because, as not indicated, the EPA has identified new reasonably available alternatives that are within the spectrum of alternatives analyzed in the draft EIS, which could reduce the environmental impacts of the action. Did you get all that? If not, basically EPA is saying that it doesn buy the State Departments assessment because it failed to consider all the options.

One Sticking Point: Estimated Emissions from Tar Sands Oil

A major EPA objection to the impact statement concerned the State Departments assessment that the pipeline itself, a parka canada goose expedition s a conduit for transporting bitumen from Canadian tar sands, would have little impact on greenhouse gases.

We note that the discussion in the DSEIS regarding energy markets, while informative, is not based on an updated energyeconomic modeling effort. The DSEIS includes a discussion of rail logistics and the potential growth of rail as a transport option, however we recommend that the Final EIS provide a more careful review of the market analysis and rail transport options. recognizing the potential for much higher per barrel rail shipment costs than presented in the DSEIS. This analysis should consider how the level and pace of oil sands crude production might be affected by higher transportation costs and the potential for congestion impacts to slow rail transport of crude.

EPA also noted that the State Departments evaluation of pipeline alternatives is not sufficient to enable a meaningful comparison to the proposed route and other alternatives. In addition, the agency reported that it would like to see a more rigorous analysis of the existing pipeline corridor, as it avoids not only the Sands Hills aquifer which was one of the sticking points of the first proposed route but the Ogallala aquifer as well.

So what happens now is more hurry up and wait. The release of the draft environmental impact statement and the conclusion of the public comment period following that release means that the preparation of a final impact statement can now officially begin. That Final Supplemental EIS, said State Department spokesman Patrick Ventrell, would include additional analysis and incorporate public comments received on the Draft SEIS. As for all those many public comments, State has promised to publish each and every one. $ub reqed There no word yet on when.

And remember all this is for just the environmental assessment. In all, eight federal agencies pdf will need to weigh in on the project before State renders its decision.

While were on the subject of carbon dioxide CO2 emissions, it is relevant to note that the Energy Information Administration EIA has begun releasing its Annual Energy Outlook for 2013. energyrelated CO2 emissions through 2040. This projection, along with EIAs past projections between 2004 and 2012, is illustrated below. commitment in the Copenhagen Accord pdf

And even given the sizable some might say remarkable decrease in our projected emissions over the next few decades, as compared to earlier projections, the current forecast falls quite short of the emissions reductions President Obama committed to as part of the Copenhagen Accord pdf, as parka canada goose expedition illustrated in the above graphic. See also here.

Perhaps thats one of the reasons EPA is concerned about the potential emissions from tar sands. Of course the State Departments answer could be that if EIA just keeps ratcheting down its emissions projections, maybe well meet our emissions commitment without even trying. So why worry about a little bit of extra greenhouse gas emissions on the order of about 19 million metric tons annually, according to EPA estimates from tar sands? Why indeed. parka canada goose expedition