Transcript NERAM

U.S.-Canada Cooperation: The U.S.Canada Air Quality Agreement
Brian McLean, U.S. EPA
Jane Barton, Environment Canada
October 17, 2006
Vancouver, BC, Canada
The Impetus to Cooperate
• In the 1980s, Canada and the US faced a common problem
impacting eastern ecosystems — acid rain
• Signed in 1991, the US-Canada Air Quality Agreement was
designed to be flexible framework to address not only acid
rain but other transboundary air pollution problems
• U.S. and Canada committed to:
–
–
–
–
–
Specific emission limitations or reductions and timetables/programs
Notification and consultation mechanism
Compliance monitoring
Prevention of air quality deterioration and visibility protection
Coordinate/cooperate on scientific and technical activities, economic
research
– Review, assess, and regularly report on progress
Air Quality Agreement Structure
• Agreement established Air Quality Committee to
implement commitments, measure/report progress,
identify evolving areas in transboundary air pollution
– Co-chaired by U.S. State Department and Environment Canada
– Membership includes relevant federal agencies and
States/Provinces
– Subcommittee on Program Monitoring and Reporting
– Subcommittee on Scientific and Technical Cooperation
• Obligations recognize different approaches taken by U.S.
and Canada in their efforts to reduce air pollution
• Success rests on supportive/cooperative working
relationships and experience of trust
Acid Rain Annex — 1991
Established specific emission reduction commitments (caps for SO2), and
detailed timetable for meeting commitments
U.S. emission reduction commitments:
• National SO2 reductions of 10 million tons, including caps of 8.95
million tons for power generation and 5.6 million tons for industrial
sources
• NOx reduction of 2 million tons from power generation and vehicles
Canada emission reduction commitments:
• Cap SO2 emissions in seven eastern provinces at 2.3 million tonnes
by 1994, and cap national SO2 emissions at 3.2 million tonnes by
2000
• By 1995, reduce stationary source NOx emissions 100,000 tonnes
below the forecast level and develop further annual national emission
reduction requirements to be achieved by 2000 and/or 2005
• Implement NOX control program for mobile sources
Ozone Annex — 2000
• Scope of AQA extended in 2000 to address ozone transport
between the U.S. and Canada and health effects
• Established Pollutant Emission Management Area (PEMA) in
transboundary region (18 states and the District of Columbia;
central and southern Ontario and southern Quebec)
• U.S. commitment: Cap on summertime utility and industrial boiler
NOx emissions (NOX SIP Call); mobile source controls; implement
new source standards for NOx and VOC reductions
– Estimated U.S. transboundary region NOx reductions of 36%
annual and 43% ozone season by 2010
• Canada commitment: NOx and VOC emission reduction measures
including annual NO2 power plant cap by 2007 in transboundary
region; Tier 2 engines and fuel regulations; solvents, paints, and
consumer products; measures to achieve Canada-wide Standards
for ozone
– Estimated Canada transboundary region reductions from 1990:
NOx 39% annual by 2010 and VOC 35% annual by 2010
Results: Reduced SO2 and NOx
Emissions in the U.S.
30.0
30.0
25.0
25.0
20.0
20.0
Other
Transportation
15.0
Power Industry
10.0
NOx (million tons)
SO2 (million tons)
Total U.S. SO2 and NOx Emissions*
Other
Transportation
15.0
Power Industry
10.0
5.0
5.0
0.0
0.0
1980
1990
1995
Year
2000
2005
1980
1990
1995
2000
2005
Year
• Total U.S. SO2 emissions have decreased 11.3 million tons (44%) from
1980 levels as of 2005.
• Total U.S. NOx emissions have decreased 8.4 million tons (31%) from
1980 levels as of 2005.
* Power industry emissions are measured by CEMS; emissions for other sources were estimated by interpolating from the 2002 final NEI data.
Results: Reduced SO2 and NOx
Emissions in Canada
Total Canadian SO2 and NOx Emissions
3.0
4.5
4.0
2.5
3.0
Other
2.5
Transportation
2.0
Power Industry
1.5
NOx (million tons)
SO2 (million tons)
3.5
2.0
Other
1.5
Transportation
Power Industry
1.0
1.0
0.5
0.5
0.0
0.0
1985
1990
1995
Year
2000
2005
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
Year
• Total Canadian SO2 emissions in 2005 have decreased by 1.5
million tons (37%) since 1985.
• Total Canadian NOx emissions in 2005 have decreased by 0.1
million tons (3%) since 1985.
Results: Environmental Benefits of
Reduced Acidic Deposition
SO4 Concentrations
1990-1994
•
•
2002-2004
These reductions have had tremendous environmental and health benefits – the Acid Rain
Program will result in $122 billion annually in U.S. benefits in 2010, including $6 billion in
benefits to Canada
Future reductions under these programs, the Clean Air Interstate Rule, and new auto and
diesel requirements are key components in the attainment of ozone and PM standards in the
U.S.
Scientific and Technical Activities
• Key Accomplishments:
– Acid Rain and ecological monitoring and assessment
– Development of extensive shared emission inventories
– Ozone assessment report (1999)
– PM science assessment report (2004)
• Coordinated tracking of ozone air quality/deposition along the border
• Informal consultations/collaborations on specific industrial facilities
• Other collaborative efforts: Border Air Quality Strategy (2005)
– The Great Lakes Basin Airshed Management Framework
– Georgia Basin/Puget Sound International Airshed Strategy
– Emissions Cap and Trading Feasibility Study for SO2 and NOx
Great Lakes Basin Airshed Study Area:
Southeast Michigan/Southwest Ontario
Region
The Great Lakes Basin Airshed
Management Framework
• Objective: To improve air quality coordination and
information exchange between the two countries
- Administrative and structural frameworks
- Control strategies and jurisdictional plans
- Permitting systems for existing, new and modified sources
- Compliance and enforcement systems
- Policy uses for scientific tool and research
• Conclusions: Coordinated management of the airshed is
feasible and desirable
– Barriers and obstacles can be overcome with sustained effort
– Existing mechanisms and new opportunities are needed
– Applicability to other areas within the Great Lakes Basin
• Next step: Proposed guidelines for airshed management
Georgia Basin/Puget Sound
International Airshed
12
Georgia Basin/Puget Sound
International Airshed Project
Results of the Project – so far…
• Partner agencies have adopted the International
Airshed Strategy for the Georgia Basin-Puget
Sound
• Health research focused on particulate matter is
underway to better define regional issues of
concern and priorities for remedial action
• Transboundary collaboration on scientific research
is continuing to better define air pollution causes
and solutions
• Ongoing regional collaborative measures to reduce
emissions from motor vehicles, marine vessels,
agricultural activities and woodstoves
Informal Consultations/Collaborations
on Specific Facilities
• Conner’s Creek Power Plant, Detroit, Michigan, U.S.
– Successful discussion which ended when the power
plant was required by EPA and Michigan to refuel with
natural gas instead of coal
• Algoma Steel Mill, Sault Ste. Marie, Ontario, Canada
– Ongoing discussion with joint monitoring of air toxics
and PM, information exchange on abatement at the
plant, and reporting to the public
• Boundary Dam Power Plant, Estevan, Saskatchewan,
Canada
– Successful conclusion this year with joint monitoring
demonstrating that no air quality levels are being
exceeded in the region
U.S. Experience with SO2 and NOx Cap
and Trading
Traditional Regulation: Command and Control
• Reduced emissions significantly
• Typically a technology or rate based method with
limited monitoring
• Very effective in many situations
– Limited expertise about air quality management
– Control or reduction options are limited or obvious
– Control or reduction costs are reasonable
• Established what needed to be done
• Prescribed how and when each source was to do it
Experiments in Flexibility: Bubbles,
Offsets, and Credits
• Assumed command and control infrastructure
• Provided some flexibility in how a source
could comply, i.e., by getting reductions from
another source
• Required government approval to prevent:
– “Paper Credits”
– “Anyway Tons”
– Unacceptable air quality impacts
Cap and Trade
• An alternative to traditional regulation and credit
trading
– Not simply a trading feature added to existing regulation
• Certainty that a specific emissions level is achieved
and maintained
• More regulatory certainty, compliance flexibility, and
lower permitting and transaction costs for sources
• Fewer administrative resources needed by industry
and government (if kept simple)
– Government focused on setting goals & assuring results, not
on approving individual compliance actions
• An incentive for innovation and early reductions
• Can be compatible with other mechanisms
• Lower costs make further improvements feasible
Why Cap and Trade Works
• Full sector coverage – All sources (existing and new)
included
– Minimizes shifting of production and emissions (“leakage”)
– Assures achievement of emission reduction goal without case-by-case
review
– Reduces administrative costs to government and industry
• Cap on emissions – Government issuance of a fixed quantity
of allowances
– Limits emissions to achieve and maintain environmental goal
– Limits creation of “paper credits” and “anyway tons”
– Provides certainty to allowance market
• Monitoring – Accurate measurement and reporting of all
emissions
– Assures accountability and results
– Establishes integrity of allowances and confidence in the market
• Trading – Unrestricted trading and banking (with sourcespecific limits allowed to protect local air quality
– Allows companies to choose (and change) compliance options
– Minimizes compliance cost
– Ensures that trading will not cause “hotspots”
Public Access to Hourly
Emissions Data
Public Access to Allowance Data
Type of transfer Seller name and
(auction, private) account info
Buyer name and Confirmation date, serial
account info
numbers and total allowances
transferred
Million Tons of SO2
Results: Major Reductions in SO2
Emissions and Acid Rain
20
18
16
17.3
Actual Emissions
15.7
14
12
Final Cap
11.9
11.2
SO2 emissions from power plants down by
5.5 million tons since 1990
10.2
89.0
10
8
6
4
2
Acid rain reduced by 25 – 40%
0
1980
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
Wet Sulfate Deposition 1990-1994
Wet Sulfate Deposition 2000-2004
Summertime NOx Emissions
Reductions
2005 NBP states ozone season reductions
(May 1 – September 30) :
Daily Emission Trends for NOx Budget Trading
Program Units in 2003, 2004 and 2005
8,000
72% from 1990 baseline
7,000
NOx Emissions (Tons)
57% from 2000 baseline
NOx Emissions (Thousand Tons)
11% from 2004
Total NBP Ozone Season NOx
Emissions
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
2,000
1,800
1,600
0
May
1,860
Jun
1,400
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Month
1,200
2003 Daily NOx Tons
1,000
1,222
800
819
600
400
593
200
530
0
1990
2000
2003
O zone Season
2004
2005
2004 Daily NOx Tons
2005 Daily NOx Tons
National SO2 and NOx Power Plant
Emissions
20
SO2
Million Tons
15
10
NOx
Projected, w/ CAIR
5
0
1980
Source: EPA
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
2010
2015
2020
Feasibility Study
• The U.S.-Canada AQA identified market-based mechanisms for
information exchange, including emissions trading. In 2003, a joint study
on SO2 and NOx emissions cap and trading was undertaken, and
completed in 2005.
• The key conclusions of the economic and air quality modeling were:
– Acid rain, smog, and regional haze are problems in both countries
that would be improved if SO2 and NOx emission caps were
implemented in both countries at levels comparable to U.S. caps.
– Cross-border trading would not alter the overall level of emission
reductions nor the consequent benefits to air quality and the
environment.
– The costs to industry of complying with the caps would be cheaper
with trading than without trading.
• Significant technical advances and cooperation resulted from this study,
such as development of analytical tools, shared emission inventories,
integrated electricity and emission modeling and cross-border air quality
modeling.
Feasibility Study
The study concluded that caps and cross-border trading
would be feasible if certain critical elements were in place:
• In Canada, enforceable SO2 and NOx emission caps for the
electricity sector—and other sectors, if appropriate—and
rigorous emissions monitoring and public reporting
requirements, comparable in stringency to those in the U.S.
• In both countries:
– Legislative and/or regulatory changes to give the
allowances in each country equivalency so that they could
be traded freely and used for compliance in either country.
– A commitment to pursue implementation of cross-border
SO2 and NOX cap and trade.
Summary of Progress
• Over past 30 years, witnessed transition from
identifying transboundary issues to developing
binational solutions
• 2006 Biennial Progress Report and Third Five-Year
Review of Program (15 year anniversary)
• With recognition of different governmental authorities,
but commitment to common goals, expect continued
progress working collaboratively
• U.S.-Canada Air Quality Agreement provides an
example for international agreements, providing real
progress in improving the environment