Transcript Sustainability and Environmental, Health & Safety Symposium March 19, 2014 Thomas W. Easterly, P.E., BCEE Commissioner IN Department of Environmental Management.

Sustainability and Environmental,
Health & Safety Symposium
March 19, 2014
Thomas W. Easterly, P.E., BCEE Commissioner
IN Department of Environmental Management
1
IDEM’s Mission
Protecting Hoosiers and Our Environment
While Becoming the Most Customer-Friendly
Environmental Agency
IDEM’s mission is to implement federal and state
regulations to protect human health and the
environment while allowing the environmentally sound
operations of industrial, agricultural, commercial and
government activities vital to a prosperous economy.
2
How Does IDEM Protect
Hoosiers and Our Environment?
• Develop regulations and issue permits to restrict
discharges to environmentally safe levels.
• Inspect and monitor permitted facilities to ensure
compliance with the permits.
3
How Does IDEM Protect
Hoosiers and Our Environment?
• Use compliance assistance and/or enforcement
when people exceed their permit levels or violate
regulations.
• Educate people on their environmental
responsibilities.
• Clean up contaminated sites to eliminate public
exposure to toxics and return properties to
productive use.
4
Performance Metrics December 2013
Result
Target
Comments
Quality of Hoosiers' Environment
% of Hoosiers that live in counties that meet air
quality standards
87.64%
100%
80%
Muncie Lead; Ozone in Clark, Floyd,
Greene and LaPorte Counties, Sulfur
Dioxide in parts of Daviess, Marion,
Morgan, Pike and Vigo Counties
% of CSO Communities with approved programs
to prevent the release of untreated sewage
99.07%
100%
90%
98+9 (107) out of 99+9 (108). Not
Gary
95%
Failure to maintain minimum
chlorine residual in Gary, Turbidity
in Carmel
% of Hoosiers that receive water from facilities in
full compliance with safe drinking water
standards
95.15%
99%
Permitting Efficiency
Total calendar days accumulated in issuing environmental permits, as determined by state statute*
Land
Air
Water
24,429
51,944
28,322
28,488
53,550
47,787
31,839
59,850
53,409
33,515 statutory
63,000 statutory
56,220 statutory
* Places emphasis on back logged permits
Compliance
Total percentage of compliance observations from regulated customers within acceptable compliance standards*
Inspections
96.41%
97%
75%
Self reporting
97.24%
99%
95%
Continuous monitoring (COM)
99.83%
99.9%
99.0%
* Tracks observations and not just inspections
5
Performance Metrics June 2005
Quality of Hoosiers' Environment
Result
Target
Comments
% of Hoosiers in counties meeting air quality
standards
61%
100%
80%
12 counties & 2,408,571 of
6,195,643 above standard
% of CSO Communities with approved programs
to prevent the release of untreated sewage
4%
100%
20%
75% by 2007 is goal
Permitting Efficiency Total calendar days accumulated in issuing environmental permits, as determined by state statute*
Land
100,013
66,565
86,864
Air
511,000
207,000
385,000
Water
301,000
48,000
200,000
* Places emphasis on back logged permits
Compliance Total percentage of compliance observations from regulated customers within acceptable compliance standards*
Inspections
95.46%
97%
75%
Self reporting
97.11%
99%
95%
Continuous monitoring (COM)
99.19%
99.90%
98.95%
* Tracks observations and not just inspections
Organizational Transformation Budgetary agency dollars spent on key outside contracts for core agency functions.
Dollars spent on outside services per year
$6,179,367
$0
$3,447,017
6
Permits--Percent of Statutory Days
Percentage of allowable days
250
200
150
100
50
0
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
7
IN
0.0%
ID
OR*
AK*
NH
MA
DE*
CT
VT*
IA
HI*
MI
SC*
MO
SD*
WI
MT*
IL
CA*
KY
W…
NM
CO*
NJ*
RI
WV
UT
PA
GA*
DC
W…
TN
MN*
KS*
AZ*
NE*
NY*
MD
AL*
MS
TX*
OH
NC*
OK*
ME*
VA
FL*
AR*
NV
ND*
LA*
Best in NPDES Permitting
Total % Current Wastewater Permits 3/31/13
120.0%
100.0%
80.0%
60.0%
40.0%
20.0%
8
Water Quality
Indiana Combined Sewer Overflow Status
120
100
80
U.S. EPA
Responsibility
60
40
IDEM
Responsibility
20
0
Total
Legal
Agreement
Approved
Plan
Completed
9
200%
Percent Difference Between Highest Historical Monitored Concentration (Left Bar) and Highest
2012 Monitored Concentration (Right Bar) - Statewide
180%
Percent of Original Standard
160%
140%
-88%
-30%
120%
-68%
-14%
-87%
-23%
100%
80%
-84%
-23%
60%
-82%
-75%
40%
20%
0%
1-Hour CO
8-Hour CO 24-Hour PM10 Annual PM2.5 Daily PM2.5 24-Hour SO2 Annual SO2
8-Hour O3
Annual NO2
Lead
10
Governor Pence’s 2014 Roadmap
• Increase the speed of business through
one-stop permitting.
• Improve recycling in Indiana through
market-based reforms.
• Implement the first step of a unified, longterm water plan by streamlining Indiana’s
water quality permitting responsibilities.
11
Federal Initiatives to Watch
• President’s climate change initiative.
– Regulations to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions from new and existing power plants.
– Mitigation measures.
• eDMRs—possible expansion of reporting
requirements and mandatory electronic
reporting.
• Air pollution issues from downwind states.
12
President’s Climate Directives
• U.S. EPA to issue proposed carbon
pollution restrictions for:
– New power plants by September 20, 2013.
– Existing power plants by June 1, 2014, and
finalize those restrictions by June 1, 2015.
• States will be required to submit
implementation plans under Section 111(d)
of the Clean Air Act by June 30, 2016.
13
President’s Climate Directives
• In September, 2013, U.S. EPA proposed
New Source Performance Standards
(NSPS) for Greenhouse Gas (GHG)
Emissions for certain Electric Utility
Generating Units (EGUs).
- Combined cycle gas turbines will meet the rule.
- Coal fired units will not meet the rule without
using carbon capture and storage.
14
President’s Climate Directives
• Carbon capture and storage:
− is not yet commercially available,
− has not yet been demonstrated at
commercial scale, and
− is likely to be prohibitively expensive.
15
What are the Goals?
The President’s Climate Directives do not contain any
emission reduction goals, however, there are two
possibilities:
1. The National Academy of Sciences report,
“America’s Climate Choices” recommends that
actions be taken now to start reducing U.S.
greenhouse gas emissions to levels between 50%
and 80% below 1990 levels.
2. The President’s letter after Copenhagen discusses
a 17% reduction from 2005 emissions by 2020.
16
Greenhouse Gas Emissions in Tg CO2 equivalent from
Table ES-2 "Recent Trends in U.S. Greenhouse Gas
Emissions and Sinks from Draft Inventory of U.S.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks 1990-2012, Feb
24, 2014 (note Columns 3, 4, and 5 are calculated)
7000
6000
5000
All Other
4000
N2O Stationary
N20 Mobile
3000
CH4 Mobile
CH4 Stationary
2000
CO2 Combustion
1000
0
1990
2012
80% below
1990
Only N
Gas as
fossil fuel
additional
reduction
required
17
United States Greenhouse Gas Emissions
8000
7000
6000
5000
Oil Electricity
Gas Electricity
Coal Electricity
Other Sources
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
1990 Tg
CO2e
2005 Tg
CO2e
2012 Tg
CO2e
17 %
Reduction
from 2005
18
Percentage Change in CO2 Emissions from Utilities
(2005 – 2012)
Decreasing >15%
Decreasing 0 – 15%
Increasing
No Data
Location of the State Capitals
State Boundaries
19
President’s Climate Directives
• In the spring of 2012, the Environmental
Council of the States (ECOS) passed
Resolution 12-1, “Challenges of Achieving
Significant Greenhouse Gas (GHG)
Emissions Reductions.” A copy of this
resolution is available at:
www.ecos.org/files/4711_file_Resolution_
12_1_Challenges_of_GHG_reductions.doc
20
President’s Climate Directives
• The resolution requests that the U.S. EPA
develop one or more scenarios that will
produce an 80% reduction in GHG emissions
nationally, from a 2005 baseline, in 2050 or
beyond; and to conduct an analysis of the
costs and the benefits associated with each
such scenario along with an estimate of the
costs and benefits of not obtaining these
GHG reductions.
21
There is No Comprehensive GHG Plan
• The President’s plan does not include numerical goals for
GHG reductions.
• U.S. EPA has decided not to spend the resources required
to develop the requested scenario, but rather to develop
rules to reduce GHG emissions, even if these rules do not
materially reduce U.S. emissions.
• The President’s Climate Directives will change the power
plant carbon profile without any public plan to actually
reduce U.S. (or world) GHG emissions to the levels
advocated by the National Academy of Sciences.
22
Summary of Concerns
• There is no clear goal for the President’s
Climate Directives.
– How will we know when we have achieved
success?
– How can we develop and evaluate alternative
plans to achieve the goal?
• Since there is no goal, there is no plan to
achieve the goal.
23
Summary of Concerns
• We have started the process of requiring very
expensive changes to our electric generating
sector with little understanding of how these
changes will impact the achievement of the
ultimate environmental goal.
• The increased energy prices caused by these
new requirements will have a significant
adverse impact on the affordability of
electricity and the economies of the states
that produce goods and energy.
24
Questions?
Tom Easterly
Commissioner
Indiana Department of Environmental Management
(317) 232-8611
[email protected]
25