As conservationists await finalization of revised rules governing methane on public lands, a new survey shows a majority of Texans support stronger limits. The poll by four environmental groups, including the Sierra Club, queried Texas voters about the Environmental Protection Agency's supplemental rules proposed in 2022, to limit methane emissions driven by oil and gas projects. Some Texas officials argue the methane regulations will kill jobs.

Cyrus Reed, conservation director of the Sierra Club's Lone Star Chapter says 72% of the 600 registered voters polled believe otherwise.

"Voters do care," he said. "They care about air quality, they care about climate change - and a majority of them actually think regulations will lead to more job growth than any job loss that potentially could occur in the oil and gas field."

Rule finalization is expected ahead of November's United Nations Climate Change Conference in Dubai. The EPA took hundreds of comments from people across the country earlier this year about its proposed methane rules, hearing from callers in leading oil-and gas-producing states such as Texas, New Mexico and Pennsylvania.

Revised regulations are central to the EPA's strategy under President Joe Biden to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions. Reed noted that Texas, the largest oil-producing state in the nation, does not have broad, independent methane regulations outside of those imposed by the federal government.

"It's also important for Texans to know that because we haven't had political leadership on these issues in Texas, we're really counting on the EPA to go forward with a regulation that not only covers new wells, but covers existing wells where we have a lot of the problem," he explained.

The EPA's methane regulations would reduce emissions 87% below 2005 levels by 2030. Dallas-Fort Worth, Houston, El Paso and San Antonio made the top 25 most polluted U.S. metro areas in the 2023 "State of the Air" report by the American Lung Association.

Researchers are out with new findings they say show that death rates linked to air pollution from coal plants are underestimated.

A Wisconsin environmental group hopes the study compels quicker action to cut harmful emissions. The study, led by experts at a handful of U.S. universities, found that over the past two decades, there were 460,000 premature deaths associated with fine particulate matter sent into the air from coal-fired power plants. That's more than what health and scientific communities had previously thought.

Ciaran Gallagher, energy and air manager with the group Clean Wisconsin, believes while coal facilities are being phased out, utilities and policymakers should speed up the energy transition.

"A lot of wind and solar is being added to the electricity grid every day, which is really exciting to see in Wisconsin and across the Midwest, and it just needs to ramp up faster, " Gallagher said.

Utilities around the U.S. have announced emissions goals, although some companies contend certain fossil fuels can't be completely put to rest right away because of electricity demands while cleaner sources are added. But Gallagher said the regulatory scene in states like Wisconsin makes it easier for utilities to move the goalposts. She's hopeful stricter standards being weighed by the federal EPA will prompt stronger commitments.

Gallagher has analyzed the proposed regulations and says for Wisconsin, they could result in nearly $50 million in broader health benefits by reducing the impact of respiratory illnesses and cardiovascular disease.

As she put it, "$50 million is a massive benefit for Wisconsinites to see in health benefits from the closed coal plants in our state."

Gallagher said the new study might mean the health benefits could be even higher.

Federal data show coal contributed to 36% of Wisconsin's electricity generation in 2022, down from more than half as recently as 2018. Meanwhile, study authors show the rate of deaths from coal pollution began to slow as more plants were being shut down.


get more stories like this via email

The importance of making ports and shipping more environmentally friendly was the topic of a town hall meeting on Tuesday. Three California members of Congress have introduced legislation to minimize greenhouse gases in shipping corridors.

Global emissions from boats and ships account for about 3% of total greenhouse gas emissions each year.

Alisa Kreynes, head of ports and shipping for C40 Cities, a nonprofit network of mayors around the world, said it is an expensive and challenging battle to clean up shipping corridors, but it must be done.

"The actors who commit to these green shipping corridor partnerships do share risks, but they also share benefits," Kreynes explained. "That's the only way we're going to align the shipping sector on a decarbonization pathway to 1.5. That means breaking down some of the traditional ways of doing business."

C40 Cities and Pacific Environment, along with the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, participated in the town hall.

When introducing the Clean Shipping Act of 2023, Sen. Alex Padilla, D-Calif., said "California's port communities have been forced to shoulder the brunt of shipping pollution for too long." Other backers include Rep. Nanette Barragán, D-Calif., and Rep. Robert Garcia, D-Calif. The bill is endorsed by multiple environmental organizations.

C40 Cities has begun work on green shipping corridor programs not only with California ports, but with Shanghai and Singapore as well.

Dawny'all Heydari, climate campaign manager of advocacy for the nonprofit Pacific Environment, said without greener shipping ports, locals who live near them will suffer significant health problems, and some ports are already making headway.

"The San Pedro Bay Port has announced a number of green shipping corridors," Heydari pointed out, "to begin scaling low- and zero-emission fuels, and reduce and eliminate greenhouse gas emissions and, by proxy, air pollution."

The American Lung Association has said the Los Angeles metropolitan area has some of the worst smog pollution in the nation. Emissions from oceangoing vessels are part of the problem.

Starting January 1st, California's ban on the sale of new gas-powered mowers and blowers will go into effect; and experts say the transition will require money, education and tolerance. It won't be illegal to use existing gas-powered landscaping tools, and the current inventory will be sold until it runs out. Dan Mabe is the founder of the American Green Zone Alliance, a group that helps landscapers, companies and public agencies make the switch.

"I was a worker with gas and electric. Definitely, when you don't have to breathe fumes, electric is zero emission at the source of operation, and the vibration is much less on your body, so you feel less fatigued at the end of the day."

Assembly Bill 1346 created a 30-million-dollar CORE program and fund to give landscapers big discounts on new equipment, which is more expensive than gas models. But the money is running low in some categories.

Mabe's company does a lot of workforce engagement - letting landscapers try out the electric models to learn how they affect their business.

"And because we understand the workload, efficiency differences, we can speak honestly about it. You know, I just think that these folks need the outreach, the education, the information, and they need to be afforded the chance to try the electric technology as it stands now. And in our experience, they are pleasantly surprised."

California is home to more than 51-thousand one-person landscaping businesses. According to the California Air Resources Board, operating a commercial gas-powered lawn mower for an hour emits as much pollution as driving a 2016 Toyota Camry about 300 miles. And for a leaf blower, an hour of operation produces the equivalent emissions of driving the car 11-hundred miles. Check the CORE website for a current list of funds still available.

This story is based on original reporting from Matthew Miranda at the Sacramento Bee.



get more stories like this via email