To print this page properly - use Print icon located on the page.
Please note that JavaScript has to be enabled.

Blog




 
  Please wait...

 
  Please wait...
  • 04-Mar-10 21:40 | anonymous

     
      Please wait...
    There's no excuse for waiting a minute on SOx, NOx and mercury because we have the technology, we know what to do, and we shouldn't be operating coal plants without pollution control equipment. – Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN)

    The Clean Air Act Amendments of 2010, S 2995, has been introduced in the Senate. This bipartisan legislation strengthens the Clean Air Act by cleaning up sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxide and mercury from power plants.   We need your help in getting your Senators to cosponsor this important legislation.  

    This bipartisan bill - introduced by the Chair of the Senate Clean Air Subcommittee, Tom Carper (D-DE) and cosponsored by Senator Lamar Alexander and 12 colleagues - will dramatically reduce air pollution across the country.  Each year, fine particles and ozone (which are created by nitrogen oxide and sulfur dioxide) lead to thousands of premature deaths and illnesses.  EPA estimates that the bill could prevent between 12,000 and 30,000 premature deaths each year.  This important legislation will provide significant public health benefits that will lead to less asthma attacks, emergency room visits and even fewer premature deaths. 

    Please support American Lung Association Board Member Albert Rizzo, MD who will be testifying before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee on Thursday, March 4.  The hearing starts at 10:00 AM EST. Watch the hearing webcast.

    Click here to send a letter to your Senators!

  • 14-Jan-10 10:54 | anonymous
    http://www.ksl.com/index.php?nid=649&sid=9157679
    http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=9300491

    A couple of comments regarding the two stories above.

    Using the number of red air days to determine whether or not air pollution along the Wasatch Front is improving is not scientific.  The DAQ does not have strict criteria for determining exactly what constitutes a red air day.  It is more of a shoot from the hip approach that takes into account current air quality levels and meteorological predictions.

    Data that shows 24-average and peak PM2.5 levels does not show much of an improvement in our air quality over the past decade.  Year to year variation is a result mostly of favorable weather patterns.  The past two years we saw generally lower PM2.5 levels because of favorable meteorologic conditions.

    I believe Ms. Spangler misspoke or was misquoted in the more recent story:
    "How bad is an air quality index of 142? Spangler said the air is considered "deteriorating" when it has an index higher than 35."
    It seems to me that Ms. Spangler is confusing the air quality index with actual PM2.5 levels.  An AQI of 142 is quite good.  When she said 35 I believe she is referring to the EPA's National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Particle Pollution which sets a standard of a 24 hour average of 35 micrograms per cubic meter.

    This underscores a problem that I have had with the DAQ's methodology since I became active in the campaign for clean air along the Wasatch Front.  Determination of air pollution trends should be based on actual fine particulate matter measurements, not the regulatory veil of the AQI or the or the Red Air Action Alert program of the DAQ.  Determination of Health Advisories should be based on 1 hour PM2.5 levels as measured at the Hawthorne monitor for Salt Lake and Davis Counties.

    If a DAQ spokesperson is getting confused then the citizens of Utah will probably also find it hard to keep the facts straight.

    sincerely,
     
    Courtney Henley, MD
    Salt Lake City, UT
    chenley71@yahoo.com
  • 07-Jan-10 16:58 | anonymous
    The Environmental Protection Agency's new limits -- which are
    presented as a range -- will likely put hundreds more
    counties nationwide in violation, a designation that will
    require them to find additional ways to clamp down on
    pollution or face government sanctions, most likely the loss
    of federal highway dollars.

    Read More:
    http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2010/01/07/us/AP-US-EPA-Smog.html?emc=na
  • 07-Jan-10 10:02 | anonymous
    For those residents who will live near or will be using the new corridor, please attend one of the the two scheduled hearings to voice your support of increased public transit in south valley!
    Click here for meeting information
    frontline meetings.JPG
  • 07-Jan-10 09:52 | anonymous
    Happy New Year from Utah Moms for Clean Air!

    With the New Year upon us tomorrow and resolutions lurking like the inversion, what better time to make a resolution that will really make a difference? Make a personal commitment to help improve our air quality all along the Wasatch Front!!

    We have already had too many “Red Air” days this winter, and by now most of us know that approximately half the pollution gooping up the valley air came out of someone’s tailpipe. So in some ways the solution is relatively straightforward — we need to drive less, especially when inversion season is upon us. Driving less means better health for everyone in the community.

    How can you contribute to cleaner air for 2010? Join the Clear the Air Challenge for the Inversion Season.

    Make your Clean Air New Year’s Resolution to reduce pollution.

    Please also visit the Clear The Air Challenge Facebook page and check out a list of examples.

    Reading others’ resolutions and actions may inspire you. So, get creative and list examples of your own actions to Clear The Air this winter. Your commitment to help Clear The Air is a New Year’s resolution that effects not only your own health, but every person in our community.

    Please encourage other people to join this grass-roots effort to take back our clean air!

    For all kinds of great information and alternatives to help you cut back on pollution this winter, visit the new “Transportation & Mobility” section of Salt Lake City’s Sustainability website, or take a spin around the “Air Quality” section.

    Please make your resolution today and share the challenge.

    Have a safe, happy, and healthy 2010!!

    With warm 2010 wishes,

    Utah Moms for Clean Air champions, Debbie, Cameron, Erin, Mary, Cherise, Michelle, Courtney, and Kathy

  • 06-Jan-10 15:02 | anonymous
      Earth Policy Release
    January 06, 2010
    U.S. CAR FLEET SHRINKS BY FOUR MILLION IN 2009
    After a Century of Growth, U.S. Fleet Entering Era of Decline

    www.earthpolicy.org/index.php?/plan_b_updates/2010/update87
    By Lester R. Brown

    America’s century-old love affair with the automobile may be coming to an
    end. The U.S. fleet has apparently peaked and started to decline. In
    2009, the 14 million cars scrapped exceeded the 10 million new cars sold,
    shrinking the U.S. fleet by 4 million, or nearly 2 percent in one year.
    While this is widely associated with the recession, it is in fact caused
    by several converging forces.

    Future U.S. fleet size will be determined by the relationship between two
    trends: new car sales and cars scrapped. Cars scrapped exceeded new car
    sales in 2009 for the first time since World War II, shrinking the U.S.
    vehicle fleet from the all-time high of 250 million to 246 million. (See
    data at www.earthpolicy.org/index.php?/plan_b_updates/2010/update87.
    ) It
    now appears that this new trend of scrappage exceeding sales could
    continue through at least 2020.

    Among the trends that are keeping sales well below the annual figure of
    15–17 million that prevailed from 1994 through 2007 are market
    saturation, ongoing urbanization, economic uncertainty, oil insecurity,
    rising gasoline prices, frustration with traffic congestion, mounting
    concerns about climate change, and a declining interest in cars among
    young people.

    Market saturation may be the dominant contributor to the peaking of the
    U.S. fleet. The United States now has 246 million registered motor
    vehicles and 209 million licensed drivers—-nearly 5 vehicles for every 4
    drivers. When is enough enough?

    Japan may offer some clues to the U.S. future. Both more densely
    populated and highly urbanized than the United States, Japan apparently
    reached car saturation in 1990. Since then its annual car sales have
    shrunk by 21 percent. The United States appears set to follow suit.

    The car promised mobility, and in a largely rural United States it
    delivered. But with four out of five Americans now living in cities, the
    growth in urban car numbers at some point provides just the opposite:
    immobility. The Texas Transportation Institute reports that U.S.
    congestion costs, including fuel wasted and time lost, climbed from $17
    billion in 1982 to $87 billion in 2007.

    Mayors across the country are waging a strong fight to save their cities
    from cars, trying to reduce traffic congestion and air pollution. Many
    are using a “carrot-and-stick” approach to reduce costly traffic
    congestion by simultaneously improving public transportation while
    imposing restrictions on the use of cars.

    Almost every U.S. city is either introducing new light rail lines, new
    subway lines, or express bus lines, or they are expanding and improving
    existing public transit systems in order to reduce dependence on cars.
    Among the cities following this path are Phoenix, Seattle, Houston,
    Nashville, and Washington, D.C. As urban transit systems expand and
    improve, commuters are turning to public transit as driving costs rise.
    Between 2005 and 2008, transit ridership climbed 9 percent in the United
    States. Many cities are also actively creating pedestrian and
    bicycle-friendly streets, making it easier to walk or bike to work.

    Forward-looking cities are also reconsidering parking requirements for
    new buildings. Washington, D.C., for example, has rewritten its
    50-year-old codes, reducing the number of parking spaces required with
    the construction of both commercial and residential buildings. Earlier
    codes that once required four parking spaces for every 1,000 square feet
    of retail space now require only one.

    As parking fees rise, many cities are moving beyond coin-fed parking
    meters and replacing them with meters that use credit cards. The nation’s
    capital is making this shift in early 2010 as it raises street parking
    fees from 75¢ to $2 per hour.

    Economic uncertainty makes some consumers reluctant to undertake the
    long-term debt associated with buying new cars. In tight economic
    circumstances, families are living with two cars instead of three, or one
    car instead of two. Some are dispensing with the car altogether. In
    Washington, D.C., with a well-developed transit system, only 63 percent
    of households own a car.

    A more specific uncertainty is the future price of gasoline. Now that
    motorists know that gas prices can climb to $4 a gallon, they worry that
    it could go even higher in the future. Drivers are fully aware that much
    of the world’s oil comes from the politically volatile Middle East.

    Perhaps the most fundamental social trend affecting the future of the
    automobile is the declining interest in cars among young people. For
    those who grew up a half-century ago in a country that was still heavily
    rural, getting a driver’s license and a car or a pickup was a rite of
    passage. Getting other teenagers into a car and driving around was a
    popular pastime.

    In contrast, many of today’s young people living in a more urban society
    learn to live without cars. They socialize on the Internet and on smart
    phones, not in cars. Many do not even bother to get a driver’s license.
    This helps explain why, despite the largest U.S. teenage population ever,
    the number of teenagers with licenses, which peaked at 12 million in
    1978, is now under 10 million. If this trend continues, the number of
    potential young car-buyers will continue to decline.

    Beyond their declining interest in cars, young people are facing a
    financial squeeze. Real incomes among a large segment of society are no
    longer increasing. College graduates already saddled with college loan
    debt may find it difficult to get the credit to buy a car. Young job
    market entrants are often more interested in getting health insurance
    than in buying a car.

    No one knows how many cars will be sold in the years ahead, but given the
    many forces at work, U.S. vehicle sales may never again reach the 17
    million that were sold each year between 1999 and 2007. Sales seem more
    likely to remain between 10 million and 14 million per year.

    Scrappage rates are easier to project. If we assume an auto life
    expectancy of 15 years, scrappage rates will lag new sales by 15 years.
    This means that the cars sold in the earliest of the elevated sales years
    of 15–17 million vehicles from 1994 through 2007 are just now reaching
    retirement age. Even though newer cars are more durable than earlier
    models, and may thus stay on the road somewhat longer on average,
    scrappage rates seem likely to exceed new car sales through at least
    2020. Given a decline of 1–2 percent a year in the fleet from 2009
    through 2020, the U.S. fleet could easily shrink by 10 percent (25
    million), dropping from the 2008 fleet peak of 250 million to 225 million
    by 2020.

    At the national level, shrinkage of the fleet combined with rising fuel
    efficiency will reinforce the trend of declining oil use that has been
    under way since 2007. This means reduced outlays for oil imports and thus
    more capital retained to invest in job creation within the United States.
    As people walk and bike more, it will mean less air pollution and fewer
    respiratory illnesses, more exercise and less obesity. This in turn will
    also reduce health care costs.

    The coming shrinkage of the U.S. car fleet also means that there will be
    little need to build new roads and highways. Fewer cars on the road
    reduces highway and street maintenance costs and lessens demand for
    parking lots and parking garages. It also sets the stage for greater
    investment in public transit and high-speed intercity rail.

    The United States is entering a new era, evolving from a car-dominated
    transport system to one that is much more diversified. As noted, this
    transition is driven by market saturation, economic trends, environmental
    concerns, and by a cultural shift away from cars that is most pronounced
    among young people. As this evolution proceeds, it will affect virtually
    every facet of life.

    # # #

    Lester R. Brown is President of the Earth Policy Institute and author of
    Plan B 4.0: Mobilizing to Save Civilization

  • 28-Dec-09 09:55 | anonymous
    By Lynn Arave
    Deseret News
    Published: Monday, Dec. 28, 2009 4:32 p.m. MST

    With northern Utah’s air quality at unhealthy levels, especially in Salt Lake and Davis counties, one doctor strongly advises against exercising outdoors in the murky air.

    “It’s a bad idea to go out and exercise in it. It’s kind of like you were exercising smoking a pack of cigarettes. You’re better off not exercising in it,” said Dr. Brian Moench, an anesthesiologist who works at LDS Hospital and is president of Utah Physicians for a Healthy Environment.

    The Utah Division of Air Quality called Monday “red alert” day in Salt Lake and Davis counties, while it was a “yellow” day in Utah and Weber counties. And the extended area forecast is for “unhealthy” conditions through at least Wednesday.

    Moench said it is simply a misconception that bad air is only detrimental to those with respiratory problems.

    “It’s unhealthy for everybody,” he said. “The bottom line is you’re better off remaining indoors. It is really hard to overstate the impact.”

    Some studies show that effects of air pollution can linger up to 30 days in a person’s body, Moench said. Skipping exercise for a day or two is better than going out in the foul air.

    Story continues below
    The purity of indoor air is also often overstated and that indoor air can have unique pollutants that outdoor air doesn’t, he said. Eventually outdoor pollution does infiltrate indoors to some degree, too.

    “The difference between outdoor and indoor air is not as great as people think,” he said.

    Moench said young children and human embryos are the most susceptible to air pollution.

    “We’d like to see the country take it more seriously,” he said.

    Even in non-inversion, non-hazy air, it is wise not to exercise on or near a busy road, Moench said. Even two blocks away, the air will be cleaner.

    Additional information on air quality health advisories is available at www.airquality.utah.gov.

    Residents of northern Utah can expect the fog and haze to continue for at least one more day and then a new snowstorm should clear the air somewhat Wednesday.

    In the meantime, the coldest of air is gone, for at least the next week.

    According to the Salt Lake Office of the National Weather Service, the daytime high Tuesday is expected to reach almost freezing — 31 degrees — and Wednesday could actually rise above the freezing mark at 33 degrees.

    There’s a 30 percent chance of snow during the day Tuesday, a 40 percent chance Tuesday night and 50 percent chance Wednesday.

    The normal daytime temperature for this time of year is about 36 degrees. However, for 21 of the 28 days in December, temperatures both day and night have been below normal and are running almost seven degrees below the average daily value.

    The Bryce Canyon Airport set an all-time overnight low temperature record for the date Monday morning at 17 degrees below zero. That broke the 1966 record of 14 degrees below zero.

    Also, Wendover on Sunday shivered at a record daytime high of just 12 degrees, one degree under the previous 1990 record for a Dec. 27.

  • 08-Dec-09 10:00 | anonymous
    December 8th, 2009

    ** Editorial note by Cherise Udell: The era of big coal is over. Coal-fired power plants are falling like dominoes across the country. Here in Utah, we had our own victory with the Sevier Power Plant, which was dealt a legal death blow last week.**

    By MATTHEW L. WALD
    Published: December 1, 2009

    WASHINGTON — A large Southern utility said Tuesday that it would close 30 percent of its North Carolina coal-fired power plants by 2017, a step that represents a bet that natural gas prices will stay acceptably low and that stricter rules are coming on sulfur dioxide emissions, which cause acid rain.

    The utility, Progress Energy, based in Raleigh, said it would close 11 coal-fired power plants built between the 1950s and 1970s.

    “Some of these plants are quite old,” said Bill Johnson, the chief executive of the company. But, he added, “They have a lot of useful life left in them, absent the need to put emissions control units on them.”

    Mr. Johnson also said the company was taking a risk by reducing its output of carbon dioxide, which is not yet regulated, in the near term. He and others expect that Congress will eventually impose a limit on carbon dioxide emissions, possibly in the form of percentage reductions based on a baseline year. By closing the plants now, Progress is effectively cutting its baseline, meaning it may have to reduce emissions even further in the future.

    “We need to do the right thing, regardless of that, and this is the right thing,” he said in a telephone interview. If there is a control system added later, he said, “we’d be making a strong argument, ‘Don’t penalize us for doing the right thing.’ ”

    While the short-term substitute is natural gas, the long-term plan is a nuclear backbone for the company’s generating system, he said.

    The plants being closed, at four sites, have a combined capacity of nearly 1,500 megawatts. Progress has spent more than $2 billion to put state-of-the-art controls on 2,500 megawatts of coal generation, the company said. And it has already announced plans for one new gas-fired plant and will soon announce additional plans, the company said. Progress is also planning to build two nuclear reactors in North Carolina and two more in Florida, but none will be in use by 2017.

    Gov. Bev Perdue said in a statement that the announcement by Progress was important for the state’s air quality. “The transition toward cleaner sources of energy is good for the environment and the economy,” she said.

    Progress said it might repower some coal-burning plants with wood waste. It does not anticipate large-scale wind or solar power in the near future, Mr. Johnson said. There is good wind offshore, but the area routinely experiences hurricanes that are stronger than existing wind machines can handle, he said.

    Duke, another utility that operates in North Carolina, is closing some coal plants but is building a new one.

    Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/02/business/energy-environment/02coal.html?emc=tnt&tntemail1=y

 
(c) 2007-2009 Utah Moms for Clean Air

Utah Moms for Clean Air is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization dedicated to using the power of moms to clean up Utah's dirty air.