One of the most celebrated achievements of Christie Todd Whitman as US EPA Director is the regulations of particulates from diesel fuel. As a matter of fact, yesterday, the regulation celebrated it's 13th year of environmental improvement.
April 16, 2003
By Jennifer B. Lee and Andrew C. Revkin
The Bush administration (click here) proposed rules yesterday that would deeply cut the soot, sulfur and smog-forming pollution from diesel engines in construction, farm and other industrial equipment.
Over the next decade, the proposed rules would phase in both a cleanup of the high-sulfur diesel fuel consumed by such engines and far stricter requirements for emissions controls on the engines themselves.
Shifting to cleaner diesel for the nonroad fleet would cost about $1.5 billion a year over the next 27 years, but that would be more than offset by savings estimated at $16 billion to $80 billion a year from prolonged lives and avoided health-care costs, administration officials said.
The proposed changes were lauded by environmentalists often at odds with the Bush administration and received muted support from affected industry groups.
The rules, proposed by the Environmental Protection Agency, could be adjusted before they start taking effect next spring. But Christie Whitman, the E.P.A. administrator, said the threat to public health was clear and the costs were justified....
That was 2003 and the 'phase in' began spring of 2004. The 'phase in' was to be completed in ten years or 2013.
The reason such new regulations are phased in is because of the capital investment companies have to make in compliance of the law. Ten years.
This is Koch today.
February 4, 2016
By David Shaffer
...The planned upgrades (click here) are designed to more efficiently process hydrocarbons that have gone through initial refining steps, turning them into ultralow-sulfur motor fuels, he said. The largest investment is the replacement of two 1960s-era coking units and integrated heaters that are a key step in converting asphalt, or “bottoms,” into higher-value fuels. The refinery will remain a major asphalt producer, however.
Federal rules already require refineries to produce diesel with less sulfur, a major contributor to diesel particulate emissions. Rules for reducing sulfur in gasoline are being phased in over several years.
During the refinery project, state-of-the-art air-pollution controls also will be installed as the coking and heating units are replaced. Other new, innovative technology will recover waste heat from some processes and use it for other refining steps, reducing cost and emissions while producing cleaner fuel, Glasrud said. The goal is to cut more than 500 tons of nitrogen oxides and other refinery emissions annually...
1960 era coking units. This from a family that is willing to spend nearly a billion dollars US (click here) later trimmed to $750 million, not to help pay the national debt, but to pay off Republicans to win elections in 2016.
...Flint Hills Resources said Thursday it plans to invest $750 million in its Pine Bend refinery in Rosemount to replace or upgrade major equipment and add advanced emission controls.
It will be the largest construction project at the refinery in at least a decade, and at its peak it will employ 2,500 workers, the company said. The planned work, which will need state permits, is expected to start in 2017 and take three years, executives said....
$750 million US in elections to buy a majority and a president for the Republican Party in 2016. Will that mean Koch won't be able to carry out their upgrades come 2017 and they expect a pass on this requirement that is already 3 years late?
The entire ten year 'phase in' is suppose to be time to get the necessary investments in place, hire the contractors or the necessary employees and BEGIN CONSTRUCTION. Koch is three years late in even announcing the work and doesn't plan beginning it for another year and it won't be complete for another three years after that. That is SEVEN YEARS this project is late. They need to be fined!
In 2005, the "Natural Resource Defense Council" (NRDC) went through a far amount of trouble and expense to write a paper that would benefit the companies impacted by this law. The NRDC receives no income from such a document. Most of their members don't even know this existed. But, they wrote this to point out to negligent companies like Koch there are benefits to move on this regulation today, not eight years from now, but, today in 2005.
I am sure Koch Industries has no use for the NRDC and won't care about such a paper.
If this project is delayed after the 2016 elections I want investigations as to where the corruption lies.
Currently, this project is going to be seven years late in achieving the goal of an US EPA regulation written by a Republican EPA Secretary in 2003. I WANT FINES for every DAY this project does not meet regulations no later than the date specified in the regulation or by the tenth anniversary of the regulation in 2013 which ever came first.!!!!!
If I am not mistaken the "Flint Hills Plant" is in Minnesota.
Technology and Efficiency Improvement Projects:
Replacement of two 1960s-era delayed
coking units with a single unit, built with
state-of-the-art technology to improve energy
efficiency and lower emissions
New gas oil fractionator, upgraded hydrogen
unit technology, and process improvements to
enhance flexibility to make more clean diesel
fuel when needed to meet demand
Improvements to gasoline blend stock
processing to allow greater flexibility in
making more ultra-low sulfur gasoline
without increasing emissions
Use of best-available control technology
Reduction of overall permitted emissions by
more than 500 tons per year
2,500 jobs during peak construction
Investment of approximately $750 million
Those lousy boilers are from the 1960s. Does anyone have any idea the kind of garbage they are throwing into the air and water of this country? That is not a successful company. It is not a responsible company. It is however a pathetic company.
This is what the Republicans are protecting. You've got to be joking if casting a vote for them in 2016!
The study below was published in another ACS journal entitled "Environmental Science and Technology." The scientists involved in the study below are from France and China. The Kochs gave the Chinese an example for every reason not to worry about changing their carbon pollution. If anything the example set by the Kochs, who have a sizable family operation in China, provided every incentive to ignore the international community. Profits before morality.
The study below was published in another ACS journal entitled "Environmental Science and Technology." The scientists involved in the study below are from France and China. The Kochs gave the Chinese an example for every reason not to worry about changing their carbon pollution. If anything the example set by the Kochs, who have a sizable family operation in China, provided every incentive to ignore the international community. Profits before morality.
Trend in Global Black Carbon Emissions from 1960 to 2007 (click here)
Environ. Sci. Technol., 2014, 48 (12), pp 6780–6787
DOI: 10.1021/es5021422
Publication Date (Web): May 13, 2014
Black carbon (BC) (click here) plays an important role in both climate change and health impact. Still, BC emissions as well as the historical trends are associated with high uncertainties in existing inventories. In the present study, global BC emissions from 1960 to 2007 were estimated for 64 sources, by using recompiled fuel consumption and emission factor data sets. Annual BC emissions had increased from 5.3 (3.4–8.5 as an interquartile range) to 9.1 (5.6–14.4) teragrams during this period. Our estimations are 11–16% higher than those in previous inventories....
Is there any wonder why the USA is STILL the largest greenhouse gas historical emitter of GHG? And to think, in 2016 China has surpassed the USA in environmental emissions. That is more than interesting. When is China going to be demanding better regulations and handing out fines?
Is there any wonder why the USA is STILL the largest greenhouse gas historical emitter of GHG? And to think, in 2016 China has surpassed the USA in environmental emissions. That is more than interesting. When is China going to be demanding better regulations and handing out fines?
