EPA Takes Another Step Towards Regulating Greenhouse Gases
Felicity Barringer, NY Times, March 23, 2009
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has moved to declare that greenhouse gases (GHGs) are pollutants that pose a danger to the public’s health and welfare. If that determination is made final, it will pave the way for federal regulation of carbon dioxide, methane, and other GHGs linked to global warming.
An endangerment finding would allow federal regulation of motor vehicle emissions. It could also open the door to regulatory controls over power plants, oil refineries, cement plants, and other factories that emit GHGs.
Read the complete NY Times story here: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/24/science/earth/24epa.html?hp
And also in the SF Chronicle: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2009/03/23/national/w122327D98.DTL&tsp=1
Monday, March 23, 2009
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
A Mandatory GHG Registry for the US?
EPA Proposes Tracking Industry Emissions
Kate Galbraith, NY Times, March 10, 2009
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed a rule on Tuesday that would require suppliers of fossil fuel and industrial chemicals, manufacturers of motor vehicles and engines, and large direct emitters of greenhouse gases (GHGs) with emissions equal to or greater than 25,000 tonnes per year to quantify and report their GHG emissions. The EPA says that the rule, promulgated under the Clean Air Act, would account for 85-90% of the country’s emissions of GHGs.
Many facilities already account and report the information voluntarily through various registries or federal agencies.
Large stationary sources of GHGs would be included in the new requirements. For example, buildings with an aggregate maximum rated heat input capacity equal to or greater than 30 mmBTU/hour (thousand thousand BTUs per hour) would have to comply, as would manure management systems that have emissions equal to or greater than 25,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents per year.
A 60-day comment period and two public hearings will take place in April 2009. If the rule is finalized this fall, as the EPA hopes, reporting could begin in 2011, after the monitoring of 2010 emissions.
Read the EPA's press release here, get more information on the proposed rule here, and read the complete NY Times story here.
Kate Galbraith, NY Times, March 10, 2009
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed a rule on Tuesday that would require suppliers of fossil fuel and industrial chemicals, manufacturers of motor vehicles and engines, and large direct emitters of greenhouse gases (GHGs) with emissions equal to or greater than 25,000 tonnes per year to quantify and report their GHG emissions. The EPA says that the rule, promulgated under the Clean Air Act, would account for 85-90% of the country’s emissions of GHGs.
Many facilities already account and report the information voluntarily through various registries or federal agencies.
Large stationary sources of GHGs would be included in the new requirements. For example, buildings with an aggregate maximum rated heat input capacity equal to or greater than 30 mmBTU/hour (thousand thousand BTUs per hour) would have to comply, as would manure management systems that have emissions equal to or greater than 25,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents per year.
A 60-day comment period and two public hearings will take place in April 2009. If the rule is finalized this fall, as the EPA hopes, reporting could begin in 2011, after the monitoring of 2010 emissions.
Read the EPA's press release here, get more information on the proposed rule here, and read the complete NY Times story here.
2008 Coastal Cleanup Day Tally Released
In September 2008, the Ocean Conservancy's 23rd International Coastal Cleanup Day netted the following waste from waterways and shorelines around the world in a single day:
Of the 104 participating countries, the US supplied about half the volunteers.
Read more in the SF Chronicle (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2009/03/10/national/a090043D65.DTL) or at www.oceanconservancy.org.
- 6,800,000 pounds of debris, 11.4 million items overall
- 3,200,000 million cigarette butts (1.3 million in the US alone)
- 1,400,000 million plastic bags
- 942,000 food wrappers and containers
- 937,000 caps and lids
- 26,585 tires
- 19,500 fishing nets in the United Kingdom
- 11,000 diapers in the Philippines
Of the 104 participating countries, the US supplied about half the volunteers.
Read more in the SF Chronicle (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2009/03/10/national/a090043D65.DTL) or at www.oceanconservancy.org.
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Brothers on the Rise
On February 24, 2009 Northgate geologist Brendan J. Mulholland was a guest speaker at the Edna Brewer Middle School in Oakland, California.
Brendan spoke to a group of adolescent boys enrolled in the Brothers on The Rise (BOTR) program. BOTR is a program for at-risk boys and identifies problems or issues related to academic achievement. BOTR's mission is to responsibly empower school-aged males to achieve individual success, develop healthy relationships, and contribute to a more just and equitable society. Their program works to resolve issues, change outcomes, and improve grades.
Brendan described his own challenges as an adolescent, and provided the boys an overview of Northgate’s daily operations as an environmental engineering firm.
He told the boys that the community recognizes their willingness and commitment to overcome obstacles and encouraged the boys to keep up the good work.
A follow-on visit by BOTR to Northgate’s office is planned.
Monday, March 2, 2009
More Wetlands on SF Bay Shoreline?
Richmond hopes to protect 5 miles of wetlands
Carolyn Jones, SF Chronicle, March 2, 2009
Developers, city officials, and park advocates are working to transform three parcels of private property in Richmond - a 5-mile stretch of wetlands that is among the last undeveloped swaths of San Francisco Bay shoreline - into permanent open space, most likely part of the Eastshore State Park. Public meetings are scheduled and city staff is working on possible zoning changes to residential or open space as part of revamping the city's general plan.
The land, a marsh that's home to egrets, herons and 15 threatened species, stretches from the West Contra Costa Sanitary Landfill, just north of the Chevron oil refinery, to Point Pinole Regional Shoreline. The Richmond Rod and Gun Club occupies the southern portion, and the rest is zoned for light industrial uses. The Giant Powder Co. and the town of Giant, both now vanished, once occupied the northern end.
Not everyone thinks open space is the best use of the shoreline. Richmond City Councilman Nathaniel Bates says the city already has too many parks. "We need jobs and economic development," Bates said. "Instead of just buying more land, I'd like to see the park district spruce up the parks they already have."
Read the complete article here: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/03/02/MNJO165QOI.DTL
Carolyn Jones, SF Chronicle, March 2, 2009
Developers, city officials, and park advocates are working to transform three parcels of private property in Richmond - a 5-mile stretch of wetlands that is among the last undeveloped swaths of San Francisco Bay shoreline - into permanent open space, most likely part of the Eastshore State Park. Public meetings are scheduled and city staff is working on possible zoning changes to residential or open space as part of revamping the city's general plan.
The land, a marsh that's home to egrets, herons and 15 threatened species, stretches from the West Contra Costa Sanitary Landfill, just north of the Chevron oil refinery, to Point Pinole Regional Shoreline. The Richmond Rod and Gun Club occupies the southern portion, and the rest is zoned for light industrial uses. The Giant Powder Co. and the town of Giant, both now vanished, once occupied the northern end.
Not everyone thinks open space is the best use of the shoreline. Richmond City Councilman Nathaniel Bates says the city already has too many parks. "We need jobs and economic development," Bates said. "Instead of just buying more land, I'd like to see the park district spruce up the parks they already have."
Read the complete article here: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/03/02/MNJO165QOI.DTL
Catch the Wave
Will California's Quest for Wave Power Sink or Sail?
Josie Garthwaite, NY Times, February 27, 2009
Having completed a wave power study, San Francisco submitted a preliminary application to federal regulators on February 27 for a permit to develop a 10 to 30 megawatt (MW) project to tap ocean energy eight miles off the city’s west coast. The proposed project has the potential to generate up to 100 MW. But while the technology has a big fan in Mayor Gavin Newsom, regulatory hurdles may prove a show-stopper. Last year state commissioners decided the technology was too new and the prices too high, and denied approval for PG&E and Finavera Renewables to develop what would have been the country’s first commercial wave power project.
Research and development of wave power technologies has rapidly expanded in recent years. The first commercial units are scheduled to go online in Portugal this year, producing 2 MW of energy. Despite several studies, no commercial operations are online in the US.
Josie Garthwaite, NY Times, February 27, 2009
Having completed a wave power study, San Francisco submitted a preliminary application to federal regulators on February 27 for a permit to develop a 10 to 30 megawatt (MW) project to tap ocean energy eight miles off the city’s west coast. The proposed project has the potential to generate up to 100 MW. But while the technology has a big fan in Mayor Gavin Newsom, regulatory hurdles may prove a show-stopper. Last year state commissioners decided the technology was too new and the prices too high, and denied approval for PG&E and Finavera Renewables to develop what would have been the country’s first commercial wave power project.
Research and development of wave power technologies has rapidly expanded in recent years. The first commercial units are scheduled to go online in Portugal this year, producing 2 MW of energy. Despite several studies, no commercial operations are online in the US.
San Francisco is hoping to change that.
Read more in the NY Times: http://www.nytimes.com/external/gigaom/2009/02/27/27gigaom-will-calis-latest-wave-power-project-sink-or-sail-24696.html
http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/27/wave-power-for-san-francisco/
Read more in the NY Times: http://www.nytimes.com/external/gigaom/2009/02/27/27gigaom-will-calis-latest-wave-power-project-sink-or-sail-24696.html
http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/27/wave-power-for-san-francisco/
Thursday, February 26, 2009
CEQA Guidelines for Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Senate Bill 97 mandates the development of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines "for the mitigation of greenhouse gas emissions or the effects of greenhouse gas emissions."
The Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR), the California Resources Agency, Cal EPA, and the California Air Resources Board have issued a technical advisory containing informal guidance for addressing climate change in CEQA documents.
How does this affect you and your clients?
Many development, redevelopment, and remediation projects are subject to CEQA.
- a CEQA project is one that requires discretionary approval by a government agency
How does this affect you and your clients?
Many development, redevelopment, and remediation projects are subject to CEQA.
- a CEQA project is one that requires discretionary approval by a government agency
Affected agencies must now address greenhouse gases (GHGs) in addition to other environmental issues and impacts.
-Identify all the GHG emission sources
-Calculate/estimate GHG emissions
-Identify mitigation measures and alternative methods/approaches
-Identify preferred mitigation strategies
-Identify all the GHG emission sources
-Calculate/estimate GHG emissions
-Identify mitigation measures and alternative methods/approaches
-Identify preferred mitigation strategies
OPR is required to prepare, develop, and transmit the guidelines to the Resources Agency on or before July 1, 2009, and the Resources Agency must certify and adopt the guidelines on or before January 1, 2010.
Visit the OPR website to view the Preliminary Draft CEQA Guideline Amendments and submitted written comments.
New LEED AP in the House!
Northgate congratulates Axel Rieke for recently passing his LEED AP exam!
LEED Professional Accreditation distinguishes building professionals with the knowledge and skills to successfully steward the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification process. LEED Accredited Professionals (APs) have demonstrated a thorough understanding of green building practices and principles and the LEED Rating System.
LEED is a third-party certification program and the nationally accepted benchmark for the design, construction, and operation of high performance green buildings. The LEED Professional Accreditation program is administered by the Green Building Certification Institute, established with the support of the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC).
LEED is a third-party certification program and the nationally accepted benchmark for the design, construction, and operation of high performance green buildings. The LEED Professional Accreditation program is administered by the Green Building Certification Institute, established with the support of the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC).
TransLink Card Now Available
Consider getting a TransLink card to ease your daily commute.
Your TransLink card carries a pre-paid balance, so you can forget about scrounging in the sofa cushions for bus money, and it provides protection of your balance if your card is lost, stolen or damaged. There is no fee for a TransLink card if you set up Autoload at the time you order the card online.
You can order a TransLink card here: https://www.translink.org/TranslinkWeb/getTranslinkOrderCard.do
...and don't let this be you!
Friday, February 13, 2009
Oakland's Green Building Requirements
Oakland - Building a Sustainable Future
The City of Oakland is considering mandatory Green Building requirements for private development. Green Building emphasizes maximizing efficiency and reducing consumption, and will mitigate the negative environmental and health impacts on many people living and working in Oakland.
A public hearing has been scheduled:
Thursday, February 19, 2009
5:30 to 7:30 pm
Oakland City Hall
Hearing Room 1
For more information:
Heather Klein, Planning and Zoning Division
510.238.3659, hklein@oaklandnet.com
Other Green Building requirements in the Bay Area:
Oakland already has Green Building requirements for applicable city building and traditional public works projects, setting LEED Silver standards for city buildings, and has adopted Green Building guidelines for private sector building. The city maintains a Green Building Resource Center to provide recycling and green building education and assistance.
Effective November 2008, Chapter 13C of the San Francisco Building Code requires new buildings constructed in the city to meet green building standards, which were developed by the Green Building Task Force.
San Francisco's priority permitting program provides expedited permit review in the Planning Department, Department of Building Inspection, and Department of Public Works for LEED Gold projects.
All San Francisco municipal projects (new construction and major renovations over 5,000 square feet) are required to achieve LEED Silver certification.
The city of San Francisco is banned from purchasing or using tropical hardwoods, virgin redwood, and wood treated with arsenic-based preservatives.
The City of Berkeley does not have green building standards, but requires that projects that require a Use Permit or Administrative Use Permit and involve demolition or construction, to consult with a green building expert provided at no charge by the Berkeley’s Best Builders Program. Applicable projects may also require completion of a Green Building Checklist, an Energy Conservation Analysis, or specific conservation measures.
All Alameda County projects must meet at least LEED Silver rating or equivalent. Traditional Public Works projects (e.g., pump stations, flood control improvements, roads, bridges, sidewalks, etc.) are exempted.
Alameda County projects with a total estimated construction costs exceeding $100,000 must divert at least 50% of debris from landfill via reuse or recycling. Traditional Public Works projects must also divert 75% of asphalt, concrete, and earth debris from landfill via reuse or recycling.
In San Jose, commercial and industrial buildings that are 25,000 square feet or more must meet LEED Silver standards. Residential developments of 10 or more units must meet basic LEED certification standards or achieve 50 points under the GreenPoint rating system. Housing structures that are 75 feet high or taller are required to meet basic LEED standards. In 2012, commercial and industrial buildings of 10,000 square feet or more and residential buildings 75 feet high or taller must meet LEED Silver standards.
Structures 10,000 square feet or more that are built by the city of San Jose or the San Jose Redevelopment Agency are required to meet LEED Silver status.
The City of Oakland is considering mandatory Green Building requirements for private development. Green Building emphasizes maximizing efficiency and reducing consumption, and will mitigate the negative environmental and health impacts on many people living and working in Oakland.
A public hearing has been scheduled:
Thursday, February 19, 2009
5:30 to 7:30 pm
Oakland City Hall
Hearing Room 1
For more information:
Heather Klein, Planning and Zoning Division
510.238.3659, hklein@oaklandnet.com
Other Green Building requirements in the Bay Area:
Oakland already has Green Building requirements for applicable city building and traditional public works projects, setting LEED Silver standards for city buildings, and has adopted Green Building guidelines for private sector building. The city maintains a Green Building Resource Center to provide recycling and green building education and assistance.
Effective November 2008, Chapter 13C of the San Francisco Building Code requires new buildings constructed in the city to meet green building standards, which were developed by the Green Building Task Force.
San Francisco's priority permitting program provides expedited permit review in the Planning Department, Department of Building Inspection, and Department of Public Works for LEED Gold projects.
All San Francisco municipal projects (new construction and major renovations over 5,000 square feet) are required to achieve LEED Silver certification.
The city of San Francisco is banned from purchasing or using tropical hardwoods, virgin redwood, and wood treated with arsenic-based preservatives.
The City of Berkeley does not have green building standards, but requires that projects that require a Use Permit or Administrative Use Permit and involve demolition or construction, to consult with a green building expert provided at no charge by the Berkeley’s Best Builders Program. Applicable projects may also require completion of a Green Building Checklist, an Energy Conservation Analysis, or specific conservation measures.
All Alameda County projects must meet at least LEED Silver rating or equivalent. Traditional Public Works projects (e.g., pump stations, flood control improvements, roads, bridges, sidewalks, etc.) are exempted.
Alameda County projects with a total estimated construction costs exceeding $100,000 must divert at least 50% of debris from landfill via reuse or recycling. Traditional Public Works projects must also divert 75% of asphalt, concrete, and earth debris from landfill via reuse or recycling.
In San Jose, commercial and industrial buildings that are 25,000 square feet or more must meet LEED Silver standards. Residential developments of 10 or more units must meet basic LEED certification standards or achieve 50 points under the GreenPoint rating system. Housing structures that are 75 feet high or taller are required to meet basic LEED standards. In 2012, commercial and industrial buildings of 10,000 square feet or more and residential buildings 75 feet high or taller must meet LEED Silver standards.
Structures 10,000 square feet or more that are built by the city of San Jose or the San Jose Redevelopment Agency are required to meet LEED Silver status.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)