Chemical Regulation : Options for Enhancing the Effectiveness of the Toxic Substances Control Act

Government Accountability Office
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d09428t.pdf?source=ra

[From summary]  Congress passed the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) in 1976, authorizing the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to obtain information on the risks of industrial chemicals and to control those that EPA determines pose an unreasonable risk. However, EPA does not have sufficient chemical assessment information to determine whether it should establish controls to limit public exposure to many chemicals that may pose substantial health risks.

In reports on TSCA, GAO has recommended statutory changes to, among other things, provide EPA with additional authorities to obtain health and safety information from the chemical industry and to shift more of the burden to chemical companies for demonstrating the safety of their chemicals.

…This testimony, which is based on prior GAO work, addresses EPA’s implementation of TSCA and options for (1) obtaining information on the risks posed by chemicals to human health and the environment, (2) controlling these risks, and (3) publicly disclosing information provided by chemical companies under TSCA.

Climate Change : Observations on the Potential Role of Carbon Offsets in Climate Change Legislation

Government Accountability Office
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d09456t.pdf?source=ra

[Summary]  Carbon offsets—reductions of greenhouse gas emissions from an activity in one place to compensate for emissions elsewhere—can reduce the cost of regulatory programs to limit emissions because the cost of creating an offset may be less than the cost of requiring entities to make the reductions themselves. To be credible, however, an offset must be additional—it must reduce emissions below the quantity emitted in a business-as-usual scenario—among other criteria.

In the U.S., there are no federal requirements to limit emissions and offsets may be purchased in a voluntary market. Outside the U.S., offsets may be purchased on compliance markets to meet requirements to reduce emissions. The Congress is considering adopting a market-based cap-and-trade program to limit greenhouse gas emissions. Such a program would create a price on emissions based on the supply and demand for allowances to emit. Under such a program, regulated entities could potentially substitute offsets for on-site emissions reductions, thereby lowering their compliance costs.

Today’s testimony summarizes GAO’s prior work examining (1) the challenges in ensuring the quality of carbon offsets in the voluntary market, (2) the effects of and lessons learned from the Clean Development Mechanism (CDM), an international offset program, and (3) matters that the Congress may wish to consider when developing regulatory programs to limit emissions.

Environmental Protection Agency : Major Management Challenges

Government Accountability Office
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d09434.pdf?source=ra

[From summary]  GAO was asked to identify challenges at EPA that hinder its ability to implement its programs effectively, based on prior GAO work. These challenges include (1) improving agencywide management, (2) transforming EPA’s processes for assessing and controlling toxic chemicals, (3) improving implementation of the Clean Air Act, (4) reducing pollutionin the nation’s waters, (5) speeding the pace of cleanup at Superfund and other hazardous waste sites, and (6) addressing emerging climate change issues.

What GAO Recommends
GAO has made a number of recommendations intended to improve EPA’s programs by enhancing the information it uses to manage them and strengthening internal controls. EPA has concurred with most of the recommendations but has been slow to implement some of them.

Clean Coal : DOE’s Decision to Restructure FutureGen Should Be Based on a Comprehensive Analysis of Costs, Benefits, and Risks

Government Accountability Office
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d09248.pdf?source=ra

[From summary]  Coal-fired power plants generate about one-half of the nation’s electricity and about one-third of its carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, which contribute to climate change. In 2003, the Department of Energy (DOE) initiated FutureGen—a commercial-scale, coal-fired power plant to incorporate integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC), an advanced generating technology, with carbon capture and storage (CCS). The plant was to capture and store underground about 90 percent of its CO2 emissions. DOE’s cost share was 74 percent, and industry partners agreed to fund the rest.

Concerned about escalating costs, DOE restructured FutureGen. GAO was asked to examine (1) the original and restructured programs’ goals, (2) similarities and differences between the new FutureGen and other DOE CCS programs, and (3) if the restructuring decision was based on sufficient information.

What GAO Recommends
GAO recommends that DOE re-examine its restructuring decision, based on the comparative costs, benefits, and risks of the original and restructured programs, as well as other incremental options for modifying the original program. DOE provided technical comments but did not comment on the report’s recommendations.

Related: Clean Coal: DOE Should Prepare a Comprehensive Analysis of the Relative Costs, Benefits, and Risks of a Range of Options for FutureGen, March 11, 2009

Climate Change : Observations on Federal Efforts to Adapt to a Changing Climate

Government Accountability Office
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d09534t.pdf?source=ra

[From summary]  Today’s testimony summarizes GAO’s prior and ongoing work examining (1) actions that federal, state, local, and international
authorities are taking to adapt to a changing climate, (2) the challenges that federal, state, and local officials face in their efforts to adapt, and (3) actions that the Congress and federal agencies could take to help address these
challenges.

Federal Land Management : Additional Documentation of Agency Experiences with Good Neighbor Authority Could Enhance Its Future Use

Government Accountanility Office
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d09277.pdf?source=ra

[Summary]  In 2000, Congress authorized the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Forest Service to allow the Colorado State Forest Service to conduct certain activities, such as reducing hazardous vegetation, on U.S. Forest Service land when performing similar activities on adjacent state or private land. The Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM) received similar “Good Neighbor” authority in 2004, as did the U.S. Forest Service in Utah.

Congress has also considered the authority’s expansion to other states. GAO was asked to determine (1) the activities conducted under the authority; (2) the federal and state guidance, procedures, and controls used to conduct Good Neighbor projects;and (3) successes, challenges, and lessons learned resulting from the authority’s use. To do so, GAO reviewed Good Neighbor project documentation and interviewed federal and state officials.

What GAO Recommends: GAO recommends that the Secretaries of Agriculture and the Interior (1) require that the U.S. Forest Service in Utah, BLM in Colorado, and any agencies that receive the authority in other states, develop written procedures for Good Neighbor timber sales before conducting any future salesand (2) direct the agencies to betterdocument their experiences using the authority. The U.S. Forest Service, Interior, and the Colorado and Utah forest agencies generally agreed with the report’s findings.

Urban Partnership Agreements : Congestion Relief Initiative Holds Promise; Some Improvements Needed in Selection Process

Government Accountability Office
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d09154.pdf?source=ra

[From summary]  As part of a broad congestion relief initiative, the Department of Transportation awarded about $848 million from 10 grant programs to five cities (Miami, Minneapolis, New York, San Francisco, and Seattle) in 2007 as part of the Urban Partnership Agreements (UPA) initiative.

The UPA initiative is intended to demonstrate the feasibility and benefits of comprehensive, integrated, and innovative approaches to relieving congestion, including the use of tolling (congestion pricing), transit, technology, and telecommuting (4Ts).

This report addresses congressional interest in (1) how well the department communicated UPA selection criteria, (2) whether it had discretion to allocate grant funds to UPA recipients and consider congestion pricing as a priority selection factor, and (3) how it is ensuring that UPA award conditions are met and results are assessed.

Carbon Tax and Greenhouse Gas Control : Options and Considerations for Congress

Congressional Research Service
http://opencrs.com/document/R40242

[From summary]  Market-based mechanisms that limit greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions can be divided into two types: quantity control (e.g., cap-and-trade) and price control (e.g., carbon tax or fee). To some extent, a carbon tax and a cap-and-trade program would produce similar effects: Both are estimated to increase the price of fossil fuels, which would ultimately be borne by consumers, particularly households. Although there are multiple tools available to policymakers that could control GHG emissions—including existing statutory authorities—this report focuses on a carbon tax approach and how it compares to its more frequently discussed counterpart: cap-and-trade.

If policymakers had perfect information regarding the market, either a price (carbon tax) or quantity control (cap-and-trade system) instrument could be designed to achieve the same outcome. Because this market ideal does not exist, preference for a carbon tax or a cap-and-trade program ultimately depends on which variable one wants to control—emissions or costs. Although there are several design mechanisms that could blur the distinction, the gap between price control and quantity control can never be completely overcome.

A carbon tax has several potential advantages. With a fixed price ceiling on emissions (or their inputs—e.g., fossil fuels), a tax approach would not cause additional volatility in energy prices. A set price would provide industry with better information to guide investment decisions: e.g., efficiency improvements, equipment upgrades. Economists often highlight a relative economic efficiency advantage of a carbon tax, but this potential advantage rests on assumptions—about the expected costs and benefits of climate change mitigation—that are uncertain and controversial. Some contend that a carbon tax may provide implementation advantages: greater transparency, reduced administrative burden, and relative ease of modification.

The primary disadvantage of a carbon tax is that it would yield uncertain emission control. Some argue that the potential for irreversible climate change impacts necessitates the emissions certainty that is only available with a quantity-based instrument (e.g., cap-and-trade). Although it may present implementation challenges, policymakers could devise a tax program that allows some short-term emission fluctuations, while progressing toward a long-term emission reduction objective. Proponents argue that short-term emission fluctuations would be preferable to the price volatility that might be expected with a cap-and-trade system.

Although a carbon tax could possibly face more political obstacles than a cap-and-trade program, some of these obstacles may be based on misunderstandings of the differences between the two approaches or on assumptions that the tax would be set too low to be effective. Carbon tax proponents could possibly address these issues to some degree, but there remains considerable political momentum for a cap-and-trade program.

Federal Lands Managed by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the Forest Service (FS) : Issues for the 11th Congress

Congressional Research Service
http://opencrs.com/document/R40237

[Summary]  The 111th Congress, the Administration, and the courts are considering many issues related to the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) public lands and the Forest Service (FS) national forests. Key issues include the following.

Energy Resources. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 has led to new regulations on leasing programs and application of environmental laws to certain actions. H.R. 6 was enacted as P.L. 110-140 on December 19, 2007, without many of the federal lands provisions considered earlier.

Hardrock Mining. The General Mining Law of 1872 allows prospecting for minerals in open public domain lands, and staking a claim, developing the minerals, and applying for a patent to obtain title to the land and minerals. The House passed H.R. 2262 in the 110th Congress, to reform aspects of the General Mining Law, and a similar bill, H.R. 699, has been introduced in the 111th Congress.

Wildfire Protection. Various initiatives seek to protect communities from wildfires by expanding fuel reduction, and bills have been offered to restore forest health. Concerns over high and rising suppression costs have led to bills for separate wildfire suppression funding accounts. The economic stimulus legislation, P.L. 111-5, includes additional funding for fuel reduction.

Wild Horses and Burros. To reduce the number of wild horses and burros on the range and/or program costs, the BLM is considering three controversial options: euthanizing healthy animals, selling them without limitations, or ceasing to removing them from the range. H.R. 1018 has been introduced to amend the Wild Horses and Burros Act to limit euthanasia and sales.

National Landscape Conservation System. The BLM created the National Landscape Conservation System in 2000 to enhance the focus on specially protected conservation areas. The 111th Congress is considering measures to establish the 27 million acre system legislatively, including in Title Q of S. 22, which passed the Senate on January 16, 2009, and may debate the adequacy of funds for the system.

Wilderness. Many agency recommendations for wilderness areas are pending. Questions persist about wilderness review and managing wilderness study areas (WSAs). Nearly fifty wilderness area bills were introduced in the 110th Congress, and one was enacted into law. Bills have been introduced in the 111th Congress, and one, S. 22, passed the Senate on January 16, 2009.
National Forest System Roadless Areas. Debates about managing roadless areas—for wilderness values or development—persist, with differing regulations from the Clinton and Bush Administrations, and litigation challenging both sets of regulations.

FS NEPA Application. The FS has proposed altering its process for activity review under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA), and has added activities that can be categorically excluded from such environmental and public reviews. Many of these changes and
proposals have been challenged in court.

Other issues discussed briefly include national forest planning, national forest county payments, BLM land sales, and grazing management.

Estimates of Carbon Mitigation Potential from Agricultural and Forestry Activities

Congressional Research Service
http://opencrs.com/document/R40236

[From summary]  High petroleum and gasoline prices, concerns over global climate change, and the desire to promote domestic rural economies have greatly increased interest in biofuels as an alternative to petroleum in the U.S. transportation sector. Biofuels, most notably corn ethanol, have grown significantly in the past few years as a component of U.S. motor fuel supply. Ethanol, the most commonly used biofuel, is blended in more than half of all U.S. gasoline (at the 10% level or lower in most cases). However, current biofuels supply of 6.8 billion gallons only represents about 4% of total vehicle fuel demand.

In the United States, the agriculture and forestry sectors account for less than 10% of current estimated total U.S. greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions annually. Combined, these sectors are estimated to emit nearly 600 million metric tons CO2 equivalent (MMT CO2-Eq.) each year, most of which is emitted from the agriculture sector.

Current estimates of the combined amount of carbon sequestered by the agriculture and forestry sectors is reported at about 800 MMT CO2-Eq. per year, most of which is attributable to carbon stocks and uptake by trees in the forestry sector.

Numerous studies estimate the additional GHG mitigation potential of farm and forestry activities. Among these, two commonly cited studies are those conducted by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

Compared to current estimated mitigation potential levels, USDA and EPA projections provide a mostly positive picture of the potential for farm and forestry activities to mitigate GHG emissions. USDA and EPA project added mitigation potential of 590 to 990 MMT CO2-Eq. annually, thus increasing to roughly double current levels, assuming a high-end value or market price for carbon. At lower carbon prices, estimated additional mitigation potential is lower, but could still add about 40 to 160 MMT CO2-Eq. annually above current sequestration levels.

These estimates are useful indicators of the potential for carbon storage in the agriculture and forestry sectors, which some in Congress see as potentially available for carbon offset allowances as part of a cap-and-trade program. A cap-and-trade system—as part of a GHG emissions reduction and trading program—is one possible approach being considered by Congress to address GHG emissions in the ongoing climate change debate.