Archive for the ‘Agriculture’ Category

Australia Carbon Tax

Tuesday, June 19th, 2012

On July 1, 2012 Australia will impose a price on carbon emissions.

A price on carbon is the most environmentally effective and economically efficient way to reduce pollution. This means our economy can continue to prosper – without our pollution continuing to grow. The Government’s plan for a clean energy future includes four key components. Firstly, the establishment of a carbon price. Secondly, support for renewable energy. Thirdly, to support improvements in energy efficiency. And fourthly, to store carbon through changed land-use practices. So, they’re the four key foundations, if you like, of our plan for a clean energy future. A carbon price has got a very important role to play because it puts a price tag on pollution. For the first time in our economy, the largest polluters will have to pay a price for every tonne of pollution that they put into the atmosphere, and that creates the incentive to cut pollution and it also creates the pressure to innovate, the pressure to invest in cleaner energy sources. And that’ll be very important for the future of our country and our economy and our living standards, because it’s the countries in the 21st century that have innovated and that have got clean energy as a key part of their economic future that will be the most competitive, and that’s very important for our future as well.

More on Carbon Taxes, Cap and Trade and Emissions Trading
More on Global Warming and Climate Change

Questions Answered

Q. Where will the money raised from the carbon price go?

A.

More than half of the money raised will be used to assist households. The majority of households will receive tax cuts, increased assistance payments  or both. With the rest of the money, the Government will be supporting jobs in the most affected industries and investing in our clean energy future. Find more questions about: Carbon Price , Household / Family

Q. Will I have to pay the carbon price?

A.

No, it’s not a tax on households or small businesses - Australia’s biggest polluters will be required to pay for their pollution under the carbon pricing mechanism. They account for around 60 per cent of our carbon pollution. For more information on Australia’s biggest polluters. Find more questions about: Carbon Price , Household / Family

An environmental problem with an economic solution

Putting a price on carbon is the most environmentally effective and cheapest way to cut pollution. This is a fact that is well recognized by economists from around the world, and respected institutions such as the OECD and the Productivity Commission. Currently, releasing carbon pollution is free despite the fact that it is harming our environment. A carbon price changes this. It puts a price on the carbon pollution that Australia’s largest polluters produce. This creates a powerful incentive for all businesses to cut their pollution, by investing in clean technology or finding more efficient ways of operating. It encourages businesses across all industries to find the cheapest and most effective way of reducing carbon pollution, rather than relying on more costly approaches such as government regulation and direct action.

A carbon price means a strong and growing economy

The economy will continue to grow as Australia embraces a clean energy future. Treasury modelling estimates that under a carbon price:

  • Average incomes grow strongly under a carbon price. Average incomes are expected to increase by about 16 per cent from current levels by 2020, an increase of around $9000 in today’s dollars. By 2050, the increase is expected to be more than $30,000.
  • National employment is projected to increase by 1.6 million jobs by 2020.


Breaking the link between emissions and economic growth

The carbon price is the first element of the Government’s plan for a clean energy future: it will trigger a broad transformation of the economy. Our economy has successfully handled comparable structural changes over its history. In fact, transformative changes – new products and technologies, and the integration of our economy into the global economy set in train by the reforms of the 1980s and 1990s – have underpinned rising prosperity and sustainable growth in Australia. Treasury modelling shows that, under a carbon price, the economy continues to grow.

Figure 1: Gross National Income with and without the carbon price

Breaking the link between emissions and economic growth For more information see: Chapter 3 – Putting a price on carbon pollution. For further details about a carbon price see:

↑ Back to Top

Cause Of Bee Colony Collapse

Wednesday, May 2nd, 2012

Use of Common Pesticide Linked to Bee Colony Collapse

Boston, MA – The likely culprit in sharp worldwide declines in honeybee colonies (colony collapse disorder) since 2006 is imidacloprid, one of the most widely used pesticides, according to a new study from Harvard School of Public Health. Pinpointing the cause of the problem is crucial because bees — beyond producing honey — are prime pollinators of roughly one-third of the crop species in the U.S. and livestock feed. Massive loss of honeybees could result in billions of dollars in agricultural losses, experts estimate.

The authors, led by Chensheng (Alex) Lu, associate professor of environmental exposure biology in the Department of Environmental Health, write that the new research provides “convincing evidence” of the link between imidacloprid and the phenomenon known as Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD), in which adult bees abandon their hives.

The study will appear in the June issue of the Bulletin of Insectology.

“The significance of bees to agriculture cannot be underestimated,” says Lu. “And it apparently doesn’t take much of the pesticide to affect the bees. Our experiment included pesticide amounts below what is normally present in the environment.”

Pinpointing the cause of the problem is crucial because bees—beyond producing honey—are prime pollinators of roughly one-third of the crop species in the U.S., including fruits, vegetables, nuts, and livestock feed such as alfalfa and clover. Massive loss of honeybees could result in billions of dollars in agricultural losses, experts estimate.

Lu and his co-authors hypothesized that the uptick in CCD resulted from the presence of imidacloprid, a neonicotinoid introduced in the early 1990s. Bees can be exposed in two ways: through nectar from plants or through high-fructose corn syrup beekeepers use to feed their bees. (Since most U.S.-grown corn has been treated with imidacloprid since 2005, it’s also found in corn syrup.)

In the summer of 2010, the researchers conducted an in situ study in Worcester County, Mass. aimed at replicating how imidacloprid may have caused the CCD outbreak. Over a 23-week period, they monitored bees in four different bee yards; each yard had four hives treated with different levels of imidacloprid and one control hive. After 12 weeks of imidacloprid dosing, all the bees were alive. But after 23 weeks, 15 out of 16 of the imidacloprid-treated hives—94%—had died. Those exposed to the highest levels of the pesticide died first.

The characteristics of the dead hives were consistent with CCD, said Lu; the hives were empty except for food stores, some pollen, and young bees, with few dead bees nearby. When other conditions cause hive collapse—such as disease or pests—many dead bees are typically found inside and outside the affected hives.

Strikingly, said Lu, it took only low levels of imidacloprid to cause hive collapse—less than what is typically used in crops or in areas where bees forage.

Scientists, policymakers, farmers, and beekeepers, alarmed at the sudden losses of between 30% and 90% of honeybee colonies since 2006, have posed numerous theories as to the cause of the collapse, such as pests, disease, pesticides, migratory beekeeping, or some combination of these factors.

This study was supported by a grant funded by Harvard University Center for the Environment.

“In Situ Replication of Honey Bee Colony Collapse Disorder,” Chensheng Lu, Kenneth M. Warchol, Richard A. Callahan, Bulletin of Insectology, June 2012

For more information:

Todd Datz
tdatz@hsph.harvard.edu
617.432.8413

Gummi Bears: Expert Says Global Warming May Be The End

Monday, April 16th, 2012

WEST CHESTER, PENNSYLVANIA, USA — Will human induced climate change cause the extinction of the Gummi Bear? An expert from West Chester University says, “Yes.”

Stay tuned for the gooey details.

More from the experiment “Human Induced Climate Change”

Ben Cohen Brings Ben & Jerry’s to Occupy Philly

Tuesday, November 15th, 2011

City Hall, Philadelphia, PA
November 15, 2011
by Daniel Brouse

It was almost like being served your last meal at Occupy Philadelphia today. Ben Cohen of Ben and Jerry’s ice cream brought free deserts for everyone at the encampment.

As Ben & Jerry’s gradually grew into a nationwide business and one of the largest ice cream companies in the USA, Cohen turned his new-found wealth and prominence toward a variety of social causes, generally through the Ben & Jerry’s Foundation. The Foundation receives 7.5% of all Ben & Jerry’s pre-tax profits and distributes funds to organizations such as the Anti Displacement Project. Cohen also oversees TrueMajority and Business Leaders for Sensible Priorities.

Cohen has been an active voice in favor of liberal causes. He supports small-scale farming, does not accept milk with rBGH or other implants, and has heavily criticized US budgetary priorities, pointing out that more money is spent on nuclear weapons than on children’s healthcare programs. He is also vocal in his support of Democratic candidates, including Dennis Kucinich for the U.S. Democratic presidential nomination in 2004 and John Edwards followed by Barack Obama in 2008. — Wikipedia

In the true spirit of his beliefs, he brought ice cream and scooped it hour after hour. Thanks, Ben!

Why? What would posses such a 1 percenter to do such act?

The Ben & Jerry’s press release:

To those who occupy: We stand with you

We, the Ben & Jerry’s Board of Directors, compelled by our personal convictions and our Company’s mission and values, wish to express our deepest admiration to all of you who have initiated the non-violent Occupy Wall Street Movement and to those around the country who have joined in solidarity. The issues raised are of fundamental importance to all of us. These include:

  • The inequity that exists between classes in our country is simply immoral.
  • We are in an unemployment crisis. Almost 14 million people are unemployed. Nearly 20% of African American men are unemployed. Over 25% of our nation’s youth are unemployed.
  • Many workers who have jobs have to work 2 or 3 of them just to scrape by.
  • Higher education is almost impossible to obtain without going deeply in debt.
  • Corporations are permitted to spend unlimited resources to influence elections while stockpiling a trillion dollars rather than hiring people.

We know the media will either ignore you or frame the issue as to who may be getting pepper sprayed rather than addressing the despair and hardships borne by so many, or accurately conveying what this movement is about. All this goes on while corporate profits continue to soar and millionaires whine about paying a bit more in taxes. And we have not even mentioned the environment.

We know that words are relatively easy but we wanted to act quickly to demonstrate our support. As a board and as a company we have actively been involved with these issues for years but your efforts have put them out front in a way we have not been able to do. We have provided support to citizens’ efforts to rein in corporate money in politics, we pay a livable wage to our employees, we directly support family farms and we are working to source fairly traded ingredients for all our products. But we realize that Occupy Wall Street is calling for systemic change. We support this call to action and are honored to join you in this call to take back our nation and democracy.

— Ben & Jerry’s Board of Directors

Who’s on our Board?

What’s our position on the issues that matter?

Does Ben & Jerry’s spend money on lobbying in the United States?
Ben & Jerry’s has launched numerous activist campaigns over the years that are considered lobbying activities according to federal and state laws.

In the past four years, the positions we have taken in these activist campaigns are:

  1. Support for a Constitutional amendment that would limit corporate spending in elections.
  2. Support for stronger social and environmental protections in the Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement.
  3. Support for the Youth PROMISE Act, which funds proven youth violence prevention programs.
  4. Support for continued funding for the United States Institute of Peace.
  5. Support for continued funding for the Complex Crises Fund which supports State Department emergency efforts to defuse volatile conflicts around the globe.
  6. Support for aggressive federal legislation to limit and reduce carbon emissions to respond to the challenge of climate change.
  7. Opposition to FDA approval of foods from cloned animals.
  8. Support for a USDA program to require mandatory tracking of cloned animals in the food supply to support consumer choice.
  9. Opposition to FDA approval of genetically engineered animals in the food supply.
  10. Support for the right of dairy companies to label their products as being ‘rBGH-free.’
  11. Support for the United Nations Millennium Development goals to eradicate extreme poverty and inequality.

Ben & Jerry’s has reported all expenditures on these grassroots campaign activities as required by federal and Vermont state law.

Increased Ethanol In Gasoline

Thursday, March 3rd, 2011

There are concerns about using ethanol in gasoline. It is possible that ethanol is actually worse for the environment and increasing the rate of global warming; however, the EPA is allowing E15.

E15 (a blend of gasoline and ethanol)

In response to a request by Growth Energy under section 211(f)(4) of the Clean Air Act, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has partially granted a waiver to allow fuel and fuel additive manufacturers to introduce into commerce gasoline that contains greater than 10 volume percent (vol%) ethanol and up to 15 vol% ethanol (E15) for use in model year (MY) 2001 and newer light-duty motor vehicles, subject to several conditions. On October 13, 2010, EPA granted a partial waiver for E15 for use in MY2007 and newer light-duty vehicles (i.e., cars, light-duty trucks and medium-duty passenger vehicles). On January 21, 2011, EPA granted a partial waiver for E15 for use in MY2001-2006 light-duty motor vehicles. These decisions were based on test results provided by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) and other information regarding the potential effect of E15 on vehicle emissions. Taken together, the two actions allow, but do not require, E15 to be introduced into commerce for use in MY2001 and newer light-duty motor vehicles if conditions for mitigating misfueling and ensuring fuel quality are met. EPA is in the process of completing work on regulations that would provide a more practical means of meeting the conditions.

Prior to the distribution of E15, fuel and fuel additive manufacturers are required to register the fuel with EPA. For more information on fuel registration visit the Registration and Health Effect Testing page. There are also a number of other actions including changes to various state and local laws that may also affect the distribution of E15.

What is E15?

Ethanol is an alcohol that can be mixed with gasoline to result in a cleaner-burning fuel. The most common blend of gasoline and ethanol is E10, or 10 percent of ethanol to 90 percent of gasoline. E10 was granted a waiver under Clean Air Act section 211(f)(4) by operation of law over 30 years ago. E15 is gasoline containing 15 vol% ethanol.

The primary source of ethanol is corn, but other grains or biomass sources may be used.
What is the E15 waiver?

In order to protect the emission control systems of vehicles and engines, the Clean Air Act prohibits the introduction of fuels or fuel additives that are not substantially similar to the fuels or fuel additives used in certifying vehicles and engines to emission standards. However, the Act authorizes EPA to grant a waiver of this prohibition for a fuel or fuel additive if it can be demonstrated that vehicles and engines using the otherwise prohibited fuel or fuel additive will continue to meet emission standards over their “full useful life” (100,000 or 120,000 miles, depending on the vehicle type and model year).

In March 2009, Growth Energy (a coalition of U.S. ethanol supporters) and 54 ethanol manufacturers applied for a waiver to increase the allowable amount of ethanol in gasoline from E10 to E15. The waiver application included data on the impact of E15 on vehicle emissions, fuel system materials, and driveability. Additional data were developed by DOE, which in 2008 began testing for potential impacts of various ethanol-gasoline blends on emissions of MY2007 and newer light-duty motor vehicles. This testing followed enactment of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, which calls for significantly increasing the amount of biofuels, such as ethanol, to be used in transportation fuel. EPA received over 78,000 public comments about Growth Energy’s application.

Initially, EPA partially granted Growth Energy’s waiver request application. Based in large part on DOE test data, the Agency approved the waiver for and allowed the introduction into commerce of E15 for use in MY2007 and newer light-duty motor vehicles, subject to certain conditions. EPA did not approve the waiver for E15 use in MY2000 and older light-duty motor vehicles, heavy-duty gasoline engines and vehicles (e.g., delivery trucks), highway and off-highway motorcycles, and nonroad engines, vehicles, and equipment (e.g., boats, snowmobiles, and lawnmowers) due to insufficient test data or other information to support a waiver for these vehicles and engines. At the time of the announcement in October, EPA deferred action on E15 for use in MY2001-2006 light-duty motor vehicles until DOE test data for those model years became available.

On January 21, 2011, after DOE test data were made available to the public (see EPA Docket #EPA-HQ-OAR-2009-0211 at www.regulations.gov), EPA took further action on Growth Energy’s waiver request application to approve the introduction into commerce of E15 for use in MY 2001-2006 and newer light-duty motor vehicles, subject to the same conditions that apply to the partial waiver decision for later model year vehicles. Taken together, the two waiver decisions allow the introduction into commerce of E15 for use in MY2001 and newer light-duty motor vehicles if the waiver conditions are met.
What Vehicles May Use E15?

* Flexible-fuel vehicles (FFVs).
* MY2001 and newer cars.
* MY2001 and newer light-duty trucks.
* MY2001 and newer medium-duty passenger vehicles. (SUVs).

top of page
What Vehicles and Engines May Not Use E15?

* All motorcycles.
* All vehicles with heavy-duty engines, such as school buses, transit buses, and delivery trucks.
* All off-road vehicles, such as boats and snowmobiles.
* All engines in off-road equipment, such as lawnmowers and chain saws.
* All MY2000 and older cars, light-duty trucks, and medium-duty passenger vehicles (SUVs).

top of page
What Conditions are Part of the Waiver Decision?

EPA placed two types of conditions on the waiver for E15: those for mitigating the potential for misfueling of E15 into vehicles, engines and equipment for which E15 is not approved, and those addressing fuel and ethanol quality. All conditions must be met prior to the introduction of E15 into commerce.

Fuel quality conditions:

* Ethanol used for E15 must meet ASTM International D4806-10.
* The Reid Vapor Pressure for E15 is limited to 9.0 psi during the summertime.

Misfueling mitigation conditions:

* Labels must be placed on E15 retail dispensers indicating that E15 use is only for MY2001 and newer motor vehicles.
* Product Transfer Documents (PTDs) must accompany all transfers of fuels for E15 use.
* Parties involved in the manufacture of E15 must participate in a survey of compliance at fuel retail dispensing facilities to ensure proper labeling of dispensers.
* Parties must submit a plan addressing conditions to EPA for approval.

top of page
What is EPA doing to Address Potential Misfueling?

EPA is in the process of establishing a regulatory program to help mitigate potential misfueling of vehicles, engines, and equipment for which E15 is not approved. Concurrently with the October 13, 2010 partial waiver decision, the Agency proposed a rule that would require all E15 fuel dispensers to have a label if a retail station chooses to sell E15, and sought comment on separate labeling requirements for fuel blender pumps and fuel pumps that dispense E85. Similar to the prohibition in Clean Air Act section 211(f)(1), the rule would prohibit the use of gasoline containing greater than 10 vol% ethanol in vehicles and engines not covered by the partial waiver for E15. In addition, the rule would require PTDs specifying ethanol content and Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP) to accompany the transfer of gasoline blended with ethanol and a national survey of retail stations to ensure compliance with these requirements. The rule would also modify the Reformulated Gasoline (RFG) program by updating the Complex Model to allow fuel manufacturers to certify batches of gasoline containing up to E15. The measures were designed to help promote the successful introduction of E15 into commerce.

EPA held a public hearing on the proposed rule in November and provided a 60-day public comment period that ended on January 3, 2011.

top of page
Notices and Updates
NOTE: You will need Adobe Acrobat Reader, available as a free download, to view some of the files on this page. See EPA’s PDF page to learn more about PDF, and for a link to the free Acrobat Reader.

Under the authority of Clean Air Act section 211(f)(4), EPA may consider the March 2009 application from Growth Energy for a waiver for a gasoline-ethanol blend with up to 15 vol% ethanol (E15) to be used in non-flexible-fueled vehicles.

EPA reviewed Growth Energy’s application along with available test data, other information and public comments. On October 13, 2010, EPA determined that, subject to compliance with the conditions listed in the waiver decision, a gasoline produced with greater than 10 volume percent (vol%) ethanol and up to 15 vol% ethanol will not cause or contribute to a failure of MY 2007 and newer cars, light-duty trucks and medium-duty passenger motor vehicles to achieve compliance with applicable emission standards over the vehicles’ full useful life. Therefore, EPA partially and conditionally granted Growth Energy’s waiver request for a gasoline-ethanol blend with up to 15 vol% ethanol. On January 21, 2011, EPA took further action on Growth Energy’s waiver request and granted a partial waiver for E15 use in MY 2001-2006 cars, light duty trucks and medium-duty passenger vehicles, subject to the same conditions that apply to the partial waiver for newer light-duty motor vehicles.

* Partial waiver for use of E15 in MY2001-2006 light-duty motor vehicles | PDF Version (22 pp; 2.7MB; January 26, 2011)
* Fact Sheet: EPA Announces E15 Partial Waiver Decision | PDF Version (3 pp; 510K; EPA-420-F-11-003; January 21, 2011)
* Partial waiver for use of E15 in MY2007 and newer light-duty motor vehicles | PDF Version (58 pp, 4.57M, published November 4, 2010)
* Status Update (July 2010)
* Status Update (PDF) (2 pp, 493K, November 30, 2009)
* Extension of Comment Period: Notice | PDF Version (2 pp, 75K, published May 20, 2009)
* Notice of Receipt of Waiver Application | PDF Version (3 pp, 77K, published April 21, 2009)

For further information or assistance, please contact Robert Anderson (anderson.robert@epa.gov) or at 202-343-9718.



Home | Contact Us | Internet & Advertising Services