Can Tulsa meet the new ozone standard?

[RecycleMichael]

I am as optomistic as the next guy, but I think the EPA just lowered the ozone level to a number we can't meet. After all of these years of doing lots of things to barely keep us off the list, they today just lowered the limit.

Here is a Yahoo story...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080313/ap_on_go_ot/dirty_air;_ylt=ApM6jctu4sTszAxKGmK80XpI2ocA

Smog rule tightened; 345 counties fail By H. JOSEF HEBERT, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - The air in hundreds of U.S. counties is simply too dirty to breathe, the government said Wednesday, ordering a multibillion-dollar expansion of efforts to clean up smog in cities and towns nationwide.

The Environmental Protection Agency announced it was tightening the amount of ozone, commonly known as smog, that will be allowed in the air. But the lower standard still falls short of what most health experts say is needed to significantly reduce heart and asthma attacks from breathing smog-clogged air. EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson called the new limits "the most stringent standards ever," and he said they will require 345 counties — out of more than 700 that are monitored — to make air quality improvements because they now have dirtier air than is healthy to breathe.

Johnson said that state and local officials have considerable time to meet the requirements — as much as 20 years for some that have the most serious pollution problems. EPA estimates that by 2020 the number of counties failing to meet the new health standard will drop to about 28. About 85 counties still fall short of the old standard enacted a decade ago.

Some of those chronic polluters are far above the old limit. Los Angeles County and a large swatch of southern California, for example, and a long stretch from Washington up to New England on the East Coast. Some areas that would be newly included under the stricter standard include Indianapolis and Cleveland's Cuyahoga County in the Midwest; Mobile, Ala., and Jacksonville, Fla., in the South and El Paso, Texas, and Tulsa, Okla., out West.

All of Florida and Oklahoma currently comply with the smog standard. Nine counties in each state are unable to meet the tougher requirement.
Johnson's decision was met with sharp criticism from health experts and some members of Congress accused the EPA chief of ignoring the science. The new standard goes counter to the recommendations of two of the agency's scientific advisory panels — one on air quality and the other on protection of children.

The new EPA standard will lower the allowable concentration of ozone in the air to no more than 75 parts per billion, compared with the old standard of 80. The science boards had told the agency that limits of 60 to 70 parts per billion are needed to protect the nation's most vulnerable citizens, especially children, the elderly and people suffering from asthma and other respiratory illnesses.

"Today's decision means millions of Americans will not get the protection that the law requires," said Bernadette Toomey, president of the American Lung Association, which had strongly urged the EPA to follow the advice of the science boards.

Johnson said he took those recommendations into account, but disagreed with the scientists. "In the end it is a judgment. I followed my obligation. I followed the law. I adhered to the science," Johnson said in a conference call with reporters.

Johnson said he did not consider the cost of meeting the new air standard. States and counties would have to require emission reductions from factories, power plants and cars to meet the tougher health rules.

The EPA estimated that compliance with a 75 parts-per-billion smog standard would cost $7.6 billion to $8.5 billion a year and "yield health benefits valued between $2 billion and $19 billion." "Benefits are likely greater than the cost of implementing the standards," said the EPA in a statement. Electric utilities, oil companies and other businesses had lobbied hard for leaving the smog rule alone, saying the high cost of lower limits could hurt the economy.

The federal Clean Air Act requires that health standards for ozone and a handful of other air pollutants not take costs into account. But Johnson said that ought to change. He said the Bush administration plans to propose legislation to Congress to overhaul the 1970 law so that in the future costs can be considered when setting health standards.

Any such move is likely to be met with strong opposition in Congress. Health experts and environmentalists view the setting of health standards without consideration of cost as essential for assuring public health. Such changes "would gut the Clean Air Act which has saved countless lives and protected the health of millions of Americans for more than 35 years," said Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee.

"It's disheartening that once again EPA has missed a critical opportunity to protect public health and welfare by ignoring the unanimous recommendations of its independent science advisers," said William Becker, executive director of the National Association of Clean Air Agencies, whose members will be developing programs to meet the federal air quality requirement. Becker acknowledged that the tighter the standard the more difficult it will be to meet, but he said: "The public deserves the right to know whether the air they breathe is healthy."

In recent weeks, some of the most powerful industry groups in Washington have waged an intense lobbying campaign at the White House, urging the administration to keep the current standard. Electric utilities, the oil and chemical industries and manufacturing groups argued that lowering the standard would require states and local officials to impose new pollution controls, harming economic growth, when the science has yet to determine the health benefits conclusively. The 80 parts per billion standard was enacted by the EPA in 1997, but its implementation was delayed for several years because of court challenges by industry groups.

"Hundreds of counties haven't been able to meet the current standard set a decade ago," said John Kinsman, senior director for environment at the Edison Electric Institute, which represents most of the country's power companies. "Moving the goalpost again will inflict economic hardship on those areas without speeding air quality improvements."

The EPA has said, based on various studies, cutting smog from 80 to 75 parts per billion would prevent between 900 and 1,100 premature deaths a year and mean 1,400 fewer nonfatal heart attacks and 5,600 fewer hospital or emergency room visits. A separate study suggests that tightening the standard to 70 parts per billion could avoid as many s 3,800 premature deaths nationwide.

This is big...it affects what industries we can recruit to come here...it affects what road projects you can do...it might mean major retro-fits of all gas pumps...

We have not failed yet, we need the windiest and mildest summer possible, but I think they finally came up with a number we can't meet. Tulsa has the best voluntary ozone alert campaign in the country and even we are going to fail.

It sucks.

[Conan71]

Hmmm, so will that eventually wind up making Tulsa a non-attainment district like Dallas, Tarrant, and Harris counties in Texas and the LA Basin?

Aside from what we already do on ozone alert days, what other measures are there to try and hit compliance goals?  Is there anyway for cities or states to sue the EPA for undue hardship?

[RecycleMichael]

There is a long list of things we we are asking local industry to do...including making better gasoline. Other emitters are investing in better technology and commercial fleets are converting over to cleaner burning fuels. Even the newest trash truck the city ordered is on CNG fuel.

We are negotiating with EPA and will announce a new agreement tomorrow. They will keep us in voluntary compliance as long as they can as long as we keep working.

[mrhaskellok]

[I think I lost my reply, so let me try this again]

Micheal,

Do you have any ideas of how a city-wide citizen driven initiative could dramatically decrease (permanently preferably) our emissions.

In other words, I want to know if you have any crazy ideas.  I want to see if we can solve this one with a lot of elbow grease and a little less $$$.  If we can get support from a few schools, churches, and organizations, we may be able to garner enough volunteers to MAKE something happen.  I don't know what that is, but lets here you wild ideas!  

[cannon_fodder]

While I have only mild interest in C02, the affects of other pollutants are obvious and I'm glad they are regulated.  Not always do I agree with the manner in which they are regulated, but certainly in the function.  Tulsa's air is fairly clean for a mid sized city with horrible driving habits, a need for AC, lots of heavy industry, a busy airport, and of course oil refineries.  

As RM pointed out, that is due to focused efforts of industry, government, and the citizens (don't fill until evenings, don't mow, car pool, turn down the AC...).  

My concern is that the new lower standard dooms us.  If it is an unobtainable goal then people's desire to go the extra mile to keep us "clean" will be lost.  It will be hard to talk industry into voluntary standards if it will not make a real differences on the ratings scale (and thus avoid mandatory standards).

Yesterday, our mean Ozone reading was .52, with a high of .64.  That is on an 80 day, with few having AC on, a strong wind, and no accumulation  (as in day after day of 95 and stagnant air).  According to the Ozone Alert web page we would fail most years - certainly on a three year average:
http://www.ozonealert.com/problem3h.htm  (I think that's what this indicates).

Why didn't we build the refineries to the EAST of Tulsa and blow the pollutions out of the area... instead of into town.  D'oh!

[Townsend]

Slightly off topic but what is happening with the large update to the Sun refinery?  Do I have the right refinery and am I right in thinking it was close to $1billion?

A large portion of that was to update anti-pollution wasn't it?  Will it help us?

[Conan71]

Sinclair

[Townsend]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

Sinclair

Thank you

[T-Town Now]

The City of Tulsa needs to spend a lot of time synching the traffic lights. Idling cars pollute at much higher levels than cars that are at speed.

Traffic lights should be timed so that morning and evening rush hour traffic flows are given priority. Time after time, I've seen 50 or 60 cars sit idling at lights so that one or two cars can go through.

This alone would save tons of gas and considerably reduce pollution in Tulsa.

[hoodlum]

i wonder how many people pay any attention to the tips on ozone alert days?

i see plenty of people filling up during the day, mowing their lawns etc.

[RecycleMichael]

We are doing lots more work with the industry folk. We met yesterday with a major gas retailer and a pipeline guy discussing what is happening. Had a press conference today with the Mayor thanking Terra Nitrogen for voluntarily spending $2 million on upgrades that will take lots of NOx tons out of the air.

It is hard to quantify everything that people do on ozone alert days. Lots of people are clueless or choose to not change their habits, but we can show lots of examples of people who do change on the few alert days we call each summer.

[mrhaskellok]

Out of curiosity,  is there anyone IN the municipality that is advocating smaller roads and fewer lanes to promote a more sustainable community?
Big box retailers are the worse...they encourage huge amounts of traffic from a large diameter of area to converge on a few roads.  Smaller neighborhood friendly units are smarter in the long run.
My thoughts are that we can greatly decrease the amount of driving we do by placing our Wal-Mart's closer to our homes.[]

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by RecycleMichael

We are doing lots more work with the industry folk. We met yesterday with a major gas retailer and a pipeline guy discussing what is happening. Had a press conference today with the Mayor thanking Terra Nitrogen for voluntarily spending $2 million on upgrades that will take lots of NOx tons out of the air.

It is hard to quantify everything that people do on ozone alert days. Lots of people are clueless or choose to not change their habits, but we can show lots of examples of people who do change on the few alert days we call each summer.

If Tulsa County goes to a mandatory NOx level on industrial and commercial end-users I'll be the one buying everyone a round of drinks.  Windfall for my biz but it's going to be a costly proposition for a lot of companies to comply with.

This is the sort of environmental regulation which can have an un-intended effect of more inflationary pressures on companies and costs being passed on to the consumer.  Basically another tax generated by our government.

[FOTD]

Buying and selling the right to pollute?

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120535230851631199.html?mod=hps_us_pageone


"The risk for Mr. Sandor is that his firm will get beaten by much bigger rivals when the U.S. sets up its own system for cutting greenhouse-gas emissions. Analysts estimate that the U.S. carbon market would be about three times the size of Europe's, a windfall that is sure to attract rivals."

I wonder where this is leading us.....

[RecycleMichael]

quote:Originally posted by T-Town Now

The City of Tulsa needs to spend a lot of time synching the traffic lights. Idling cars pollute at much higher levels than cars that are at speed.

Traffic lights should be timed so that morning and evening rush hour traffic flows are given priority. Time after time, I've seen 50 or 60 cars sit idling at lights so that one or two cars can go through.

This alone would save tons of gas and considerably reduce pollution in Tulsa.

The Mayor mentioned this specifically at the press conference this morning. It has already started...