Registering Greenhouse Gases

Registering Greenhouse Gases

September 30, 2009

Ken Silverstein
EnergyBiz Insider
Editor-in-Chief

It's a first step. But it's a big one. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has signed a final rule to establish a mandatory greenhouse gas reporting system that it says would cover about 85 percent of all such emissions.

The thinking is that the formation of such a registry requires industrial concerns to not just tabulate their heat-trapping emissions but to also consider ways to reduce them. In effect, what gets measured gets managed. That, in turn, would make it more feasible to enact national policy that would require cuts in those releases and could like facilitate the implementation of a cap-and-trade system.

"Monitoring and reporting of emissions is a critical step in laying the foundation for successful climate policy in the United States," says Pankaj Bhatia, a director for the World Resources Institute. "To be effective, climate policies require accurate and reliable emissions data. Mandatory reporting represents an important next step as the U.S. moves to a mandatory approach to reducing climate change."

In December 2007, the U.S. Congress passed legislation that directed the EPA to establish mandatory reporting of greenhouse gas emissions from appropriate sources in all sectors of the economy. The rule would affect utilities, oil refineries and any other facilities that release 25,000 metric tons or more of not just carbon dioxide but also methane, hydrofluorocarbons and nitrous oxide.

About 10,000 businesses will now be required to start the monitoring process on January 1, 2010 and to have their first reports into the EPA by March 31, 2011. While many such companies are now voluntarily reporting the volume of their greenhouse gas emissions, the new system will make it all uniform and more transparent. The data will also allow entities to track their own emissions and compare them to similar facilities.

The signing of the rule came as President Obama met with world leaders at the United Nations and with those of the developed world at a summit in Pittsburgh. Because this country is responsible for a quarter of all global greenhouse gas emissions, he has been under increasing pressure to commit the nation to hard reductions in such releases before the global conference in Copenhagen in December.

The mandatory registry has thus given the president increasing credence among those who want to see greenhouse gases cut from 2005 levels by 80 percent before mid century. European policymakers in particular have expressed skepticism in the government here, noting that a climate bill is now languishing in the U.S. Senate.

"The American public, and industry itself, will finally gain critically important knowledge and with this information we can determine how best to reduce those emissions," says EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson.

Avoiding Trouble

The Edison Electric Institute commended the EPA for its efforts, noting that its final plan was more flexible plan that what it had originally presented. But some organizations and policymakers are still expressing concern that the policy could eventually overreach and adversely affect smaller, less industrial-driven businesses.

The National Association of Manufacturers, for instance, fought hard to reduce the overall metric tonnage that would be required to force reporting. It said that if that level were raised from the now mandated 25,000 metric tons to 100,000 metric tons, then it would exempt thousands of smaller enterprises that will now have to report. The important figure, it adds, is that instead of recording 85 percent of all greenhouse gas emissions, it would still be able to track 82 percent of them.

A compulsory registry is one thing. But a formal law to require businesses to cut their carbon issues is another. Some U.S. lawmakers, cognizant of the fact that President Obama is dedicated to signing the next round of global climate change talks, are trying to get him to act more cautiously.

U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, had wanted take the heat off the Senate to draft a bill compatible to that of the House. Her measure, which was blocked by the majority, would have prevented EPA from spending money on regulating carbon dioxide from stationary sources for one year. Murkowski, the ranking Republican on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, said such a bill is still necessary to avoid an "economic train wreck."

"Very clearly, stationary sources must reduce emissions in order to bring our nation to its climate goal," says Murkowski. "But forcing them to do so through the Clean Air Act would be one of the least efficient and most damaging ways to pursue that goal. It would be rife with unintended consequences, and could be devastating for our economy."

The Democrats, of course have the muscle to block any similar measures that would attempt to ax carbon legislation. But that's not to say that they will exercise it. Many democratic lawmakers, in fact, reside in the Midwest and Southeast where coal-fired generation is prominent.

In any event, environmentalists and many other Democrats are hailing EPA's move to require a registry for all greenhouse gases, saying it is an essential step on the path to formally regulate such emissions. "Accurate data are critical to designing cost-effective programs that respond to the threat of climate change," says Eileen Claussen, president of the Pew Center on Global Climate Change.

By tracking of those emissions, businesses would then be better positioned to know where to make advances. Congress, meanwhile, would have an existing body to help oversee enforcement and to show companies how they might improve their processes. It's all a precursor to what is becoming an increasingly carbon-constrained world.