published monthly environmental synopsis -...

A Legislative Service Agency of the Pennsylvania General Assembly

The Chairman’s CornerSen. Scott E. Hutchinson, Chairman

(continued on page 8)

September 2013Vol. 14, No. 9

Published Monthly ENVIRONMENTAL SYNOPSIS

In This Issue…The Chairman’s Corner .................................p. 1

Notes From the Director ..............................p. 2

Research Briefs .........................................p. 3-6

Americans Buy Green More EPA Rulemaking on Renewable Fuel Standards

Hurricane Isaac Triggers Spills in Louisiana Getting a Handle on Electronic WasteOn the Horizon .............................................p. 7

Committee Chronicles .................................p. 7

CJC

oint LegislativeAir and WaterPollution Control and

onservation

ommittee

Is there anybody here who doesn’t like to color? Even if you’re an adult?

And, how many of those reading this column have at one time or another purchased colored markers for their children or their children’s school, so that big, bright works of art could be created? I’d venture a guess that nearly everyone reading this has done so at one time or another.

What does that have to do with the Joint Legisla-tive Air and Water Pollution Control and Conservation Committee, you might be asking. Well, the committee has had a long history of dealing with issues in the recycling field, and has been particularly interested in new markets for

recyclables for some time. And, today’s article really has to do with recycling and a new recycling market, and not just pretty colors.

I recently came across an article that described a new partnership between a well-known Pennsylvania company and a New York company to recycle previously unrecyclable ma-terials. Such news is always of interest to the committee, and should be to readers as well.

The name of the PA company is one of the most colorful in the world – Crayola – the iconic maker of crayons, markers and other colorful products. Crayola is headquartered in the Easton area and is a major PA employer, employing approximately 1,300 people in 2012, according to a company webpage.

Crayola’s partner in this new recycling venture is JBI, Inc., a clean energy company that recycles waste plastic into liquid fuels. JBI is headquartered in Niagara Falls, NY.

Together the two companies have embarked upon the “Col-orCycle” program. The program will take – and already is taking – those ubiq-uitous colored markers that I spoke about above and is converting the used-up markers into diesel and other liquid fuels.

ENVIRONMENTAL SYNOPSIS / SEPTEMBER 2013 / P. 2

CRAIG D. BROOKS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTORNOTES FROM THE DIRECTOR

_____________________________________________________A new report finds that the amount of solid waste

generated nationally– both in total and per capita –

declined slightly in 2011, while the amount recovered increased slightly

_____________________________________________________

The amount of solid waste generated nation-ally was 250.4 million tons in 2011, a slight decrease from the 250.5 million tons in 2010,

while the percentage recovered increased to 34.7 percent in 2011 from 34 percent in 2010.

In its annual report, Municipal Solid Waste in the United States: 2011 Facts and Figures, the Environ-mental Protection Agency (EPA) said that 86.9 million tons of solid waste generated were recovered in 2011. EPA also found per capita generation of municipal solid waste declined to 4.40 pounds daily in 2011, from 4.44 pounds generated daily in 2010.

The largest types of materials discarded include food waste at 21.3 percent, plastics at 17.8 percent, paper and paperboard products at 14.8 percent, and rubber, leather and textiles at 10.6 percent, according to the report. The amount of municipal solid waste generated in 2011 rep-resented a decline of six million tons from 257 million in 2007, the peak year for waste genera-tion.

EPA’s report exam-ined the recycling rates of individual materials. Glass containers have a recycling rate of 34.2 percent, aluminum beer and soda cans have a recycling rate of 54.5 percent, news-papers and other paper have a recycling rate of 72.5 percent, and plastic bottles (polyethylene terephthal-ate) have a recycling rate of 29.2 percent.

Recycling rates rose most dramatically for alumi-num cans and tires. The aluminum can recycling rate increased 9.9 percent from 49.6 in 2010 to 54.5 in 2011, and the tire recycling rate increased 9.1 percent from 35.5 percent in 2010 to 44.6 percent in 2011.

In other recycling news, the Institute of Scrap Re-cycling Industries (ISRI), a recycling and reprocessing industry group, said in August 2013 that it opposes attempts to charge consumer fees or ban the use of plastic and paper bags in commerce, because of con-cerns that such policies harm the recycling industry.

In July 2013, ISRI adopted a policy opposing bans and fees on paper and plastic bags that are being manufactured into useful commodity grade materials and sold into viable, commercial markets. The group says that collected paper and plastic bags are being processed into commodity grade materials that are in turn being sold back to manufacturing plants and used in the production of new products.

Multiple cities and municipalities across the coun-try have enacted bans and restrictions in recent years. Proponents of the measures say the restrictions pro-tect human health and the environment.

However, no matter how good the intentions, these policy discussions should not be made in a vacuum, and rather than bans and restrictions that take away jobs and increase consumer costs, policy makers should take advantage of the great economic

and environmental oppor-tunities associated with responsible recycling of these bags, ISRI said.

ISRI became one of the highest profile groups to join the plastics in-dustry in opposition to these measures and have stated their concerns that

the policy decisions to ban plastic bags are having a significant negative impact on the recycling industry.

ISRI’s adopted policy also promotes the proper recycling and economic opportunities associated with the collection, processing and reuse of paper and plastic bags in finished products.

ISRI’s policy statement on bag bans and restric-tions is available at: http://op.bna.com/env.nsf/r?Open=aada-9aapp4.

EPA’s solid waste report is available at: http://www.epa.gov/osw/nonhaz/municipal/pubs/MSW-characterization_fnl_060713_2_rpt.pdf.


RESEARCH BRIEFSEach month, the committee’s staff

researches and prepares a number of “briefs” on several topics relevant to the Joint Conservation

Committee’s mission. Very often, these briefs include references to reports

and further research on the topics so that readers may pursue issues on their own.

Please Note: The information and opinions expressed in the Research Brief articles do not necessarily represent the opinions or positions of the Joint Legislative Air and Water Pollution Control and Conservation Committee, nor those of the

Pennsylvania General Assembly.

Substantial Numbers of Americans Think Green While Shopping-- Tony M. Guerrieri, Research Analyst

Approximately three-quarters of 1,045 Ameri-can adults over 18-years of age polled in a na-tional survey said they consider the environ-

mental impact of products and services when deciding whether or not to make a purchase.

This according to the “Americans’ Actions to Limit Global Warming In April 2013” report done by the Yale Project on Climate Change Communication and the George Mason University Center on Climate Change Communication.

Fifty-two percent said they consider the environ-mental impact “occasionally”, while 22 percent report-ed doing so “very consistently” or “often.”

When making a purchase, 47 percent said the product’s recyclability is “essential” to their decision-making, while 78 percent said it is “important.”

Further: 42 percent said it is essential the product does

not cause environmental damage (73 percent said it was important);

36 percent thought it was essential that the product used few resources during production (65 per-cent said it was important); while

34 percent said it was crucial it did not contrib-ute to global warming (62 percent said it was impor-tant).

When asked why they buy environmentally friendly products, 72 percent of consumers said it is because it helps them live simply. Seventy percent said it supports the well-being of the next generation, 68 percent cited the boost to their local economy and 60 percent said it reflects their own personal values.

The survey also found a demand for locally grown or produced food. At least four in 10 of those polled

said they “often” or “occasionally” bought food grown or produced locally (69 percent), or had bought organic food (42 percent) in the past 12 months. Eight in 10 told pollsters that they intend to buy locally grown or produced food and six in 10 intend to buy organic food in the next 12 months.

Respondents were asked whether they planned to buy specific energy-efficient items the next time they made a big purchase - like a major appliance or car. Strong majorities of those polled said they will buy an energy-efficient kitchen appliance (75 percent), home water heater (71 percent), home air conditioner (68 percent), or home furnace (67 percent). Six in 10 say the next time they buy a car, it will average 30 miles or more per gallon (61 percent).

__________________________________________________See how your “green shopping” practices stack up against those measured in a national survey__________________________________________________

With the exception of using energy-efficient com-pact fluorescent light bulbs – which has become the norm – the number of Americans who are taking a va-riety of energy saving actions at home and on the road has remained relatively stable over the past five years, according to the survey report. Compact fluorescent light bulbs continue to be adopted by American con-sumers, with 53 percent of responders reporting that most or all of the light bulbs in their homes are com-pact fluorescent bulbs – up from 40 percent in 2008.

The report also studied links between a company’s environmental practices and consumers’ willingness to reward or punish that business. Three in 10 respon-dents (28 percent) said that, in the past 12 months, they have rewarded companies taking steps to reduce global warming by buying their products. At the same time, one in five respondents said that they have punished companies opposing efforts to reduce global warming by not purchasing their goods or services.

In the past 12 months, one in four of those sur-veyed says he or she discussed what he/she saw as a


company’s irresponsible environmental behavior with friends or family. One in 10 has spread information about offending companies via the Internet. Further, nearly four out of 10 respondents (38 percent) say that they would be willing to join a campaign to convince elected officials to do “the right thing” about global warming.

Over the past 12 months, five to 10 percent of Americans have “often” or “occasionally” signed a peti-tion about global warming (10 percent). Seven percent have shared information about global warming on Face-book or Twitter, or donated money to an organization working on global warming. Six percent have donated money to a political candidate because they shared the respondent’s views on global warming, five percent have written letters, e-mailed, or phoned a newspaper about global warming, and five percent have volun-teered time to elect a political candidate because he or she shares their views on global warming.

The joint research project report, “Americans’ Ac-tions to Limit Global Warming In April 2013”, is avail-able at: http://environment.yale.edu/climate-com-munication/files/Behavior-April-2013.pdf.

EPA Reduces 2013 Cellulosic Mandate-- Craig D. Brooks, Executive Director

In a final rule released in August 2013, the En-vironmental Protection Agency (EPA) reduced the renewable fuel standard’s cellulosic ethanol

blending requirement for 2013 from what it had origi-nally proposed.

EPA did not reduce the overall requirement that pe-troleum refiners and importers must blend 16.55 billion gallons of renewable fuels into the nation’s fuel supply in 2013.

However, the agency will now require that only six million gallons of cellulosic ethanol be blended into the gasoline supply in 2013, down from the 14 million gal-lons it had proposed in February 2013 and well below the one billion gallons set out in the Energy Indepen-dence and Security Act of 2007.

This latest reduction in the cellulosic ethanol blend-ing requirement comes in response to a January 2013 decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia that vacated EPA’s mandate for 2012.

EPA also said it will likely reduce the renewable fuel standard requirement for 2014 in an upcoming rulemaking to avoid hitting the blend wall, the point at which the amount of ethanol petroleum refiners and importers must blend into the gasoline supply exceeds

10 percent. Renewable fuels are expected to account for 9.74 percent of the fuel consumed in 2013, accord-ing to EPA.

EPA’s final rule extends the compliance deadline for the 2013 standards to June 30, 2014, providing petro-leum refiners and importers an additional four months to meet the requirements. Petroleum refiners have challenged EPA’s cellulosic ethanol requirements in the past because the fuel was not being produced com-mercially. Refiners had to pay penalties to EPA for their failure to blend a fuel that was not available.

__________________________________________________EPA continues its rule-making efforts in regard

to renewable fuel standards andcellulosic ethanol blending requirements

__________________________________________________

The first commercial-scale cellulosic bio-refineries began operation this year and according to EPA, more than 73,000 gallons of cellulosic ethanol have been produced as of July 2013. However, in its final rule EPA has said that it does not currently foresee a scenario in which the market can absorb more ethanol, and there-fore will most likely reduce the requirement for 2014.

Although EPA has approved gasoline containing up to 15 percent ethanol (E15) for model year 2001 and newer vehicles, the fuel has been slow to enter the market. Additionally, there is little demand for gasoline containing 85 percent ethanol (E85) which can be used in flex fuel vehicles.

The Energy Independence and Security Act requires that 18.15 billion gallons of renewable fuel be blended into the fuel supply by 2014. However, given the chal-lenges, EPA anticipates that in the 2014 proposed rule, they will make adjustments to the 2014 volume require-ments, including adjustments to both the advanced biofuel and total renewable fuel categories.

In doing this, EPA has the opportunity to bring long-term stability to the renewable fuels market. The petroleum industry has repeatedly called for Congress to repeal the standard.

According to EPA, in preparing the 2014 standard, it will estimate the available supply of cellulosic ethanol and advanced biofuel, and assess the E10 blend wall, as well as the current infrastructure and market-based limitations to the consumption of the ethanol in gaso-line blends above E10.

EPA will then propose to establish volume require-ments that are reasonably attainable in light of the circumstances.

EPA’s final rule is available at: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-08-15/pdf/2013-19557.pdf.


Hurricane Isaac Oil and Chemical Releases Examined-- Tony M. Guerrieri, Research Analyst

Energy and chemical companies are keeping a close eye on weather reports around the Gulf of Mexico as the Atlantic hurricane season

moves into it most active phase. In the Gulf’s coastal states – especially ones that are home to oil and gas production facilities – even minor hurricanes cause major environmental damage. In 2012, when Hurricane Isaac made its main assault on the gulf coast, Loui-siana received the brunt of Isaac’s winds and heavy rains. The storm overwhelmed the heavy industrial facilities that stretch along the coastline.

A report by a coalition of environmental groups examines the vulnerability of low-lying oil refineries and chemical plants during extreme weather events. The Gulf Monitoring Consortium (GMC) report, “Lessons from Hurricane Isaac: Gulf Coast Industrial Facilities Still Not Storm Ready”, examines the environmental dam-age reported after Hurricane Isaac, a mild Category 1 storm that made landfall in Louisiana at the mouth of the Mississippi River on August 28, 2012.

Isaac was barely a Category 1 hurricane in terms of its wind speed but the unusual combination of its broad size and stall-and-start movement onto the state’s coastline caused an unprecedented surge that flooded areas that hadn’t experienced water even dur-ing Hurricane Katrina in 2005. During the storm and in the days immediately afterward a total of 130 accidents that were a direct result of the storm were reported to the U.S. Coast Guard’s National Response Center, the federal office that collects information on oil and chemical spills in U.S. waters.

The GMC report highlights examples of pollution from transport, storage, and refining facilities during and after the storm.

These failures included: inadequate levees which allowed contaminated

water to spill into surrounding waterways; insufficient storage capacity to handle storm-

water and/or wastewater during predictable high-rain events;

tanks and railroad tanker cars shifted or upset by the storm and floodwaters; and

other weaknesses.

Of the facilities included in the report, at least 341,000 gallons of oil, chemicals and untreated waste-water were released. In addition, the facilities also released 192 tons of gases (or about 355,000 pounds) and other materials as a result of the storm, according to the facilities’ own self-reported data.

One refinery released 12.6 million gallons of un-treated wastewater after its storage capacity filled. According to reports, it had on-site capacity for waste-water treatment storage of more than 26 million gal-lons and also had additional capacity in a crude oil tank, but that filled as well as rain fell. The refinery did not shut down for the storm. A second refinery shut down in advance of the storm, but had significant issues with pollution controls during shut-down resulting in a 58 ton release of sulfur dioxide.

In addition to the five refineries, the report also looked at two chemical storage and transfer terminals in New Orleans, of which one reported the release of 169,810 gallons of polluted materials.

__________________________________________________The study of the releases from oil and chemical

plants in the Gulf of Mexico as a result of Hurricane Isaac has resulted

in new recommendations in monitoring, preparation and reporting

__________________________________________________

Isaac was the first hurricane to strike the Gulf Coast since the BP Deepwater Horizon accident of 2010. Louisiana’s and Alabama’s coastlines were the hardest-hit by the massive offshore oil spill. The report notes that oil from the Deepwater Horizon continued to wash ashore as a result of the hurricane stirring up submerged oil deposits. Oil found on the coastline matched the biological fingerprint of the hundreds of millions of gallons of oil that spewed from the BP well. Auburn University reported that 37,000 pounds of tar balls, tar mat fragments, and other oil-tainted material were removed from Alabama beaches in the wake of Hurricane Isaac.

Preventing such incidents in the first place is critical for a hurricane-prone state that has so many oil and chemical plants in the strike zone. The GMC recom-mends that government regulatory agencies and emergency responders monitor these facilities more closely and that the facilities address their vulnerabili-ties before potential storm events.

It also calls on regulatory agencies to require more reporting during and after storms and for the facilities themselves to provide more accurate estimates of the amount of materials released.

The Gulf Monitoring Consortium is made up of member environmental groups and includes the Louisiana Bucket Brigade, Gulf Restoration Network, SkyTruth, SouthWings and the Lower Mississippi Riverkeepers. The Gulf Monitoring Consortium report is available at: http://www.gulfmonitor.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Isaac.GMC_.Pollution.Report.Final_.1.1.pdf.


EPA Inspector General Says More Data Needed to Manage Electronic Waste-- Craig D. Brooks, Executive Director

More accurate and thorough information would allow the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to better manage electronic

waste (e-waste) and enforce federal e-waste regula-tions, according to a report prepared by the agency’s Office of Inspector General (OIG).

The report, released in June 2013, found that EPA’s ability to collect waste disposal information and set management goals for e-waste recycling programs is hampered by the agency’s failure to establish uniform definitions for e-waste or to develop a comprehensive list of electronics categorized as e-waste.

The collection of inclusive e-waste information would allow EPA to better direct its limited available resources to the areas of greatest need in the e-waste program, according to the report. Currently, EPA lacks accurate information on the volume of e-waste disposed and recycled, including waste disposed at municipal solid waste landfills.

____________________________________________The Office of the Inspector General

has taken a critical lookat EPA’s management of electronic waste

_____________________________________________

OIG also found that the agency lacks information on the number of exporters of cathode ray tubes (CRT), the only electronic devices that are specifically regu-lated as hazardous wastes. Federal regulations specifi-cally set management requirements for the recycling of CRTs and glass by exporters and recyclers in the United States. The report found that EPA does not have ad-equate information needed to target the enforcement inspections on CRT recycling.

OIG also found that EPA has an ineffective en-forcement process for non-CRT electronic waste. For example, the report said EPA lacks information on the potential hazards associated with e-waste disposed of in municipal solid waste landfills. OIG said there is a potential that toxic e-waste is being sent to landfills or being incinerated without having hazards identified, which is required under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).

The report was also critical of the agency’s efforts to ensure that e-waste is processed by certified recy-clers. Although the agency advocates for the use of

certified recyclers, it does not audit recycling facilities to ensure they are compliant with RCRA.

Currently, recyclers voluntarily submit independent certifications from e-Stewards, which conducts its own audits to ensure recyclers are compliant with all federal and state environmental, health and safety regulations. The report recommended that EPA include indepen-dently certified recyclers in the work plans to ensure facilities are in compliance with federal regulations. OIG said that EPA needs to target electronic recyclers for inspections to ensure non-certified recyclers are in compliance.

The report recommends that EPA: develop a consistent approach for defining

e-waste and gather information needed to manage goals;

develop a more practical process to address the hazards of non-CRT electronic waste, ensuring the waste is handled in a safe and sustainable manner;

evaluate the implementation of electronics cer-tification programs and conduct inspections of certified recyclers, if inspections are deemed necessary;

evaluate needed resources and direct available additional resources as needed; and

evaluate methods for gathering information to set cathode ray tube enforcement targets.

EPA has agreed to take the actions recommended by the OIG report.

The OIG report is available at: http://www.epa.gov/oig/reports/2013/20130621-13-P-0298.pdf.


ON THE HORIZON . . . A LOOK AT UPCOMING EVENTS

Monday, September 30, 2013, 12 noon - Environmental Issues Forum.Room G-50, K. Leroy Irvis Bldg., Capitol complex, Harrisburg, PA –

Dr. David J. Nowak, Ph.D, project leader for the USDA Forest Service’s Northern Research Station, will discuss the agency’s innova-tive “i-Tree” program and how communities can get help in planning how best to make trees work for them.

Monday, October 21, 2013, 12 noon - Environmental Issues Forum.Room G-50, K. Leroy Irvis Bldg., Capitol complex, Harrisburg, PA –

Pennsylvania hydro-geologist Bruce Leavitt will discuss his “back to the future” technology – known as “trompe” technology, dating back to the 16th century - that has been rediscovered and is being used to remediate acid mine drainage in an energy saving, cost-

efficient and effective way.

Please e-mail Geoff MacLaughlin in the committee office at [email protected] or call Geoff at 717-787-7570 if you plan to attend Environmental Issues Forums.

And, check the committee website at http://jcc.legis.state.pa.us for more details and events that may be added to the schedule.

The Joint Legislative Air and Water Pollution Control and Conservation Committee recently held a public hear-ing in Schuylkill County regarding the buildup of sediment and silt in the Schuylkill River and its future implications. At right, pictured at the hearing are committee members (far left and 2nd to left) Rep. Rick Saccone and Sen. David G. Argall. They are joined by (3rd from left to right) Schuylkill County Rep. Mike

Tobash, Justin Leventry of committee Chair Sen. Scott Hutchinson’s staff and committee Executive Director Craig D. Brooks.Among those testifying were Department of Environmental Protection Deputy Secretary for Water Management Kelly Heffner (photo at left), Erosion and Sedimentation Technician Bill Reichert with the Schuylkill Conservation District (photo at right), Tom Shervinskie with the PA Fish and Boat Commission and Robert Folwell with the Schuylkill River National and State Heritage Area.

Copies of testimony from the hearing are avail-able upon request.

COMMITTEE CHRONICLES . . .A REVIEW OF SOME

MEMORABLE COMMITTEE EVENTS


How toContact

The JointConservation Committee

Phone: 717-787-7570 Fax: 717-772-3836

Location: Rm. 408, Finance Bldg.

Internet Website: http://jcc.legis.state.pa.us

Mail: Joint Conservation CommitteePA House of RepresentativesP.O. Box 202254Harrisburg, PA 17120-2254

CJC

oint LegislativeAir and WaterPollution Control and

onservation

ommittee

Printed on Recycled Paper

Previously, the used up markers were tossed in the trash and in all prob-ability landfilled. According to a spokesman for JBI, Inc., 30 mil-lion tons of plastic that could be converted to fuel are landfilled each year.

Under the ColorCycle program, plastic markers are collected by K-12 schools across the nation and in parts of Canada and sent to JBI’s energy conversion site. The markers do not have to be Crayola brand markers, but can be any markers out there on the market, and include dry erase markers and highlighters.

Once a participating school collects the markers and packs them up and labels them, Crayola has ar-ranged to have them picked up by FedEx Ground and Crayola pays the ship-ping to send the markers to JBI.

____________________________________________________________________For more information about the “ColorCycle” program

you can visit the Crayola website at www.crayola.com/colorcycle.____________________________________________________________________

JBI has a proprietary process (registered as “Plastic2Oil” or “P2O”) to convert the waste plastic into what it describes as “ultra-clean, ultra-low sulphur in-spec fuels.”

The company’s process extracts most of the petroleum used to make the mark-ers’ plastic housings and produces the fuels described. The company states that the fuels can be used for a variety of ap-plications immediately without having to be further refined.

According to Crayola, the program is off to a good start. The company says some 300 schools have already signed up for the program, and about 17,000 mark-ers have been collected.

If you – or your local school - would like to learn more about the Color-Cycle program, visit Crayola’s website at www.crayola.com/colorcycle.

published monthly environmental synopsis -...

Documents