Energy and Environment Monitor

US EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson Sends Letter to West Virginia’s Senator Rockefeller

    On February 22, 2010, U.S. EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson sent a letter to West Virginia’s Senator Jay D. Rockefeller IV responding to his concern about the U.S. EPA’s efforts to comply with the Supreme Court’s decision in Massachusetts v. EPA through the regulation of greenhouse gases. Through this letter Jackson identified the following points about the modifications she plans to make on U.S. EPA’s greenhouse gas proposals: 

·    The United States Supreme Court held three years ago in Massachusetts v. EPA that greenhouse gases are air pollution and are subject to regulation under the Clean Air Act. EPA must follow the Supreme Court's holding, as you recognize in your letter.

 

·     By April of this year, I expect to take actions to ensure that no stationary source will be required to get a Clean Air Act permit to cover its greenhouse gas emissions in calendar year 2010.

 

 

·    Based on those anticipated actions, I expect that EPA will phase-in permit requirements and regulation of greenhouse gases for large stationary sources beginning in calendar year 2011. In the first half of 2011, only those facilities that already must apply for Clean Air Act permits as a result of their non-greenhouse gas emissions will need to address their greenhouse gas emissions in their permit applications.

 

 

·     Further, I am expecting that greenhouse gas emissions from other large sources will phase in starting in the latter half of 2011. Between the latter half of 2011 and 2013, I expect that the threshold for permitting will be substantially higher than the 25,000-ton limit that EPA originally proposed. In any event, EPA does not intend to subject the smallest sources to Clean Air Act permitting for greenhouse-gas emissions any sooner than 2016.

 

• You asked in your letter what the result would be if Senator Lisa Murkowski's resolution of disapproval of EPA's endangerment finding were enacted. One result would be to prevent EPA from issuing its greenhouse gas standard for light-duty vehicles, because the endangerment finding is a legal prerequisite of that standard. The impacts of that result would be significant. In particular, it would undo an historic agreement among states, automakers, the federal government, and other stakeholders. California and at least thirteen other states that have adopted California's emissions standards likely would enforce those standards within their, jurisdictions¹, leaving the automobile industry without the explicit nationwide uniformity that it has described as important to its business². 

Letter from Administrator Jackson to Senator Rockefeller IV of 2/22/2010, at 1-2. 

    It remains to be seen whether this response ends the dialogue or provokes more questions from the several senators who endorsed the letter. 

This article was authored by Laura G. Swingle, Jackson Kelly PLLC. For more information on the author see here.

Status of WV Voluntary Land Stewardship Program

In previous articles I have discussed the ongoing process by the West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (WVDEP) to develop a West Virginia Voluntary Land Stewardship Program (VLSP) in West Virginia. The WVDEP envisions that the VLSP would be a “comprehensive integrated system for implementing, monitoring, tracking, and protecting institutional and engineering controls” at formerly environmentally contaminated sites that have been closed under either State or Federal programs in West Virginia. 

In early 2009, the WVDEP established a stakeholders group, which is referred to as the Institutional Controls (IC) Work Group, to assist it in this process. The IC Work Group consists of various stakeholders from trade associations, industry, and government, which has been working with the WVDEP and its contractors. The most recent meeting of the IC Work Group with the WVDEP and its contractors was on January 27, 2010. This was the sixth meeting of the IC Work Group since its inception. As the representative of the WV Coal Association on the IC Work Group, I think it is safe to say that the WVDEP and the IC Working Group have made significant progress in a number of areas, which include: 

·     Developed the overall administrative structure of a VLSP.

·     Developed various draft documents that would be used by a VLSP.

·     Identified the range of services that the VLSP could offer to an entity (public or private) that has entered a site into the VLSP (e.g., operation and maintenance of remediation systems, environmental monitoring, reporting to WVDEP).

·     Evaluated the advantages and disadvantages of creating a 501(C)3 or 501(C)4 non-profit corporation versus a for-profit corporation to operate the fiduciary “Trust” that would be established to manage the dollars paid into the VLSP to perform the operations, maintenance, and tracking functions required under the site closure documents. 

Based on the progress made during 2009, the WVDEP anticipates that the following activities will occur during 2010: 

1)   WVDEP will continue to move forward with implementing a pilot program to further test the concept of a VLSP, most likely during the second half of 2010. At this time, both DOW Chemical and FMC Corporation have reported that they are still planning on entering two of their sites into the pilot program. In addition, the WVDEP intends to enter several former municipal solid waste (MSW) landfills into the pilot program. At the sites, it is anticipated that the VLSP will provide a mix of the following services during the term of the pilot program:

·     Maintaining the landfill cap.

·     Operating the landfill leachate collection system.

·     Implementing the provisions of the Land Use Covenants (LUCs) under the provisions of the Voluntary Remediation Program.

·     Performing groundwater monitoring. 

2)   The IC Focus Group will prepare a report for the public entitled Recommendations for Establishing a Comprehensive State Voluntary Land Stewardship Program. This document will likely address the following topics:

·     Identify the universe of State and Federal risk-based programs that include the option to use institutional and/or engineering controls to achieve site closure.

·     Discuss the challenges and benefits of a VLSP for West Virginia.

·     Survey the approaches to tracking and monitoring long-term institutional controls that are being implemented by other States.

·     Outline the administrative structure of a VLSP, the elements of the fiduciary “Trust,” and overall management issues. 

At this time, it is anticipated that the Recommendations for Establishing a Comprehensive State Voluntary Land Stewardship Program will be completed by mid-2010.  

This article was authored by Greg Tieman, Acacia Environmental Group LLC. For more information on the author see here. 

Climate Change Headlines:

2/14/2010:  Can Climate Shift the Biology of Ecosystems?

TIME

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1964085,00.html?xid=rss-topstories

 

 

2/14/2010:  Global Warming Skeptics Lambaste Plan to Increase Funding for Climate Change Research

FOXNews

http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2010/02/11/obama-spending-increase-global-warming-research/

 

 

2/15/2010:  Leading Global Warming Believer Now Admits There Hasn't Been Any for 15 Years

FOXNews

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,586025,00.html

 

 

2/16/2010:  What Strange Snowstorms Say About Global Warming

Discovery News

http://news.discovery.com/earth/what-strange-snowstorms-say-about-global-warming.html

 

 

2/17/2010:  Texas challenges EPA's global warming findings

Houston Chronicle

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/6870313.html

 

 

2/17/2010:  The Disappearing Science of Global Warming

American Spectator

http://spectator.org/archives/2010/02/17/the-disappearing-science-of-gl

 

 

2/18/2010:   LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Federal global-warming office a bad idea

Washington Times

http://washingtontimes.com/news/2010/feb/18/federal-global-warming-office-a-bad-idea/

 

 

2/18/2010:   Schoenburg: Shimkus uses winter to attack climate-change research

The State Journal-Register

http://www.sj-r.com/opinions/x2115932417/Bernard-Schoenburg-Shimkus-uses-winter-to-attack-climate-change-research

 

 

2/18/2010:   Virginia Files Challenge to E.P.A. Greenhouse Gas Regulation

New York Times (blog)

http://greeninc.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/18/virginia-files-challenge-to-e-p-a-greenhouse-gas-regulation/

 

 

2/20/2010:   Increasing global warming could cause longer-lasting weather patterns

Times of India

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/environment/global-warming/Increasing-global-warming-could-cause-longer-lasting-weather-patterns-/articleshow/5595224.cms

EPA’s Science Advisory Board Seeks Nomination to Panel to Review Studies on MTR and Conductivity in Water Discharges: Review is Likely Precursor to Effort to Regulate Conductivity

EPA’s Science Advisory Board (“SAB”) has issued two federal register notices seeking nominations to a proposed panel that would review and provide advice on two draft documents prepared by EPA which address surface mining in Central Appalachia. The first notice, issued in September 2009, requested nominations to an ad hoc panel. 74 Fed. Reg. 48952 (Sept. 25, 2009). That panel would provide expert advice to EPA on its draft assessment of the ecological impacts “associated with a surface coal mining technique known as mountaintop mining and valley-fill where mining overburden is placed in adjacent valleys.” A list of current nominees to that panel includes representatives of the mining industry, private consultants and university professors. Among the nominees is Emily Bernhardt, a professor at Duke University who has testified against the holders of “fill” permits issued by the Corps in litigation pending in the Southern District of West Virginia. A full list of the current nominees may be found on EPA’s SAB website.  

Before nominees were selected to the ad hoc panel, EPA issued a second federal register notice in February 2010. 75 Fed. Reg. 5589 (Feb. 3, 2010). That notice seeks nomination of experts to conduct a peer review of EPA’s draft “Advisory Value for Conductivity Using Field Data: an Adaptation of the USEPA’s Standard Methodology for Deriving Water Quality Criteria.” In that federal register notice, EPA observed that its Office of Research and Development has developed a report that uses field data to derive an aquatic life advisory value for conductivity that may be applied to waters in the Appalachian region. In the same notice, EPA’s SAB noted that it has decided to form one expert panel under the auspices of the SAB to cover the necessary expertise for the review of both the draft assessment on ecological impacts of mountaintop mining and the proposed advisory value for conductivity using field data.  

It is widely believed in the mining industry that EPA Region 3 is using both of these reports to impose unachievable limits on conductivity in NPDES and Clean Water Act Section 404 permits.    EPA maintains a set of national recommended water quality criteria to protect aquatic life. It has never issued a national standard for specific conductance (conductivity), but claims that its research shows “impairment” to aquatic insect populations at specific conductance levels as low as 300-500 uS/cm. These numbers are well below levels at which state officials in West Virginia and Kentucky believe there are substantial impacts and are so low as to be unachievable by coal mines and any large-scale earth disturbance. 

This article was authored by Robert G. McLusky, Jackson Kelly PLLC. For more information on the author see here.

EPA Proposes to Repeal PM10 Grandfathering Provision and End the PM10 Surrogate Policy

    On February 11, 2010, EPA proposed (75 Fed Reg 6827-6836) two actions that would end it’s 1997 policy that allows sources and permitting authorities to use a demonstration of compliance with the prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) requirements for particulate matter less than 10 micrometers (PM10) as a surrogate for meeting the PSD requirements for particulate matter less than 2.5 micrometers (PM2.5). First, EPA is proposing to repeal the “grandfathering'' provision for PM2.5 contained in the Federal PSD program. Second, EPA is proposing to end early the PM10 Surrogate Policy applicable in States that have an approved PSD program in their State Implementation Plan (SIP-approved States).  

Entities affected by this proposed action include those proposed new and modified major stationary sources subject to the Federal PSD program that submitted a complete application for a PSD permit before the July 15, 2008 effective date of the PM2.5 New Source Review (NSR) Implementation Rule, but have not yet received a final and effective permit authorizing the source to commence construction, and those proposed new and modified major stationary sources that are subject to a PSD program in SIP-approved States and have not yet received a final and effective permit authorizing the source to commence construction. 

EPA estimates that about twenty-one proposed new sources or modifications would be affected by the proposed repeal of the grandfathering provision. EPA is not proposing that the repeal would apply retroactively to any permits. 

The entities potentially affected by a proposal to end early the use of the PM10 Surrogate Policy in SIP-approved States include proposed new and modified major stationary sources in all industry groups. The majority of sources potentially affected are expected to be in the groups Electric services, Petroleum refining, Industrial inorganic chemicals, Industrial organic chemicals, Miscellaneous chemical products, Natural gas liquids, Natural gas transport, Pulp and paper mills, Paper mills, Automobile manufacturing, and Pharmaceuticals. 

EPA notes that it knows of twenty-seven sources that had submitted PSD permit applications under the Federal PSD program prior to July 15, 2008--the effective date of the PM2.5 NSR Implementation Rule--but did not receive their permits by that date. These applications were eligible to be grandfathered to use the PM10 Surrogate Policy to satisfy the PM2.5 requirements. For at least six of these applications, the permit was either issued or denied, or the project was cancelled, prior to June 1, 2009, when the administrative stay became effective. For most of the remaining twenty-one applications, the sources have already directly addressed, or are planning to directly address, the applicable PM2.5 requirements in order to obtain a permit. At least two of the sources are reportedly planning to take enforceable emissions limitations on their PM2.5 emissions in order to avoid the PSD requirements for PM2.5 altogether. 

EPA said further that ending the use of the PM10 Surrogate Policy will provide desired certainty to the PM2.5 permitting process by ensuring that all permit applicants show that their source does not cause or contribute to a violation of the PM2.5 NAAQS and otherwise meets all of the requirements for PM2.5, and not use PM10 surrogacy as means of avoiding a real analysis demonstrating that the PM2.5 requirements are met. EPA states that it believes that the certainty outweighs “any burdens caused by any delay to the permit applicants that would be affected.” However, EPA solicits comments about any burdens that affected sources believe may be incurred. 

Finally, EPA notes that a repeal of the grandfathering provision in a subsequent final rule would not impact any PSD permits that became final and effective in reliance on the PM10 Surrogate Policy under the policy itself or the grandfathering provision that incorporated that policy by reference before the stay of that provision. 

 

Comments on the February 11 proposals must be received on or before March 15, 2010. If requests a public hearing, it will be held on February 26, 2010. If a hearing is held, the record for the hearing will remain open until March 29, 2010.  

This article was authored by Skipp Kropp, Jackson Kelly PLLC. For more information on the author see here.

EPA Extends Expiration Date of Stormwater General Permit

On January 28, 2010, EPA announced that Regions 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 were modifying the 2008 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) general permits for stormwater discharges associated with construction activity.  75 Fed. Reg. 4554 (Jan. 28, 2010).  A copy of the Federal Register notice may be accessed here.  The permits will be extended by one year, so that the new expiration date will be June 30, 2011.  The 2008 CGP permit provides coverage for discharges from construction sites that occur in areas not covered by an approved State NPDES program.  Construction activities (which include soil disturbing activities such as clearing, grading, excavating, stockpiling, etc.) that disturb one or more acres, or smaller sites that are part of a larger common plan of development or sale, are regulated under the NPDES stormwater program. Operators of regulated construction sites are required to develop stormwater pollution prevention plans; to implement sediment, erosion, and pollution prevention control measures; and to obtain coverage under a state or EPA NPDES permit.  Most states are authorized to implement the NPDES permit program, including the stormwater program.  West Virginia’s stormwater discharge program requires operators disturbing more than one acre of land to be covered under its general permit, WV0115824, which expires December 4, 2012.  The extension of the 2008 CGP is intended to enable EPA to assist state agencies in incorporating the new guidelines into permits set to be reissued in the next few years, recognizing that the new guidelines enact numeric effluent limitations and monitoring requirements that may be new to construction site operations.  

This article was authored by Chris M. Hunter, Jackson Kelly PLLC. For more information on the author see here.

Climate Change Headlines:

2/7/2010:  Water at core of climate change impacts-UN experts

Reuters

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSLDE6160G3

 

2/8/2010:  Push to change embattled climate panel

ABC Online

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/02/08/2813722.htm?section=justin

 

 

2/8/2010:  Melting Arctic could cost global economy over $2.4tn

Business Green

http://www.businessgreen.com/business-green/news/2257475/melting-arctic-cost-global

 

 

2/9/2010:  A Federal Climate Service Is Created to Provide Data

New York Times

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/09/business/energy-environment/09noaa.html

 

 

2/10/2010:  Another Blizzard: What Happened to Global Warming?

TIME

http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1962294,00.html?xid=rss-topstories

 

 

2/10/2010:  Challenged Back Home on His Right, McCain Stays Away From Climate Bill

New York Times

http://www.nytimes.com/cwire/2010/02/10/10climatewire-challenged-back-home-on-his-right-mccain-sta-91703.html

 

 

2/10/2010:  Global warming 'tipping points' may arrive without warning

USA Today

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/greenhouse/post/2010/02/global-warming-tipping-points-may-arrive-without-warning/1

 

 

2/11/2010:  NOAA's Climate Service: Obama's New Federal Climate Change Agency

EnergyBoom

http://www.energyboom.com/emerging/noaas-climate-service-obamas-new-federal-climate-change-agency

 

 

2/12/2010:  Climate Study Gets Review

Wall Street Journal

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB20001424052748704337004575059303107000656.html

 

 

2/13/2010:  Microsoft co-founder Gates tackling climate change

AFP

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5h_iNFAG254im4XHNHGNRIpKj6bLA

 

Proposed Lead Monitoring Changes

On December 23, 2009 the US EPA proposed to revise the ambient monitoring requirements for measuring airborne lead. These rule amendments would improve the lead monitoring network to better assess compliance with the revised National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) established in November 2008.  

History:  

The lead monitoring network measures concentrations of lead in the outdoor air, to assess compliance with the lead national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS). EPA substantially strengthened those standards in a rule issued October 15, 2008, revising the level of the primary (health-based) standard from 1.5 micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m3) to 0.15 micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m3), measured as total suspended particles (TSP). The agency revised the secondary (welfare-based) standard to be identical to the primary standard. 

In January 2009, EPA received a petition to reconsider the lead monitoring requirements from Missouri Coalition for the Environment Foundation, Natural Resources Defense Council, Coalition to End Childhood Lead Poisoning and Physicians for Social Responsibility.   EPA granted the petition to reconsider on July 22, 2009. This proposal represents the results of the EPA’s reconsideration of the lead monitoring requirements. The reconsideration will not change the timeline for meeting the revised lead standards or the deadline for deploying monitors around sources that emit at least 1.0 tons per year of lead.  

Current Proposal: 

The EPA is proposing revisions to the requirements for both source-oriented and non-source-oriented monitoring for lead.  

Source Based Monitoring: 

The current source based monitoring emission threshold is 1.0 tpy. EPA is proposing to change the lead emissions monitoring threshold to 0.50 tpy. Air quality monitoring agencies would use this threshold to determine if an air quality monitor is required to be place near a facility emitting lead.   The EPA projected the source-oriented portion of the network to be up to 135 monitors based on these requirements and the 2002 NEI (National Emission Inventory).

EPA proposes that these source-oriented monitors would begin operating one year after this rule is finalized. Monitors around the largest sources (those that emit 1.0 tpy or greater) are already required to be operational no later than January 1, 2010.  

Lead is emitted at airports as a result of leaded aviation fuel. As a result, EPA is proposing to treat airports identically to other sources of lead when determining if source-oriented lead monitoring is needed. The EPA identified 55 airports that may exceed the proposed 0.50 tpy emission threshold.  

Non-Source-Oriented Monitoring:  

The EPA is proposing to replace the current non-source-oriented monitoring approach with the requirement for lead monitoring at the national multi-pollutant monitoring network known as NCore. 

The NCore network is intended to be a long-term, multi-pollutant monitoring network that provides data useful for NAAQS attainment decisions, understanding of air quality conditions and pollutant interactions, evaluating air quality models, developing emission control strategies, and supporting long-term health studies. The NCore network will become fully operational no later than January 1, 2011 and will consist of approximately 80 sites – 60 sites located in urban areas and about 20 sites in rural areas.  

The purpose of these monitors is to measure neighborhood scale lead concentrations in urban areas impacted by re-suspended dust from roadways, closed industrial sources which previously were significant sources of lead, hazardous waste sites, construction and demolition projects, or other fugitive dust sources of lead.  

EPA had proposed and taken comment on a smaller non-source-oriented lead monitoring network that included 1 monitor in each CBSA with a population of 1,000,000 or more people, located to measure typical neighborhood scale lead concentrations in urban areas. The EPA noted that data from these non-source oriented monitors would be helpful in better characterizing population exposure to ambient air related lead and may assist in determining non attainment boundaries.  

During the comment period, concerns were raised that non-inventoried lead sources in urban areas, such as closed industrial sources, hazardous waste sites, and construction and demolition projects could potentially result in ambient lead concentrations in excess of the lead NAAQS. To address these concerns, the EPA modified the siting criteria to require non-source-oriented monitors to be sited to evaluate these non-inventoried lead sources.   The EPA also lowered the population threshold from requiring monitoring at CBSAs with a population of 1,000,000 people or more to requiring monitoring at CBSAs with a population of 500,000 people or more.  

Map of Proposed Monitoring Locations 

A map of the proposed monitoring location is provided at the link below. Currently there are no proposed monitoring locations in West Virginia. http://www.epa.gov/air/lead/pdfs/leademissionsmap.pdf 

Comment Period:  

EPA will accept comment on the proposal until February 16, 2010. On-line instruction for submitting comments are available at www.regulations.gov.  Use the following to identify the comments: Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OAR-2006-0735. 

This article was excerpted from publically available information, and was authored by Joyce Gentry, Acacia Environmental Group LLC.  For more information on the author see here.

West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection (WVDEP) Pending Regulation 47CSR10 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Program as it relates to Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) in West Virginia

Proposed regulation 47CSR10 for CAFOs is currently awaiting approval in the West Virginia legislature. The passage is almost assured, since denial of the regulation would result in federal administration of the NPDES permitting of large chicken and turkey farming operations.  

·     This regulation is consistent with the current federal regulation.

·     Those affected are commercial chicken and turkey farming operations in West Virginia. Possibly a very few swine farming operations could be affected.

·     Generally the current and pending regulations could affect those operations with as few as 30,000 chickens or as few as 16,500 turkeys. There are small, medium and large CAFOs. The classification depends on number of animals and animal waste disposal methodology.

The following is a brief summary of the new requirements included in the pending regulation before you now. Page references from the pending regulation on file with the WV Secretary of State are provided for the following requirements. The pending regulation can be accessed by this link:  http://www.sos.wv.gov/administrative-law/modified/Pages/default.aspx 

Perhaps the single most attention-getting provision added in the regulation is Section 13.1.c., which allows the Director of the WVDEP or the Regional Administrator of the USEPA to designate any Animal Feeding Operation (AFO) as a CAFO upon determining that it is a significant contributor of pollutants to the waters of WV. The Regional Administrator must determine that the pollution is impacting a downstream or adjacent State. p. 42 

NPDES permit applications for CAFOs will require a nutrient management plan (NMP) that includes detailed procedures to meet effluent limitations, including operational procedures, sampling and testing to verify nutrient concentrations (nitrogen & phosphorus) in land applied waste to fields, wastewater treatment processes, etc. pp. 43-47 

The new regulation implies that the NMP must be developed or approved by a certified nutrient management planner. p. 44 

The NMP must be maintained onsite and be made available to the WVDEP upon request. p. 44

The permittee must maintain various operational records for a period of five years and make to records available to the WVDEP upon request. p. 44 

When transferring manure, litter or process waste water to other persons, Large CAFOs must provide the recipient with the most current nutrient analysis and maintain information regarding the transfer for five years. p. 44 

Permittees must prepare annual reports to the WVDEP regarding the number and type of animals, amounts of waste generated, amounts of waste transferred to other persons, acres of land application (manure, etc.) covered by the NMP, summary of all manure or waste water discharges during the past year, actual crops and yields for each field (including chemical analysis of the waste) receiving land application. pp. 44-45 

The WVDEP shall review the rates of land application of the waste in terms of nitrogen and phosphorus as identified in the NMP for each crop. The land application must be based on calculations to verify the crop will use the nutrients applied as intended. These calculations must be performed at least once each year and must take into account nutrient requirements of the crops, nutrients and nutrient analysis of the land application waste. pp. 45 

Changes to a NMP must be submitted to the WVDEP. If the WVDEP finds the changes are not substantial, the permittee and the public will be advised of any changes to the terms of the NMP and the changes can be implemented. If the changes are substantial, public review and opportunity for comment, along with the opportunity for a public hearing is provided. Once the WVDEP makes a final determination, the owner or operator and the public will be informed regarding the decision. pp. 46-47.  

This article was authored by William Chambers, Acacia Environmental Group LLC. For more information on the author see here.

Climate Change Headlines:

2/1/2010:  Omitted: The Bright Side of Global Warming

Wall Street Journal

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704107204575038742717786422.html?mod=WSJ_Investing_MoreHeadlines

 

2/1/2010:  Abbott to release climate change policy

Business Spectator

http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/Abbott-to-release-climate-change-policy-29E7L?OpenDocument&src=hp18

 

 

2/2/2010:  Obama's climate change police

CNNMoney.com

http://money.cnn.com/2010/02/02/news/economy/epa_global_warming/

 

 

2/1/2010:  Head of ‘Policy Neutral’ IPCC Calls for ‘Grassroots Action’ in Response to Setbacks on Climate Legislation

CNSNews.com

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/60815

 

 

2/4/2010:  HKBN Takes on Climate Change With Expedition to the Antarctica

CNNMoney.com (press release)

http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/globenewswire/183572.htm

 

 

2/4/2010:  Administration Presses On for a 'Cap' on Carbon Emissions

New York Times

http://www.nytimes.com/cwire/2010/02/04/04climatewire-administration-presses-on-for-a-cap-on-carbo-27152.html

 

 

2/4/2010:  GOP lawmakers seek to suspend Calif. greenhouse gas law championed by Schwarzenegger

Los Angeles Times

http://www.latimes.com/business/nationworld/wire/sns-ap-us-california-climate-law,0,7971672.story

 

 

2/5/2010:  Arctic Climate Changing Faster Than Expected

ABC News

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/wireStory?id=9762170

 

 

2/6/2010:  MET OFFICE BLASTED FOR 'BIASED SUPPORT OF CLIMATE THEORY'

UK Express

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/156564/Met-Office-blasted-for-biased-support-of-climate-theory-

 

 

2/162010:  TV ad accuses Senator Barrasso of ignoring global warming's security threat

Examiner.com

http://www.examiner.com/x-18277-Cheyenne-Green-Living-Examiner~y2010m2d6-TV-ad-accuses-Senator-Barrasso-of-ignoring-global-warmings-security-threat