The Policy Tracker: Energy and Environment: March 2015

* Jan.
* January 5, 2015
* January 12, 2015
* January 19, 2015
* January 26, 2015
* Feb.
* February 2, 2015
* February 9, 2015
* February 16, 2015
* February 23, 2015
* March
* March 9, 2015
* March 16, 2015
* March 23, 2015
* March 30, 2015
* April
* April 6, 2015
* April 13, 2015
* April 20, 2015
* April 27, 2015
* May
* May 4, 2015
* May 11, 2015
* May 18, 2015
* May 26, 2015
* June
* June 1, 2015
* June 8, 2015
* June 15, 2015
* June 29, 2015
* July
* July 6, 2015
* July 13, 2015
* July 20, 2015
* July 27, 2015
* August
* August 3, 2015
* August 10, 2015
* August 17, 2015
* August 31, 2015
* Sept.
* September 8, 2015
* September 14, 2015
* September 21, 2015
* September 28, 2015
* October
* October 5, 2015
* October 12, 2015
* October 19, 2015
* October 26, 2015
* Nov.
* November 2, 2015
* November 9, 2015
* November 16, 2015
* November 23, 2015
* Dec.
* December 1, 2015
* December 7, 2015

March 2015

The Environmental Policy Project produces this weekly Policy Tracker: Energy and Environment to report on major national and state environmental issues, including land ownership, energy production, air and water regulations, endangered species, pollution and much more.

* February 2015 Energy and Environmental News
* Supreme Court hears arguments on EPA air standards

* Alaska environmental commissioner accepts trip to a mine his agency regulates

* Iowa water utility files lawsuit against neighboring counties over water pollution

* Obama signs executive order to reduce federal carbon emissions

* Florida officials reportedly forbidden from using the term 'climate change'

* Federal environmental regulations eliminate coal at Alabama power plant

* Oregon Governor signs measure to extend state clean fuels program

* Maryland's Zero Waste Plan remains up in the air

* Massachusetts provides $1.2 million to 13 clean energy projects statewide

* New York towns looking to secede from the state

* Discussion ongoing on separate plans to manage Florida Everglades

* Hawaii highlights 10 most invasive species during Hawaii Invasive Species Awareness Week

### March 30, 2015[edit]

### Supreme Court hears arguments on EPA air standards[edit]

Click to read more about Clean Air Act and mercury standards for power plants.

On March 25, 2015, the United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments on whether the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) should have considered the costs of its mercury standards for coal-fired power plants. The EPA's standards have proceeded from the federal Clean Air Act and are the result of a multistage process, as the agency must determine whether regulating power plants is "appropriate and necessary" under the law and decide which pollution limits to set. States, led by Michigan, sued the EPA, arguing that utilities will have to pay total annual costs of $9.6 billion in exchange for only $4 million to $6 million in health benefits, while the EPA counters that it is only required to consider the public health risks, not costs to the industry, before it decides to regulate.[1]

Justice Antonin Scalia appeared skeptical of the idea that the EPA's rules were appropriate and necessary given their annual costs. "I would think it's classic arbitrary and capricious agency action for an agency to command something that is outrageously expensive and in which the expense vastly exceeds whatever public benefit can be achieved," Scalia said during oral arguments.[2]

Meanwhile, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg stated that the Supreme Court has upheld a federal agency's rules in the past as long as the agency's interpretation of the law was reasonable, and that Congress only requires the EPA to decide if its regulations are appropriate. "Is there any case in all of our decisions where we have said even though there was no instruction to consider costs, EPA is required to consider costs?" Ginsburg asked during oral arguments.[3]

Justice Anthony Kennedy, who is often considered a swing vote in high-profile court cases, affirmed the idea that Congress gives the EPA broad latitude in its regulatory powers, but asked why the EPA waited to consider costs late in its decision-making. "At that point the game is over," he said.[3]

A decision in the case is expected by July 2015. The mercury standards affect over 600 power plants nationwide, many of which are located in the South and the Midwest, where coal-fired plants make up a significant portion of electricity generation. Existing plants are required to install retro-fitted technology for reducing mercury emissions or face the prospect of shutting down their operations if the costs are too high.[4]

### Alaska environmental commissioner accepts trip to a mine his agency regulates[edit]

Click to read more about environmental policy in Alaska.

Alaska's chief environmental conservation commissioner, Larry Hartig, accepted a round-trip, industry-paid flight to Alaska's largest mine, the Red Dog Mine, for an anniversary celebration in 2014. The Red Dog Mine, which is regulated by Hartig's department (the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation), is operated by Teck, a Canadian company, where Hartig was an attorney before his appointment to the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation.[5]

The Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation regulates the mine's waste water discharges by issuing a permit for the mine to operate each year. The mine has been known to be a source of pollution, such as lead and other metals, near a 50-mile road leading from the mine itself to the Chukchi Sea. Residents from Kivalina, a small village west of the mine, have sued the mine in the past, arguing that the mine had violated the federal Clean Water Act for its waste water discharges. The mine also paid a $120,000 fine in 2009 for violating the terms of its federal water permit.[5]

In a public statement, a Red Dog spokesman said that the anniversary event was only intended to celebrate the mine's significant employees. Hartig was previously an attorney for Teck before becoming commissioner of Alaska's environmental department. "We wanted to honor and recognize significant people from Red Dog's past. Larry Hartig is one of those individuals," said Red Mine spokesman Wayne Hall.[5][6]

Alaska Governor Bill Walker defended Hartig's trip. "The face we want to put on the state is that we're open for business. ... We don't only show up when there's a violation. We show up when there's a celebration as well, if it's a meaningful one," Walker said in an interview. Although Hartig was appointed by former governor Sean Parnell, whom Walker defeated in the 2014 gubernatorial election, and made his visit during Parnell's tenure, Walker stated he would have approved the visit.[6]

### Iowa water utility files lawsuit against neighboring counties over water pollution[edit]

Click to read more about the Clean Water Act and environmental policy in Iowa.

Des Moines, the largest city in Iowa, filed its awaited lawsuit against the trustees of three neighboring counties on March 16, 2015, related to damage to the city's drinking water as a result of high levels of nitrate particles. Since 2013, the city's water utility, the Des Moines Water Works, has paid $900,000 for nitrate filtration of water. The lawsuit could have a substantial impact on agriculture and farming practices in the state.[7]

The lawsuit, which was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa against the boards of supervisors in Sac, Buena Vista and Calhoun counties, claimed that local agencies that drain water from beneath farmland (where nitrates are added) should be regulated under the Clean Water Act's pollution permit program, similar to major industrial facilities. If the counties lose the case, they could be required to pay damages to utility companies for nitrates and could also face civil penalties.[8]

"Des Moines Water Works' mission is to provide safe, abundant and affordable water to our customers," CEO Bill Stowe said in a statement. "In order for Des Moines Water Works to continue to meet its mission and protection of the state of Iowa and the United States from further environmental and health risks, the discharge of nitrate from drainage districts must be addressed."[7]

The lawsuit has sparked widespread debate over agricultural practices in a state where agriculture products sold by Iowa farmers accounted for $30.8 billion in 2012, according to the Iowa Department of Agriculture. Farm groups such as the Iowa Farm Bureau, the Iowa Soybean Association and 10 others issued a joint statement last week calling the lawsuit a "startling disconnect from the scope and complexity of nonpoint water issues," saying that Iowa farmers have already cut down on nutrient pollution significantly through technological improvements.[9][8]

A poll commissioned by the Des Moines Register, the state's largest newspaper, found that 63 percent of Iowa residents believe that the lawsuit should go forward. Though the lawsuit is supported by 71 percent of urban residents, rural residents are more divided, with 44 percent agreeing that the lawsuit should go forward compared to 42 percent saying that the utility company is in the wrong. Governor of Iowa Terry Branstad has called the lawsuit "a war on rural Iowa."[10][11]

### March 23, 2015[edit]

### Obama signs executive order to reduce federal carbon emissions[edit]

Click to read more about climate change and the Clean Air Act.

President Barack Obama's recent executive order, signed on March 19, 2015, would reduce greenhouse gas emissions in federal agencies by an average of 40 percent over the next decade. It would also require agencies to generate 30 percent of their electricity from renewable sources by 2025. The White House has stated that the executive order is in line with the United States' non-binding agreement with China in 2014 to decrease carbon emissions below 2005 levels and increase the use of alternative energy. The national share of greenhouse gas emitted by the federal government was less than 1 percent in 2013, although the federal government is the economy's leading energy consumer for over 360,000 buildings and 650,000 fleet vehicles.[12][13][14]

"We're proving that it is possible to grow our economy robustly while at the same time doing the right thing for our environment and tackling climate change in a serious way," Obama said at the U.S. Department of Energy.[13] He added that the executive order would help the U.S. to lead by example. It demands the reduction of 26 million metric tons of carbon over the next 10 years and purportedly will save $18 billion in energy costs, according to the White House.[14][13]

Through the executive order, Obama used unilateral presidential authority to expand regulations on air pollution and carbon emissions through the existing Clean Air Act, a law which has also permitted new regulations on mercury and ozone produced by trucks, power plants and oil wells.

### Florida officials reportedly forbidden from using the term 'climate change'[edit]

Click to read more about environmental policy in Florida.

Former employees of the Florida Department of Environmental Protection told an investigative news agency that they were forbidden from using "climate change" and "global warming" in their official government communications. Bart Bibler, a land management plan coordinator for the state, said he was suspended after using the term "climate change" in one of his reports, although the department has stated he was put on leave rather than suspended. "I didn't know there was any sort of ban on the subject or discussion," Bibler said in an interview with the Washington Post. "We should be talking about climate change. If we can't, that's absurd. And it's harming our future." A former department employee, Kristina Trotta, said that the "ban" on the term's use came from the Florida Governor's office, although Governor Rick Scott's (R) office denies any sort of ban, official or otherwise.[15][16]

The news even prompted Secretary of State John Kerry to comment on the issue, although he did not mention Florida or Scott by name. "We literally do not have the time to debate whether we can say 'climate change.' We have to solve climate change," Kerry stated. "When science tells us that our climate is changing and human beings are largely causing that change, by what right do people just stand up and say, 'I dispute that,' or 'I deny this elementary truth'?"[17]

Skepticism on climate change, which Scott has expressed since his 2010 campaign for governor, is more prevalent among Republicans than Democrats. Skeptics have argued in the past that the science of climate change remains inconclusive, and that policies such as carbon emission limits for things like cars and power plants would stifle economic growth and reduce jobs. Those who accept the science of climate change as conclusive have said that inaction could produce harmful environmental and health effects in the future, and they generally support government policies to cap greenhouse gas emissions and fund renewable sources of energy.[18]

### Federal environmental regulations eliminate coal at Alabama power plant[edit]

Click to read more about the Clean Power Plan and environmental policy in Alabama.

An Alabama power plant called Plant Gadsden is switching from coal to natural gas due to federal environmental mandates in the Clean Power Plan, a rule requiring plants to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions. According to the plant's owner, Alabama Power, these federal regulations are "imposing new restrictions on fuel options," forcing the company to either use natural gas or consider increasing its prices due to rising production costs.[19]

The plant, located in Etowah County, Alabama, has a capacity of 120 megawatts, and most of its electricity goes to power 30,000 homes in the county. The switch to natural gas is not expected to cut jobs at the plant, which has 52 employees. However, throughout Alabama Power's facilities, environmental regulations are predicted to eliminate up to 200 jobs in the upcoming months, although the company has stated it will reduce employee positions through job transfers and attrition rather than layoffs.[19]

Alabama Power's decision will likely be replicated at power plants nationwide as the Clean Power Plan goes into effect between 2015 and 2030. Coal power plants must be retro-fitted with technology to make them more efficient or switch to natural gas in order to meet federal standards. The plan has sparked debate over the estimated benefits of reduced greenhouse gas emissions from power plants and the costs in terms of fewer jobs and higher energy prices.[20]

### March 16, 2015[edit]

### Oregon Governor signs measure to extend state clean fuels program[edit]

Click to read more about climate change and energy policy in Washington.

Oregon Governor Kate Brown signed a narrowly passed bill (entitled SB 324) on March 12, 2015, extending the state's low-carbon, clean fuels program, which requires fuel providers to lower the amount of carbon dioxide emitted per unit of energy used in vehicle fuel by 10 percent over the next decade.[21][22]

Brown issued a statement on her decision to sign the legislation: "I strongly support SB 324's goal to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. It is difficult to deny that we are seeing the effects of a warming planet. This year, 85 percent of our state is experiencing drought, with 33 percent experiencing extreme drought. ... it is imperative not only that Oregon does its part to reduce greenhouse gas emissions but also that we build a program that meets the needs of Oregonians."[23]

The bill extends the Oregon Clean Fuels Program, cutting greenhouse gases by requiring lower carbon content in transportation fuels over the next 10 years. The program's rules, written by the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality, went into effect on February 1, 2015. Although similar to the California Low Carbon Fuel Standard, the Oregon Clean Fuels Program does not take into account the carbon intensity of what are sometimes called "indirect emissions," which are calculated to predict how certain fuels (such as biofuels) may produce greenhouse gas emissions when land is used or changed during their production (since biofuels are produced from organic, biological material such as crops and lumber). The Oregon program excludes "indirect emissions" from regulation, a decision supported by the Renewable Fuel Association, a group of representatives from the American ethanol industry.[24][21]

SB 324 passed the Oregon House of Representatives by a narrow 31-29 margin on March 4, 2015, after more than five hours of heated debate. The Oregon House Republican Caucus opposed the legislation for its potential negative impact on gas prices. The bill's supporters saw the program's extension as an advance toward lowering greenhouse gases in the state and as a serious commitment to address climate change.[21][25]

### Maryland's Zero Waste Plan remains up in the air[edit]

Click to read more about environmental policy in Maryland.

In December 2014, then-Maryland Governor Martin O'Malley introduced the Zero Waste Plan, a strategy to encourage more recycling and to eliminate waste disposal in state landfills by 2040. According to the Baltimore Sun, Maryland residents dispose of more trash per person than the average American, although state residents divert 45 percent of their waste to recycling. Statewide, Maryland generates about 12 million tons of waste per year. In January 2015, before leaving office, O'Malley issued an executive order to implement the plan immediately, although whether the plan survives is up to Governor Larry Hogan, a Republican elected in 2014 on a platform of reducing state spending and scaling back regulations.[26][27][28]

The plan calls for the "beneficial reuse" of wastewater and the reduction of potential trash by getting residents to cut down on their purchases; it also prevents product manufacturers from using unnecessary amounts of packaging. The goal is to divert about 85 percent of the state's trash and waste to recycling or reuse by 2040. State officials also hope that the amount of methane, a greenhouse gas linked to climate change, could be reduced in landfills throughout the state.[29]

"We owe it to our children and future generations of Marylanders to take steps now to ensure that our communities are environmentally sustainable, prosperous and healthy," O'Malley announced. "This Zero Waste Plan is an ambitious policy framework to create green jobs and business opportunities while virtually doing away with the inefficient waste disposal practices that threaten our future."[29]

Supporters of the plan, such as the Maryland Public Interest Research Group, have praised the plan's expansion of recycling through the reuse of bottles and other beverage containers. However, some aspects of the plan have been criticized, sometimes by the plan's supporters, for not going far enough. According to Emily Scarr, the director of the Maryland Public Interest Research Group, the proposal to burn more trash for energy was problematic. In an interview, Scarr explained that incinerators were costly and that they "discourage waste reduction and recycling because the business model requires a constant flow of waste, which works directly against efforts to reduce, reuse, recycle, and compost." Julie Lawson of the Maryland Trash-Free Alliance has stated that the plan did not do enough to solve the state's litter problem.[26][27]

The Zero Waste Plan's future is in the hands of Republican Governor Larry Hogan, and whether or not the plan will be implemented in its entirety, or O'Malley's executive order reversed, has yet to be decided.

### Massachusetts provides $1.2 million to 13 clean energy projects statewide[edit]

Click to read more about environmental policy and energy policy in Massachusetts.

In March 2015, the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center gave 13 projects a total of $1.2 million in state funding for clean energy initiatives. The projects are part of two state programs, the InnovateMass and Catalyst programs, which fund projects that adopt or develop clean energy technologies in Massachusetts. Since its 2013 inception, InnovateMass has provided $1.2 million in state funding for clean energy projects across the state. The Massachusetts Clean Energy Center was established in 2009 to provide state funds for municipal clean energy initiatives such as solar energy installations in commercial and residential areas and to help spur job creation in the environmental and clean energy sectors.[30][31]

Some of the grant recipients include a Boston-based company developing a handheld device to detect bacteria in water in under 30 minutes ($150,000 grant), a company working on more energy-efficient beverage machines that would reduce plastic bottle use ($150,000 grant), a mechanical engineer's project at Worcester Polytechnic Institute to develop technology that would produce iron free from greenhouse gas emissions ($40,000 grant) and a company developing an energy-reduced cooling technology for roof-mounted air conditioners ($150,000 grant).[30]

According to the CEO of the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center, Alicia Barton, the Massachusetts clean energy industry employs 88,000 people and is worth $10 billion in total economic output. "These grants will help emerging companies and researchers hone the game-changing technologies that will tackle our energy challenges and create local jobs," Barton said in a statement.[30][31]

### March 9, 2015[edit]

### New York towns looking to secede from the state[edit]

Click to read more about fracking and tax policy in New York.

On December 17, 2014, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo announced that his administration would ban fracking in New York State. Prior to this ban, New York had a statewide moratorium on fracking, pending the release of a study on fracking's potential impact on human health.[32][33][34]

In February 2015, a group of 15 towns announced that they were considering the possibility of seceding from New York to join Pennsylvania, where fracking is legal. The announcement was made by the Upstate New York Towns Association. According to Conklin Town Supervisor Jim Finch (R), "The Southern Tier is desolate...We have no jobs and no income. The richest resource we have is in the ground." According to secession supporters, their concerns go beyond the legality of fracking, to include low sales tax revenue and high property taxes in New York's Southern Tier.[35]

The 15 towns looking to secede have not been named, but they are located in Broome County, Delaware County, Tioga County and Sullivan County (the counties are pictured in the map above).

The Upstate New York Towns Association is reviewing specific tax policies in New York and Pennsylvania before deciding whether to secede.[35]

### Discussion ongoing on separate plans to manage Florida Everglades[edit]

See also: Environmental policy in Florida

On February 2, 2015, Florida Governor Rick Scott (R) announced a budget plan to provide over $5 billion to Everglades restoration projects over the next 20 years. The Florida Everglades, a collection of lakes, rivers and estuaries around the central and southern Florida coasts, have been a central focus of federal and state environmental policy.

The largest environmental program undertaken by both the federal and Florida state governments was the Comprehensive Everglades Restoration Plan (CERP), a federal-state partnership that provided $13.5 billion for restoration projects throughout an 18,000 square-mile area spanning 16 counties. A second major program, the Northern Everglades and Estuaries Protection Program (NEEPP), passed in 2007 and devoted state funds and resources to restoring and preserving the Northern Florida Everglades.[36][37]

If passed by the Florida State Legislature, Governor Scott's plan would allocate $150 million to Everglades restoration in 2015 alone, with an additional $150 million spent on land acquisition and management. In his official statement, Governor Scott said, "We will keep working to make sure we preserve our natural treasures so Florida can continue to be a top destination for families, visitors and businesses."[38]

Discussion has also centered on whether the state government will purchase land in southern Florida and direct the area's excess water to the Everglades National Park, a proposal that was not part of Governor Scott's Everglades funding plan. The land purchase, which has a price tag of $350 million, would allow the South Florida Water Management District to clean excess water near Lake Okeechobee and direct it further south. Environmental advocates support the purchase as a way to reduce water pollution and conserve land in the area. The issue is expected to be a hot topic during the Florida State Legislature's 2015 session.[39][40][41]

### Hawaii highlights 10 most invasive species during Hawaii Invasive Species Awareness Week[edit]

See also: Environmental policy in Hawaii

Mongooses, rats, frogs, algae, fire ants and rhinoceros beetles are among the 10 most invasive species in Hawaii. Invasive species have been a nuisance to the islands' native animals and plants, and have affected the state's economy and lifestyle, according to the Hawaii Invasive Species Council.[42][43]

Since 2013, state government agencies, including the Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources and the Hawaii Department of Agriculture, have organized Hawaii Invasive Species Awareness Week, a period when the state government brings attention to the impact of invasive species.

Each year, 20 to 25 new species invade the state, half of which pose environmental and economic problems, according to the state's Department of Agriculture.[43]

The week is meant to engage government agencies, environmental groups, farmers, communities and citizens in an effort to bring attention to the state's ongoing problem with invasive species. "Representation from such a broad and diverse group of agencies and individuals is not only symbolic of our commitment to protect Hawaii from invasive species, but in practicality provides a strong framework for interagency coordination," Scott Enright, chairperson of the Hawaii Department of Agriculture, said.[42]

"Some of these can be a huge problem like little fire ants. If that was stopped right in the beginning when it showed up and someone found it early, it wouldn't be the problem it is now," Neil Reimer, of the Hawaii Department of Agriculture, said in an interview.[42]

In no particular order, the 10 most invasive species include coqui frogs, rats, mongooses, miconia (a leafy, green plant), fire ants, coconut rhinoceros beetles, strawberry guava (a yellow fruit), fireweed (a small, dandelion-like plant), invasive algae and albizia trees.[43]

Hawaii is more prone to invasive species than any other state in the United States, and the state government has frequently debated the affordability and safety of removing invasive species, many of which could introduce further environmental problems, such as the use of chemical or biological agents.[42][43]

## See also[edit]

* Environmental policy in the United States
* Environmental Policy
* Energy policy in the United States
* State environmental policy pages
* Energy Policy

## Footnotes[edit]

1. ↑ Los Angeles Times, "Supreme Court conservatives skeptical about EPA mercury rule," March 25, 2015
2. ↑ Forbes, "EPA Grilled At Supreme Court Over Refusal To Consider Costs," March 25, 2015
3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 Wall Street Journal, "Supreme Court Appears Divided on EPA Rules to Limit Mercury Emissions," March 25, 2015
4. ↑ National Public Radio, "Obama Administration Emissions Rules Face Supreme Court Test," March 25, 2015
5. ↑ 5.0 5.1 5.2 Alaska Dispatch News, "Commissioner of Alaska's DEC celebrated mine his agency regulates," March 19, 2015
6. ↑ 6.0 6.1 Alaska Dispatch News, "Walker defends DEC commissioner's trip to mine celebration," March 25, 2015
7. ↑ 7.0 7.1 Farm Futures, "Des Moines Water Works' nitrate lawsuit filed," March 17, 2015
8. ↑ 8.0 8.1 Agri-Pulse, "Des Moines Water Works files lawsuit against Iowa counties," March 16, 2015
9. ↑ Iowa House of Representatives, "Agriculture Provides Tremendous Economic Impact in Iowa," May 13, 2014
10. ↑ Des Moines Register, "Most Iowans support water pollution lawsuit, poll says," February 26, 2015
11. ↑ Des Moines Register, "Branstad: 'Des Moines has declared war on rural Iowa'," January 12, 2015
12. ↑ WhiteHouse.gov, "Climate Change policy," accessed January 23, 2015
13. ↑ 13.0 13.1 13.2 New York Times, "Obama Orders Cuts in Federal Greenhouse Gas Emissions," March 19, 2015
14. ↑ 14.0 14.1 Washington Examiner, "Obama to sign executive order curbing federal emissions," March 19, 2015
15. ↑ Washington Post, "Fla. official says he was punished for using ‘climate change’ in report," March 20, 2015
16. ↑ Tallahassee Democrat, "Update: DEP worker sent home after sharing climate-change views," March 20, 2015
17. ↑ National Journal, "Kerry Hits Back at Florida’s ‘Climate Change’ Ban," March 12, 2015
18. ↑ Florida Center for Investigative Report, "In Florida, Officials Ban Term ‘Climate Change’," March 8, 2015
19. ↑ 19.0 19.1 Gadsden Times, "Federal environmental mandates force elimination of coal at Alabama Power's Plant Gadsden," March 10, 2015
20. ↑ U.S. Federal Register, "Carbon Pollution Emission Guidelines for Existing Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units," accessed September 22, 2014
21. ↑ 21.0 21.1 21.2 Oregon Live, "Kate Brown will sign divisive bill extending Oregon's clean fuels program," March 10, 2015
22. ↑ Dictionary of the Climate Debate, "Definition of Carbon Intensity," accessed March 16, 2015
23. ↑ Oregon Governor's Office, "Governor Kate Brown Signs Clean Fuels Legislation," March 12, 2015
24. ↑ Domestic Fuel, "Oregon Moves Forward with Clean Fuels Program," January 8, 2015
25. ↑ Oregon Live, "2015 Session: Senate Bill 324," accessed March 16, 2015
26. ↑ 26.0 26.1 Baltimore Sun, "'Ambitious' zero-waste plan draws fire," December 15, 2014
27. ↑ 27.0 27.1 Baltimore Sun, "State aims for 'zero' waste, but goal is far off," January 2, 2015
28. ↑ WMDT News, "O'Malley Executive Order for zero waste," January 13, 2015
29. ↑ 29.0 29.1 Maryland Governor's Office, "Maryland releases Zero Waste Plan, discussion forum," December 15, 2014
30. ↑ 30.0 30.1 30.2 Boston Business Journal, "Thirteen clean energy projects get $1.2M from Massachusetts Clean Energy Center," March 11, 2015
31. ↑ 31.0 31.1 Business Telegram, "State awards $1.2M clean energy grants," March 15, 2015
32. ↑ The New York Times, "Cuomo to Ban Fracking in New York State, Citing Health Risks," December 17, 2014
33. ↑ The Washington Post, "How two small New York towns have shaken up the national fight over fracking," July 2, 2014
34. ↑ Bloomberg, "New York Towns Can Ban Fracking, State's Top Court Rules," June 30, 2014
35. ↑ 35.0 35.1 WBNG Binghamton, "Southern Tier towns looking to cut NY ties," February 22, 2015
36. ↑ Florida Department of Environmental Protection, "Everglades Restoration," accessed November 18, 2014
37. ↑ Everglades Restoration Plan, "Overview," accessed November 18, 2014
38. ↑ Water Online, "Gov. Scott Announces $5B Over 20 Years To Restore The Everglades," February 2, 2015
39. ↑ Palm Beach Post, "Should the state buy the U.S. Sugar land for Everglades restoration?" February 21, 2015
40. ↑ NBC-WJHG News, "Environmentalists Want Land for Everglades Restoration," February 24, 2015
41. ↑ CBS Miami, "Lawmakers Wade Into Amendment 1 Policy, Funding," February 24, 2015
42. ↑ 42.0 42.1 42.2 42.3 KITV News, "Hawaii Highlights Top 10 Invasive Species," February 23, 2015
43. ↑ 43.0 43.1 43.2 43.3 KITV News, "DLNR releases top 10 list of invasive species," February 24, 2015

v • e

The Policy Tracker: Energy and Environment

States|

Alabama • Alaska • Arizona • Arkansas • California • Colorado • Connecticut • Delaware • Florida • Georgia • Hawaii • Idaho • Illinois • Indiana • Iowa • Kansas • Kentucky • Louisiana • Maine • Maryland • Massachusetts • Michigan • Minnesota • Mississippi • Missouri • Montana • Nebraska • Nevada • New Hampshire • New Jersey • New Mexico • New York • North Carolina • North Dakota • Ohio • Oklahoma • Oregon • Pennsylvania • Rhode Island • South Carolina • South Dakota • Tennessee • Texas • Utah • Vermont • Virginia • Washington • West Virginia • Wisconsin • Wyoming

* * *

Archives|

January 2015 • February 2015 • March 2015

* * *

v • e

Environmental Policy

Background|

Environmental policy in the United States • Clean Air Act • Clean Water Act • Conservation • Endangered Species Act • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency • Enforcement at the EPA • Glossary of environmental terms • Energy and environmental news

* * *

Energy and environmental news|

January 2015 • February 2015 • March 2015 • April 2015 • May 2015 • June 2015 • July 2015 • August 2015 • September 2015 • October 2015 • November 2015 • December 2015

* * *

Environmental terms|

Air pollutants • Air Quality Index • BLM grazing permit • Carbon dioxide • Carbon footprint • Clean Air Act • Clean Water Act • Climate change • ConservAmerica • Cross State Air Pollution Rule • Deep ecology • Ecology • Endangered species • Implementation of the Endangered Species Act • Environmental chemistry • Environmental engineering • Environmental health • Environmental restoration • Environmental science • Federal land • Fracking • Greenhouse effect • Greenhouse gas • Ground-level ozone standards • Ground water • Hazardous air pollutant • Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change • Keystone XL • Mercury and air toxics standards • Municipal solid waste • National Ambient Air Quality Standards • National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System • National Priorities List of Superfund sites • National Wildlife Federation • Natural resources • Nonpoint source of water pollution • Oil • Ozone • Pesticide • Petroleum • Point source of water pollution • Public water system • Radioactive waste • Renewable energy resources • Renewable Portfolio Standards • Solar energy • State park • Superfund • Traditional energy resources • U.S. Bureau of Land Management • U.S. Environmental Protection Agency • • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service • U.S. Forest Service • U.S. Geological Survey • Wastewater treatment • Water quality criteria • Wetland • Wilderness Act • Wilderness Society • Wind energy

* * *

Endangered species terms|

Candidate species • Critical habitat • Delisting • Distinct population segment • Endangered species • Listed species • Listing a species • Listing petition • Species recovery • Taking a species

* * *

Environmental policy by state|

Alabama • Alaska • Arizona • Arkansas • California • Colorado • Connecticut • Delaware • Florida • Georgia • Hawaii • Idaho • Illinois • Indiana • Iowa • Kansas • Kentucky • Louisiana • Maine • Maryland • Massachusetts • Michigan • Minnesota • Mississippi • Missouri • Montana • Nebraska • Nevada • New Hampshire • New Jersey • New Mexico • New York • North Carolina • North Dakota • Ohio • Oklahoma • Oregon • Pennsylvania • Rhode Island • South Carolina • South Dakota • Tennessee • Texas • Utah • Vermont • Virginia • Washington • West Virginia • Wisconsin • Wyoming

* * *

Endangered species policy|

Costs of listing a species • Delisting a species • Endangered Species Act litigation • Endangered species policy in the United States • Endangered Species Act litigation • History of the Endangered Species Act • Private property and the Endangered Species Act • Science and the Endangered Species Act • Success rate of the Endangered Species Act • Transparency and the Endangered Species Act

* * *

Endangered species policy by state|

Alabama • Alaska • Arizona • Arkansas • California • Colorado • Connecticut • Delaware • Florida • Georgia • Hawaii • Idaho • Illinois • Indiana • Iowa • Kansas • Kentucky • Louisiana • Maine • Maryland • Massachusetts • Michigan • Minnesota • Mississippi • Missouri • Montana • Nebraska • Nevada • New Hampshire • New Jersey • New Mexico • New York • North Carolina • North Dakota • Ohio • Oklahoma • Oregon • Pennsylvania • Rhode Island • South Carolina • South Dakota • Tennessee • Texas • Utah • Vermont • Virginia • Washington • West Virginia • Wisconsin • Wyoming

* * *

Environmental statistics|

Payments in lieu of taxes • Land ownership by state • Grazing permits on BLM lands • Federal land ownership by state • BLM oil and gas permits by state • Environmental spending in the 50 states • Greenhouse gas emissions by state • Superfund sites in the United States • National Park Visitor Spending Effects Report

* * *

Endangered species statistics|

Endangered species by state • Endangered animals by state • Endangered plants by state • Delisted species • Top 20 federally funded species • Land acquisition funding for endangered species • Federal endangered species grants by state

* * *