In the last days of the special session, one more victory notch in the belt of Oregon’s environmental community.

This afternoon, the House approved SB 1059, a bill that lowers greenhouse gas emissions from car and light trucks. The Oregon Environmental Council says the vote was 32-26. The Senate approved the bill yesterday, all that’s left is getting the Governor’s signature.

Here’s a brief rundown of what’s in the bill:

State agencies develop a plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from transportation in Oregon.

Working with metro area governments, the agencies develop guidelines on how to reduce emissions. This includes looking at land use policy to and mass transit options. Supporters hope this will lead to less sprawl and make it easier to people to get around without driving.

The next step is creating a “toolkit” for local governments to use. This may include information about the options local governments have to reduce emissions, which methods are most effective, and the costs and benefits.

The five metro areas of Salem-Keizer, Eugene-Springfield, Medford, Bend and Corvallis will get specific targets to hit for reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 2035. A separate law covers the Portland metro area.

Finally, the agencies report back to the legislature on how much all of this is going to cost.

Under the bill, state agencies will set greenhouse gas reduction targets for five metro areas in the state, Salem-Keizer, Eugene-Springfield, Bend, Medford and Corvallis. The Portland metro area is already covered by a similar law.

The bill also calls for the state to help the metro areas by giving them help with planning and ideas on the best ways to reach the goals.

Supporters are hoping this will encourage more metro areas in the state to expand their mass transit options, and look for ways to control sprawl.

The Senate convenes this afternoon starting at 1pm. Brock Howell of Environment Oregon says if the bill passes, the House could vote on as soon as tomorrow.

This is what the bill does.

• Requires ODOT and the Department of Land Conservation to set overall state strategies for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector.
• Sets emissions targets that the state’s largest metro areas have to reach by 2035. This includes Salem-Keizer, Eugene-Springfield, Bend, Medford and Corvallis. It doesn’t include Portland because that metro area is covered by separate legislation.
• Provides the metro areas with ideas, strategies and plans to help them achieve the new goals.

Supporters hope this will lead to more mass transit in the regions covered by the bill, and help prevent sprawl.

Thanks to 1000 Friends of Oregon for the tip!

But rather than going straight to the Senate floor, SB 1059 will be taking an unexpected detour.

Eric Stachon of 1000 Friends of Oregon says the bill was forwarded to the Joint Committee on Ways and Means. Stachon says that’s because the bill requires some federal funds to be moved from one account to another, something that Ways and Means has to approve.

It’s not clear if this helps or hurts the bill’s prospects. But if Ways and Means goes along, the bill can move to the floor of both houses without any more hearings.

Here’s what’s in SB 1059 in its current form.

• Requires ODOT and the Department of Land Conservation to set overall state strategies for reducing greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector.
• Requires emissions targets that the state’s largest metro areas have to reach by 2035. This includes Salem-Keizer, Eugene-Springfield, Bend, Medford and Corvallis. It doesn’t include Portland because that metro area is covered by separate legislation.
• Provides the metro areas with ideas, strategies and plans to help them achieve the new goals.

Supporters hope this will lead to more mass transit in the regions covered by the bill, and help prevent sprawl.

The EPA wants to limit greenhouse gas emissions from cars and trucks. Photo from ODOT.

Today, the Environmental Protection Agency declared greenhouse gases a threat to public health, and will start regulating them as pollutants under the Clean Air Act. EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson says the agency will move forward on plans to control greenhouse emissions from cars and trucks, and from large stationary sources such as factories.

The decision is receiving, so far, unanimous praise from Northwest environmental groups.

Environment Oregon calls this the, “Most significant step the federal government has taken on global warming.”

The Center For Biological Diversity, a national group with offices in Portland says, “We applaud the EPA for moving forward to implement one of our nation’s most successful environmental laws to avert catastrophic runaway global warming.”

Seattle based Earthjustice adds, “We are heartened to see that our government is recognizing the global warming threat.”

The decision is especially important because it means the Obama Administration can move forward to control greenhouse gases with, or without, Congress.

Here’s what they’re planning to do next:

Green Cars: The EPA will move forward on limiting emissions from cars and light trucks. By 2016, these vehicles will have to limit their emissions to 250 grams of CO2 per mile. That’s about how much a car getting 35 miles per gallon produces. EPA hopes to phase in the limits starting with the 2012 model year. This would reduce greenhouse gases from cars and trucks 21% by 2030.

Greenhouse Gas Reporting: Starting in 2011, large stationary sources of carbon, such as factories, will have to publicly report how much greenhouse gas they emit. The EPA says this should encourage business to start investing in clean air technologies.

Controlling New Emissions: Finally, the EPA will require large greenhouse gas producers to include the “best available technology” to control carbon whenever they expand facilities or build new ones.

All this has to be at least somewhat gratifying to local environmental groups in Oregon, who were blocked in their attempts to pass a cap-and-trade law in the last session of the state legislature. Nicole Forbes with Environment Oregon, says the U.S. Senate needs to continue work on climate legislation. But she says, “The stage is now set for EPA to hold the biggest global warming polluters accountable. It’s up to EPA to crack down on pollution from cars and mega industrial polluters, like coal-fired power plants.”

My conversation earlier this week with Environment Oregon’s Brock Howell now seems prophetic. Brock talked about how Obama is in a stronger position for Copenhagen because of the actions state governments are taking to reduce greenhouse gases. Even without a federal climate change law, Brock said state efforts will reduce carbon emissions by 536 million metric tons, per year, by 2020. This amount to 7% of U.S. global warming pollution in 2007.

Despite Oregon’s failure to adopt cap-and-trade, he says the state is showing leadership in several other areas. Hear what he has to say in this video.

Meanwhile, here is a replay of the EPA news conference. If you can’t see it on this page, go here

<br /> frameborder=”0″ id=”co2announcement” SCROLLING=”no” MARGINWIDTH=”0″ MARGINHEIGHT=”0″ >

See stories from:

Associated Press via Yahoo News
New York Times
Washington Post

EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson holds a press conference at 10:15am, Portland time. Check back for live updates and hopefully streaming video.

No surprise, the answer is Oregon.

Downtown Portland. Courtesy EPA.

Our state, along with Washington, California, New York, Rhode Island and Vermont, get special mention in a new report about the wide differences in greenhouse gas emissions across the country.

These six states have the lowest per capita emissions in the U.S., about half the national average, and are on par with several European nations including Belgium, Ireland, German and the United Kingdom.

But before we pat ourselves on the back, lets dig into the numbers a little further.

Bonneville Dam. Courtesy BPA.

One of the reasons we score so well is that much of our electricity is generated by hydropower. Dams don’t emit greenhouse gases. But they do come with their own set of environmental consequences, including the damage they do to salmon. Vermont scores well in part because more than a third of it’s electricity comes from nuclear power.

And what about Portland’s highly praised mass transit system? Sorry Oregonians, when it comes to greenhouse gas emissions from transportation, we score near the national average. But the report says that our use of trains and buses, along with high gas prices, is making a difference. Because of those factors, we’re driving several hundred fewer miles per year.

The report was produced by a newly formed group called Real Climate Economics. Portland based Ecotrust provides major support. The group’s aim is to dispute charges that controling greenhouse gas emissions will harm the economy.

One of the questions raised by the report is this; if Oregon and five other states can have good lifestyles with less pollution, how can we repeat those results in other parts of the country?

For more information please see:

Ecotrust Press Room

House Bill 2186 takes a number of steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, including…

• Requires tire companies to start selling “low rolling resistance” tires that improve gas mileage and reduce pollution.  Supporters say tires cost about $7 – $12 more per set, but can save drivers anywhere from $50 – $150 in lower fuel costs.
• Allows Oregon DEQ to require long haul truckers to improve the aerodynamics of their rigs, giving them better fuel efficiency and reducing greenhouse gas emissions.  The Oregon League Of Conservation Voters says this could save truckers billions of dollars in annual fuel costs.
• Restricts unneeded idling for heavy trucks and ships at ports.  Allows the DEQ to set exemptions.
• Introduces a low carbon fuel standard.  Fuel suppliers will have to reduce the greenhouse emissions of the fuel they sell in Oregon10% by 2020.  Gives suppliers some flexibility in how they meet the standards.

Environmental groups were quick to praise the legislation.  Evan Manvel with the Oregon League of Conservation Voters calls HB 2186 a “no-brainer”, because it focuses on simple changes he says, “Will help pave the way to a green economy that will create local jobs and save precious dollars for Oregon’s working families.”

Other major supporters include the Healthy Climate Partnership and the Oregon Environmental Council.

But Oregonians for Food and Shelter, which represents agriculture interests, has criticized the bill saying it gives DEQ “loose reins” to bring Oregon in line with California’s greenhouse gas regulations.  The group says retrofitting trucks for better aerodynamics will cost $5,000 – $15,000 per rig and will cost drivers far more than what it will save them in fuel efficiency.

Grocers want to create a statewide system of redemption centers, so that they don’t have to handle so many bottle returns.  A dispute over which stores would have to accept returns, and how many, was dropped to help the bill pass.

As for the Greenhouse gas legislation, the Senate Environment and Natural Resources Committee approved it on a 3-2 party line vote.  Senate bill 80 puts into place plans to reduce greenhouse emissions in the state over the next 40 years.  It was forwarded to the Joint Ways and Means Committee, meaning a floor vote is still in doubt.

The bottle bill, House Bill 2184, goes before the House Environment and Water Committee this afternoon.  Katy Daily of the Oregon League of Conservation Voters thinks there’s a good chance it’ll be approved today.  The latest version adds several beverages to the bottle refund list starting in 2013, including sports drinks, coffee, tea, juice and similar non-carbonated beverages.  Meanwhile, Oregonian will have to do a better job of recycling or returning bottles.  If we don’t hit an 80% recycle/return rate in the next few years, the deposit increases to ten cents per bottle.

Odds are improving that the greenhouse gas reduction bill, Senate Bill 80, gets a vote this afternoon.  The latest version includes language that might provide some relief to opponents.  It allows the Public Utility Commission, and utilities, to back away from plans to reduce emissions if the costs are so high they’re not “economically feasible”.   The earlier version used an “extreme economic hardship” standard.