EPA's Dust Regulation Proposal

Farmers fear dust rules won't reflect rural life


By RICK CALLAHAN (AP) – 19 hours ago
AP
INDIANAPOLIS — As they begin the fall harvest, wary farmers are watching a federal debate over whether to clamp down on one of rural life's constant companions — the dust clouds that farm machinery kick up in fields and along unpaved roads.

Farming groups have urged the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to retain its current standards for dust, soot and other microscopic particles, arguing that tighter restrictions would be unworkable and that dust isn't a real pollutant.

Grain farmer Charles Schmitt, who farms about 2,000 acres of corn and soybeans near the southwestern Indiana town of Haubstadt, called the possibility of tougher rules on dust "ridiculous."

The 59-year-old, who's farmed for more than four decades, said there's little farmers can do to reduce dust, especially after a dry summer like this year's that left his fields parched.

"Mother Nature has more to do with it than we do — there's going to be dust and dirt no matter what," Schmitt said.

The EPA is reviewing its airborne pollutant standards, as required every five years under the Clean Air Act. It's looking both at its standards for tiny particles of industrial pollution, and slightly larger particles called "coarse particulate matter" that include dust.     Read More

This is a really frustrating thing for many of us in agriculture.  We certainly do as much as we can to reduce dust but there is no possible way to completely prevent it.  Dust comes from the dirt just like our crops do.  Some days it seems that it won’t be long until someone will want to ban dirt as a way to eliminate dust.  That’s how out of touch some of these folks are.  They claim that this new regulation could prevent some respiratory problems but it’s not an overall improvement if it causes a food prices to increase. 

EPA Disapproval Vote Tomorrow

Rockefeller Backs Murkowski's EPA Resolution in Senate
By ROBIN BRAVENDER of ClimateWire
Published: June 9, 2010

Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) will vote for a resolution to hamstring U.S. EPA's authority to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act, he said yesterday.

"I intend to vote for Senator Murkowski's Resolution of Disapproval because I believe we must send a strong message that the fate of West Virginia's economy, our manufacturing industries, and our workers should not be solely in the hands of EPA," Rockefeller said in a statement.

The Senate will vote tomorrow on a disapproval resolution (S.J.Res. 26 (pdf)) from Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) that would essentially veto EPA's "endangerment" finding, a scientific determination that greenhouse gases threaten public health and welfare. The finding is the basis for EPA's greenhouse gas regulations, which are set to take effect next year.

Asked yesterday whether she thought she could muster the votes needed for passage, Murkowski said, "It really is dependent on many of our colleagues on the other side, who have said they agree that the EPA moving forward is the worst option. So now they've got an opportunity to really back that statement by supporting this resolution of disapproval."

Read More

This vote is still on schedule for tomorrow. Please contact your Senators and urge their support for this resolution. The endangerment finding by the unelected officials at the EPA will drive up the cost of everything from food to energy with no foreseeable benefits. In order to get this done though everyone need to let their opinion be heard. Take a couple minutes right now to do it.

HSUS Asks EPA To Regulate Livestock Feeders

Activists petition EPA to regulate CAFO air emissions
(9/22/2009)
Sally Schuff

A coalition of activist organizations filed a formal petition with the Environmental Protection Agency on Sept. 21 seeking to add confined animal feeding operations to the list of operations regulated under the Clean Air Act’s endangerment standard. The coalition, which includes the Humane Society of the United States, the Waterkeepers Alliance, and Friends of the Earth, seeks to add CAFOs to the list of stationary sources which produce air pollution "which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare." The EPA Administrator is required to keep such a list under Section 111 of the Clean Air Act.

The petition points out that Section 111 "defines a 'stationary source' as 'any building, structure, facility, or installation which emits or may emit an air pollutant.'" It notes EPA uses the word "facility" in its regulatory definition of CAFOs.

The petition charges that CAFOs emit air pollutants, specifically,

Greenhouse gases that cause or contribute to climate change;

Hydrogen sulfide that cause or contribute to hydrogen sulfide exposure, localized odors, acid rain, and haze;

Ammonia that causes or contributes odors, ecosystem acidification and eutrophication, and haze;
Particulate matter and small particulates that cause or contribute to particle pollution, acid rain, and haze;

And certain volatile organic compounds (VOCs) that cause or contribute to localized odors, ground-level ozone, and haze.

The petition is online at: www.foe.org/sites/default/files/HSUS_et_al_v_EPA_CAFO_CAA_Petition.pdf.

Article Link

The HSUS continues their assault on family farmers by suing the Environmental Protection Agency in order to force them to place burdensome and unaffordable regulations on them. This country needs to wake up and realize that if groups like the HSUS are allowed to put family farmers out of business in this country, then we will begin to rely on food that is produced in foreign countries. If that would happen, it would be the absolute end of our nation’s sovereignty.