AUSTIN, Texas, Jan. 16, 2008
Texas Is No. 1 Carbon Polluter In U.S.
Everything's Bigger In Texas, Including Vehicles, Which Are Leaving A Big Carbon Footprint
-
Photo
A steady stream of traffic travels south on I-45 in Houston, Saturday, Sept. 24, 2005. Texans' fondness for big pickup trucks and big SUVs has helped make the Lone Star State the biggest carbon polluter in the nation. (AP)
-
Interactive
Global Warming
The greenhouse effect, a look at the Kyoto Protocol and a history of the Earth's climate.
Texans' fondness for large, manly vehicles has helped make the Lone Star State the biggest carbon polluter in the nation.
The headquarters state of America's oil industry spewed 670 million metric tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere in 2003, enough that Texas would rank seventh in the world if it were its own country, according to the most recent figures from the U.S. Energy Information Administration. The amount is more than that of California and Pennsylvania - the second- and third-ranking states - combined.
A multitude of factors contribute to the carbon output, among them: Texas' 19 coal-burning power plants; a heavy concentration of refineries and chemical plants; a lack of mass transit; and a penchant among ranchers and urban cowboys alike for brawny, gas-guzzling trucks - sometimes to haul things, but often just to look Texas tough.
Debbie Howden, an Austin real estate agent, said her family of six has two pickup trucks, three SUVs, and no apologies. "I would definitely put size and safety over the emissions thing," said Howden, 55. She calls their high fuel bills a "necessary evil."
Anthony Nguyen attended the famously liberal University of California at Berkeley but drives a black Nissan Frontier pickup handed down from his dad, a liquor store owner near Houston. Nguyen said his father hauled liquor around in the truck, but he admitted he has no practical use for its large bed.
"I think it's the idea that in Texas, everything is bigger," said Nguyen, 20. "I grew up here, and I think it's pretty cool."
While states such as like California and New York are moving quickly to address global warming, the issue has prompted only scattered calls for reforms here. GOP leaders in Texas have refused to make emissions reduction a priority, and Republican Gov. Rick Perry has expressed doubt as to whether global warming is even a manmade problem.
Texas political leaders read "environmental protection as government activism" and want no part of it, said Jim Henson, director of the Texas Politics Project at the University of Texas at Austin.
With all the don't-mess-with-Texas swagger he can muster, Perry has called Al Gore's mouth the leading source of carbon dioxide. As for the state's greenhouse gas ranking, Perry's administration makes no apologies.
"Being that Texas is a heavily populated state, that it is the leading producer of energy, has the largest refining capacity and has the largest petrochemical industry in the nation, it would be expected that we would have the largest total of greenhouse gases in the country," Perry spokeswoman Allison Castle said.
Texas, the second most populous state, behind California, has 23.5 million people and more than 20 million registered vehicles, about one in four of them a pickup truck. California has a population of 36.5 million and 33 million registered vehicles.
Transportation accounted for 28 percent of Texas' carbon emissions in 2003.
Fast Fact
Texas consumes more coal than any other state. And its per-capita residential use of electricity is significantly higher than the national average, because of high demand for air conditioning during the hot summers and the widespread use of electricity for heating during the winter.Texans polled last spring listed the Iraq war and immigration as the nation's most pressing issues, with fewer than 4 percent saying the environment was a top concern.
There is little doubt the state's stand on pollution reflects the influence of Texas' biggest and most powerful industry: energy.
"Decisions are not just made by politicians because of a lack of foresight, but in many cases, they have big contributors encouraging them to move in that direction," said Luke Metzger, director of Environment Texas.
Texans polled last spring listed the Iraq war and immigration as the nation's most pressing issues, with fewer than 4 percent saying the environment was a top concern. Nationally, slightly less than half of Americans polled by the Pew Research Center last year rated global warming as a "very serious" problem. Of those, 55 percent say it requires immediate government action.
Kirk Pingel, 28, said his Chevy Trailblazer gets about 18 miles per gallon on the highway, but high gas prices don't deter him: "I'd rather have the luxury of the car I want instead of a car that gets good gas mileage but maybe I didn't want that car."
Pingel coaches youth football and basketball teams and said the extra space in his SUV is useful for transporting sports equipment. His theory on why Texans love their trucks and SUVs? "The larger the car, the bigger you feel," he said.
There is some evidence that attitudes are changing, but only modestly.
The number of hybrid vehicles registered in Texas more than doubled last year, to 48,550. Still, that's only a fraction of 1 percent of all vehicles registered in the state.
"As more hybrids are added on, particularly hybrids that are trucks, you see a spike in those," said Kim Sue Lia Perkes, a spokeswoman for the Texas Department of Transportation title and registration division. "You might not get Texans out of their trucks, but they will buy their hybrid trucks."
The governor touts the state's leadership on renewable energy, like wind. But environmentalists were outraged early last year when Perry signed an executive order to speed construction of 11 new coal-fired power plants. Plans for most of those plants were eventually scrapped after TXU - the state's biggest utility and the source of $400,000 in contributions to Perry's political campaigns - was sold to a private equity firm.
Last fall, the mayors of the state's seven largest cities kicked off a campaign to encourage Texans to replace incandescent light bulbs with efficient compact fluorescents.
"Texans have long had their heads in the sand and now the sand is getting so hot that they're starting to pull it out and look around at what other states are doing," said Tom "Smitty" Smith, director of Public Citizen's Texas office.
One of the House's most conservative members recently declared there's no sense in debating global warming and created a House Carbon Caucus to address carbon emissions.
"It's not about whether global warming is a fact. I don't think we ever get anywhere with that," said Republican state Rep. Warren Chisum, a rancher from the Texas Panhandle and chairman of the House budget-writing committee. He said about 56 Republican and Democratic House members out of 150 have joined the Carbon Caucus.
Teri Kuester, a textbook consultant, drives a Toyota Tundra pickup around Austin. "We need the ability to go to Home Depot, to go to Lowe's and be able to haul stuff back," she said. "We need the ability to go to the nursery and bring back plants."
But she hopes to buy a more efficient vehicle next time around, and when she can, she walks to the post office and the drugstore instead of driving.
"It's time to quit letting the oil lobbies run things," she said. "We need alternative energy. We're really interested in seeing that."
© MMVIII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Video and Galleries from SciTech
-
Video
Bottled H2O Backlash
-
Video
Hohm, sweet Hohm
-
Video
Loaded: On Tour
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 82 CommentsDONT GET ME WRONG! I LIVE IN OKLAHOMA! NOT DEFENDING TEXAS!
yea they did take it into account. Amazingly enough, you can find the answer to all that and more by reading the article instead of asking folks like me to read it for you.
NO DUH
So don''t talk to me about carbon footprints; the ocean/atmosphere hydrological cycle washes away any carbon footprint you can possibly make.
That''s great Seafang. So lets keep producing smog that you folks obviously enjoy breathing. I would rather take measures to breath clean air and drink clean water regardless of global warming.
Posted by easeup
-------
Hmmmm, shoe seems to fit!
They can''t heat or cool their houses without going broke (electricity expected to be 10x current rates within 20 yrs, with extensive periodic brownouts and blackouts due to overstressed grid system and lack of fuel)
They can''t drive because they either can''t get or can''t afford Gas (Peak oil is nearing, and prices will shoot up to over $200, per gallon at least $6, and that is WITHOUT the expected big added Federal Tax to support alternative energy.. and assumes you can even BUY gas)
Texas, barring some big change in the cost structure for Alternative Energy (ie replacing oil with something sustainable and NOT because of global warming but because we are running OUT), your whole way of life will end in 20 years. You will become a big hot humid wasteland of foolishness. You WILL be able to get around, like the old days, on Horses.
most Refineries are in the Gulf coast......
we were left behind
bush/cheney are the proof of it
Yea. Bigger egos. Bigger debt. Bigger butts.
Texas is the "number one" wind powered electricity generator in the United States and soon to be the world...........
Posted by davek455 at 05:22 PM : Jan 16, 2008
Eat your heart out loser your just jealous. Talks cheap it takes money to buy good whiskey.
most Refineries are in the Gulf coast......
Posted by Quetzal666 at 05:03 PM : Jan 16, 2008
Hey Santa Anna wanna be go find a map, most refineries are in Texas and on the Gulf coast.
Posted by trglazier at 05:54 PM : Jan 16, 2008
Got a lot cleaner and the IQ went up 50 points on average when you left.
Um -
Thank you, Governor Bu$h...
West Virginia coal in railroad cars, courtesy of Robert Bird''s legislation
If only it were its own country.
Seriously, if people need to haul things regularly, then there''s nothign wrong with a pick-up or SUV, but if you''re driving one to make up forother "shortcomings," then just buy some Enzyte and get over it. The picture with this article tells it all...out of all the vehicles shown I could only pick out 2 regular passenger cars.
But careful now, we COULD secede and start charging you guys $100/barrel if you pixx us off!! :P
F*ck Texass! The only good thing to come out of Texass is their martini olives stuffed with jalapenos. Too bad Bushit doesnt'' stuff some of those where the sun don''t shine.
Sorry amigo but it would be well worth it!
The occupied territory of Texas should go back to Mexico! Justice for the oppressed people of Mexico!
"WAHHHH!!! IT''S BUSH''S FAULT!!!! WAAAA!!!!!"
Hey M-O-R-O-N-S, it''s the REFINERIES.
God you people are stupid.
This article really does not contain anything but meaningless, superficial data designed to get people up in arms. For those who bite on such things, it was apparently successful.
Thanks go to Bush for rolling back Texas environmental regulation and putting all the biggest polluters in the state on the honor system. Bush''s "No Corporation Left Behind" plan is great for polluters and terrible for the public.
This article really does not contain anything but meaningless, superficial data designed to get people up in arms. For those who bite on such things, it was apparently successful.
The Bush Administration''s Roll Back of Clean Air Protections is a National Disaster for Public Health.
Oil Giants Could Increase Pollution by Two to 140 Times Current Emissions Without Triggering Pollution Control Requirements.
The Clean Air Act, passed in 1970, is arguably the most successful public health and environmental law ever. The benefits of this landmark legislation have far outweighed its costs. But the Bush administration is engaged in the most serious effort to roll back the Clean Air Act since its enactment.
When the Clean Air Act became law, compromises were made in order to get it passed. One of these was grandfathering in thousands of the oldest and dirtiest power plants and refineries, which were allowed to pollute up to ten times more than modern plants. Under a provision called New Source Review (NSR), however, if these dirty facilities expand, they have to upgrade to new anti-pollution technologies and modern pollution-control equipment.
n its latest attack on the Clean Air Act, the Bush administration has moved to eviscerate NSR and allow these plants to expand and pollute even more. On December 30 last year, the EPA issued revisions to the NSR rules, permitting thousands of aging coal-fired power plants and other industrial sites to upgrade without having to install new anti-pollution devices. Slated to go into effect in March, the new rules make all but the most flagrant polluters virtually immune from government legal action. Companies will also be given greater latitude in calculating pollution, reducing the likelihood that new pollution controls will be required.
A collaboration of state, local and national groups today released a new study that calculates, for the first time ever, the pollution burden that the nation could suffer if the Bush administration succeeds in its likely proposal to gut the Clean Air Act''s New Source Review program. The report, Smokestack Rollback: How the Bush administration''s Clean Air Act proposals will increase toxic refinery pollution and jeopardize public health, focuses on the public health threats posed by expected increases in oil industry pollution as a result of the Bush administration''s proposals.
One part ignorance, one part denial and two parts greed equal a recipe for disaster as the Bush Administration rolls back the Clean Air Act and lets industry build and improve plants without upgrading pollution control equipment. As this disaster unfolds, the spotlight should be on Texas, the state responsible for two-thirds of U.S. petrochemical production. Here, for a long time, the industry has used our air and water as a dumping ground without knowing or wanting to know how much toxic pollution the refineries and plants spew out each day. A weaker Clean Air Act means Texas industry stands to reap financial savings for not installing pollution control devices. Left to live with the illness and health care costs are the communities and families that cannot escape the health effects of the pollution.
Posted by donbl1
That''s due to all the frickin'' hot air from you yahoo''s.
Bush''s roll-back of Clean Air Act protections has been a huge money maker for corporate polluters and a bust for anyone who likes to breath.
One part ignorance, one part denial and two parts greed equal a recipe for disaster as the Bush Administration rolls back the Clean Air Act and lets industry build and improve plants without upgrading pollution control equipment. As this disaster unfolds, the spotlight should be on Texas, the state responsible for two-thirds of U.S. petrochemical production. Here, for a long time, the industry has used our air and water as a dumping ground without knowing or wanting to know how much toxic pollution the refineries and plants spew out each day. A weaker Clean Air Act means Texas industry stands to reap financial savings for not installing pollution control devices. Left to live with the illness and health care costs are the communities and families that cannot escape the health effects of the pollution.
"Texas Is No. 1 Carbon Polluter In U.S."
Imagine my surprise...
Texans can live in such a wasteful lifestyle because their mortgages and rents are dirt cheap. Over there a $400,000 house is something to behold. Even with prices down you could not find a tool shed for that price in the S.F. Bay area!
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 82 Comments