Return to Home Page Web Hosting donated by Xmission
Return to Home Page Web Hosting donated by Xmission
Xmission is UMA's preferred internet provider
January 2007 Edition
CUMMINS ROCKY MOUNTAIN
BLM SEEKS PUBLIC INPUT ON
IMPACT OF COAL MINE Five scoping meetings have been scheduled to determine what issues the federal Bureau of Land Management should address in an environmental impact statement (EIS) studying a proposed surface coal mine near Alton. The EIS will review Alton Coal Development LLC's application for a federal coal lease on 3,851 acres of public and private land about three miles south of the Kane County town of Alton and about 10 miles west of Bryce Canyon National Park. BLM specialists will use input from the meetings to shape the environmental study. "The public needs to be involved in the process as early as possible so we can be aware of and address all concerns with the proposal," said Rex Smart, manager of the BLM's Kanab Field Office. "We have already identified several issues . . . but we still need to hear from the public about their issues." Smart said the EIS will address the potential impacts of the surface mine to nearby homes as well as city and county facilities, the possible health effects from blasting to remove the coal and an overlying layer of rock, and potential impacts on livestock grazing, big game herds and hunting. Alton Coal Development LLC estimates the surface mine would create about 50 jobs and yield about 2 million tons of coal annually. Each weekday, about 190 truckloads of coal would be hauled from the mine site north on U.S. Highway 89 to State Route 20 and then down Interstate 15 to a coal loadout facility west of Cedar City. Since June, the Utah Division of Oil, Gas and Mining has been processing a parallel application to start the strip mine on 440 acres of private land. The Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance already has expressed reservations about the proposed project because of its proximity to Bryce Canyon. Project documents are available for public review weekdays (except holidays) at the Kanab Field Office, 318 N. 100 East, Kanab, UT 84741. Written comments may be mailed to Keith Rigtrup at the Field Office, faxed to him at 435-644-4620 or e-mailed to UT Kanab Altoncoal@blm.gov. Meetings to collect public input on a proposed surface coal mine near Alton will be held from 5 p.m. to 8 p.m. on: BOARD OF OIL, GAS AND MINING SEEKS EARTH DAY AWARD NOMINATIONS The Utah Board of Oil, Gas and Mining is seeking nominations for 2007 Earth Day Awards. Earth Day Awards are presented each year to companies, organizations or individuals who go beyond what is required by regulation to protect the environment while developing Utah's natural resources. Awards are presented in each of three areas: oil and gas, minerals mining, and coal mining. Specific award categories include environmental improvement to an active mine site, exploration site, or producing field; outstanding results following applications of innovative environmental technology; and outstanding final reclamation or site restoration. For more information, or to obtain a nomination form, contact Jim Springer at (801) 538-5324, or go to the division website at www.ogm.utah.gov. UMA encourages member companies to participate in the Earth Day Awards program! COMSTOCK MOUNTAIN LION MINE As the New Year begins and I reflect on what we have accomplished over the past year, it is exciting to see the progress we have made in the short time we have owned the Comstock/Mountain Lion Mine. From a mining project that sat idle for over 10 years with facilities that had been ransacked, shot at, and in some cases run over with vehicles on the property grounds, we now have a site that is in the first stages of becoming an active iron ore mine once again. Since we have acquired the mine we have accomplished the following:
I am very proud of our small and efficient staff that has worked long hours putting all of this together in such a short period of time when a project of this type could typically take significantly longer to complete. This is especially difficult in a time when we have a robust minerals industry and everyone is competing for contractors, equipment, and skilled workers. The next steps, which include the execution of port and sales contracts, are well underway. Once those terms are finalized and funding is in place, we will move ahead quickly to construct the new facility and begin shipping concentrate to the west coast. This is a large undertaking indeed, but one that is close to being realized. And, with the recent increase in iron ore prices and positive outlook for steel, we are optimistic about the future of Palladon. Once the final details are complete we will release a timeline and projection of start-up dates. We also look forward to increasing our presence in the cement industry, which is an ideal related business that provides consistent and short-term cash flow. The Comstock/Mountain Lion project is not all that we have on the plate right now. Drill rigs are preparing to move forward on our gold properties in Nevada through At this time I would like to wish all of you a prosperous new year in 2007. We thank you all for your support and your patience as we move forward with these projects, and hope that the benefits of our labors will be realized by all in the near future. On Behalf of the Board of Directors,
EAGLE MINE GETS TENTATIVE APPROVAL TRAVERSE CITY, Mich. - Kennecott Minerals Co. of Utah moved a step closer to opening a nickel and copper mine in the Upper Peninsula backwoods by winning tentative approval Tuesday from the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality. The Eagle Mine would operate six to eight years in the Yellow Dog Plains region of northern Marquette County, a remote area popular with hikers and snowmobilers and home to moose and bear. It would create about 120 full-time jobs, the company says. Opponents fear the mine would pollute groundwater and the Salmon Trout River, which scientists say could be the only stream on Lake Superior's southern shore with a native, naturally reproducing population of rare coaster brook trout. The mine would extend beneath the river's headwaters. The DEQ promised to consider public comments before making a final decision on Kennecott's mining permit application. A hearing is scheduled for March 6-8 at Northern Michigan University. The final ruling is planned for early May but could be delayed if the agency seeks further information from the company. Kennecott hopes to begin construction this fall and mining operations in 2009, project manager Jon Cherry said. ''We're pleased with the DEQ's decision thus far and look forward to the remainder of the process,'' he said.
AT UTAH MINING ASSOCIATION Coal, Nuclear, and Green House Gases In this month's UMA Newsletter under the "Coal" section, you will see an editorial by the Desert Morning News, which indicated that coal is the backbone of America's electricity generation, and that the so called "alternatives" aren't really available on a large scale to replace coal. Tim Wagner's response (i.e. the Sierra Club) to this editorial is also shown wherein he quotes the founder of Sun Microsystem Venod Klosha as saying "Anyone who invests today in a coal plant is insane." This whole issue of coal plants and greenhouse gas emissions is most interesting in light of the fact that America was moving towards "cleaner" nuclear power in the 1970's until adoption of that technology was stopped by the environmental community on the false grounds that nuclear energy was "unsafe." The environmental community now realizes the error of their ways as other countries – particularly, France, Germany, Japan and China – have moved into nuclear powerplants leaving the United States nowhere to go except for coal. I wonder who in the environmental community will have the guts and be forthright enough to tell the American public they have again been mislead in the name of "environmentalism." Sorry, Tim, but coal is here today, and with the adoption of advanced clean coal technology now under development, coal will remain America's energy backbone for many many decades to come. Utah Legislative ReportThe Utah legislature is now nearly half way through its 45 day session, which started January 15th. The major issue being pursued by your Association is the removal of sales and use tax on mining equipment capital purchases (i.e. those with a life of three years or longer). Economists have shown that sound tax policy for tools of production is to tax the outputs of production not the inputs. As you recall, agriculture and manufacturing and some other industries in Utah already have this exemption. Senator Howard Stephenson (R) has introduced SB142 that removes the sales and use tax for mining, mining related suppliers, some additional manufacturing categories, and computer activities. SB142 has passed the Senate Revenue and Taxation Committee and is waiting to be passed by the full Senate. Representative Wayne Harper (R) will manage the bill in the House. It is imperative that all Utah mining companies and suppliers act now to send letters of support for SB142 to your elected representatives and Governor Huntsman. (Find your legislators: www.le.state.ut.us/maps/amap.html) Contact the UMA and we will be happy to assist as needed. In addition personal meetings and phone calls to your representatives should take place as soon as possible. We have an opportunity to get this bill enacted and signed by the Governor, but it won't happen without your voices being heard now.
Return to Top of Page
CAN'T RUSH POWER ALTERNATIVE Perhaps it's the mother of all squeeze plays. If enough municipalities shun electrical power produced by coal-fired power plants, then the nation has to get serious - and quick - about alternative forms of electrical production. Of course, the other possibility is it's a foolish gamble. Coal has been king since the Industrial Age. It's widely available and relatively inexpensive. But coal-fired power plants pollute the air. Environmentalists go so far as to say that coal-fired power plants contribute to global warming. The alternatives pose their own challenges. Although nuclear power is widely used in Europe, the United States - in particular the Western United States - has very limited experience with electricity produced in this manner. After the 1979 accident at the Three Mile Island nuclear reactor in Pennsylvania and the world's worst nuclear accident in history at the Chernobyl reactor near Kiev in 1986, the public's enthusiasm for nuclear power was greatly tempered. Overall, however, the industry boasts a very good safety record. But more than two decades after President Ronald Reagan introduced a policy calling for a high-level radioactive waste storage facility, the waste issue is far from settled. So what are other alternatives? Hydroelectric power has fallen from favor because of its environmental effects. Wind power has exciting potential, but it currently supplies very little of our nation's electricity. Likewise for solar power. That takes us back to coal. The science on fossil fuel's role in global warming has become nearly irrefutable. America can't keep doing what it's been doing for centuries without further deleterious impacts. It has to be smarter about how it uses coal, make better use of natural gas reserves for producing electricity and, yes, investigate further use of nuclear power. But, as our nation's history with energy indicates, these advances will take time. Is it prudent, in the meantime, to pressure municipalities to abandon electricity produced by coal-fired power plants? A number of California cities interested in alternative energy have said they won't renew their contracts with Intermountain Power Agency when the agreements expire in 20 years. In February, the Logan Municipal Council will decide whether to purchase an additional 20 megawatts of electricity, in part to prepare for growth. The new demand would help justify the need for a third IPA power unit. Another unit, cautions the Sierra Club, would mean more global warming. The fact of the matter is, American utility customers will not accept supply disruptions. As more people add central cooling and heating systems to their homes and businesses, the demands for electricity will only increase. Add to that the population boom in places such as Utah and Nevada. Environmentalists are correct in that America cannot continue on same road to ruin. But their zeal to phase out coal power must be tempered by the reality that there are difficult public-policy issues tied to energy "alternatives," such as supply and waste disposal. The vast majority of electrical power produced in the United States comes from coal-fired power plants. With time, it may be appropriate to decommission coal-fired power plants. For now, policymakers must figure out how to keep the lights on until new technologies can assume the load effectively.
COAL PLANTS ARE ENDANGERING U.S. The editorial board in its Jan. 2 editorial on coal-based power and global warming hit the nail on the head. Barely. It missed a lot more of it. It is true that as more municipalities say no to coal-fired power plants, like Intermountain Power, we need to get serious about energy efficiency and renewable sources. I would suggest, however, that it shouldn't be a forced choice but one we should embrace. For sound reasons. First, as the board says, the science on global warming is beyond debatable, it's irrefutable. But not "nearly," as claimed. Just seeing the rise in fossil fuel use in the last 200 years paralleled with the rise in atmospheric CO2, from 280 ppm to over 380, I beg anyone to hedge their monthly salary on the claim that we are not the principal cause of climate change. NASA scientist Dr. James Hansen, who likely has more credibility on this issue than anyone, has stated that we have about 10 years to start reducing CO2, that when we hit 450 ppm, it's irreversible. To claim that it's still debatable is tantamount to doubting the hazards of smoking. Second, coal-based electricity is responsible for approximately 40 percent of all atmospheric CO2 worldwide. This is also irrefutable and not an "environmentalist" assertion as suggested. Intermountain Power's two 900-megawatt coal-burning units, for example, currently emit nearly 15 million tons annually. Its proposal for a third unit will increase that by approximately 50 percent. That equates into approximately 7,000 to 8,000 tons of CO2 per MW. (One MW provides for about 500 homes). Keep in mind that IPP is one of approximately 1,100 similar power plants across the United States. Yet the industry wants to build about 150 additional plants, 20-plus here in the West. Most will be traditional coal-combustion units, not so-called clean coal technology with potential carbon sequestration. Third, the Deseret Morning News mistakenly assumes coal as a better bet today. But that's today, literally. Those who believe that coal-based power will be the cheapest source even 10 years from now may have their head in the sand. Most within the energy sector agree that carbon caps and taxes are a reality of the not-so-distant future. The coal industry likes to tout that there's over 200 years worth of coal in the ground. But many industry analysts also predict that if we continue business as usual and build those 150 additional plants, that supply shrinks to less than 20 years. IPP and coal may seem cheap now but the future is far different. Carbon taxes, extra pollution control equipment, the disappearance of tax benefits for coal depletion, shrinking supplies and mining costs are just some of the variables that will add to the costs for residents and businesses. Yet none of these variables apply to efficiencies or renewables. Only one other industry is experiencing the rate of change like the high-tech computer world: energy. Technologies and markets are transforming so quickly that I firmly believe that we are on the verge of a total energy revolution worldwide. If one looks at the projected increases over the next 5-10 years in baseload capability, efficiency and capacity factors, technological improvements like concentrated solar paired with thermal storage and five—megawatt wind turbines, compared to the rising costs in coal-based energy, one sees exactly why California venture capitalist and founder of Sun Microsystems Venod Klosha said recently at the national Solar Energy Industry Association convention, "Anyone who invests today in a coal plant is insane." Tim Wagner is director of the Utah Smart energy campaign for the Utah chapter of the Sierra Club.
CALIFORNIA POWER COMPANIES BARRED FROM BUYING DIRTY POWER SAN FRANCISCO -- California power companies will be barred from buying electricity from most coal-fired power plants after state utility regulators adopted new limits on emissions of heat-trapping gases linked to global warming. The 4-0 vote by the Public Utilities Commission prohibits investor-owned utilities from entering long-term contracts to obtain electricity from sources that emit more carbon dioxide than a modern natural gas plant. The so-called "greenhouse gas emissions performance standard" takes effect Feb. 1. "It represents a significant milestone in our ongoing efforts to address the challenge of climate change," PUC President Michael Peevey said. The new rules - along with similar regulations for municipal utilities later this year - are expected to affect energy markets across the West. While there are almost no coal-fired plants in California, about 20 percent of the state's electricity comes from coal plants in Nevada, Wyoming, Utah and other Western states. The new emissions standard is aimed at encouraging investment in cleaner energy sources such as wind and solar, while discouraging use of coal and other high-polluting sources. Coal is inexpensive and plentiful, but releases high levels of carbon dioxide, a gas blamed for trapping heat in the earth's atmosphere and raising temperatures worldwide. The standard, which is expected to take effect Feb. 1, was adopted as part of California's strategy to combat climate change by reducing emissions of greenhouse gases. Legislation signed into law last year required the state to adopt emissions standards for investor-owned and municipal utilities. The PUC regulates the state's three investor-owned utilities - Pacific Gas & Electric Co. in San Francisco, Southern California Edison in Rosemead and San Diego Gas and Electric, owned by Sempra Energy in San Diego. Together, they supply power to more than 70 percent of Californians. The three utilities said Thursday they support the emissions standard and did not anticipate much impact on electricity rates. Coal only makes up 1 percent of electricity at PG&E, 3 percent at SDGE and 7 percent at SCE, company officials said. The California Energy Commission is drawing up a similar emissions standard for municipal utilities, which import a greater share of their electricity from out-of-state coal plants. The CEC is expected to issues its rules by July. Municipal utilities in Anaheim, Los Angeles, Pasadena and Truckee ran into strong opposition when they tried to secure long-term contracts with out-of-state coal plants before the emissions standard took effect. Environmentalists praised the PUC's emissions standard, saying it could encourage other states to adopt similar rules. "It will help transition California's energy market to one that produces less greenhouse gas emissions," said Jim Metropulos of the Sierra Club. "Other states may look at it and decide that they also want to transition from dirty coal power to cleaner, green power." But Luke Popovich of the Washington-based National Mining Association, which represents the coal industry, said restricting emissions would drive up energy costs because coal makes up about half of the nation's electricity supply. Such restrictions will do little to combat global warming unless other countries adopt similar limits, he added. "We don't think it makes sense for the United States to unilaterally deny itself use of its most abundant energy source, which is coal," Popovich said. "It is hardly going to solve anything unless we get China and India and other rapidly expanding economies into some sort of control regime." Bob Finkelstein, who heads The Utility Reform Network in San Francisco, said California ratepayers may pay a little more now, but will benefit from cleaner-energy sources in the long run. "Consumers now and later will be better off if we start planning today for an energy future that doesn't have dirty coal," he said
COAL PLANTS COULD WARM SOUTHWEST'S CLIMATE, STUDY SAYS Greenhouse-gas emissions from 14 coal-fired power plants planned for the Southwest could undercut action to curb global warming, a new study says. The study, by Environmental Defense and Boulder, based Western Resource Advocates, estimates that the plants will each year release more than 70 million tons of carbon dioxide, a heat trapping gas linked to global warming. If that happens, the Southwest can expect to feel climate change effects, including increased flooding, wildfires and infectious disease outbreaks, the study concludes. "As much as any region in the country, the Southwest will feel the impact of global warming," said John Nielsen, energy program director for Western Resource Advocates. The study looks at the climate impacts in Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada, Utah and Arizona. Utility officials say that the new plants will be built with modern pollution controls eclipsing the technology in older facilities. Jim Van Someren, a spokesman for Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association Inc. — which serves Colorado, Wyoming, Nebraska and New Mexico — said the report makes assumptions about the company's long-term plans and technology investments. "We will comply with all state and federal regulations, but to say anything beyond that would be speculative," Van Someren said. The report calls on states to invest more in renewable energy and support plans that aggressively combat global warming. The report's authors cite California's 2002 commitment to control auto carbon-dioxide emissions. "Our elected leaders have already shown strong leadership on global warming and clean-energy issues," said Jana Milford, a scientist with Environmental Defense. "These new plants, which are based on outdated technology, threaten to undo much of the hard work," she said.
2007 UMA LEGISLATIVE DIRECTORY The Utah Mining Association annually publishes a directory of the Utah State Legislature. The Association has been publishing this directory, as a public service to the citizens of Utah, for over 10 years. We published 4,000 directories this year. These directories are distributed to legislators, lobbyists, other associations, and the public when they come to the capitol to participate in the legislative process. We also have a pdf version of this directory on our website for the public to access (www.utahmining.org/2007UMALegDir.pdf). Following is a thank you note the UMA received from Kathy Jasperson of North Salt Lake:
TAKING ANOTHER LOOK AT
UTAH'S TAR SAND RESOURCES Recent increases in the price of crude oil have sparked renewed interest in unconventional energy resources, including Utah's tar sands. Tar sands (also called oil-impregnated sandstones, oil sands, and bituminous sandstones) are, as the names imply, sandstones that are saturated or filled with black, heavy hydrocarbons or bitumen. The sandstone can be unconsolidated, that is, the sand grains are held together mainly by the bitumen, or it can be consolidated, whereby the sand grains are held together by silica or carbonate cement with the bitumen filling the remaining voids. The bitumen is viscous, relatively immobile in the rock, and cannot be extracted by conventional oil-production techniques. The bitumen often "bleeds" from outcrops that are warmed by the sun, however. North America has the greatest measured tar sand resources in the world. Canada holds the majority of these tar sands, followed by the United States. Utah's measured tar sand resource, though small in comparison to that of Canada, is the largest in the United States. Smaller resources exist in Texas, California, Alabama, Kentucky, and several other states. The speculative tar sand resource of Alaska is nearly equal to the total resource of Utah. Utah's tar sand deposits contain 14 to 15 billion barrels of measured oil in place, with an additional estimated resource of 23 to 28 billion barrels. These deposits are within the eastern part of the state (Colorado Plateau physiographic province). Twenty-four individual deposits exist in the Uinta Basin, mainly around its periphery, and an additional 50 deposits are scattered throughout the southeastern part of the state. Utah's major tar sand deposits individually have areal extents ranging from 20 to over 250 square miles, as many as 13 pay zones, gross thickness ranging from 10 to more than 1000 feet, and overburden thickness ranging from zero to over 500 feet. The estimated/measured oil-in-place resources of individual deposits range from 100 million barrels to more than 22 billion barrels. A few geologic units contain nearly all of Utah's tar sand resource. In the Uinta Basin, the Asphalt Ridge and Asphalt Ridge Northwest deposits are in the Eocene-Oligocene Duchesne River Formation, the P.R. Spring and Hill Creek deposits are in the Douglas Creek Member of the Eocene Green River Formation, and the Sunnyside deposit is in the Green River Formation. In the southeastern Utah deposits, the Tar Sand Triangle deposit is in the Permian White Rim Sandstone of the Cutler Group, and the Circle Cliffs deposit is in the Triassic Moenkopi Formation. By the late 1800s and early 1900s, many of Utah's tar sand deposits had been discovered and described, and in some cases efforts were made to extract the tar or to use the tar sand as paving material. Increased interest in Utah's tar sands really began in the mid-1900s as evidenced by an increase in the number of publications on the subject. By 1975, interest was fueled by the first major increase in the cost of crude oil above $10 per barrel. Tar sands were now viewed as less of a novelty and more as a new and hopefully less expensive source of oil. During the next 20 years, interest in tar sands continued, as did tar sand research, which included detailed geologic mapping and core drilling, bitumen characterization, development of bitumen extraction techniques, and development of bitumen upgrading processes. Funding for tar sand research during this time came from the U.S. Department of Energy and major corporations, as well as private and other sources. Unfortunately, in spite of the great amount of research, testing, and initial developments, a lasting and successful tar sand industry in Utah was not realized. After 1995, interest in tar sands waned, and tar sand research dropped dramatically even with the price of crude oil fluctuating within the $10- to $30-per-barrel range. Foreign and domestic crude oil supplies were abundant, so production of synthetic crude from tar sands was not profitable. In late 2001, however, the price of crude oil started a steep rise from around $18 per barrel to over $75 per barrel by 2006. During this period of rising crude oil prices, interest in tar sands, as well as oil shales, again came to the forefront, prompting tar sand and oil shale initiatives on the federal, state, corporate, academic, and private levels. With the high price of crude oil as an incentive, coupled with the vast amount of past research information that is available, new drilling, bitumen extraction, and upgrading techniques may provide the necessary ingredients for the successful and sustainable development of Utah's tar sand deposits in the near future. However, in spite of the current favorable economical and technological setting, factors such as site accessibility, adequate infrastructure, water availability, environmental concerns, land access and permitting, and the heterogeneity of reservoir sands must be resolved before tar sand development will become a reality in Utah. UGS Annotated Bibliography and Databases of Utah Tar Sands, and other sources of information from the UGS Over the past two years, the UGS has been assembling an annotated compilation of over 550 references and data sources for Utah tar sands. The Annotated Bibliography and Databases of Utah Tar Sands, by J. Wallace Gwynn and E Hanson (University of Utah), provides references to information on the geology, chemistry, extraction techniques and trials, and upgrading of tar sand bitumen in Utah. Sources of information include journal articles, theses and dissertations, UGS files, and industry files. The compilation will be released as a UGS Open-File Report on compact disk and the UGS Web site, and is expected to be available in early 2007. Additional information on Utah tar sands is available online in the following UGS publications: Blackett, R.E., 1996, Tar-sand resources of the Uinta Basin, Utah (a catalog of deposits): Utah Geological Survey Open-File Report 335, 122 p. http://ugspub.nr.utah.gov/publications/open_ file_reports/OFR-335.pdf Campbell, J.A., and Ritzma, H.R., 1979, Geology and petroleum resources of the major oil-impregnated sandstone deposits of Utah: Utah Geological and Mineral Survey Special Studies 50, 24 p. http://ugspub.nr.utah.gov/publications/special_studies/SS-50.pdf Utah Geological and Mineral Survey, 1983, Energy resources map of Utah: Utah Geological and Mineral Survey Map 68, scale 1:500,000. http://ugspub.nr.utah.gov/publications/energy_maps/M-68.pdf
TOXIC SECRETS: NEW EPA RULE WILL LET POLLUTERS AVOID DISCLOSURE If confession is good for the repentant soul, disclosure is good for the businesses that produce toxic chemicals - and Americans who have to live with the pollution. A rule requiring companies to report details about what chemicals they are releasing into the environment allows individuals and regulators to protect themselves and encourages businesses to pollute less in order to avoid having to file reports. Now, for no good reason, the Environmental Protection Agency has decided to change the rule, allowing companies to release up to 2,000 pounds of pollutants before they must report the releases to the Toxic Release Inventory, a national database accessible to anyone. Before the rule change, the threshold was 500 pounds. The change is especially toxic in Utah, which ranks sixth in the nation in concentration of pollutants. The EPA rule change means that as many as 30 to 35 companies may no longer have to disclose the chemicals they use and release, leaving their neighbors with no information about what might be floating in the air or water or hidden in the soil. The EPA's stated reason for the change, to save the paperwork burden on businesses that pollute, is a poor excuse for robbing members of the public of information needed to keep them safe. The Washington D.C.-based environmental organization OMB Watch reports that the EPA's action has been criticized by more than a thousand individuals, 23 state governments, 60 members of Congress, 30 public-health organizations, 40 labor organizations and 200 environmental and public-interest groups. And rightly so. It's not surprising that only 33 who responded to the change, 29 of them with interests in polluting companies, favored the new standard. The Toxic Release Inventory is a useful tool for individuals and organizations, including government regulators, to learn what businesses are doing, which ones are using and producing toxic substances and how well they are managing the pollutants. That usefulness will be needlessly undermined if this rule change is allowed to stand. The EPA's role is to guard the environment and, consequently, the health and safety of Americans who depend on the agency's diligence. It is not the industry-protection agency.
MERCURY THREAT SPREADS ACROSS UTAH New tests show that mercury contamination is widespread in fish throughout Utah, including 14 areas where it is higher than federal standards, state officials said Thursday. But they caution that further review or more testing is warranted before advisories to limit the amount of fish eaten are issued beyond the three now in place. "This shows the problem is ubiquitous," said Cheryl Heying, a member of the Statewide Mercury Work Group and a state air-quality official. "And there are hot spots." John Whitehead, assistant director of the Utah Division of Water Quality, said more than a dozen areas around the state - many of them favorites among fishermen, like Jordanelle Reservoir, the Weber River, Joes Valley Reservoir and Panguitch Lake - have been identified as mercury hot spots. "This is one of our major concerns," said Whitehead. Other popular fishing waters where at least some fish were above the federal mercury limit (when averaged, they fell below) include: Strawberry Reservoir, Deer Creek Reservoir, Bear Lake and Scofield Reservoir. The Utah Health Department is going over the results of mercury tests on nearly 821 fish taken from 139 locations around the state. On average, they found that 12 percent of the fish sampled contained mercury above levels considered safe for unlimited consumption by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Whitehead said it will be about a month before the state Health Department finishes reviewing the data and decides what sort of advisories are in order, if any. "If you look at the data set, it's pretty clear some of these sites have a pretty clear conclusion and some are questionable and need further sampling and analysis," he said. The advisories are intended to protect people from ingesting too much mercury in its toxic form, methylmercury, which is a neurotoxin. The advisories usually target women of childbearing age and young children, who, if exposed to too much mercury, may suffer impaired brain function that can result in difficulty thinking, talking and/or remembering. Methylmercury builds up in the food chain and eating contaminated meat is thought to be the most likely way for people to be affected. Utah officials already have issued consumption advisories for three fish - channel catfish from the Green River in Desolation Canyon; largemouth bass from Gunlock Reservoir in Washington County; and brown trout from Mill Creek in Grand County - and three Great Salt Lake ducks, the common goldeneye, northern shoveler and cinnamon teal. One question making it difficult for the state to decide on more advisories is that in some sites there have been too few fish sampled to determine scientific certainty that they contain mercury above levels considered safe. Walt Donaldson, chief of aquatics for the Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, says he would like to see a larger sample size from each of the sites. "A sample size of three to five fish is not enough to indicate an area of concern," he said. "We would like to [look] at 30 or more fish for a broad spectrum. That would allow us to look at young fish and old fish and develop a solid average." Ed Kent, chairman of the Utah Anglers Coalition, said he was not surprised with the announcement of the new mercury hot spots. "This is a known persistent problem in other parts of the country. Even though it is still in its infancy here in Utah, as far as the discovery of it, I'm not sure it will have an impact on the fishing industry," Kent said. "We just need to be sure to educate the public and let them know the risks." Collecting and processing samples costs about $50 apiece with a new mercury analyzer the state bought about a year ago. And, with no additional funding to address this relatively new issue, the agencies have been limited in the number of samples they process. Last year, the EPA turned down a state request for about $95,000 to help understand mercury in the Great Salt Lake, where methylmercury levels are some of the highest ever measured in the United States. Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. has requested $213,600 in his 2008 budget proposal specifically to deal with the mercury problem, including tracking down the sources that might be responsible for the contamination.
NEW MEXICO GOVERNOR ISSUES
EXECUTIVE ORDER New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson on Dec. 28 signed an executive order outlining further greenhouse gas emissions reduction efforts for his state and reportedly said that he is considering asking the Legislature to pass a law to require power plants and other industries to reduce carbon emissions, similar to California's newly enacted law. Richardson, a Democrat considering a run for the presidential nomination in 2008, was quoted by the Associated Press as saying at a news conference concerning his executive order that he is looking at the possibility of backing legislation that would require power plants, natural gas producers and other industries to reduce carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions. Greenhouse gas emissions limits could heavily impact PNM Resources Inc. subsidiary Public Service Co. of New Mexico, the largest utility in the state, and could also have implications for up to 19 rural electric distribution cooperatives and a generation and transmission cooperative that serve many customers throughout New Mexico, since much of their power comes from coal-fired plants. On a per capita basis, New Mexico produces twice the national average of greenhouse gas emissions; electricity generation is the largest source in the state with 40% of the emissions, followed by the fossil fuel industry with 23%, according to a presentation from the New Mexico Environment Department. The state Legislature convenes Jan. 16, but Richardson said he has not decided whether to ask for such a bill. Meanwhile, he issued an executive order for state government agencies to create a market-based greenhouse gas emissions registry and reduction program, advance carbon capture and sequestration technology, promote the use of dairy cow manure for power generation and encourage private builders to implement "green building" efforts. Richardson announced on Oct. 31, 2006, that he would ask the Legislature to increase the state's renewable portfolio standard requirements. He proposed to increase the standard by requiring electric utilities to get at least 15% of their electricity from renewable sources by 2015 and 25% by 2020. The utilities now get about 5% from renewables. The governor's Climate Change Advisory Group produced a plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 267 million metric tons through the year 2020 and at the same time save a projected $2 billion for New Mexico's economy, according to a news release from the state Environment Department. The Energy Supply Technical Work Group released a summary list of pending policy options in October 2006 that states renewable energy would reduce development of coal-fired and oil-fired generation in New Mexico. The advisory group called for ramping up the existing 10% renewables standard in annual increments. Under his Dec. 28 order, Richardson called for creating a Climate Change Action Implementation Team to ensure that state agencies conduct greenhouse gas reduction measures. The executive order requires various agencies to submit studies, analyses, plans, evaluations and proposals to develop regulations, policy and guidance as well as impanel more stakeholder groups and pursue regional efforts with other states. New Mexico's utility regulators joined California, Oregon and Washington in an agreement Dec. 1 to explore development and implementation of greenhouse gas emissions standards for new long-term power supplies. Richardson also ordered efforts to establish policies for modification of state procurement processes for state equipment, vehicles and buildings. The executive order follows a previous executive order Richardson issued in the spring of 2005 establishing greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals for New Mexico. The goals were to meet year 2000 levels of emissions by 2012 and make further reductions thereafter. The state has a long way to go. The Environment Department says greenhouse gas emissions are predicted to grow 8% above 2000 levels by 2010 and 23% above 2000 levels by 2020. The order includes a disclaimer that in part states it is not intended to create a private right to enforce or mandate the undertaking of any particular action. Richardson's track record getting legislation passed that would help reduce greenhouse gases is mixed. Bills that would have created a state transmission authority to help renewable energy developers were smothered under a backlog of proposals in February 2006 due to one of New Mexico's short legislative sessions. However, Richardson pushed for a renewables portfolio standard that requires utilities to get at least 10% of their electricity sales from renewables by 2011 and signed it into law in early 2004.
CATERPILLAR, NMA AT ODDS OVER MANDATORY
U.S. EMISSIONS CAPS RENO, NV (Mineweb.com) -- As mining heavy equipment giant Caterpillar joined with the U.S. Climate Action Partnership (USCAP) Monday to proclaim their support for mandatory U.S. emissions reductions, the National Mining Association declared its opposition to the group's policy proposals. In a news conference, CAT Chairman and CEO Jim Owens said his company believes in the need for a market-based approach to develop current and future clean technologies to reduce emissions and sustain the environment. The company said it supports a federal approach "that is well integrated into a harmonized global system of greenhouse gas reduction initiatives, in particular one that avoids local or regional development of separate paths-requiring separate technology in achieving emissions targets." "Reducing greenhouse gas emissions can-and should-provide more economic opportunities than risks for industry and the economy. The goals of reduced emissions and economic growth are not mutually exclusive," declared Owens. "As the world's largest maker of construction and mining equipment and a technology leader, one of the reasons that Caterpillar is pleased to have a seat at this table is to focus on market-based solutions to issues that impact manufacturers and key customer groups, especially coal." CAT is also a member of the NMA, whose President and CEO Kraig R. Naasz responded, "Policy proposals such as those made by USCAP would penalize modern and more carbon-efficient power plants currently being planned simply because they do not meet an arbitrary definition of `readily carbon-capture capable.' This approach completely ignores the economic hardship that would be imposed on many residential and industrial consumers and turns a blind eye to both the technological and regional constraints on carbon sequestration." "Further, the proposal will have the perverse effect of encouraging continued use of older facilities and hindering the development of more modern electric power generation," he said. "NMA is convinced that a real and sustained commitment to development of carbon management technologies can achieve meaningful improvements in energy efficiency and emissions of greenhouse gases-domestically and internationally-at less cost to our economy and energy security than will arbitrary caps on emissions," Naasz declared. USCAP's membership includes Alcoa, BP America, Caterpillar, Duke Energy, DuPont, FPL Group, General Electric, Lehman Brothers, PG&E, and PNM Resources along with environmental NGOs Environmental Defense, Natural Resources Defense Council, the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, and the World Resources Institute. The group asks policy markers to enact mandatory reductions of GHG (greenhouse gas) emissions from major emitting sectors, including large stationary sources and transportation, and energy use in commercial and residential buildings. Their proposal includes a cap-and-trade program. The group recommends that Congress establish short- and mid-term emission reduction targets; a national program to accelerate technology research, development and deployment; and approaches to encourage actions by other countries including those in the developing world. USCAP asked Congress to establish specific mandatory emission reductions targets of between 100-105% with five years of enactment; between 90-100% of today's levels within 10 years of enactment; and between 70-90% of today's levels that are within 15 years of enactment. "Furthermore, Congress should specify an emission target zone aimed at reducing emissions by 60% to 80% from current levels by 2050," the group asserted." The organization recommended that a cap and trade program "should cover as much of the economy's GHG emissions as is politically and administratively possible." They also suggested that legislation be enacted that require cap and trade regulations by no later than the end of 2008. To read the USCAP "A Call for Action" proposal, go to www.us-cap.org.
TO CURB GLOBAL WARMING, U.S. COAL PRODUCERS RENO, NV (Mineweb.com) --The battle lines have been clearly drawn between the Democrats in Congress, a handful of major names in the international mining industry and the National Mining Association and its coal company members. The Democrats' victory in last year's elections means Congress's stance on environmental issues has changed dramatically. Gone is the champion of mining and big oil from the House Natural Resources Committee. Meanwhile, the mining attorney, who formerly chaired the House Subcommittee on Energy and Mining, is now Nevada's governor. The first woman speaker of the House, San Francisco Democrat Nancy Pelosi, has turned her attention to global warming. The good news is that the House Energy Committee Chairman Rep. John Dingell of Detroit has long opposed mandatory emissions caps. Senate Energy Committee Chairman Jeff Bingaman, a Democrat, replaced his fellow New Mexico colleague Pete Domenici, a Republican. Unlike his colleague, Bingaman has already introduced an energy cap-and-trade scheme, aimed at slowing the growth of emissions. Last week Republican Presidential candidate Sen. John McCain of Arizona, and Senator Joe Lieberman (D-Conn.) introduced the most ambitious cap-and-trade scheme. Their bill mandates strict CO2 and GHG emission reduction targets as well as a cap-and-trade emissions reduction credit system identical to what has been proposed in the United Nations' Clean Development Mechanism. The McCain/Lieberman bill would only apply to entities that emit more than 10,000 metric tons of greenhouse gases per year, and would not apply to individual car owners, homeowners, or the agricultural sector. Companies would be mandated to submit one tradable allowance for each metric ton of GHG. They will have the economic choice of reducing their emissions to reduce their required allowances, or purchasing other companies' allowance to cover their continued emissions. In the meantime, Senator Dianne Feinstein, another San Francisco Democrat, has proposed legislation that would cut power companies emissions by 25% of their project levels by 2020. To compound the politic morass, evangelical Christian groups are beginning to embrace global warming as a moral issue. And, on the other side of the aisle, former Vice President Al Gore's documentary on global warming is now up for an Oscar for best documentary. And, a number of Americans actually paid to see it in movie theaters. President George W. Bush asserts that the U.S. dependence on fossil fuel, specifically oil, is the "confluence of national security and economic security concerns and environmental concerns that come together and can be solved at the same time by technologies. .The good news is, is that we're on the verge of some unbelievable technological breakthroughs." Bush's advocacy of U.S. energy independence is striking a resounding chord of support among his constituents. A recent poll by Public Agenda On-Line found that 51% of Americans think that government can do a lot to reduce dependence on foreign energy. Another 36% would also like to see the government become more active on this issue. During a talk to DuPont employees this week, Bush declared "I think it's an appropriate use of taxpayers' money to spend on developing new technologies to help us deal with problems that affect today and the future for your children." Noting that "we've got a lot of coal," the President suggested that "the fundamental question is: Can we burn that coal to heat your homes in a way that doesn't endanger the environment? And so we're spending a lot of money to do that. .We're spending billions. The dream one day is for-for us to be able to say here's a coal-fired plant that has zero emissions. And it's possible. It's likely, as a matter of fact." The world's largest heavy equipment manufacturer has already taken on one of its biggest customers, the international mining sector, in calling for mandatory caps on greenhouse gas emissions. Caterpillar Chairman and CEO Jim Owens said this week that, "We fully agree with the President that abundant supplies of coal will produce the majority of this country's energy for years to come." "We believe a well-thought-out program can create economic opportunities while allowing flexible and expanded use of coal, clean diesel and other alternative energy," he added. This week CAT has also joined Alcoa, DuPont and other major companies who do business with mining in supporting mandatory emissions reductions to address climate change. Carter Roberts, President and CEO of the World Wildlife Fund, noted that during President Bush's State of the Union address, Bush "took a long overdue step toward acknowledging global warming as a significant threat to the nation." Nevertheless, Roberts asserted that "the majority of Americans, a growing number of states and an increasing number of CEOs are demand a comprehensive approach that includes a mandatory cap of emissions across sectors." The Congressional Budget Office released a study last September which suggested that one efficient policy response would be to reduce carbon emissions by increasing the costs of emitting carbons, both in the near term and in the future. Federal policymakers could tax fossil fuels in proportion to their carbon content, or establish a cap-and-trade program. Meanwhile, the CBO also advocating a concurrent federal policy of increasing federal support for R&D on various technologies that could help reduce the growth rate of carbon emissions, and create spillover benefits in achieving energy efficiency. Under a third, hybrid approach, the CBO has suggested that policymakers could set emissions caps, but also establish an upper limit on the price of allowances, referred to as a "safety valve price." Regulated entities under market-based greenhouse gas (GHG) emission trading proposals now under consideration by the Senate include coal mines, petroleum refineries, natural gas processing facilities, fossil fuel importers, coal mine methane, and non-CO2 greenhouse gases. The Energy Information Administration has estimated that the U.S. will produce 8649, 9248 and 9930 million metric tons of GHG emissions in 2020, 2025, and 2030 respectively. The National Mining Association is supporting Bush's quest for U.S. energy security. In a news release this week, NMA President and CEO Kraig Naasz noted that "a study last summer by the Southern States Energy Board estimates that liquefying a small portion of U.S. coal reserves could offset a significant portion of imported energy, reduce our enormous costs of protecting offshore energy sources and create high-wage jobs." However, Naasz was far less enthusiastic about Senator Bingaman's carbon emissions cap-and-trade legislation, calling it a "tax on our country's most abundant source of energy." Naasz claimed Bingaman's proposal will "cripple U.S. coal production, the nation's economy and our efforts to ensure greater energy security." He also accused the Energy Information Administration of vastly understating the cumulative costs of the Bingaman legislation. The NMA advocates "a technology-based approach to climate change that promotes voluntary efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, both in the United States and abroad, and take into account the fundamental links between climate policy, energy supply, national security and economic growth," Naasz said. GHG TRADING MARKETSThe International Emissions Trading Association and the World Bank estimate that the overall carbon market is now worth more than $21.5 billion. The Chicago Climate Exchange and the InterContinental Exchange have already developed electronic and Internet carbon and GHG reduction contracts and trading platforms. Among their members are utility companies, forest products, environmental organizations, local governments, chemical companies, electronics and semiconductor manufacturers, and retailers. There are even future and options contracts for CO2 reduction that are stimulating new sources of trading activity. The European Emissions Trading Scheme strives to meet environmental aims through economic means through its cooperative and licensing agreement with the Chicago Climate Exchange.
MOUNTAIN STATES ECONOMIC GAUGE DECLINES
FOR 5TH STRAIGHT MONTH The leading economic indicator for the Mountain States region declined in December while inflationary pressures moderated, while Utah should experience healthy but slower growth in the months ahead, according to a monthly survey of supply managers and business leaders in Utah, Colorado and Wyoming. Utah added 2,700 manufacturing jobs for 2006 for a growth rate of 2.3 percent, according to the Creighton Economic Forecasting Group report. Growth was reported by technology manufacturing firms including computer and electronic component production while transportation equipment manufacturers detailed softer economic conditions over the past several months.
Utah's growing population will continue to stimulate the local economy, but the low unemployment rate will act as a slight impediment to job growth, according to Mark Knold, senior economist for the Utah Department of Workforce Services. Knold spoke Friday during the Utah First Fridays regular event. Utah First Fridays provides networking and information presentations for the entrepreneurial and small/micro business community. "The thing that is going to restrain the economy is the amount of labor [available]," Knold said, adding that Utah is already experiencing this phenomenon. In 2006, Utah recorded a record low 2.5 percent unemployment along with a 5 percent job growth rate that led to the creation of 154,400 new jobs. These new jobs were created in every sector, with construction leading the pack, followed by the professional and business sector and the trade, transportation and utility sector. "It's interesting that construction led," Knold said, pointing out that this sector typically responds to market conditions. "With construction leading the way, it's shows how optimistic the economy is." In-migration is helping to fill those jobs, but the strong job picture in the remainder of the United States means fewer people are willing to move to Utah for work. Because of these factors, Knold believes that his earlier prediction of a 4.7 percent job growth rate this year is optimistic. "I think the lack of labor is going to slow the economy," he said, similar to what occurred in the 1990s. Nevertheless, he remains optimistic about the economy for the next three years at least. Utah's strong population growth will generate economic activity that will lead to jobs, he said. Utah saw a surge of babies in the late 1980s and early ‘90s. Those children are now reaching the age where they will enter the workforce and begin to establish their own households, stimulating the economy, he said. These young people also tend to skew the comparison of Utah's average annual pay compared to the remainder of the nation, he said. Younger people tend to be paid less than more experienced workers, and Utah's workforce has a larger percentage of younger workers, Knold said. Therefore, Utah's average annual pay is about 80 percent of the national average. However, that rate tends to catch up to the national average for Utah workers in their 40s and in many cases surpasses the national average in the older age categories, Knold said. Another factor that will help Utah's economy in the next few years is the City Creek downtown development project undertaken by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, Knold said, because it will provide a large number of jobs for a long period of time. JOB BOOM PAST PEAK? Utah is creating jobs at a rate higher than most other parts of the country. And the state's unemployment rate remains ridiculously low. But there is one strong sign in a report released Tuesday that demonstrates Utah's economy, after years of unparalleled prosperity, is facing an inevitable slowdown. Job growth registered 4.7 percent for the year that ended in December, the Utah Department of Workforce Services reported. Although that rate keeps Utah in the top three states in terms of job growth, it is down from a peak of 5.3 percent for the year that ended in June. "We hit a peak and we're slowing down now," said Mark Knold, senior economist with the agency. But that slowdown is gradual, he said, and is caused only by the tight labor market and a shortage of workers, not some fundamental problem in Utah's economy. "It could be quite a long time before workers even start to notice it is more difficult to find a job," Knold said. And it will be at least that long for employers to notice it is any easier to find or retain workers, he said. Plenty of businesses in a variety of industries certainly want some relief. Hunter Douglas, a custom window covering manufacturer, has hired 75 people in the Salt Lake area since June, bringing the number of employees to about 400. It plans to hire another 100 or so by the end of the year to accommodate an expansion. The company is building a $17 million, 240,000-square-foot facility on nearly 21 acres at Salt Lake City's Bonneville Center west of the airport. "It is tough," said General Manager Lynne Meixell. "We have had a lot of challenges finding high-caliber workers. Anyone who wants to work already has" a job. Human resources director Lana Warner said that in recent months the company has started using two employment agencies instead of just one to get applicants. And Hunter Douglas has started paying existing employees for referrals. She would not disclose the amount but said employees get a bonus if they refer someone who is hired. They get another bonus if the new hire remains on the job for at least six months. The company has done a number of other things, such as advertising on as many employment Web sites as possible and even putting up signs along the roadway leading to the new facility. "I'm not sure we get the very best people all the time, but we are staffing [our offices], and the majority are staying," she said. Though the job market is slowing, Utahns probably will not notice any difference in 2007 and it might be 2008 before fewer jobs are available, Knold said. "This year, there will still be plenty of jobs, and employers will still have to raise wages to fill positions." The current up-cycle for Utah's economy and job market began in late 2003. By 2004, job growth climbed to 2.4 percent. By 2005, it was 4 percent. Job growth in 2006 ranged from 4.6 percent in January to a high of 5.3 percent in June. Approximately 55,700 new jobs have been created in the Utah economy over the past year, raising total wage and salary employment to more than 1.2 million. Those new jobs - in a state that has less than 1 percent of all U.S. jobs - represent about 2.9 percent of all the new jobs added nationwide over the past year. About 34,400 Utahns were unemployed in December 2006, compared with 51,000 in December 2005. Although employers generally do not like a tight labor market because it makes it more difficult to recruit and retain workers, Utah has had a record couple of years in terms of corporate recruitment. Bradford Muller of the Charlotte N.C.-based Charlotte Pipe and Foundry said his company has been well aware of the situation, but that has not stopped him from praising Utah as a site for expansion. He said Utah's business climate and location as a crossroads of the West override any labor shortages. A year ago, Charlotte Pipe, which makes plastic pipe and fittings for commercial and residential plumbing systems, acquired a Salt Lake City manufacturing and distribution facility that employs about 20 people. The company recently purchased land for a Cedar City facility, as well. "The state is a central geographic location for distribution," he said. Muller said Utah also has a pro-business climate. The company, for example, secured a promise of up to $857,000 in tax rebates to expand in Cedar City. "Utah was very eager to have us. It's easy to do business with a state that wants businesses like ours."
UTAH EXECS MOST OPTIMISTIC IN ROCKY MOUNTAIN REGION The economic outlook for Utah in 2007 is bright, according to a new study of 300 business owners and executives in the Rocky Mountain region conducted by KeyBank. Owners and senior executives of privately held businesses in Utah, Colorado, Idaho, Wyoming and Montana were interviewed about a variety of topics, ranging from regional and national issues to major business challenges and expansion plans. More than half of Utah respondents (66 percent) believe the Rocky Mountain region's economy will improve in the coming year, making Utah the most bullish on the region's outlook, when compared with Idaho (a close second at 65 percent) and Colorado (44 percent). None of the Utah respondents said they felt the region's economy will worsen thus The vast majority (85 percent) of Utah business leaders also forecast that overall employment levels in the state will increase in 2007, with almost two-thirds (64 percent) indicating they plan to increase employment levels at their own companies in the coming year. Seven in 10 (69 percent) of the respondents expect,their firm to experience some form of business expansion in 2007, including one in five who expect to open a new location or make an equipment purchase. Utah respondents were largely optimistic, they did cite several obstacles to unimpeded growth in the region — specifically, labor force availability, government regulation and health care costs. Forty-one percent of the Utah business owners (more than any other state) cited health care costs as the top issue affecting the United States today, far outpacing terrorism/national security, which was a distant second (15 percent). Rounding out the list of top five concerns were Social Security (11 percent), slow economy (7 percent) and government issues, including taxes and compliance (7 percent). When asked to name the challenges that businesses will face in the region in 2007, the top five issues cited by Utah respondents were profit margins, stability of client relationships, government regulations, competition from larger organizations and competition for quality talent. Twenty-one percent of Utah respondents cited cash flow as the biggest financial challenge they have faced in the past year, followed by health care and other benefit costs (16 percent) and cost of raw materials (11 percent). In addition to asking questions regarding top business issues, the KeyBank study asked respondents which issue concerned them most from the standpoint of their personal finances. Health care costs dominated personal finance concerns, with more than one-half (56 percent) of Utah respondents indicating they were concerned about not having enough money to pay for adequate health care. Other top concerns included investments not doing as well as expected (54 percent) and an inability to maintain a reasonable standard of living (52 percent). When compared to 2005, one-third (31 percent) said that access to capital was easier in 2006, while 12 percent said it was harder and most (58 percent) said that it was the same, Of the 43 percent of Utah respondents whose firm had used any type of financing in the past year, most turned to bank loans and lines of credit, although almost two-thirds (65 percent) also had financed their business growth through the use of credit cards. This number compares to the 56 percent of all respondents in the region that reported financing with credit cards. When asked how they would describe the local housing market,44 percent of Utah executives described it as "heating up," while 20 percent said "slowing down" and 34 percent said it was remaining the same. This is compared to the regional numbers, with only 26 percent of all respondents describing their local market as heating up and 48 percent saying it was slowing down. Respondents cited the most appealing reasons for living and doing business in the region as recreational activities, local economic climate, eco-friendly environment and quality school systems. When asked — via an open-ended question — to name the city in the five-state region that has the greatest potential for growth in the next five years, more than half (54 percent) of Utah respondents named Salt Lake City or another city within the state. Overall, the largest percentage of respondents from the Rocky Mountain states (13 percent) believe that Boise is most primed for growth. Other "Cinderella" cities cited in the survey were Denver (12 percent), Salt Lake City (10 percent) and Colorado Springs (6 percent).
WHOLESALE PRICES COOL OFF,
INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTION UP Wholesale prices moderated in December after a big surge the previous month, while industrial production rebounded from three consecutive declines. The Federal Reserve, meanwhile, reported that the economy was expanding at a modest pace at the beginning of the year in spite of a weakness in housing. Analysts said the reports released Wednesday indicated the Fed is on track to achieve its goal: The economy keeps growing, but slowly enough so inflation is kept under control without pushing the country into a recession. The Labor Department reported that wholesale prices rose by 0.9 percent in December. Industrial production rose by 0.4 percent, which proved much better than expected. Manufacturing rebounded, with gains at auto plants, electronic products, machinery and aircraft.
U.S. ECONOMY REBOUNDS WITHOUT
INFLATION SURGE The U.S. economy is rebounding from last year's slowdown without stoking inflation, government reports on housing, consumer prices and jobs showed Thursday. Home starts unexpectedly climbed 4.5 percent last month from November, the Commerce Department said in Washington. Consumer prices excluding food and energy rose 0.2 percent, the Labor Department reported, matching forecasts by economists. Separate figures showed jobless claims fell to an 11-month low and the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia said manufacturing in the region resumed its expansion. The reports suggest the Federal Reserve will neither increase nor reduce interest rates in coming months. Yields on Treasury notes held close to the highest in three months after the numbers.
UTAH PROFESSOR SERVES ON
MINING-SAFETY PANEL Felipe Calizaya, an associate professor of mining engineering at the University of Utah, is part of a federal panel convened to look at safety issues surrounding the use of conveyor belts in underground coal mines. The U.S. Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA) assembled the technical study committee of industry and academic experts to fulfill mandates of the Mine Improvement and New Emergency Response (MINER) Act of 2006, passed last year by Congress after 17 miners were killed in explosions at the Sago Mine in West Virginia and the Darby Mine in Kentucky. Panel members met for the first time Tuesday and will conclude their initial session today. The MINER Act, the first major update of coal-mine safety laws since 1977, gives MSHA a year to prepare a report on uses of air within tunnels containing conveyor belts. The air in those tunnels usually has slightly elevated concentrations of fine, potentially flammable coal dust that comes off chunks of coal being carried out of the mine on the conveyor belts. The panel also is examining the composition and fire-retardant properties of conveyor belt materials. Calizaya is one of six panel members. Others include the chief of the disaster prevention and response branch of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, professors from Penn State and the University of Missouri-Rolla Rolla, and mining consultants Thomas Mucho and James Weeks. Calizaya received master's and doctoral degrees in mining engineering from the Colorado School of Mines. He has been an associate professor at the U. since 2002, after serving as chief ventilation engineer for six years at PT Freeport Indonesia.
TEN STEPS TO REPORTING
WORKPLACE INCIDENTS You've identified the hazards, you've conducted the analysis and you've implemented controls to eliminate or reduce the hazards. But what happens if an incident still occurs? The first step is to investigate the incident. Why? When you investigate an incident, you will be uncover the cause of the hazard and then be able to determine how to correct it. While such an investigation sounds reactive, the corrective action you take as a result of the investigation is proactive-possibly preventing a repeat of a similar incident. There are different types of incidents all should be investigated. For example, although a "near miss" incident results in no injury or damage, it should be heeded as a warning sign. if corrective action is not taken, the incident can occur again until an injury or damage results. Other types of incidents include those with injury, with property damage, with equipment/product damage, or with fatalities and recordable injuries. How To Respond To An Incident There are 10 basic steps to investigate an incident, according to the National Safety Council.
Return to Top of Page
21-22 MSHA Ventilation Summit, National Mine and Health Safety Academy, Beaver, West Virginia. For more 25-28 SME Annual Meeting & Exhibit and Colorado Mining Association's National Western Mining Conference,
4-7 International PDAC Convention, Toronto, Canada. For more info. visit: www.mininginvestmentshow.com 5-7 Utah Water Users' Workshop, The Dixie Center, St. George, Utah. For more info. contact Megan Poulton at 435-797-2802. 20-22 Mercury & Multi Emissions compliance, Pittsburgh, PA. For more info. visit: www.americancoalcouncil.org 29-30 Coal in the West Conference, Denver, CO. For more info. visit: www.lawseminars.com
21-23 Spring Coal Forum, Memphis, TN. For more info. visit: www.americancoalcouncil.org
6 UMA EDUCATION GOLF TOURNAMENT, RIVERBEND GOLF COURSE, Riverton, Utah
23-25 PRB Coal Use Seminar, St. Louis, MO. For more info. visit: www.americancoalcouncil.org
23-24 UMA ANNUAL CONVENTION, GRAND SUMMIT HOTEL, Park City, Utah
8-10 Coal Market Strategies, Tucson, AZ. For more info. visit: www.americancoalcouncil.org
3-4 Coal Trading Conference. For more info. visit: www.americancoalcouncil.org
|
