Isra-Mart srl:Will EPA's 13 per cent budget cut placate GOP hawks?

www.isra-mart.com

Isra-Mart srl news:

The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposed a 13 per cent spending cut as part of yesterday's 2012 presidential budget proposals, settling for a budget for the next fiscal year of $8.973bn, down from $10.3bn in the last enacted budget.

The settlement forms part of President Obama's efforts to halve the deficit and secure support from moderate Republicans, many of whom are demanding deeper budget cuts.

The EPA, which has recently been targeted by Republicans in Congress, will be hoping that this reduced budget placates those looking for deeper budgetary cuts.

Under the proposed budget, the EPA will significantly cut spending in areas such as water quality preservation, while delivering modest gains in other areas such as climate change regulation.

For example, the government slashed the budget for preserving the Great Lakes ecosystem by a quarter, to $350m, while cutting water quality funding to states by 27 per cent to $2.54bn. It also cut funding for Superfund cleanup programmes by $70.3m to $1.24bn. Other big losses included $60m of savings from the elimination of Diesel Emission Reduction Act (DERA) grants.

However, a token increase was given to greenhouse gas regulation, which is a particularly hot topic for Congress where Republicans are pursuing legislation designed to block the EPA from regulating greenhouse gas emissions.

The Administration is proposing an extra $46m in the EPA budget to help it increase reporting requirements under the Clean Air Act, including $30m for state and federal activities to fund the management and policing of greenhouse gas permits.

The move is likely to infuriate many Republicans who have over the past few weeks proposed a series of bills designed to stop the EPA regulating emissions and have been lookign for a deeper 17 per cent cut in the agency's funding.

Meanwhile, $17.4m was allocated to Chesapeake Bay protection and restoration, boosting that fund to $67.4m, while $6.6m was given to a new program to clean up nutrient loadings in the Mississippi, which contribute directly to hypoxic ‘dead zones' in the ocean.

EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson argued that the budget represented a belt-tightening step in line with the American public's own cost-cutting measures, but suggested that the budget would still enable the Agency to carry out its core mission of protecting public health and the environment, while reducing toxic air and water pollution.

The proposed budget will now be sent to Congress for consideration, which will publish appropriations bills allocating funds to the Agency.

Significantly, although this represents a substantial cut in the EPA's budget, it still maintains a higher expenditure for the EPA that it had for the entire Bush era. The highest the government spent on the EPA during his tenure was in 2004, when the Agency got $8.4bn.

Elsewhere, President Obama's budget proposal outlined plans to increase funding for clean energy projects paid for with savings realised by cutting fossil fuel subsidies.



The settlement would see the Department of Energy budget increase 4.2 per cent to $29.5bn with around $8bn earmarked for clean energy projects.

The budget also includes $853m of funding to support advanced nuclear research projects and a request for $36bn of federal loan guarantees for new nuclear power plants.

In a move that is bound to be opposed by many Reepublicans, the White House is proposing to help pay for the increased clean tech spending by axing $3.6bn in oil, natural gas and coal subsidies and cutting funding for oil, gas and hydrogen research projects.

The budget will now be subject to weeks of fierce negotiations as the Republicans, who now hold a majority in the House of Representatives, step up calls for deeper budget cuts.