DOE/EA-1664 

Environmental Assessment 

for 

10 CFR Part 430 Energy Conservation Standards: Energy 

Conservation Standards for Fluorescent and Incandescent 

Lamps 

June 2009
16-i

CHAPTER 16. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

16.1 INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................... 16-1

16.2 AIR EMISSIONS ANALYSIS...................................................................................... 16-1

16.2.1 Air Emissions Descriptions............................................................................................ 16-1

16.2.2 Air Quality Regulation................................................................................................... 16-3

16.2.3 Global Climate Change.................................................................................................. 16-4

16.2.4 Analytical Methods for Air Emissions .......................................................................... 16-8

16.2.5 Effects on Power Plant Emissions ............................................................................... 16-10

16.2.6 Effects on Upstream Fuel-Cycle Emissions ................................................................ 16-15

16.3 WETLAND, ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES, AND 

CULTURAL RESOURCES ........................................................................................ 16-16

16.4 SOCIOECONOMIC IMPACTS.................................................................................. 16-16

16.5 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE IMPACTS................................................................ 16-16

16.6 NOISE AND AESTHETICS ....................................................................................... 16-17

16.7 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS..................................................... 16-17

LIST OF TABLES 

Table 16.2.1 Impact of IRL and GSFL Efficiency Standards on Cumulative EnergyRelated Emissions of CO2 between 2012-2042 by Trial Standard Level 

(Million Metric Tons of CO2)............................................................................ 16-7

Table 16.2.2 Power Sector Emissions Forecast from AEO2009 Reference Case................. 16-10

Table 16.2.3 Power Sector Emissions Impact Forecasts IRL, Shift ..................................... 16-11

Table 16.2.4 Power Sector Emissions Impact Forecasts for IRL, Roll-up ........................... 16-12

Table 16.2.5 Power Sector Emissions Impact Forecasts for GSFL, Shift ............................ 16-13

Table 16.2.6 Power Sector Emissions Impact Forecasts for GSFL, Roll-up........................ 16-14

Table 16.2.7 Estimated Upstream Emissions of Air Pollutants as a Percentage of Direct 

Power Plant Combustion Emissions ................................................................ 16-15

Table 16.7.1 Environmental Impact Analysis Results Summary for IRL ............................ 16-18

Table 16.7.2 Environmental Impact Analysis Results Summary for GSFL......................... 16-18

LIST OF FIGURE 

Error! No table of figures entries found.
16-1 

CHAPTER 16. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 

16.1 INTRODUCTION 

 This chapter describes potential environmental effects that may result from amended 

energy conservation standards for incandescent reflector lamps (IRL) and general service 

fluorescent lamps (GSFL). The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)’s proposed energy 

conservation standards are not site-specific, and would apply to all 50 States and U.S. territories. 

Therefore, none of the proposed standards would impact land uses, cause any direct disturbance 

to the land, or directly affect biological resources in any one area. 

 All of the potential trial standard levels (TSLs) are expected to reduce energy 

consumption in comparison to a baseline efficiency level. These changes in the demand for 

electricity and the costs of achieving these savings are the primary drivers in analyzing 

environmental effects. Estimates of source energy savings can be found in the national impact 

analysis in Chapter 11 of this technical support document (TSD). Detailed discussion on TSLs 

can be found in Chapter 9 of this TSD. 

 The primary impact of the TSLs is in air quality resulting from changes in power plant 

operations and capacity additions. Therefore, much of this chapter describes the air quality 

analysis. 

16.2 AIR EMISSIONS ANALYSIS 

 The primary focus of the environmental analysis is the impact on air quality of amended 

energy conservation standards for residential, commercial and industrial IRL and GSFL. The 

outcomes of the environmental analysis are driven by changes in power plant types and 

quantities of electricity generated under each of the alternatives. Changes in generation are 

described in the utility impact analysis in Chapter 14. 

16.2.1 Air Emissions Descriptions 

 For each of the TSLs, DOE calculated total power-sector emissions based on output from 

NEMS-BT model (see Chapter 14). This analysis considers three pollutants: nitrogen oxides 

(NOx), mercury (Hg), and sulfur dioxide (SO2). An air pollutant is any substance in the air that 

can cause harm to humans or the environment. Pollutants may be natural or man-made (i.e., 

anthropogenic) and may take the form of solid particles (i.e., particulates or particulate matter), 

liquid droplets, or gasesa

. This analysis also considers carbon dioxide (CO2). 

 

a

 More information on air pollution characteristics and regulations is available on the U.S. Environment Protection 

Agent (EPA)’s website at http://www.epa.gov 
16-2 

 

Sulfur Dioxide (SO2) 

 

 In addressing SO2 emissions, the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 set an SO2 

emissions cap on all affected electric generating units. The attainment of the emissions cap is 

flexible among generators and is enforced through the use of emissions allowances and tradeable 

permits. This SO2 trading process (sometimes called “cap and trade”) implies that the standard 

will have no affect on total physical emissions because emissions will always be at, or near, the 

allowed emissions ceiling. Consequently, there is no direct SO2 environmental benefit from a 

reduction in electricity use due to the proposed energy conservation standards, as long as there is 

enforcement of the emissions ceiling. But to the extent reduced power generation demand 

decreases the demand for and price of emissions allowance permits, there would be an 

environmentally-related economic benefit from the proposed energy conservation standards 

reducing SO2 emissions allowance demand. Furthermore, over time, if emissions decline, there 

is greater flexibility in reducing the ceiling amount. However, since DOE does not anticipate a 

change in SO2 emissions, SO2 emission results are not reported in this Chapter. 

 

Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) 

 Nitrogen oxides, or NOx, are the generic term for a group of highly reactive gases, all of 

which contain nitrogen and oxygen in varying amounts. Many of the nitrogen oxides are 

colorless and odorless. However, one common pollutant, nitrogen dioxide (NO2), along with 

particles in the air can often be seen as a reddish-brown layer over many urban areas. NO2 is the 

specific form of NOx reported in this document. NOx is one of the main ingredients involved in 

the formation of ground-level ozone, which can trigger serious respiratory problems. It can 

contribute to the formation of acid rain, and can impair visibility in areas such as national parks. 

NOx also contributes to the formation of fine particles that can impair human health. 

 Nitrogen oxides form when fossil fuel is burned at high temperatures, as in a combustion 

process. The primary manmade sources of NOx are motor vehicles, electric utilities, and other 

industrial, commercial, and residential sources that burn fossil fuels. NOx can also be formed 

naturally. Electric utilities account for about 22 percent of NOx emissions in the United States. 

Mercury(Hg) 

 Coal-fired power plants emit Hg present in coal during the burning process. While coalfired power plants are the largest remaining source of human-generated Hg emissions in the 

United States, they contribute very little to the global Hg pool or to contamination of U.S. 

waters. U.S. coal-fired power plants emit Hg in three different forms: oxidized Hg (likely to 

deposit within the United States); elemental Hg, which can travel thousands of miles before 

depositing to land and water; and Hg that is in particulate form. Atmospheric Hg is then 

deposited on land, lakes, rivers, and estuaries through rain, snow, and dry deposition. Once 

there, it can transform into methylmercury and accumulate in fish tissue through 

bioaccumulation. 
16-3 

 Americans are exposed to methylmercury primarily by eating contaminated fish. Because 

the developing fetus is the most sensitive to the toxic effects of methylmercury, women of 

childbearing age are regarded as the population of greatest concern. Children exposed to 

methylmercury before birth may be at increased risk of poor performance on neurobehavioral 

tasks, such as those measuring attention, fine motor function, language skills, visual-spatial 

abilities, and verbal memory. 

Carbon Dioxide (CO2) 

 EPA does not currently require emissions controls for CO2 under the Clean Air Act. 

However, CO2 is of interest because of its classification as a greenhouse gas (GHG). GHGs trap 

the sun’s radiation inside the Earth’s atmosphere and either occur naturally in the atmosphere or 

result from human activities. Naturally occurring GHGs include water vapor, CO2, methane 

(CH4), nitrous oxide (N2O), and ozone (O3). Human activities, however, add to the levels of 

most of these naturally occurring gases. For example, CO2 is emitted to the atmosphere when 

solid waste, fossil fuels (oil, natural gas, and coal), wood, and wood products are burned. During 

the past 20 years, about three-quarters of anthropogenic (i.e., human-made) CO2 emissions 

resulted from burning fossil fuels. 

 Concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere are naturally regulated by numerous processes, 

collectively known as the “carbon cycle.” The movement of carbon between the atmosphere and 

the land and oceans is dominated by natural processes, such as plant photosynthesis. While these 

natural processes can absorb some of the anthropogenic CO2 emissions produced each year, 

billions of metric tons are added to the atmosphere annually. In the U. S., CO2 emissions 

account for 84.6 percent of total U.S. GHG emissions. 

16.2.2 Air Quality Regulation 

 The Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 list 188 toxic air pollutants that EPA is required 

to control. EPA has set national air quality standards for six common pollutants (also referred to 

as “criteria” pollutants), two of which are SO2 and NOx. Also, the Clean Air Act Amendments of 

1990 gave EPA the authority to control acidification and to require operators of electric power 

plants to reduce emissions of SO2 and NOx. Title IV of the 1990 amendments established a capand-trade program for SO2 from certain sources. The cap-and-trade program is intended to help 

control acid rain and serves as a model for more recent programs with similar features. 

 In 2005, EPA issued the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR) under sections 110 and 111 of 

the Clean Air Act (40 CFR Parts 51, 96, and 97).b

 CAIR would permanently cap emissions of 

SO2 and NOx in eastern States of the United States. CAIR required large reductions of SO2

and/or NOx emissions across 28 eastern states and the District of Columbia. States must achieve 

the required emission reductions using one of two compliance options: 1) meet an emission 

budget for each regulated state by requiring power plants to participate in an EPA-administered 

 

b

 See http://www.epa.gov/cleanairinterstaterule/ . 
16-4 

interstate cap-and-trade system that caps emissions in two stages, or 2) meet an individual state 

emissions budget through measures of the state’s choosing. Phase 1 caps for NOx are to be in 

place in 2009. Phase 1 caps for SO2 are to be in place in 2010. The Phase 2 caps for both 

pollutants are due in 2015. 

 Also in 2005, EPA issued the final rule entitled “Standards of Performance for New and 

Existing Stationary Sources: Electric Steam Generating Units,” under sections 110 and 111 of 

the Clean Air Act (40 CFR Parts 60, 63, 72, and 75). This rule, also called the Clean Air 

Mercury Rule (CAMR), was closely related to the CAIR and established standards of 

performance for Hg emissions from new and existing coal-fired electric utility steam generating 

units. The CAMR regulated Hg emissions from coal-fired power plants. 

 

 On February 8, 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit 

(D.C. Circuit) issued its decision in State of New Jersey, et al. v. Environmental Protection 

Agency,

c

 in which the Court, among other actions, vacated the CAMR referenced above. 

On July 11, 2008, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. 

Circuit) issued its decision in North Carolina v. Environmental Protection Agency, which 

vacated the CAIR issued by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on March 10, 2005.d 

But on December 23, 2008, the D.C. Circuit decided to allow CAIR to remain in effect until it is 

replaced by a rule consistent with the court’s earlier opinion. North Carolina v. Environmental 

Protection Agency, 550 F.3d 1176 (D.C. Cir. 2008) (remand of vacatur). 

16.2.3 Global Climate Change 

 Climate change has evolved into a matter of global concern because it is expected to have 

widespread, adverse effects on natural resources and systems. A growing body of evidence 

points to anthropogenic sources of greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide (CO2), as major 

contributors to climate change. Because this Rule, if finalized, will likely decrease CO2 emission 

rates that are associated with IRLs and GSFLs and are from the fossil fuel sector in the United 

States, the Department here examines the impacts and causes of climate change and then the 

potential impact of the Rule on CO2 emissions and global warming. 

Impacts of Climate Change on the Environment 

 

 Climate is usually defined as the average weather, over a period ranging from months to 

many years. Climate change refers to a change in the state of the climate, which is identifiable 

through changes in the mean and/or the variability of its properties (e.g., temperature or 

precipitation) over an extended period, typically decades or longer. 

 

c

 No. 05-1097, 2008 WL 341338, at *1 (D.C. Cir. Feb. 8, 2008). 

d

 See http://www.epa.gov/cleanairinterstaterule/. 
16-5 

 The World Meteorological Organization and United Nations Environment Programme 

(UNEP) established the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to provide an 

objective source of information about climate change. According to the IPCC Fourth 

Assessment Report (IPCC Report), published in 2007, climate change is consistent with 

observed changes to the world’s natural systems; the IPCC expects these changes to continue. 

 Changes that are consistent with warming include warming of the world’s oceans to a 

depth of 3000 meters; global average sea level rise at an average rate of 1.8 mm per year from 

1961 to 2003; loss of annual average Arctic sea ice at a rate of 2.7 % per decade, changes in 

wind patterns that affect extra-tropical storm tracks and temperature patterns, increases in intense 

precipitation in some parts of the world, as well as increased drought and more frequent heat 

waves in many locations worldwide, and numerous ecological changes. 

 Looking forward, the IPCC describes continued global warming of about 0.2°C per 

decade for the next two decades under a wide range of emission scenarios for carbon dioxide 

(CO2), other greenhouse gases (GHG)s, and aerosols. After that period, the rate of increase is 

less certain. The IPCC Report describes increases in average global temperatures of about 1.1°C 

to 6.4°C at the end of the century relative to today. These increases vary depending on the model 

and emissions scenarios. 

 The IPCC Report describes incremental impacts associated with the rise in temperature. 

At ranges of incremental increases to the global average temperature, IPCC reports, with either 

high or very high confidence, that there is likely to be an increasing degree of impacts such as 

coral reef bleaching, loss of wildlife habitat, loss to specific ecosystems, and negative yield 

impacts for major cereal crops in the tropics, but also projects that there likely will be some 

beneficial impacts on crop yields in temperate regions. 

Causes of Climate Change 

 The IPCC Report states that the world has warmed by about 0.74°C in the last 100 years. 

The IPCC Report finds that most of the temperature increase since the mid-20th century is very 

likely due to the increase in anthropogenic concentrations of CO2 and other long-lived 

greenhouse gases (GHGs) such as methane and nitrous oxide in the atmosphere, rather than from 

natural causes. 

 Increasing the CO2 concentration partially blocks the earth’s re-radiation of captured 

solar energy in the infrared band, inhibits the radiant cooling of the earth, and thereby alters the 

energy balance of the planet, which gradually increases its average temperature. The IPCC 

Report estimates that currently, CO2 makes up about 77% of the total CO2-equivalente global 

 

e GHGs differ in their warming influence (radiative forcing) on a global climate system due to their different 

radiative properties and lifetimes in the atmosphere. These warming influences may be expressed through a 

common metric based on the radiative forcing of CO2, i.e., CO2-equivalent. CO2 equivalent emission is the amount 

of CO2 emission that would cause the same- time integrated radiative forcing, over a given time horizon, as an 

emitted amount of other long- lived GHG or mixture of GHGs.
16-6 

warming potential in GHGs emitted from human activities, with the vast majority (74%) of the 

CO2 attributable to fossil fuel use. For the future, the IPCC Report describes a wide range of 

GHG emissions scenarios, but under each scenario CO2 would continue to comprise above 70% 

of the total global warming potential. 

Stabilization of CO2 Concentrations 

 Unlike many traditional air pollutants, CO2 mixes thoroughly in the entire atmosphere 

and is long-lived. The residence time of CO2 in the atmosphere is long compared to the emission 

processes. Therefore, the global cumulative emissions of CO2 over long periods determine CO2

concentrations because it takes hundreds of years for natural processes to remove the CO2. 

Globally, 49 billion metric tons of CO2 –equivalent of anthropogenic (man-made) greenhouse 

gases are emitted every year. Of this annual total, fossil fuels contribute about 29 billion metric 

tons of CO2.

f

 

 Researchers have focused on considering atmospheric CO2 concentrations that likely will 

result in some level of global climate stabilization, and the emission rates associated with 

achieving the “stabilizing” concentrations by particular dates. They associate these stabilized 

CO2 concentrations with temperature increases that plateau in a defined range. For example, at 

the low end, the IPCC Report scenarios target CO2 stabilized concentrations range between 350 

ppm and 400 ppm (essentially today’s value)—because of climate inertia, concentrations in this 

low end range would still result in temperatures projected to increase 2.0°C to 2.4°C above preindustrial levelsg

 (about 1.3°C to 1.7°C above today’s levels). To achieve concentrations 

between 350 ppm to 400 ppm, the IPCC scenarios present that there would have to be a rapid 

downward trend in total annual global emissions of greenhouse gases to levels that are 50% to 

85% below today’s annual emission rates by no later than 2050. Since it is assumed that there 

would continue to be growth in global populations and substantial increases in economic 

production, the scenarios identify required reductions in greenhouse gas emissions intensity 

(emissions per unit of output) of more than 90%. However, even at these rates, the scenarios 

describe some warming and some climate change is projected due to already accumulated CO2

and GHGs in the atmosphere. 

The Beneficial Impact of the Rule on CO2 Emissions 

 If finalized, it is anticipated that the Rule will reduce energy-related CO2 emission rates, 

particularly those associated with energy consumption in buildings. In the United States, the 

U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) reports in its 2009 Annual Energy Outlook 

(AEO2009)

1

 that U.S. annual energy-related emissions of CO2 in 2005 were about 6.0 billion 

metric tons (about 20 percent of the world energy-related CO2 emissions and about 12 percent of 

total global greenhouse gas emissions), of which 2.4 billion tons were attributed to the electric 

 

f

 Other non-fossil fuel contributors include CO2 emissions from deforestation and decay from agriculture biomass; 

agricultural and industrial emissions of methane; and emissions of nitrous oxide and fluorocarbons. 

g

 IPCC Working Group 3 Table TS 2 
16-7 

power sector. In the AEO2009 Updated Reference Case, EIA projected that annual energyrelated CO2 emissions would grow from 6.0 billion metric tons in 2005 to 6.2 billion metric tons 

in 2030, an increase of 4 percent (see AEO2009), while emissions attributable to the electric 

power sector would grow to 2.6 billion tons, an increase of 10 percent. 

 As shown in Table 16.2.2 in the AEO2009 Reference Case, the cumulative U.S. energyrelated power sector CO2 emissions between 2012 and 2042 are described at about 79 billion 

metric tons. The estimated cumulative CO2 emission reductions from IRL and GSFL during this 

same 30-year period are indicated in Table 16.2.1. Estimated CO2 emission reductions in Table 

16.2.1 come from electricity generation (i.e., power plants). The estimated CO2 emission 

reductions from electricity generation are calculated using the NEMS-BT model. 

Table 16.2.1 Impact of IRL and GSFL Efficiency Standards on Cumulative EnergyRelated Emissions of CO2 between 2012-2042 by Trial Standard Level 

(Million Metric Tons of CO2) 

GSFL 

TSL 

Estimated Cumulative CO2

(MMt) Emission Reductions 

1 66.4 to 130.3 

2 86.0 to 133.9 

3 148.3 to 296.6 

4 174.6 to 487.6 

5 262.0 to 552.0 

IRL 

TSL 

Estimated Cumulative CO2

(MMt) Emission Reductions 

1 7.5 to 19.8 

2 19.1 to 48.9 

3 37.8 to 85.1 

4 44.0 to 105.7 

5 53.3 to 118.1 

 The estimated savings shown in Table 16.2.1, which are at most 0.9 percent of U.S. 

emissions of CO2 from electricity generation (total emissions reported for TSL 5 in Table 16.2.1 

combining IRL and GSFL), comprise an even smaller fraction of U.S. emissions of greenhouse 

gases and of world emissions of greenhouse gases. However, the savings would likely reduce 

the overall U.S. CO2 emissions rate, as compared to the U.S. CO2 emissions rate absent an 

increase in the required efficiency of IRLs and GSFLs. 

 

The Incremental Impact of the Rule on Climate Change 

 It is difficult to correlate specific emission rates with atmospheric concentrations of CO2 

and specific atmospheric concentrations with future temperatures because the IPCC Report 
16-8 

describes a clear lag in the climate system between any given concentration of CO2 (even if 

maintained for long periods) and the subsequent average worldwide and regional temperature, 

precipitation, and extreme weather regimes. For example, a major determinant of climate 

response is “equilibrium climate sensitivity”, a measure of the climate system response to 

sustained radioactive forcing. It is defined as the global average surface warming following a 

doubling of carbon dioxide concentrations. The IPCC Report describes its estimated, numeric 

value as about 3°C, but the likely range of that value is 2°C to 4.5°C, with cloud feedbacks the 

largest source of uncertainty. Further, as illustrated above, the IPCC Report scenarios for 

stabilization rates are presented in terms of a range of concentrations, which then correlates to a 

range of temperature changes. Thus, climate sensitivity is a key uncertainty for CO2 mitigation 

scenarios that aim to meet specific temperature levels. 

 

 Because of the complexity of global climate systems, it is difficult to know to what extent 

and when particular CO2 emissions rates will impact global warming. However, as Table 16.2.1 

indicates, the Rule will likely reduce CO2 emissions rates from the electric power sector. 

16.2.4 Analytical Methods for Air Emissions 

 NEMS-BT incorporates capabilities to assess compliance with SO2 restrictions specified 

in the Clean Air Act and its amendments. Clean Air Act provisions include New Source 

Performance Standards, and Revised New Source Performance Standards. The version of 

NEMS-BT in 2008 also included provisions for the CAIR, which imposes stricter restrictions on 

SO2 and NOX for some states, and the CAMR, which imposed a national Hg constraint. As 

discussed earlier is section 16.2.2, on December 23, 2008, the D.C. Circuit decided to allow 

CAIR to remain in effect until it is replaced by a rule consistent with the court’s earlier opinion. 

Carolina v. Environmental Protection Agency, 550 F.3d 1176 (D.C. Cir. 2008) (remand of 

vacatur). But actions taken on February 8, 2008 by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of 

Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit) issued in its decision in State of New Jersey, et al. v. 

Environmental Protection Agency, remain in effect vacating the CAMR. Although the 

constraints on Hg in CAMR have since been vacated by a court decision, the AEO2009

Reference Case assumes that emissions of Hg would decline over time as shown in Table 16.2.2. 

 Because the courts had vacated both CAIR and CAMR at the time that DOE was drafting 

the NOPR, the 2008 version of NEMS-BT could not be used directly to estimate emissions 

impacts for NOX and Hg. Instead, for the NOPR DOE established a range of NOX and Hg 

reductions due to standards. For the final rule, DOE is able to use the AEO2009 version of 

NEMS-BT to estimate NOX reductions that result from States not covered under CAIR. 

 The NEMS-BT has only rough estimates of mercury emissions, and it was decided that 

the range of emissions used in the NOPR remained appropriate given these circumstances. 

Therefore, rather than using the NEMS-BT model, DOE established a range of Hg emission rates 

to estimate the Hg emissions that could be reduced through standards. DOE’s low estimate 

assumed that future standards would displace electrical generation only from natural gas-fired 

power plants, thereby resulting in an effective emission rate of zero. (Under this scenario, coalfired power plant generation would remain unaffected.) The low-end emission rate is zero 
16-9 

because natural gas-fired power plants have virtually zero Hg emissions associated with their 

operation. Earthjustice stated that basing the low end of the range on the displacement of only 

gas-fired power plants was inconsistent with DOE’s utility impact analysis (Earthjustice, No. 60 

at pg. 8-9). However, DOE believes that the estimate should provide the full range of possible 

outcomes and has selected the low and high values to bracket the uncertainties associated with 

estimating mercury emission reductions. 

 DOE’s high estimate, which assumed that standards would displace only coal-fired power 

plants, was based on an estimate of the 2006 nationwide mercury emission rate from AEO2008. 

(Under this scenario, DOE assumed that no future reductions in the rate of mercury emissions 

from such sources would occur.) Because power plant emission rates are a function of local 

regulation, scrubbers, and the mercury content of coal, it is extremely difficult to identify a 

precise high-end emission rate. Therefore, the most reasonable high estimate is based on the 

assumption that all displaced coal generation would have been emitting at the 2006 average 

emission rate for coal generation as specified by the April Update to AEO2009. This is viewed 

as a high estimate because it is likely that future emission controls will be installed at coal-fired 

power plants which will reduce their average emission rate. As noted previously, because 

virtually all mercury emitted from electricity generation is from coal-fired power plants, DOE 

based the emission rate on the tons of mercury emitted per TWh of coal-generated electricity. 

Based on the emission rate for 2006, DOE derived a high-end emission rate of 0.0255 tons per 

TWh. To estimate the reduction in mercury emissions, DOE multiplied the emission rate by the 

reduction in coal-generated electricity due to the standards considered in the utility impact 

analysis. These changes in Hg emissions are extremely small, ranging from 0.2 to 1.0 percent of 

the national base-case emissions forecast by NEMS-BT for GFSL, depending on the TSL and 

scenario, and less than 0.2 percent for all IRL levels. 

 Coal-fired electric generation is the single largest source of electricity in the United 

States. Because the mix of coals used significantly affects the emissions produced, the model 

includes a detailed representation of coal supply. The model considers the rank of the coal as 

well as the sulfur contents of the fuel used when determining optimal dispatch. 

 Within the NEMS-BT model, planning options for achieving emissions restrictions in the 

Clean Air Act Amendments include installing pollution control equipment on existing power 

plants and building new power plants with low emission rates. These methods for reducing 

emission are compared to dispatching options such as fuel switching and allowance trading. 

Environmental regulations also affect capacity expansion decisions. For instance, new plants are 

not allocated SO2 emissions allowances according to the Clean Air Act Amendments. 

Consequently, the decision to build a particular capacity type must consider the cost (if any) of 

obtaining sufficient allowances. This could involve purchasing allowances or over complying at 

an existing unit. 

 Modeling of SO2 trading tends to imply that the physical emissions effects will be zero, 

as long as emissions are at the allowed ceiling. Because SO2 has been regulated with emissions 

caps for more than a decade, and no emissions reductions are reported from the NEMS-BT 
16-10 

forecast model, DOE does not report SO2 results here. This assumption is consistent with 

previous DOE environmental assessment documents. 

 As noted in Chapter 14, NEMS-BT model forecasts end in year 2030. Emissions impacts 

beyond 2030 were extrapolated for this rulemaking in Table 16.2.3 through 16.2.6. 

16.2.5 Effects on Power Plant Emissions 

 Table 16.2.2 shows the AEO2009 Updated Reference Case power plant emissions in 

selected years along with the extrapolation to 2042. The Reference case emissions are the 

emissions shown by the NEMS-BT model to result if none of the TSLs are promulgated. 

Table 16.2.2 Power Sector Emissions Forecast from AEO2009 Reference Case 

NEMS-BT Results*: 

 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030

Total 

2012-

2042††

CO2 (Million metric tons)** 2,397 2,343 2,384 2,462 2,533 2,637 78,824

NOX (Million metric tons)† 3.64 2.29 2.05 2.07 2.07 2.09 59.0

Hg (Metric tons)† 51.49 43.69 29.37 28.75 29.00 28.63 846.1

** Comparable to Table A18 of AEO2009: Electric Power 

†

 Comparable to Table A8 of AEO2009: Electric Power Sector Emissions 

†† Extrapolated by assuming 2030 end values in all subsequent years 2031-2042. 

 Table 16.2.3 through Table 16.2.6 show the estimated changes in power plant emissions 

in selected years for all the TSLs. Changes in CO2, NOX and Hg emissions from power plants 

are shown in these tables. Compared to the anticipated reference case emissions impacts forecast 

shown in Table 16.2.2, changes in emission levels shown in Table 16.2.3 though 16.2.6 are 

extremely small. 
16-11 

Table 16.2.3 Power Sector Emissions Impact Forecasts IRL, Shift 

IRL Existing Technologies, Shift, R-CFL Substitution

NEMS-BT Results Difference From Updated AEO2009 Reference

Exptrapolation Total

Trial Standard Level 1 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2042 2012‐2042

Power Sector CO2 (MMT CO2) (0.72) 0.06 (0.57) (0.64) (0.68) (0.68) (0.68) (19.8) (0.68) 

Nitrogen Oxide ‐ (x000 t) (0.04) (0.01) (0.02) (0.03) (0.02) (0.02) (0.02) (1.9) (0.02) 

Mercury (Hg) ‐ Low (t) - - - - - - - - -

Mercury (Hg) ‐ High (t) (0.01) (0.00) (0.01) (0.01) (0.01) (0.01) (0.01) (0.3) (0.01) 

Trial Standard Level 2

Power Sector CO2 (MMT CO2) (1.76) 0.20 (1.31) (1.47) (1.67) (1.67) (1.67) (48.9) (1.67) 

Nitrogen Oxide ‐ (x000 t) (0.03) 0.08 0.06 (0.04) (0.04) (0.04) (0.04) (5.5) (0.04) 

Mercury (Hg) ‐ Low (t) - - - - - - - - -

Mercury (Hg) ‐ High (t) (0.03) 0.00 (0.01) (0.02) (0.03) (0.03) (0.03) (0.7) (0.03) 

Trial Standard Level 3

Power Sector CO2 (MMT CO2) (3.02) 0.31 (2.41) (2.71) (2.93) (2.93) (2.93) (85.1) (2.93) 

Nitrogen Oxide ‐ (x000 t) (0.07) 0.10 0.16 (0.06) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 (7.6) 

Mercury (Hg) ‐ Low (t) - - - - - - - - -

Mercury (Hg) ‐ High (t) (0.05) 0.00 (0.03) (0.03) (0.05) (0.05) (0.05) (1.3) (0.05) 

Trial Standard Level 4

Power Sector CO2 (MMT CO2) (3.70) 0.35 (2.85) (3.15) (3.71) (3.71) (3.71) (105.7) (3.71) 

Nitrogen Oxide ‐ (x000 t) 0.02 0.02 (0.08) (0.18) 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 (8.4) 

Mercury (Hg) ‐ Low (t) - - - - - - - - -

Mercury (Hg) ‐ High (t) (0.06) 0.00 (0.03) (0.04) (0.07) (0.07) (0.07) (1.7) (0.07) 

Trial Standard Level 5

Power Sector CO2 (MMT CO2) (4.24) 0.49 (3.32) (3.55) (4.06) (4.06) (4.06) (118.1) (4.06) 

Nitrogen Oxide ‐ (x000 t) 0.12 0.18 0.16 (0.02) 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 (9.3) 

Mercury (Hg) ‐ Low (t) - - - - - - - - -

Mercury (Hg) ‐ High (t) (0.07) 0.00 (0.04) (0.04) (0.07) (0.07) (0.07) (1.8) (0.07) 

Note: All units are metric tons, equivalent to 1.1 short tons
16-12 

Table 16.2.4 Power Sector Emissions Impact Forecasts for IRL, Roll-up 

IRL Emerging Technologies, Rollup, BR Lamp Substitution

NEMS-BT Results Difference From Updated AEO2009 Reference

Exptrapolation Total

Trial Standard Level 1 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2042 2012‐2042

Power Sector CO2 (MMT CO2) (0.30) 0.03 (0.22) (0.21) (0.24) (0.24) (0.24) (7.5) (0.24) 

Nitrogen Oxide ‐ (x000 t) (0.02) 0.01 (0.02) (0.02) (0.02) (0.02) (0.02) (1.3) (0.02) 

Mercury (Hg) ‐ Low (t) - - - - - - - - -

Mercury (Hg) ‐ High (t) (0.00) 0.00 (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.1) (0.00) 

Trial Standard Level 2

Power Sector CO2 (MMT CO2) (0.78) 0.10 (0.54) (0.53) (0.59) (0.59) (0.59) (19.1) (0.59) 

Nitrogen Oxide ‐ (x000 t) 0.06 0.05 0.01 (0.05) (0.01) (0.01) (0.01) (3.2) (0.01) 

Mercury (Hg) ‐ Low (t) - - - - - - - - -

Mercury (Hg) ‐ High (t) (0.01) 0.00 (0.01) (0.01) (0.01) (0.01) (0.01) (0.3) (0.01) 

Trial Standard Level 3

Power Sector CO2 (MMT CO2) (1.63) 0.23 (1.07) (1.07) (1.20) (1.20) (1.20) (37.8) (1.20) 

Nitrogen Oxide ‐ (x000 t) (0.22) 0.05 (0.09) (0.07) 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 (5.4) 

Mercury (Hg) ‐ Low (t) - - - - - - - - -

Mercury (Hg) ‐ High (t) (0.03) 0.00 (0.01) (0.01) (0.02) (0.02) (0.02) (0.6) (0.02) 

Trial Standard Level 4

Power Sector CO2 (MMT CO2) (1.88) 0.26 (1.22) (1.20) (1.40) (1.40) (1.40) (44.0) (1.40) 

Nitrogen Oxide ‐ (x000 t) 0.11 0.16 (0.06) (0.10) 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 (6.4) 

Mercury (Hg) ‐ Low (t) - - - - - - - - -

Mercury (Hg) ‐ High (t) (0.03) 0.00 (0.02) (0.01) (0.02) (0.02) (0.02) (0.7) (0.02) 

Trial Standard Level 5

Power Sector CO2 (MMT CO2) (2.22) 0.32 (1.52) (1.56) (1.65) (1.65) (1.65) (53.3) (1.65) 

Nitrogen Oxide ‐ (x000 t) (0.13) 0.31 (0.12) (0.10) 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 (8.1) 

Mercury (Hg) ‐ Low (t) - - - - - - - - -

Mercury (Hg) ‐ High (t) (0.03) 0.00 (0.02) (0.02) (0.03) (0.03) (0.03) (0.8) (0.03) 

Note: All units are metric tons, equivalent to 1.1 short tons
16-13 

Table 16.2.5 Power Sector Emissions Impact Forecasts for GSFL, Shift 

GSFL Existing Technologies, Shift, High Lighting Expertise

NEMS-BT Results Difference From Updated AEO2009 Reference

Exptrapolation Total

Trial Standard Level 1 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2042 2012‐2042

Power Sector CO2 (MMT CO2) (3.24) 0.29 (3.97) (4.27) (4.98) (4.98) (4.98) (130.3) (4.98) 

Nitrogen Oxide ‐ (x000 t) (0.51) (0.02) (0.37) (0.33) (0.09) (0.09) (0.09) (0.09) (11.7)

Mercury (Hg) ‐ Low (t) - - - - - - - - -

Mercury (Hg) ‐ High (t) (0.05) 0.00 (0.05) (0.05) (0.08) (0.08) (0.08) (0.08) (2.0)

Trial Standard Level 2

Power Sector CO2 (MMT CO2) (3.64) 0.32 (3.79) (4.69) (5.11) (5.11) (5.11) (133.9) (5.11) 

Nitrogen Oxide ‐ (x000 t) (0.37) 0.05 (0.06) (0.48) (0.09) (0.09) (0.09) (0.09) (10.0)

Mercury (Hg) ‐ Low (t) - - - - - - - - -

Mercury (Hg) ‐ High (t) (0.00) (0.07) (0.06) (0.07) (0.10) (0.10) (0.10) (0.10) (2.4)

Trial Standard Level 3

Power Sector CO2 (MMT CO2) (8.12) 0.89 (8.67) (10.69) (10.91) (10.91) (10.91) (10.91) (296.6)

Nitrogen Oxide ‐ (x000 t) (0.06) (0.13) 0.10 (0.72) (0.02) (0.02) (0.02) (0.02) (17.0)

Mercury (Hg) ‐ Low (t) - - - - - - - - -

Mercury (Hg) ‐ High (t) (0.00) (0.14) (0.13) (0.15) (0.19) (0.19) (0.19) (0.19) (4.8)

Trial Standard Level 4

Power Sector CO2 (MMT CO2) (17.35) 1.82 (15.16) (16.64) (16.15) (16.15) (16.15) (487.6) (16.15) 

Nitrogen Oxide ‐ (x000 t) (2.34) 1.09 0.18 (1.00) 0.53 0.53 0.53 0.53 (36.8) 

Mercury (Hg) ‐ Low (t) - - - - - - - - -

Mercury (Hg) ‐ High (t) (0.27) 0.01 (0.19) (0.21) (0.26) (0.26) (0.26) (0.26) (7.3)

Trial Standard Level 5

Power Sector CO2 (MMT CO2) (23.09) 1.96 (17.71) (18.03) (17.86) (17.86) (17.86) (552.0) (17.86) 

Nitrogen Oxide ‐ (x000 t) (2.86) (0.07) 0.20 0.13 (1.13) (1.13) (1.13) (1.13) (58.1)

Mercury (Hg) ‐ Low (t) - - - - - - - - -

Mercury (Hg) ‐ High (t) (0.01) (0.42) (0.24) (0.24) (0.31) (0.31) (0.31) (0.31) (8.8)

Note: All units are metric tons, equivalent to 1.1 short tons
16-14 

Table 16.2.6 Power Sector Emissions Impact Forecasts for GSFL, Roll-up 

GSFL Emerging Technologies, Roll up, Market Segment Based Lighting Expertise

NEMS-BT Results Difference From Updated AEO2009 Reference

Exptrapolation Total

Trial Standard Level 1 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035 2040 2042 2012‐2042

Power Sector CO2 (MMT CO2) (1.66) 0.15 (1.81) (2.22) (2.60) (2.60) (2.60) (2.60) (66.4)

Nitrogen Oxide ‐ (x000 t) (0.19) 0.00 0.10 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 (1.9) 

Mercury (Hg) ‐ Low (t) - - - - - - - - -

Mercury (Hg) ‐ High (t) (0.00) (0.03) (0.03) (0.03) (0.05) (0.05) (0.05) (0.05) (1.2)

Trial Standard Level 2

Power Sector CO2 (MMT CO2) (3.46) 0.26 (2.54) (2.72) (2.94) (2.94) (2.94) (2.94) (86.0)

Nitrogen Oxide ‐ (x000 t) (0.34) 0.14 0.12 0.00 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 (5.1) 

Mercury (Hg) ‐ Low (t) - - - - - - - - -

Mercury (Hg) ‐ High (t) (0.00) (0.06) (0.04) (0.04) (0.05) (0.05) (0.05) (0.05) (1.4)

Trial Standard Level 3

Power Sector CO2 (MMT CO2) (5.07) 0.53 (4.43) (5.10) (5.15) (5.15) (5.15) (5.15) (148.3) 

Nitrogen Oxide ‐ (x000 t) (0.40) 0.19 0.27 (0.23) 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.15 (7.3) 

Mercury (Hg) ‐ Low (t) - - - - - - - - -

Mercury (Hg) ‐ High (t) (0.00) (0.09) (0.06) (0.07) (0.09) (0.09) (0.09) (0.09) (2.3)

Trial Standard Level 4

Power Sector CO2 (MMT CO2) (7.78) 0.89 (4.98) (5.74) (5.48) (5.48) (5.48) (174.6) (5.48) 

Nitrogen Oxide ‐ (x000 t) (0.75) (0.07) 0.33 0.08 0.40 0.40 0.40 0.40 (11.0) 

Mercury (Hg) ‐ Low (t) - - - - - - - - -

Mercury (Hg) ‐ High (t) (0.13) 0.00 (0.06) (0.08) (0.10) (0.10) (0.10) (0.10) (2.8)

Trial Standard Level 5

Power Sector CO2 (MMT CO2) (9.84) 0.84 (8.17) (8.89) (8.55) (8.55) (8.55) (262.0) (8.55) 

Nitrogen Oxide ‐ (x000 t) 0.38 0.16 0.35 (0.23) 0.59 0.59 0.59 0.59 (12.9) 

Mercury (Hg) ‐ Low (t) - - - - - - - - -

Mercury (Hg) ‐ High (t) (0.00) (0.16) (0.11) (0.12) (0.14) (0.14) (0.14) (0.14) (4.0)

Note: All units are metric tons, equivalent to 1.1 short tons
16-15 

16.2.6 Effects on Upstream Fuel-Cycle Emissions 

 Fuel-cycle emissions refer to the emissions associated with the amount of energy used in 

the upstream production and downstream consumption of electricity, including energy used at 

the power plant. Upstream processes include the mining of coal or extraction of natural gas, 

physical preparatory and cleaning processes, and transportation to the power plant. The NEMSBT does a thorough accounting of emissions at the power plant due to downstream energy 

consumption, but does not account for upstream emissions (i.e., emissions from energy losses 

during coal and natural gas production). Thus, this analysis reports only power plant emissions. 

 However, previous DOE environmental assessment documents have developed 

qualitative estimates of affects on upstream fuel-cycle emissions. These emissions factors 

provide the reader with a sense of the possible magnitude of upstream effects. These upstream 

emissions would be in addition to emissions from direct combustion. Relative to the entire fuel 

cycle, estimates based on the work of Dr. Mark DeLuchi, and reported in earlier DOE 

environmental assessment documents, find that an amount approximately equal to eight percent, 

by mass, of emissions (including SO2) from coal production are due to mining, preparation that 

includes cleaning the coal, and transportation from the mine to the power plant.2 Transportation 

emissions include emissions from the fuel used by the mode of transportation that moves the coal 

from the mine to the power plant. 

 In addition, based on Dr. DeLuchi’s work, DOE estimated that approximately an amount 

equal to 14 percent of emissions from natural gas production result from upstream processes. 

Emission factor estimates and corresponding percentages of contributions of upstream emissions 

from coal and natural gas production, relative to power plant emissions, are shown in Table 

16.2.9 for CO2 and NOx. The percentages are relative to power plant emissions and provide a 

means to estimate upstream emission savings based on changes in emissions from power plants. 

The percentage effects presented in Table 16.2.9 provides a qualitative approach to viewing 

effects on fuel cycle emissions. The previous section indicates slight overall reductions in CO2

and NOx. Thus, very small reductions in upstream emissions of air pollutant could be expected. 

This approach does not address Hg emissions. 

Table 16.2.7 Estimated Upstream Emissions of Air Pollutants as a Percentage of 

Direct Power Plant Combustion Emissions 

Pollutant 

Percent of Coal 

Combustion Emissions 

Percent of Natural Gas 

Combustion Emissions 

CO2 2.7 11.9 

Nox 5.8 40 
16-16 

16.3 WETLAND, ENDANGERED AND THREATENED SPECIES, AND 

CULTURAL RESOURCES 

DOE’s proposed action is not site-specific, nor would it affect land disturbance or use 

due to IRL and GSFL adoption. Therefore, none of the proposed TSLs is expected to affect the 

quality of wetlands, or threatened or endangered species. Further, this action is not expected to 

impact cultural resources such as historical or archaeological sites. 

16.4 SOCIOECONOMIC IMPACTS 

 DOE's analysis has shown that the increase in the first cost of purchasing more efficient 

lighting products at the proposed standard level is completely offset by a reduction in the lifecycle cost (LCC) of owning a more efficient piece of equipment. In other words, the customer 

will pay less operating costs over the life of the equipment even through the first cost increases. 

The complete analysis and its conclusions are presented in Chapter 8 of the TSD. 

 For subgroups of low-income and senior consumers that purchase lighting products, DOE 

determined that the average LCC impact is similar to that for the full sample of consumers. 

Therefore, DOE concludes that the proposed action would have no significant socioeconomic 

impact. For a complete discussion on the LCC impacts on consumer subgroups, see Chapter 12 

of the TSD. 

16.5 ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE IMPACTS 

According to Executive Order 12898 of February 11, 1994, “Federal Actions to Address 

Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations,” DOE is required 

to examine the effect of more stringent energy-efficiency standards on: (1) small businesses that 

either manufacture or use IRL and GSFL, (2) manufacturers of niche products related to IRL and 

GSFL, and (3) small businesses operated by disadvantaged or minority populations. 

DOE identified small businesses as a sub-group that possibly could be disproportionately 

affected by IRL and GSFL energy conservation standards. As described in the Life-Cycle Cost 

Subgroup Analysis, Chapter 11 of the TSD, DOE found that there was no disproportionately 

high and adverse human health or environmental effects on small businesses that would result 

from the proposed energy conservation standards. DOE believes that above conclusion also 

applies to minority populations. 
16-17 

16.6 NOISE AND AESTHETICS 

Improvements in efficiency of IRL and GSFL equipment is expected to result from 

changes in the choice of components and other design features. These changes are described in 

Chapter 5 of this TSD. Efficiency improvements result from improved heat exchanger designs 

using increased levels of coppers, and more efficient compressors. These design changes are not 

expected to change noise levels in comparison to equipment in today’s market. Equipment that 

is currently manufactured in the existing market that would meet the proposed standards is no 

louder than less efficient equipment. Changes to the design to improve the efficiency levels are 

not anticipated to affect the equipment’s aesthetics. 

16.7 SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS 

 Table 16.7.1 and Table 16.7.2 summarize anticipated environmental impacts for each of 

the TSLs across all equipment types. Air quality impacts were estimated for each of the TSLs. 

The summary table shows cumulative changes in emissions for CO2, NOx, and Hg over the 

period 2012 to 2042. The resulting changes in emission quantities are very small. Cumulative 

CO2, NOx, and Hg emissions show a decrease compared to the reference case. 

 Upstream fuel cycle emission of CO2 and NOx are described but not quantified in section 

16.2.7. The text describes potential reductions in fuel cycle emissions as percentage of decreases 

in power plant emissions. This qualitative approach suggests that upstream fuel cycle emissions 

would decrease and provides a sense for the magnitude of effects, however DOE does not report 

actual estimates of the effects. This approach does not address Hg emissions. 

 Socioeconomic impacts are presented in TSD Chapter 12. 
16-18 

Table 16.7.1 Environmental Impact Analysis Results Summary for IRL 

NEMS-BT Results: Environmental Effects

Total Reference Case 

2012-2042† TSL 1 TSL 2 TSL 3 TSL 4 TSL 5

IRL Existing Technologies, Shift, R-CFL Substitution

CO2 (Million metric tons) 78,824 48.9 85.1 19.8 105.7 118.1 

NOX (x1000t) 59,033 5.5 7.6 1.9 8.4 9.3 

Mercury (t)

Low Emission Rate 846 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

High Emission Rate 846 0.7 1.3 0.3 1.7 1.8 

IRL Emerging Technologies, Rollup, BR Lamp Substitution

CO2 (Million metric tons) 78,824 7.5 19.1 44.0 37.8 53.3 

NOX (x1000t) 59,033 3.2 5.4 1.3 6.4 8.1 

Mercury (t)

Low Emission Rate 846 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

High Emission Rate 846 0.3 0.6 0.1 0.7 0.8 

† Extrapolated by assuming 2030 end values in all subsequent years 2031-2042.

Table 16.7.2 Environmental Impact Analysis Results Summary for GSFL 

NEMS-BT Results: Environmental Effects

Total Reference Case 

2012-2042† TSL 1 TSL 2 TSL 3 TSL 4 TSL 5

GSFL Existing Technologies, Shift, High Lighting Expertise

CO2 (Million metric tons) 78,824 133.9 130.3 296.6 487.6 552.0 

NOX (x1000t) 59,033 10.0 11.7 17.0 36.8 58.1 

Mercury (t)

Low Emission Rate 846 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

High Emission Rate 846 2.4 4.8 2.0 7.3 8.8 

GSFL Emerging Technologies, Roll up, Market Segment Based Lighting Expertise

CO2 (Million metric tons) 78,824 66.4 86.0 174.6 262.0 148.3 

NOX (x1000t) 59,033 5.1 7.3 1.9 11.0 12.9 

Mercury (t)

Low Emission Rate 846 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

High Emission Rate 846 1.4 2.3 1.2 2.8 4.0 

† Extrapolated by assuming 2030 end values in all subsequent years 2031-2042.
16-19 

REFERENCES 

 

1

 U.S. Department of Energy - Energy Information Administration, An Updated Annual 

Energy Outlook 2009 Reference Case Reflecting Provisions of the American Recovery and 

Reinvestment Act and Recent Changes in the Economic Outlook. April 2009: Washington, 

DC. <http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/> 

2

 DeLuchi, M. A. Emissions of Greenhouse Gases from the Use of Transportation Fuels and 

Electricity, Volume 2: Appendixes A-S. November, 1993. Argonne National Laboratory. 

Argonne, IL. Report No. ANL/ESD/TM-22-Vol.2.