Introducing Order Online Capabilities for Select Baghouse Products

,

Beginning today, Baghouse.com has become the only major dust collector manufacturer and parts supplier that allows its customers to directly purchases items online. With our new online shopping cart interface, buying baghouse products is as easy as buying your favorite book from Amazon.com.

Starting in March, 2015, visitors to Baghouse.com can order online leak testing supplies, including leak testing powder and leak testing light kits directly from Baghouse.com. As time goes on, we will introduce this ability to other products as well.

Why is This a Major Improvement?

Ordering baghouse replacement parts can be quite complicated

Sometimes getting a price for a replacement part from a baghouse parts supplier can seem to take forever! Now Baghouse.com lets you find your part online and order it all on one page!

While other suppliers require you to fill out a contact form and wait for a response before you can order your leak testing supplies. This process is slow and requires many emails/phone calls back and forth before you can actually place your order. Now with our new online setup, this entire process has been simplified and allows you to place an order in only a few minutes.

How To Order Leak Testing Supplies on Baghouse.com Without a Quote

First, visit our page with information about our dust collector leak testing supplies, including our leak testing powder, and leak detection light kits. There you will find a description of our leak powder and light kits. You can also use the information there to determine (a) how much leak powder you require and (b) which color(s) you should order.

To Order Leak Powder: Select your color(s), how many pounds you want to order and then click  “add to cart”. This will then redirect you to the checkout page where you can review your order. If you want to add additional items to your cart (e.g. leak testing light kits, etc.) you can return to those areas using the menu links on the page.

To Order Black Light Kits: Select the number of kits you wish order, and then click “add to cart”.

When you are ready to checkout, click on the “checkout” button on the checkout page. Here you will be shown a summery of your order and asked to enter your billing/shipping information. You can also specify a shipping method (if multiple methods are available) and add notes to your order. When you are done, enter your credit card information and submit the order. You should receive a confirmation email with a receipt. We will follow up with you to confirm a shipment date and to answer any questions you included in your order.

A New Way to Buy Dust Collector Replacement Parts

With this new system, Baghouse.com hopes to revolutionize the way you buy dust collector products. As time goes on we hope to add additional products to our website for instant online purchase. Of course, if you have a rather large order quantity, or would like to order these parts together with other products/services that require a quote (filter bags, dust collection systems, system audits/inspections, etc.) we would be happy to quote them together.

If you have any questions regarding placing an order for leak testing supplies, or any other products/services on our site, please feel free to give us a call at (702) 848-3990, or email us using our contact us form.

/by

Broken Dust Collector DP Gauge Leads to $325,000 in Fines

, , ,
Magnehelic gauge for reading differential pressure in a baghouse

Slag processing facility recently agreed to pay over $325,000 in fines for a violation of their air permit. What major infraction lead to such an immense fine? A broken differential pressure gauge on their baghouse! 

By Dominick DalSanto
Dust Collection Expert
Baghouse.com

Portage, Indiana – On September 18th, 2014 a manufacturing plant agreed to pay $325,000 in fines over a broken dust collector differential pressure gauge and falsified reports.

Calumite Company LLC manufactures an additive for the glass industry made from recycled slag from nearby steel mills. As part of its air permit with the state of Indiana, the company is require to operate dust collection systems throughout the plant and to record and report their operation efficiency to state regulators.

Over a period of at least 16 months this particular unit did not have a working differential pressure gauge (also called a magnehelic gauge). Rather than replace the broken gauge, workers regularly estimated DP readings for their reports and then submitted them to state and federal regulators as required. The dust collector in question controlled emissions from the loading and unloading of the company’s product onto railcars and truck trailers. During the course of the investigation, several workers admitted to falsifying reports, and supervisors even admitted to knowing about the broken gauge, but signed-off on the readings and submitted the reports anyway.

Magnehelic gauge for baghouse dust collection system

A broken baghouse differential pressure gauge resulted in massive fines for one facility

What is Differential Pressure on a Baghouse?

State and federal regulators often use differential pressure readings to determine how efficiently a dust collector operates and thus use it as a standard for controlling emissions. Differential pressure is the difference in pressure between the clean and dirty air sides of a dust collector. As dirty air passes through the filters in a dust collector it encounters resistance from the fabric and any buildup dirty on the filters. When the filters are clean there is less resistance and thus a lower drop in pressure between the two compartments inside the dust collector. For this reason, differential pressure readings tell operators the current condition of the filters and the unit in general. If the DP is high, it can signify high dust loading, filter blinding (i.e. clogged filters) which in turn lead to high emissions. A abnormally low reading can also mean that the filters have holes in them or have come lose…also resulting in high emissions.

Lessons Learned? – Do Not Neglect The Dust Collectors

The company was fined for operating one of its dust collectors without taking accurate differential pressure readings. While most dust collection related penalties and fines are related to failure to replace blinded or torn dust collector filters (often due exceeded service life, lower efficiency media, or pushing too much airflow through the filters) this fine comes solely from a failure to accurately monitor the dust collector operation and to record and report it accurately.

The take away here is to never neglect dust collection system maintenance, operation, and especially as this case highlights, reporting. While keeping up with the many regulations, regulations, standards, and requirements imposed on facility managers for dust collection systems might pose a challenge, forgoing the needed maintenance to change something seemingly small and unimportant (in this case a DP gauge) will eventually cost far more in fines, lost productivity, system downtime, and repair costs than maintaining the system properly ever will.

Link to official case record: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/indiana-manufacturer-pleads-guilty-clean-air-act-false-statement-violations

 

/by

Dust Collector Technology – Benefiting the US Economy

,

Why dust collectors and all environmental technology are important to our economy

By Dominick DalSanto
Dust Collector Technology Expert and Sales Director
Baghouse.com

This month the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency issued for the first time ever rules regulating carbon emissions for power plants. These new regulations have brought controversy, with many claiming that regulating carbon emissions in not only unnecessary, but will terrifically affect the US economy for the worse. Other claim that the effect will be more than offset by the benefits of reducing the pace of climate change, which they hold is primarily caused by greenhouse emissions.

It is not our point to delve into the issues involved in the EPA’s Clean Power Plan, or even climate change in general. However, it has spurred yet another fierce debate about pollution laws and regulations, air pollution control technologies and their economic effects on the nation. It leads one to thinking about industrial dust collection and what it costs the country’s economy. Do environmental rules protect or hurt the economy?

While there are many facets to this debate, we wanted to look at just one area today; how much revenue the does the dust collection industry directly cost or add to the US economy each year?

Dust Collector Systems, and Other PM Control Systems Add Billions to Economy Each Year

While politicians debate over increased regulation, there really should be no debate about whether the environmental technology industry is a valuable contributor to the country’s economy. The facts show that, regardless of the political rhetoric on both sides, the sector contributes a great deal to U.S. economic growth.

Today, the global environmental technologies market (including dust collection), which is broad and encompasses products and services for air, water, and soil pollution control, is around $800 billion. The U.S. is the largest supplier and consumer of this equipment and services in the world. Approximately 119,000 firms generate $300 billion in revenues supporting close to 1.7 million jobs. (1)

Trade Surplus From Environmental Exports

The U.S. exported pollution controls worth nearly $40 billion and generated a trade surplus of nearly $13 billion in 2007. In terms of exports as a percentage of total U.S. ET production, the leading sub-sectors are: resource recovery (58 percent); instruments and information systems (46 percent); water equipment and chemicals (36 percent); waste management equipment (25 percent); and air pollution control (16 percent). (Figure 1)

The air pollution control equipment sub-sector, not including engineering and consulting, generates revenues of more than $18 billion each year. A further breakdown of the numbers shows that dust collection equipment exports —  dust collector systems, dust collector filters, baghouses, etc. — in 2008 added up to more than $300 million. Adding in engineering and consulting services pushes that number over $1 billion. With an economy that is feeling the pressures of excessive foreign debt, trade imbalances, and lackluster growth, this sector of the U.S. economy certainly is carrying its own weight.

The Outlook: Advantages and Challenges Lie Ahead

As the situation stands now, the U.S. ET sector, including dust collection technology, holds some distinct advantages over foreign competitors. However, that advantage has been slipping away, little by little, and assuring future growth will prove to be a challenge.

While the United States market remains the largest single ET market, it’s also the most mature. Foreign markets, particularly those in developing countries, continue to grow at a higher rate, offering the most opportunity for U.S. companies.

According to a report by the Office of Energy and Environmental Industries’ Environmental Technologies Trade Advisory Committee, which is made up of governmental agencies responsible for fostering growth of U.S. exports, there are several notable barriers to increasing U.S. trade in this area. They include lengthy and/or nontransparent approval processes, incompatible standards, and legal and regulatory framework issues. Nonetheless, the report also states that the U.S. is well-positioned to compete on the international scene due to factors such as market share, workforce experience, and a highly advanced development process that leads to innovation.

The U.S. share of foreign ET markets went from 5.7 percent in 1997 to 9.8 percent in 2007, giving the industry a positive trade surplus. Although the rate of growth slowed, it has been returning steadily, influenced, in part, by the booming global demand for renewable energy technology.

Another large driver of the growth in developing markets has been the increased number of governmental pollution regulations. While in other industries environmental laws and regulations are seen as a source of extra cost and burden, the opposite is true for the ET sector. Complying with these regulations requires investment in products and services that help prevent, remediate, and alleviate environmental degradation. The ET industry supplies those goods and services.

Less-Obvious Financial Benefits

Dust Collection Economy

U.S. environmental technology exports in 2008

A clean and healthy environment (specifically clean air) has a host of benefits to people that directly affect them economically.  Preventing environmental degradation prevents pollution-related health problems and premature death, and improves the health and productivity of the U.S. work force.

While it can be difficult to quantify in monetary terms the effect of keeping people healthy and giving them better lives, several studies do exist that show that even in these terms environmental control regulations, specifically particle pollution control (e.g. dust collectors) have had a massive impact. A 2011 EPA  peer-reviewed study concluded that the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments have yielded direct benefits that tremendously exceed their costs. The study’s central benefits estimate in 2020 exceeds costs by a factor of more than 30-to-1, and the high benefits estimate exceeds costs by 90-to-1. (2)

The Path to Growth?

Now more than ever, to get back on the path to recovery, this economy needs to do what it has always done best — innovate and lead. Few sectors of the economy are better suited to do this than the ET industry. With new laws and regulations making environmental compliance tougher, U.S. firms are — out of necessity — finding, developing, and creating new ways to continue expanding while reducing environmental impacts. This experience has provided U.S. companies with the opportunity to get an edge over the competition, and they must take advantage.

The size of the world market for environmental goods and services – $782 billion – is comparable to the aerospace and pharmaceutical industries and presents important opportunities for U.S. industry. In 2008, the United States’ environmental technologies and services industry supported 1.7 million jobs. The industry generated approximately $300 billion in revenues and exported goods and services worth $44 billion – larger than exports of sectors such as plastics and rubber products. Air pollution control equipment alone generated revenues of $18 billion in 2008, including exports of approximately $3 billion.

Without a doubt, over-regulation and governmental bureaucracy can stifle economic growth. However, the ET industry, rather than being part of this systemic problem, is, in reality, part of the solution. This industry is a highly adaptive, com- petitive, and useful one that has proven its worth by creating mil- lions of jobs and billions in profits and trade surpluses. If every sector of the economy had similar characteristics, it would be back on the path to growth.

| Dominick DalSanto is an author & dust collector technology expert, specializing in baghouse systems. With nearly a decade of hands-on working experience in the industry, Dominick’s knowledge of the industry goes beyond a mere classroom education. He is currently serving as sales director at Baghouse.com. His articles have been published not only on Baghouse.com , but also on other industry related blogs and sites. In his spare time, Dominick writes about travel and life abroad for various travel sites and blogs.

 

References

1. Environmental Business International, San Diego, CA. U.S. Environmental Exports By Sector 2008 ($ billion)

2. http://www.epa.gov/air/sect812/prospective2.html

/by

Free Dust Collector Inspections In Los Angeles & San Diego

, ,

Baghouse.com now offers free dust collector inspections to new customers in the Los Angeles and San Diego areas.

By Dominick DalSanto
Baghouse Technology Expert and Sales Director
Baghouse.com

Baghouse.com News | Beginning June 1st, new customers in the Los Angeles and San Diego areas can request free site visits from Baghouse.com. Visits from a dust collector engineer provide far greater value than the usual method whereby companies merely send manufacture’s representative to pitch products.

Upon request, a dust collector engineer will arrange to visit the facility and conduct a condensed version of a standard dust collection system audit. They will visually inspect and review the plant’s dust collectors (if exceptionally large facility , then only primary units), review operating conditions, maintenance procedures, and discuss overall system performance and issues with operators and maintenance personnel. After reviewing the data, the dust collector engineer will present a set of recommendations to improve system efficiency, capacity, and service life of filters, while also reducing maintenance, operating costs (e.g. electricity, compressed air usage, replaceable parts, etc.) and system downtime. If any specific issues are identified during the inspection, or presented by plant personnel, these also will be addressed in the report.

Benefits of a Baghouse.com Dust Collector Report

Free dust collector inspection and report from Baghouse.com

Many of our current customers have benefited from our recommendations. By putting into practice our recommendations they increased efficiency, capacity without large capital investments, reduced down-time, operating costs, and lowered emissions and improved safety (due to air quality) within their facilities. Here are just some of the items we often identify during a free site visit:

  • Troubleshoot existing issues and work with staff on how to resolve them
  • Filter selection: recommend alternative fabrics, finishes (e.g. PTFE membrane), filter types (e.g. pleated filters
  • Baghouse condition and unit selection:
    • Recommend repairs (structural, pulse valves, gaskets, etc.)
    • Identify shaker and reverse air units with potential for retrofitting into newer pulse jet style
    • Condense several inefficient small units into one larger system,  etc.
  • Examine current operating methods and make recommendations on how to improve efficiency, reduce operating costs and system downtime (e.g. startup and shut down procedures, fan operating parameters, cleaning system settings, etc.)
  • Examine current maintenance procedures and make recommendations for improvement. Includes daily, weekly, monthly, yearly procedures, inspection checklist, handling of replacement bags, diagnosing need for bag replacement, proper bag replacement techniques, etc.
  • Replacing out of date equipment and methods with latest technology, such as pleated filters, clean-on-demand cleaning, PTFE membrane filters, etc.
  • Recommendations for new OSHA standards for combustible dust, such as explosion protection and fire suppression systems.

Request Your Free Dust Collector Report Today!

To request a free visit in the Los Angeles and San Diego areas, simply contact Baghouse.com by phone at 800 351 6200 or send us an email and ask for information about our free Las Vegas dust collector inspections and reports. For more information please see the following pages:

 

| Dominick DalSanto is an author & dust collection technologies expert, specializing in dust collection systems. With nearly a decade of hands-on working experience in the industry, Dominick’s knowledge of the industry goes beyond a mere classroom education. He is currently serving as sales director at Baghouse.com. His articles have been published not only on Baghouse.com , but also on other industry related blogs and sites. In his spare time, Dominick writes about travel and life abroad for various travel sites and blogs.

/by

Free Site Visits In Las Vegas – Free Dust Collector Inspections

, ,

Baghouse.com now offers free site visits to new customers in the Las Vegas area to all new customers. 

By Dominick DalSanto
Baghouse Technology Expert and Sales Director
Baghouse.com

Baghouse.com News | As of May 1st, Baghouse.com now offers free on-site visits to all new customers in the Las Vegas, Nevada area. These visits will provide potential customers with a more personalized relationship with the company. Upon request, a baghouse engineer will arrange to visit a facility on-site to introduce the company’s products and services. Where possible, the baghouse expert will tour the facility and examine its dust collection systems. When finished, the Baghouse.com representative will review their findings with plant personnel and issue a brief written summery within one week. This will include an overview of the facility’s dust collection systems and general recommendations for areas where improvement can be made.

Benefits of a Baghouse.com Dust Collector Report

Free dust collector inspection and report from Baghouse.com

Free dust collector inspection and report from Baghouse.com

Many of our current customers have benefited from our recommendations. By putting into practice our recommendations they increased efficiency, capacity without large capital investments, reduced down-time, operating costs, and lowered emissions and improved safety (due to air quality) within their facilities.

Here are just some of the items we often identify during a free site visit:

  • Troubleshoot existing issues and work with staff on how to resolve them
  • Filter selection: recommend alternative fabrics, finishes (e.g. PTFE membrane), filter types (e.g. pleated filters
  • Baghouse condition and unit selection:
    • Recommend repairs (structural, pulse valves, gaskets, etc.)
    • Identify shaker and reverse air units with potential for retrofitting into newer pulse jet style
    • Condense several inefficient small units into one larger system,  etc.
  • Examine current operating methods and make recommendations on how to improve efficiency, reduce operating costs and system downtime (e.g. startup and shut down procedures, fan operating parameters, cleaning system settings, etc.)
  • Examine current maintenance procedures and make recommendations for improvement. Includes daily, weekly, monthly, yearly procedures, inspection checklist, handling of replacement bags, diagnosing need for bag replacement, proper bag replacement techniques, etc.
  • Replacing out of date equipment and methods with latest technology, such as pleated filters, clean-on-demand cleaning, PTFE membrane filters, etc.
  • Recommendations for new OSHA standards for combustible dust, such as explosion protection and fire suppression systems.

Request Your Free Dust Collector Report Today!

To request a free visit in the Las Vegas area, simply contact Baghouse.com by phone at 800 351 6200 or send us an email and ask for information about our free Las Vegas dust collector inspections and reports.

For more information please see the following pages:

 

| Dominick DalSanto is an author & dust collection technologies expert, specializing in dust collection systems. With nearly a decade of hands-on working experience in the industry, Dominick’s knowledge of the industry goes beyond a mere classroom education. He is currently serving as sales director at Baghouse.com. His articles have been published not only on Baghouse.com , but also on other industry related blogs and sites. In his spare time, Dominick writes about travel and life abroad for various travel sites and blogs.

/by

Dearborn Steel Plant Requests Massive Increase For Particulate Emissions

, ,
Saverstal Steel Dearborn industrial dust collection system

Massive steel mill looks to revise its air permit to allow for proportionally huge increases in its emissions, particularly PM10, VOCs, lead and manganese from its industrial dust collection system. Neighbors say its already emits far too much while the company says it is only a correct to reflect the actual state of the plant and will not result in increased emissions. 

 

By Dominick DalSanto
Baghouse Technology Expert and Sales Director
Baghouse.com

Controversy has surrounded a recent application to modify the air permits for a Severstal Steel Mill. Last week, the plant submitted an application to revise its current air permits with the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality for its operations at the Dearbourn, Michigan facility. Specifically, the revisions will allow for large increase in particulate emissions for the plants industrial dust collection systems, i.e. its baghouses. The company says that the revision is not an application for an increase, but rather a modification of the old permit which was inaccurate. The company claims that no increase in emissions will occur, only that the air permit will now accurate detail the existing emissions at the plant.

Neighbors and environmentalists in the area are not buying it. “Just to make a profit, you are going to expose these kids to pollution,” said Haidar Abdallah “That’s wrong.” Given that the area surrounding the massive plant, which produces over 5 million metric tones of rolled sheet and another 1.5 galvanized and galvannealed sheet in 2012, is already one of the most heavily polluted in the country. The EPA estimated the area’s toxicity score as 45 times that of the statewide average.

 

Looking for baghouse filters? Contact us today for a free quote! Now providing free on-site visits in Las Vegas, Houston and San Diego Areas!

Dust Emissions Increase or Revision to Accurate Levels?

The majority of the debate revolves around differing views on the increases in the plant’s application for the revised limits. According to the plant, “the permit Severstal is seeking from the MDEQ does not authorize us to emit more pollutants. The permit is a technical correction that is based upon the results of stringent testing rather than upon estimates. With this permit correction, Severstal will continue to meet all applicable state and Federal air regulations for the protection of the public health.”

Severstal bought the plant in 2004, when the Rouge Steel (the previous owner) declared bankruptcy. Since then, the company claims to have poured over $1.7 billion into the plant, largely in the form on new pollution controls such as improved dust collection systems. The plant recently upgrading several of its lines with “two state-of-the-art air pollution control baghouses” to control PM, lead and manganese emissions. According to the company, when they acquired the nearly 100 year old plant, it had not and could not provide accurate measurements of its emissions to the state regulatory board. They claim they followed a plan approved by state regulators to “plan, do, check, and act”. They invested in the new control technology, then they proceeded to check the emissions, and now they are simply submitting a now accurate report on the plant’s emissions levels.

While the company’s story does have merit, it is still hard to swallow the large increases bourn out by the numbers released from the application. In some cases, the plant is asking for a revision of over 5,500% of its lead emissions. On average, the company is asking for an increase for emissions of about 725 times the amounts previously allowed for. It should be noted that many of these increases are proportional, the real amounts here are still very small on many categories. (see chart below)

Residents and workers have cause for concern. The dangers from particulate (i.e. dust) pollution are well established and very real. Particulate matter exposure is linked to respiratory health problems and is proven to be an aggravating cause of several cancers and other respiratory aliments. Even more so  the other contaminates involved here, namely lead and manganese pose a health risk. According to the American Lung Association, lead dust exposure  ” can harm every system in the body, particularly targeting the nervous system.” It also can cause severe brain and kidney damage, especially in young children. Additionally, manganese is known to cause severe damage to the central nervous system.

In any case, the company will still have to win over the state regulatory boards to its side to gain approval for its plan. A public hearing on the issue has been scheduled for March 19th at Henry Ford Community College. Information portion starts at 6 p.m. and the public hearing begins at 7 p.m. The company has already invested a large amount of capital into bringing the plant into compliance with state and federal air pollution regulations for particulate matter, lead and other pollutants. Whether or not it has been enough may depend on how severe the public backlash over the dirty nature of its plant and more importantly its response.

Pollutant Location within Severstal plant Currently allowed Proposed revised % increase
PM10 (fine-particle dust) B Blast Furnace Casthouse Baghouse 2.85 lbs/hr. 7.6 lbs/hr 167%
PM10 C Blast Furnace Casthouse Baghouse 5.70 lbs/hr. 18.24 lbs/hr 220%
PM10 Relading fugitives 3.22 tpy (12-month rolling average) 3.6 tpy (12-month rolling average) 12%
PM10 Desulfurization – baghouse 1.55 lbs/hr. 3.6 lbs/hr. 132%
PM10 Desulfurization – roof 6.88 tpy (12-month rolling average) 24.38 tpy (12-month rolling average) 254%
PM10 BOF electrostatic precipitator 37.7 lbs/hr. 47.5 lbs/hr. 26%
PM10 BOF fugitives 7.25 tpy (12-month rolling average) 28.3 tpy (12-month rolling average) 290%
PM10 Combined B/C blast furnace casthouse fugitives 10.16 tpy 15.04 tpy 48%
PM10 Combined B and C stoves 14.16 lbs/hr. 27.84 lbs/hr. 97%
PM10 BOF baghouse 3.35 lbs/hr. 17.71 lbs/hr. 429%
CO (Carbon Monoxide) BOF electrostatic precipitator 3,057.4 lbs/hr. 7,048 lbs/hr. 131%
VOC (volatile organic compounds) C Blast Furnace Casthouse Baghouse 6.77 lbs/hr. 9.92 lbs/hr. 47%
VOC Combined B/C blast furnace casthouse baghouses 27.0 tpy 49.42 tpy 83%
Lead (Pb) C Blast Furnace Casthouse Baghouse 0.00015 lbs/hr. 0.0077 lbs/hr. 5033%
Lead (Pb) Desulfurization – baghouse 0.000278 lbs/hr. 0.0016 lbs/hr. 476%
Lead (Pb) Combined B/C blast furnace casthouse fugitives 0.000087 lbs/hr. 0.0064 lbs/hr. 7256%
Lead (Pb) Combined B/C blast furnace casthouse baghouse 0.000223 lbs/hr. 0.00753 lbs/hr. 3277%
Manganese (Mn) C Blast Furnace Casthouse Baghouses 0.00256 lbs/hr. 0.042 lbs/hr. 1541%
Manganese (Mn) Desulfurization baghouse 0.00064 lbs/hr. 0.013 lbs/hr. 1931%
Manganese (Mn) Combined B/C blast furnace casthouse fugitives 0.006 lbs/hr. 0.0448 lbs/hr. 647%
Manganese (Mn) Combined B/C blast furnace casthouse baghouses 0.00385 lbs/hr. 0.0597 lbs/hr. 1451%

Links

Severstal Official Website

News article with full text of company’s statement regarding the revised emissions application.

 

| Dominick DalSanto is an author & dust collection technologies expert, specializing in dust collection systems. With nearly a decade of hands-on working experience in the industry, Dominick’s knowledge of the industry goes beyond a mere classroom education. He is currently serving as sales director at Baghouse.com. His articles have been published not only on Baghouse.com , but also on other industry related blogs and sites. In his spare time, Dominick writes about travel and life abroad for various travel sites and blogs.

 

 

/by

How To Get The Best Price For Baghouse Filters

,

By Dominick DalSanto

October 28th, 2012 Baghouse.com | The process of selecting a baghouse filter supplier for your next set of replacement filters might seem like a simple task. You might think that all you need to do is call them up, tell them your model number and you will be set. But is it really that easy? Can you always rely on just any supplier to get you the right bags, at the best price, every time?

Outlined below are several things that will help you to find the right supplier for your next set of replacement baghouse filters. Going into the filter quoting process armed with this information will enable you to secure the products at a fair price. These are the three key points to keep in mind when searching for your next set of replacement bags.

Have The Correct Information Before You Call

Most people begin their search for replacement bags with only the most basic of information, if any at all. At times all they have is some supplier’s arbitrary product number from their last set of bags, or a serial number from the side of their baghouse. The fact is that there is no central database of baghouse filters out there for your supplier to check. The majority of these product numbers are from their respective manufacturers and only for their internal record keeping/branding.

In order to receive an accurate replacement baghouse filter RFQ more information will be needed. While you may not have easy access to all of this information when sourcing quotes, the more you have the easier it will be for the supplier to give you an accurate quote. Information to have on hand includes:

Dust Collector Type – What kind of filters, cleaning system type, etc.

Filter Measurements – Physical dimensions of the filters

  • Length
  • Diameter
  • Flat-Width

Filter Construction – This differs based on how the bags are installed in the baghouse

  • Top (Snapband, Strap, Raw Edge, etc.)
  • Bottom (Snapband, Disk, Compression, etc.)

Filter Fabric – The material along with any coatings, finishes or membranes

  • Fabric (Polyester, PPS, Cotton, Fiberglass, etc.)
  • Coating/Finish (Singed, fire-resistant, etc.)
  • Membrane (PTFE, etc.)

Special Considerations – Special added features needed only on certain bags

  • Antistatic wires
  • Support rings

It is also good to include a general overview of the process the filters are used for. This would include air temperature, product to be filtered, alkali or acidic level, combustibility of the dust, etc. You should also including information about how often you replace your filters, system pressure drop, filtering efficiency. While not absolutely necessary, this information will allow a good supplier to offer suggestions for different products that might improve the operation of your system. (SEE BELOW)

Remember to have as much of this information on hand before you begin contacting filter suppliers. If you are not sure about some of these specifications try to get as much as information as possible and then a good filter supplier can help you to find the rest.

How to Choose a Baghouse Filter Supplier

There are hundreds of filter suppliers, manufacturers, and sales reps out there to choose from. Finding one that will get you the best product and provide you with the best service for a fair price is no easy task.

Often times, companies portray themselves as “dust collection experts” when in reality they are only sales reps that have little real knowledge of how these complex industrial systems operate. You will want to consider their level of experience in the industry. Companies with real-world experience in the field are able to provide a vastly superior service than the rest. For example, an experienced supplier will be able to not only take your order, but also offer suggestions on how to improve your dust collector operation by offering tips on installation methods, maintenance procedures, and other ways to increase system efficiency, and extend bag life. They also will be able to offer suggestions for different products (such as new fabrics, pleated elements vs. traditional bags, etc.) that could reduce costs and increase efficiency.

Additionally, you should look into the reliability and trust-worthiness of the company before doing any business with them. This can include asking for references from their previous clients, reviewing their return policy, and any guarantees they may offer on their products.

Additionally, you may wish to seek out a supplier that also offers baghouse filter replacement services as well. Having qualified baghouse technicians install your new baghouse filters often is a better choice than using in-house personal. Many times filter suppliers will provide you with a far better price for your filters if you also use them for the service work. (For more information on how to find a capable baghouse service provider please visit Baghouse.com for more information.)

The knowledge an experienced supplier can provide is invaluable. Take advantage of this by seeking out a trust-worthy, and experienced supplier?

Do Not Forget About Filter Replacement Services!

While many facilities often elect to use their own in-house labor to install their replacement baghouse filters, or they purchase the bags themselves and then contract out the installation work to another company. However, there are large savings to be had by purchasing your filter bags from a company that also performs baghouse filter replacement services. In a future article we will discuss additional reasons why it is advantageous to have experienced baghouse maintenance specialists perform your filter replacement. But for now, it will suffice to say that savings of upwards of 5% to 10% can easily be had by sourcing your filter bags and replacement service from the same company. Truly, not something to be overlooked!

Conclusion

Sourcing a quote for replacement baghouse filters is not a task to take lightly. The difference between a capable filter supplier and a poor one is dramatic. While it may not always be easy to find a good supplier, by following the suggestions in this article you can find one that can provide you with the products you need for a fair and reasonable price.

 

| Dominick DalSanto is an author and environmental expert specializing in baghouse dust collection systems. With nearly a decade of hands-on working experience in the industry, Dominick’s knowledge of the industry goes beyond a mere classroom education. He is currently serving as marketing director at Baghouse.com. His articles have been published not only on Baghouse.com , but also on other industry related blogs and sites. In his spare time, Dominick writes about travel and life abroad for various travel sites and blogs.

 

Footnotes:

1. For help see article “How to Chose The Correct Baghouse Filter.”
2. A good filter supplier should allow you to send in a sample of your current bags to ensure they are measured correctly. This can be an extra bag, or one from the baghouse (you can remove it and cap off the spot where it was to prevent leaks).

 

 

 

/by

Texas Coal Plant Sued Over Dust (PM2.5) Emissions

, ,

Environmental groups claim the 1625 MW coal-fired plant in La Grange, Texas is exceeding PM2.5 emissions limits due to outdated dust collectors and poor operating practices.

By Dominick DalSanto

July 20, 2012 Baghouse.com News | Environmental groups in Texas are suing one of the largest coal-fire power plants in the state, alleging the plant is violating its air pollution permits and emitting excess dust pollution. The Fayette Power Project located in La Grange, Texas, a 1,625 megawatt power plant located about 60 miles west of the state capital of Austin was served a notice of intent by the Environmental Integrity Project (EIP).

Excessive emissions often occur when plant operators fail to stay within require operating parameters (e.g. running the system to hot thus causing damage to the filter bags, placing too large of a load on the baghouse, etc.) or when they are using out-of-date equipment that is well past its recommended service life.

The EIP alleges LCRA (Lower Colorado River Authority the majority owner and operator of the plant) is in violation of its air pollution permits from the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), specifically the limits on particulate matter (PM2.5), claiming that the plant uses antiquated electrostatic precipitators for dust collection instead of newer, more efficient baghouse filters.

The EIP, which is representing the Texas Campaign for the Environment and other environmental groups, previously filed six claims against LCRA, two were withdrawn, three others were dismissed by the courts, leaving only this issue to continue to the discovery phase in a Houston federal court. LCRA says that claim “involves unfounded allegations” and the costs of the suit “will eventually be passed on to ratepayers.”

“We’ve discovered what we believe are egregious violations of the air pollution permit for the power plant and that harms public health, pollutes the air that we all breath,” said Ilan Levin, the Associate Director of Environmental Integrity Project.

LCRA General Manager Becky Motal flatly denied the charges, and claims the environmental groups are harassing them despite being “one of cleanest coal-fired plants in Texas”. “This notice of intent to file yet another lawsuit with similar allegations as in a previous suit is completely unwarranted and harassing,” Motal said in a press release after they learned of the suit. “FPP [Fayette Power Project] is one of the cleanest and most efficiently operated coal plants in Texas, and I am proud of the conscientious, environmentally responsible work our employees do providing electricity to more than a million people in Central Texas.”

Texas Vs. The EPA – The Origins of the Battle

Currently, the Fayette plant operates under what is known as a “flexible permit”. meaning it allows for exceeding emissions levels in certain areas if they are made up for by better than required performance in other areas. The flexible permits are issued by the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, the state agency charged with regulating and enforcing environmental laws in Texas. The EPA (the federal agency with ultimate authority over environmental law in the US) ruled several years ago that the flexible permits did not meet federal standards and were illegal. The situation between the EPA and the TCEQ plays a part in the case against LCRA.

Environmental groups are suing the Fayette Power Project located in LaGrange, Texas saying it violates its air permits, and needs to install new air pollution control equipment, including new more efficient baghouse filter systems to replace older, less efficient ESPs.

According to Ilan Levin the Associate Director of Environmental Integrity Project, the LCRA is in the process of obtaining a new permit to increase levels for particulate matter emissions from the state board. “We are trying to enforce the permit that is currently on the books,” he says. “Now EPA has already ruled that those flexible permits are illegal — that they don’t meet federal standards. And we agree with that. But nonetheless that’s the permit they have. And what we’ve found is that they’re not even meeting the limits in that awful flexible permit.”

In response Motal of LCRA said “FPP complies with all permit limits, and in most cases emissions are well below levels set by federal and state authorities. The authority says that the plant “has long been recognized as one of the cleanest coal-burning power plants in the state.”

ESPs vs. Baghouses – “Outdated ESPs not working very well”

In March 2011, the plant installed air scrubbers on Unites 1 and 2 at a cost of about $400 million. LCRA and its partner Austin Energy (which jointly owns Unites 1 and 2 with LCRA) says the air scrubbers now remove more than 95% of sulfur dioxide emissions. Prior to this local farmers accused the plant of contributing to the degradation of their surrounding farm land due to acid rain caused by the plant’s SO2 emissions. *

While environmentalists welcome the installation of the SO2 scrubbers, they believe the plant needs to do more regarding particulate matter (PM2.5 dust particles 2.5 microns in size and larger) emissions, which are linked to asthma, heart disease, premature death, and other respiratory conditions. The core of the current lawsuit claims the plant exceeded federal limits for PM2.5.

They say the plant needs to replace its outdated ESPs with newer, more efficient baghouse filter systems. “The LCRA Fayette Power Plant doesn’t have baghouses,” Levin says. “Instead they’ve got thirty-year old electrostatic precipitators or ESPs and those aren’t working very well. In fact, what we’ve found is that the really high levels of particulate matter pollution are happening when they start those coal-fired boilers up. And they are often in start-up mode for hundreds of hours per year.” Levins says that the LCRA doesn’t turn on their pollution controls that would capture particulate matter during those start-ups. “And so during start-up, the public is exposed to excessive and very dangerous levels of soot or particle pollution,” he says.

Today, filters (commonly known as baghouses or fabric filters) are used by plants to prevent the escape of particulate matter from their stacks. these are help in most opinions to be more efficiency than ESPs, which use electrodes to charge incoming dirty air that then passes by large electromagnetic plates that collect the charged dirt particles.

No Amicable Settlement in Sight

While both sides claim to be working to ensure a clean source of electricity for the surrounding area, it does not seem likely that the two parties will work things out by themselves. “The answer to the question ‘Why now?’ is that we feel like we have no choice. We’ve been talking to LCRA or trying to talk to LCRA for a couple of years,” Levin says. “We haven’t made any headway. We’re only bringing this lawsuit because the state regulators and the federal regulators, that is to say the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality and the EPA, are not enforcing the law.”

About The Author:

| Dominick DalSanto is an Author & Environmental Technologies Expert, specializing in baghouse filter systems. With nearly a decade of hands-on working experience in the industry, Dominick’s knowledge of the industry goes beyond a mere classroom education. He is currently serving as Online Marketing Director & Content Manager at Baghouse.com. His articles have been published not only on Baghouse.com , but also on other industry related blogs and sites. In his spare time, Dominick writes about travel and life abroad for various travel sites and blogs. Born in San Bernardino county California, raised in Chicago Illinois, he currently resides in Buenos Aires, Argentina.

Footnotes:

* See Article Pecan Growers Blame Coal-Fired Plant For Killing Crops

/by

Industrial Air Permits – New Clean Air Regulations and Baghouses

, , ,

Previous Baghouse.com Articles on Air Permitting:

By Dominick DalSanto

October 3, 2012 – Baghouse.com | Recently, the EPA has been busy issuing new air pollution regulations (Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, Cement MACT, Mercury MACT, etc.) and tightened several exiting ones (NESHAPs, NAAQs, etc). With the new standards, and revisions to existing ones, many formerly compliant facilities may not find themselves no longer able to meet their existing air permits. In addition, some facilities will need to complete the application process again for new permits based on the new standards. This process can be exceedingly difficult, due to the complexity of the regulations. Many facilities end up getting lost along the way, potentially costing them millions of dollars in the process.

A while back Baghouse.com had the opportunity to speak with Trinity Consultants, an international firm that specializes in assisting industrial companies with air quality regulatory compliance challenges, about the coming changes in the regulatory scene and how companies can avoid getting lost in the process. The following are some excerpts from that interview that we feel will be helpful for our readers.

Interview with Trinity Consultants

What would you say is the most difficult section of current clean air regulation for industry to come into compliance with?

“At present, the new National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and associated U.S. EPA dispersion modeling requirements for demonstrating compliance with nitrogen dioxide (NO2), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and fine particulate matter (PM2.5) are the most difficult provisions of the clean air act regulations for new or modified facilities.  U.S. EPA has also promulgated additional challenging requirements that affect specific industries or specific source types including National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP), Maximum Achievable Control Technologies (MACT), and New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for industrial-commercial-institutional steam generators (boilers), electric utility steam generating units (utilities), portland cement manufacturing, and others.”

What problems do you encounter with regards to dust collection/particulate matter (PM2.5)emissions?

“Dust collection, capture, and control is an important consideration for compliance with the PM2.5 NAAQS as well as compliance with the new NESHAP, MACT, and NSPS noted above. ”

One of the “scariest” new regulations is the Mercury MACT; what role will baghouses play in meeting these new standards?

“Most technologies for collecting mercury emissions involve the use of a baghouse. The most common include injecting a material to absorb the mercury in the airstream, usually activated carbon or a proprietary sorbent compound, which then needs to be collected from the airstream just like any other particulate matter would be, by the baghouse. In some cases the only way to handle this increased particulate load is to upgrade the baghouse. This could mean replacing the bags with more efficient PTFE membrane bags, expanding the baghouse (either by added more compartments, using a larger baghouse, or by switching to pleated baghouse filter elements).”

What problems do you encounter frequently with the regulatory process that are the most frustrating?

“We have clients that have had to cancel proposed capital expansion projects due to the economic and/or operational infeasibility of complying with the new NAAQS provisions for PM2.5, SO2, & NO2.”

What can companies do when they feel overwhelmed by the often complex permitting process to make sense of the situation?

“Our clients frequently request staff from Trinity Consultants to train, advise, or develop strategic guidance for their environmental, management, operations, and/or legal staff on the complex environmental topics or have Trinity Consultants directly assist with their permitting and compliance needs.”

What do you feel is the most important thing for companies to keep in mind with regards to compliance issues?

“Stay up to date (fresh, timely) on the regulatory rule changes affecting their industry.  Participate in industry associations or work groups that focus on environmental requirements for your industry.  Companies can also find timely updates, regulatory notices, and training courses at www.trinityconsultants.com.  We also suggest that companies subscribe to Trinity Consultants’ periodic publications which include Environmental Quarterly and eNews at www.trinityconsultants.com/subscribe”

How do these previously mentioned regulations come into play with regards to dust collection? (National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP), Maximum Achievable Control Technologies (MACT), and New Source Performance Standards (NSPS) for industrial-commercial-institutional steam generators (boilers), electric utility steam generating units (utilities), portland cement manufacturing, and others)

“For existing utility sources, the 0.03 lb/MMBtu limit should easily be met with a good ESP, and does not force you into a baghouse – our understanding is the crossover point may be about 0.005 lb/MMBtu filterable.  For new utility sources, the limit is very low and could only potentially be met with a baghouse.   

For cement plants, ESPs are likely a thing of the past and existing baghouses will likely need new filter media or polishing baghouses.  There are many retrofit projects currently being pursued.  With the new NSPS, lower than 0.002 gr/dscf bags are being evaluated.  Getting suppliers to guarantee PM emissions limits on new units that meet the standards will be very challenging.  In some places, two bags may be needed in series, one for lime injection providing some scrubbing effect and then a final bag house.  Meeting the PM limit is very challenging for the cement industry, requiring periodic maintenance program improvements, even a single bag leak can take you out of compliance.   

Industrial-commercial-institutional boiler considerations:   
For solid fuel-fired boilers, it appears that fabric filters will be required (whenever the rule becomes effective).  At this time, it’s impossible to tell what the reconsideration will do as many companies are looking to expand it. 
For liquid fuel-fired boilers, fabric filter may be an option.  We expect companies that installed a new baghouse would have used a BLDS since it appears to be preferred over a COMS.  We expect some companies will convert to natural gas instead of upgrading their solid and liquid-fired emissions controls.”

What specific problems do you find that companies have gaining compliance with regards to their baghouse?

“Opacity limits with short-averaging periods are a big problem for ESPs – almost any ESP on a solid fuel unit cannot run 100% compliance, though 99%+ is possible.  A baghouse can run essentially 100% compliance.  Since they all have COMS you record every hour.  PM CEMS are a big problem as their accuracy is suspect – back-to-back testing with Method 5 and a PM CEMS can give very different answers.

For the cement industry, the greatest challenge in meeting the new PM limits, other than the limits being low, is the related requirement to meet the limits with a PM CEM.  There is virtually no data of this type in the industry and the monitoring equipment is complex.  Therefore, there is significant uncertainty at to whether the limit is achievable, day in, day out. 

According to the Council of Industrial Boiler Owners (CIBO) the level of emission reduction for industrial-commercial-institutional boilers has not been demonstrated to be achievable by industrial applications, and may only be achievable on a consistent basis with the use of new technology not commonly used in industrial applications.  Electrostatic precipitator suppliers and bag house suppliers both indicate that this new standard is not achievable with the exception that the type of exotic filters used for clean rooms in food production and some pharmaceuticals may be applicable but at exorbitant cost.”

What aspect (or specific regulation or set of regulations) do you feel needs to be revised or reformed the most to make the regulatory process more conducive to industrial growth, while still providing protection for our environment?

“I believe EPA and state agencies need to revise or reform their dispersion modeling methodologies and/or tools to more realistically assess compliance with the new 1-hr NAAQS.”

Would you say that current regulation is hampering companies’ efforts to expand their operation?

“Yes.”

Advice for Companies

When working with a client to achieve overall compliance of their facility with applicable regulations, what advice or warnings do you give to them regarding the proper operation, and maintenance of their baghouse system?

“Periodic baghouse maintenance programs for many plants will need to be improved. There is a lot facility operators can do to make their baghouses run more efficiently.”

How important is it for plants to make sure their dust collection system is functioning properly?

“It will be very important to demonstrate continuous compliance with the more stringent regulatory requirements.”

Do you believe that it is in a facilities best interest to upgrade outdated and undersized dust collection equipment? In your experience (expert opinion) do you feel that it is worth the investment in capital for the potential benefits?

“Upgrade decisions will be required on a facility by facility basis but in many instances, upgrading of equipment will be necessary / required.”

What percentage of your clients would you say are having problems with their baghouse system that are causing them to be out of compliance with clean air regulations?

“By and large, our clients are in compliance with clean air regulations (continuous compliance is not an option for business risk mitigation).  However, the recent stringent regulations presents significant challenges and our clients are actively pursuing and developing solutions to implement in the next year or two.”

 

About Trinity Consultants: Founded in 1974, Trinity Consultants is an international firm that specializes in assisting industrial companies with air quality regulatory compliance challenges.  Trinity also provides professional training, environmental modeling software, EH&S information management solutions, and EH&S staffing services.  Environmental professionals can subscribe to Trinity’s free Environmental Quarterly publication at trinityconsultants.com/subscribe.

 

| Dominick DalSanto is an Author & Environmental Technologies Expert, specializing in Dust Collection Systems. With nearly a decade of hands-on working experience in the industry, Dominick’s knowledge of the industry goes beyond a mere classroom education. He is currently serving as Marketing Director at Baghouse.com. His articles have been published not only on Baghouse.com , but also on other industry related blogs and sites. In his spare time, Dominick writes about travel and life abroad for various travel sites and blogs.

/by

EPA Administrator Resigns Over “Crucify” Comments Regarding Enforcement Philosophy

, ,
Al Armendariz EPA

EPA chief resigns after outrage over comments saying EPA should figuratively “crucify” EPA offenders to set an example.

April 30 2012 – Baghouse.com News | A top EPA regional administrator resigned today over controversial comments regarding his views of how the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) should enforce its environmental regulations, saying that the EPA should do like the ancient Romans who would crucify conquered villagers to set an example. Al Armendariz, the administrator for the EPA’s 6th region tendered his resignation after his remarks draw the ire of various members of Congress and the media.

In his letter of resignation to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson, he expressed his regret over his statements, and claimed they did not reflect his work as an EPA administrator, or the EPA’s views general. However, he acknowledged that with the controversy his continued work at the EPA cause an undue distraction, and therefore he felt it necessary to resign.

At a local government meeting in Texas in 2010, Armendariz liked his “philosophy of enforcement” of EPA policy to how the Romans would use crucifixion to intimidate recently conquered lands. “It was kind of like how the Romans used to, you know, conquer villages in the Mediterranean,” he said. “They’d go in to a little Turkish town somewhere, they’d find the first five guys they saw, and they’d crucify them. And then, you know, that town was really easy to manage for the next few years,” he added.

Armendariz went on to related that “you make examples out of people who are in this case not complying with the law … and you hit them as hard as you can” — to act as a “deterrent” to others. He went on to say that the oil and gas industry needed to be an “enforcement priority” for the agency. The oil and gas industry along with the power generation industry have been coming under increased pressure from new and tougher environmental regulations such as the Cross-State rule, Mercury MACT, NESHAPs, and more. Many companies will need to make extensive investments in pollution control technologies such as dust collection systems, air scrubbers and mercury capture systems to comply with the new rules.

In accepting his resignation, EPA Administrator Jackson reiterated earlier sentiments that the EPA did not agree with Armendariz comments or views as expressed in his speech. “I respect the difficult decision he made and his wish to avoid distracting from the important work of the agency,” she said, thanking him for his service.

Critics Claim Remarks Are Evidence of Obama-EPA’s “Assault On Energy”

Critics of the EPA have taken the controversy as the latest proof that the “Obama-EPA” is playing partisan politics and is acting in bad faith to further the Administration’s alleged vendetta against the U.S. energy industry.

The controversy began earlier this week when Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), a vehement critic of the Obama Administration (particularly on environmental issues) referenced the remarks in a speech on the Senate floor. Sen. Inhofe then proposed to launch an investigation into alleged politically-motivated bias on the part of the “Obama-EPA”.

Sen. Inhofe was not the only member of Congress to weigh in on the controversy. Several Republican lawmakers also expressed outrage and called for Armendariz to be fired including Reps. Steve Scalise (R-La.) and Pete Olson (R-Texas).

Rep. John Fleming (R-La.), called the comments “enviro-fascism at its worst.” The EPA’s Region 6 includes Louisiana, Texas, New Mexico, Arkansas, and Oklahoma.

House Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio) reached out on Twitter, stating that the “Obama admin admits ‘crucify’ strategy for energy job creators.”

And Texas Gov. and recent Republican Presidential Primary candidate Rick Perry took the comments as “another reason to all-but-eliminate EPA” called the comments “unacceptable & offensive”.

Another top Republican, House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), plans to question EPA about the remarks. “He’s writing to EPA to seek clarification and express outrage with comments that are clearly at odds with the president’s prior comments on domestic energy production and that are clearly anathema to the cause of job creation,” a spokesman for Issa said.

In addition to lawmakers, several business and trade organizations are taking aim at the EPA over the controversy. Energy in Depth, an oil-and-gas industry group, is also highlighting the comments over Twitter and on its website, providing updates on the controversy including the calls for GOP members for his resignation. Other groups including the Business Roundtable and the Institute for Energy Research also took to Twitter to vent their feelings on the matter, criticizing the EPA and the Obama Administration.

The White House Denies Link To Armendariz Controversy – Cites Record As Proof

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney on Thursday called the comments at odds with the administration’s record of promoting oil-and-gas development and EPA’s approach. He pointed to increased oil and natural gas production in recent years as proof.

“The president’s approach, his all-of-the-above approach to our energy needs, I think documents and proves that those comments do not reflect his policy or the approach that the EPA has taken,” Carney said.

Carney also reiterated that the regional EPA official has apologized for the remarks. “What he said is clearly not representative of either this president’s belief in the way that we should approach these matters, or in the way that he has approached these matters, either from this office here in the White House or at the EPA,” Carney said at a press briefing.

While the ousting of Armendariz from his position is likely to be sufficient to reassure most, it is not likely to be the end of the matter. Given the serious implications of these words from a top level EPA administrator (one of the most important regions, the oil-rich South and Southwest), the Obama Administration’s tough stance on environmental issues, and role the booming U.S. oil fracking industry has in the nation’s future, ensure this issue will not go away. Republicans are likely to use this experience as a part of a continuing rally against Obama’s energy and environmental agenda…a fight that does not have a clear victor in sight.

 

| Dominick DalSanto is an Author & Environmental Technologies Expert, specializing in Dust Collection Systems. With nearly a decade of hands-on working experience in the industry, Dominick’s knowledge of the industry goes beyond a mere classroom education. He is currently serving as Online Marketing Director & Content Manager at Baghouse.com. His articles have been published not only on Baghouse.com , but also on other industry related blogs and sites. In his spare time, Dominick writes about travel and life abroad for various travel sites and blogs.

/by