Greenhouse Gas Tracking To Become Mandatory In The United States

Companies are now responsible to understand and comply with the GHG regulations laid out by EPA on Greenhouse Gas (GHG) tracking and reporting, or be liable to pay fines for non-compliance. By 2011, GHG reports for all data collected in 2010 shall be due as the United States mandates all affected organizations to track report GHG emissions.

The Climate Registry Protocol outlines GHG tracking, defining further the requirements in the mandated GHG tracking and monitoring. The fundamental ideas stimulating GHG reporting are part of the U.S. Clean Air Act, aimed at improving air quality and lowering greenhouse gas emissions.

EPA is proposing compulsory tracking and monitoring of GHG coming from 13,000 facilities in the country which will eventually cause global climate change and global warming. Such facilities are accounted to be the major contributors of GHG emissions in the US, which is a very logical starting point in the greehouse gas emissions reduction targets. Such regulation covers companies and organizations which release relatively large amounts of GHG or those which produce or import industrial chemicals and fuels which emit high carbon gases when burned.

One of the major focuses of the Greenhouse Gas tracking protocol is refrigerant gases used in refrigeration and cooling systems by numerous facilities, including manufacturers, food processors, retailers, grocery stores, office buildings, municipalities and hospitals, just to name a few. Because of their chemical makeup, refrigerant gases contain significant levels of carbon in the form of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs), hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs) and perfluorocarbons (PFCs). Use of these compounds has been regulated under the U.S. Clean Air Act for several years.

Global warming results from GHG absorption of radiation which is released to the atmosphere, increasing temperature. Greenhouse Gas tracking will help pinpoint the major sources of GHG emissions and monitor the amounts released to the atmosphere. This helps environmental officials establish a baseline which will be the benchmark for all usage and evaluation practices in the future. With this accurate information, it can be determined if the guidelines are effective in lowering the harmful effects of these substances to the ozone layer.

Greenhouse Gas tracking will enable enterprises to measure direct and indirect GHG emissions and be equipped with the data needed to properly use, maintain, contain and dispose leaks. Heating and cooling systems, as well as other energy consumption, are defined as direct emissions.

Greenhouse Gas tracking was among the major goals of the Obama administration as the United States aims to protect the future of the environment by reducing the carbon footprint of today. By taking no action, the earth's makeup would significantly change, with humans and animals adversely affected and marine and plant life severely damaged.

Greenhouse Gas tracking will become law because it was determined that certain manmade compounds contribute substantially to global warming. The substances are carbon dioxide, chlorine, bromine, nitrous oxide, chloroflurocarbons, hydrofluorocarbons, methane, methyl bromide, methyl chloroform, sulfur hexafluoride, hydroxyl, perfluorocarbobs, halons, carbon tetrachloride, fluorine, and the fluorinated gases hydrofluorinated ethers and nitrogen trifluoride. This compulsory law aims to reduce the use of harmful substances to help curtail the already felt adverse effects of global warming.

Although Greenhouse Gas tracking was optional for large emitters in the United States, it becomes mandatory in 2010 with the regulation requiring companies and municipalities to submit exact information on how much of the global warming substances they use everyday and if any leaks occurred.

The requirements are so extensive that vendors who are knowledgeable in the area have developed software programs and web-based applications to assist companies in complying with the law across distributed facilities down to the individual asset level.