Preview Newsletter
ET ACC PM 9/29/15
-
Global PFC group addresses best practice and inventory
Sep 29, 2015 | Chemical Watch
The OECD and the UN Environment Programme (Unep) have published a report assessing different approaches taken to control per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs). -
Sustainable chemistry ready for global consideration, says Unep
Sep 29, 2015 | Chemical Watch
By Leigh Stringer
The concept of ‘sustainable chemistry’ is now established enough to receive international attention and consideration, says Achim Halpaap, the UN Environment Programme’s (Unep) new head of chemicals and waste branch. -
(ACC Mentioned) Weight Loss Plans & Tips: Ditch The Chemicals To Lose Pounds, Manage Diabetes
Sep 29, 2015 | Parent Herald
By Rachel
Scientists have found more links that suggest exposure to chemicals can lead to serious health problems like diabetes and obesity. -
Evidence for EDCs 'more definitive than ever’
Sep 29, 2015 | Chemical Watch
Evidence that some chemicals disrupt hormones, in a way that causes a range of serious health problems, has become more compelling, says international scientific organisation the Endocrine Society. -
(ACC Mentioned) Solid waste disposal and landfill gas collection: Research
Sep 29, 2015 | Journalist's Resource
By Denise-Marie Ordway
Americans make a lot of garbage – 4.3 pounds per person per day on average, which is 59% more than they did in 1960, according to Duke University’s Center for Sustainability and Commerce. -
Obama admin cracks down on refinery emissions
Sep 29, 2015 | E&E Greenwire
By Amanda Reilly
Petroleum refineries will be forced to curb toxic air emissions and beef up monitoring under a rule finalized today by U.S. EPA. -
All eyes turn to EPA on new power plant toxics rule
Sep 29, 2015 | E&E Greenwire
By Annie Snider
A long-fought battle over new limits on the amount of toxic metals that can flow from coal-fired power plants into U.S. waterways is slated to come to an end tomorrow, but whether the rule's release will truly halt the fight will depend on what the final regulation looks like. -
EPA to release refinery emissions rule today
Sep 29, 2015 | Politico Pro
By Elana Schor
EPA plans to release new refinery emissions regulations later today, according to a source briefed on the timeframe. -
EPA cracks down on oil refinery pollution
Sep 30, 2015 | The Hill -- E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has issued a new rule designed to slash toxic air pollution generated by petroleum refineries. -
EPA defends refinery emission rule from industry critics
Sep 29, 2015 | Politico Pro
By Elana Schor
EPA today defended its new refinery emissions rule from condemnation by industry groups that warn the updated pollution controls are too costly. -
House GOP revises omnibus bill; committee votes tomorrow
Sep 29, 2015 | E&E Greenwire
By Hannah Northey
Republicans on the House Energy and Commerce Committee today unveiled a revised version of a comprehensive energy package that's up for a vote in the lower chamber tomorrow after weeks of trying to reach a compromise with Democrats. -
US Dept. of Energy uses smart manufacturing to boost energy efficiency
Sep 29, 2015 | Metering and Smart Energy International
By Amy Ryan
In the US, the Department of Energy is offering US$70m in funding for a new institute focusing on smart manufacturing research and development. -
Low oil prices hurt even energy markets not burning it
Sep 29, 2015 | E&E Energywire
U.S. power generators' shares just had their steepest weekly decline in six years. Though they usually don't burn the stuff, it's attributed to low oil prices. -
Shell Exits Arctic as Slump in Oil Prices Forces Industry to Retrench
Sep 29, 2015 | The New York Times
By Clifford Krauss and Stanley Reed
As oil prices have continued their steady decline this year, rig after rig has been shut down, costing thousands of jobs in the United States. -
Shell departure 'a punch in the gut' for Alaska
Sep 29, 2015 | E&E Energywire
By Margaret Kriz Hobson
Alaskans are struggling to understand the full impact of Royal Dutch Shell PLC's Sunday announcement that it is abandoning its Chukchi Sea leases because it found too little oil and gas to warrant further exploration. -
Exuberance and Disappointment at Shell’s AboutFace in the Arctic
Sep 30, 2015 | The New York Times
By Kirk Johnson
For many Alaskans, Monday was “a huge disappointment, a really big disappointment,” as Gov. Bill Walker put it, reflecting on the tax revenue, jobs and investments that may be lost as Royal Dutch Shell abandons its plan to drill for oil in the Alaskan Arctic. -
Jeb Bush slams Clean Power Plan in new energy proposal
Sep 29, 2015 | E&E Climatewire
By Evan Lehmann
Jeb Bush will propose repealing President Obama's climate rules in an energy plan being released today at an oil and natural gas company near Pittsburgh. -
Jeb Bush to back oil exports in energy plan
Sep 29, 2015 | E&E Greenwire
By Jennifer Yachnin
Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush today will call for ending the ban on U.S. oil exports as well as easing restrictions on natural gas exports when he unveils his energy policy proposals at an event near Pittsburgh. -
Freeport-McMoRan hits new oil in deepwater Gulf
Sep 29, 2015 | E&E Energywire
By Nathanial Gronewald
A new oil discovery in the Gulf of Mexico's deepwater frontier was announced yesterday. -
DOE seeks to focus national lab research on top cyber, grid priorities
Sep 29, 2015 | E&E Energywire
By Peter Behr
A unique collaboration among the Energy Department's national laboratories is seeking to close high-priority technology gaps facing the U.S. power grid, as it deals with disruptive operating changes and cybersecurity threats.
Industry and Association News
Chemical Management News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Energy and Environment News
Transportation News - There are no clips to report at this time
-
Global PFC group addresses best practice and inventory
Sep 29, 2015 | Chemical Watch
The OECD and the UN Environment Programme (Unep) have published a report assessing different approaches taken to control per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs).
The substances are used as ingredients, or intermediates, of surfactants and surface protectors for a wide range of industrial and consumer applications, but are in the process of being replaced because of their ability to persist and bioaccumulate.
With information from 15 countries, the report from the Global Perfluorinated Chemicals (PFC) group –Good Practices and Options to Support Shared Challenges in the Development and Implementation of PFAS Risk Reduction Approaches – aims to provide a snapshot of current activities and inform other countries about options they might take.
It has been presented at the fourth session of the International Conference on Chemicals Management – which is currently underway in Geneva. The group is also presenting options for a global emission inventory for PFASs at ICCM4.
It says:the OECD 2007 list of 920 should be updated;their global production, use and release should be surveyed and the results made public; andsynergies between stakeholders should be made, along with links between existing programmes.
-
Sustainable chemistry ready for global consideration, says Unep
Sep 29, 2015 | Chemical Watch
By Leigh Stringer
The concept of ‘sustainable chemistry’ is now established enough to receive international attention and consideration, says Achim Halpaap, the UN Environment Programme’s (Unep) new head of chemicals and waste branch.
Speaking at a conference in Berlin last week, Mr Halpaap said the increase in examples of the commercial introduction of sustainable chemicals and chemical processes into supply chains shows it is “ready to take to the global community”.
The European Roundtable on Sustainable Chemistry was organised by Germany's federal environment ministry (BMUB) and environment agency (UBA).
Mr Halpaap said if the implementation of sustainable chemistry is to be successful globally, it must involve decision makers, researchers and practitioners from developing countries. He suggested a follow up conference, focused more on inviting, informing and fully engaging those from developing countries.
However, it is important, he said, to ensure all countries “implement the basics” of chemical management, alongside pursuing sustainable chemistry programmes.
“We still have many countries in the world that have not implemented legislation on the Globally Harmonized System (GHS), or that don't have the capacity to use and understand material safety data sheets,” he said.
The OECD’s widely accepted definition of sustainable chemistry was the basis for the conference's discussions: a scientific concept that seeks to improve the efficiency with which natural resources are used to meet human needs for chemical products and services.
“Sustainable chemistry encompasses the design, manufacture and use of efficient, effective, safe and more environmentally benign chemical products and processes,” the definition continues.
The BMUB and UBA are setting up an International Sustainable Chemistry Collaborative Centre (ISC3) (GBB August 2015). Its aim is to encourage the exchange of information, as well as identify links between chemicals management and sustainable development, by bringing together a network of:international researchers;enterprises;associations; andinstitutions.
The centre will be built in Germany and is due to open in early 2017.
-
(ACC Mentioned) Weight Loss Plans & Tips: Ditch The Chemicals To Lose Pounds, Manage Diabetes
Sep 29, 2015 | Parent Herald
By Rachel
Scientists have found more links that suggest exposure to chemicals can lead to serious health problems like diabetes and obesity. The study, released via the Endrocrine Society in a press release, points out that chemical exposure can adversely affect the body's hormones, when it's vital to regulating a person's physiology and behavior.
The chemicals identified by the experts include bisphenol A and phthalates, which are found in food and personal care products people use at home, according to NBC News. They are in canned goods, bottled waters, perfumes, soaps, toothpastes and shampoos, as well as certain pesticides, according to Web MD.
It's not the first study to point out the dangers of chemical exposure, but the latest findings highlight why changing eating habits by avoiding chemicals could be advantageous to people who have diabetes or are trying to battle obesity.
"I think when doctors talk about lifestyle to their patients, they typically emphasize a healthy diet and exercise. But I would be surprised if, as part of the healthy diet conversation, they talk about ... trying to remove processed foods, or staying away from microwaving the plastics," said pharmacologist Andrea Gore, according to Healio. "You may have a healthy meal, but if it's in a [microwaved] plastic container, it's leaching chemicals," she emphasized.
Gore is part of task force that reviewed over 1,300 studies to come up with convincing evidence that chemicals disrupt the hormones. Aside from what was already suggested, Gore and her team also also hope for better safety testing of products and the implementation of tighter regulations among manufacturers.
"With more chemicals being introduced into the marketplace all the time, better safety testing is needed to identify new endocrine disrupting chemicals and ensure they are kept out of household goods," said Gore, via NBC News.
As a result, giant retail shops like Target and Walmart are already taking a pro-active stance. Target is expanding its list of banned chemicals and suppliers have to comply to their standards, according to Safechemicals Org. On the other hand, Walmart also has a list of products with harmful chemicals, according to another Safechemicals report.
However, chemical manufacturers have issued a statement to address the report by Gore's team. In part it said via American Chemistry Council, "The Endocrine Society's report fails to differentiate between chemicals that are 'endocrine-active,' meaning they interact with the endocrine system, and those that are 'endocrine disruptors,' meaning that the levels of exposure associated with that interaction cause scientifically-proven adverse health effects."
Read more: http://www.parentherald.com/articles/10552/20150929/weight-loss-plans-tips-ditch-the-chemicals-to-lose-pounds-manage-diabetes.htm#ixzz3n8fOADdD -
Evidence for EDCs 'more definitive than ever’
Sep 29, 2015 | Chemical Watch
Evidence that some chemicals disrupt hormones, in a way that causes a range of serious health problems, has become more compelling, says international scientific organisation the Endocrine Society.
Yesterday – the same day that a key UN conference on global chemicals management opened in Geneva - the organisation published a review of the evidence from the last five years. This concludes that exposure to chemicals, such as bisphenol A (BPA), phthalates, flame retardants and pesticides such as atrazine and DDT, is associated with an increased risk of diabetes and obesity, infertility, hormone-related cancers, prostate conditions, thyroid disorders and neurodevelopmental issues.
“The evidence is more definitive than ever before – endocrine disrupting chemicals disrupt hormones in a manner that harms human health,” said Andrea Gore, professor and Vacek chair of pharmacology at the University of Texas, and chair of the task force that produced the statement.
“Hundreds of studies are pointing to the same conclusion, whether they are long-term epidemiological studies in humans, basic research in animals and cells, or research into groups of people with known occupational exposure to specific chemicals.
“It is clear we need to take action to minimise further exposure,” said professor Gore. “With more chemicals being introduced into the marketplace all the time, better safety testing is needed to identify new EDCs and ensure they are kept out if household goods.”
In the statement, the society calls for:regulation to ensure that chemicals are tested for endocrine activity, including at low doses, prior to being permitted for use;additional research to infer more directly cause-and-effect relationships between EDC exposure and health conditions;advice for the public and policymakers on “how to keep EDCs out of food, water and the air, as well as ways to protect unborn children from exposure”; andchemists to create products that test for and eliminate potential EDCs.
“The science is clear and it’s time for policymakers to take this wealth of evidence into account as they develop legislation,” said society member Jean-Pierre Bourguignon, professor of paediatrics at the University of Liège.
A global issue
The statement executive summary says, although some countries and US states have banned some EDCs, “the fact that EDCs are ubiquitous makes it a global issue that requires international partnerships among developed and developing nations.”
It also backs the “evidence integration” philosophy of the US National Toxicology Program in deciding whether a chemical may have a health impact.
“When high-quality endocrinological studies demonstrate that a chemical interferes with hormone actionin vivo and in vitro at environmentally (human) relevant concentrations, and when we have a high degree of evidence that these hormone systems are essential for normal development, it is reasonable to infer that these chemicals will produce adverse effects in humans,” says the summary.
To back up its call for the provision of “substantial information” before a chemical can be used in household products, it says BPS, which has been used to replace BPA, “is now shown to have endocrine-disrupting activity on a par with BPA”.
-
(ACC Mentioned) Solid waste disposal and landfill gas collection: Research
Sep 29, 2015 | Journalist's Resource
By Denise-Marie Ordway
Americans make a lot of garbage – 4.3 pounds per person per day on average, which is 59% more than they did in 1960, according to Duke University’s Center for Sustainability and Commerce. A number of efforts are underway locally and nationally to reduce waste, including a new push announced in September 2015 by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the Environmental Protection Agency to get restaurants, food manufacturers and others involved in helping cut food waste in half by 2030.
Making less garbage would save money, prevent pollution and conserve natural resources. It also could help the country curb emissions of methane, a byproduct of decomposition and a potent greenhouse gas that contributes to climate change. Landfills are America’s third largest source of methane, according to the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). About 18% of methane emissions in 2012 came from municipal solid waste landfills.
For decades, the EPA has collected and reported data on the generation and disposal of trash as a way to measure the success of waste-reduction and recycling programs. But three researchers from Yale University and the University of Florida have published a report in the journal Nature Climate Change indicating they have established a more accurate method for calculating how much solid waste the U.S. produces annually. For the September 2015 study, “Estimates of Solid Waste Disposal Rates and Reduction Targets for Landfill Gas Emissions,” Jon T. Powell and Julie B. Zimmerman of Yale and Timothy G. Townsend of the University of Florida analyzed operational data from more than 1,200 landfills over a number of years. In addition to waste disposal quantities, the team looked at the efficiency of landfills’ gas collection systems and the prevalence of landfill fires. The EPA’s Office of Research and Development partially funded the study.
Key findings include:U.S. landfills disposed of a total of 262 million metric tons of municipal waste in 2012 – more than twice as much as the EPA had estimated. The EPA’s nationwide disposal estimate for 2012 was 122 million metric tons. The authors’ calculation also exceeds the amount of municipal waste that the World Bank had projected that the U.S. would have in 2025 by about 4%.Gas collection systems at closed landfills were significantly more efficient than those at open landfills. On average, closed landfills were 17 percentage points more efficient. However, 91% of all landfill methane emissions were generated at open facilities.A challenge to improving gas collection at landfills is the potential for collection methods to cause or contribute to fires. Of the 869 landfills that had active gas collection systems in 2010, 46% experienced at least one fire between 2004 and 2010. During this time period, about 17% of landfills with gas collection systems had multiple fires.U.S. landfills have a median of 34 years of available capacity remaining.
The authors note that the EPA’s “significant under-prediction” of waste disposal quantities raises questions about the limits of the method the agency uses to generate estimates. The differences between the authors’ calculation and those made by the EPA and the World Bank could suggest that other countries also are underestimating their amounts of solid waste. The authors warn that policymakers, researchers and practitioners should focus on helping landfills improve their methane collection systems. “The World Bank projects that the generation rate of municipal waste will increase in nearly all parts of the world, with the largest increases occurring in low-income countries, which are expected to double waste generation rates over 2010 levels by the year 2025,” Powell, Townsend and Zimmerman state. “The collective, consistent global trend towards steady or perhaps increasing rates of landfilling clearly demonstrates that the waste sector warrants additional scrutiny to identify GHG [Greenhouse Gas] emission reduction opportunities at landfills.”
Related research: A 2014 report from the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, “Climate Change 2014: Mitigation of Climate Change,” outlines ways to limit or reverse trends in greenhouse-gas emissions. A 2013 study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, “Anthropogenic Emissions of Methane in the United States,” attempts to quantify methane levels and identify key sources of emissions. A 2011 study by Columbia University’s Earth Engineering Center for the American Chemistry Council, “Energy and Economic Value of Non-recycled Plastics (NRP) and Municipal Solid Wastes (MSW) that are Currently Landfilled in the Fifty States,” seeks to quantify the energy that is contained in discarded materials and its economic value.
- See more at: http://journalistsresource.org/studies/environment/solid-waste-disposal-landfill-gas-collection#sthash.06fGJCcI.dpuf
-
Obama admin cracks down on refinery emissions
Sep 29, 2015 | E&E Greenwire
By Amanda Reilly
Petroleum refineries will be forced to curb toxic air emissions and beef up monitoring under a rule finalized today by U.S. EPA.
Released this afternoon ahead of a court-ordered deadline tomorrow, the rule encompasses New Source Performance Standards and maximum achievable control technology for refineries under the Clean Air Act.
"The common-sense final rule will improve air quality and protect the health of families who live near refineries," EPA said.
There are 142 petroleum refineries considered major pollution sources under the Clean Air Act, as well as seven small area sources.
Among contaminants targeted by the rule: benzene, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, nickel and hydrogen cyanide. EPA said the final rule would reduce emissions of toxic air pollutants by 5,200 tons per year, as well as eliminate 50,000 tons of volatile organic compounds annually.
First proposed in May 2014, the rule requires refineries to upgrade emissions controls and to continuously monitor concentrations of benzene pollution levels at their property lines.
Refiners will be required to encircle their facilities with monitors so that they can detect pollution depending on the wind, install technology that can detect benzene at very low levels and take corrective actions if monitored emissions exceed limits.
"This rule will, for the first time ever, provide important information about refinery emissions to the public and neighboring communities by requiring refineries to monitor emissions at their fence lines," EPA said in a statement sent to environmental justice advocates.
The rule will also put in place a national program to reduce smoking flare emissions and emissions by pressure-release devices. Refineries will be required to monitor flares. The rule will limit flaring events to no more than three events in three years per device, EPA said in its fact sheet.
Storage tanks and delayed coking units also face new emission limitations under the final rule.
The oil industry had opposed the refinery regulation's fence-line monitoring and flaring requirements, warning that the agency's proposal overall would cost refiners more than $20 billion on top of millions of dollars in annual costs.
To address concerns raised by the oil industry about real-time monitoring, EPA's final rule allows refiners to choose alternative methods in the short term that will allow for real-time monitoring in the future.
EPA said the final rule will cost $283 million in capital costs and $63 million annually.
The White House Office of Management and Budget hosted a handful of meetings on the final rule this month, including with key oil industry groups, but the release of the standards has been overshadowed by EPA's more contentious proposal to lower the national ozone standard. The final ozone rule is due out this week under a court order (see related stories).
-
All eyes turn to EPA on new power plant toxics rule
Sep 29, 2015 | E&E Greenwire
By Annie Snider
A long-fought battle over new limits on the amount of toxic metals that can flow from coal-fired power plants into U.S. waterways is slated to come to an end tomorrow, but whether the rule's release will truly halt the fight will depend on what the final regulation looks like.
As new air pollution rules have come online in recent decades, U.S. EPA says some of the pollutants that once went into the sky have simply been shifted to waterways. But wastewater guidelines for power plants haven't been updated in more than 30 years. Today, power plants are the top source of toxic pollutants including mercury, arsenic, lead and selenium, according to the agency.
Environmental groups sued in 2010 to force new technology-based limits for these heavy metals, called effluent limitation guidelines, and EPA settled, agreeing to set them. After a number of deadline extensions, the new rules are due out tomorrow.
What's at stake depends on who you ask.
Industry generally agrees that the limits could use an update but argues that a deviation too far from the status quo could lead to a number of plant closures, especially since the water regulations come at the same time as a number of other new or pending rules.
"The options range from pretty much the status quo to more reasons to shut down coal plants, especially the smaller ones," said Jim Wedeking an attorney with the firm Sidley Austin. "This is going to simply add to the pile of costs and regulatory requirements ... and additional regulations are going to eventually nudge some companies to believe that they're just not worth the hassle."
But environmental groups argue that no less than the health of waterways and the creatures that rely upon them -- including humans -- hangs in the balance.
A 2013 report from a coalition of green groups found that 70 percent of coal-fired power plants' permits had no discharge limits for toxins that are linked with neurological damage, cancer and fish die-offs. More than a quarter of the plants the groups looked at were releasing such metals into waterways that were already declared impaired (E&ENews PM, July 23, 2013).
Moreover, greens contend that the agency is not required to rely as heavily on cost-benefit analyses for this rule as for others and that there should be a heavier thumb on the scale for environmental protection.
The White House Office of Management and Budget has held at least seven meetings with outside groups on the rule since late July.
Now, the administration must thread the needle.
The regulation the agency proposed in 2013 included eight variations on approaches, four deemed "preferred," for managing three main power plant waste streams: fly ash, bottom ash and wastewater from smokestack scrubbers that capture pollutants such as sulfur dioxide -- called flue gas desulfurization (FGD) wastewater.
The new discharge regulations come on the heels of an EPA regulation governing ash disposal and will help shape what industry decides to do with the ash now.
All of the proposed options require fly ash to be dry handled, which would likely mean that plants would turn to landfills to deposit the material rather than coal ash ponds.
But what to do with bottom ash -- the material left at the bottom of the boiler after coal is burned -- has been a flashpoint. Industry argues that it is far less harmful than fly ash and has pushed back hard against requirements for all power plants to convert to dry handling.
Environmental groups argue that it still poses a serious danger to waterways.
"Ultimately, the strength of the final rule, just in terms of the sheer amount of pollution that EPA keeps out of our water, will rely on this stream in particular," said Thomas Cmar, an attorney for Earthjustice's coal program. "How EPA comes down on some of those technical questions about toxicity will ultimately drive what the final rule looks like."
Meanwhile, the proposed rule offered a wide variety of options for how FGD wastewater could be handled. Many of the options would require chemical precipitation and biological treatment -- processes that require large settling tanks and other new infrastructure. Industry, concerned about space limitations at individual plants, has pushed hard for individualized determinations.
Wedeking of Sidley Austin said he could see industry accepting an option that requires such processes at the largest power plants, where industry is willing to make steep investments, but that requiring such approaches across the board would be logistically tricky at plants that don't have much space available.
Aside from which main option EPA chooses, groups are also watching the compliance time frame closely and how the rule deals with legacy wastewater.
But, knowing that no one is likely to get all of what they want, both sides are hopeful.
"We are cautiously optimistic that on the whole the rule is going to require a number of good, environmentally protective things that will require power plants to get rid of a lot of harmful pollution," Cmar said.
Asked if he saw a flood of lawsuits coming, Wedeking said he wasn't so sure.
"There's a way that EPA could do this that largely makes both sides happy," he said. "I just don't know if that's what they will do."
-
EPA to release refinery emissions rule today
Sep 29, 2015 | Politico Pro
By Elana Schor
EPA plans to release new refinery emissions regulations later today, according to a source briefed on the timeframe.
The updated refinery rule aims to slash volatile organic compounds as well as other types of air pollution, while requiring companies to install monitors along their fence-lines.
Industry groups have warned that the proposed version of the rule could cost as much as $20 billion to implement.
The refinery rule is the first of three regulations the agency is rolling out this week ahead of court-mandated deadlines.
-
EPA cracks down on oil refinery pollution
Sep 30, 2015 | The Hill -- E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has issued a new rule designed to slash toxic air pollution generated by petroleum refineries.
The rule, which will be implemented in 2018, requires refiners to reduce toxic air pollutants by 5,200 tons and cut 50,000 tons of volatile organic compounds from the air every year.
It also requires refiners, for the first time, to monitor concentrations of benzene, a chemical that has been linked to health problems, at their sites and inform the public about those levels. If the benzene levels exceed federal regulations, refiners will have to reduce them.
In a statement, the EPA pitched the new rule as a public health necessity.
“These updated Clean Air Act standards will lower the cancer risk from petroleum refineries for more than 1.4 million people and are a substantial step forward in EPA’s work to protect the health of vulnerable communities located near these facilities,” EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy said in the statement.
There are 142 large refineries in the United States, and 6.1 million people within three miles of them.
The agency said the regulation will cost about $63 million to implement annually and that the final standards “will have a negligible impact on the cost of petroleum products.”
The oil industry pushed back against the rule last year during the comment period, saying the standard would be “infeasible” to comply with and warned they could increase emissions of greenhouse gases.
On Tuesday, the American Petroleum Institute (API) said regulators considered some of their concerns and tweaked the rule in some ways. But even so, API said the rule is still too expensive. It predicts it would cost $1 billion to implement and contends refiners were already working hard on reducing their emissions.
“Despite these improvements, regulators need to be thoughtful about the additional impacts of new regulations and added costs to delivering affordable energy to U.S. consumers,” API Downstream Group Director Bob Greco said in a statement.
“Companies have already spent billions of dollars to reduce emissions by installing flare gas recovery and flare minimization systems to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and air quality continues to improve as a result of these voluntary programs and existing regulations,” he added.
-
EPA defends refinery emission rule from industry critics
Sep 29, 2015 | Politico Pro
By Elana Schor
EPA today defended its new refinery emissions rule from condemnation by industry groups that warn the updated pollution controls are too costly.
The American Petroleum Institute and American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers fired off criticism minutes after the final rule's release with a projected price tag of $283 million, with API claiming that its total cost could reach $1 billion.
EPA air chief Janet McCabe described the new controls, which include up-to-date fence-line monitoring for benzene emissions from refineries, as "doable" for the industry and the product of long-running consultations.
Oil and gas producers were less sanguine. AFPM President Chet Thompson observed in a statement that EPA"s rule found refinery emissions "fall well under the significance level for chronic risk and are not a source of harm to surrounding communities," adding that his members "therefore are disappointed by EPA’s decision to require additional expensive new emissions controls that provide little incremental health benefits."
API's downstream director, Bob Greco, hailed changes EPA made to the final update from its proposed version but warned in a statement that “[d]espite these improvements, regulators need to be thoughtful about the additional impacts of new regulations and added costs to delivering affordable energy to U.S. consumers."
-
House GOP revises omnibus bill; committee votes tomorrow
Sep 29, 2015 | E&E Greenwire
By Hannah Northey
Republicans on the House Energy and Commerce Committee today unveiled a revised version of a comprehensive energy package that's up for a vote in the lower chamber tomorrow after weeks of trying to reach a compromise with Democrats.
The 208-page manager's amendment to H.R. 8, the "North American Energy Security and Infrastructure Act of 2015," contains provisions included in an earlier draft that would speed natural gas exports and efficiency, as well as new language aimed at bolstering hydropower and requiring reviews of how the Clean Power Plan would affect the grid.
Committee Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) said the amendment reflects input from several witnesses, including Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz and the private sector.
A Republican aide said the amendment was written by the majority but merits bipartisan support.
"Keeping the lights on and engines running across America should remain a top priority -- we have crafted a thoughtful, substantive package to update our laws for the 21st century that will hopefully end up on the president's desk for his signature," Upton said in a statement.
The language arrives after weeks of debates over a host of policy issues that derailed an earlier markup of the bill. Republicans have said they will follow regular order and take amendments in marking up the legislation starting tonight, but just how much bipartisan agreement can be reached is unclear. A spokeswoman for Energy and Commerce Democrats did not respond to a request for comment today on whether the minority supports the manager's amendment.
Rep. Frank Pallone of New Jersey, the full committee's top Democrat, accused Republicans of abandoning nearly months of "good faith efforts" to reach an agreement on both sides of the aisle and making drastic changes to the energy bill.
Pallone also said he cannot support the bill in its current form.
"With this manager's amendment, the majority has made significant and controversial changes, just hours before we are set to start marking up this bill," Pallone said in a statement. "A number of concerning provisions have been added at the last minute, and this bill continues to ignore the impacts of climate change, which remain the biggest threat to our energy security."Strategic Petroleum Reserve facilities
The package includes language to establish a budget-neutral fund for building, maintaining, repairing and replacing Strategic Petroleum Reserve facilities. It would also set up a competitive grant program for states, local governments and Indian tribes to enhance grid reliability. Under the bill, the Energy secretary would be authorized to sell crude from the SPR to reinvest in energy security projects.
Energy and Power Subcommittee Chairman Ed Whitfield (R-Ky.) said during an interview earlier this month -- after the full committee punted on marking up the bill -- that Republicans had included the SPR provision to appease their Democratic colleagues while receiving little in return (Greenwire, Sept. 17).Clean Power Plan
Yet another section of the bill appears to take aim at U.S. EPA's Clean Power Plan and other major utility-sector rules by requiring the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and the country's grid operators to analyze the effects of complying with any proposed or final "billion-dollar" federal rule that affects electric generating units. Those rules would include environmental rules like the Clean Power Plan, which has become a target for Republicans.
Under the bill, FERC and system operators would need to complete an independent review of how a rule would affect reliability, the nation's energy mix, wholesale markets, and infrastructure like transmission and gas pipelines.LNG
The revised bill also revives a provision that would require the Energy Department to make final decisions on liquefied natural gas exports within 30 days of the conclusion of National Environmental Policy Act review requirements. That requirement was included in an earlier draft of the bill but was dropped before the measure moved through subcommittee in July (Greenwire, July 22).
The energy package that passed the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee in July contains similar language.Building efficiency
The manager's package would repeal part of a 2007 law that required the phaseout of fossil-fuel-generated power in new and significantly renovated federal buildings by 2030. The American Gas Association today said the repeal is accompanied by a compromise negotiated by Sens. John Hoeven (R-N.D.) and Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) that would beef up existing federal building targets.
Additionally, the revised measure includes language from a controversial bill, H.R. 1273, sponsored by Reps. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) and Kurt Schrader (D-Ore.), that would impose procedural requirements on DOE for setting building efficiency codes.
An earlier version of that provision was a sticking point for efficiency advocates, who said it would unnecessarily tie DOE's hands in setting building codes. It's unclear whether those earlier concerns have been addressed.Other efficiency standards
The changes revise and clarify DOE's process for setting energy efficiency standards to allow industry more time for review and input about the data and models the agency bases its decisions on. Under the revised bill, DOE would have to finalize what it will test to ensure new appliances meet the standards -- known as test procedures -- at least 180 days before the end of the public comment period for a proposed rule. The agency would also have to start a rulemaking procedure under the new provisions to ensure accessibility and public availability of its technical and economic assumptions, methods and models used to justify a standard.
Under the Obama administration, DOE has picked up the pace on updating and reviewing energy efficiency standards, some of which were years past the statutory deadline and were the subject of several lawsuits from efficiency advocates and states.
But industry has complained that DOE's accelerated schedule has led to test procedures and rules being finalized in parallel, uncalculated cumulative regulatory impact, and a lack of time to gather sufficient information and feedback from stakeholders -- as exemplified by a recent backlash against a water heater and gas furnace standard (Greenwire, July 14).
The new language also offers more flexibility for DOE to adopt recommendations from consensus agreements developed by working groups of industry, advocates and other stakeholders. And it would repeal several studies including on residential energy efficiency, weatherization and energy saving potential.Hydropower
Unlike an earlier version, the revised language includes provisions to bolster hydropower. It would amend a 2005 law to reauthorize incentives and incentive payments to owners and operators of hydroelectric facilities on existing dams through fiscal 2025.
The language appears to address a sticking point that triggered partisan grumblings in the past by minimizing the amount FERC infringes on property owners and users when issuing hydropower licenses. Rep. Jerry McNerney (D-Calif.) during an interview before the August recess said that he was working with his Republican colleagues on the hydropower provision and that the agency's role was playing into the disagreement.
"I don't think FERC is intentionally lobbying for that; I think what the Republicans want is to have one agency so they can have everyone be responsible to that agency and they can get it done," McNerney said at the time. "I think that's the big point of contention -- it's giving too much authority, decisionmaking authority, to one agency."Carbon capture
Another change is the inclusion of provisions meant to boost fossil fuel research and development, particularly carbon capture, utilization and sequestration (CCUS) efforts to help coal plants burn cleaner.
Originally, House Republicans opted to leave carbon capture out of their broad energy package, focusing instead on helping coal through efforts to roll back Obama administration rules, including a requirement for new coal plants to include carbon capture.
The new language includes an effort to promote large-scale demonstration and commercialization of CCUS. It would also task DOE with evaluating government-backed CCUS projects every two years for accountability.
This week, DOE announced it was returning almost $2.5 billion to the Treasury in unspent research and development dollars from the 2009 stimulus bill, including $1.27 billion from CCUS technology.
Projects like Summit Power Group LLC's Texas Clean Energy Project and Hydrogen Energy California LLC's carbon capture venture were not able to spend all the money allotted by the end of the fiscal year deadline (ClimateWire, Sept. 23; Greenwire, July 10).
In the Senate, both Republican and Democratic versions of broad energy reform legislation include CCUS provisions. Pro-coal lawmakers prefer language championed by Energy and Natural Resources Chairwoman Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska).
-
US Dept. of Energy uses smart manufacturing to boost energy efficiency
Sep 29, 2015 | Metering and Smart Energy International
By Amy Ryan
In the US, the Department of Energy is offering US$70m in funding for a new institute focusing on smart manufacturing research and development.
The primary focus of the Innovation Institute on Smart Manufacturing will conduct research and development into reducing the cost of sensors, controls, platforms and modelling for manufacturing by 50%.
The institute is also aimed at developing technologies that will increase energy efficiency by a minimum of 15% and improve energy productivity by at least 50%.
Based on statistics from the US Department of Energy, the manufacturing sector in the US consumes approximately 79% of total industrial energy use, reports EnergyEfficiencyMarkets.com.
Commenting on the creation of the facility, Ernest Moniz, DOE secretary, said: "Smart manufacturing is a key information technology approach to unlocking energy efficiency in manufacturing.
“These technologies will make industries from oil and gas to aerospace and food production more competitive with intelligent communications systems, real-time energy savings and increased energy productivity.
Moniz added: “Energy intensive industries, such as steelmaking, could see a 10-20% reduction in the cost of production, making products such as solar panels and chemical materials, such as plastics, as well as the cars and other products they go into, more affordable for American consumers.”
The Innovation Institute on Smart Manufacturing will operate a collaborative effort, bringing together federal agencies, companies, universities and other academic institutions, in a bid to bridge the gap between applied research and product development.US DOE investment in distributed energy
In other US Department of Energy news, the government agency’s Loan Programmes Office (LPO) has announced that it will grant US$1bn in loan guarantees for commercial-scale distributed energy projects.
Rooftop solar, energy storage and smart grid technology solve key energy challenges, but their deployment is blocked by commercial lenders’ cautious approach to investing in these technologies without a "solid history of credit performance and commercial operation", stated a local media report.
The announcement by the DOE’s Loan Programmes Office will help overcome these barriers and speed up deployment of distributed energy technologies.
The LPO will also provide guidance with regard to the types of financial structure it may implement to support distributed energy resources projects.
-
Low oil prices hurt even energy markets not burning it
Sep 29, 2015 | E&E Energywire
U.S. power generators' shares just had their steepest weekly decline in six years. Though they usually don't burn the stuff, it's attributed to low oil prices.
Oil prices dropped 23 percent in three months. The natural gas associated with it is now so cheap globally that the United States is having a hard time finding buyers for it.
Speculation that the gas will be trapped in the already-full American market drove gas futures' seasonal levels to a 14-year low. Stocks in power appear to be tied to the sinking oil and gas market, riding it down to a three-year low last week.
"Power price futures have fallen with natural gas prices amid concern about excess shale gas supply, in part because low oil prices may reduce price competitiveness and demand for U.S. liquefied natural gas exports," said Stacy Nemeroff, a Bloomberg utilities analyst. "Investors may also be selling off power stocks as part of a strategy to reduce overall commodity exposure."
A Bloomberg Intelligence index of generators fell 12.9 percent last week. And power stocks slid further yesterday, with Bloomberg's index falling over 1 percent and Dynegy Inc. falling 2.2 percent.
Seeing the worst decline last week was Talen Energy Corp., with a 17 percent drop.
Steven Fleishman, a Wolfe Research LLC analyst, said things don't look as if they'll be getting better soon.
All this while only 1 percent of the nation's electricity comes from burning petroleum (Chediak/Malik, Bloomberg, Sept. 25). -- MB
-
Shell Exits Arctic as Slump in Oil Prices Forces Industry to Retrench
Sep 29, 2015 | The New York Times
By Clifford Krauss and Stanley Reed
As oil prices have continued their steady decline this year, rig after rig has been shut down, costing thousands of jobs in the United States. Yet major oil producers have been loath to pull the plug on their most ambitious projects — the multibilliondollar investments that form the backbone of their operations. Until now. On Monday, Royal Dutch Shell ended its expensive and fruitless nineyear effort to explore for oil in the Alaskan Arctic — a $7 billion investment — in another sign that the entire industry is trimming its ambitions in the wake of collapsing oil prices. The announcement was hailed as a major victory by environmentalists, who had fought the project for years, only to be stymied by pressure inside and outside the industry to increase domestic oil production. But at a time when global markets are glutted with oil, thanks to the advent of new drilling techniques, the announcement also confirmed major oil companies’ increasing willingness to turn their backs on the most expensive new drilling prospects in the Gulf of Mexico and suspend plans for new projects in Canada’s oil sands. The industry has cut its investments by 20 percent this year and laid off at 9/30/2015 Shell Exits Arctic as Slump in Oil Prices Forces Industry to Retrench The New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/29/business/international/royaldutchshellalaskaoilexplorationhalt.html 2/5 least 200,000 workers worldwide, roughly 5 percent of the total work force. Companies also have retreated from less profitable fields in places like the North Sea, West Africa, and some shale prospects in Louisiana and North Dakota. American oil companies have decommissioned more than half of their drilling rigs over the last year, and production is beginning to drop in the United States. Even exports from Saudi Arabia are beginning to ebb because of a glut in its Asian markets. “The decision by Shell to abandon its Arctic drilling program for now primarily reflects the realities of lower global oil prices,” said Michael C. Lynch, president of Strategic Energy and Economic Research, who advises oil companies and investment banks. “When prices go down, the oil industry shortens their list of projects in development by removing the most expensive ones.” This year, industry executives held out hope that the oil price, which has fallen more than 50 percent to below $50 a barrel since last summer, would recover before too long. But in recent weeks, a growing number of executives have warned that the downturn could last well into 2016 and perhaps beyond, especially if the Iran nuclear deal leads to a flood of new oil on world markets. With demand dwindling, the current market of 94 million barrels a day has roughly two million barrels in surplus supply. Now, economic forces have scuttled what environmentalists had tried to do for years in the courts and with raucous protests in canoes and kayaks, arguing that drilling in the dark, icefilled Arctic was dangerous to polar bears and other sea life. “This is a victory for everyone who has stood up for the Arctic,” said Annie Leonard, executive director of Greenpeace, a leader in the protests against Shell. “There is no better time to keep fossil fuels in the ground, bringing us 9/30/2015 Shell Exits Arctic as Slump in Oil Prices Forces Industry to Retrench The New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/29/business/international/royaldutchshellalaskaoilexplorationhalt.html 3/5 one step closer to an energy revolution and sustainable future.” When Shell first leased a huge portion of Alaska’s Chukchi and Beaufort Seas after they were opened up by the George W. Bush administration, oil prices were soaring. Middle classes in China and the developing world were demanding more liquid fuels every year. At the same time, a growing number of oil fields around the world were aging and in decline. Then, just as Shell began its Alaskan effort, the shale revolution began in the United States. Independent oil companies found ways to fracture hard rocks to produce oil, nearly doubling domestic production. That surprise development, along with the slowing Chinese and European economies, drove the oil price down just as Shell returned to drilling in the Chukchi this year. The environmental movement delayed Shell at every turn, but the 2010 BP disaster in the Gulf of Mexico pushed the company off several years as well. Industry experts say that there is plenty of oil in offshore Alaska and that renewed efforts are still possible if and when the oil price recovers. But environmentalists declared a triumph. Shell has spent more than $7 billion on an effort that has been plagued by blunders and accidents involving ships and support equipment, reaching a climax with the grounding of one of its drilling vessels in December 2012 in stormy seas. Even after ConocoPhillips and the Norwegian oil giant Statoil suspended their Alaskan offshore drilling operations, Shell carried on, asserting that the Chukchi Sea potentially represented the next great global oil find. But the company announced that its one well drilled this summer “found indications of oil and gas, but these are not sufficient to warrant further exploration.” In a statement, it also acknowledged “the high costs associated with the project and the challenging and unpredictable federal regulatory environment in offshore Alaska.” 9/30/2015 Shell Exits Arctic as Slump in Oil Prices Forces Industry to Retrench The New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/29/business/international/royaldutchshellalaskaoilexplorationhalt.html 4/5 The decision represented a major turnaround from the faith in the project that Ben van Beurden, Shell’s chief executive, expressed as recently as August. At the time, he said that Shell’s holdings in the Alaskan Arctic could be “multiple times” more bountiful than the enormous fields in the Gulf of Mexico. “We can’t be driven by today’s, tomorrow’s, or next year’s, or last year’s oil price,” he said. Shell’s efforts to drill in Alaska have long seemed quixotic. It came closest to finding oil in 2012 when it drilled two shallow wells but had to stop short of deeper oil zones after several bizarre accidents, including the crushing of a containment dome during a vital test. This summer, a storm whipping though the Arctic Ocean forced Shell to suspend drilling, and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service made a regulatory ruling that cut back the company’s drilling plans. After a Finnish icebreaker hired by Shell struck an uncharted shoal in the Aleutians in July, it was forced to go to Portland, Ore., for repairs. Protesters there tried to block the vessel, going so far as to suspend themselves from a bridge over the Willamette River. Shell’s current venture into the Alaska offshore began under Mr. van Beurden’s predecessors, and he has always been concerned about the project’s costs and risks. Soon after he became chief executive in 2014, he temporarily halted drilling in Alaska because of legal and regulatory issues. He came around to the view that the potential bonanza was worth the expense and headaches, but now that drilling has produced an unexpectedly poor result, he may have decided to follow his original instincts and call a halt. “This first dry well seems to have been the trigger for the C.E.O. to pull the plug on their Alaska exploration campaign,” said Oswald Clint, an analyst at Bernstein Research in London. The Alaska operations have cost billions of dollars. Shell said the value of 9/30/2015 Shell Exits Arctic as Slump in Oil Prices Forces Industry to Retrench The New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/29/business/international/royaldutchshellalaskaoilexplorationhalt.html 5/5 Alaska drilling on its balance sheet was $3.1 billion and that it had a further $1.1 billion in contractual commitments, probably for items like drilling rigs. The company said it would take writeoffs as a result of the decision to halt drilling. “Shell continues to see important exploration potential” in offshore Alaska, Marvin E. Odum, president of Shell Oil, said in a statement. “However, this is clearly a disappointing outcome.” Energy experts have expressed skepticism about the economics of Arctic drilling for some time. “The number of special challenges, unforeseen things you have to deal with, long supply chains, just make it very difficult to have the same level of confidence around costs as you do for development elsewhere,” said Andrew Slaughter, executive director of the Deloitte Center for Energy Solutions
-
Shell departure 'a punch in the gut' for Alaska
Sep 29, 2015 | E&E Energywire
By Margaret Kriz Hobson
Alaskans are struggling to understand the full impact of Royal Dutch Shell PLC's Sunday announcement that it is abandoning its Chukchi Sea leases because it found too little oil and gas to warrant further exploration.
Shell's decision to scrap its U.S. Arctic drilling program shocked and angered Alaska state officials and Native group leaders who have been among the oil giant's most vocal supporters.
Alaska House Speaker Mike Chenault (R) spoke for many state oil supporters in describing Shell's decision as "a punch in the gut."
Ben Nageak, a Democratic state House member from Barrow, called Shell's action "heartbreaking" for North Slope residents who had hoped to benefit from the company's Chukchi Sea oil development.
Noting that production is steadily declining at the 40-year-old Prudhoe Bay oil fields, Nageak said Shell's operation could have provided "another economic boom that could have propelled our young people and their children to better futures."
Arctic Slope Regional Corp.'s president and CEO, Rex Rock Sr., shared those sentiments.
"We are looking for solutions on how we continue to sustain our local economies to support our communities," Rock said. "Absent any responsible resource development onshore and offshore, we are facing a fiscal crisis beyond measure."
Shell's departure is especially a blow for company employees and contractors who have worked on the Arctic drilling program over the last seven years. This summer, Shell had roughly 400 workers in its Anchorage office and 3,000 contractors working in the field on the Chukchi operation.
Shell officials acknowledged yesterday that the company's decision to leave Alaska is "hugely disappointing."
"We had hoped to write the next chapter of Alaska's oil and gas history, and that won't happen -- at least not now, not with Shell," said Shell Alaska spokeswoman Megan Baldino.
Although Shell is closing down its Arctic drilling operation, it has not relinquished its Beaufort or Chukchi leases. In fact, the company continues to push federal regulators for an additional five years to explore on those properties.Regulatory blame
In announcing its decision to stop drilling in the Arctic, Shell took a swipe at the Obama administration, criticizing the federal government's "challenging and unpredictable federal regulatory environment in offshore Alaska."
The Alaska leaders are also blaming the federal government for the demise of the company's Chukchi Sea oil development operation. Shell's action is certain to intensify efforts by Alaska leaders to gain greater control over resource development in the state.
Alaska Gov. Bill Walker (I) argued that the outcome of Shell's $7 billion Arctic oil development program might have been different if the company had been given more time and greater leeway to explore.
"It's certainly disappointing that they could not drill multiple wells in that amount of time, given the amount of money" the company spent, Walker said in a press conference. "Typically, around the world, they would have drilled multiple wells. That was not allowed."
Regulators initially allowed Shell to simultaneously drill two wells about 9 miles apart at its Chukchi unit. But regulators later withdrew that decision based on a 2013 marine mammal rule that requires a minimum well spacing of 15 miles (E&ENews PM, June 23).
Walker said he is pressing President Obama to open federal lands in the state to new exploration. He also plans to meet with Interior Secretary Sally Jewell in the near future "to emphasize the importance of putting oil in the pipeline," he said, referring to the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System.
"I contacted the White House this morning to set up meetings to discuss the potential impact of Shell's decision, as well as Alaska's need to explore in the 1002 area," located in the northern region of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, he said.
Alaska Republican Sen. Lisa Murkowski called for the Obama administration to work with Alaskans to develop "a predictable and sensible regulatory system both onshore and offshore that encourages companies to make major investments in our future."
Murkowski, who chairs the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, is lobbying regulators to open the door to new oil and gas development in the National Petroleum Reserve-Alaska, off the Beaufort Sea coast, and in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
She also recommended that the Interior Department extend the lease terms for Shell and other companies that own federal lands in the Beaufort and Chukchi seas, as well as hold new lease sales in the American Arctic.
-
Exuberance and Disappointment at Shell’s AboutFace in the Arctic
Sep 30, 2015 | The New York Times
By Kirk Johnson
SEATTLE — For many Alaskans, Monday was “a huge disappointment, a really big disappointment,” as Gov. Bill Walker put it, reflecting on the tax revenue, jobs and investments that may be lost as Royal Dutch Shell abandons its plan to drill for oil in the Alaskan Arctic. But for many people here in Washington State and elsewhere, it was a day of exuberance, one that offered evidence that the harbor blockades, city resolutions, lawsuits and relentless cries of “Shell No!” had helped force Shell’s hand. “This is testament to the fact that when people come together they have power to move mountains,” said John Sellers, a local climate activist who organized a “mosquito fleet” of kayakers who trained together and then surged out into Puget Sound over the summer to fight Shell. The economies and cultures of Alaska and Washington have long been intertwined and dependent. Many Alaskan fishing fleets today are based in Seattle and pay their wages here; in decades past, gold miners disembarked from Puget Sound for the gold fields of Alaska and Canada. The result is a kind of mutual orbit with each side circling the other, in mutual benefit or frustration. On Monday, the glaring differences were everywhere. 9/30/2015 Exuberance and Disappointment at Shell’s AboutFace in the Arctic The New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/29/us/exuberanceanddisappointmentatshellsaboutfaceinthearctic.html 2/5 In Alaska, Shell’s announcement that it would suspend drilling in the Chukchi Sea after a test well showed less promise than hoped for was one more blow to a state where energytax revenues — which pay for most of the budget — are drying up as prices and production have fallen. More than half of the state’s $5.2 billion this year could not be collected, forcing budget cuts and a deep dive into a state savings account. The TransAlaska Pipeline that made the state rich after its completion in the 1970s is pumping only a quarter of its oil capacity. “It’s tough times,” said Kara Moriarty, the president of the Alaska Oil and Gas Association, who said that rumors of layoffs in the next few weeks or months, in both the corporate offices of oil companies in Anchorage and in the drilling fields, were flying everywhere. “It’s an incredibly sobering day,” she added. Economists in Alaska said that questions of psychology and morale were now crucial: If Shell was bailing out, they said, other companies might get cold feet as well in investing or hiring or exploring. Political pressure would also intensify, they said, particularly in advance of a special session of the Legislature called for next month to consider state investment in a natural gas pipeline. “This will probably not help all the people who have been saying it’s the decade of the Arctic,” said Gunnar Knapp, director of the Institute of Social and Economic Research at the University of Alaska. Dr. Knapp, a professor of economics, said that about $7 billion remains in a savings account set up by the Legislature for emergencies, but that the state is going through the fund at the rate of about $3 billion a year. “This is what is causing a political crisis,” he said. Seattle’s mayor, Ed Murray, a Democrat, said the future looked very different — and hopeful — to him. “The people of Seattle stood up to oppose the use of our city as a base for 9/30/2015 Exuberance and Disappointment at Shell’s AboutFace in the Arctic The New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/29/us/exuberanceanddisappointmentatshellsaboutfaceinthearctic.html 3/5 expanded Arctic drilling,” he said in a statement. “With today’s announcement, it is time to move forward.” Political leaders in Seattle — including a City Council member, Mike O’Brien — who joined the socalled kayaktivists in facing down Shell, said that the tactics honed and used here to defeat the company had already become a template for climate activists elsewhere. Tinyboat flotillas for climate protest are being planned or have already occurred in the Seine River in Paris and waterways in Switzerland and Southern California. The premise of this new approach, they said, is that since the effects of climate change are global, climateprotection battlefields are everywhere as well. “The world we’re heading into is very different from the world we’re coming out of,” Mr. O’Brien said, “and cities like Seattle are not open to doing business with folks like Shell if their business model is extracting oil from the Arctic.” Shell said that a failure to find enough oil in its test well, along with federal regulatory uncertainty, prompted its decision, not protests or attacks on its public image. But leaders of environmental groups said they believed the tactical decision made earlier this year — to wage the fight against Arctic drilling here in Seattle, where there is little oil but lots of environmental passion — had made a big impact in focusing the nation’s attention. “The problem was never directly about Shell coming to Seattle, it was a problem with them leaving and going to the Arctic,” said Emily Johnston, one of the kayak flotilla organizers. She said there was no way of knowing what influence, if any, the protests had on Shell’s decision, but she and other demonstrators said they felt certain that their work had succeeded in keeping pressure on local elected officials and the Obama administration. That pressure, they said, helped foster the regulatory uncertainty that Shell found untenable. A spokesman for Shell, Curtis Smith, said in an email that it was too early 9/30/2015 Exuberance and Disappointment at Shell’s AboutFace in the Arctic The New York Times http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/29/us/exuberanceanddisappointmentatshellsaboutfaceinthearctic.html 4/5 to say what presence the company might want to maintain in Seattle’s port, but suggested that there might not be much. “Our staging needs in the Pacific Northwest will be commensurate with the amount of activity we have planned for future Arctic exploration,” he said. Mr. Walker, Alaska’s governor, said in an interview that any benefit from Shell’s program was years in the future at best. But in the short term, he said, he feared ripple effects on the many subcontractors supplying Shell with goods or services. About 600 to 800 people were also working directly for Shell in Alaska at any given time in rotating shifts, according to the oil and gas association. Alaska’s unemployment rate was 5.5 percent in August, just slightly higher than the national rate of 5.2 percent. “It will have an impact on companies, no question about it,” said Mr. Walker, a former Republican who was elected last year as an independent. What happens next is also likely to become a battlefield. Climate protesters here said that with Shell now out of the way, the momentum and pressure would continue on the Obama administration to close the door on any further Arctic drilling. “We want to put him in a moral dilemma for the rest of his presidency,” said Mr. Sellers, the Seattle protester. Mr. Walker said he would fight harder than ever to get more oil drilling permitted, especially in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, which the Obama administration partly shut down to exploration earlier this year. “We need to get some oil in the pipeline, and we need to get it as quickly as possible,” Mr. Walker said. A version of this article appears in print on September 29, 2015, on page A13 of the New York edition with the headline: Exuberance and Disappointment at Shell’s AboutFace in the Arctic.
-
Jeb Bush slams Clean Power Plan in new energy proposal
Sep 29, 2015 | E&E Climatewire
By Evan Lehmann
Jeb Bush will propose repealing President Obama's climate rules in an energy plan being released today at an oil and natural gas company near Pittsburgh.
The former Republican governor of Florida describes the Obama administration as a heavy-handed regulator that goes beyond reasonable steps to protect the environment. "Some [regulations], such as Obama's Carbon Rule, need to be stopped in their tracks," the plan says, according to a summary obtained by ClimateWire.
The plan doesn't highlight renewable energy, a subject Bush spoke about earlier this month when he told supporters in New Hampshire that he believes disruptive technologies could eventually reshape the nation's energy landscape.
But it does call for the repeal of all energy tax breaks, including those on fossil fuels.
"We must create a level playing field for all energy sources including, but not limited to, nuclear, renewables, coal, natural gas, oil and alternative fuels," Bush says in a post on Medium being released this morning, according to The Wall Street Journal. "We unnecessarily drive up energy costs on Americans when we play favorites and suppress the dynamism of free markets."
Renewable energy accounts for about 10 percent of the nation's electricity.
Bush's plan also calls for ending the export ban on U.S. oil, allowing states to drill for oil and gas with less federal interference, and approving the Keystone XL pipeline.
The plan is being released as Bush trails in national polls behind Donald Trump, Ben Carson and Carly Fiorina, a trio of candidates with little of the public policy experience described by Bush's supporters as the cornerstone of his campaign. Bush also trails Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, who has previously called for the repeal of Obama's climate regulations, called the Clean Power Plan.
Bush's plan doesn't offer any surprises, some Republican analysts said.An outdated Keystone XL push?
George "David" Banks, a former adviser with the Council on Environmental Quality under George W. Bush and a past aide to Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), is confident that Bush's campaign will put together a comprehensive approach to energy. Banks is not associated with the campaign.
He said efforts to export U.S. oil and gas can resonate with GOP voters because the issue links energy and foreign policy, and it can be viewed as reducing the influence of Russia and Iran by eroding their role as energy suppliers.
The Keystone XL pipeline, meanwhile, is less salient in the energy debate than it was during the last election cycle, he and another GOP analyst said. The expansion of domestic oil production and other factors prompted government energy analysts to predict that the United States would import about 14 percent of its oil from foreign countries by 2020, Banks said. That could erode national security reasons for the pipeline.
"It's not as important as it was," said Banks, now executive vice president with the American Council for Capital Formation. "If I were part of a campaign, I'd probably say, 'Let's not focus so much on Keystone. Let's talk about the creation of a North American energy market to help bolster U.S. energy security.'"
Another Republican energy expert was blunter. The lack of details and the emphasis on Keystone left this person frustrated about the direction of Bush, who is viewed as perhaps having the firmest grasp on policy among the candidates.
"If all you can come up with is what Michele Bachmann came up with last cycle, why should you be taken seriously?" said the analyst, who is familiar with the speech that Bush will give today at Rice Energy Inc.
Bush's speech comes as some within his party are urging Republicans to take an active role in the debate around clean energy and climate change.Poll finds majority GOP support for carbon fees
Polling released yesterday by the ClearPath Foundation, a nonprofit organization created by Jay Faison, who plans to spend $175 million to reach Republicans on climate issues, found that 72 percent of Republicans support accelerating the use of clean energy. It also found that a majority of GOP respondents believe that climate change is happening and that humans are contributing to it.
"Outright dismissal of climate change is very limited, even among conservative Republicans," said Kristen Soltis Anderson of Echelon Insights, which helped conduct the polling. "Where the debate sort of falls apart is you have a lot of this alarmist rhetoric that seems to push away some of these conservatives ... who are willing to acknowledge that climate change is happening and there's a role, even if a limited one, that mankind's activity is playing in it."
The survey found that policies that allow homeowners to install solar panels and sell excess power to utilities are favored by 87 percent of Republican respondents. Additionally, 66 percent of Republicans surveyed support requiring utilities to provide some clean energy to customers, and 58 percent support increased government funding for research into clean energy technology.
"I think it's pretty clear from this poll that Republicans support clean energy. When the discussion is about climate change, that's when they get their backs up. But when it's about the benefits, the innovations, and the idea that clean energy is a future energy, that resonates," said Glen Bolger, a GOP pollster with Public Opinion Strategies.
The survey also found that carbon fees and tax incentives are supported by a majority of Republicans. One question about whether power plants should have to pay for their greenhouse gas emissions and then return some of it to consumers was favored by 54 percent of GOP respondents. Among all respondents, 68 percent expressed support.
The poll surveyed 1,200 registered voters nationwide at the end of August. Its margin of error is 2.8 percentage points.
-
Jeb Bush to back oil exports in energy plan
Sep 29, 2015 | E&E Greenwire
By Jennifer Yachnin
Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush today will call for ending the ban on U.S. oil exports as well as easing restrictions on natural gas exports when he unveils his energy policy proposals at an event near Pittsburgh.
Bush, who is vying for the GOP presidential primary nod, is set to speak at Canonsburg, Pa.-based Rice Energy Inc. this afternoon and will publish an essay on the website Medium about his plans.
"Lifting the ban on crude oil exports and liberalizing natural gas exports would create hundreds of thousands of additional jobs and significantly lower net energy costs," Bush wrote in a preview of his plan provided to the Associated Press.
In addition to backing export measures, Bush will reiterate his support for constructing the Keystone XL pipeline and his opposition to a series of Obama administration environmental regulations.
Bush last week announced a series of regulatory reforms he would back if elected to the White House, including the rejection of the Clean Power Plan, which aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from existing power plants; the coal ash rule, which addresses the disposal of coal combustion waste; and the Waters of the U.S. rule, which aimed to clarify which waters fall under the protection of the Clean Water Act (E&ENews PM, Sept. 22).
Bush also is expected to repeat his vow to focus on increasing domestic energy production in his efforts to expand the economy if elected to the White House (Greenwire, April 8).
"More domestic energy leads to more jobs, higher wages, lower gas prices and smaller electricity bills," Bush said in the preview. "In short, it means more money in people's pockets, allowing them more freedom to make more choices for themselves and their children."
-
Freeport-McMoRan hits new oil in deepwater Gulf
Sep 29, 2015 | E&E Energywire
By Nathanial Gronewald
A new oil discovery in the Gulf of Mexico's deepwater frontier was announced yesterday.
The oil and gas arm of global mining giant Freeport-McMoRan Inc. told investors Monday that a rig it contracted with encountered a volume of hydrocarbons worthy of developing further at its Horn Mountain Deep well. The development is in the Mississippi Canyon region of the Gulf just off the southeast tip of Louisiana.
The company said it plans to complete the well and tie back its production to existing Gulf facilities, forgoing the need for another platform. Freeport-McMoRan thinks it can bring the discovery online by the first part of 2017, with initial production estimated at about 30,000 barrels of oil equivalent per day, including liquids and natural gas.
Oil production from the Gulf of Mexico is expected to peak in 2017. The addition of the Horn Mountain Deep well and the anticipated addition of a major Chevron Corp. offshore project in 2018 could cause future production estimates to be adjusted.
In a release, the company said this latest discovery leaves executives there convinced there is even more oil to be found in the vicinity.
"The positive results at Horn Mountain Deep and our geophysical data support the existence of prolific Middle Miocene reservoir potential for several additional opportunities in the area, including the 100-percent-owned Sugar, Rose, Fiesta, Platinum and Peach prospects," the company said.
Freeport-McMoRan also provided an update on a separate Gulf of Mexico project. It said its Holstein Deep project is running on schedule and should be online by the middle of next year.
Despite the collapse in crude oil prices, drilling in the Gulf continues, though at a much more subdued pace.
The offshore rig count in the Gulf is off by about half from where it was at the height of 2014. Last week, oil field services firm Baker Hughes Inc. reported that the rig count for U.S. federal offshore waters actually increased slightly, with the industry adding two rigs to the Gulf of Mexico compared with a week prior.
-
DOE seeks to focus national lab research on top cyber, grid priorities
Sep 29, 2015 | E&E Energywire
By Peter Behr
A unique collaboration among the Energy Department's national laboratories is seeking to close high-priority technology gaps facing the U.S. power grid, as it deals with disruptive operating changes and cybersecurity threats.
Tomorrow is the deadline for federal laboratories to submit bids for research grants to initiate the program. The grants span a wide agenda of technology issues, including integrating renewable energy generation, storage devices, electric vehicles and "smart buildings" into power networks; improving cybersecurity of utilities' vendor supply chain; and giving control room operators more tools to manage the grid in emergencies. The grants are projected to total nearly $200 million in all over the next three fiscal years. DOE's 17 laboratories have an annual budget of about $13.5 billion.
The project calls for the creation of a single operating plan between DOE headquarters and the laboratories.
"I've only worked here 35 years, and I've never seen something like that, so we're pretty excited about that," said Carl Imhoff, manager of electricity infrastructure at the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL) and lead lab representative on the consortium.
The push to achieve better coordination among the labs is a response to DOE's initial Quadrennial Energy Review, issued last April, which made grid modernization a top priority.
It also follows a report by Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz's national labs task force warning that a "proliferation of duplicative and burdensome [administrative] requirements are choking the DOE National Laboratories."
Citing tensions "throughout the laboratory complex" over program administration, the task force recommended that the labs' work be tied more closely to DOE and national priorities. Proposals to reform the labs' management have bipartisan support in Congress, but there isn't bipartisan consensus on most national energy priorities (E&E Daily, June 8).
To steer the project, DOE has created the Grid Modernization Laboratory Consortium, which will set priorities and award the research grants.
The grants, due to be awarded in November, will launch the first three years of the project as a single, integrated strategy across DOE, said Imhoff. "It calls for major new approaches, including making cyber and general security and resilience more tightly coupled to grid modernization," he said in an interview.
Imhoff's colleague, Paul Skare, PNNL chief cybersecurity program manager, added, "We are collaborating collectively to make sure that we are able to work in partnership with DOE to identify where the gaps are in the research."
The national labs' agendas on cyber research displays both the ambition and diversity of the projects, some of which are being promoted by the Department of Homeland Security's Transition to Practice (TPP) commercialization program (EnergyWire, July 13).
For example, the CodeDNA technology developed at the Johns Hopkins University Applied Physics Laboratory assigns "fingerprints" to families of attack malware and looks for similarities in software code to find new attacks.
DigitalAnts, created at PNNL, employs mobile sensors that "roam" like foraging ants within interconnected computers and devices in a network, gathering and evaluating key operational indicators such as memory or processing activity. When a sensor spots activity out of the ordinary, it triggers an alarm, PNNL said. Sandia National Laboratories' WeaselBoard technology addresses cyber vulnerabilities in grid PLCs (programmable logic controllers) on grid networks. WeaselBoard, when added to a network, analyzes communications between PLCs to spot unusual activity and detect threats.
An underlying assumption behind the QER and the new laboratory project appears to be that the changes underway in the electric power sector are irreversible, no matter what happens to the debate in Washington and the states over the Obama administration's Clean Power Plan to cut power plant carbon emissions.
More solar and wind generation and microgrids are coming, the DOE plans anticipate. Linkages between electricity supply and natural gas deliveries will grow tighter. Smart meters and sensors, and other "intelligent" digital devices on the grid's edge, now numbering in the tens of thousands, will increase to millions, Imhoff said, causing a huge increase in diagnostic information flowing to grid operators.Tides of data
The tide of data changes the nature of the operating emergencies grid operators are likely to face, and the technologies they will need to cope with fast-moving crises.
When the high-voltage network in eastern Ohio was nearing a "cliff edge" collapse on Aug. 14, 2003, grid operators for FirstEnergy Corp. in Akron were flying blind, ignorant of the escalating signs of the approaching Northeast blackout, DOE's investigation of the event concluded. Their control center did not have a map board representing major lines and plants on the wall facing the operators, and critically, their balky control room alarm system and system tracking software failed. But the operators did not know the alarms weren't working.
As the information flow into control rooms escalates, the problem may be too much information, Imhoff and Skare said.
"Much of what we do today is anywhere from 10 seconds to 6 minutes in retrospect in terms of risk and what is that is doing to the system, whether it is hit by physical attack or cyberattack or storms, or just equipment damage," Imhoff said. But digital data is generated in milliseconds. "We're trying to switch that paradigm to more real-time predictive tools that leverage new math and advanced computation, where we can actually see where the system is heading and better detect how to protect it."
Skare said a second challenge is developing a system of alarms that guides operators toward actions that give the grid the best chance of overcoming threats, whether from nature or humans.
The triggering event of the Three Mile Island nuclear plant emergency in 1979 was the failure of a critical pressure control valve, allowing the escape of cooling water required to keep the reactor core from a meltdown, the accident investigation determined. Within seconds, the plant's alarm systems, including a loud horn and more than 100 flashing lights on the control panels, signaled the escalation of the accident. But they only confused operators, said Nuclear Regulatory Commission historian J. Samuel Walker. "I would have liked to have thrown away the alarm panel," one operator said later.
The national laboratory research project must look for ways of presenting information about increasingly complex grid emergencies in ways the operators can handle, Skare said.
"We will be looking at how the brain processes that information, which then identifies which type of data should be put on the screen [to] get the results as fast as you can," he said. "What are the most critical things to pay attention to? Then you have to do the additional analysis to say, how do I absorb that information in my brain" as fast as possible.
Charles Hanley, senior manager of grid modernization at Sandia National Laboratories, said, "It's too early to tell how well this experiment will turn out, but it's definitely a worthy endeavor."
It shows DOE's recognition of the need for a concerted effort to coordinate technology research on the grid's future, dealing with national security threats to a critical infrastructure and opening potentially tremendous economic opportunities if the United States can lead the way on these fronts, Hanely said.
"There are definitely opportunities for false starts and inefficiencies" in the grant process, he said. "Hopefully, it will lead to new, prioritized funding on a national scale."
Part of the project will support innovative grid projects in states such as California, Vermont and New York, DOE said.
"There is going to be a significant challenge, in fact, in how we track these opportunities. In general, the continuing bureaucratic pressures being placed on the labs are indeed affecting morale in a bad way," Hanley added. "But this project really works to enhance morale and cut through some of the bureaucratic overhead issues."
Industry and Association News
Chemical Management News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Energy and Environment News
Transportation News - There are no clips to report at this time
Add recipients
Suggested