Preview Newsletter
PM ACC 1/5/2015
-
(ACC Mentioned) North Carolina Joins Effort to Recycle More Plastic Wraps, Bags, Film
Jan 5, 2016 | Recycling Today
By Recycling Today Staff
The American Chemistry Council (ACC) has announced that LyondellBasell, with U.S. headquarters in Houston, has joined the Flexible Film Recycling Group (FFRG), a collaboration working to double the recycling of postuse polyethylene film by 2020. -
(ACC Mentioned) Film Recycling Group Brings More Players on Board
Jan 5, 2016 | Plastics News
By Jim Johnson
A group dedicated to promoting polyethylene film recycling has a new member and a new collaborator. -
(ACC Mentioned) Reduce, Reuse, Recycle is the Theme for GreenerPackage.com’s Top 10 of 2015
Jan 5, 2016 | Greener Package
By Anne Marie Mohan
Most-read articles center around commercial applications that reduce the use of petroleum-based plastics, the reuse of packaging materials, and recycling. -
(ACC Mentioned) Federal Microbead Ban Officially Signed into Law
Jan 5, 2016 | Waste Dive
By Kristin Musulin
st Week, President Obama approved and signed the Microbead-Free Waters Act of 2015, which completely bans the manufacturing or sale of personal-care products and cosmetics which include plastic microbeads. -
Senate's Chemical Control Bill Still Falls Short
Jan 5, 2016 | MinnPost
By Kathleen Schuler
Among the lists of "to dos" for Congress prior to the holiday recess was passing S.697, a bipartisan bill to update the 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), the federal law regulating industrial chemicals in the United States. -
FDA Clamps Down on Food Packaging Substances
Jan 5, 2016 | E&E - Greenwire
By Sam Pearson
The Food and Drug Administration is moving to bar some chemicals used to keep food grease from sticking to packaging, following the lead of many companies that have already stopped using the products. -
Gas Line Gets Go-Ahead in Unspoiled Corner of Texas
Jan 5, 2016 | E&E - Energywire
By Mike Lee
Federal regulators tentatively approved a natural gas pipeline through the pristine Big Bend area of Texas after months of protests from landowners and environmentalists. -
South Dakota Again Approves Keystone XL Permit
Jan 5, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
South Dakota regulators on Tuesday approved permits for the Keystone XL pipeline, clearing the way for the development of the pipeline there should federal officials ever allow the project to move forward. -
(ACC Mentioned) Doubts Raised About Green Claims of New Belgian Waste-to-Energy Plant
Jan 5, 2016 | Huffington Post
By Julie Ann Aelbrecht
Port of Antwerp proudly announced last May that the Saudi company Energy Recovery Systems (ERS) will invest 3.7 billion euros (roughly U.S. $4 billion) in a green project at one of its docks. -
Sierra Club Sues EPA over State Sulfur Dioxide Plans
Jan 5, 2016 | E&E - Greenwire
By Sean Reilly
The Sierra Club is suing U.S. EPA to force the agency into formally acknowledging that 13 states have failed to turn in plans explaining how they'll meet the ambient air quality standard for sulfur dioxide, a step that would require the agency to wade in on their behalf. -
Clean Energy Groups Urge EPA To Extend ESPS Incentive Program Timeline
Jan 5, 2016 | InsideEPA
By Abby Smith
Renewable and energy efficiency groups are urging EPA to extend by two years the time during which projects would be eligible to generate credits for the early incentive program under the agency's existing power plant greenhouse gas rule, a move that... -
Methane Leak Will Spew for Months More in Calif.
Jan 5, 2016 | E&E - Energywire
California's upscale Porter Ranch community has been smelling natural gas additives since a nearby leak started Oct. 23 -- and those who stayed will smell it for months to come. -
Can an Invisible Gas Leak Draw Attention to a Climate Problem?
Jan 5, 2016 | National Journal
By Jason Plautz
As Californians struggle to address a massive leak of natural gas that’s forced the evacuation of thousands of homes and left countless residents feeling nauseous, green groups are hoping that the incident draws more attention to what’s been a literally invisible problem. -
No 'Silver Bullet' to Pinpoint Leaks, But One Tool Emerges
Jan 5, 2016 | E&E - Climatewire
By Gayathri Vaidyanathan
Leaks from oil and gas equipment in California's San Joaquin Valley are releasing at least 2.4 kilotons per year of methane, a potent greenhouse gas, into the atmosphere. -
Despite Protests, Oil Industry Thrives Under Obama Energy Agenda
Jan 5, 2016 | Bloomberg (In The Chicago Tribune)
By Jennifer A. Dlouhy and Bloomberg
The nation's biggest fossil-fuel trade group will deliver its annual state-of-the-industry report Tuesday. It's sure to include a whack at PresidentBarack Obama -- even though oil and gas have flourished on his watch. -
More LNG Shipments Could Help U.S. Economy, but There's a Catch -- Report
Jan 5, 2016 | E&E - Energywire
By Jenny Mandel
Significantly expanding U.S. natural gas exports would be "marginally positive" for the domestic economy, according to a new study commissioned by the Department of Energy that will likely serve as a green light for continued export approvals. -
DOE Finalizes 13 Standards with Post-Holiday Spurt
Jan 5, 2016 | E&E - Greenwire
By Christa Marshall
In a post-holiday spurt, the Department of Energy moved to finalize efficiency standards for commercial and industrial pumps, beverage vending machines, residential boilers, and spray valves used in restaurants as part of President Obama's Climate Action Plan.
Industry and Association News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation News
Energy and Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) North Carolina Joins Effort to Recycle More Plastic Wraps, Bags, Film
Jan 5, 2016 | Recycling Today
By Recycling Today Staff
The American Chemistry Council (ACC) has announced that LyondellBasell, with U.S. headquarters in Houston, has joined the Flexible Film Recycling Group (FFRG), a collaboration working to double the recycling of postuse polyethylene film by 2020.
The FFRG represents materials suppliers, brand owners, retailers and recyclers. Its Wrap Action Recycling Program (“WRAP”) works directly with states, municipalities and retailers to increase plastic film recycling through store drop-off programs.
Additionally, North Carolina has announced that it will be the second state to officially partner with WRAP. North Carolina’s decision comes on the heels of successful WRAP programs launched in Wisconsin and in Vancouver, Washington.
“We are thrilled to welcome LyondellBasell and North Carolina in our efforts to significantly increase the recycling of flexible wraps and bags,” says Shari Jackson, director of FFRG. “These great partnerships expand our footprint and our ability to educate consumers about the wide range of polyethylene film packaging that can be recycled at major grocery and retail stores.”
“Polyethylene is a valuable material and resource even after its initial use,” says Jim Clark, LyondellBasell polyethylene director, Americas. “We look forward to working with FFRG and the WRAP partners to see that more postuse polyethylene packaging gets recycled.”
"Much of the infrastructure to recycle polyethylene wraps and bags is already in place," says Scott Mouw of the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (NCDEQ). “Working through WRAP will expedite our efforts to educate residents about opportunities to recycle and divert more valuable plastics and reduce waste.”
Through this program, WRAP and North Carolina will implement a series of campaign initiatives using effective communications tools and best practices to support community outreach efforts on plastic film recycling. The program also will work to encourage commitment by more retailers to collect a broader mix of polyethylene film materials from consumers. Additionally, the program will work to expand collection and recycling of commercial film (pallet wrap and transport packaging) from small to midsized businesses.
GreenBlue® Sustainable Packaging Coalition (SPC) and the Association of Plastics Recyclers (APR) join the NCDEQ and the FFRG in launching the new North Carolina WRAP initiative.
Plastic film is one of the fastest growing areas of recycling with collection surging by 11 percent in 2013 to 1.14 billion pounds, according to the “2013 National Postconsumer Plastic Bag & Film Recycling Report.” This marks the highest annual collection of plastic film—74 percent increase—since the survey began in 2005.
Currently, more than 90 percent of Americans have access to programs that collect polyethylene wraps and bags, primarily at major grocery and retail stores. These programs collect a variety of common packaging items, such as bags from bread, produce and dry cleaning, along with wraps from beverage cases, napkins, paper towels, plus shipping pillows, shopping bags and bubble wrap.
Recycled polyethylene film can become durable outdoor lumber for decks and fences, shopping carts or new packaging.
Founding members of the FFRG include Dow Chemical, ExxonMobil, Chevron Phillips, Berry Plastics, Wisconsin Film and Bag, Sealed Air Corp., SC Johnson, Trex and Avangard.
-
(ACC Mentioned) Film Recycling Group Brings More Players on Board
Jan 5, 2016 | Plastics News
By Jim Johnson
A group dedicated to promoting polyethylene film recycling has a new member and a new collaborator.
LyondellBasell Industries has joined the Flexible Film Recycling Group of the American Chemistry Council. And the state of North Carolina has agreed to work with the group.
FFRG represents material suppliers, brand owners, retailers and recyclers while its Wrap Action Recycling Program works directly with governments and retailers to promote film recycling through drop-off locations.
“We are thrilled to welcome LyondellBasell and North Carolina in our efforts to significantly increase the recycling of flexible wraps and bags,” said Shari Jackson, director of FFRG, in a statement. “These great partnerships expand our footprint and our ability to educate consumers about the wide range of polyethylene film packaging that can be recycled at major grocery and retail stores.”
FFRG was established to bring together representatives from throughout “the polyethylene value chain” to raise public awareness and create programs to recycle PE film, according to the group.
North Carolina follows Wisconsin as the second state to work with WRAP.
“Much of the infrastructure to recycle polyethylene wraps and bags is already in place," said Scott Mouw, of the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality, in a statement. “Working through WRAP will expedite our efforts to educate residents about opportunities to recycle and divert more valuable plastics and reduce waste.”
The Sustainable Packaging Coalition and the Association of Plastics Recyclers also will work with North Carolina and FFRG in the new WRAP initiative there.
“Polyethylene is a valuable material and resource even after its initial use,” said Jim Clark, LyondellBasell’s polyethylene director, Americas, in a statement.
LyondellBasell joins more than a dozen companies that are already part of FFRG, including Berry Plastics Group Inc., Bemis Co. Inc., Procter & Gamble Co., and Trex Co. Inc.
-
(ACC Mentioned) Reduce, Reuse, Recycle is the Theme for GreenerPackage.com’s Top 10 of 2015
Jan 5, 2016 | Greener Package
By Anne Marie Mohan
Most-read articles center around commercial applications that reduce the use of petroleum-based plastics, the reuse of packaging materials, and recycling.
In 2015, visitors to the GreenerPackage.com website demonstrated their desire to learn about the range of options available for pursuing more sustainable packaging. Among the most read articles of the year are several that highlight CPG’s use of alternative materials such as sugarcane, bamboo, and mushrooms to replace petroleum-based plastics, the reuse of recycled materials, and a recycling initiative that puts the focus on flexible film.
10. Bread bag is 36% bio-based: Eureka! Organic Bread switches to bread bags made of 36% sugarcane-based PE in introducing its products to the East Coast market for marketing and sustainability benefits.
9. Gillette razor packs made of renewable-fiber molded tray: Bamboo and bulrush form the basis of new packaging for Procter & Gamble’s Gillette Fusion ProGlide razor.
8. Method is first with 100% RPET detergent bottle: Method overcomes design and manufacturing challenges to create a 53-oz 100% RPET bottle with strong shelf appeal and environmental benefits for its new laundry detergent.
7. Keurig coffee-to-go pods are recyclable: A new hot beverage pod from Keurig, the K-Mug, joins two other pod formats for the Keurig 2.0 brewing system that are now available in recyclable polypropylene.
6. Spring water is packed in more than just a bottle: Spring water company JUST Beverages selects a hybrid package that offers the environmental benefits of a paper carton along with the functionality of a plastic bottle.
5. P&G puts focus on PE film recycling: P&G joins the American Chemistry Council’s Flexible Film Recycling Group to develop and encourage local recycling programs. P&G R&D Manager Stephen Sikra explains why.
4. Brilliant move to mushroom packaging: Lighting manufacturer Rich Brilliant Willing switches to protective packaging made from mushroom ‘roots’ for its wall sconces, enabling faster packing, damage-free shipping, and a more sustainable packaging solution.
3. Biopolymers in packaging—some hurdles, but strong signs of growth: Europe has led the charge when it comes to embracing bio-based packaging. But new and intriguing applications are surfacing in other parts of the world, including Asia and North and South America.
2. Apple purchases 36,000 acres of timberland for packaging: In mid-April, tech giant Apple revealed that it had purchased up to 36,000 acres of American timberland in Maine and North Carolina in an effort to preserve forests while developing a source for eco-friendly packaging for its products.
1. Top five packaging trends for 2015: Reported Ian Lifshitz in early 2015, packaging—irrespective of industry sector—was continuing to undergo an array of important changes that brands and senior-level executives were advised to watch in the coming year.
-
(ACC Mentioned) Federal Microbead Ban Officially Signed into Law
Jan 5, 2016 | Waste Dive
By Kristin Musulin
Dive Brief:
Last Week, President Obama approved and signed the Microbead-Free Waters Act of 2015, which completely bans the manufacturing or sale of personal-care products and cosmetics which include plastic microbeads. The aim of the new law is to protect the nation's waterways from plastic pollution.Microbeads are defined as "any solid plastic particle that is less than 5 millimeters in size," according to the bill. These plastic particles — which easily enter water streams and are nearly impossible to dissolve — had been polluting many beloved bodies of water including the Great Lakes. The law banning the manufacturing of such products will go into effect on July 1, 2017. Sales of products containing the microbeads will be prohibited as of July 1, 2019.
Dive Insight:
“We commend leaders in Congress and the president for working together on the Microbead-Free Waters Act of 2015," stated the American Chemistry Council in a press release. "This new law reflects national product stewardship efforts by the personal care industry to phase out the use of solid plastic microbeads used in personal care exfoliating products."
The International Campaign Against Microbeads in Cosmetics has compiled a list of nearly 100 products that will eventually need to remove microbeads, including products from Johnson & Johnson, Procter & Gamble, and Rite Aid.
Now that the law will be recognized nationally, the federal bill voids any existing legislation in states that have already enacted microbead bans, including California, Connecticut, Illinois, New Jersey, and Wisconsin. These state laws call for a slower timeline and leave loopholes, according to Plastics News.
Obama did not issue any remarks about the ban, however the plastics industry has shown great support for the decision.
-
Senate's Chemical Control Bill Still Falls Short
Jan 5, 2016 | MinnPost
By Kathleen Schuler
Among the lists of "to dos" for Congress prior to the holiday recess was passing S.697, a bipartisan bill to update the 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), the federal law regulating industrial chemicals in the United States. There is broad consensus among business, advocacy and government organizations that reform of this law is long overdue. TSCA fails to give the EPA the authority it needs to protect the public from everyday exposures to toxic chemicals in common household products. It has only regulated five chemicals in its nearly 40-year history and has required testing on only 200 of the more than 80,000 chemicals currently on the TSCA inventory.
On the evening of Dec. 17, with no advance notice, the U.S. Senate passed TSCA reform legislation by unanimous consent. The legislation is an updated version of the Senate bill, S.697 (known as Udall/Vitter), not previously made public. A very different and much preferred version of TSCA reform, the TSCA Modernization Act, passed the House in June.
Problems with the Senate bill
Although improved from earlier versions, the Senate bill still has serious problems. In a rollback of current regulatory authority, the legislation makes it more difficult for EPA to identify and intercept imported products containing a toxic chemical, leaving a large segment of the marketplace weakly regulated. This includes many of the toys and other articles that parents placed under the tree this Christmas.
Another problem with the bill is the designation of “low priority” chemicals, requiring EPA to approve them and allow them to be put into consumer products without a thorough safety review. In addition, there are numerous bureaucratic requirements placed on EPA, such as a complete review of the TSCA inventory, that divert scarce resources from EPA’s core work of identifying and restricting harmful chemicals.
However, the fatal flaw in the Senate bill is the timing of pre-emption of state action on chemicals of concern. States will be blocked from taking action while EPA studies a chemical, creating a regulatory void that could leave the public unprotected. This will tie the hands of states like Minnesota that have been in the lead in protecting public health from unnecessary toxic chemical exposures. Over the past few years Minnesota has passed bills to protect public health from exposure to mercury, formaldehyde, BPA, toxic flame retardants, lead, cadmium and to require a listing of other chemicals of concern in children’s products.
States free to act in House version
The House bill, on the other hand, does not pre-empt state action until EPA makes a final determination on a chemical, a much more reasonable approach. The House bill supports a robust partnership between state and federal regulators in protecting the public from toxic chemical exposures.
Because the timeline for EPA action on chemicals is slow in both bills, we should at least be assured that our government retains the ability to prevent toxic imports and that states can continue to enact policies to protect their citizens when the federal government has not yet taken action. As members of Congress reconcile the House and Senate bills to arrive at a version that lands on President Barack Obama's desk, I urge lawmakers to address the weaknesses in the Senate bill by adopting the best provisions of the House and Senate bills to craft a reformed TSCA that will truly protect the health of our citizens.
Kathleen Schuler, MPH, is Healthy Kids and Families program director at Conservation Minnesota.
-
FDA Clamps Down on Food Packaging Substances
Jan 5, 2016 | E&E - Greenwire
By Sam Pearson
The Food and Drug Administration is moving to bar some chemicals used to keep food grease from sticking to packaging, following the lead of many companies that have already stopped using the products.
FDA said in an order published in the Federal Register yesterday that the chemicals could no longer be considered safe in food applications beginning next month. The agency acted in response to a petition filed by environmental groups in 2014.
The three chemicals covered by the petition are specific types of perfluorinated chemicals, or PFCs, a class of compounds under scrutiny from scientists and environment and public health groups for their bioaccumulative properties (Greenwire, May 1, 2015).
FDA said research shows the chemicals no longer have a reasonable certainty of no harm, the standard required under food safety laws.
While lauding the administration's move, environmental groups pressing for change also described the new restrictions as coming far too late.
The move is "an important first step -- but just a first step -- toward improving the safety of our food supply," Erik Olson, director of the health program at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said in a statement.
In public comments, the Society of the Plastics Industry described the chemicals as "an old technology that has since been replaced by alternative materials."
In a statement, Environmental Working Group President Ken Cook said the FDA's previous inaction had rendered the ban of little impact.
"Industrial chemicals that pollute people's blood clearly have no place in food packaging," Cook said. "But it's taken the FDA more than 10 years to figure that out, and it's banning only three chemicals that aren't even made any more."
Cook added that the delay was "another egregious example of how, all too often, regulatory actions under the nation's broken chemical laws are too little and too late to protect Americans' health."
For decades, companies used the chemicals in products like microwave popcorn bags, sandwich wrappers and pizza boxes, but FDA said it received public comments that chemical companies had stopped using the substances.
EWG said it believed the substances had not been manufactured in the United States since 2011. Companies could still switch to similar chemicals that may have similar hazardous properties, Cook said.
Joining NRDC and EWG on the petition were the Center for Food Safety, the Breast Cancer Fund, the Center for Environmental Health, Clean Water Action, the Center for Science in the Public Interest, the Children's Environmental Health Network and Improving Kids' Environment.
-
Gas Line Gets Go-Ahead in Unspoiled Corner of Texas
Jan 5, 2016 | E&E - Energywire
By Mike Lee
Federal regulators tentatively approved a natural gas pipeline through the pristine Big Bend area of Texas after months of protests from landowners and environmentalists.
The Federal Energy Regulation Commission found no significant harm from Energy Transfer Partners LP's plan to build a pipeline across the U.S.-Mexico border near Presidio, Texas, according to a draft environmental assessment released yesterday.
FERC hasn't decided whether its authority extends past the 1,093-foot section of pipeline that crosses the border. Energy Transfer has argued that the bulk of the 143-mile route is an intrastate line that's not subject to federal regulation. If FERC agrees, that would leave oversight of the majority of the project in the hands of the Texas Railroad Commission, which has a history of lax regulation.
Construction could start in a few months, a spokeswoman for Dallas-based Energy Transfer said in an email. The line is scheduled to be in service in 2017.
It's "the worst possible outcome for the preservation of the natural and cultural resources of the Big Bend region but at the same time not surprising or unexpected," Mattie Matthaei, a member of the Big Bend Conservation Alliance, said in an email.
The 42-inch Trans-Pecos line would move as much as 1.4 billion cubic feet of gas a day from a storage and trading hub at Fort Stockton, Texas, to the border, where it would connect to pipelines servicing power plants in Chihuahua and other Mexican states. The route would pass close to the towns of Alpine and Marfa before reaching the border, where Energy Transfer plans to bore under the Rio Grande (EnergyWire, July 27, 2015).
Energy Transfer said the pipeline will provide $7.1 million a year in local property taxes and that its impact on local residents will be minimal. The only compressor station, for instance, will be near Fort Stockton, according to the company's website.
The Big Bend region, named after a curve in the Rio Grande, has been largely isolated from urbanization and oil and gas production and has become a haven for tourists and outdoor lovers. Several films have been set in the area, including "Giant" and "No Country for Old Men."
The Big Bend Conservation Alliance has rallied environmentalists, ranchers and local governments against the project, raising concerns about the project's impact on the fragile desert and the need to condemn private property for the pipeline.
It wasn't immediately clear yesterday how the opponents could keep fighting the pipeline.
Comments on the environmental assessment are due Feb. 3, and the FERC commissioners could vote on the project after that. They have the option to approve or reject the project, modify it, or send it to a hearing before an administrative law judge, Tamara Young-Allen, an agency spokeswoman, said in an email.
-
South Dakota Again Approves Keystone XL Permit
Jan 5, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
South Dakota regulators on Tuesday approved permits for the Keystone XL pipeline, clearing the way for the development of the pipeline there should federal officials ever allow the project to move forward.
The state Public Utilities Commission voted 3-0 Tuesday to approve the pipeline’s path through the state, the Associated Press reports. The commission originally issued the license in 2010, but it lapsed after four years of no construction.
Keystone developer TransCanada has said it is still hoping to build the 1,200-mile pipeline despite President Obama’s rejection of the project in November. Because Keystone crosses an international border, it requires a presidential permit.
The permits issued in South Dakota on Tuesday clear the way for the pipeline’s construction in the state should federal policy ever change.
That prospect is likely contingent on a change of control of the White House: Obama opposes the project, as do the Democratic candidates looking to replace him. Republicans running for the White House overwhelmingly support the pipeline.
Keystone faces a string of other challenges, as well, including a lawsuit from homeowners in Nebraska. In November, after Obama rejected the project, TransCanada withdrew its request that the Nebraska Public Service Commission approve that portion of the pipeline’s route.
-
(ACC Mentioned) Doubts Raised About Green Claims of New Belgian Waste-to-Energy Plant
Jan 5, 2016 | Huffington Post
By Julie Ann Aelbrecht
Port of Antwerp proudly announced last May that the Saudi company Energy Recovery Systems (ERS) will invest 3.7 billion euros (roughly U.S. $4 billion) in a green project at one of its docks. The Saudi company's waste-to-chemical plant will turn unrecyclable plastic into "green" urea and ammonia through gasification, which could be fed into a cluster of chemical companies already present at Antwerp's port. The Dutch company Howa International as its sole vendor for the waste.
The Port of Antwerp lauded the project as 40 percent more energy-efficient than a classical waste incinerator, but doubts about how green the project actually is have quickly developed. Underwhelming results from previous attempts at similar projects, doubts about the project's feasibility report and the uncertain final destination of the plant's products all make the grounds for port management's and city officials' initial euphoria seem less and less certain.
The Plant
When completed, the plant is expected to process roughly 3.5 million tons of unrecyclable plastic waste into around 1.2 million tons of green urea and 645,000 tons of green ammonia every year. Located on a now empty plot on the port's Delwaide dock, the plant would become part of Antwerp's cluster of petrochemical companies and form a closed system that, its constructors claim, will remove a major potential pollutant from the Dutch environment.
One day after the project was announced, it was reported that a feasibility study had been completed. The study was done by the Flemish Institute for Technological Research (VITO), an organization focusing on clean technology and sustainable development that is listed on ERS's website as a "partner."
The study is not available to the public, but according to VITO, the plant would combine a gassing installation with a chemical synthesis plant for ammonia and urea, which will be linked in a closed system without either a chimney or exhaust--meaning without any emissions. A VITO analyst, Ivo Vanderreydt, said the environmental impact study showed that "the ERS concept for waste management scores better than classical waste burning and electricity production." But there are two problems with this conclusion. First, the chemical composition of plastic contains more carbon than that of urea and ammonia combined, so even if there is no chimney, a significant amount of carbon will be left over from the process. The second problem is the destination of the urea and ammonia themselves.
The Questions
Urea is used as an artificial fertilizer, and, according to the chemicals industry trade site, chemicals-technology.com, the urea produced by the plant would be transported out of the port by 35 ships every year. The green ammonia, meanwhile, would be fed into the port's chemical cluster with pipelines, eliminating the need to transport the chemicals. But the ultimate impact of the plant's products remains unclear. When asked, the Port of Antwerp did not comment on the chemicals' final destination.
A recent study by Bond Beter Leefmilieu (BBL), an umbrella group of Belgium's environmental organizations, sheds more light on the plant and raises more questions about how it will function in reality. According to study in the project's second phase, the plant would be processing three times more waste than initially announced.
ERS has called the Antwerp plant "the first of its kind," and while innovative technology is crucial in the recycling sector, the plant's unprecedented size brings great uncertainty. According to BBL, worldwide, there is no incinerator or gasification plant that processes 3.5 million tons of waste per year, which makes it extremely difficult to assess its impact and feasibility.
Similar waste gasification plants have been built in the past, the most notable of these constructed by Swiss company Thermoselect. According to a 2013 study by the American Chemistry Council, however, these facilities have been far less cost-efficient than promised. "Several have been closed due to economic pressures [specifically] the price of energy and high costs of operation] and pressures from the environmental community in Europe," the report noted. Two of those facilities, built in Germany and Italy in the 1990s, are now closed.
Asked to comment on the Bond Beter Leefmilieu study, the Port of Antwerp declined to comment on the size of the plant and said the negotiations with ERS will continue. In a statement, the port said, "The public debate will be held once the full picture is available. The matter concerns an enormous investment with a lot of stakeholders. Submitting a clear project is more important than timing."
The plant's construction will begin in a couple of years, but whether the project will be as "green" as initially announced remains to be seen.
This story was originally published on projourno.org.
-
Sierra Club Sues EPA over State Sulfur Dioxide Plans
Jan 5, 2016 | E&E - Greenwire
By Sean Reilly
The Sierra Club is suing U.S. EPA to force the agency into formally acknowledging that 13 states have failed to turn in plans explaining how they'll meet the ambient air quality standard for sulfur dioxide, a step that would require the agency to wade in on their behalf.
By law, states had to turn in those "nonattainment area state implementation plans" by last April and EPA should have issued a "finding of failure" within six months for any state that didn't meet the deadline, the environmental group said in the suit filed last week in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.
The complaint asked Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly for an order compelling EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy "to perform her mandatory duties by an expeditious certain date."
EPA lawyers have not yet replied in court. In an email this morning, spokesman Nick Conger said the agency "works closely with states to ensure their clean air plans are up to date" and will respond after reviewing the suit.
Among other health effects, EPA links exposure to sulfur dioxide with increased asthma symptoms and tightening of lung passageways. The current 75 parts per billion ambient air quality standard for the chemical was set in 2010.
The lawsuit says 25 areas around the United States -- including Detroit, Indianapolis and St. Bernard Parish near New Orleans -- are currently designated as in nonattainment with the 2010 standard.
The required state plans are supposed to spell out how they'll bring those areas into compliance by late 2018. Once EPA issues a failure finding, however, the agency has two years to promulgate a federal implementation plan, the lawsuit said.
Besides Michigan, Indiana and Louisiana, states that have failed to submit their plans are Arizona, Iowa, Kentucky, Montana, New Hampshire, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, West Virginia and Wisconsin, said the suit.
-
Clean Energy Groups Urge EPA To Extend ESPS Incentive Program Timeline
Jan 5, 2016 | InsideEPA
By Abby Smith
Renewable and energy efficiency groups are urging EPA to extend by two years the time during which projects would be eligible to generate credits for the early incentive program under the agency's existing power plant greenhouse gas rule, a move that would bolster the sector's benefits from the recently extended renewable energy tax credits.
In recent comments on EPA's proposed Clean Energy Incentive Program (CEIP), a voluntary element the agency added to its final existing source performance standards (ESPS) rule to encourage early action to deploy zero-emitting resources, the groups charged that the program's current form would stunt the growth of clean energy markets by causing project delays.
“[A]s currently structured, the [incentive program] is likely to disrupt the development pipeline of renewable and efficiency projects because it will incent delay in the development of new projects and stall the progression of projects in early planning stages,” the Advanced Energy Economy (AEE) says in Dec. 15 comments to EPA's non-regulatory docket for the incentive program.
The group adds: “This disruption is likely to stunt the growth of these markets, result in unnecessary and costly delays to electric system decarbonization, and decelerate the impressive progress that the renewable and efficiency industries have realized in driving down the costs of advanced energy technologies.”
To the extent the groups can persuade EPA to boost the program's incentives for renewable power, that would intensify the impact of the recent fiscal year 2016 budget deal that provided five-year extensions, and subsequent phase-downs, for wind and solar energy tax breaks that are seen as critical for the sectors' development.
Advocates had already hailed the tax inventive extensions as a “bridge” for the renewable sector until EPA's power sector rule begins to act as a regulatory incentive for the technology. Any further boost through EPA's separate incentive program would overlap with such tax incentives, strengthening the push toward zero-emitting power generation.
As proposed, EPA's CEIP takes effect in 2020. Projects that commence construction or operation after a state submits its final compliance plan to EPA -- or after Sept. 6, 2018, for states subject to a federal plan -- would be eligible to generate credits during 2020 and 2021, before the rule's compliance period begins in 2022.
The incentive program would award additional allowances or emissions rate credits that states could apply toward their emissions targets for wind and solar projects and energy efficiency projects in low-income areas. Wind and solar projects receive one credit for each megawatt hour (MWh) of generation during the two-year period, with half of the credit coming from the state's pool and the other half from a matching federal pool.
Efficiency projects in low-income communities receive two credits for each MWh of energy savings, with one credit coming from the state and the other from the matching federal pool.
However, with most states expected to file only initial plans in September 2016 and request a two-year deadline extension for filing a final plan, renewable and efficiency groups have expressed concern that developers will delay projects already in the works to accrue benefits from the CEIP.
Two-Year Extension
In their recent comments, AEE and several other efficiency and renewable groups urge EPA to extend the CEIP timeline, lengthening the period during which projects can generate credits by two years, to begin in 2018. That would align with the date when most states are expected to submit final plans.
The groups are also urging EPA to move up the project eligibility date, allowing projects that commence construction after Sept. 6, 2016 -- the date that states must submit initial plans and indicate an intent to participate in the CEIP -- to be eligible to generate credits.
“Given the typical development cycle of large renewable installations and energy efficiency initiatives, it would benefit both power generating entities and renewable/efficiency entities to begin working toward [Clean Power Plan (CPP)] compliance through CEIP incentives on a more flexible timeline and as early as possible,” AEE writes.
It is unclear, however, what effect the recent bipartisan spending deal will have on the likelihood EPA will extend the CEIP's timeline, or whether the deal allayed any concerns of the clean energy groups, whose comments on the CEIP were filed before the spending deal was reached.
Environmental groups hailed the budget deal, announced Dec. 16 and enacted days later, as providing crucial policy support for wind and solar before the CEIP begins to give the industries a regulatory boost.
“For the first time in the U.S. renewables industry's history, it will have roughly seven years of predictable support, which will cement the tremendous gains wind and solar have made over the last decade,” Nathaniel Greene of the Natural Resources Defense Council wrote in a Dec. 16 blog post. “This will also bridge the industry into the early incentives offered as part of [EPA's rule], providing even greater stability.”
The budget deal includes a long-term phaseout of the production tax credit (PTC) for wind energy, reinstating an already-expired credit for 2015 and 2016 and then gradually reducing the credit before it expires at the start of 2020. It also includes language sought by the solar industry that would generally extend for five years, with a similar phase-down, an elevated solar power investment tax credit (ITC) that was slated to be sharply reduced at the end of 2016, as well as a separate-but-related credit for residential solar units slated to end after 2016.
“The extension of all these important clean energy incentives is a big deal in and of itself, but it's also huge for what it means in terms of our long-term climate goals,” Greene wrote. “The action on tax credits will ensure that clean energy is prioritized as a part of the Clean Power Plan, and will dramatically accelerate the power sector's progress toward making the deeper long-term pollution cuts we need.”
'True Potential'
Nevertheless, solar and wind groups are pushing hard for EPA to move up the CEIP's project eligibility date to September, when states' initial plans are due, to diminish any potential incentives for project developers to delay ongoing efforts, and to ensure that the incentive program fulfills EPA's goals.
“Changing the CEIP timeline is the single most important change EPA can make in order to ensure that the CEIP lives up to its true potential,” the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) writes in Dec. 15 comments.
AWEA notes that its members are already reporting that “some utilities have frozen power purchase agreement discussions in light of the uncertainty surrounding CEIP eligibility and the timing of eligibility under the current proposal.” In addition, the wind group says there would be a “condensed development period” after most states likely submit final plans in 2018 and projects race to be operational by the CEIP's 2020 start date.
“This condensed development period could also cause spikes in demand and increase costs, thus reducing the ability of the CEIP to help achieve CPP compliance in an efficient and cost-effective manner. These challenges could be even greater if the CEIP timeline causes a near-term slump in wind energy markets leading up to September 2018 by incentivizing delay, because such a slump would likely result in layoffs and the closure of manufacturing facilities,” AWEA writes.
Further, AWEA and the Solar Energy Industries Association (SEIA) argue that without a change in the project eligibility date and an extension of the credit generation period, it is unlikely that states will utilize the full 300 million short ton-allowance pool EPA proposed for the CEIP.
SEIA notes in Dec. 15 comments that the construction timeline for utility-scale solar projects is usually two to three years minimum, meaning that with a project eligibility “commence construction” date of September 2018, many utility-scale projects may only be completed in time to generate credits by late 2020 or 2021.
SEIA even recommends that EPA move the CEIP's project eligibility date even earlier, to Oct. 23, 2015, when the ESPS was published in the Federal Register.
Energy efficiency advocates also argue that the pool of federal incentives may go underutilized, due to both the short timeframe and EPA's decision to limit eligible efficiency projects to only those in low-income areas.
AEE in its comments “emphasizes that addressing the CEIP timeline -- by moving up the start dates for project eligibility and credit generation eligibility . . . -- will not increase the overall scale of the CEIP program. . . . Rather, it will merely ensure that the CEIP is actually able to fulfill its purpose 'to drive the widespread development and deployment of . . . technology . . . essential to longer term climate strategies,' by affording developers and project providers with clear incentives to pursue new projects and a realistic amount of time to start generating or saving energy.”
-
Methane Leak Will Spew for Months More in Calif.
Jan 5, 2016 | E&E - Energywire
California's upscale Porter Ranch community has been smelling natural gas additives since a nearby leak started Oct. 23 -- and those who stayed will smell it for months to come.
This is because of Southern California Gas Co.'s time-consuming solution and the nature of the well itself.
The well is a used-up oil well that's storing gas for about 22 million customers in the Los Angeles Basin. The ruptured pipe is nearly 62 years old, and while it was converted from oil to gas in 1973 and upgraded in 1979, Jason Marshall, chief deputy director of the California Department of Conservation, said the age could have been a factor.
Marshall said SoCal Gas already tried plugging the hole with a brine and mud mixture, but first a blockage and then the pressure stopped it from finishing the job. The new tactic is to drill two relief wells, which start 1,500 feet out from the well, angle thousands of feet into the soil to meet up with the 7-inch-diameter pipe, and then parallel it for another 6,000 feet. At that point, it would angle into the concrete casing near the well's base, or capstone, and start plugging the well with the mud and brine from underneath. The relief well is there in case the first misses the pipe or in case the first can't deliver enough plugging mixture.
This process will take months because while drilling, the company has to set aside full days to bring out the drill and send down sensors to make sure it's on target. Marshall said trying to connect with that 7-inch pipe "is a little like trying to hit a quarter-inch target from the distance of a football field."
The first relief well was 4,000 feet deep last week after it was started Dec. 4. Marshall expects SoCal Gas to start drilling the second well by Jan. 20. SoCal Gas estimated that the well wouldn't be plugged until late February or even March.
In the meantime, thousands have evacuated from the area, and the state's Air Resources Board reported that the rate of escaping gas has been cut in half as SoCal Gas directs some reserves elsewhere, easing the pressure (Thomas Curwen, Los Angeles Times, Jan. 2).
-
Can an Invisible Gas Leak Draw Attention to a Climate Problem?
Jan 5, 2016 | National Journal
By Jason Plautz
As Californians struggle to address a massive leak of natural gas that’s forced the evacuation of thousands of homes and left countless residents feeling nauseous, green groups are hoping that the incident draws more attention to what’s been a literally invisible problem.
Natural gas is largely methane, a potent greenhouse gas that traps 20 times as much heat as carbon dioxide. So in addition to making people sick, the California leak could have serious consequences for the climate.
The leak from a natural-gas-storage field in Aliso Canyon, outside of Los Angeles, has been spewing since October, sending tons of methane into the atmosphere. And Southern California Gas Company, the utility that owns the facility in question, says it could be months before it’s stopped up.
California has estimated that the leak is emitting between 40 and 64 tons of methane every hour, and that the leak is increasing the state’s total emissions of the potent greenhouse gas by a quarter. As of Monday, more than 77,000 metric tons of methane had escaped, the equivalent of more than 732 million gallons of gasoline, according to the Environmental Defense Fund.
The leaking gas well has forced the evacuation of more than 2,000 families from the Porter Ranch neighborhood, with more than 1,000 set to be relocated. Residents have been complaining of nausea, nosebleeds, headaches, and vomiting from breathing in chemicals known as mercaptans, which are added so the gas has an odor. Lawyers have alsoreportedly detected toxins such as hydrogen sulfide and benzene in the air, which also carry health impacts.
Rep. Brad Sherman, a California Democrat who lives in Porter Ranch, said that even though his family hasn’t been affected (he said he hasn’t felt any health effects from the smell), his community is feeling the brunt of the problem, and he’s trying to get the federal government involved.
“We’ve gotten at least some action out of the government,” Sherman said. In response to his request, the Environmental Protection Agency opened an investigation and sent two on-scene coordinators to the site. Sherman said he’s currently working to get the Transportation Department’s Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration on board as well with state agencies. Sherman said his focus right now is on maximizing the amount of gas that can be taken out of the field to reduce pressure on the leak.
But advocates are hoping that the incident can draw more attention to the dangers of the natural-gas boom. Natural gas is mostly methane, and tiny leaks from wells and pipelines carry a huge climate impact.
“This is a large, maybe unusually large, example of a phenomenon that exists across the industry,” said Mark Brownstein, vice president of the EDF’s climate and energy program. “States are looking into leak detection and repair requirements, and we think the federal government ultimately is going to have to impose requirements for existing sources of methane.”
SoCalGas has said that the leak comes from a 40-year-old pipe that’s more than a thousand feet underground, and it could be until late February or March before it is stopped. The company is drilling a relief well to divert the methane flow; then it can stop up the leak.
The scale of the leak—and that it’s still spewing gas—has drawn comparisons to the 2011 Deepwater Horizon oil spill, which sent 210 million gallons of crude into the Gulf of Mexico and focused newfound attention on the dangers of deepwater drilling (it also forced a temporary moratorium on some offshore extraction). The federal response to the California leak, however, has paled compared to the outpouring of attention to the Gulf of Mexico.
Methane, which makes up 9 percent of the country’s greenhouse-gas emissions, hasn’t been at the center of the country’s climate policy. The Obama administration has pledged to cut methane emissions from the oil-and-gas sector by 40 to 45 percent in the next decade and last year proposed a rule that would limit methane emissions from new and modified wells.
Green groups are hopeful that President Obama will roll out regulations on existing sources in his final year on top of finalizing the rule for new and modified sources, but it’s unclear if those rules would even cover storage facilities like the one in Aliso Canyon.
“This wasn’t even in the scope of what was reasonable to consider,” said Alan Septoff of Earthworks, an environmental group active on methane issues. “This is something that needs to be addressed separately. We’ve got to really be on our guard if we’re going to rein this in.”
According to the Energy Information Administration, there are 326 other storage facilities made out of depleted oil fields like the one in California. But there’s been little attention paid to the aging wells and gas fields where the natural gas is stored, and the aging infrastructure that gets it there.
In part, that’s because the problem is invisible—Septoff said there was little attention paid to the Aliso Canyon leak until his team used infrared cameras to show the actual gas belching out of the ground. And there are lax requirements on inspections of storage wells and equipment, especially compared to other parts of the natural-gas life cycle.
“We have a natural-gas transportation-integrity system. We do not have the same level of protocols for a natural-gas storage-integrity system,” said Sherman, who said he’d be pressing the issue in the aftermath of the leak. “If your home is near a natural-gas pipeline, you get a higher level of protection than if it’s near a storage facility.”
Richard Mathews, a California environmentalist who is running for the state Senate, said the leak should spur more than just more attention on natural-gas leaks—it should push the state government to get rid of natural gas entirely.
“We’ve been saying that expanding natural gas is not a good climate solution, and this just demonstrates the dangers of relying on natural gas,” Mathews said. “We’re going to have a lot more of the leaks if we keep extending the life of these wells. But we don’t need more wells; we need to get off of fossil fuels entirely.”
-
No 'Silver Bullet' to Pinpoint Leaks, But One Tool Emerges
Jan 5, 2016 | E&E - Climatewire
By Gayathri Vaidyanathan
Leaks from oil and gas equipment in California's San Joaquin Valley are releasing at least 2.4 kilotons per year of methane, a potent greenhouse gas, into the atmosphere.
Overall, scientists detected 40 plumes, and 28 of them were detected on more than one occasion.
The leaks were detected using a new tool, called the hyperspectral thermal emission spectrometer, or HyTES, developed by NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL). The device is able to detect plumes of methane emitted by operations such as oil and gas or dairy facilities.
"We think it is an efficient method to survey large areas and identify source facilities that release large methane emissions at broad spatial scales," said Francesca Hopkins, an environmental scientist at JPL. She spoke at the American Geophysical Union meeting last month.
Methane leaks are a cause for concern since the gas is 86 times more potent than carbon dioxide on a 20-year time scale. Methane is the primary component of natural gas, and the energy industry is the second largest industrial emitter.
Studies have shown that a small percentage of operators are responsible for most of the emissions in a basin. A recent study in the Barnett Shale showed that just 10 percent of producers were responsible for 95 percent of the emissions (ClimateWire, Dec. 8, 2015).
The smaller producing basins, such as the Kern field, or the San Juan basin of New Mexico, tend to be bigger problems than the larger basins, said Colm Sweeney, atmospheric scientist at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's Earth System Research Laboratory.
The struggle now is to pinpoint the sources of leaks, which can vary widely by basin.Waste ponds a leading source of leaks
"There is no silver bullet," Sweeney said. "We have been to nine different places, we've found out that every place needs a different sets of tracers, we need a different set of instruments to attack the problem."
In the San Joaquin valley, where the Kern oil field is located, scientists deployed the HyTES device on an aircraft flying at 1 kilometer altitude in early 2015. The oil field, which covers 63 square miles, contains 29 percent of the active wells in California.
The device revealed the sources of the leaks. About 33 percent of the leaks were from waste ponds contained on well pads. Another 33 percent came from cogeneration facilities, used to generate energy for oil extraction, and 13 percent from tanks.
Preliminary results suggest the oil fields emitted at least 2.4 kilotons of methane per year, the scientists calculated. That accounts for a quarter of the methane emissions contained in the state inventory.
Similar measurements over the dairy producing operations revealed that 80 percent of manure lagoons had large methane emissions, more than animal housing. Dairy operations emitted an estimated 1 kiloton per year of methane in the region.
NOAA also deployed the device in the San Juan basin of New Mexico, which satellite data suggest is one of the leakiest oil fields in the United States (ClimateWire, Oct. 10, 2014). The region emits 10 percent of all the methane emissions in the United States.
Some had pointed to coalbed methane wells in the San Juan basin as one of the biggest problems, but NOAA's analysis suggests they may be contributing a small percentage of the total, Sweeney said.
Other sources in the basin include oil wells, landfills and power plants.
-
Despite Protests, Oil Industry Thrives Under Obama Energy Agenda
Jan 5, 2016 | Bloomberg (In The Chicago Tribune)
By Jennifer A. Dlouhy and Bloomberg
The nation's biggest fossil-fuel trade group will deliver its annual state-of-the-industry report Tuesday. It's sure to include a whack at PresidentBarack Obama -- even though oil and gas have flourished on his watch.
U.S. oil production has surged 82 percent to near-record levels in the past seven years and natural gas is up by nearly one-quarter. Instead of shutting down the hydraulic fracturing process that has unlocked natural gas from dense rock formations, Obama has promoted the fuel as a stepping stone to a greener, renewable future.
The administration has also permitted drilling in the Arctic Ocean over the objections of environmentalists and opened the door to a new generation of oil and gas drilling in Atlantic waters hugging the East Coast. Obama also signed, with reservations, a measure to lift a 40-year-old ban on the export of most U.S. crude.
"Given an administration that was so committed to combating climate change, they have coexisted pretty peacefully with the industry, despite all the protestations," said David Goldwyn, a consultant who for two years served as the State Department's top energy diplomat under Obama. "And the best metric is just look at the production."
That hasn't stopped the American Petroleum Institute from taking aim at Obama in its annual addresses on the industry -- such as the one API president, Jack Gerard, is scheduled to deliver in Washington.
The Obama administration's approach to fossil fuels -- including his endorsement of natural gas in State of the Union addresses and in a landmark climate change speech in 2013 -- has drawn anger from some environmentalists.
"From day one of the administration and accelerating into the present, this administration and this White House has viewed the natural gas and oil bonanza in this country as an economic opportunity, and they have ridden it and ridden it hard," said Bill Snape, senior counsel for the Center for Biological Diversity. "They greased the skids for too much natural gas, oil and fracking in this country."
The administration's strategy, which Kevin Book, managing director of ClearView Energy Partners, calls a "give-a-little, take-a-little" approach to energy, reflects the president's conflicted relationship with oil and gas. On one hand, fossil fuels are a major impediment to his green goals and his hope to thwart the worst effects of climate change. At the same time, their production has delivered big economic benefits to the country.
Ed Hirs, an energy expert at the University of Houston who is managing director of Hillhouse Resources, an independent oil and gas company, says Obama took a lighter touch on fracking after the worst environmental fears of the process failed to materialize.
"No one in the Obama administration can deny the massive positive impact on GDP that oil from the shale plays has brought," Hirs said in an email.
Oil industry leaders say Obama has driven strangling regulation, stifling U.S. energy production and blocking companies from plumbing new areas in search of crude. To the American Petroleum Institute, the domestic drilling boom has happened in spite of the Obama administration, not because of it.
"This isn't happening because of the administration. Prices aren't down because of the administration," API executive vice president Louis Finkel said in an interview. "This is happening on private land because of thoughtful and balanced state regulatory regimes that balance economic growth and production of oil and natural gas with environmental stewardship. In many ways, this administration has missed the opportunity to seize on that."
Finkel cited the Obama administration's decision to reject the Keystone XL pipeline that would ship Canadian crude into the United States, impose stricter ozone limits and clamp down on potent heat-trapping methane emissions that are the primary component of natural gas.
"The only reason consumers haven't been buried by these costs yet is because our industry continues to innovate and increase efficiency," he said.
In recent months, market forces have delivered a major blow to the U.S. oil and gas industry in the form of the biggest price slump in decades. That's resulted in job losses and a downturn in drilling.
Spokesmen for the White House, Interior Department and Environmental Protection Agency declined to comment for this story.
Gas will take on new importance under the administration's Clean Power Plan, which mandates a cut in carbon dioxide emissions from the electric sector, accelerating a shift away from coal-fired power. The international climate accord reached in Paris last year also sets up a framework for more worldwide demand for natural gas. And Obama's Energy Department has now approved 13 licenses to broadly export 14.04 billion cubic feet per day of liquefied natural gas, despite initial permitting delays.
Obama has moved to regulate hydraulic fracturing, the process of pumping water, sand and chemicals underground to unlock oil and gas in dense rock formations, but those efforts have hit roadblocks. His Interior Department imposed new mandates on fracking last March, but the requirements only apply to wells on public land and have since been blocked by a federal court.
A 2012 EPA rule to force energy companies to use "green completion" equipment that can pare methane emissions at natural gas wells applies only to new and modified sites -- and largely tracks what the industry was doing already. The agency is working to finalize similar requirements for existing natural gas wells and infrastructure. The Interior Department is working on its own plan to crack down on methane released when energy companies burn or vent natural gas flowing from oil wells.
"API has plenty to celebrate. The flaring rule is behind schedule, the methane rule is a half-measure that covers only existing sources, and 2015 ended with the oil lobby notching their biggest policy victory in years with the repeal of the crude oil export ban," said Lukas Ross, a climate campaigner with the environmental group Friends of the Earth.
To be sure, the oil industry hasn't secured everything on its wish list. The American Petroleum Institute has pushed for more territory to drill, both onshore and off. And while a draft plan for selling offshore oil and gas leases from 2017 to 2022 opens the door to eventual Atlantic drilling, the government's auctions may be scaled back. The Obama administration also has walled off drilling in some areas with wildlife protections, including 12 million acres of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
And Obama's Interior Department in October also canceled two planned auctions of drilling rights in the Arctic Ocean, citing low industry interest.
Some moves by this administration also will live on after Obama leaves office -- affecting oil and gas companies' fortunes for years to come, Book said.
They include the international climate deal, broader environmental reviews of proposed government actions folding in climate change considerations, embedding a "social cost of carbon" into rule making and the Environmental Protection Agency's conclusion that carbon dioxide is a dangerous pollutant that must be regulated.
"Those four things, irrespective of the regulations they produced, still provide a fairly compelling green agenda as a legacy -- some form of which is likely to endure," Book said.
Environmentalists are hoping Obama will build on those developments this year. He still has the power, Snape said.
"If this president wants to go down with the legacy of being the climate president - the president who really changed course -- it's clear to me and clear to us, he's going to have to truly wrestle fracking down and not be wrestled down by it."
-
More LNG Shipments Could Help U.S. Economy, but There's a Catch -- Report
Jan 5, 2016 | E&E - Energywire
By Jenny Mandel
Significantly expanding U.S. natural gas exports would be "marginally positive" for the domestic economy, according to a new study commissioned by the Department of Energy that will likely serve as a green light for continued export approvals.
The study looked at macroeconomic impacts of increasing foreign sales of U.S. liquefied natural gas, with a focus on how the interplay of domestic and international market forces would affect the U.S. gross domestic product and various related stakeholders.
Increasing LNG exports would boost domestic production significantly while expanding GDP slightly -- by between 0.03 and 0.07 percent between 2026 and 2040, or between $7 billion and $20 billion in today's dollars, according to the study.
But greater exports would also raise domestic natural gas prices in every scenario considered, presenting economic trade-offs for consumers and industry with implications for domestic economic conditions.
The new assessment was carried out by Rice University's Center for Energy Studies and Oxford Economics, a private forecasting firm, under contract for DOE.
DOE is pairing the study with a companion released by the U.S. Energy Information Administration in October 2014 that looked at similar export volumes from a U.S. economic perspective. In a Federal Register notice last week, DOE announced that it would accept public comment on both documents through Feb. 12.
Together, the two studies mirror another pair of studies completed for DOE in 2012, by EIA and a different private group, NERA Economic Consulting. Those two studies considered the economic impacts that could result if DOE approved LNG exports in volumes up to 12 billion cubic feet per day (Bcf/d).
Those studies found small economic benefits from greenlighting exports and limited consequences, and have been cited in subsequent decisions by DOE to grant export permits to LNG project developers seeking the right to sell LNG into the broadest range of world markets (EnergyWire, Dec. 6, 2012).
As of early December, DOE had granted 50 authorizations totaling 47.45 Bcf/d of exports to a small group of U.S. free-trade partners and 12 authorizations totaling 10.01 Bcf/d for export into broader world markets, a spokesman said yesterday.
The two recent studies consider the potential effects of exporting between 12 Bcf/d and 20 Bcf/d, and the latest also considers what might happen if exports were allowed to range as high as market pull permits.
While the new assessment concluded that any amount of exports would be "marginally positive," the greatest negative impact would come in the form of higher domestic natural gas prices.
In all cases, greater LNG exports would raise natural gas prices, the study found. The absolute impact on consumers would be relatively small, with the consumer price index increasing by between 0.13 and 0.5 percent over a baseline of that associated with 12 Bcf/d of exports during the years 2026 to 2040.
Still, those price impacts were several times larger than the accompanying GDP increases, which hovered around 0.05 percent higher than without the increased exports.
Constituencies that stand to benefit from natural gas supply growth and capital expenditures would do well with greater exports, the study found, while a small group of energy-intensive sectors such as cement and glass manufacturing would see reduced expansion opportunities from increased natural gas prices -- though the study found that "impacts on those industries are small compared with the expected growth in output through 2040."
The new study does not confirm a worst-case scenario considered by EIA's assessment published last year, in which natural gas prices could rise from the current range of $2 to $3 per million British thermal units (MMBtu) to as high as $10 per MMBtu -- a scenario that industry critics dismissed as "outrageous" and "almost impossible" and that would risk a major backlash against the decision to allow exports (EnergyWire, Oct. 30, 2014).Fuel for industry
Overall, the review highlights the extent to which LNG export decisions matter to the industry but disappear into the margins for the country as a whole.
Kenneth Medlock, senior director for the Center for Energy Studies and an author of the study, said the reference case was based around LNG exports of about 6.5 Bcf/d, less than the "floor" considered by the study, thanks to the "abundant, competitive resources around the world that can be delivered to international markets via LNG or pipelines."
Modeling higher export levels requires "a variety of factors that limit the otherwise competitive production of natural gas outside of the United States. Moreover, those factors must become increasingly restrictive to raise U.S. LNG exports over 12 Bcf/d," he said.
And while the study looked at a timeline from the present through 2040, Medlock noted that the impacts that come with additional LNG exports would not be felt until 2025 due to the significant pipeline of new supply expected to come online around the world in the coming years.
"The global market simply cannot accommodate U.S. volumes in excess of 12 Bcf/d before 2025 in any of the scenarios considered. Accordingly, while international demand continues to increase, the market must first work through a large amount of available LNG supply before turning to U.S.-sourced LNG," he said.
For the Center for LNG, a Washington, D.C.-based advocacy group, the study is ammunition to renew a push for streamlined export permitting.
"This report is the latest addition to the large body of existing research showing that we can export LNG without adversely affecting the availability or affordability of our abundant natural gas supplies," CLNG spokesman Casey O'Shea said in a statement. "With the U.S. facing stiff global competition for the opportunity to export LNG, timely export permits from the DOE are becoming increasingly pressing. We call on Congress to support legislation ensuring that LNG export applications would be reviewed quickly, and to help America fulfill its potential as an energy powerhouse."
-
DOE Finalizes 13 Standards with Post-Holiday Spurt
Jan 5, 2016 | E&E - Greenwire
By Christa Marshall
In a post-holiday spurt, the Department of Energy moved to finalize efficiency standards for commercial and industrial pumps, beverage vending machines, residential boilers, and spray valves used in restaurants as part of President Obama's Climate Action Plan.
The administration said it finalized 13 efficiency standards last year, matching its goal and completing one on rooftop air conditioners that was the largest in department history for energy savings. The rules add to a pledge to slash CO2 emissions by 3 billion tons through final efficiency rules during Obama's two terms. With the most recent rules, the administration is about three-fourths of the way, or about 2.25 billion tons, toward that goal, DOE said.
One of the final rules issued after Christmas would establish the first-ever national efficiency standards for commercial and industrial pumps, which commonly are used to move water for heating and cooling purposes and irrigation.
The standard, which would take effect in 2020, would require a redesign of the least-efficient pumps on the market and save 0.29 quadrillion British thermal units (quads) of energy over a 30-year period. It would reduce electricity consumption by about 30 billion kilowatt-hours over that time span, or the equivalent of the annual electricity use of 2.8 million U.S. households , according to the Appliance Standards Awareness Project. The cumulative CO2 emissions savings through 2030 would equal the equivalent emissions of the annual electricity use of more than 370,000 homes, according to DOE.
Andrew deLaski, ASAP's executive director, called the rule an "accomplishment" considering that the statute outlining a pumps rule was first passed as part of the Energy Policy Act of 1992. The new rule also sets up a rating system allowing pumps sold with variable speed drives and controls to get a much better efficiency rating than pumps sold without, helping provide a basis for efficiency programs to promote these products and buyers to select them, he said in an email.
Like several rulemakings from the Obama administration, the proposed final rule for pumps resulted from a negotiation process among industry, manufacturers and efficiency advocates via an internal department process -- the Appliance Standards and Rulemaking Federal Advisory Committee. The same process -- designed to find common ground before DOE takes final action -- was tapped to finalize the rooftop air conditioner rule and is an ongoing focus of the administration with rulemaking (E&ENews PM, Dec. 17, 2015).
The proposed final rules for beverage vending machines, residential boilers and pre-rinse spray valves would have smaller energy savings than those for commercial and industrial pumps. Set to take effect in 2019, the rule on vending machines is an update to a 2012 standard and would save up to $510 million and 0.122 quad of energy, DOE said. The boiler rule would take effect in 2021 and save about 0.16 quad of energy.
The final standard for pre-rinse spray valves -- which are used in restaurants to remove food waste -- would save as much as $1.48 billion and conserve 0.10 quad of energy and 119.57 billion gallons of water, DOE said.
Industry and Association News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation News
Energy and Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested