Preview Newsletter
PM ACC 7/25/2016
-
EPA Evaluates Risk on 1st New Chemicals Under Reformed TSCA
Jul 25, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Colby Bermel
U.S. EPA on Friday took its first formal chemical regulatory action since reforms to the Toxic Substances Control Act were signed into law last month. -
EPA Issues First New Chemical Safety Reviews Under Reformed TSCA Law
Jul 25, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Bridget DiCosmo
EPA has issued its first regulatory determinations under the reformed Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), finding that four new chemicals are “not likely to present an unreasonable risk,” the first set of affirmative findings of safety the agency must now make... -
California Seeks to Extend BPA Emergency Regulation
Jul 25, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
California’s Office of Health Hazard Assessment (Oehha) has proposed extending an emergency regulation on providing warning for exposure to BPA from canned and bottled food and drink under Proposition 65. -
Your Air is Killing You: 3 Steps for Reducing Your Daily Toxic Exposure
Jul 25, 2016 | U.S. News & World Report
By Noreen Khan-Mayberry
What is the fastest way to be exposed to chemicals? Breathing. Each time we inhale, we introduce a variety of potentially harmful chemicals (gases, vapors) and particles (solids) into our upper and lower airways, which can lead to a number of short- and long-term health issues. -
(ACC Mentioned) Exxon, Saudi Firm Seek to Build Petrochemical Plant on U.S. Gulf Coast
Jul 25, 2016 | Wall Street Journal
By Bradley Olson and Ahmed Al Omran
Exxon Mobil Corp. is considering a major new petrochemical complex on the U.S. Gulf Coast that would be developed as a joint venture with Saudi Basic Industries Corp., one of the biggest chemical companies in the world. -
Gov. Wolf, Other Pennsylvania Officials Gathering Ideas on How to Leverage Shell's Ethane Cracker
Jul 25, 2016 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jamison Cocklin
Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf visited Pittsburgh on Friday to meet with lawmakers, business leaders and other stakeholders, as his administration begins to escalate its role in helping to fortify the economic development that's expected to stem from Royal Dutch Shell... -
Proposed Calif. Methane Regs Rankle Producers
Jul 25, 2016 | E&E Climatewire
By Debra Kahn
Oil and gas companies are worried about pending regulations to reduce methane from their operations in California. -
U.S. and Mexico Launch Next Steps of North American Deal
Jul 25, 2016 | E&E Climatewire
By Jean Chemnick
President Obama and Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto released new steps Friday for how the countries will implement last month's "Three Amigos" deal, including their pledge with Canada to draw half the continent's power from nonemitting sources by 2025. -
Convention Shows Democrats Support Fracking, Activists on the Fringe
Jul 25, 2016 | The Hill - Congress Blog
By Katie Brown
In a recent op-ed in The Hill, Wenonah Hauter of Food & Water Watch claimed that “fracking has emerged as a key issue in 2016” but certainly not in the way she and the anti-fracking movement intended. -
Who Should the Oil Industry Root For, Democrats or Republicans?
Jul 25, 2016 | Forbes
By Michael Lynch
After George W. Bush was elected president, a friend attended an oil industry meeting and said that the mood was celebratory: “They think they’ll be drilling on the White House lawn,” she noted. Reality proved somewhat different, despite the controversial Cheney Energy Task... -
Canada to Accelerate Oil Train Car Phaseout
Jul 25, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
Canadian regulators are pushing up the deadline for old tank cars to be banned from carrying crude oil. -
CSX: Bearing Failed 9 Miles Before Tennessee Derailment
Jul 25, 2016 | AP (In Washington Post)
CSX Transportation Inc. says the mechanical failure that caused a July 2015 train derailment in Tennessee actually began about nine miles earlier. -
Obama Admin Counters WOTUS Challengers' Document Request
Jul 25, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Tiffany Stecker
The Obama administration pushed back Friday against accusations it handed an incomplete record to the court handling a challenge to the Clean Water Rule. -
How Tim Kaine helped Persuade Virginians — Including Conservatives — To Act on Climate Change
Jul 25, 2016 | Washington Post
By Chris Mooney
Donald Trump’s running mate, Mike Pence, questions climate change just like Trump himself does. -
Legionnaires’ Outbreaks in Flint Linked to Corrosive Tap Water
Jul 25, 2016 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Janet Pelley
The tainted water crisis in Flint, Mich., didn’t just poison children with lead; it also likely contributed to two outbreaks of Legionnaires’ disease, according to a new study (Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. 2016, DOI:10.1021/acs.estlett.6b00192).
Industry and Association News - There are no clips to report at this time.
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation News
Environment News
-
EPA Evaluates Risk on 1st New Chemicals Under Reformed TSCA
Jul 25, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Colby Bermel
U.S. EPA on Friday took its first formal chemical regulatory action since reforms to the Toxic Substances Control Act were signed into law last month.
The agency published premanufacture notices (PMNs) for four new chemicals -- three lubricants and one finishing agent -- drawing the conclusion that all are "not likely to present an unreasonable risk" to human health or to the environment.
If any had presented an unreasonable risk, that finding would have triggered a risk evaluation process that could have lasted years, during which time prohibitions or restrictions would be imposed on the chemical.
The review start date for all four of the chemicals was on June 22, the day that President Obama signed the legislation into law (Greenwire, June 22). Decisions were made on three of the chemicals last Wednesday, and on a fourth two weeks ago.
Two of the chemicals did get caveats, however.
Depolymerized waste plastics and organic modified propyl silsesquioxane were estimated by EPA to be "very persistent."
Persistence means the degree to which chemicals degrade in the environment, and whether their buildup poses hazards.
But, the agency added, "this did not indicate likelihood that the chemical substance would present an unreasonable risk, given that the chemical substance has low potential for bioaccumulation, low human health hazard, and low environmental hazard."
Determination documents were posted for each of the four chemicals, and each carried the signature of specific officials at EPA.
Environmental Defense Fund Lead Senior Scientist Richard Denison was an active architect of the TSCA reform legislation. In a blog post, he applauded EPA for its openness and following of new mandates.
"This, in my view, constitutes an unprecedented level of transparency for a program that has often felt like a 'black box' in the past," he wrote.
Bergeson & Campbell PC, a chemicals law firm in Washington, D.C., also welcomed the determinations.
"It is reassuring that the [structure-activity relationship analyses were] used to reach determinations about persistence, bioaccumulation, and hazard potential, including mention of category analysis," the firm wrote in a blog post.
But Denison was critical of other aspects, including the withholding of confidential business information from the determination documents. Under the TSCA reform legislation, any company bringing a new chemical to EPA for review that says doing so would cause it competitive harm has to justify this claim in an appeal (Greenwire, July 1).
The company names and specific chemical identities were not published in Friday's documents.
"It is not clear the extent to which such claims were scrutinized by EPA in these cases, and as the [premanufacture notices] were submitted and the claims asserted prior to the signing of the new law, it's not clear these particular claims would have been subject to the new requirements," Denison wrote. "Going forward, however, we will be seeking assurance that EPA is applying the new [confidential business information] requirements to applicable claims in PMNs and also reflecting them in its reviews and decision documents regarding those PMNs."
Three other grievances Denison brought forward include the documents' use of estimated, not measured, data; the lack of technical information beyond summaries; and "cursory" consideration of exposure and exposed subpopulations.
"So, these first decisions by EPA under the Lautenberg Act are welcome and appear to represent real progress in a number of respects. We recognize the pressure EPA was under not to unduly extend its reviews of PMNs that had been filed prior to the law's passage," Denison wrote. "Going forward, however, and in dealing with less 'easy' cases, EPA needs to do more to ensure and communicate that its review is based on information sufficient to make the affirmative finding the new law requires: whether each new chemical is or is not likely to present an unreasonable risk."
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2016/07/25/stories/1060040744
-
EPA Issues First New Chemical Safety Reviews Under Reformed TSCA Law
Jul 25, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Bridget DiCosmo
EPA has issued its first regulatory determinations under the reformed Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), finding that four new chemicals are “not likely to present an unreasonable risk,” the first set of affirmative findings of safety the agency must now make before new substances may enter the marketplace under the new law.
The agency late last week posted to its website safety determinations for four new chemicals under section 5 of TSCA, which governs new chemicals or those with significant new uses. The chemicals are fatty alcohols-dimers, trimers, and polymers; depolymerized waste plastics; propyl silsesquioxanes, hydrogen-terminated; and organic modified propyl silsesquioxane.
EPA for all the chemicals and chemical groups found that they are “not likely to present an unreasonable risk based on low human health hazard and low environmental toxicity,” though for depolymerized waste plastics and organic modified propyl silsesquioxane, the agency estimated that the new chemical would be “very persistent.” However, the agency found that this did not indicate a likelihood that the substance would present an unreasonable risk, because it also had a low potential for bioaccumulation, low human health hazard, and low environmental hazard.
The safety determinations include sections discussing each chemical's conditions of use, fate, persistence, bioaccumulation, human health hazard, environmental hazard, potential exposure and potential exposure to susceptible populations. For example, for propyl silsesquioxanes, hydrogen-terminated, EPA found that the intended use is as a lubricant and lubricant additive, and that susceptible subpopulations include workers, but those exposures are not of concern because the chemical is believed to be of low hazard potential.
Chemical sector officials raised initial concerns on EPA's plan to implement regulatory revisions for addressing new chemicals under section 5 in situations where a new substance has already been submitted for review under the old TSCA, though others said that undergoing reviews under the new law provides long-term certainty.
The new reviews are significant because under the old law, EPA was not mandated to make safety findings of new chemicals, though it had the authority to do so, and chemicals that were not reviewed could enter the marketplace once a 90-day time frame expired.
Under the previous section 5 of TSCA, after the 90 days, a company may begin manufacturing and sales barring an EPA finding that the chemical "may present an unreasonable risk," but the agency is not required to make an affirmative finding of safety for a substance to enter the marketplace.
Premanufacture Notices
Companies submit premanufacture notices (PMNs) to EPA, and almost 90 percent of them do not lead to limits on the chemical, EPA says on its website. Regulatory options include a consent order with testing mandates, limits on some releases, or other provisions. Another option is a significant new use rule (SNUR) to “require notice to EPA before chemical substances and mixtures are used in new ways that might create concerns.”
Under the old TSCA, the PMNs were subject to a 90-day EPA review period before manufacturing could begin. The TSCA overhaul will require EPA to review all new chemicals and make an affirmative finding on each substance's safety. EPA may find that the chemical is not likely to present a significant risk; it may find that there is insufficient information to make a safety determination or that it may present an unreasonable risk. Should EPA conclude that a PMN contains too little information to make a finding, it can bar or limit the chemical from entering the market. Chemicals found to be likely to present an unreasonable risk will not be permitted to be manufactured and sold.
In a July 22 blog post, Environmental Defense Fund senior scientist Richard Denison writes that the reviews constitute an “unprecedented level of transparency for a program that has often felt like a 'black box' in the past,” noting that EPA previously did not make its section 5 findings public.
But Denison also flags “other concerning features of the reviews that bear mention,” including that substantial amounts of information were withheld as confidential business information (CBI), despite CBI claims now being subject to a host of new requirements under the new law, including that each claim be substantiated by EPA. Given that the PMNs were submitted prior to the law's June 22 effective date, it is not clear whether EPA reviewed those claims.
“Going forward, however, we will be seeking assurance that EPA is applying the new CBI requirements to applicable claims in PMNs and also reflecting them in its reviews and decision documents regarding those PMNs,” Denison writes.
Denison also writes that much of the environmental fate, hazard and exposure information appears to be estimated rather than measured, that the agency should have made public the more detailed PMN documents rather than just summaries of the reviews, and the agency's reviews of potential exposure and susceptible subpopulations appears to be “incomplete and insufficient."
“In all four cases, EPA noted that exposure potential was not even estimated due to predicted low bioaccumulation and hazard potential,” Denison writes. “Among other issues, this amplifies the concern we have over EPA’s heavy reliance on limited estimation models for bioaccumulation and hazard, when that in turn leads EPA not to further consider exposure potential.”
SAR Use
The susceptible populations in each review were workers, with one of the chemicals also flagged for consumer susceptibility if used in lubricant products.
In a July 22 memo to clients and colleagues, the law firm Bergeson & Campbell also notes that EPA appears to have used structure activity relationship (SAR) modeling in its analyses, though the firm, unlike Denison, applauded the use of these approaches. EPA use of SAR modeling in its PMN review process pre-dates TSCA reform. EPA has used these models for some time in the PMN program, because there is often limited information available about the toxicity and properties of new chemicals.
“It is reassuring that the SAR was used to reach determinations about persistence, bioaccumulation, and hazard potential, including mention of category analysis,” the firm's memo states. “This suggests that EPA intends to maintain SAR as a basic component in its evaluation of new chemicals consistent with the provisions at Section 4(h) to reduce vertebrate animal testing and to maximize the use of existing hazard information.”
http://insideepa.com/daily-news/epa-issues-first-new-chemical-safety-reviews-under-reformed-tsca-law
-
California Seeks to Extend BPA Emergency Regulation
Jul 25, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
California’s Office of Health Hazard Assessment (Oehha) has proposed extending an emergency regulation on providing warning for exposure to BPA from canned and bottled food and drink under Proposition 65.
The emergency regulation was enacted on 19 April. It allows for compliance with BPA warning requirements in these applications through uniform point-of-sale signs, in lieu of traditional on-product labels.
Emergency regulations are valid for only 180 days. Oehha has proposed a regular rulemaking process to continue the emergency regulation through until 30 December 2017, unless reenacted.
Warning for exposure to BPA has been required since 11 May, a year after the substance was listed as a reproductive toxicant under the state's Prop 65.
'Reasonable transition'
Oehha said the emergency regulation was implemented to provide a "reasonable transition period to help avoid consumer confusion and at the same time provide consistent, informative, and meaningful warnings to consumers about significant exposures to BPA".
Several NGOs protested the against the agency's action. They said it serves "no purpose other than to unlawfully shield industry from complying with Proposition 65, and to withhold from California consumers the information to which they are entitled under the law."
But some industry groups have asked Oehha to continue the point-of-sale warning alternative until it establishes a maximum allowable dose level (MADL) for oral exposures to BPA. These include the Can Manufacturers Institute and the North American Metal Packaging Alliance (Nampa).
Oehha will hold a public hearing on the proposal on 12 September. Written comments will be accepted until 26 September.
https://chemicalwatch.com/48780/california-seeks-to-extend-bpa-emergency-regulation
-
Your Air is Killing You: 3 Steps for Reducing Your Daily Toxic Exposure
Jul 25, 2016 | U.S. News & World Report
By Noreen Khan-Mayberry
What is the fastest way to be exposed to chemicals? Breathing. Each time we inhale, we introduce a variety of potentially harmful chemicals (gases, vapors) and particles (solids) into our upper and lower airways, which can lead to a number of short- and long-term health issues. For this reason, whenever I advise people on how to limit their exposure to toxins, I lead with air quality. Particularly, indoor air quality – not just because this is where we spend the vast majority of our time, but because it's also an environment over which we actually have some control. We spend approximately 80 percent of our time indoors on average, yet we often fail to properly maintain the air in those spaces – and to make matters worse, many of the products we use each day contaminate our breathable air even more.
Let's stop using our respiratory systems as chemical scrubbers and start taking the right steps towards protecting our health by improving our air. Here's how:
Elimination. Reducing your daily chemical intake begins by knowing the main sources for exposure, and eliminating (or at the very least, limiting) your interaction with potentially harmful products and materials. Toxic chemicals evaporate, or "off-gas," at a constant rate from sealants, adhesives, pressed wood flooring, paint, fabrics and other materials we use to construct and furnish our homes and offices. The worst of these airborne chemicals is formaldehyde, which is classified by the World Health Organization as a human carcinogen and is present in virtually every indoor space. Exposure to formaldehyde is unsafe at any level, and in addition to cancer, can lead to respiratory problems and many other chronic illnesses.
Beyond building materials, formaldehyde also off-gasses from many treated fabrics – especially flame retardant clothing and bedding – scented candles, cosmetics, air fresheners and chemical cleaning products. Many of these common household products also contain a variety of hazardous solvents known as volatile organic chemicals, or VOCs, which can affect the liver, kidneys and central nervous system when inhaled. So, first and foremost, I recommend replacing as many chemical-containing products and materials as possible with natural ones, and isolating any remaining chemical-containing products in a tightly sealed bin to prevent their fumes from slowly leeching into your air.
Maintenance. Maintaining your HVAC system is critical to good indoor air quality. An unbalanced HVAC system can cause your house to "sweat" and produce an excess of condensation that collects in and around your air registers. Condensation leads to mold, and elevated mold concentrations can lead to allergy-like symptoms, or even worse, neurological and respiratory illness.
For this reason, it's critical to not only change your air HVAC filters on time, but to have your HVAC system and air ducts professionally inspected once a year for fungal contamination. If they are infected, they must be replaced, as no amount of cleaning will fix mold-contaminated duct-work. Neglect is a leading cause of poor air quality, so the bottom line is that you must maintain your HVAC system or window units if you have them.
Technology. Using (and maintaining) a high-quality air purification system at home and at work is one of the most effective steps you can take to improve your air quality. Today's plug-and-go air purifying units are technological marvels that can detect, trap and remove harmful chemicals and particulates like dust, pollen, dander, mold, and viruses from your breathable air.
The fact is, we're bombarded with an array of harmful airborne contaminants each day. And while we cannot control the air quality everywhere, we can significantly reduce our daily dosage at home and at work – where we spend the majority of our time – by learning to identify and limit our contact with potential sources for exposure, and by properly utilizing technology to eliminate the rest.
http://health.usnews.com/health-news/patient-advice/articles/2016-07-25/your-air-is-killing-you-3-steps-for-reducing-your-daily-toxic-exposure
-
(ACC Mentioned) Exxon, Saudi Firm Seek to Build Petrochemical Plant on U.S. Gulf Coast
Jul 25, 2016 | Wall Street Journal
By Bradley Olson and Ahmed Al Omran
Exxon Mobil Corp. is considering a major new petrochemical complex on the U.S. Gulf Coast that would be developed as a joint venture with Saudi Basic Industries Corp., one of the biggest chemical companies in the world.
Monday’s announcement is another signal that energy companies continue to find potential investment opportunities even as oil and natural gas prices remain depressed.
The project, if developed, would be located in Texas or Louisiana near abundant supplies of cheap natural gas, the companies said. It would also include a stream cracker, which is capable of producing the chemicals used to make plastic products from football helmets to bulletproof vests.
No final investment decision has been made yet. The companies plan to carry out further studies and consult with state and local officials to help identify a potential site. Neither company disclosed how much such a complex would cost.
A Gulf Coast chemical plant on this size and scale could compete internationally with other similar projects around the world, said Neil Chapman, president of ExxonMobil Chemical Co.
“That is vitally important as most of the chemical demand growth in the next several decades is anticipated to come from developing economies,” he said.
Major energy and chemical companies have completed or are planning about 250 such projects around the U.S. valued at a collective $160 billon, according to the American Chemistry Council.
Hydraulic fracturing of wells around the U.S. has unleashed new natural gas reserves, making the country an ideal location for petrochemical operations that use gas as a feedstock to make plastics. U.S. oil and gas drilling has revitalized the American chemical industry in recent years.
Royal Dutch Shell PLC last month said it would move forward with a multibillion petrochemical complex near Pittsburgh, close to the Marcellus and Utica shale gas fields. That plant is projected to cost $6 billion.
Sabic is the state-run chemical company is Saudi Arabia. Exxon and Sabic have worked together for 35 years in other chemical joint ventures in the Middle East.
“We are focused on geographic diversification to supply new markets,” said Yousef Abdullah Al-Benyan, SABIC vice chairman and chief executive officer.
Saudi Arabia is seeking to diversify its economy away from oil and plans to hold an initial public offering for a portion of its state-run oil-production company, Saudi Arabian Oil Co., also known as Aramco. Over the last decade, that company has made significant investments in refining as well as chemical operations around the world.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/exxon-saudi-firm-seek-to-build-petrochemical-plant-on-u-s-gulf-coast-1469464804
-
Gov. Wolf, Other Pennsylvania Officials Gathering Ideas on How to Leverage Shell's Ethane Cracker
Jul 25, 2016 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jamison Cocklin
Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf visited Pittsburgh on Friday to meet with lawmakers, business leaders and other stakeholders, as his administration begins to escalate its role in helping to fortify the economic development that's expected to stem from Royal Dutch Shell plc's decision to build a multi-billion dollar ethane cracker in the state.
At a roundtable discussion downtown at JLL Inc., a commercial real estate firm that worked with Shell during the site selection process, Wolf called the cracker transformational and said it's likely to change the economic landscape, not just in Western Pennsylvania, where it will be located, but for the rest of the state as well.
"There's a dynamism here, an energy; a lot of really, really good things are happening," Wolf said of Pittsburgh's growth in recent years. "I want to do what I can to keep that going. And one of the big game-changers is the cracker plant.
"What I want to talk about today is what do we need to do to make sure we have the skills, the infrastructure, to make sure that we're ready not just for the cracker plant -- which is going to be big in and of itself -- but for all the other jobs that are going to come to this area and to Pennsylvania because of this," he told roundtable participants.
Shell has already spent millions of dollars on site preparation and administrative work for the facility, which would be built on the site of a former zinc-smelting plant next to the Ohio River in Potter and Center townships in Beaver County, about 30 miles northwest of Pittsburgh (see Shale Daily, March 4).
Given that activity, many industry and state officials believed the cracker would eventually be built. But in the weeks since Shell made a final investment decision to move forward with the plant, they've seemed equally surprised, marveling at the work that now needs to be done to build on the decision during recent discussions about the regional economy and how it can accommodate a robust petrochemical industry (see Shale Daily, July 5; June 27).
Shell said in June that it would build the cracker, which would have a capacity to process more than 100,000 b/d of ethane to make 1.6 million metric tons/year (mmty) of polyethylene and 1.5 mmty of ethylene -- key building blocks for plastics (see Shale Daily, June 8; June 7).
Participants in Friday's roundtable discussed a jumble of issues from capital constraints and infrastructure issues to housing and transportation. But the primary focus was on workforce development as Shell prepares to break ground and after the facility is up and running.
During construction, which is set to begin in December 2017, Shell expects to employ 6,000. Once the facility is operational, sometime in the early 2020s, it would employ 600. Based on public reports of similar projects, the Wolf administration said, the projected economic impact of the cracker is estimated to be $6 billion.
Wolf recently signed the state's 2016-2017 budget. He has focused heavily on education spending, pushing to secure an additional $200 million in basic education funding and a nearly $40 million increase for higher education this year. Stakeholders on the roundtable asked Wolf to continue beefing up support for universities, community colleges and trade schools across the state to better prepare the workforce for the construction of the cracker and similar projects in the future.
There were also concerns about employing enough Pennsylvanians at the worksite and the facility once it's operational. "I think we might be in a crunch," said Rich Stanizzo, business manager of the Pittsburgh Regional Building Trades Council, about the area's ability to meet Shell's demand for labor.
Early in the planning process, he said, initial estimates called for roughly 12,000 construction workers on the site. Stanizzo said the region currently has a base of about 40,000 tradesman to draw from at any give time. With calls for as many as 1,200 electricians, 1,200 pipefitters and more than two dozen crane operators, Stanizzo said it's going to be difficult to source manpower locally, conceding that some with the necessary skills would likely have to travel from the Gulf Coast.
Allegheny County Executive Rich Fitzgerald said one of the region's last major projects was the construction of Heinz Field, home of the Pittsburgh Steelers. Fitzgerald said the cracker is "like building 25 Heinz Fields, $6 to $7 billion.
Wolf called the challenges "interesting" and the "start of something really big." He credited former Gov. Tom Corbett, who participated in the roundtable, for landing the facility in the state.
"From my perspective, I don't think any of us can reason completely where this is going to go," Corbett said. "I view the cracker itself as the first seedling of an oak tree."
Corbett challenged the participants to be thinking decades ahead, as he anticipates more building along the shores of the Ohio River as it's revitalized with Shell's cracker and additional oil and gas-related development.
Absent from the roundtable were members of the upstream and midstream industries, which will be responsible for supplying the cracker with feedstock. Similar to other state officials across the Appalachian Basin, Wolf, who held another roundtable in Beaver County on Thursday, is just beginning to gather input about what more can be done to help build the region’s petrochemical industry.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/107175-gov-wolf-other-pennsylvania-officials-gathering-ideas-on-how-to-leverage-shells-ethane-cracker
-
Proposed Calif. Methane Regs Rankle Producers
Jul 25, 2016 | E&E Climatewire
By Debra Kahn
Oil and gas companies are worried about pending regulations to reduce methane from their operations in California.
The draft regulations, which the California Air Resources Board (ARB) released at the end of May and aired at a Sacramento hearing last week, envision rules for monitoring, repairing leaks and capturing vapor from facilities that produce, process and store oil and natural gas, including underground storage tanks like the one in Southern California's Aliso Canyon that ruptured last year (ClimateWire, Feb. 5).
While the oil and gas sector as a whole is responsible for about 15 percent of the state's methane emissions, ARB's regulations would cover the roughly 4 percent of in-state methane emissions that come from production, processing and storage. Other state agencies are working on regulations to cover leaks from pipelines.
Overall, the rules are intended to reduce emissions from the covered sources by more than half, or around 1.5 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent annually. They're part of a larger push by California to address short-lived climate pollutants, which also include black carbon -- generated by forest fires -- and hydrofluorocarbons.
California is the seventh-largest petroleum producer in the country overall, but the third-largest crude oil producer. Its proposed methane regulations go further than the ones that U.S. EPA proposed in May (Greenwire, May 12).
While EPA's rules would cover new and modified sources, California's also would cover existing sources. EPA is collecting information from existing sources, but won't have a rule ready until after President Obama leaves office.
Nos. 1 and 2 in crude production -- North Dakota and Texas -- are on the record opposing EPA's regulations, but California sees the federal rules as a spur, one environmentalist said.
"They want to make sure they're not weaker than the feds," said Kathryn Phillips, director of Sierra Club California, which supports the proposed rules. Regulators were also driven by the leak at Aliso Canyon, as well as subsequent, smaller leaks found elsewhere in the state.
"The evidence of what the problem is kind of forced the regulators; they can't ignore what's so obvious," she said.
California is trying to harmonize its rules with EPA, as well as with local air districts that are already in charge of regulating emissions from oil and gas equipment. Local air officers cautioned that it would increase their workload, but said they are on board with the regulations.
"Implementation of this rule ... is going to be challenging," said Alan Abbs, executive director of the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association. "A regulation isn't any good if it can't be effectively enforced."
In addition to reducing global warming gases, the regulations are expected to reduce air pollutants that are emitted alongside methane and can cause asthma, cancer and other illnesses. The majority of the reductions in volatile organic compounds like benzene and formaldehyde are expected to occur in the San Joaquin Valley, which suffers from perpetual poor air quality and is also home to some of the state's poorest residents.
ARB Chairwoman Mary Nichols said the consideration of conventional pollutants in a greenhouse gas regulation was a "landmark in the board's evolution."
"We're making sure we're really trying to optimize for both of these things," she said. "It's a challenge, but it's not impossible."
Cost calculations hinge on science
State regulators say the cost of the regulations on the economy as a whole will be negligible, and will cost companies $15 to 17 per ton, but oil industry representatives are disputing that. They argue that the state is using a misleading method of calculating the emissions reductions over time.
Since methane stays in the atmosphere for less time than carbon dioxide but is more effective at causing global warming during its lifetime, California is using a shorter life-span estimate than it uses for CO2 -- 20 years, instead of 100. By using the 20-year calculation, which assumes a higher concentration of methane, the regulations become less expensive per ton of reductions.
"Using the 20-[year] GWP [global warming potential], which is more than three times the 100-[year] GWP, makes the emissions estimates from the regulation appear to be three times the emissions estimates of standard GHG programs," the Western States Petroleum Association wrote in comments filed last week. "It also makes the costs for this regulation appear to be three times smaller when compared to other GHG programs."
Southern California Gas Co., which owns the Aliso Canyon storage facility, also called for ARB to use the 100-year formula, as well as to allow more time to comply with storage well monitoring requirements.
WSPA is also arguing that the regulations overlap with existing rules imposed by local air districts, and that some of the rules could actually increase pollution by using diesel generators to run the machines that collect the methane.
"As written, it still will result in two sets of inspections, two programs and two record-keeping requirements," said Jenifer Pitcher WSPA's San Joaquin Valley regional coordinator. As well, she said, a start date of January 2018 would give local air districts just nine months to figure out their permitting procedures from the time ARB approves the regulations, which is expected in the spring of 2017.
Environmentalists and residents of the Aliso Canyon area were particularly happy that the latest version of the rules is tighter than a February draft, which would have allowed operators to test equipment once a year after meeting leak standards for five consecutive quarters. The new version requires quarterly testing in perpetuity, which SoCalGas opposes.
A resident of the Porter Ranch neighborhood, where the leak occurred, said her daughters suffered from having to switch schools for four months. "They couldn't even have a decent [birthday] party because all the kids were dropping out of school like flies," said Cheri Derohanian.
Board members who will be voting on the regulations next year appeared pleased with agency staff's progress since February.
"You've clearly hit the sweet spot when we have angry mothers on one side and oil and gas on the other, so great job," said ARB board member Alexander Sherriffs.
http://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2016/07/25/stories/1060040716
-
U.S. and Mexico Launch Next Steps of North American Deal
Jul 25, 2016 | E&E Climatewire
By Jean Chemnick
President Obama and Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto released new steps Friday for how the countries will implement last month's "Three Amigos" deal, including their pledge with Canada to draw half the continent's power from nonemitting sources by 2025.
Meeting in Washington, D.C., the two presidents launched a slate of collaborations aimed at drawing down methane emissions from oil and gas, planning for deep decarbonization by midcentury, and boosting the continent's supply of renewable energy. The visit followed last month's North American Leaders' Summit, which produced a comprehensive and sweeping continental decarbonization plan (ClimateWire, June 28).
Friday's meeting took place against the backdrop of last week's Republican National Convention, where illegal immigration from Mexico was raised frequently by GOP nominee Donald Trump and other participants. But Obama in remarks from the White House said of Mexico, "We're neighbors, and we're friends, and we're family."
The two countries reaffirmed their commitment to attaining two shared climate diplomacy goals this year: an amendment to the Montreal Protocol to control hydrofluorocarbons and a market-based mechanism on aviation emissions. Parties to the ozone deal were in Vienna on Friday considering the HFC amendment, with both U.S. EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy and Secretary of State John Kerry participating in negotiations. The administration hopes for a final deal in October.
The presidents also launched collaborations on methane and black carbon and announced new members of the U.S.-Mexico Energy Business Council, which will begin meeting this autumn. The governments will also host a clean energy investment roundtable or trade mission before February 2017, they said.
The two countries are also working with Canada to produce a road map by the end of the year that will set the continent on track to make long-term greenhouse gas cuts under last year's Paris Agreement. And Mexico will adopt the administration's social cost of carbon (SCC) figure when calculating the incremental climate costs of projects and investments.
Greens praised the collaboration as a boon to both transborder cooperation and the environment.
"Today's announcement provides yet another illustration of the growing importance of North American leadership on climate and clean energy -- one of many recent bright spots in climate action," said Nat Keohane of the Environmental Defense Fund.
Greg Dotson, vice president of energy and climate change at the Center for American Progress, said the meetings and technical workshops rolled out Friday would help make last month's North American deal a reality.
He praised Mexico's adoption of the SCC as particularly important, saying it "would be a step toward the ultimate goal of creating a low-carbon continent."
http://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2016/07/25/stories/1060040706
-
Convention Shows Democrats Support Fracking, Activists on the Fringe
Jul 25, 2016 | The Hill - Congress Blog
By Katie Brown
In a recent op-ed in The Hill, Wenonah Hauter of Food & Water Watch claimed that “fracking has emerged as a key issue in 2016” but certainly not in the way she and the anti-fracking movement intended.
If fracking has come to the forefront of the 2016 campaign it’s because both Democrats and Republicans strongly support it – and activists trying to ban fracking are finding themselves very much on the fringe. How do we know? Because the organization Ms. Hauter represents just spent the past week placing fake poop under statues of donkeys throughout Philadelphia to protest the Democratic National Committee’s rejection of their ban-fracking platform. These are not the actions of folks who have the science on their side.
has said that the “rapid deployment of hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling technologies” is “an important reason for a reduction of GHG emissions in the United States.”
The clear role of fracking in reducing emissions was echoed by President Obama’s Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Gina McCarthy who explained, “Responsible development of natural gas is an important part of our work to curb climate change and support a robust clean energy market at home.” Virginia Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine put it well when he said, “we’ve been improving our emissions in this country without agreeing to the Kyoto Accord, without congressional actions, because of innovations in the natural gas area.”
Ban-fracking activists also refuse to accept the results of the EPA’s five year study, which concluded unequivocally that fracking has not led to “widespread, systemic impacts” on drinking water resources. Ms. Hauter tried to suggest that the EPA’s science advisors have rejected that finding when the opposite is true – they have asked for EPA to provide more details, not change its topline finding, thereby affirming EPA’s conclusion is sound. EPA isn’t alone, either. Study after study has found that fracking hasn’t harmed drinking water, but activists just continue to deny the science.
Considering all this, it’s no wonder that President Obama’s top science advisor, John Holdren, rejected ban-fracking activists’ agenda saying, “The notion that we’re going to keep it all in the ground is unrealistic.”
It’s also no surprise that the DNC rejected activists call to ban fracking on the Democratic platform, since most prominent Democrats have noted the incredible benefits of fracking. Just to name a few, New York Sen. Chuck Schumer said, “Overall the Democrats throughout the country have supported fracking. The president has, most of us have, and it’s worked quite well.” Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper noted that “Based on experience and science, I recognized that fracking was one of our very best and safest extraction techniques.” Gov. Jerry Brown of California put it more succinctly when he said that anti-fracking activists “don’t know what the hell they’re talking about.”
Instead of spreading poop around Philadelphia, maybe Food & Water Watch should review its advocacy and embrace the science for once.
Katie Brown, PhD, is the Team Lead and spokesperson for Energy In Depth, a research and education program of the Independent Petroleum Association of America (IPAA).
http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/energy-environment/289091-convention-shows-democrats-support-fracking-activists
-
Who Should the Oil Industry Root For, Democrats or Republicans?
Jul 25, 2016 | Forbes
By Michael Lynch
After George W. Bush was elected president, a friend attended an oil industry meeting and said that the mood was celebratory: “They think they’ll be drilling on the White House lawn,” she noted. Reality proved somewhat different, despite the controversial Cheney Energy Task Force, which seemed to consist of industry executives setting out a wish list of policies, with a nod to energy efficiency. The controversy centered on the closed nature of deliberations and the attendees, with minimal attention paid to its suggestions, all too typical of our “focus on the contest, not the policy” culture.
The Bush/Cheney Administration did little for the petroleum industry, and some noted with chagrin that neither was really an “oil man” despite their reputations as such. Cheney was a lifetime politician, going to Halliburton only after leaving government, and George W. Bush wore a number of hats, and oil industry executive was not his primary occupation.
More prominently, many in the industry were appalled at Gulf War II, fearing that U.S. war against an Arab/Muslim nation would create a backlash against them and that their postwar ‘access’ to Iraqi oil would be worth little, given a likely unattractive fiscal system and high political risk. And on other issues, like offshore drilling or the ban on exploration of ANWR in Alaska, the Bush Administration made little effort to change pre-existing policies.
Which isn’t to dispute that Gulf War II, by removing Iraqi oil from the market for a time and delaying upstream expansion in that country, helped to create the 2003-2014 oil price boom, certainly a benefit to the industry. But overall, they seemed to fit into the “anti-Communist Nixon goes to China” theme, where it is easier to adopt policies that run contrary to your background, because you will suffer less political opprobrium. Bush favoring the oil industry would run into ferocious opposition; Obama less so.
And the Obama Administration’s track record is much more mixed than many seem to remember. It has taken a neutral stance with regard to drilling, proposing to open up more offshore areas just before the Macondo disaster put a stop to that. Shell’s offshore Alaska exploration was approved, and the government took a pragmatic approach to fracking, avoiding the hysterical, Luddite reaction of many liberals. Other steps, like the opposition to the Keystone XL pipeline and the suspension of offshore drilling after the Macondo disaster, were definitely much more political than rational.
Again, the “Nixon goes to China” syndrome comes into play. If fracking had become a major issue during the George Bush administration, the most reasonable, pragmatic policy response would have met with a “he’s in the pocket of the oil industry” fury. Nobody would accuse either the Democratic Party or the Obama Administration of such a thing, so they can afford to be rational instead of ideological. Consider Colorado, where the Democratic governor successfully generated a consensus for regulation of fracking, which would not interfere seriously with upstream investment.
The elephant in the room is, as always, price. Democrats have presided over periods of very high prices, as in the Carter years and most of the Obama Administration, whereas the Reagan Administration is often blamed for the 1986 oil price collapse. This latter follows a logic chain along the lines of: Reagan was anti-Soviet, the Soviets relied heavily on petroleum export revenue, the U.S. government urged the Saudis to lower oil prices, they did, and this accelerated the collapse of the Soviet Union. The argument was put forward by Peter Schweizer in Victory, and embraced by many in the oil sector who like to think that prices dropped not due to market forces but as the result of a deliberate political act.
This provides a perfect example of an argument that appears logical, and seems to have the support of some facts (diplomatic cables), but fails the laugh test. The U.S. government has, with perhaps one exception, always encouraged the Saudis and OPEC more generally to lower oil prices, so the fact that a cable includes such comments is to be expected and doesn’t reflect a conspiracy between anti-Soviet Reagan advisers and the Saudi government. As the figure below shows, Saudi production was collapsing in the 1980s because prices were too high; a cut in prices became essential.
Although it might seem that Democrats have usually produced more favorable environments for the petroleum industry, much of that is correlation without causality. They have happened to be in power during the Iranian Revolution and the Arab Spring, both periods of high prices. Of course, there might be something to the idea that Republicans are more inclined to favor free markets, which usually favor consumers over producers because they mean lower prices, but you will probably not find any oil men or women denouncing such a stance.
My next post will evaluate the likely impact of the two candidates’ possible administrations on the petroleum industry.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/michaellynch/2016/07/25/who-should-the-oil-industry-root-for-democrats-or-republicans/#3de8756b32c5
-
Canada to Accelerate Oil Train Car Phaseout
Jul 25, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
Canadian regulators are pushing up the deadline for old tank cars to be banned from carrying crude oil.
Tank cars that do not meet new safety standards from Canada’s federal government must not carry oil after Nov. 1 under a new schedule due to be formally announced Monday, CBC News reported.
That’s six months earlier than the original phase-out timeline for non-jacketed cars, which don’t have additional steel jackets, and 18 months than what was previously scheduled for jacketed cars.
The accelerated timeline is one of the latest steps that Canadian regulators have taken to improve oil-by-rail safety, following a July 2013 derailment and explosion in Quebec that killed 47.
Officials in Canada and the United States have rushed to improve oil train safety after that disaster and a series of other derailments and explosions since then.
Both countries last year finalized regulations setting new standards for oil tank cars and deadlines for getting the old cars retrofitted or off the rails. In the United States, older cars can remain in service for years.
New standards on both sides of the board also include rules on operation, inspection and other aspects of oil train use.
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/289072-canada-to-accelerate-oil-train-car-phaseout
-
CSX: Bearing Failed 9 Miles Before Tennessee Derailment
Jul 25, 2016 | AP (In Washington Post)
CSX Transportation Inc. says the mechanical failure that caused a July 2015 train derailment in Tennessee actually began about nine miles earlier.
The Daily Times reports (http://bit.ly/2aorOgB) CSX explained the cause of the derailment of a tank car carrying 24,000 gallons of a toxic chemical called acrylonitrile in responses filed in court Thursday to two lawsuits.
CSX says a roller bearing initially failed near a crossing in Louisville. Equipment designed to detect the problem failed to do so for about nine miles. In the meantime, a broken axle punctured the tank car and started a fire that burned over 16 hours, sending dozens to the hospital and forcing 5,000 residents of the town of Maryville to evacuate.
CSX and co-defendant Union Tank Car Co. called the lawsuits frivolous.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/csx-bearing-failed-9-miles-before-tennessee-derailment/2016/07/25/0f8b2ea8-5272-11e6-b652-315ae5d4d4dd_story.html
-
Obama Admin Counters WOTUS Challengers' Document Request
Jul 25, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Tiffany Stecker
The Obama administration pushed back Friday against accusations it handed an incomplete record to the court handling a challenge to the Clean Water Rule.
Lawyers for U.S. EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers were responding to challengers who asked the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to force the release of internal memos as part of the record to challenge the legality of the rule, also known as Waters of the U.S., or WOTUS (Greenwire, July 11).
The memos in question show Army Corps officials strongly objecting to how WOTUS was written. The documents were the focus of news stories last year (Greenwire, July 27).
WOTUS would redefine which waterways and wetlands receive automatic protection under the Clean Water Act. Implementation of the rule is on hold pending the outcome of litigation.
The administration argues the memos represent the deliberative process of agencies and shouldn't be included in the review process.
"The decisionmaker's mental processes and subjective intent are irrelevant to the court's review," Department of Justice lawyers wrote in filings last week.
Courts have historically considered the administrative record to be what the agencies submit.
"Only in exceptionally narrow circumstances will courts look beyond the record compiled by the agency," the administration argues.
EPA and the corps, its filing says, handed over a "robust record that thoroughly documents and explains the agencies' decision-making process and rationale for the Clean Water Rule."
Vermont Law School professor Pat Parenteau agrees with the administration.
"The administrative record is whatever the agency says it is," he said. "My guess is the court is going to be very reluctant to expand the record."
Such fights aren't unusual in regulatory challenges, said Larry Liebesman, a senior adviser with the water resources policy firm Dawson and Associates. At issue is whether the documents are considered "deliberative process," which could shield them from the public eye in a courtroom.
WOTUS challenges over the rule are expected to last well through the next presidential administration.
Click here to read the Obama administration's response to the motion to complete the administrative record.
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2016/07/25/stories/1060040741
-
How Tim Kaine helped Persuade Virginians — Including Conservatives — To Act on Climate Change
Jul 25, 2016 | Washington Post
By Chris Mooney
Donald Trump’s running mate, Mike Pence, questions climate change just like Trump himself does.
By contrast, a peek into the recent past of Hillary Clinton’s running mate, Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia, suggests he takes the issue seriously and has paid particular attention to how it is affecting his constituents in the Hampton Roads area of Virginia, which faces some of the largest rates of sea level rise in the country. The link also underscores the strong connection between climate change and national security, because one of the key players that must grapple with sea level rise in the area is Naval Station Norfolk, “the largest naval complex in the world.”
And it suggests that by approaching the issue in this way — focusing on regional vulnerability and on national security — Kaine has actually been able to make some significant bipartisan progress.
To understand why the Hampton Roads region is so vulnerable, it helps to think about how it’s like another region that is often cited as the only one in the United States that’s worse off — New Orleans. As in New Orleans, in the Hampton Roads area it isn’t just that seas are rising, but also that land itself is getting lower.
“The land is sinking at about three or four millimeters a year, and sea level is rising, three or four millimeters per year,” said Larry Atkinson, an oceanographer at Old Dominion University in Norfolk. “So that adds up to two feet per century. And then there’s a bunch of new evidence that show that the whole North Atlantic Ocean is changing, and as it changes, the Gulf Stream slows down, we see sea level rise.”
Some of these factors, like subsidence, may be partly natural and geologically driven (though subsidence is also caused by humans pumping water out of the ground). But rising seas — at an accelerating rate — is a phenomenon reflecting global warming. The Gulf Stream changes, too, are thought to be due to climate change.
According to the Center for Sea Level Rise at Old Dominion University, Hampton Roads ranks 10th globally when it comes to the value of assets that are exposed to rising seas.
Which brings us to Kaine. In 2014, ODU launched a “pilot project” to begin to address sea level rise by coordinating all the parties involved — local, state, federal — to address the issue. That’s when Kaine got really involved, Atkinson said.
“Several years ago we started working to get the Navy and the federal agencies and the cities to start to work together,” he said. “Kaine, after he heard we were doing that, he called a briefing where he got all of the elected representatives down here to get up on stage together to listen to this from the Corps of Engineers and the Navy.”
That 2014 event — sponsored by Kaine, three congressional colleagues (including two Republicans) and two regional mayors — was followed by letters from Kaine to federal agencies seeking support for sea level resilience planning efforts in the region. At the time, discussing the forum, Kainetold the Richmond Times-Dispatch that “It only worked if I could get Democrats and Republicans to do it together.”
“Virginia Officials Accomplish the Impossible: A Bipartisan Sea Level Rise Discussion,” wrote Mashable at the time.
Kaine himself seems to take a cautious, un-provocative stance on the issue. He argues that while some of the area’s sea level rise is due to natural causes, the safe bet is to take action: “If we act now on clean energy and infrastructure resilience — and sea level rise is on the low end of that spectrum — we’ll have cleaner air and tougher infrastructure, and our fossil energy resources will still be there. If the reverse happens — we don’t act now, and sea level rise is on the high end — our generation will have much to answer for with our grandchildren.”
“Sen. Tim Kaine has been an early and strong supporter of Old Dominion University’s coastal resiliency and recurrent flooding initiatives,” said Morris Foster, vice president for research at ODU, in a statement “Sen. Kaine helped kick off ODU’s Intergovernmental Pilot Project to coordinate local, state and federal responses to rising seas with a bipartisan panel from Virginia’s congressional delegation.
The local Virginian-Pilot newspaper accordingly called Kaine “perhaps the region’s loudest voice in Washington calling for a coordinated attack backed by federal funding” on the sea level rise issue. The Richmond Times-Dispatch, meanwhile, credited Kaine with bringing Republicans along to support action to address rising seas in the region by highlighting its national security consequences.
“It’s one thing to deny climate change to a friendly crowd on the campaign trail,” the paper editorialized. “It’s something else entirely to deny it in front of an angry admiral who’s worried about the fate of his ports.”
The ultimate end game for the area, said Atkinson, must be for a New Orleans-style solution: Major construction of seawalls and other defenses to stave off the sea, which requires vast federal planning and expenditures. He says this process is already beginning through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
“We’re going into a new phase now, all the mayors are agreeing that they’ve got to get together on this, there’s no argument about what’s happening,” Atkinson said.
Some environmental activists have faulted Kaine for being too favorable to fracking. And when you listen to Kaine talk about the sea level problem, it isn’t as though he speaks as a climate change crusader. The language is practical, no nonsense.
But it’s that very combination of avoiding polarization, and focusing on the hard-to-ignore national defense implications of rising seas, that seems to have made Kaine effective on the issue.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/07/25/how-tim-kaine-helped-convince-virginians-including-conservatives-to-act-on-climate-change/
-
Legionnaires’ Outbreaks in Flint Linked to Corrosive Tap Water
Jul 25, 2016 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Janet Pelley
The tainted water crisis in Flint, Mich., didn’t just poison children with lead; it also likely contributed to two outbreaks of Legionnaires’ disease, according to a new study (Environ. Sci. Technol. Lett. 2016, DOI:10.1021/acs.estlett.6b00192). When Flint switched its drinking water source in 2014 from Lake Huron to the Flint River, the corrosive river water created ideal growth conditions for deadly Legionella bacteria. The first to link pipe corrosion to risk of disease at the community scale, the study is a wake-up call to the many cities failing to address corrosion in their aging water pipes.
Legionnaires’ disease is a deadly pneumonia caused by inhaling Legionella pneumophila or other species of Legionella bacteria that lurk in the organic matter lining drinking water pipes. The disease has been on the rise in the U.S., with cases quadrupling over the last 10 years. Headline-grabbing outbreaks often occur from a contaminated ventilation or hot water system in a hospital, and that’s where monitoring and prevention efforts have been focused.
Yet the majority of Legionnaires’ disease cases in the U.S. arise in private homes with no common link other than their water supply, underscoring that drinking water distribution systems are the ultimate source of outbreaks. “Furthermore, lab-scale type studies have illustrated that corrosion in drinking water pipes can stimulate the growth of Legionella,” says Amy Pruden, an environmental microbiologist at Virginia Tech and an author of the study. Corrosive water dissolves the protective mineral lining in pipes and then leaches iron out of old iron pipes. Iron is a micronutrient that boosts Legionella reproduction. The metal also reacts with and inactivates chlorine disinfectant that otherwise would kill the bacteria.
“Our team recognized that the conditions in Flint—a corrosive new water source in an aging water system—were just right for Legionella,” Pruden says. So before the city switched back to Lake Huron water in October 2015, the scientists decided to sample Flint’s water for Legionella, iron, and free chlorine. At the time of sampling, Flint had already experienced outbreaks of Legionnaires’ disease in June 2014 and May 2015, but the researchers were unaware because public health agencies did not notify the public about the outbreak.
The Virginia Tech team, led by environmental engineer Marc A. Edwards, collected tap water samples from homes and hospitals in and around Flint and determined Legionellaconcentrations by counting copies of genes unique to Legionella using quantitative polymerase chain reaction methods. They compared the measurements to those from baseline U.S. water surveys that they and the U.S. EPA carried out in the absence of outbreaks and from Flint buildings that remained on Lake Huron water.
In homes supplied with Flint River water, the scientists recorded Legionella concentrations roughly seven times as high as those found in the baseline surveys. The researchers measured a mean concentration of 1,890 gene copies/mL of L. pneumophila in the hospitals, about 470 times as high as the alert threshold of 4 gene copies/mL suggested by a recent study (Mol. Cell. Probes 2015, DOI: 10.1016/j.mcp.2014.09.002). In more than half the water samples from Flint, the researchers could not detect any chlorine, which they expected due to corrosion. The team reported no measurable iron in the baseline surveys and the control group of buildings using Lake Huron water, but found high levels of 51 ppb in the Flint homes and hospitals. NoLegionella were detected in the buildings using Lake Huron water.
“This paper shows that the water quality disruptions in Flint directly contributed to the presence of Legionella bacteria and the disease cases that subsequently occurred,” says Janet E. Stout, director of the Special Pathogens Laboratory Pittsburgh, the nation’s leading Legionella testing laboratory. She and Pruden support calls for the Environmental Protection Agency to require testing for Legionella in drinking water systems. “Water operators need to understand that when water service is disrupted, the risk of Legionnaires’ disease can go up and the community should be notified,” she concludes.
http://cen.acs.org/articles/94/web/2016/07/Legionnairesoutbreaks-Flint-linked-corrosive-tap.html
Industry and Association News - There are no clips to report at this time.
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested