Preview Newsletter
ACC AM 9/19/16
-
Oversight Hearing On The Impacts Of The Obama CEQ’s Final Guidance For GHG Emissions And The Effects Of Climate Change
Sep 21, 2016 | Committee on Natural Resources
Location: 1334 Longworth / 10:00 AM -
(ACC Mentioned) Industry Groups Press For Ex-Im Bank’s Full Operation
Sep 16, 2016 | American Shipper
By Chris Gillis
Exporters that rely on U.S. Export-Import Bank financing to secure large international deals are frustrated that the bank’s board currently cannot approve transactions of more than $10 million without a quorum. -
Prepare Now for 2017 Chemical Inventory Update, Attorneys Say
Sep 19, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
Chemical manufacturers should start reviewing records immediately to identify chemicals they have made or imported over the last 10 years, attorneys and other Toxic Substances Control Act specialists say. -
(ACC Mentioned) Why Tighter Asbestos Restrictions Could be Bad News For Chlorine Producers
Sep 16, 2016 | Chem Info
By Andy Szal
As public health advocates push for asbestos to be at the top of the Environmental Protection Agency's list for upcoming chemical evaluations, some chemical producers could be forced to alter their manufacturing processes. -
California Proposes Listing PFOA, PFOS Under Prop 65
Sep 19, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
California's Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (Oehha) has issued a notice of intent to list perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) as developmental toxicants under Proposition 65. -
CalEPA to Add PFOS, PFOA to Prop. 65 List
Sep 19, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Joyce E. Cutler
The California Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment intends to add chemicals used in waterproof garments, carpets, stain repellents and fast food wrappers to the Proposition 65 reproductive toxicity list. -
EU Proposes Effective Ban on 12 Chemical Substances
Sep 19, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Stephen Gardner
The European Commission Sept. 16 proposed an effective ban on 12 chemicals in the European Union by adding them to the so-called REACH authorization list, which would bring an end to a two-year moratorium on listing new substances for authorization in the EU. -
US House Advances Conflict Minerals Reporting Repeal Measure
Sep 19, 2016 | Chemical Watch
The US House Financial Services Committee has approved an amended version of a bill to repeal the US's conflict minerals reporting rule. -
Maryland Fracking Regulations to Miss Oct. 1 Deadline
Sep 19, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Kathy Lundy Springuel
The Maryland Department of the Environment will not have regulations for hydraulic fracturing in place by Oct. 1, as required by a 2015 state law, but officials are reviewing comments received this summer on four “issue papers” and will “propose regulations sometime in the fall,” a spokesman told Bloomberg BNA Sept. 16. -
Small Retailers, Refiners Support Changing RFS 'Obligation'
Sep 16, 2016 | Inside EPA
Some small retailers and a refiner largely owned by billionaire investor Carl Icahn in new legal briefs filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit are backing calls to shift the renewable fuel standard (RFS) “point of obligation” from refiners to fuel blenders, which they say will fix a major problem with the RFS. -
Attorneys Practice For Landmark Court Battle
Sep 19, 2016 | E&E Daily
By Emily Holden and Ellen M. Gilmer
Lawyers challenging U.S. EPA's Clean Power Plan in oral arguments before federal judges next Tuesday are spending this week sharpening their talking points in moot courts. -
Trump To Talk Fracking, Energy Specifics This Week — Adviser
Sep 19, 2016 | E&E News
By Hannah Northey,
Donald Trump and his top energy adviser, oil baron Harold Hamm, will appear in the hard-hit battleground state of Pennsylvania this week to rally the oil and gas industry in the heart of Marcellus Shale country. -
Regulators Keep Major Pipeline Closed Amid Spill Probe
Sep 19, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Chris Marr
Federal regulators ordered a section of a major petroleum pipeline in the Southeast to remain shut down until the cause of a more than 6,000-barrel gasoline leak in Alabama can be determined and the pipeline repaired. -
Dakota Pipeline Protests Rise, Could Delay Completion
Sep 19, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Meenal Vamburkar
The Dakota Access Pipeline has been stalled by the White House. Now protesters want to make sure it is killed. -
Army Corps Signals Timeline For Easement Decision
Sep 16, 2016 | E&E News PM
By Ellen M. Gilmer
The Army Corps of Engineers will likely spend a number of weeks — not months — considering whether to grant an easement for a portion of the controversial Dakota Access pipeline. -
Pipeline Delay Stirs Anger, But Not Yet Action, On Capitol Hill
Sep 17, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
Republican lawmakers who supported the Keystone XL project are slamming President Obama’s delay of the Dakota Access Pipeline, calling it another example of his harmful approach to energy production. -
Groups Sue EPA Over SO2 NAAQS Attainment Designations
Sep 16, 2016 | Inside EPA
Groups representing environmentalists, the power sector and others are suing EPA in several federal appeals courts over the agency's latest round of designations for areas that are either attaining or out of attainment with the 2010 sulfur dioxide (SO2) national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) set at 75 parts per billion (ppb). -
California’s Latest Pioneering Climate Laws Provide A Model For The Country
Sep 17, 2016 | The Hill - Congress Blog
By Vien Truong
There is a growing movement across the country working hard to keep fossil fuels in the ground. Two weeks ago Native Americans resisting the Dakota Access Pipeline in North Dakota were attacked by dogs, which were paid for by the fossil fuel company that is trying to build the pipeline.
Congressional Hearings
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
-
Sep 21, 2016 | Committee on Natural Resources
-
(ACC Mentioned) Industry Groups Press For Ex-Im Bank’s Full Operation
Sep 16, 2016 | American Shipper
By Chris Gillis
Exporters that rely on U.S. Export-Import Bank financing to secure large international deals are frustrated that the bank’s board currently cannot approve transactions of more than $10 million without a quorum.
Exporters that rely on U.S. Export-Import Bank financing to secure large international deals are frustrated that the bank’s board currently cannot approve transactions of more than $10 million without a quorum.
The bank requires three of its five board members to approve large financing packages. However, the board currently has only two seats filled and congressional approval for the third bank board director’s appointment has stalled on Capitol Hill.
“As a result, manufacturers and other exporters throughout the United States are at a significant disadvantage to global competitors who are aggressively supported by their own governments’ export credit agencies,” a group of 15 large trade association warned in a letter to both House and Senate leadership this week.
Some of the trade groups to sign the letter include the Aerospace Industries Association, American Chemistry Council, Association of Equipment Manufacturers, National Association of Manufacturers, National Foreign Trade Council, and U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
The groups said they are "encouraged" to see language in both the House and Senate foreign operations appropriations bills that would "temporarily modify the bank’s quorum requirement so that it may again review transactions over $10 million dollars."
"We strongly urge you to include this modification, which was also on the White House’s anomaly list, to the bank’s board in the continuing resolution,” they added.
However, Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, chairman of the House Freedom Caucus, is leading the charge to block this attempt to modify Ex-Im Bank's quorum requirement.
Jordan told The Daily Signal Thursday that what supporters of the bank on Capitol Hill are attempting to do is “just wrong,” adding “the Ex-Im Bank and the cronyism associated with it is wrong, and now they’re changing the rules midstream? That is wrong, too.”
The beleaguered bank was closed last summer while a group of Republican lawmakers opposed the reauthorization of its charter. Ex-Im Bank supporters in Congress managed reauthorize its charter on Dec. 3 as part of a long-term transportation bill. The bill approved long-term reauthorization from Congress that will remain in effect through Sept. 30, 2019.http://www.americanshipper.com/main/news/industry-groups-press-for-exim-banks-full-operatio-65385.aspx
-
Prepare Now for 2017 Chemical Inventory Update, Attorneys Say
Sep 19, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
Chemical manufacturers should start reviewing records immediately to identify chemicals they have made or imported over the last 10 years, attorneys and other Toxic Substances Control Act specialists say.
Under the recently amended statute, the Environmental Protection Agency must publish a final regulation to update the TSCA inventory by June 2017. Chemicals that are on the active inventory that EPA's rule will establish can remain in commerce. Other chemicals not on that inventory must go through certain procedures before they can be produced or imported.
Manufacturers will have only 180 days after the inventory regulation is issued to notify the agency about every chemical they have produced or imported over the last decade, Thomas Berger, a partner with Keller and Heckman LLP, said Sept. 13 at a chemical control law seminar the firm held.
The Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act (Pub. L. No. 114-182), which amended TSCA June 22, requires the inventory update rule and 180-day notification period.
The Lautenberg Act allows the EPA to include chemical processors among the companies that will have to notify the agency for the inventory update, said Kathleen Roberts, vice president of Bergeson & Campbell Consortia Management LLC, during a Sept. 12 webinar.
The EPA has not announced whether processors will be included, she said. Processors are companies, such as paint or glue manufacturers, that mix chemicals together without causing chemical reactions. Roberts urged chemical manufacturers and processors to “plan ahead.”
Locating 10 years of records, confidential business information and nomenclature are among the challenges expect to arise, Berger, Roberts and other TSCA specialists said during the seminar and webinar.
Confidentiality to Arise in Inventory Update
This inventory update, or “reset,” provision of the Lautenberg Act, welcomed by many industry representatives, is designed to address a problem. The TSCA Inventory lists more than 84,000 chemicals, but only a fraction of those are in commerce today.
The law requires the EPA to update or “reset” the inventory by dividing it into two parts: an active and an inactive inventory. The active inventory will list chemicals that are or recently have been in commerce, while the inactive inventory will list chemicals that no longer are made or sold.
This process is designed to help EPA focus its oversight on active chemicals and new ones that manufacturers would like to bring to market.
Updating the inventory, however, will be a challenge for many reasons including sorting through computer files and paperwork to identify all the chemicals a company has made or imported during the last 10 years. This may also encompass the chemicals made by one or more other manufacturers that have been acquired during that time, Berger said. The statute does not set a volume threshold limit for chemical notifications, although the agency may suggest limits in the rule it plans to propose by December, he said.
Roberts said manufacturers will need to determine which of their chemicals have their specific molecular identities protected from public release through confidential business information, or CBI, claims, so they can reassert their need for that protection if it is still needed.
Companies may not claim their chemical warrants CBI protection unless it already has that protection, she said.
The Lautenberg Act also will require all confidential business information claims to not only be asserted but be substantiated, Roberts said.
New Rule Will Describe CBI Claim Review
It is unclear how long it will take the agency to compile all the notifications it receives into a final, updated active inventory. During their seminar Keller and Heckman attorneys speculated compilation could take a year, meaning the active and inactive inventories would be complete in late 2018 or early 2019.
Once the EPA has established the active inventory, it will have one year to publish another final rule, Roberts said. That rule will establish a five- to seven-year process through which it will review all CBI claims for active chemicals, she said.
Nomenclature issues, or questions about how a chemical is named, are likely to be a challenging issue, Berger said. The inventory, which began to be established in 1997, is replete with errors, he said.
Its unclear whether the EPA will have the time to complete the inventory update as soon as possible while also sorting through nomenclature issues or working on inventory correction requests—if those continue to be possible, Berger said.
Data Reporting Rule is Starting Point
An important source of information for the EPA and chemical manufacturers will be the Chemical Data Reporting information they must submit to the EPA by the end of September, Berger said.
This year's reports will identify production volumes of many chemicals made in or imported during 2012, 2013, 2014 and 2015.
However, not all chemicals in commerce are reported under the Chemical Data Reporting rule, Berger said.
These include some polymers, chemicals made in small volumes and chemicals made by small manufacturers, he said.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=97285932&vname=dennotallissues&fn=97285932&jd=97285932
-
(ACC Mentioned) Why Tighter Asbestos Restrictions Could be Bad News For Chlorine Producers
Sep 16, 2016 | Chem Info
By Andy Szal
As public health advocates push for asbestos to be at the top of the Environmental Protection Agency's list for upcoming chemical evaluations, some chemical producers could be forced to alter their manufacturing processes.
Bloomberg reports that the chlor-alkali industry accounts for the vast majority of asbestos currently imported into the U.S.; those companies can use asbestos in one of three government-approved processes to make chlorine or caustic soda.
Under newly signed chemical oversight legislation, however, the number of acceptable processes could be trimmed to two.
Asbestos, an industrial carcinogen used for decades in fire-proofing or insulation materials, was long cited as an example of the failures of the 1970s-era Toxic Substances Control Act. The EPA banned most uses of asbestos in 1989, only to see the ban tossed out by a federal appeals court two years later.
Legislation to replace the TSCA, however, was signed in June, and the EPA is set to pare its list of 90 high-priority chemicals to be evaluated down to the 10 it will examine first.
Advocacy groups strongly argued that asbestos should be among them; if the EPA agrees, Bloomberg reported that its use in chlorine production could be restricted or eliminated altogether.
Industry groups, meanwhile, countered than an EPA review would confirm efforts to safeguard chlorine workers from exposure to asbestos. The American Chemistry Council, Bloomberg noted, said that the wet environments in chlorine production limit the airborne asbestos fibers linked to lung disease.
http://www.chem.info/news/2016/09/why-tighter-asbestos-restrictions-could-be-bad-news-chlorine-producers
-
California Proposes Listing PFOA, PFOS Under Prop 65
Sep 19, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
California's Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (Oehha) has issued a notice of intent to list perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) as developmental toxicants under Proposition 65.
It is proposing the action under the authoritative bodies listing mechanism. This is based on the US EPA's findings on the substances.
The proposal to list the substances – and their respective salts – comes after the Developmental and Reproductive Toxicant Identification Committee (Dartic) designated each as a high priority for preparation of hazard identification materials.
PFOA and PFOS are surfactants that have been used in a variety of consumer products. These include:carpets;textiles;leather;non-stick cookware; andfood packaging.
Industry groups have advised against the prioritisation of PFOA and PFOS. They say the resources necessary to prepare hazard identification materials are not merited, given that the substances were due to have been phased out under the EPA’s stewardship programme by the end of 2015.
But several consumer advocacy groups have highlighted scientific evidence linking the chemicals to adverse human health effects and urged they be taken up.
The EPA has proposed a significant new use rule (Snur) to codify the voluntary phase out, but it has not been finalised.
Comments can be made on the proposed listing until 17 October.
https://chemicalwatch.com/49702/california-proposes-listing-pfoa-pfos-under-prop-65
-
CalEPA to Add PFOS, PFOA to Prop. 65 List
Sep 19, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Joyce E. Cutler
The California Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment intends to add chemicals used in waterproof garments, carpets, stain repellents and fast food wrappers to the Proposition 65 reproductive toxicity list.
The Sept. 16 notice of intent to list perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) comes under the California Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, commonly called Prop. 65.
The listing follows the Environmental Protection Agency earlier this year releasing lifetime health advisories of 0.07 micrograms per liter for individual or combined exposure to PFOA and PFOS in drinking water.
CalEPA in August 2015 released a preliminary toxicological evaluation of five chemicals including the surfactants PFOA and PFOS used in a variety of consumer products. PFOA is part of the process in manufacturing Teflon in making nonstick cookware and PFOS in stain repellents and other coatings, the notice said.
The 1986 voter-approved Prop. 65 requires the state to maintain a list of chemicals known to cause cancer and reproductive and developmental harm. The law's regulations require a chemical be listed once a state or federal agency requires that a chemical be labeled or identified as causing cancer or reproductive toxicity, OEHHA said.
Comments are due by Oct. 17 on whether PFOA and PFOS meet the criteria set forth in Prop. 65 regulations.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=97285933&vname=dennotallissues&fn=97285933&jd=97285933
-
EU Proposes Effective Ban on 12 Chemical Substances
Sep 19, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Stephen Gardner
The European Commission Sept. 16 proposed an effective ban on 12 chemicals in the European Union by adding them to the so-called REACH authorization list, which would bring an end to a two-year moratorium on listing new substances for authorization in the EU.
The commission's draft regulation would add the substances to REACH Annex XIV, which includes hazardous chemicals that are subject to usage bans in the EU, unless specific continued-use authorizations are granted.
Annex XIV currently contains 31 substances. Phaseout in the EU of the most hazardous substances if there are viable substitutes is considered one of the main objectives of REACH (Regulation No. 1907/2006 on the registration, evaluation and authorization of chemicals).
But the commission, the EU's executive arm, suspended new additions to Annex XIV in 2014 amid concerns the process of applying for continued-use authorizations was too burdensome for companies. The commission subsequently said it would simplify authorization procedures for substances that are used in low volumes or are needed for spare parts for machinery that is still in use but no longer manufactured.
Phaseout Dates
Comments on the draft regulation can be submitted through Oct. 14.
According to the regulation, use without authorization of eight of the 12 substances would become illegal in the EU 36 months after the regulation enters into force. Those substances are:
• 1-bromopropane (n-propyl bromide);
• 1,2-benzenedicarboxylic acid, di-C6-8-branched alkyl esters, C7 rich;
• 1,2-benzenedicarboxylic acid, di-C7-11-branched and linear alkyl esters;
• 1,2-benzenedicarboxylic acid, dipentylester, branched and linear;
• bis(2-methoxyethyl) phthalate;
• diisopentylphthalate;
• dipentylphthalate; and
• n-pentyl-isopentylphthalate.
Two substances—anthracene oil; and pitch substance, coal tar (high temp.)—would be banned after 39 months.
Two others—4-(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)phenol, ethoxylated; and 4-nonylphenol, branched and linear, ethoxylated—would be banned after 42 months.
The European Chemicals Agency recommended 11 of the substances for Annex XIV in July 2015, while one, 4-(1,1,3,3-tetramethylbutyl)phenol, was recommended in February 2014.
The addition of the substances to Annex XIV was recommended because they have reprotoxic or carcinogenic properties, or are considered to be endocrine disruptors.
Proposal Welcomed
Environmental groups and some EU countries were critical of the commission's decision to suspend new Annex XIV listings. Denmark and eight other countries wrote to the commission in October 2015 saying phasing out the most hazardous substances should be speeded up.
Tatiana Santos, senior policy officer with the European Environmental Bureau, told Bloomberg BNA Sept. 16 that the group welcomed “the commission's step forward to finally resume its work” on Annex XIV listings.
The REACH authorization process aimed to phase out substances of very high concern “while unleashing the innovation potential of European businesses for developing safer alternatives,” Santos said.
“Now is time to catch up, quickly reactivate and speed up the inclusion of SVHCs in the REACH authorization list, and to achieve their substitution,” she added.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=97285910&vname=dennotallissues&fn=97285910&jd=97285910
-
US House Advances Conflict Minerals Reporting Repeal Measure
Sep 19, 2016 | Chemical Watch
The US House Financial Services Committee has approved an amended version of a bill to repeal the US's conflict minerals reporting rule.
HR 5983 – the Financial CHOICE [Creating hope and opportunity for investors, consumers and entrepreneurs] Act – was formally introduced in the House on 9 September. The committee gave the measure the nod, as amended, on a 30-26 margin.
The far-reaching bill calls for comprehensive changes to the US's financial regulations.
Among these, it would repeal section 1502 of the Dodd-Frank Act. This requires publicly traded companies to conduct due diligence and report to the Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) on whether their sourcing of conflict minerals – tin, tungsten, tantalum and gold (3TG) – is supporting armed groups in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC), or neighbouring countries.
The bill has been referred to more than a half dozen House committees for consideration of the provisions that fall within the jurisdiction of each.
https://chemicalwatch.com/49703/us-house-advances-conflict-minerals-reporting-repeal-measure
-
Maryland Fracking Regulations to Miss Oct. 1 Deadline
Sep 19, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Kathy Lundy Springuel
The Maryland Department of the Environment will not have regulations for hydraulic fracturing in place by Oct. 1, as required by a 2015 state law, but officials are reviewing comments received this summer on four “issue papers” and will “propose regulations sometime in the fall,” a spokesman told Bloomberg BNA Sept. 16.
The June issue papers discussed areas in which MDE is likely to depart from the stringent “fracking” regulations proposed in January 2015 by former Gov. Martin O'Malley (D) but never finalized by his successor, Gov. Larry Hogan (R).
Targeting four areas, the issue papers suggested that MDE used O'Malley's proposal as a starting point but is considering changes that would beef up standards for well construction and streamline certain environmental monitoring, setback and review requirements for shale gas developers.
No fracking is being performed in Maryland because O'Malley imposed a de-facto moratorium in 2011 while conducting studies that formed the basis for the strict regulations he dubbed “the gold standard” in best management practices.
Oct. 1 Deadline Was Compromise
The deadline for MDE to act on new regulations by Oct. 1 was set by the General Assembly last year under S.B. 409/H.B. 449.
The legislation—which Hogan allowed to become law without his signature or any comment—instructs the agency to adopt regulations by Oct. 1 and have them take effect one year later, at which time the state's first fracking permits could be issued.
The bills originally called for an eight-year fracking moratorium, which was whittled down to three before the final version was amended to provide for the two-year timeline—one year for MDE to adopt regulations and another year until they are supposed to take effect on Oct. 1, 2017.
MDE spokesman Jay Apperson told Bloomberg BNA in a Sept. 16 e-mail that fracking regulations now are expected to be published in the Maryland Register “sometime in the fall,” followed by a 30-day comment period.
He noted that MDE “provided an additional round of public comment, not required by law, through the issue papers and related public meetings. We felt it was important to provide that additional opportunity for comment.”
Apperson said the agency is reviewing the “hundreds of written comments” generated and “will make changes from the issue papers to the proposed regulations as appropriate.”
Maryland has two western counties that sit atop a small portion of the gas-rich Marcellus Shale formation.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=97285939&vname=dennotallissues&fn=97285939&jd=97285939
-
Small Retailers, Refiners Support Changing RFS 'Obligation'
Sep 16, 2016 | Inside EPA
Some small retailers and a refiner largely owned by billionaire investor Carl Icahn in new legal briefs filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit are backing calls to shift the renewable fuel standard (RFS) “point of obligation” from refiners to fuel blenders, which they say will fix a major problem with the RFS.
In an amicus brief filed Sept. 15 in Americans for Clean Energy, et al. v. EPA -- consolidated litigation over EPA's 2015 rule setting renewable fuel volumes for the compliance years 2014 through 2016 -- the Small Retailers Coalition (SRC), representing many smaller fuel retailers, says the existing burden on refiners and importers to comply with the RFS' blending mandates is misplaced.
Under the program, “obligated parties” must surrender biofuel credits, known as renewable identification numbers (RINs), which are either generated by production of biofuel, or purchased from others. However, not all refiners have the capacity to blend, which forces them to buy RINs. Critics of the system say it leaves the RIN market vulnerable to speculation, and disadvantages small refiners that cannot blend.
Small retailers, meanwhile, claim they are at a disadvantage because, “large fuel retailers with the capability of blending gasoline or diesel with a renewable fuel at the [refinery] rack can capture the RIN from the renewable fuel source. Because these large retailers are not obligated parties under the RFS, they are then free to sell the RIN and pocket the revenue,” SRC says in its brief. Smaller retailers cannot do this.
SRC calls this “devastating” to small retailers, and asks the court to “direct EPA to consider the point of obligation requirement and whether to amend the point of obligation to the point of blending,” also know as the refinery rack.
CVR Energy, Inc., a refiner mostly owned by Icahn, in a separate Sept. 15 amicus brief agrees that the point of obligation should be moved to blenders, but adds a legal argument that it says other petitioners have so far neglected. The RFS' implementing statute “required EPA to develop regulations for the generation of credits only by parties that over-comply -- in other words, parties that are subject to the regulations and that blend renewable fuel in excess of their obligation -- and for the sale of credits only to parties for purposes of compliance,” CVR says.
Meanwhile, The American Soybean Association, U.S. Canola Association, National Renderers Association, Canola Council of Canada and Arvegenix, Inc., in their Sept. 15 amicus brief support arguments raised by the National Biodiesel Board in the case that EPA is unlawfully punishing the biomass-based diesel sector by setting RFS “advanced” biofuel volumes too low. EPA cited “inadequate domestic supply” to justify reducing the advanced biofuel volume from statutory levels. Most advanced biofuel is biomass-based diesel, the groups say.
“Amici contend that EPA inappropriately exercised its waiver authority since biomass-based diesel has the ability to meet increased supply demands, and is already producing volumes poised to surpass the entire advanced biofuel category. EPA chose to prioritize competition amongst advanced biofuels instead of fulfilling Congress’s intent to further energy security and diversity, increase employment in rural communities, and decrease greenhouse gas emissions,” the groups argue.
http://insideepa.com/news-briefs/small-retailers-refiners-support-changing-rfs-obligation
-
Attorneys Practice For Landmark Court Battle
Sep 19, 2016 | E&E Daily
By Emily Holden and Ellen M. Gilmer
Lawyers challenging U.S. EPA's Clean Power Plan in oral arguments before federal judges next Tuesday are spending this week sharpening their talking points in moot courts.
Nine judges at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit will hear from both sides on five different issues, ranging from whether the federal government is illegally dictating state energy decisions to whether EPA violated laws in substantially changing greenhouse gas emissions requirements between the draft and the final rule.
Supporters of the rule last week rolled out events and briefs outlining their arguments in favor of the Clean Power Plan (Greenwire, Sept. 13). Opponents may hold their fire until the day before court. On Sept. 26, West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrissey (R) and Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) will speak at an event hosted by the Texas Public Policy Foundation in Washington, D.C.
Leading up to next week, E&E reporters will preview the major legal arguments and profile how key players in the fight over the Clean Power Plan are preparing and will spend the day on Tuesday. How will you stay updated through the daylong process? We'd like to know. Email powerplanhub@eenews.net.
Tomorrow night in Texas, the University of Houston will hold a panel discussion on the Clean Power Plan's future. Speakers will participate from the Sierra Club's Beyond Coal Campaign, the Environmental Defense Fund, and the law firms Bracewell LLP and Jackson Walker LLP.EnergyWire reporter Edward Klump will attend.
On Thursday in California, the Air Resources Board is moving ahead with plans to extend a carbon cap-and-trade program past 2020, despite legal uncertainty. California hopes to use the program to comply with the Clean Power Plan, although it is facing a lawsuit. Reporter Debra Kahn will cover the meeting.
In case you missed it:
Some attorneys think the Supreme Court might not hear appeals on the Clean Power Plan's legality after the D.C. Circuit makes a decision. A Supreme Court vacancy may not be filled in time, and a split 4-4 decision would uphold the lower court's ruling (Greenwire, Sept. 14).
Legal challenges to the rule are causing concern among the international community that America may fall short of its climate commitments, according to a former EPA chief (E&ENews PM, Sept. 12).Lawyers for leading environmental groups are unconcerned that their arguments in favor of the Clean Power Plan could be undermined by an already rapid transition away from coal power (EnergyWire, Sept. 16).
A roundup of research from the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions explains how market forces are making it cheaper to produce cleaner energy (E&ENews PM, Sept. 14). A conference in Atlanta drove home the same message (EnergyWire, Sept. 14).
The Clean Power Plan could spur Western states to create a new electricity market, according to PG&E Corp. CEO Anthony Earley (EnergyWire, Sept. 13).
Washington adopted a "unique" rule to cap carbon emissions from the state's 24 largest emitters and require them to decline 5 percent every three years (ClimateWire, Sept. 16).
http://www.eenews.net/interactive/clean_power_plan/column_posts/1060042992
-
Trump To Talk Fracking, Energy Specifics This Week — Adviser
Sep 19, 2016 | E&E News
By Hannah Northey,
Donald Trump and his top energy adviser, oil baron Harold Hamm, will appear in the hard-hit battleground state of Pennsylvania this week to rally the oil and gas industry in the heart of Marcellus Shale country.
The Republican presidential nominee is scheduled to speak at an industry conference in Pittsburgh on Thursday before almost 2,000 attendees, where insiders say he's likely to delve deeper into a strategy that has been heavy on oil and gas while steering clear of renewable energy and climate change.
"He will get more specific about his energy policy there," said Trump economic adviser and Texas energy guru Kathleen Hartnett White, who has yet to meet the famed billionaire TV personality. "You don't have to do too much, other than restrain government — I'm serious."
Trump is also slated to talk about hydraulic fracturing, an issue that prompted clarification from Hamm last month after the presidential candidate said he would support local bans on hydraulic fracturing. Hamm later told The Wall Street Journal that Trump didn't fully understand the question and supports the industry.
"Donald Trump is pro-business. He is pro-energy and he is not going to shut down fracking or drilling or anything else," Hamm told the newspaper. "He is for this industry 100 percent."
Noticeably absent from the Marcellus Shale Coalition's Shale Insight conference in Pittsburgh this week will be Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, who was invited to attend but is not teed up to speak. Her campaign was not immediately available for comment. The Ohio Oil and Gas Association and the West Virginia Oil and Natural Gas Association are co-hosting the conference.
The Trump family has been hitting the swing state of Pennsylvania hard in recent weeks. At the opening of Trump's campaign headquarters last week near Canonsburg, Pa., south of Pittsburgh, Donald Trump Jr. told a crowd of 500 that his father is going to bring jobs back to the area by pushing energy development, according to a local television station.
Trump will likely take the opportunity in Pittsburgh to touch on the need to authorize infrastructure like the long-discussed Keystone XL pipeline and infrastructure at ports, White said, but will steer clear of any chatter on grants, low-interest loans or subsidies.
"It is quite self-contained, a competitive industry; it's not the big, global majors, Shell, Exxon, etc. The shale revolution originates from many small and medium-sized energy companies that have just figured out how to refine existing technologies," she said.
Trump's pro-infrastructure message could resonate in the Marcellus region, which has been experiencing an oil and gas production slowdown, a drop in the number of rigs being drilled and waves of layoffs.
David Spigelmyer, the head of the Pittsburgh-based Marcellus Shale Coalition, touted the region's pivotal role in energy, job creation — and White House elections.
"Our states will also play a critical role in determining the presidential outcome, as they have in years past," Spigelmyer said in a statement. "For these reasons, we're very excited to hear from Donald Trump at this week's conference, and to put our industry and its shared economic, environmental and national security-related successes on a national stage."
Trump has come under fire for providing few details on his energy views and even shifting his positions by scrubbing content on his website (Greenwire, Sept. 16).
While Trump's major energy policy speech, delivered in May in North Dakota, may be "more general than you'd like to see," White said it recognizes a steady increase of energy regulations in the United States since the 1970s that have severely restricted energy production on federal lands (E&E Daily, May 27).
White, director of the Center for Energy & Environment at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, co-authored the book "Fueling Freedom" with former Wall Street Journal columnist Stephen Moore, who has also been urging Trump to push energy and jobs on the campaign trail and believes that message was heard (E&E Daily, Sept. 7).
http://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2016/09/19/stories/1060043011
-
Regulators Keep Major Pipeline Closed Amid Spill Probe
Sep 19, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Chris Marr
Federal regulators ordered a section of a major petroleum pipeline in the Southeast to remain shut down until the cause of a more than 6,000-barrel gasoline leak in Alabama can be determined and the pipeline repaired.
The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration issued a corrective action order Sept. 16 to Colonial Pipeline following a leak discovered Sept. 9 near the pipeline's path through Helena, Ala.
Colonial has said that between 6,000 and 8,000 barrels of gasoline leaked from its Line 1 and that the gasoline is contained in a retention pond at a nearby mining site.
“PHMSA had a team of investigators on site as quickly as possible to investigate the cause of this leak, and took important safety measures to prevent additional damage to the environment and the communities impacted and to ensure the integrity of the pipeline before it returns to operation,” said Marie Therese Dominguez, administrator for PHMSA, in a Sept. 16 e-mail to Bloomberg BNA. “The Department will remain on site to carry out its investigation, and make sure the operator is taking the necessary steps to prevent any future incidents.”
The corrective action order requires Colonial to get PHMSA's approval before restarting the affected section, as well as imposing monitoring and reporting requirements. The cause of the spill cannot be determined until the leaking line is dug up, according to the order.
Excavation Begins
Colonial Pipeline planned to begin excavating the leaking section Sept. 16 in order to repair it, the company said in a written statement on its spill response website. Work to investigate and repair the line had been delayed earlier in the week by high concentrations of benzene and gasoline vapors in the air that were deemed unsafe for response crews.
“This work will continue throughout the weekend, with Line 1 projected to restart next week,” Colonial said in the Sept. 16 statement. “Recovery of gasoline, which remains contained, also continues as safety conditions allow.”
Colonial's two parallel lines run from Houston through the Southeast and East Coast to New York City, supplying gasoline, diesel, jet fuel and other products to about 50 million people.
The company has temporarily shifted gasoline into line 2 while line 1 is shut down.
Governors Address Fuel Shortages
In the meantime, several Southeastern states implemented emergency actions to prevent fuel shortages, including temporary waivers from federal low-volatility fuel requirements and from restrictions on how many hours truck drivers can log to allow more fuel transport.
“We are working with state and national officials to make sure North Carolina is not impacted by this leak,” Gov. Pat McCrory (R) said in announcing a Sept. 15 executive order to temporarily waive service hour restrictions on truck drivers for up to 30 days. “This executive order will help ensure an uninterrupted supply of fuel that is essential for the health, safety and economic well-being of businesses, consumers and visitors in North Carolina.”
The governors of Georgia and Alabama announced similar orders related to truck drivers.
Georgia and Tennessee also received waivers from the Environmental Protection Agency related to use of low-volatility gas during the summer months in metropolitan Atlanta and metro Nashville.
Fuel shippers also are pursuing contingency plans to move fuel, including by ocean tanker, Colonial said.
680 on Site for Response
The spill response by Colonial and local, state and federal agencies includes skimming operations to remove gasoline from the retention pond where it spilled, among other efforts to minimize environmental and safety hazards, the company said, with more than 680 people involved.
“Underflow dams have been constructed and boom has been installed as a contingency to prevent product from reaching a dry creek bed that runs from the pond to Peel Creek,” the company said.
Groups including Alabama Fish & Wildlife, Cahaba Riverkeeper and Tri-State Bird and Rescue are involved in the response to help protect wildlife, according to Colonial.
with assistance from Andrew Ballard
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=97285938&vname=dennotallissues&fn=97285938&jd=97285938
-
Dakota Pipeline Protests Rise, Could Delay Completion
Sep 19, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Meenal Vamburkar
The Dakota Access Pipeline has been stalled by the White House. Now protesters want to make sure it is killed.
As construction on a segment of the controversial project remains frozen, critics are escalating efforts to ensure the Dakota line meets the same fate as the last major pipeline that drew the intervention of President Barack Obama. He rejected TransCanada Corp.’s cross-border Keystone XL pipeline last year, citing environmental concerns, after more than seven years of debate and protests.
Energy Transfer Partners LP has reaffirmed its commitment to finishing its 1,172-mile Dakota line, which is nearly 60 percent complete.
“All eyes are on President Obama right now,” said Jason Kowalski, policy director at 350.org, one of the groups fighting Dakota Access. “This sort of opposition is the new normal and should have an effect on industry behavior.“
Critics say the project would damage culturally significant sites in North Dakota and create an environmental hazard where it crosses the Missouri River.
Opponents held a “day of action” on Tuesday with more than 200 events across the country. Independent Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, a former presidential candidate, spoke at a protest held outside the White House. The effort follows the Obama administration's action last week, when federal agencies withdrew permission for work to go ahead on one section until they have a chance to review it further.
Different Issues
While protesters are hoping to draw parallels between Dakota and Keystone, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest noted the two cases have different considerations.
“The issues related to the construction of that pipeline are somewhat different than the issues that have arisen in the context of this one,” he said during a press briefing on Sept. 14.
Much of what happens next is unknown, but any potential re-routing of the pipeline would be a costly and complicated endeavor, said Brigham McCown, chairman and founder of the Alliance for Innovation and Infrastructure and a former chief of the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. Like with Keystone, the opposition wants the pipeline rejected, not just rerouted, he said on a conference call Sept. 15—but the permits are likely to be upheld.
Delay Game
The big question for Energy Transfer, and North Dakota drillers who will see transport cost savings from the pipeline, is how long the federal review will delay the project. It was slated to be in service by the end of the year.
Assuming the resolution doesn't involve new permits, the line is likely to be in service in the first quarter next year, said Katie Bays, an analyst at Height Securities LLC, an advisory and investment firm based in Washington, D.C. If the end result is a process that requires new permits, that may take a few more months and push the in-service date to the end of the second quarter, she said.
Energy Transfer Partners fell 0.8 percent to $36.57 in New York Sept. 15.
Allowing the Dakota project to wind up in the hands of the next president's administration probably isn't what the White House wants, Bays said. The Justice Department's intervention is one way Obama can keep the environmental lobby engaged in the election, she said.
Most industry experts are expecting the project to resume after a delay, said Bays. “I don't think anyone's base-case assumption should be that the pipeline is going to get ‘Keystone-ed.' ”
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=97285898&vname=dennotallissues&fn=97285898&jd=97285898
-
Army Corps Signals Timeline For Easement Decision
Sep 16, 2016 | E&E News PM
By Ellen M. Gilmer
The Army Corps of Engineers will likely spend a number of weeks — not months — considering whether to grant an easement for a portion of the controversial Dakota Access pipeline.
The news came in a court hearing today as a federal judge slammed the corps for last week's surprise announcement that it would not immediately grant the easement, which is needed for the Dakota Access to cross the Missouri River and ultimately deliver oil from North Dakota to Illinois.
U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia Judge James Boasberg pressed Army Corps and Justice Department lawyers on the issue, saying he was "quite troubled" by the administration's decision to make the announcement just minutes after Boasberg issued a lengthy opinion denying a broader injunction requested by pipeline opponents.
"How did this happen?" he asked. "And how is this complying with your duty of candor to the tribunal?"
Government lawyers responded that the Army Corps' position has never changed, that the announcement was merely intended to notify the public "in the interest of public safety" that the easement remains pending. Dakota Access lawyers, meanwhile, argued that before court proceedings last week, they were under the impression the easement had already been approved.
In North Dakota, where thousands of tribal members and their allies gathered to oppose the pipeline, outrage over news of the judge's denial of the injunction turned to at least partial relief when the Obama administration made its announcement a week ago (EnergyWire, Sept. 12).
The agency also said its decision on the easement will likely be made in weeks, not months or days.
In the meantime, an appeal over the injunction denial is pending at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, where a decision on an emergency freeze within 20 miles of Lake Oahe, part of the Missouri River, is expected soon.
The district court, meanwhile, declined to extend a temporary restraining order, under which all parties had agreed that the Dakota Access would not move forward on construction 20 miles east of Lake Oahe and 2 miles west of it. The portion east of the lake is virtually complete already, but now the company can technically move forward on construction in the 2-mile zone just west of the corps-regulated lake and shorelines. That area is also the heart of the massive demonstration against the pipeline, and Dakota Access has not signaled whether it plans to take action there.
http://www.eenews.net/eenewspm/2016/09/16/stories/1060042985
-
Pipeline Delay Stirs Anger, But Not Yet Action, On Capitol Hill
Sep 17, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
Republican lawmakers who supported the Keystone XL project are slamming President Obama’s delay of the Dakota Access Pipeline, calling it another example of his harmful approach to energy production.
Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) said it is “astonishing” that the administration delayed the Dakota project despite a federal court ruling it could move forward.
“The courts have ruled, the permits were there, the permission was given, and then the president comes in and intervenes in something that his own department had won the court case on it. So it just shows how anti-energy and anti-economy President Obama is,” Barrasso said.
Activists, environmentalists and American Indians have mobilized opposition to Dakota Access in recent weeks, hoping to recapture the energy that helped grind the Keystone XL pipeline to a halt.
The administration gave the effort a jolt of momentum earlier this month when it delayed final approval of Dakota Access for an agency review.
GOP supporters of Keystone lamented Obama’s decision but are not yet preparing legislative action, with some noting that the administration’s time in office is drawing to close.
“I’m not exactly sure what can be done,” said Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.), whose state hosts part of the Dakota Access project.
“Certainly we’ve looked at it, we’re studying it,” he said. “But we’ve got between now and the end of the year, when this administration is gone, and can you do anything between now and then?”
Asked if there was a need for Congress to step in, such as to compel the Army Corps of Engineers to grant the easement the project needs or to hold oversight hearings on the matter, Rep. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) said, “not at this point.”
Cramer said the responsibility now should be on the parties involved to work through the issues.
“Right now, my team and I are focused on getting the administration and the agencies and the tribe together to get this thing settled very quickly,” said Cramer, whose state hosts the section of Lake Oahe under which Energy Transfer Partners wants an easement to build Dakota Access.
When Cramer came to the House in 2015, he became a leading advocate for Keystone, which needed a permit from Obama to cross the border with Canada.
Congress tried numerous tactics to force Obama to approve Keystone or bypass his review authority altogether. The efforts soon became a high-profile referendum on fossil fuels and culminated in early 2015 when both the House and Senate voted to approve the project.
But Obama vetoed the legislation quickly, and later that year, he denied TransCanada Corp.’s permit application. The company is now suing in federal court to get the pipeline approved, and challenging the administration through the North American Free Trade Agreement to recover money it said it lost due to the denial.
Some fear the Dakota Access pipeline could be headed down a similar path.
Following the decision Sept. 9 by the Army Corps, Justice Department and Interior Department to delay the easement for Dakota Access, some Republicans fear that Obama is looking to stop every oil pipeline he can.
“It seems like another rerun of the Keystone pipeline,” said Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.)
But they’re not rushing to stop Obama.
“We’re watching this, but I don’t think we need anything right now,” said Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.), chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee.
Barrasso predicted Obama would veto any legislation on the subject, so Congress can’t do much unless Republican Donald Trump is elected president.
“You’ve got to remember who’s in the White House,” he said. “We’re going to have to have somebody else in the White House to accomplish that sort of a goal.”
Energy Transfer hasn’t publicly asked lawmakers to step in, and a spokeswoman declined to say whether it’s something the company wants.
And while American Petroleum Institute head Jack Gerard said the administration’s action is “putting politics ahead of the rule of law,” that group also hasn’t publicly sought legislative action.
Melinda Pierce, legislative director at the Sierra Club, said she was surprised to see a lack of congressional action on Dakota Access.
“It’s a surprise, because with Keystone XL, we saw Republicans forcing a dozen votes to preempt, block and even try and reverse Keystone decisions and inject Congress into that process,” Pierce said.
But Dakota Access only came to national attention weeks ago, so pipeline supporters might just not be ready to take action yet, she said.
Pierce warned that Republicans might soon look for opportunities to override Obama, such as an end-of-the-year appropriations bill. If they do, they could expect an all-out opposition from activists, just like they saw for Keystone.
“We’ll be watching and make sure that Congress doesn’t try in the eleventh hour to inject themselves into this process,” she said. “We want to make sure that there isn’t an effort to push a rider into any end-of-the-year funding bill that would somehow reverse the decision.”
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/296384-pipeline-delay-stirs-anger-but-not-yet-action-on-capitol-hill
-
Groups Sue EPA Over SO2 NAAQS Attainment Designations
Sep 16, 2016 | Inside EPA
Groups representing environmentalists, the power sector and others are suing EPA in several federal appeals courts over the agency's latest round of designations for areas that are either attaining or out of attainment with the 2010 sulfur dioxide (SO2) national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) set at 75 parts per billion (ppb).
EPA on June 30 finalized its latest round of area designations, as part of a long-delayed process for issuing the findings. Environmentalists filed a deadline suit to force issuance of the designations, which trigger a Clean Air Act clock for states to craft plans detailing how they will maintain or meet the standard.
The designations rule places four areas in nonattainment with the SO2 NAAQS, which is measured with a 1-hour average: Alton Township and Williamson County, IL; Anne Arundel County and Baltimore County, MD, combined as one area; and St. Clair, MI.
Another 41 areas are designated “attainment/unclassifiable,” meaning they are considered in attainment despite a lack of data.
A further 16 areas are simply designated “unclassifiable,” meaning their status cannot be accurately determined -- but they still escape a nonattainment designation. Nonattainment status requires states to impose tougher pollution controls on industry in the affected area, so states try to avoid receiving such designations.
The agency initially asked states to use primarily computer modeling to assess their compliance with the NAAQS, because the national monitoring network was inadequate for the task.
However, states protested that modeling uses conservative assumptions and can wrongly lead to nonattainment designations. EPA therefore gave states the option of using monitoring instead, requiring the establishment of new monitoring networks.
Under the current schedule, designations must be complete by the end of 2020, but the lawsuits filed over the June 30 designations could complicate the issue.
In a suit filed Sept. 12 with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, Sierra Club challenges the designations rule on the national level, without listing specifics of its complaint.
In its comments on the proposed version of the designations rule, Sierra Club said it was disappointed with EPA's and states' reluctance to designate areas “nonattainment,” and to use modeling where required. The group urged EPA to rely more on modeling, and making specific observations with respect to designations in Colorado, Maryland, Missouri, Ohio, Indiana, Louisiana, Michigan, Oklahoma and Texas.
Meanwhile, local citizens in Colorado filed suit Sept. 9 in the D.C. Circuit suit Samuel Masias, Jacqueline Ostrom and Jim Riggins v. EPA, over EPA's failure to designate El Paso County, CO, as nonattainment because of SO2 emissions from a local power plant. They are challenging EPA's designation of unclassifiable for the area, which is impacted by emissions from the Martin Drake Power Plant, according to Sept. 16 statement by the group.
In the 7th Circuit, the Southern Illinois Power Cooperative filed suit over the rule on Sept. 9, and also filed a Sept. 12 petition for reconsideration with the agency asking it to reconsider the designation.
The reconsideration petition asks EPA to instead “designate Williamson County . . . as in attainment of the 2010 SO2 NAAQS.”
The company says that updated air modeling shows the county, including the area around its Marion Station power plant, to be attaining the NAAQS. Although its administrative petition is “narrowly focused” on this area, it also claims that, “EPA may not base a nonattainment designation on modeling data alone.”
Meanwhile, the Kansas City Board of Public Utilities, and Unified Government of Wyandotte County and Kansas City, KS, filed a suit in the 10th Circuit over EPA's rule. The governmental bodies are unhappy with EPA's designation of “unclassifiable,” which contradicts the state of Kansas' recommendation of “unclassifiable/attainment,” according to March 31 comments they filed on the proposed version of the rule.
http://insideepa.com/news-briefs/groups-sue-epa-over-so2-naaqs-attainment-designations
-
California’s Latest Pioneering Climate Laws Provide A Model For The Country
Sep 17, 2016 | The Hill - Congress Blog
By Vien Truong
We need to change the way we fight climate change.
There is a growing movement across the country working hard to keep fossil fuels in the ground. Two weeks ago Native Americans resisting the Dakota Access Pipeline in North Dakota were attacked by dogs, which were paid for by the fossil fuel company that is trying to build the pipeline. Just days later on Sept. 9, they won a first victory from the Obama Administration who paused construction on the pipeline. Meanwhile, Louisiana was underwater for nearly a month; the West Coast is burning in wildfires; and sunny day flooding across the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts are here.
Here is what we know: climate change and the fossil fuel industry have hit black, brown, and poor families first and worst. Now, as we move towards a transition to clean energy, we have both an opportunity and responsibility to fix what was broken in the era of fossil fuels. Put simply, we need to rebuild the very communities most harmed by fossil fuels as we transition to clean energy.
California is leading the way. On Sept. 8 Gov. Jerry Brown signed SB 32 into law, an extension of California’s historic and game changing climate law. It aims to reduce emissions by 40% by 2030.
But it does something else equally historic: it secures the single most game-changing transition program in our country, taking money from California’s cap and trade program and using it to rebuild communities worst hit by both fossil fuel pollution and poverty.
The reality is that for decades, low-income communities and communities of color have been plagued by pollution from the fossil fuel industry. When a coal-fired power plant moves in, “white flight” sees more affluent residents move out. Often, fossil fuel corporations just move into black and brown communities first, because richer and whiter communities have more political clout to stop them.
I grew up in one of these “environmental justice communities.” People in my neighborhood in Oakland, Calif., have a life expectancy that is 12 years shorter than a nearby, more affluent suburb. In similar communities across the country -- Chester, Pa.; Flint, Mich.; Chicago and many others -- our friends and family have higher rates of asthma and cancer. We spend more on our health as a result and overall have less wealth.
When Gov. Brown signed SB 32 into law last week, he jumpstarted the future of America’s most revolutionary transition process. That program has already invested nearly a billion dollars into rebuilding communities struggling with poverty and pollution. From solar panel jobs to ride shares and clean energy programs, this program is bringing everyone along for the new era of clean energy, not just the wealthy, powerful and white.
If the federal courts lift the current Supreme Court stay on President Obama’s Clean Power Plan, it has the power to create carbon pricing programs across the country like California’s. That would mean dozens of opportunities to replicate California’s achievements in other states, dozens of opportunities to ensure black and brown and poor communities join the clean energy era.
Polluters are already gearing up to try to oppose this climate progress state by state, no surprise there. The fight won’t end in North Dakota, just like it didn’t end with Keystone XL -- but we will win.
The question now is where we go next, and who do we take with us. California is answering that question with a fast transition to the clean energy economy in a way that rebuilds the very communities thrown under the bus by fossil fuels.
The era of fossil fuel dominance will come to a close. We already have more solar jobs than coal jobs, and solar is the fastest growing energy source in America. Now, we need to fight for a transition, like California’s, that doesn’t leave black, brown, and poor communities behind. We have a wildly successful model to guide us, and the time has come to expand it.
Vien Truong is director of Green For All.
http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/energy-environment/296348-californias-latest-pioneering-climate-laws-provide-a
Congressional Hearings
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested