Preview Newsletter
ACC PM 9/22/16
-
Local Emergency Responders Conduct Mock Emergency Drill
Sep 22, 2016 | True Jersey
By Bob Dinyon
On Aug. 27, Crestwood Equity Partners, located in Bridgeton, partnered with local emergency responders and Transportation Community Awareness and Emergency Response (TRANSCAER) to conduct a mock emergency drill at Crestwood's South Jersey Terminal. -
(ACC Mentioned) ECOS To Debate TSCA Reform Law, Drinking Water At Upcoming Meeting
Sep 21, 2016 | Inside EPA
By David LaRoss
The Environmental Council of the States (ECOS), representing many state environmental agencies, is planning to debate implementation of the revised Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) as well as new strategies to address drinking water contaminants as two of the most significant issues during its upcoming fall meeting next week. -
Hundreds of Cancer-Causing Chemicals Pollute Americans’ Bodies
Sep 22, 2016 | Huntington News
EWG spent almost a year reviewing more than 1,000 biomonitoring studies and other research by leading government agencies and independent scientists in the U.S. and around the world. -
Scientists Call for 'Potency Comparisons' in EDC Criteria
Sep 22, 2016 | Chemical Watch
The European Commission's criteria for identifying endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) should allow for potency comparisons with natural hormones and human pharmaceuticals, according to more than 50 scientists who have signed “an appeal”. -
Member States Support decaBDE Restriction
Sep 22, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
Members states have accepted the European Commission’s draft Regulation for the restriction of the brominated flame retardant decaBDE. -
Member States Reject Proposal to Add HDDA to Candidate List
Sep 22, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
A majority of REACH Committee members have rejected the advice of Echa's Member State Committee, and instead backed the European Commission’s position that the skin sensitiser hexamethylene diacrylate (HDDA) should not be added to the candidate list of SVHCs. -
(ACC Mentioned) NatGas, Oil Renaissance Bounty Ignored by Anti-Energy Groups, U.S. Chamber Says
Sep 22, 2016 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Carolyn Davis
The U.S. economy would be "much weaker" if the energy renaissance had not occurred, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce said in a report outlining the jobs and financial gains resulting from unconventional drilling. -
Plea for Emergency Injunction Gets Court Date
Sep 22, 2016 | E&E Energywire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
An American Indian tribe pushing for an emergency injunction to block part of the Dakota Access oil pipeline will make its case in federal court early next month. -
How Do You Prepare for 'A Case for the Ages'?
Sep 22, 2016 | E&E Energywire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
Kevin Poloncarz has been talking aloud to himself all summer. -
Ahead Of D.C. Circuit Arguments In ESPS Suit, Both Sides Express Optimism
Sep 22, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Dawn Reeves & Abby Smith
Opponents and supporters of EPA's landmark rule to curb greenhouse gases (GHGs) from existing power plants are expressing strong optimism that their side will prevail -- just days before marathon oral arguments before the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. -
California Governor Signs Nation's Toughest Methane Emissions Law
Sep 22, 2016 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Richard Nemec
California Gov. Jerry Brown has signed into law SB 1383, said to enact the nation’s toughest restrictions on methane and other "super pollutants," which include black carbon and fluorinated (HFC) gases. -
Heightened Opposition Puts Oil Industry on the Defensive
Sep 22, 2016 | E&E Energywire
By Jenny Mandel
Are oil and gas opponents agenda-driven ideologues or regular people like parents, police officers and neighbors seeking to protect their own best interests? -
Trump's Pennsylvania Fracking Pitch May Fall Flat in November
Sep 22, 2016 | Politico Pro
By Elana Schor
Donald Trump’s trip to the heart of Pennsylvania's shale region on Thursday will help cement his ties to the energy industry that's slowly starting to embrace him, but he'll have a tougher time tailoring a fracking message to appeal to voters across the rest of the state. -
Houston to Investigate Local Chemical Companies After Report
Sep 22, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
Elected officials in Houston are pressing for the city's chemical companies to reveal where they store some of their most hazardous compounds. -
Calif. City Rejects Valero's Crude-by-Rail Plan
Sep 22, 2016 | E&E Energywire
Benicia, Calif., this week turned down a crude-by-rail plan proposed by Valero Refining Co., the city's biggest employer. -
Inspectors Still Checking Crude Oil Tank Cars in New York State
Sep 22, 2016 | Occupational Health & Safety
New York Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo announced that state and federal inspectors found a total of three critical defects and 41 non-critical defects during their latest round of crude oil tank car and rail inspections in the state. -
100 Nations Join to Call for Rapid Reduction in HFCs
Sep 22, 2016 | Politico Pro - Whiteboard
By Eric Wolff
More than 100 nations today launched a coalition to call for an ambitious amendment to the Montreal Protocol to reduce emissions of hydrofluorocarbons, a potent greenhouse gas. -
The Environmental Groups Killing a Carbon Tax
Sep 22, 2016 | The Hill - Congress Blog
By Shi-Ling Hsu
The news on climate change gets worse and worse. Each of the first six months of 2016 smashed the previous records for being the hottest such month in history, and this July was the hottest ever recorded.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News
Environment News
-
Local Emergency Responders Conduct Mock Emergency Drill
Sep 22, 2016 | True Jersey
By Bob Dinyon
On Aug. 27, Crestwood Equity Partners, located in Bridgeton, partnered with local emergency responders and Transportation Community Awareness and Emergency Response (TRANSCAER) to conduct a mock emergency drill at Crestwood's South Jersey Terminal. TRANSCAER is an organization that encourages partnerships between citizens and industry to develop awareness of transportation emergency preparedness.
Through the partnership with TRANSCAER local officials and emergency responders work to develop and implement a community response plan. The mock drill allowed local officials and community members to be trained and put the plan to the test in a real life scenario. This drill also assisted Crestwood in meeting regulatory requirements.
Crestwood was joined by the Upper Deerfield Township Fire Companies No. 1 and No. 3, Upper Deerfield EMS, Rosenhayn Fire Company, and the Cumberland County Fire Police, led by Chief Rogers, Chief Mooneyham and Chief Ott. Members of these departments responded to a drill simulating a hazardous materials incident and were expected to successfully apply procedures on how to handle a fire involving a propane transport.
The mock emergency drill was a great success and learning experience for all involved. The members of the fire department performed well in the simulation and followed textbook procedure to handle such an emergency.
Crestwood is confident that in the event of an emergency all parties involved will respond with quick professionalism, allowing for the best possible outcome for the community and its citizens. Crestwood is focused on employee and public safety, operational excellence and a commitment to protecting the environment. Through regulatory best practices and intensive safety protocol it is continuously working to reduce environmental impacts and be a good neighbor.
Crestwood Equity is engaged in the gathering, processing, treating, compression, storage and transportation of natural gas; storage, transportation, terminaling, and marketing of NGLs; and gathering, storage, terminaling and marketing of crude oil.
http://www.nj.com/south-jersey-towns/index.ssf/2016/09/local_emergency_responders_con.html
-
(ACC Mentioned) ECOS To Debate TSCA Reform Law, Drinking Water At Upcoming Meeting
Sep 21, 2016 | Inside EPA
By David LaRoss
The Environmental Council of the States (ECOS), representing many state environmental agencies, is planning to debate implementation of the revised Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) as well as new strategies to address drinking water contaminants as two of the most significant issues during its upcoming fall meeting next week.
ECOS is slated to meet Sept. 26-28 in Wheeling, WV, and the agenda for the event signals that state regulators will also discuss other issues including produced water from oil and gas drilling, implementation of a memorandum of understanding ECOS officials signed with EPA at the group's spring meeting earlier this year, and "innovative" methods of enforcing the Clean Air Act. The agenda is available on InsideEPA.com. (Doc. ID: 194851)
On TSCA reform, a planned Sept. 27 panel will focus on how to prioritize chemicals slated for future assessment, while also complying with the law's short-term implementation deadlines. EPA toxics chief Jim Jones will be among the speakers, along with the Massachusetts Toxics Use Reduction Institute's Rachel Massey, the American Chemistry Council's Michael Walls and Andy Ingrejas of Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families.
ECOS has previously grappled with how states can advance their own restrictions on toxic chemicals under the reform law's complicated preemption system, even publishing a flowchart to guide regulators on July 22. The new law suspends state policies based on EPA action, but only under certain circumstances and for a limited time.
The new regime is likely to complicate states' decisions on which chemicals to prioritize for review and regulation, since future rules could be preempted if EPA decides to address the same substance a state has regulated.
For example, California's pending proposal to regulate two flame retardant chemicals as "priority chemicals" under the state's green chemistry program could serve as an early test of TSCA preemption since EPA is already assessing the risks of several flame retardants (Inside EPA, Aug. 26).
The drinking water panel, also scheduled for Sept. 27, deals with emerging and existing contaminants -- including perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and the similar contaminant perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), for which EPA recently issued a new drinking water advisory that significantly tightened its previous advisory level.
PFOA, a persistent, toxic non-stick chemical, was used in a slew of consumer and industrial applications, and has been linked to adverse health effects, including kidney and testicular cancers.
State and local authorities in New York and elsewhere have lately been grappling with PFOA contamination in drinking water supplies, leading to an increased focus on dealing with the chemicals and EPA's stricter advisory -- which regulators will consider in setting enforceable limits.
However, New Jersey, the first state to consider such a limit, is already considering breaking with EPA's guidance. An advisory panel there is weighing a first-in-the-nation enforceable drinking water standard that would be much stricter than the federal advisory level.
http://insideepa.com/inside-epa/ecos-debate-tsca-reform-law-drinking-water-upcoming-meeting
-
Hundreds of Cancer-Causing Chemicals Pollute Americans’ Bodies
Sep 22, 2016 | Huntington News
EWG spent almost a year reviewing more than 1,000 biomonitoring studies and other research by leading government agencies and independent scientists in the U.S. and around the world. The nonprofit research group found that up to 420 chemicals known or likely to cause cancer have been detected in blood, urine, hair and other human samples.
Studies of the causes of cancer often focus on tobacco, alcohol and over-exposure to the sun. But the World Health Organization and many other scientists believe nearly 1 in 5 cancers are caused by chemicals and other environmental exposures––not only in the workplaces, but in consumer products, food, water and air.
EWG’s review bolsters the findings and ongoing research of the Halifax Project, a collaboration of more than 300 scientists from around the world who are investigating new ways in which combinations of toxic chemicals in our environment may cause cancer. While most cancer research focuses on treatment, the Halifax Project and EWG’s Rethinking Cancer initiative are looking at prevention by reducing people’s contact with cancer-causing chemicals.
“The presence of a toxic chemical in our bodies does not necessarily mean it will cause harm, but this report details the astounding number of carcinogens we are exposed to in almost every part of life that are building up in our systems,” said Curt DellaValle, author of the report and a senior scientist at EWG. “At any given time some people may harbor dozens or hundreds of cancer-causing chemicals. This troubling truth underscores the need for greater awareness of our everyday exposure to chemicals and how to avoid them.”
EWG estimated that a small subset of the chemicals inventoried in the report were measured at levels high enough to pose significant cancer risks in most Americans ––risks that generally exceed Environmental Protection Agency safety standards. But those estimates are only for individual chemicals and do not account for a question scientists and doctors are increasingly concerned about––how combined exposures to multiple chemicals may increase risk?
EWG’s inventory comes at an auspicious moment for the issue of cancer and chemicals. Last week Congress passed the first reform in 40 years of the nation’s woefully weak toxic chemical regulations, which President Obama is expected to sign soon. In January, the president announced the establishment of the National Cancer Moonshot Initiative, a $1 billion program led by Vice President Joe Biden, “to eliminate cancer as we know it.”
But the law to overhaul the Toxic Substances Control Act falls far short of giving the Environmental Protection Agency the resources and authority to quickly restrict or ban chemicals known to cause cancer. And the only concrete agenda related to prevention in the Moonshot Initiative is for screening and vaccination. As demonstrated by the success of antismoking efforts, which have cut the rate of lung cancer by more than 25 percent in the last 25 years, to prevent and defeat cancer it is necessary to understand the environmental causes.
It is not clear how, or if, the new chemicals law will protect Americans from the hundreds of industrial chemicals that cause cancer.
“Many of the carcinogens this study documents in people find their way into our bodies through food, air, water and consumer products every day. Dozens of them show up in human umbilical cord blood—which means Americans are exposed to carcinogens before they’ve left the womb,” said EWG President Ken Cook. “We should focus on preventing cancer by preventing human exposure to these chemicals.”
Cook said the report should trigger outrage among Americans and urgent action by public health and elected officials. EWG called for the cancer “Moonshot Initiative” announced by President Obama in his state of the union address in January to include federal funding for investigation of the environmental causes of cancer and the development of prevention initiatives.
EWG has also published multiple health guides and online consumer tools to help people avoid toxic cancer-causing chemicals in their day to day lives.
http://www.huntingtonnews.net/142157
-
Scientists Call for 'Potency Comparisons' in EDC Criteria
Sep 22, 2016 | Chemical Watch
The European Commission's criteria for identifying endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) should allow for potency comparisons with natural hormones and human pharmaceuticals, according to more than 50 scientists who have signed “an appeal”.
The European Commission published draft criteria for identifying EDCs in June 2016. The signatories, who call themselves “scientists for scientific European Commission regulation”, call for a "small change" to the second criterion for a chemical to be considered an EDC.
They suggest altering the wording so that it reads: "It acts through an endocrine mode of action with sufficient potency to alter human endocrine function, as established by potency comparisons to human hormones or human pharmaceuticals."
"Inferring the potential for adverse effects, based on potency evaluation, is more efficient than the alternative means of linking adverse effects with an endocrine mode of action," says the group. Potency is the "basic operating principle" of the endocrine system and provides the "critical link" between an endocrine mode of action and an adverse effect, it adds.
In the lead up to the publication of the draft criteria, the chemical and pesticide industries made a concerted push to have the question of potency included in the identification criteria, and it became one of the most hotly contested elements of the debate.
In the event - and following publication of a "consensus statement", drafted following an expert meeting organised by Germany's National Institute for Risk Assessment - the draft criteria stated that it is not necessary to include considerations of how potent an endocrine disruptor is.
https://chemicalwatch.com/49826/scientists-call-for-potency-comparisons-in-edc-criteria
-
Member States Support decaBDE Restriction
Sep 22, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
Members states have accepted the European Commission’s draft Regulation for the restriction of the brominated flame retardant decaBDE.
This restricts its manufacture or placing on the market as a substance. It also restricts the chemical's use and marketing on its own, as a constituent of other substances, in mixtures or in articles, in a concentration equal to or greater than 0.1% by weight.
These restrictions will come into force 18 months after the Regulation takes effect.
On 20 September, a majority of member state representatives in the Commission's REACH Committee voted for a 24-month transitional period for recycled materials. This is six months longer than the Commission’s original proposal.
The Regulation includes exemptions for:
spare parts for motor vehicles;
spare parts for agricultural and forestry vehicles;
aircraft - civil or military;
spare parts for all aircraft - civil or military; and
electrical and electronic equipment.
The restrictions will also not apply to uses in the production of aircraft, or aircraft spare parts produced within ten years of the Regulation coming into force.
https://chemicalwatch.com/49820/member-states-back-decabde-restriction
-
Member States Reject Proposal to Add HDDA to Candidate List
Sep 22, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
A majority of REACH Committee members have rejected the advice of Echa's Member State Committee, and instead backed the European Commission’s position that the skin sensitiser hexamethylene diacrylate (HDDA) should not be added to the candidate list of SVHCs.
Sweden proposed HDDA for the list, in August last year, on the grounds that the category 1 skin sensitiser poses an "equivalent level of concern" to substances such as category 1 CMRs. The substance is an acrylic chemical used in UV-cured inks, adhesives and sealants.
In December, the majority of Echa’s Member State Committee members said they supported Sweden's proposal.
But most REACH Committee members, at their meeting this week, agreed with the Commission that the documentation was not strong enough to justify or prove equivalent level of concern.
Some member states said this argument [of equivalent level of concern] could be used for many other types of substances if they are being considered for the candidate list. This could include skin sensitisers.
https://chemicalwatch.com/49813/member-states-reject-proposal-to-add-hdda-to-candidate-list
-
(ACC Mentioned) NatGas, Oil Renaissance Bounty Ignored by Anti-Energy Groups, U.S. Chamber Says
Sep 22, 2016 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Carolyn Davis
The U.S. economy would be "much weaker" if the energy renaissance had not occurred, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce said in a report outlining the jobs and financial gains resulting from unconventional drilling. Researchers also highlighted some of the biggest benefactors: Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas and Wisconsin.
The report, "What if America's Energy Renaissance Had Not Actually Happened?" is the second in a series by the Chamber's Institute for 21st Century Energy. Researchers compiled data from 2009 through 2015 to imagine the U.S. economy minus the plethora of oil and natural gas reserves uncovered in shale, sand and other formations now being tapped by hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling.
"The 'Keep It in the Ground' movement completely ignores the vast benefits to our nation's economy that the energy renaissance has brought to us," Institute CEO Karen Harbert said. "For instance, lower electricity and fuel prices spurred a comeback in manufacturing that alone is responsible for nearly 400,000 jobs. It costs consumers less to drive a car and heat their homes today. And all the while, our nation has been decreasing its energy imports and lowering emissions."
Because of the energy renaissance, U.S. natural gas import levels have declined by 73%, while oil imports have fallen by 62%, the researchers said.
"As recently as a decade ago, 60% of the oil consumed in the United States came from foreign sources. Today, the country only imports 24% of its overall consumption. Natural gas import levels have also dropped from 16% to 3% during that same period." Meanwhile, carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions have fallen by 19%.
"Natural gas has gradually replaced coal as the primary fuel choice for U.S. power generation. This shift has contributed to a net decrease of power-sector CO2 emissions of 19% over the past decade."
Gas "has not only benefited residential consumers, it has also stimulated manufacturing activity," the researchers said. "For example, the U.S. plastics industry has benefited from lower natural gas prices, since natural gas is used as both a fuel and natural gas liquids are the primary feedstock for plastics manufacturing...
"The recent plunge in natural gas commodity prices has shifted the competitive advantage back in favor of the United States. The industry has responded in kind with substantial investments to increase plastics production in this country. According to the American Chemistry Council, over the past five years the chemicals industry has announced plans for more than $130 billion in investment in new manufacturing capacity. In the next 10 years, these investments are expected to generate roughly 462,000 new jobs for American workers."
Without the gains from the oil and gas industry, the United States would have lost an estimated 4.3 million jobs and $548 billion in annual gross domestic product (GDP), according to the report. Were it not for the growth and development of oil and natural gas, "today's electricity prices would be 31% higher, and motor fuels would cost 43% more," the researchers said.
Few jobs and "very little growth" also would have been realized in sectors beyond the energy industry, researchers argued in the 64-page report. Publicly available information on jobs and production levels were reviewed using the Impact Analysis for Planning, or IMPLAN, a macroeconomic model that estimates the economic and fiscal impacts of investments.
Expanded energy development has led to huge benefits for Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas and Wisconsin, the Chamber said.
"Pennsylvania is now the second largest natural gas producing state in the country," while "manufacturing remains the backbone" of Pennsylvania and Ohio economies, the report said.
"Texas was selected because it leads the nation in both oil and gas production. It also has a large manufacturing sector, including robust petrochemical and fuels manufacturing segments." Wisconsin is not considered an oil and gas producer, but "its sand mines serve as an important supplier to service companies and operators that deploy hydraulic fracturing technology, and it has a large manufacturing base that has directly benefited from the lower energy and feedstock prices that have resulted from the energy revolution."
Without the onshore energy gains, Pennsylvania over the period studied would have lost an estimated $13 billion in GDP while Ohio would have lost $10 billion in GDP. Texas would have lost more than 675,000 jobs, while Wisconsin's job losses would have amounted to around 46,000.
"From Pennsylvania’s paper industry, to iron and steel in Ohio, to petrochemicals in Texas, to cheese manufacturing in Wisconsin, the energy renaissance has been responsible for the preservation and growth of industries across America," Harbert said.
"This is not just about the oil and gas industry. This is about the investment that has taken place and would continue to take place in virtually every sector of the economy if we are able to take of advantage of our abundant, inexpensive energy supplies."
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/107835-natgas-oil-renaissance-bounty-ignored-by-anti-energy-groups-us-chamber-says
-
Plea for Emergency Injunction Gets Court Date
Sep 22, 2016 | E&E Energywire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
An American Indian tribe pushing for an emergency injunction to block part of the Dakota Access oil pipeline will make its case in federal court early next month.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit will hear oral arguments Oct. 5 on the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe's emergency request to halt construction while the judges review a lower court's decision to deny a broader injunction request from the tribe.
In the meantime, the appeals court's temporary work freeze — issued last Friday night — will remain in effect. That means Dakota Access LLC may not engage in any construction activities within 20 miles of Lake Oahe, a dammed section of the Missouri River in North Dakota. Pipeline work under and on the shorelines of the lake is also off-limits while the Army Corps of Engineers decides whether to grant an easement there.
The area is culturally significant to the Sioux and has become a rallying point for thousands of protesters from tribes and the environmental community. The neighboring Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe has intervened in the litigation against the corps, while Dakota Access has joined on the agency's side. The 1,172-mile pipeline would carry as much as 570,000 barrels a day of Bakken crude from North Dakota to Illinois.
The early October court date is not welcome news to Dakota Access and its allies, which had hoped the D.C. Circuit would hold arguments and deny the emergency injunction request this week or next. But pipeline supporters said yesterday they remained confident that the courts would ultimately rule in Dakota Access' favor.
"We respect the process and appreciate the Court moving as quickly as possible to hear the facts," said Craig Stevens, spokesman for the Midwest Alliance for Infrastructure Now, arguing that the lower court was correct in its decision to allow construction to proceed.
"We continue to believe that if the ultimate decision is based on the facts, science, engineering and the rule of law the Dakota Access Pipeline will be completed and become operational," he said in an email.
In a statement, Standing Rock Chairman David Archambault II reiterated that the temporary freeze was a "brief reprieve" and that the tribe would continue fighting.
The D.C. Circuit panel handling the case includes Judges Janice Rogers Brown and Thomas Griffith, Republican appointees, and Judge Nina Pillard, a Democratic appointee. Last week's court order noted that Brown would not grant the emergency injunction (EnergyWire, Sept. 19).
http://www.eenews.net/energywire/2016/09/22/stories/1060043242
-
How Do You Prepare for 'A Case for the Ages'?
Sep 22, 2016 | E&E Energywire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
Kevin Poloncarz has been talking aloud to himself all summer.
On the ferry from his Marin County home to his San Francisco office, the Paul Hastings LLP attorney repeats talking points, hones inflection and perfects phrasing for a very big day in court.
"If you've ever been to San Francisco, you know that someone talking aloud to him- or herself on the streets is not a strange sight, so, for the most part, no one tends to pay me any mind," he says.
It's all part of his preparation for oral arguments over the Obama administration's Clean Power Plan — an embattled rule he is defending on behalf of power companies that support it.
The high-stakes debate over the plan is set for Tuesday in Washington, D.C., and Poloncarz and more than a dozen other lawyers presenting that day have spent the better part of this year getting ready.
"Every oral argument is exciting," said BakerHostetler LLP attorney David Rivkin Jr., who is representing Oklahoma against U.S. EPA in the case. "It's an opportunity to meet the challenge every case presents and have a serious discussion with the judges.
"But this is a particularly exciting case," he added. "This is really a case for the ages."
The latest stage in the landmark legal battle will be packed into a single day at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, where 16 lawyers will spar over the Clean Air Act, federalism and procedural issues that will help judges decide the rule's fate.
Several of those attorneys spoke with EnergyWire to discuss how they prepare for the big day.
Prepping for the courtroom
To start, handling the massive litigation involves mountains of reading. With more than 150 challengers to EPA's carbon-cutting rule, plus legal arguments that range from high-level constitutional questions to complex administrative issues, the case's docket has swelled in the year since the original challenges were filed.
"Obviously, you sit and you read the briefs, and you reread the briefs, and you re-reread the briefs," said Crowell & Moring LLP attorney Tom Lorenzen, who is representing electric power cooperatives opposed to the rule, "because each time you go through, you see something you didn't notice before."
Wisconsin Solicitor General Misha Tseytlin, tasked with presenting several technical arguments against the rule, has a full plate of separate cases as his state's top appellate lawyer. But for the past week or two, he's had to block out non-Clean Power Plan issues as much as possible.
"I read over the briefs and read over all of the stuff in the record," he said. "That just takes a whole lot of time. I'm currently asking my team not to bother me with anything else unless it's absolutely necessary."
Outlines, highlighters and sticky notes are the lawyers' best friends during this intense prep time. Environmental lawyer Sean Donahue likes to mix it up with "occasional walks and making little write-ups called 'modules.'"
When they're not reading and making notes, many of the lawyers are acting. Moot courts are a key preparation method for any big case, and the Clean Power Plan litigation's wide variety of parties and arguments makes practice and coordination even more important.
Rivkin said he's done internal moots with colleagues at his firm and a couple of sessions with other lawyers, including one organized by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
"You get into character; you get up at the podium; you say, 'May it please the court,'" he said, adding that colleagues don't go easy on him.
"They'll give one an incredibly hard time," he said. "In fact, I can tell you for certain in the last 20 years, I don't ever recall an actual oral argument that was more challenging than the moots. If you've got good people mooting you, they would ask you every conceivable difficult question, and you'll have the right answers for the court."
For many, the practice and tweaking of arguments continue until the last minute.
"I remember with great admiration one of the best oral advocates I've ever seen, the late Bruce Ennis, taking his kids to a baseball game in Baltimore the very day before his oral argument in some hugely complex First Amendment/telecoms case," Donahue said.
"But I'm no Bruce Ennis," he continued, "so I'm fairly obsessive down to the wire."
Others, like Lorenzen, prefer to distance themselves from the legal material and "get into the frame of mind for arguments." Poloncarz plans to spend the weekend in the garden.
"I find that pruning roses is the perfect motivator to make those last judicious cuts to your argument," he said.
Inside the courtroom
Once inside the courtroom Tuesday, many attorneys will have ample time to get composed — or anxious — for their turn on the podium.
The D.C. Circuit is hearing the case en banc, meaning the full roster of active judges will participate. The final lineup will have 10 judges on the bench; Chief Judge Merrick Garland, who has been nominated to the vacant seat on the Supreme Court, will not participate.
The court has scheduled about 3 ½ hours of arguments between the two sides but may extend time at its discretion. With a lunch break, the case is expected to last all day.
"What's unusual is I'll be basically sitting there for maybe four or five hours before my turn," said Rivkin, who is slated to make constitutional arguments after other lawyers move through two sections of Clean Air Act arguments.
But he says he won't let the waiting game affect his nerves.
"Impatient, yes. Nervous, no," he said. "It's one of those things where you get in the zone, and you just really want to go get it done."
Tseytlin, who presents even later in the day, said he'll use the time to study the interactions between judges and other lawyers and adjust his own argument accordingly.
"On the actual day, you really want to be paying attention to what the judges are asking other advocates," he said. "You probably won't have too much time to be nervous at that point — you're going to be so in the soup."
Once the lawyers take their turns, the stakes are high and the questions are fast. Lorenzen said he focuses on giving the judges the most relevant information they might not already understand from the voluminous legal briefs. And he stays on his toes for any questions they might raise.
"People don't tend to win arguments at oral argument, but people lose arguments at oral argument," he said, adding that it's important to stay serious and civil. "This is not a political date where you're trying to get in zingers."
Outside the courtroom
The job's not over once their arguments are prepared. Several attorneys arguing the case Tuesday noted various personal approaches to readying themselves for the big event.
Poloncarz said an appellate partner of his recommended he buy a new suit.
"Arguments like this seldom come around, and it's important both to mark the occasion and to ensure that, no matter what else happens when you stand before the court, at least you'll know you look your very best," he said.
Rivkin stays relaxed by exercising and eating light. He's a big fan of Japanese food but will avoid sushi the night before because "you never know."
And several will carefully dial in their breakfast plans to fuel for the long day. Some are creatures of habit: the usual cold muesli, orange juice and strong coffee for Lorenzen and a simple serving of tea and toast for Rivkin.
For Poloncarz, three eggs over medium, and for Tseytlin, "maybe a bagel."
As for Donahue, there's no tradition.
"Game day decision," he said. "Oeufs en banc?"
http://www.eenews.net/energywire/2016/09/22/stories/1060043213
-
Ahead Of D.C. Circuit Arguments In ESPS Suit, Both Sides Express Optimism
Sep 22, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Dawn Reeves & Abby Smith
Opponents and supporters of EPA's landmark rule to curb greenhouse gases (GHGs) from existing power plants are expressing strong optimism that their side will prevail -- just days before marathon oral arguments before the full U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
Opponents plan to argue that any reasonable court will agree that EPA's rule -- known as the existing source performance standards (ESPS) and the Clean Power Plan (CPP) -- overstepped the legal bounds of the Clean Air Act, while proponents intend to counter that the court will agree that EPA reasonably acted within the statute to address one of the country's largest sources of GHGs, a step toward resolving an urgent global problem.
One source who will argue on EPA's behalf says, “Our whole side of the case will emphasize the real urgency of this problem, and the breadth of the legislative remedy that EPA is using. This is the Clean Air Act being used to address the most serious air pollution problem that we've had at least in generations. That kind of gets lost,” the source says.
Potentially bolstering this argument, the Sept. 27 oral arguments in the case, West Virginia, et al. v. EPA, et al., will come as the United Nations Paris Agreement to cut GHGs is nearing key thresholds to enter into force around the globe.
But a source backing challengers to the EPA rule says, “I think the big question in everyone's mind is, really try to look at the Clean Air Act, what Congress intended, what is supposed to happen under [section] 111(d)” -- the section under which EPA developed the rule -- “or say climate is such an important issue we need to read the statute creatively to let EPA do a rule like this. That is the fundamental question.”
The source adds: “If you take away all of the passion about climate change and just look at what the Clean Air Act says and what Congress intended, and how it has been implemented for the last 45 years, it shouldn't even be a close case. It is quite clear EPA went way beyond what 111(d) was intended to allow.”
EPA is “hoping that the judges will agree that climate is such an important issue and this is such an important rule” that they will uphold it, the source says.
The challenger source adds that it will be important to see whether the judges are inclined to agree with EPA that the “best system of emission reduction,” (BSER) is broad, as defined in the rule as including emission reductionmeasures from the entire electric system, or whether it follows the statutory definition of achieving a continuous emission reduction at a particular source.
But the source defending the rule says the rule is well within air act bounds and is a “reasonable, moderate, carefully considered effort to build upon trends already in the works. . . . We are already two-thirds of the way there based solely on trends already out there, and the rule harnesses the growth of renewable energy and the relative cheapness of natural gas, and so the rhetoric about how extreme [the CPP] is and that it will change us in radical ways is not true.”
'Fence Line'
The ESPS requires the power sector to cut GHGs by 32 percent from 2005 levels by 2030, and sets state-specific GHG goals that can be achieved by using a series of “building blocks,” including heat-rate improvements at existing coal plants, greater dispatch of existing natural gas and greater use of non-emitting resources. It also provides incentives for early renewable and efficiency development, especially in economically disadvantaged areas.
Such building blocks are the components of BSER, a key statutory definition that determines the stringency of the rule's targets.
Opponents claim the rule's approach to BSER is unlawful because the blocks assume steps from throughout the power sector and not just within the “fence line” of regulated power plants.
The legality of the “fence line” issue -- expected to be one of the key questions in the litigation -- will likely be determined by the 10 circuit judges, six appointed by Democratic presidents and four appointed by Republicans. D.C. Circuit Chief Judge Merrick Garland, who has been nominated for the Supreme Court, has recused himself from the case. Judge Nina Pillard had been expected to recuse herself from the arguments, but the courtannounced Sept. 22 that she would participate.
University of California-Los Angeles environmental law professor Ann Carlson said during a Sept. 21 press call that the court “will struggle the most” on the “fence line” issue. “I imagine you would see the Republican-appointed judges fighting hard on” opposing this issue, she said, adding that she predicts a majority of judges will defer to EPA's interpretation of BSER.
While there is a narrow edge for EPA based on the judges' backgrounds, sources on both sides of the case hope for a decisive decision for their sides, while acknowledging a ruling -- which might not be issued until 2017 -- could be fractured and complicated.
A second opponent of the rule declines to predict an outcome but acknowledges that “EPA has a decent chance in this round,” while adding the result of a Supreme Court review is even more difficult to predict, noting that the higher court stayed the ESPS early this year in a 5-4 vote prior to the death of Justice Antonin Scalia.
But the source points to a July D.C. Circuit ruling upholding a Federal Communications Commission's “net neutrality” rule as a sign that the appellate court is broadly granting deference to Obama administration interpretations of ambiguous statutory provisions.
Carlson expects significant conversation during oral argument about the amount of deference the court should give EPA's interpretation of the air act. “There is a long tradition in the court, including by the Supreme Court, in deferring to complex decisions that EPA makes in interpreting the Clean Air Act,” she said.
Citing litigation over EPA's Cross-State Air Pollution Rule, she said the D.C. Circuit “really stressed that these are very hard and complex choices EPA has to make, and they defer to those choices even in the case where statutory provisions could have been read much more narrowly.”
The first source supporting ESPS challengers hopes the court composition will not be a factor in a ruling. “It would be a shame if it comes down [along political lines] because it would be good to have the court say, 'We really do believe in the rule of law, and as much as we might want EPA to do something, it has to live within the bounds Congress set.' This is a clear enough case that hopefully we'll get at least several of the Democratic appointees.”
The source also expects the court to vacate the entire ESPS, rather than remand portions of it, because the key challenges “strike at the core” of the rule.
The EPA supporter also declines to predict an outcome but said, “We are going to seek the vote of every judge, and we're not going to take any judge's vote for granted. We think the statutory arguments and the factual support for the rule are really strong, so we are optimistic that the court will be persuaded as such.”
The source expects the court to be well prepared, and is well aware of the case's importance, since it opted to haveen banc review on its own rather than at the request of any party, and scheduled three-plus hours of arguments.
Threshold Authority
Under the court's oral argument format, it will first hear major statutory challenges, including the “fence line” issue that is also known as “generation shifting.” And it will consider “state authority” concerns.
Then the court will move to a second major issue, which is whether EPA has authority to issue the rule at all, since it already regulates power plant air toxics under section 112 of the air law.
Some of the rule's opponents have interpreted the air act language in section 112 to say that a sector cannot be regulated under both 112 and 111.
“This is a very serious argument,” the first EPA opponent says. “Originally, EPA thought that was just a silly throwaway” but since a three-judge D.C. Circuit panel heard oral argument on this same issue before EPA even finalized the rule, that belies the agency's original contention, the source says.
But EPA says the so-called section 112 exclusion is limited to pollutants, not source categories, and that opponents' interpretation is nonsensical because the agency could simply regulate GHGs first under 111 and then regulate air toxics under 112, and the exclusion would no longer apply.
During the Sept. 21 press call, Richard Revesz of New York University's Institute for Policy Integrity called opponents arguments on this issue “extremely weak” and that the claim “defies logic.” For opponents to make their point, Revesz said they “have to engage in all kinds of strange statutory interpretative gymnastics.”
A second source backing EPA also notes that power companies in earlier litigation specifically asked for 111 rules to control GHGs in lieu of torts. Now that EPA issued a rule under 111, which the source says is intended to fill regulatory gaps, many coal-heavy utilities continue to object. The source expects “a lot of back and forth about that.”
Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) is highlighting that request from a 2011 Supreme Court case, American Electric Power v. Connecticut, where EDF notes attorney Peter Keisler, who will be arguing for coal groups in West Virginia, told the high court that EPA had authority to regulate GHGs from existing power plants. “We believe that EPA can consider, as it's undertaking to do, regulating existing nonmodified sources under section 111 of the Clean Air Act, and that's the process that's engaged in now,” Keisler said at the time.
Then the court will turn to constitutional claims against the ESPS, including that it unlawfully intrudes into states' power grid jurisdiction and could cause dire scenarios of power shortages.
One source tracking the litigation says if EPA loses these arguments, “You throw the EPA rule out [completely]. Nothing survives. This is not some arcane issue about state emissions budgets.” Then, EPA and its allies' only option to limit power sector GHGs is to “go to Congress and get a [new] statute passed.”
If EPA prevails on the constitutional claims, the source says that “would violate decades of Supreme Court case law on federalism.”
However, the second source backing EPA says the Clean Air Act is “an exercise in cooperative federalism, and EPA's rule is too, and EPA has limited itself to playing the role it is supposed to play” by letting states take the lead in drafting compliance plans while pledging to implement a federal plan if states decline to do so.
While the constitutional claims that EPA is “commandeering” states might be “sexy, I don't think they have a lot of merit. I hate to predict what the court will say or do . . . but [the rule] seems like a straightforward application of EPA's authority to regulate pollution from this industry. I'm hopeful,” the source notes.
Administrative Issues
The final issues the court will hear are notice- and record-based concerns, including claims that the final ESPS is so different from the proposal that it violated notice-and-comment requirements and that EPA basically finalized an entirely new rule. EPA says it made significant changes -- including setting uniform coal and gas rates, and dropping a fourth building block focused on demand-side efficiency improvements -- in response to public comments.
One source calls the notice concerns the “great sleeper issue of the case,” because a win on this issue would have broad ramifications for administrative law, and because the ESPS “violates the express provisions of the Clean Air Act, which requires notice and comment. . . . It could require vacatur of the rule without consideration of the actual merits.”
But the first source opposing EPA doubts the court will even reach that issue. “They wouldn't need to if they decide on the other issues first,” the source notes. “If they get there, it could be pretty important but mostly for other Clean Air Act rules,” since that is the only EPA statute that requires people to have commented on a proposed issue in order to challenge a final version -- a requirement this source says EPA has abused in a “bait-and-switch” manner.
http://insideepa.com/daily-news/ahead-dc-circuit-arguments-esps-suit-both-sides-express-optimism
-
California Governor Signs Nation's Toughest Methane Emissions Law
Sep 22, 2016 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Richard Nemec
California Gov. Jerry Brown has signed into law SB 1383, said to enact the nation’s toughest restrictions on methane and other "super pollutants," which include black carbon and fluorinated (HFC) gases.
"If followed worldwide, these [restrictions] would help cut the projected rate of global warming in half by 2050," a spokesperson for Brown said.
Brown, who signed the bill on Monday, called it "the critical next step in our program to combat climate change," during a signing ceremony at a Long Beach, CA, playground bordering a refinery to dramatize the new law's expected effect on public health and climate change.
SB 1383 requires the California Air Resources Board (CARB) to develop and implement strategies to cut the super pollutant emissions, including a specific target by 2030 to cut methane emissions and HFC gases each by 40% and black carbon by 50%. It also calls for efforts to increase sustainable production and use of renewable natural gas (RNG).
The restrictions follow the prolonged natural gas storage well leak at the Southern California Gas Co. (SoCalGas) Aliso Canyon facility that ended last February (see Daily GPI, Feb. 18). The facility has remained closed pending completion of testing all 114 storage wells at the 3,600-acre site on the northwest fringe of Los Angeles.
A SoCalGas spokesperson said CARB planned to work with the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) and the state's Department of Food and Agriculture to develop at least five dairy biomethane pilot projects to produce more RNG in the state.
SoCalGas commended SB 1383 sponsor Sen. Ricardo Lara and Brown “for bringing California this bold legislation that will help drive innovation and develop the market for RNG," the spokesperson said. "Using RNG is the next step in addressing climate issues."
Lara and Brown emphasized that California's overall efforts to address air quality and climate change issues have led to what they called "important reductions" in super pollutants and "have provided a strong foundation for SB 1383” (see Daily GPI, Sept. 9).
"The super pollutants addressed in this bill -- black carbon, methane and HFC gases -- are powerful climate forces that have a profound effect on climate change and global warming," Lara said. "This bill represents a unique opportunity to balance our global vision for the future with a much more local and immediate perspective."
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/107832-california-governor-signs-nations-toughest-methane-emissions-law
-
Heightened Opposition Puts Oil Industry on the Defensive
Sep 22, 2016 | E&E Energywire
By Jenny Mandel
Are oil and gas opponents agenda-driven ideologues or regular people like parents, police officers and neighbors seeking to protect their own best interests?
It's not an easy question to answer for many in the oil and gas industry, which is grappling with unprecedented levels of scrutiny and opposition to pipelines and other infrastructure in the post-Keystone XL era.
At the annual Shale Insight conference here, much of the community is defensively aggressive, taking swipes at those who throw up obstacles to development.
"Never forget that reliable, affordable energy lifts people from poverty," said Gary Heminger, chairman, president and CEO of Marathon Petroleum Corp., in a keynote address. "The issue should not be how to stop fossil fuel companies from operating. Rather, if you truly care about your fellow human beings, if you want to prove a way to give the world's poorest longer lives, better lives, more prosperity, the issue really is that we need more fossil fuels, not less."
Other industry leaders used similarly strident language. "Self-promoting, anti-fossil-fuel profiteers want to shut down U.S. oil and gas," warned Harold Hamm, CEO of Continental Resources Inc., in a talk describing climate-based opposition to the industry as "the triumph of extremism over common sense."
Most industry proponents are far less outspoken, but many attendees at the conference — which draws industry people of all stripes, especially from the Ohio, Pennsylvania and West Virginia region — see opponents on the far side of an invisible fault line.
Michael Krancer, a partner with law firm Blank Rome LLP, said he sees "political risk" as a bigger issue today than technical risk in development and argued that industry is not spending properly to respond to it.
A 1,000-mile pipeline, for instance, will have multiple "veto points" representing opportunities for opponents to block it, he said. "We see the state of New York being a veto point for Constitution," Krancer said, referring to the pipeline project under development by Williams Cos. and others that was approved by federal regulators in 2014 but turned down for state permits in April (EnergyWire, April 27).
Those veto points don't focus on technical concerns so much as "public comfort issues," Krancer said, and will require a new kind of industry response.
Krancer, a former secretary of Pennsylvania's Department of Environmental Protection, suggested taking a hard line. Opponents of oil and gas development "use lies, intimidation and fear tactics" to derail projects, he said, while companies are obligated by federal regulations to tell the truth.
"We have to rethink it," he said, saying coalition-building should go hand in hand with "creating tensions in the coalitions of the opposition."
Krancer pointed to Earthjustice, an advocacy group that has become closely involved in the fight over the Dakota Access pipeline, which is facing protests in North Dakota. "Do you think Earthjustice, before this, ever paid a single bit of attention to Native Americans? And what do you think they're going to do after this with Native Americans? They're going to forget them forever."
A call for more communication
Others advocated for a more cooperative approach.
"These are very complex projects with strong viewpoints. Debate becomes very polarized to become about passion, rather than about facts," said Manisha Patel, associate director of the environmental policy practice at WSP Parsons Brinckerhoff, a professional services firm. "So start early, do your homework, do your research to know what those points are going to be."
In response, industry will need to both operate and communicate differently, Patel said. In today's atmosphere, she said, companies trying to advance pipeline or other infrastructure projects need to start early within the affected communities, building relationships with those affected to identify and address areas of potential concern.
It's an easy sound bite that appeals to basic human nature, Patel said, that people should fight projects because they "want the world to be a better place for their grandchildren." But industry can help explain how building pipelines will bring macroeconomic benefits. "We need to get that message out in a way that resonates with the equal human nature of, 'I want what I want when I want it,'" she said.
John Loftus is the executive director of the Detroit/Wayne County Port Authority, which has seen its own fair share of environmental incidents and responses, good and bad. "Don't wait until a disaster happens to let people know what you're up to," he urged. "You've got to start early letting people know what you're doing, why the work you're doing is important to their lifestyle," he said, while also being clear that you take their viewpoints seriously.
Tom Ahern, a partner with public affairs group Five Corners Strategies, rebutted the notion that pipeline opponents are fringe elements who can be written off as outside of the mainstream.
"Typical opposition that you will encounter are normal people, actual regular people and citizens like regular moms and dads, police officers, nurses, teachers, Democrats, Republicans, libertarians, Maoists, they're anyone," Ahern said. "If you think a wind farm, or a real estate development, or a solar field, or a hospital or anything is going to have an impact on your life ... you're going to be opposed. You're going to be open to being opposed."
Ahern is a proponent of companies' holding low-pressure events like open houses where the public is invited to learn about a project and what it could mean on fronts like environmental impacts, traffic and pipeline routing.
"I'm talking about knocking on their door and saying, 'Hey, I want to do this project, let's talk. You don't have to support me today, you don't have to support me tomorrow, but let's talk,'" he said. "That's the way you do public outreach now. That's what works."
Sarah Battisti, vice president of government affairs with Southwestern Energy Co., highlighted the role of education in winning people over.
Much of the public simply doesn't realize how integral natural gas is to their daily life, not just as fuel but as an ingredient in plastics and other modern materials, Battisti said. "We need gas to make everything, the pen in your hand, your phone; we need to educate people about how we need gas to make these things," she said.
A fracking do-over
Dena Wiggins, president and CEO of the Natural Gas Supply Association, said the industry must not dismiss the record levels of activism that pipeline projects now face.
"We need to understand that they are serious," she said. "They are extraordinarily well-funded; they are extraordinarily well-organized."
Recent opposition to pipelines is often rooted in a broader interest in wanting to see the United States move away from fossil fuels. As a result, activists are frequently targeting natural gas distribution as a weak point in the industry.
Wiggins likened the pipeline protests to other opposition to hydraulic fracturing that is rooted in environmental concerns about the technology.
"People had legitimate questions about the water supply, the safety, the trucks, the this, the that, the proppants, and I don't think we did a very good job answering those questions," Wiggins said. "The debate on hydraulic fracturing almost did get away from us. Let's not make that mistake again."
http://www.eenews.net/energywire/2016/09/22/stories/1060043248
-
Trump's Pennsylvania Fracking Pitch May Fall Flat in November
Sep 22, 2016 | Politico Pro
By Elana Schor
Donald Trump’s trip to the heart of Pennsylvania's shale region on Thursday will help cement his ties to the energy industry that's slowly starting to embrace him, but he'll have a tougher time tailoring a fracking message to appeal to voters across the rest of the state.
No GOP presidential nominee has won Pennsylvania since 1988, and polls show that while voters there welcome the economic benefits of fracking, they are wary of its environmental risks and want the industry to kick in more money to state coffers.
Trump’s Thursday speech is his first in-depth foray into energy issues since May, when he offered red meat to an oil-and-gas audience in North Dakota, accusing Hillary Clinton of planning to “shut down energy production across this country.” But Trump faces a steep climb in Pennsylvania, where polls show Clinton with a consistent lead of more than 5 percentage points.
The state’s natural gas production is second highest in the nation, and a U.S. Chamber of Commerce report to be released Thursday estimates that oil and gas production supports more than 117,000 jobs there. But that’s less than 2 percent of Pennsylvania’s nearly 5.9 million jobs — leaving Trump with a narrow appeal to the working-class, shale-rich counties where he needs to win big to try to offset Clinton's support in the heavily populated Philadelphia suburbs.
Calls to expand drilling and ease regulations are “not going to help him in the Philadelphia suburbs in particular, and in urban areas,” said longtime Pennsylvania pollster Terry Madonna, director of the state’s Franklin & Marshall College Poll.
Trump isn't trailing Clinton in the state because of his pro-oil and gas agenda that calls for eliminating EPA and opening up large swaths of land to drilling, Madonna added, but those positions won't help him make up ground.
A Franklin & Marshall poll in March found 73 percent of Pennsylvanians support taxing natural gas companies, even as state legislators shot down Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf’s proposal to impose a production tax on the industry. Bernie Sanders and former Rep. Joe Sestak staked their campaigns in Pennsylvania’s Democratic primary on proposals to ban fracking, but Clinton and Senate candidate Katie McGinty won over Democrats after embracing new regulations rather than an outright prohibition.
“If Trump wanted to maximize his chances, he’d have a regular ‘tax but don’t ban it’ position,” said John Hanger, a fracking supporter and former state environmental secretary to former Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell. “I don’t think Trump speaks that way.”
Trump has received about $240,000 from donors in the oil and gas industry, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics, less than half the $526,000 collected by Clinton’s campaign. Yet the industry is slowly warming to Trump and its initial wariness is fading since he signed on several veteran conservative energy lobbyists as advisers.
That improving relationship suggests Trump will deliver a favorable message to the Shale Insight conference that is sponsored by the Marcellus Shale Coalition, the Ohio Oil and Gas Association and the West Virginia Oil and Natural Gas Association.
But competing for Pennsylvania’s 20 electoral votes will require Trump to make a broader pitch to independent voters outside of the shale-rich areas, said Tom Ahern, a partner at the public affairs firm Five Corners Strategies and who’s also appearing at the conference.
“To win, you’ve got to find a way to talk to folks in the southeast in a way that doesn’t scare them,” said Ahern, a former Democratic strategist who has worked with the natural gas industry. “When you’re talking about energy, fracking and pipelines, you have to make the case to voters that you’re interested in their best interests.”
Pennsylvania GOP Rep. Keith Rothfus, whose district lies in the heart of the Marcellus shale area, modeled Trump’s pitch by urging an “an all-of-the-above approach to” energy — the same phrase President Barack Obama has eschewed lately after touting it during his 2012 reelection bid.
“When it comes to protecting Western Pennsylvania’s energy sector jobs, Donald Trump is the clear choice for our region and the entire nation,” said Rothfus, who backed Trump in May. “I think he wants to protect these good-paying jobs, not destroy them, and I hope he will speak to that tomorrow.”
While most Pennsylvanians tend to agree with Trump in supporting fracking, polls show they line up with Clinton on taxing the industry and instituting tight oversight on its environmental impacts.
“A majority of people, collectively across the state, favor gas development with an environmental caveat attached to it -- so, as long as regulations and transparency and other components of that caveat are adhered to,” said Tom Murphy, co-director of Penn State University’s Marcellus Center for Outreach and Research.
Nationwide, opposition to fracking is on the rise as environmental groups hammer away at natural gas, pressing Clinton and Obama to renounce the practice. A Gallup poll released in March found 51 percent of Americans opposed fracking, and a poll conducted last month by the University of Chicago and the AP-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research found opposition outweighing support, with 23 percent of Republicans against fracking.
Even if Trump’s Pittsburgh speech doesn’t help him cut into Clinton’s significant advantage in the vote-rich Philadelphia suburbs, the industry is welcoming his visit to a region where the downturn in oil and gas prices has sent production falling and sparked fears of layoffs. Karen Harbert, president of the Chamber’s Institute for 21st Century Energy, praised the GOP’s “all-of-the-above” platform that “reflects the reality that we are going to have oil, gas, coal, nuclear, and renewables.”
Asked about Pennsylvania voters’ support for taxing gas developers, Harbert said: “I don’t know that a federal candidate gains anything from wading into an issue that’s going to be decided by the state.” She added that “the industry certainly has an opportunity to vote with its feet” by moving development to other states in response to new taxes.
In a statement, Marcellus Shale Coalition President Dave Spigelmyer nodded to the outisized importance of Pennsylvania — and that of neighboring Ohio — to the next occupant of the White House, saying that states in the Appalachian shale region are set to “play a critical role in determining the presidential outcome, as they have in years past."
https://www.politicopro.com/energy/story/2016/09/trumps-pennsylvania-fracking-pitch-may-fall-flat-in-november-131158
-
Houston to Investigate Local Chemical Companies After Report
Sep 22, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
Elected officials in Houston are pressing for the city's chemical companies to reveal where they store some of their most hazardous compounds.
The move comes after the Houston Chronicle revealed that local fire departments don't know where the chemicals are stored, a safety gap some officials say could put residents and firefighters at risk in the event of a chemical accident.
The Chronicle's six-part investigation was published earlier this week (Greenwire, Sept. 19).
Mayor Sylvester Turner has announced his office will prepare a chemical safety action plan within 45 days. The city will examine more than 6,000 businesses to determine their chemical inventories.
The Chronicle calls fire departments a "last line of defense" against chemical dangers, as federal and state regulators have failed to clamp down on industry safety.
Though President Obama ordered federal agencies to update their chemical regulations after the 2013 West Fertilizer Co. explosion in West, Texas, little progress has been made, the newspaper found.
Turner said he wants better coordination between the chemical industry and government so that firefighters can access data on plants' chemical stockpiles.
Houston administrators also said the fire department will begin conducting site visits to chemical companies.
"The statistics are terrifying when you think of how many buildings are containing hazardous materials that we simply don't know about," said David Robinson, a City Council member. "I don't know of any elected official who'd be comfortable with those statistics."
But Turner also said his political priority is to resolve a pension shortfall that is crippling the city's budget.
Texas' antiterrorism law allows chemical companies to keep their wares secret, noted Houston City Council member Michael Kubosh.
"I think anyone who follows current events would be concerned about the state's approach — essentially to not regulate the storage of chemicals," said state Sen. John Whitmire (D).
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2016/09/22/stories/1060043271
-
Calif. City Rejects Valero's Crude-by-Rail Plan
Sep 22, 2016 | E&E Energywire
Benicia, Calif., this week turned down a crude-by-rail plan proposed by Valero Refining Co., the city's biggest employer.
The company, a subsidiary of Valero Energy Corp., proposed the plan in 2012. It would have allowed the company to ship oil trains through Sacramento and other Northern California cities to its Benicia refinery. Company officials said the oil trains would help the refinery remain competitive in a changing oil industry.
Opponents of the project said the oil trains would risk residents' safety and the consequences would be catastrophic if there were an oil spill and fire.
The Benicia Planning Commission denied Valero's request earlier this year over safety concerns and its environmental impact. Valero appealed that decision to the City Council. The council rejected the appeal in a 5-0 vote Tuesday.
Valero officials said they are disappointed with the decision. The company has also asked the federal Surface Transportation Board to issue a ruling saying Benicia does not have the right to deny Valero's request to build a rail transfer station. But the federal agency denied the request, also Tuesday.
The company had previously said it likely would sue the city over an adverse decision.
A similar hearing is taking place this week in another California county, where Phillips 66 Co. is proposing a rail transfer station to allow it to ship oil via train.
http://www.eenews.net/energywire/2016/09/22/stories/1060043220
-
Inspectors Still Checking Crude Oil Tank Cars in New York State
Sep 22, 2016 | Occupational Health & Safety
New York Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo announced that state and federal inspectors found a total of three critical defects and 41 non-critical defects during their latest round of crude oil tank car and rail inspections in the state. Inspection teams examined 109 crude oil tank cars, approximately 196 miles of track, and 72 switches as they focused on track, track hardware, and tank car mechanical safety equipment, including wheels, brakes, and couplers.
Critical defects involve important maintenance issues that must be addressed immediately but don't necessarily indicate safety lapses, while non-critical rail defects must be repaired within 30 days. Tank car defects must be fixed before the train departs the yard or, if that is not possible, the affected car must be pulled from the train to await repair.
"Protecting public safety is our number one priority, and by finding and repairing defects in crude oil tanks and on railroad tracks, we are working to avoid risk and prevent accidents," Cuomo said. "We will continue to hold crude oil transport to the strictest possible standard to ensure a safer rail system for all in New York."
The inspectors work for the New York State Department of Transportation and the Federal Railroad Administration. They conducted tanker inspections at CSX Corporation's Frontier Rail Yard in Buffalo and CSX mainline track between Selkirk and Schenectady; between Rome and Oneida; between Hamburg and Cheektowaga; and between Blasdell and Ripley, as well as a CSX switch in Haverstraw. They also inspected Canadian Pacific-owned mainline track between Albany and Clifton Park and between Willsboro and Whitehall.
The inspection campaign began in February 2014 and thus far has identified 1,736 defects after 13,120 rail cars and 5,087 miles of track have been checked. The inspectors also have issued 23 hazardous materials violations.
https://ohsonline.com/articles/2016/09/22/inspectors-still-checking-crude-oil-tank-cars-in-new-york-state.aspx?admgarea=news
-
100 Nations Join to Call for Rapid Reduction in HFCs
Sep 22, 2016 | Politico Pro - Whiteboard
By Eric Wolff
More than 100 nations today launched a coalition to call for an ambitious amendment to the Montreal Protocol to reduce emissions of hydrofluorocarbons, a potent greenhouse gas.
The announcement was an attempt to generate momentum for a strong amendment two weeks before final negotiations in Kigali, Rwanda. HFCs, which are widely used in air conditioning and refrigeration, have many times the heat trapping power of carbon dioxide, but spend less time in the atmosphere. If successful, the revised agreement would hold down global warming by half a degree Celsius by the end of the century, helping the world meet the goals of the Paris climate agreement, Secretary of State John Kerry said.
"We know the Paris agreement won’t in and of itself get the job done," Kerry said. "And one of the single most important things we can get done is amend the Montreal agreement to bring down the emissions of hyroflourocarbons."
In addition, the U.S. and other developed nations promised to contribute $27 million in 2017 to a fund to help developing nations meet the phasedown of HFCs. A group of 19 donors and foundations will also pony up $53 million to help developing nations improve their energy efficiency and thereby reduce the emission of HFCs.
"This effort to reduce potent greenhouse gases known as hydrofluorocarbons while cutting energy waste and costs is a great example of the critical role innovation can play in addressing climate change while prioritizing international development," Bill Gates, who personally contributed, said in a statement.
https://www.politicopro.com/energy/whiteboard
-
The Environmental Groups Killing a Carbon Tax
Sep 22, 2016 | The Hill - Congress Blog
By Shi-Ling Hsu
The news on climate change gets worse and worse. Each of the first six months of 2016 smashed the previous records for being the hottest such month in history, and this July was the hottest ever recorded. With planetary crisis upon us, climate policy advocates cannot afford to fight with each other. But that’s what is happening in one of the most environmentally conscious states in the country, the Evergreen State of Washington. This sad tale holds lessons for everybody as the world grapples with climate change.
Yoram Bauman, a climate advocate and stand-up comedian with a Ph.D in economics, is the founder of CarbonWA, an organization dedicated to passing a carbon tax in Washington. Last year, CarbonWA stunned the environmental community by collecting over 360,000 signatures to get the carbon tax proposal onto the 2016 November ballot. This is a remarkable achievement, as no other state has come close to considering a state carbon tax. Now, this tiny, hand-to-mouth organization has foisted the issue onto Washington voters in a Presidential election year.
But all is not well in Enviro-topia. CarbonWA's carbon tax ballot initiative, I-732, is facing opposition not only from the expected industry groups, but in a surprising twist, from social justice groups and other environmental groups. Why?
The problem starts with the household economics of a carbon tax. Viewed in isolation, a carbon tax hurts poor people more than rich people, because it raises energy prices, and energy costs make up a larger and less flexible part of a poor household's budget than a rich one's. But a carbon tax generates revenues, and those revenues can be used to compensate poor households for the higher energy prices—leaving poor households better off than they are without the carbon tax.
I-732 alleviates its effects on the poor in two ways: it lowers Washington’s regressive sales tax by one percent, and provides a match of up to $1500 of the federal Earned Income Tax Credit for low-income working families. About 75% of I-732 revenues will be spent funding these two budget items.
So why the internecine warfare? Bauman will admit when pressed (as I did) that he might have done better in reaching out to other groups for their input. I-732 is a good policy, and it does for the most part what the social and environmental groups want: reduce emissions and funnel the money back to poor people.
But along with good policy must come good politics. One observer praised I-732, but accused Bauman of "political malpractice." Lesson number one in climate advocacy: consult with others.
Here is lesson number two: perfect politics cannot become the enemy of good policy. The Alliance for Jobs and Clean Energy is a network of environmental and social justice groups, most of which oppose I-732 on the grounds that it doesn't do enough to help poor households. But take a look at what these groups actually want, and their claims fall apart. The Alliance also proposes a carbon tax, but would not lower sales taxes or redirect any money towards vulnerable populations. Their proposal would invest funds in "clean energy, clean and abundant water, and healthy forests," earmarking 25% of those investments "to benefit disadvantaged communities."
Exactly what these investments are and how they would help poor people is left unsaid. One Alliance member I talked to said they would pay for solar panels for poor households. I have never heard a poor family say, "if only we had solar panels, life would be so much easier." The Alliance is a solid network that has practiced good politics, but is guilty of policy malpractice.
What is worse, some of these groups have, out of personal vendetta, unleashed spurious attacks on Bauman and I-732. Some write things like "I-732 kowtows to polluters, disrespects communities of color." This is not faintly ridiculous. If you want to see kowtowing to polluters, you should see the agreement signed by four local environmental organizations with TransAlta, the owner of Washington State's last coal-fired power plant, promising to not sue over pollution or carbon dioxide emissions. And they have the chutzpah to object to I-732 on the grounds that it doesn't do enough?
Another Trumpian accusation is that CarbonWA hired signature-gathering firms that have run into trouble with forging signatures. Actually, CarbonWA hired a group that was employed by a conservative advocacy group, that hired another firm that had forged signatures.
The broader lesson for all of us—not just Washington State voters—is that climate policy is not the place to grind a political axe. Some liberal environmental organizations still see climate change as just another political football, a hypocritical attitude we cannot afford. The Canadian environmentalist David Suzuki said of climate change that "[w]e're a giant car heading towards a brick wall and everyone’s arguing over where they’re going to sit." It is time to recognize that we are getting rather close to that brick wall.
Shi-Ling Hsu is a Florida State University law professor and adjunct fellow at the Niskanen Center.
http://www.thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/energy-environment/297170-the-environmental-groups-killing-a-carbon-tax
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested