Preview Newsletter
ACC PM 10/10/16
-
(ACC Mentioned) Takeaways from the 2016 Biannual Meeting of the Global WTERT Council
Oct 10, 2016 | Waste 360
By Mallory Szczepanski
The 2016 Biannual Meeting of the Global Waste-to-Energy Research and Technology Council (WTERT) was held on October 6 and 7, 2016, at Columbia University in New York. The council, which was founded by the Earth & Environmental Engineering Center of Columbia University, brought together, engineers, scientists, managers from universities, waste and recycling industry members and current students for two days of presentations that focused on waste-to-energy (WTE) trends and issues. -
ShiFt Happens, But It's Not Always Good Science
Oct 10, 2016 | The Parliament Magazine
By Christopher J. Borgert
Have you ever wondered why some scientists self-identify as revolutionaries? In his 1962 book, "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions," physicist Thomas Kuhn promoted the concept of a "paradigm shift" to describe new ways of thinking that can only be ushered in by scientific revolutions, not by working within the framework of accepted scientific knowledge. -
Think Before You Pink
Oct 10, 2016 | Houston Chronicle
By Shelly Reese Bain
Breast Cancer Awareness Month always seemed like a positive idea to me: a no-brainer. Buying things with pink ribbons was an easy way to show my solidarity with cancer patients fighting the disease and to remember those who lost their battles, right? -
(ACC Mentioned) Chevron Phillips Nears Completion of $6 Billion Petrochemical Project
Oct 10, 2016 | Houston Patch
By Bryan Kirk
Chevron Phillips’ Baytown expansion project is about 80 percent complete and should be operational late next year, officials said. -
In Second Debate, Both Clinton and Trump Slip Up on Energy
Oct 10, 2016 | Houston Chronicle
By Lydia DePillis
Amidst the personal nastiness of the second presidential debate Sunday night, the moderators squeezed in a couple substantive questions. Among them was one about energy policy, and both nominees answered with their stump-speech sound bites — neither of which were a perfect treatment of the truth. -
Second Presidential Debate (Energy Policy Excerpt)
Oct 10, 2016 | Transcript
Cooper: We have one more question from Ken Bone about energy policy. Bone: What steps will your energy policy take to meet our energy needs, while at the same time remaining environmentally-friendly and minimizing job loss for fossil power plant workers? -
EPA Agrees to Review Flaring Emissions Formula
Oct 10, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Sean Reilly
U.S. EPA will revisit a key gauge for estimating emissions of volatile organic compounds from natural gas production flaring operations under a tentative settlement to a lawsuit brought by four Gulf Coast environmental groups. -
Construction Now 'Would Be a Tragedy' — Critics
Oct 10, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
American Indian tribes are urging Dakota Access pipeline backers to hold off on construction plans, despite a federal court order yesterday lifting a work freeze on part of the embattled oil project. -
Tribe Will Continue Fight Against ND Pipeline Project
Oct 10, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe says it will continue its legal fight against the Dakota Access Pipeline despite an order allowing some construction on the project to move forward. -
Setback for Dakota Access Opponents in Court
Oct 10, 2016 | Politico Pro - Morning Energy
By Anthony Adragna
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals late Sunday lifted an injunction that had frozen work on a disputed section of the Dakota Access pipeline near Lake Oahe, the center of an ongoing protest by tribal and green groups. -
Texas Parks Department Admits It Never Studied Impact of Oil Drilling on Balmorhea Springs
Oct 10, 2016 | Fuel Fix
By David Hunn
State park officials have not conducted any research to assess the impact of oil drilling on West Texas’s Balmorhea State Park and the region’s famous artesian springs. Nor had the parks department gathered other scientific studies on the region’s aquifers until just recently. -
Clinton Vexed by Pipeline, Fracking and 'Phony' Greens — Emails
Oct 10, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Hannah Northey
A trove of leaked emails from Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton's inner circle reveal a tricky balancing act the former secretary of State faced trying to appease both unions and environmental groups before announcing her opposition to the Keystone XL pipeline last year. -
Progress, The President And Natural Gas
Oct 10, 2016 | Breaking Energy (in Real Clear Energy)
By Mark Green
Interesting remarks from President Obama during the “South By South Lawn” event at the White House this week – with the president basically saying that the abundance and affordability of domestic natural gas is key to America’s energy present and future, even as he gave a nod to natural gas’ ongoing role in reducing U.S. carbon emissions. -
Rail Supplier News from Granite, Alstom, RSI, TRANSCAER and WSP Parsons Brinckerhoff
Oct 10, 2016 | Progressive Railroading
Granite Construction Inc. has obtained a $39 million subcontract from Absher Construction Co. to build Sound Transit's Northgate Station in Seattle. -
There’s No Oxygen Left in This Campaign for a Debate About Carbon
Oct 10, 2016 | Washington Post
By Chris Mooney
It’s becoming more and more clear what role climate and energy issues are going to play in this presidential campaign — a minor one at best.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation News
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) Takeaways from the 2016 Biannual Meeting of the Global WTERT Council
Oct 10, 2016 | Waste 360
By Mallory Szczepanski
The 2016 Biannual Meeting of the Global Waste-to-Energy Research and Technology Council (WTERT) was held on October 6 and 7, 2016, at Columbia University in New York. The council, which was founded by the Earth & Environmental Engineering Center of Columbia University, brought together, engineers, scientists, managers from universities, waste and recycling industry members and current students for two days of presentations that focused on waste-to-energy (WTE) trends and issues.
The speakers included well-known industry members, such as Stephen Jones, CEO of Covanta Energy; Julia Watsford, vice president of strategic planning at Wheelabrator Technologies; Kathryn Garcia, the commissioner for the City of New York Department of Sanitation (DSNY); David Biderman, executive director for the Solid Waste Association of North America (SWANA); and Antonis Mavropoulos, president of the International Solid Waste Association (ISWA).
Here are some takeaways from day one of the meeting:
1. Jones spoke about the future of the U.S. WTE industry and gave a rundown of Covanta’s numbers, which include a 30+ year operating history, 41 energy-from-waste (EfW) facilities in 18 states and providences, 4,000 employees, 110+ boilers, 50+ turbine generators, 20 million tons of waste processed, 10 million MWh of power generated, 500,000+ gross tons of metal recovered and 20 million tons of CO2 equivalent offset. Covanta also has five main environmental solutions: assured destruction, zero waste to landfill, recycling and repurpose solutions, liquid waste management and industrial services.
According to Jones, there are two choices for post-recycled waste: landfill and EfW. Landfills are a major source of man-made methane, a non-sustainable use of land and the methane is 28 to 34 times more potent than carbon dioxide over 100 years and 84 to 86 times strong over 20 years. EfW, on the other hand, allows for 90 percent reduction of waste in volume, clean energy generation and the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. EfW also produces more than nine times the energy per ton compared to landfills. Jones also commented that EfW will be a key to improving the state of sustainable waste management in the U.S., and that international growth of EfW shows a large addressable market.
Jones also stated that more than 80 percent of S&P 500 reports on sustainability, which is a four-fold increase since 2011. And out of 80 reviewed companies, 90 percent had some form of a waste reduction goal.
2. In an interview with Waste360, Jones gave an update on what Covanta is currently working on. “Construction on Covanta’s WTE facility in Dublin is now about 80 percent complete, and we are on track to open the facility in 2017,” says Jones. “We also have approximately 90 percent of our waste signed up for about a 10-year term. In addition to that, we are working on growing and acquiring more companies so that we can continue to gain access to more profile waste. We are also expecting to see a lot more opportunities outside the U.S. over the next five years.”
3. Chen Xiaoping, CEO of China Everbight International, provided an overview of China’s municipal solid waste (MSW) treatment industry.
China’s environmental industry is policy driven. Change in national policies and the country’s economic system will lead to a fundamental transformation in the environmental industry.
During the last decade (2001 to 2010), China commercialized its infrastructure projects by allowing private enterprises to invest in and operate waste management.
PPP models, including POT, BOO, BT, TOT, etc., help to promote corporate development.
Xiaoping also identified the characteristics of MSW in China, which include mixed waste, high water content, high ash content, low heat value and no waste sorting.
According to Xiaoping, 38 percent of the waste in China was treated by WTE in 2015.
4. Watsford explained the role of WTE in sustainable waste management.According to Watsford, the real advantage of EfW is our ability to accommodate changing waste habits over time. EfW ultimately drives sustainable waste management, clean renewable energy, local economic benefits and environmental sustainability.
“Wheelabrator Technologies understands the need to be continually innovative, and we need to develop new ways that WTE can operate,” says Watsford.
5. Garcia spoke about the organics programs in New York. New York currently has more than 225 community composting sites and 87 food waste drop-off sites. The city’s curbside organics collection program is slated to serve nearly 1 million New Yorkers by the end of 2016. In addition to that, more than 700 schools in New York City have curbside organics collection and 100 zero waste schools were launched in 2016.
Garcia also gave an update on how the DSNY is affected by Hurricane Matthew.“Hurricane Matthew could affect DSNY’s ability to export waste to South Carolina,” says Garcia. “Extra rail cars are being sent north to prepare for the storm.”
6. Mavropoulos discussed the Fourth Industrial Revolution and the future of waste management. He claimed that some recycled-material prices are hitting severe lows compared to four or five years ago, and that in the next 10 to 15 years, we will have new waste streams for what are now new materials and products.
Mavropoulos also sees social media as a major benefit for the industry because industry members have the opportunity to track behavior trends.
He also touched on e-waste, stating that “it took us 45 million tonnes of e-waste per year for us to figure out what to do with it.”
7. Biderman’s presentation covered the obstacles and opportunities for a national waste management policy for the U.S. Currently, there is not a national waste management policy for the U.S. and according to Biderman, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act could probably need to be amended and a democrat could probably need to control the White House and the Congress.
Biderman also commented that SWANA’s officially policy supports “integrated waste management” at the local level and that the association let’s local governments decide what’s best.
8. Craig Cookson, director of recycling and energy recovery for the American Chemistry Council, highlighted the advocacy to advance the recovery of non-recycled plastics.
Cookson outlined the four main ways to grow plastic recycling:
Technical reports and data: rate reports, material recovery for the future and mixed waste.
Industry programs: plastic film recycling, common recycling terms and grocery rigids.
Policy alignment: advance broadly supported recycling policies.
Large scalable partnerships: for carts, education and infrastructure.
“Currently, about 70 percent of plastics in North America come from natural gas and as plastics continue to grow, it’s important for us to continue to explore new options for recycling and recovery,” says Cookson.
http://www.waste360.com/waste-energy/takeaways-2016-biannual-meeting-global-wtert-council
-
ShiFt Happens, But It's Not Always Good Science
Oct 10, 2016 | The Parliament Magazine
By Christopher J. Borgert
Have you ever wondered why some scientists self-identify as revolutionaries? In his 1962 book, "The Structure of Scientific Revolutions," physicist Thomas Kuhn promoted the concept of a "paradigm shift" to describe new ways of thinking that can only be ushered in by scientific revolutions, not by working within the framework of accepted scientific knowledge.
Regardless of whether he was correct, most scientists would agree that when technological developments provide surprising new measurements of the natural world that can't be explained by established scientific theories, a paradigm shift may be necessary to move forward. But just as important, new ideas that violate scientific methodology should be discarded quickly to avoid stepping backward. At least, that is the way science ought to work.
Increasingly, however, paradigm shift alone is being used to justify frightening public health claims. To name a few, these range from blaming vaccinations for autism and genetically modified (GM) foods or common chemicals, pesticides and consumer products for nearly every adverse health condition imaginable - from diabetes to obesity to attention deficit hyperactivity disorder. With so many allegations and "new paradigms" being demanded, it's fair to ask: Why is the revolution taking so long and why aren't we taking action now?
The standard answer from proponents of these various new paradigms is that financial conflicts of interest generated by corporate money in science prevent progress by sowing doubt about new ideas. This convenient excuse ignores the fact that all parties derive profit from arguing their own side of the issue: pushing for these serious public health claims earns research grants and media prominence for scientists and advocates, defence of commercial products allows their continued sale by corporations, and addressing the controversy increases the prominence of regulatory authorities and politicians.
But blaming the influence of corporate money is a tired excuse. A more compelling answer comes from closely examining each new paradigm on its own merits and asking whether it will shift science forward or backward.
And so we might ask: Have new, reproducible observations been made that cannot be sufficiently explained by established scientific knowledge? Interestingly, for many of these serious public health claims, the answer is no. Rather than making discoveries that established science cannot explain, advocates are simply making new allegations, using unique interpretations that have already been rejected by established scientific theory. Put simply, it's not that we have new discoveries that demand new ways of thinking; we have new interpretations that only a paradigm shift could justify. Established scientific theory can explain the data perfectly well, but opposite to the alarmists' claims.
Nevertheless, new paradigms could be correct even if generated by nothing more than the imagination and conviction of their advocates. New paradigms often fail, however, because their supporters overlook one simple but critical question: Does the new paradigm adequately explain the facts we already know? For a new paradigm to move science forward rather than backward, it must explain both the old and the new, not just the new.
For example, advocates of a new paradigm for so-called "endocrine disruptors" claim that dozens of oestrogen-like chemicals contained in household products cause disease and birth defects, even at doses well below those found to be safe in studies used by government agencies to regulate drugs and chemicals. If this new paradigm were correct, then low doses of pharmaceutical oestrogens contained in birth control pills would also cause disease in offspring and birth defects because they are even more potent than so-called endocrine-disrupting chemicals.
But that doesn't occur. Children born to mothers who continued taking oral estrogenic contraceptives through the early months of pregnancy do not suffer the diseases and birth defects supposedly caused by estrogenic "endocrine disruptors." Neither do children whose mothers consume an Asian diet high in botanical oestrogens, such as soy.
Similarly, the claims of anti-GM organisations fail to explain how the health of humans, livestock and domesticated animals improved despite countless genetic modifications of food crops by traditional plant breeders over the last two centuries. Traditional plant breeding also produced GM foods, but with less precision and with much higher risks of unintended genetic outcomes than does modern biotechnology. If genetic modification really created "Frankenfood," our great grandparents would have suffered severely.
Everyone loves a good revolution, but if we accept every new paradigm blindly, we should also be prepared to give up many life-improving and disease-sparing drugs, countless innovative modern technologies and many plentiful, healthy foods. After all, some of these new paradigms lead to the conclusion that birth control pills cause birth defects and the corn from grandma's garden killed grandpa.
Scientific revolutions may be on the horizon, but most of this shift isn't credible science or a step forward.
http://www.theparliamentmagazine.eu/blog/shift-happens-its-not-always-good-science
-
Oct 10, 2016 | Houston Chronicle
By Shelly Reese Bain
Breast Cancer Awareness Month always seemed like a positive idea to me: a no-brainer. Buying things with pink ribbons was an easy way to show my solidarity with cancer patients fighting the disease and to remember those who lost their battles, right?
That changed dramatically in 2014 when, at the age of 38, I was diagnosed with breast cancer myself. As a survivor, I have conflicted emotions about Pink-tober and its ubiquitous looped ribbons and "awareness" campaigns.
I appreciate people's genuine desire people to support breast cancer fighters and survivors. But often, pink ribbons are slapped on unhealthy food or body-care products loaded with chemicals. It's a trend called "pinkwashing."
Before I had breast cancer, I was certainly guilty of using pink ribbons to justify my purchases: "This plastic water bottle is really cute, plus it benefits people with breast cancer!" Turns out, that plastic bottle probably contained phthalates, a dangerous chemical used in products ranging from plastic bottles to vinyl flooring to body lotion.
Phthalates are considered endocrine disruptors and have been linked to some cancers. Many makeup and body-care products also are laden with parabens, chemicals that mimic estrogen and disrupt the endocrine system. Some scientists and medical professionals question whether these types of additives - among many others - might be to blame for an increased occurrence of breast cancer in women under the age of 50.
Another possible cause of cancer is our highly processed, sugar-laden diet. Fried-chicken "buckets for the cure," pink-wrapped booze bottles and candy bars with pink wrappers are not only ironic, but infuriating.
And no, pink ribbons on packaging do not automatically mean the manufacturers are funneling big bucks to cancer research organizations. If you're considering buying a pink-ribbon item in support of research, make sure to read the fine print. What is being donated? A clearly stated 10 percent of profits or the vague "portion of sales"? Where will the funds go? "A portion of sales" going to "cancer research" does not leave me with confidence.
Pinktober problems don't end with the products. Unnecessary "awareness" campaigns (who at this point isn't aware of breast cancer?) can be cutesy or even degrading. I know monthly self-exams are important, but slogans like "Save second base" or "It's all about the boobies" sexualize and downplay crucial education about self-care.
Breast cancer is not glamorous or sexy. It is mentally, emotionally and physically devastating. And even with all the awareness out there, many people do not realize that about 30 percent of women initially diagnosed with a lower stage (0-III) breast cancer will eventually progress to full-blown Stage IV metastatic cancer.
Breast cancer is terrifying, even when you "fight like a girl" and "beat cancer"...because you never are completely certain you did.
If you are tempted to buy candy or nail polish because you want to help, instead consider donating to research for women and men living with stage IV breast cancer via www.metavivor.org.
If you want to help locally, look for organizations offering treatment, research and support for breast cancer patients, survivors and their families.
Thank you for your mindfulness, for caring and for taking time to, as Breast Cancer Action advises, "think before you pink."
Shelly Reese Bain lives in Austin. She received cancer treatment in Houston, at Baylor College of Medicine's Lester and Sue Smith Breast Center.
http://www.houstonchronicle.com/life/article/Think-before-you-pink-9958422.php
-
(ACC Mentioned) Chevron Phillips Nears Completion of $6 Billion Petrochemical Project
Oct 10, 2016 | Houston Patch
By Bryan Kirk
Chevron Phillips’ Baytown expansion project is about 80 percent complete and should be operational late next year, officials said.
The $6 billion U.S. Gulf Coast Petrochemicals Project -- a huge ethane cracker the size of 44 football fields -- is being built at the Cedar Bayou plant in Baytown, and will use natural gas to produce 1.5 metric tons of ethylene annually.
Once it is produced, the ethylene will be shipped to facilities in Sweeney, south of Houston, which are currently under construction.
Once it arrives there, the ethylene will be turned into plastic resin that will be used at other facilities globally.
Ron Corn, Chevron Phillips senior vice president of projects and supply chain, told FuelFix that Chevron Phillips had focused most of its growth in the Middle East with major projects in Qatar and Saudi Arabia six years ago, which helped create this massive petrochemical project.
It was quite radical at the time,” Corn said of building massive petrochemical projects in Texas. “These are big, big projects — very complex.”
The project is possible because of the pendulum swing in the Houston economy in recent years from oil to natural gas.
The shift has resulted in a petrochemical boom in communities like Baytown and other areas of the Gulf Coast where cheap ethane derived from natural gas through the ongoing shale fracking operations.
The American Chemistry Council has estimated that this boom will create more than 70,000 jobs and that more than 250 petrochemical projects are under construction or planned across the country through 2023.
The combined cost of these projects is estimated at about $160 billion, including about $50 billion in Texas.
The Chevron Phillips cracker includes eight giant furnaces that essentially heat up the ethane and cook it into ethylene.
The project has created 10,000 temporary construction jobs — Baytown and Old Ocean combined — and 400 new permanent positions once it’s completed.
Other petrochemical companies are also building ethane crackers of their own.
Exxon-Mobil is building a cracker with 1.5 million tons of capacity, with theirs being located nearby in Mont Belvieu, and Houston-based Occidental Petroleum Chemical and Mexico’s Mexichem have another cracker going up outside of Corpus Christi.Exxon is also looking at another site to build the world’s biggest ethane cracker in a joint venture with the Saudi Arabia Basic Industries Corp., known as SABIC.
The site for this facility will either be Texas or Louisiana, officials said.
Corn said he’s convinced global plastics demand is growing quickly enough to consume the upcoming supply explosion.
“The spotlight is on the U.S., and the world needs the U.S. production,” Corn said.
http://patch.com/texas/houston/chevron-phillips-nears-completion-6-billion-petrochemical-project
-
In Second Debate, Both Clinton and Trump Slip Up on Energy
Oct 10, 2016 | Houston Chronicle
By Lydia DePillis
Amidst the personal nastiness of the second presidential debate Sunday night, the moderators squeezed in a couple substantive questions. Among them was one about energy policy, and both nominees answered with their stump-speech sound bites — neither of which were a perfect treatment of the truth.
That's not to say, however, that the two candidates' distortions were equal in magnitude. While Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton's points were merely debatable and incomplete, Republican candidate Donald Trump rolled out an argument that had little grounding in fact, adding to a pile of falsehoods that has rapidly outgrown his rival's.
The central thrust of Trump's response, which you can read in the transcript here, is that Barack Obama's Environmental Protection Agency is entirely responsible for the demise of the coal industry, and that a President Trump could bring all those jobs back by simply reversing rules on rules on coal plant emissions. Coal is one of the dirtiest fossil fuels, producing much greater amounts of greenhouse gases blamed for global warming.
"Energy is under siege by the Obama administration," Trump said. "The EPA is killing these energy companies."
In reality, those rules may have accelerated the rapid decline of coal production, but it has much more to do with the emergence of natural gas as a cheap, abundant, and relatively clean alternative. In addition, some states have have adopted regulations to limit the use of coal, whilefalling consumption in developing countries has weakened coal demand further, as Vox explains. And mechanization has reduced the number of people needed to get coal out of the ground, so even if production recovered, West Virginia and Ohio wouldn't get those mining jobs back.
Trump then repeated the claim that so-called "clean coal" technology is ready to go, and that "coal will last for 1,000 years in this country." In fact, clean coal research has foundered in the United States after years of failed experiments, and the Energy Information Administration estimates that America only has enough recoverable coal reserves to last about 250 years at current levels of production.
Trump also mentioned something that would be confusing to most casual debate-watchers. Foreign companies, he says, are "buying so many of our different plants and then rejiggering the plant, so they take care of their oil."
That appears to be a reference to this presentation from June 2015 by theDomestic Energy Producers Association, a group run by Trump's energy advisor, Harold Hamm, the chief executive of the independent oil producer Continental Resources. It makes the case that foreign companies are buying refineries and converting them to process heavy oil produced overseas, rather than the light, sweet crude produced in the U.S., and that Congress should lift the ban on exporting crude oil in order to fix the problem.
That happened at the end of 2015, so it's unclear how U.S. policy is now abetting foreign ownership of domestic refinery capacity.
Finally, Trump mentions natural gas, implying that those producers have also been hurt by government action. "I will bring our energy companies back and they will be able to compete and they'll make money and pay off our national debt and budget deficits which are tremendous," he said.
First of all, those energy companies seem to be doing a pretty good job on their own figuring out how to compete, bringing the cost per barrel of natural gas production far below where it was during the boom. And second, it's unclear how increased production will make much of a dent in either the debt or the deficit when oil and gas companies enjoy favorable tax treatment and royalty rates are as low as they are; oil and gas generated only about $11 billion in royalty revenue for the federal government in 2013, when drillers were nearing peak production.
Hillary Clinton's departures from the truth were relatively minor.
The most concrete was her statement that the U.S. is now "energy independent." In fact, although U.S. shale production has lessened that dependence, America is still a net importer of both crude oil and natural gas.
Less importantly, Clinton also misdiagnosd the force behind the declining price of oil — she pins it on the Middle East, saying that the region "controls a lot of prices." That's actually a pretty small part of the puzzle right now. Although the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries has wielded power over prices in the past by changing production levels as a unit, the cartel's ability to enforce those limits has weakened in recent years. Now, low global prices are due in large part to the same problem facing the coal industry: Abundant natural gas and weak global demand.
All in all, a rough night for nuanced discussion of energy policy. The good news: You probably weren't watching the debate for that anyway.
http://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/texanomics/article/In-second-debate-both-Clinton-and-Trump-slip-up-9959131.php
-
Second Presidential Debate (Energy Policy Excerpt)
Oct 10, 2016 | Transcript
Cooper: We have one more question from Ken Bone about energy policy.
Bone: What steps will your energy policy take to meet our energy needs, while at the same time remaining environmentally-friendly and minimizing job loss for fossil power plant workers?
Cooper: Mr. Trump, two minutes.
Trump: Such a great question because energy is under siege by the Obama administration. Under absolute siege. The EPA, Environmental Protection Agency, is killing these energy companies. And foreign companies are now coming in. Buying so many of our different plants and then rejiggering the plant, so they take care of their oil. We are killing, absolutely killing our energy business in this country. Now I am all for alternative forms of energy including: wind and solar, etc. But we need much more than wind and solar. And you look at the miners, Hillary Clinton wants to put the miners out of business. There is a thing called clean coal. Coal will last for 1,000 years in this country. Now we have natural gas, and so other things because of technology, we have unbelievable, we have found over the last seven years, we found tremendous wealth right under our feet. So good, especially when you have $20 trillion in debt. I will bring our energy companies back and they will be able to compete and they’ll make money and pay off our national debt and budget deficits which are tremendous. But we are putting our energy companies out of business. We have to bring back our workers. You take a look at what’s happening to steel and the cost of steel and China dumping vast amounts steel all over the United States, which essentially is killing our steelworkers and steel companies. We have to guard our energy companies, we have to make it possible. The EPA is so restrictive that they are putting our energy companies out of business. And all you have to do is go to a great place like West Virginia or places like Ohio which is phenomenal or places like Pennsylvania and you see what they are doing to the people, miners and others in the energy business. It’s a disgrace. It’s an absolute disgrace.
Cooper: Your time is up. Secretary Clinton, two minutes.
Clinton: Well, that was very interesting. First of all, China is illegally dumping steel in the United States and Donald Trump is buying it to build his buildings, putting steelworkers and American steel plants out of business. That’s something that I fought against as a senator and something I would have a trade prosecutor to make sure we don’t get taken advantage of by China on steel or anything else. You know because it sounds like you are in the business or you’re aware of people in the business. You know that we are now for the first time energy independent. We are not dependent on the Middle East, but the Middle East controls a lot of prices. So the price of oil has been way down and that has a damaging effect on a lot the oil companies, right? We are however producing a lot of natural gas that serves as a bridge to more renewable fuels and I think that’s an important transition. We’ve got to remain energy independent. It gives us much more power and freedom than to be worried about what goes on in the Middle East. We have enough worried over there without having to worry about that. So I have a comprehensive energy policy, but it really does include fighting climate change because I think that is a serious problem. And I support moving towards more clean renewable energy as quickly as we can. Because I think we can be the 21st century clean energy superpower and create millions of new jobs and businesses. But I want to be sure that we don’t leave people behind. That’s why I’m the only candidate from the very beginning of this campaign who had a plan to help us revitalize coal country. Because those coal miners and their fathers and grandfathers, they dug that coal out, a lot of them lost their lives. They were injured. But they turn the lights on and powered our factories. I don’t want to walk away from them. So we’ve got to do something for them. But the price of coal is down worldwide. We have to look at this comprehensively and that’s what I have proposed. I hope you will go to hillaryclinton.com and read my entire policy.
-
EPA Agrees to Review Flaring Emissions Formula
Oct 10, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Sean Reilly
U.S. EPA will revisit a key gauge for estimating emissions of volatile organic compounds from natural gas production flaring operations under a tentative settlement to a lawsuit brought by four Gulf Coast environmental groups.
The proposed consent decree was lodged Friday afternoon with the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia as part of a prearranged agreement one day after the suit was filed. It calls on EPA to review the "emissions factor" by next June, with a final decision on any revisions following by February 2018.
In the suit, Air Alliance Houston and the other plaintiffs alleged that EPA hadn't looked at the formula since 1985, contrary to a Clean Air Act requirement for reviews every three years.
The upshot could be misleadingly low estimates of emissions of volatile organic compounds, a key contributor to smog, the suit alleged.
The proposed settlement, which still needs a judge's approval, "is important for public health reasons because people who live downwind from drilling and fracking sites have a right to accurate information about how much air pollution they are breathing," said Sparsh Khandeshi, an attorney for the Environmental Integrity Project, in a press release. Khandeshi was one of the lawyers representing the plaintiffs.
In this instance, the existing emissions factor estimates that 5.6 pounds of volatile organic compounds (VOCs) are released from flares for every million cubic feet of gas produced.
But that estimate assumes that flaring achieves a 98 percent destruction efficiency, while more recent EPA and Bureau of Land Management regulations assume that the rate is 95 percent, the suit said.
The other three plaintiffs are the Community In-Power and Development Association, based in Port Arthur, Texas; Louisiana Bucket Brigade; and Texas Environmental Justice Advocacy Services.
If EPA decides that changes are warranted to the existing emissions factor, many of the approximately 1 million natural gas drilling and production sites around the United States could be affected, according to Friday's release.
VOCs are a class of chemicals that include benzene, toluene and formaldehyde. In sunlight, they react with nitrogen oxides to form ozone, a lung irritant that is the primary ingredient in smog.
EPA relies heavily on emissions factors — which number more than 1,700 for some 200 different pollutants — as a substitute for direct monitoring. Last year, in response to a 2013 suit by the same four plaintiffs, the agency released a package of eight revised or new emissions factors for the chemical manufacturing and refinery industries (Greenwire, April 21, 2015).
The earlier suit was brought after sampling registered VOC levels over Houston oil refineries that were far higher than what industry reported, based on the emission factors in use at that time, Friday's press release said. The revised formulas showed that flares from refineries and chemical plants were releasing VOCs at about four times the levels of previous estimates.
"Members of industry have a saying, 'What gets measured gets improved,'" said Adrian Shelley, executive director of Air Alliance Houston, in a statement. "Only by accurately measuring emissions can we reduce pollution and protect public health."
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2016/10/10/stories/1060044044
-
Construction Now 'Would Be a Tragedy' — Critics
Oct 10, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
American Indian tribes are urging Dakota Access pipeline backers to hold off on construction plans, despite a federal court order yesterday lifting a work freeze on part of the embattled oil project.
Lawyers for the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe noted that while the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit refused to extend an injunction on a contested stretch of the pipeline's route, the Obama administration is still weighing whether to grant a necessary easement across Lake Oahe, part of the Missouri River.
Dakota Access LLC should grant the administration's September request that it voluntarily delay nearby construction until that easement is issued, Earthjustice attorney Jan Hasselman said.
"We call on Dakota Access to heed the government's request to stand down around Lake Oahe," Hasselman said in a statement. "The government is still deciding whether or not Dakota Access should get a permit. Continuing construction before the decision is made would be a tragedy given what we know about the importance of this area."
The disputed area is a 20-mile stretch of North Dakota land near Lake Oahe. Though the 1,172-mile pipeline, which would travel from North Dakota to Illinois, is routed primarily on private land, the area includes the Sioux's ancestral homelands, and several tribes worry that cultural artifacts have been disturbed by construction.
They also say the Army Corps of Engineers did not adequately consult with tribes when it approved Clean Water Act permits for the pipeline's water crossings. The Lake Oahe crossing is just a half-mile north of the Standing Rock reservation.
While Lake Oahe itself remains off-limits as the easement is pending, yesterday's court order allows Dakota Access LLC to resume construction within 20 miles of it (Greenwire, Oct. 9). The 20-mile section east of the lake is mostly complete. The 20-mile section west of the lake is partially complete and extremely contentious, as the Sioux say they recently discovered evidence of burial grounds in the area.
"This ruling puts 17 million people who rely on the Missouri River at serious risk," Standing Rock Sioux Tribe Chairman Dave Archambault II said in a statement. "And, already, the Dakota Access Pipeline has led to the desecration of our sacred sites when the company bulldozed over the burials of our Lakota and Dakota ancestors. This is not the end of this fight. We will continue to explore all lawful options to protect our people, our water, our land, and our sacred places."
Thousands of tribal members and environmentalists have gathered near Lake Oahe in recent months to protest the pipeline, sparking the administration's delay in issuing the easement (EnergyWire, Sept. 12). The neighboring Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe has joined the litigation, and the Yankton Sioux Tribe filed a separate lawsuit.
During oral arguments last week, the three-judge panel of the appeals court appeared skeptical of the Sioux's emergency request for an injunction (EnergyWire, Oct. 6). Yesterday's order concluded that the tribe did not meet the legal requirements for an injunction, but the court seemed sympathetic to its complaints about inadequate consultation.
"Although the tribe has not met the narrow and stringent standard governing this extraordinary form of relief, we recognize Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act was intended to mediate precisely the disparate perspectives involved in a case such as this one," the order said.
Dakota Access "has rights of access to the limited portion of pipeline corridor not yet cleared — where the tribe alleges additional historic sites are at risk," the order added. "We can only hope the spirit of Section 106 may yet prevail."
Supporters of the pipeline argued this weekend that the Army Corps and the developer exceeded consultation and National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) requirements, pointing to a preliminary decision from U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg that reviewed the project's history.
"As laid out in Judge Boasberg's opinion, the corps consulted 389 times with 55 tribes including the Standing Rock Sioux," the Midwest Alliance for Infrastructure Now said in a statement. "Not only was the letter of the law met, but considering the lengths the corps and Dakota Access, LLC, went, so too was the spirit."
The appeals court will now consider whether to uphold the district court's September ruling that rejected the tribe's request for a broader injunction along the length of the pipeline. Meanwhile, the core merits of the case — whether the Army Corps met its consultation and NHPA responsibilities — remain pending at the district court.
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2016/10/10/stories/1060044056
-
Tribe Will Continue Fight Against ND Pipeline Project
Oct 10, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe says it will continue its legal fight against the Dakota Access Pipeline despite an order allowing some construction on the project to move forward.
“The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe is not backing down from this fight,” Dave Archambault, the chairman of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, said in a statement Sunday night. The tribe has sued over the 1,170-mile, $3.8 billion pipeline, arguing it threatens cultural sites in North Dakota.
“We are guided by prayer, and we will continue to fight for our people. We will not rest until our lands, people, waters and sacred places are permanently protected from this destructive pipeline.”
The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia on Sunday night rejected a Standing Rock Sioux request for an injunction against construction along a stretch of the pipeline’s route. It also overturned an administrative hold on construction while the tribe’s injunction request moved forward.
The unanimous two-page ruling did not delve into the merits of the tribe's underlying legal case against the pipeline, which is still moving forward. But the three-judge panel said the tribe's arguments didn't meet the conditions necessary for issuing an injunction.
Sunday's ruling decision was a victory for Dakota Access, with the developers telling the court last week they would move forward with early construction work on the pipeline if the court ruled in their favor.
The decision is not the final word on the pipeline project, which has spurred protests in North Dakota and nationally. Federal officials have not issued a final easement necessary for construction work near North Dakota’s Lake Oahe, the focal point of the dispute.
“We continue to believe that as long as the ultimate administrative and judicial decisions are based on the facts, science, engineering, and the rule of law the Dakota Access Pipeline will become operational without additional delay,” said Craig Stevens, a spokesman for the Midwest Alliance for Infrastructure Now Coalition, which supports the project.
http://www.thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/300187-tribe-will-continue-fight-against-nd-pipeline-project
-
Setback for Dakota Access Opponents in Court
Oct 10, 2016 | Politico Pro - Morning Energy
By Anthony Adragna
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals late Sunday lifted an injunction that had frozen work on a disputed section of the Dakota Access pipeline near Lake Oahe, the center of an ongoing protest by tribal and green groups. A three-judge panel on the court gave a clear nod to the validity of the Standing Rock Sioux's claim to have not been adequately consulted in its two-page order in the case, noting that "ours is not the final word" on the ongoing legal dispute.
Still, the court noted, the Sioux have not met the "narrow and stringent standard governing this extraordinary form of relief." The court had imposed an emergency injunction while it heard the Sioux's appeal of a federal court decision denying its request for a work freeze while the broader case against Dakota Access proceeded.
In response to the court's decision, the Midwest Alliance for Infrastructure Now said it was "pleased, but not surprised" by the decision: "We continue to believe that as long as the ultimate administrative and judicial decisions are based on the facts, science, engineering, and the rule of law the Dakota Access Pipeline will become operational without additional delay," Craig Stevens, a spokesman for the group, said in a statement.
Dave Archambault II, chairman of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe, said in response to the court's decision: "The federal government recognizes what is at stake and has asked [Dakota Access Pipeline] to halt construction. We hope that they will comply with that request." His comment refers to last month's request from the Interior Department, Department of Justice, and the Army Corps of Engineers asking for a "voluntarily pause" in construction.
http://www.politico.com/tipsheets/morning-energy/2016/10/setback-for-dakota-access-opponents-in-court-216766#ixzz4MhsNwkQf
-
Texas Parks Department Admits It Never Studied Impact of Oil Drilling on Balmorhea Springs
Oct 10, 2016 | Fuel Fix
By David Hunn
State park officials have not conducted any research to assess the impact of oil drilling on West Texas’s Balmorhea State Park and the region’s famous artesian springs. Nor had the parks department gathered other scientific studies on the region’s aquifers until just recently.
Three weeks ago, park officials said they had “no evidence to indicate concern” about Houston-based Apache Corp.’s plans to drill oil and gas wells on 350,000 acres surrounding the pools and canals fed by the San Solomon Springs.
Stephanie Salinas, a spokeswoman for the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, said staff had consulted with a national research institute that has studied the springs. Since the oil wells are lower than or equal in depth to the springs, she said, the park should not be affected by oil and gas drilling.
The department declined multiple requests for clarification, including an interview with parks director Brent Leisure.
Then, late last week, a parks spokesman said that the department has no research on the subject, and is now collecting some.
“We apologize for this process having taken so long, but we’ve looked into the matter and, unfortunately, we do not have written records with test data or similar written information related to your request,” deputy communications director Tom Harvey told the Chronicle.
Apache announced last month the discovery of a new oilfield it named Alpine High in the scrub brush desert north of the Davis Mountains. It estimated the field holds more than 15 billion barrels of oil and gas, potentially one of the largest discoveries in recent years.
Some residents of the 500-person town of Balmorhea, however, are worried about the impact of such a vast find. They’re concerned the drilling could contaminate the aquifer or use up the springs — hydraulic fracturing requires millions of gallons of water to flood the well, crack shale and release oil. If drilling spoils the state park pool, several residents said they worry the town wouldn’t make it. The park logged about 160,000 visitors last year.
Apache has met with regional officials and promised not to drill under the town or state park. The company has also explained that with modern drilling technology, it can carefully and easily avoid such aquifers.
The parks department said on Friday that it is now collecting research and considering water testing. Harvey said the department’s “posture has certainly evolved” since it’s original statement. Officials there are now mindful of the possible impact of drilling, he said. “We don’t know for sure what’s going to happen,” Harvey said. “But we are ramping up efforts to gather information.”
Park staff had previously gathered most of its information by talking to George Veni, director of a federally funded cave and springs research institute.
But Veni, when contacted by the Chronicle, said the most recent study he did on the springs was three years old. Moreover, he said he was concerned about the effect of drilling on the area aquifers.
“In my estimation, there is a chance that future drilling in the wrong place, with some sort of release, could impact one or more of the springs,” Veni said last month.
The biggest issue, he said, is that researchers just don’t have enough information.
“Right now, we have a very general big-picture understanding of the aquifer,” Veni said. “But that’s just super, super general. We don’t know the details. And details are critically important in terms of understanding how to manage and protect the aquifer.”
http://fuelfix.com/blog/2016/10/10/texas-parks-department-admits-it-never-studied-impact-of-oil-drilling-on-balmorhea-springs/
-
Clinton Vexed by Pipeline, Fracking and 'Phony' Greens — Emails
Oct 10, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Hannah Northey
A trove of leaked emails from Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton's inner circle reveal a tricky balancing act the former secretary of State faced trying to appease both unions and environmental groups before announcing her opposition to the Keystone XL pipeline last year.
Senior Clinton aides in the summer of 2015 debated about the timing and tone of her reaction to President Obama's imminent rejection of the Keystone XL pipeline and how to "soften the blow" to trade unions, according to emails Wikileaks obtained from an account belonging to Clinton's campaign chairman, John Podesta.
The emails are among more than 2,000 Wikileaks released last week, including portions of Clinton's paid speeches to Wall Street that her staff had flagged as potentially problematic, including her statement that "You need both a public and a private position on certain issues."
The contents of the emails triggered a sharp exchange during last night's debate between Clinton and her Republican rival, Donald Trump, over the Kremlin's role in the upcoming presidential election and her intent when making the comments.
After defending her stance on having a private and public policy position to get things done in Congress, Clinton last night attempted to lay the blame for the leaks squarely with Russia.
"We have never in the history of our country been in a situation where an adversary, a foreign power, is working so hard to influence the outcome of the election," Clinton said. "And believe me, they're not doing it to get me elected. They're doing it to try to influence the election for Donald Trump."
WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange released more emails from Podesta's account late this morning.
Keystone XL
According to the emails, Clinton's staff debated her handling of Keystone XL months before she signaled her opposition to the oil sands pipeline in September 2015 during a campaign stop in Des Moines, Iowa, where she said, "I oppose it because I don't think it's in the best interest of what we need to do to combat climate change" (Greenwire, Sept. 22, 2015).
In one exchange in August 2015, the Clinton campaign's labor outreach director, Nikki Budzinski, asks about specific timing and ways to reassure unions. Some labor organizations teamed with environmental groups to oppose the pipeline project, but others — particularly those representing the building trade unions — tended to support it.
"The Building Trades are flagging for me that they hear the Obama Administration will deny KXL on Monday. I just wanted to try to politically get ahead of this and where we are on the issue if this in fact happens," Budzinski wrote.
"The trades are also hearing that HRC will put out a statement stating that she encouraged Obama to take this position. Politically with the building trades, this would be a very dangerous posture," she continued.
Podesta in a reply email to Budzinski wrote, "Your [sic] in trouble, girl. Seriously, doubt we'll say we 'encouraged' but assume we'll support if it goes that way."
Republicans who cast Clinton's silence on the project as weak leadership would pivot toward accusing her of opposing job creation shortly after announcing her opposition to the pipeline.
And former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley, who was also seeking the Democratic nomination for president at the time, would also target Clinton, accusing her of following rather than leading public opinion (Greenwire, Sept. 23, 2015).
Other emails show Clinton staffers' concern with reported ties to Keystone XL backers and mentions of the pipeline.
"The enviros may latch onto this going forward," Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook wrote in an April 19, 2015, email about "Clinton Cash," a 2015 book by Peter Schweizer on the Clinton Foundation getting donations from a Canadian bank that's also a shareholder in Keystone XL.
"Have we discussed when she will come out against Keystone? After POTUS vetoes?" Mook wrote. "And more than $1 million in payments to Mr. Clinton by a Canadian bank and major shareholder in the Keystone XL ... oil pipeline around the time the project was being debated in the State Department."
In April 2014, staff questioned whether Clinton should mention the project in her book, "Hard Choices."
"Unless you feel some need to mention it, I'm not sure what the gain is," Jonathan Karp, now a publisher at Simon & Schuster, told Clinton aide and speechwriter Dan Schwerin, according to an April 23, 2014, leaked email chain.
"You say you're waiting for the study before making a determination, but I question whether any study is capable of defining a clear course of action," Karp wrote. "And some readers might think that relying on a study is a stalling tactic."
Podesta in a reply email told Clinton staffers to "cut" any mention of the oil pipeline from the book. Clinton's staff agreed and suggested the addition of more material on clean energy.
'Russians'
Clinton's camp yesterday questioned the validity of the emails and linked the leak to the Kremlin.
Podesta during an interview with "Fox News Sunday" said, "They've put out documents that are purported to be from my account.
"The Russians, as U.S. senior members of the U.S. government confirmed, have been hacking into Democratic accounts, and now, they've hacked into my account," Podesta said. "I would just say, you know, this should be of concern to everyone that the Russians are trying to influence our election."
Clinton's running mate, Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), said during an interview with CNN yesterday that he couldn't dignify material released by Wikileaks by commenting on them, noting that any group is capable of doctoring documents.
"I have no way of knowing the accuracy of documents dumped by this hacking organization," Kaine said, adding that much of the hacking has been linked to the Russian government.
CNN host Jake Tapper pushed back, saying, "You could ask her."
'An extra scrub'
The batch of leaked emails also contains excerpts from Clinton's paid speeches that her campaign research director, Tony Carrk, flagged for other staffers in a Jan. 25 email as potentially troublesome.
The email pointed to a 2014 speech at Goldman-Black Rock, in which Clinton said she was "kind of far removed" from middle-class struggles because of "fortunes that my husband and I now enjoy."
Another email that triggered a sharp exchange last night during the second presidential debate was Clinton's comment in 2013 before the National Multifamily Housing Council that "you need both a public and a private position" on policies. Other speeches included statements Clinton made about her ties to Wall Street.
The list also included comments her staff said could be interpreted as "pro-Keystone."
Russia surfaced again in June 2014 when Clinton during a speech brought up the issue of "phony" green groups opposed to pipelines and fracking.
"We were up against Russia pushing oligarchs and others to buy media," Clinton said at an event hosted by tinePublic Inc. "We were even up against phony environmental groups, and I'm a big environmentalist, but these were funded by the Russians to stand against any effort, oh, that pipeline, that fracking, that whatever will be a problem for you, and a lot of the money supporting that message was coming from Russia."
Tax credits
In the most recent batch of emails, top Clinton advisers huddled over a policy background meeting with Ben Geman, an energy and environment reporter at National Journal.
Clinton energy adviser Trevor Houser in a note contained in a June 29, 2015, email advised staff to carefully tread on the issue of production and investment tax credits for renewables given financial implications.
"The one other thing I would flag for John is that if Ben asks whether we would support a permanent extension of the PTC/ITC we need to hedge given out solar/renewable targets," Houser wrote. "Those imply a $10-$15 billion per year price tag by 2020 and $25-$35 billion per year by 2027 if extended at current levels. May need to call for 'extending and improving' or something like that."
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2016/10/10/stories/1060044058
-
Progress, The President And Natural Gas
Oct 10, 2016 | Breaking Energy (in Real Clear Energy)
By Mark Green
Interesting remarks from President Obama during the “South By South Lawn” event at the White House this week – with the president basically saying that the abundance and affordability of domestic natural gas is key to America’s energy present and future, even as he gave a nod to natural gas’ ongoing role in reducing U.S. carbon emissions. President Obama:
“[T]he fact that we’re transitioning from coal to natural gas means less greenhouse gases. … We’ve got to live in the real world. I say all that not because I don’t recognize the urgency of the (climate) problem. It is because we’re going to have to straddle between the world as it is and the world as we want it to be …”
Credit where credit’s due: It’s tricky lauding natural gas in front of a crowd that’s not all that big on natural gas (not to mention while sharing the stage with actor/climate activist Leonardo DiCaprio) – even if you’re the president and even if the event’s going on in your own back yard.
Yet, President Obama talked about the realities of energy development, the energy needs of other countries around the world and the real concerns of lots of Americans about climate-related policies that could significantly impact their lives. The president:
“It is important for those of us who care deeply about this … to not be dismissive of people’s concerns when it comes to what will this mean for me and my family. If you’re a working-class family and dad has to drive 50 miles to get to his job and … the most important thing to him economically is to make sure he can pay the bill at the end of the month is the price of gas. And when gas prices are low that extra hundred bucks in his pocket or two hundred bucks in his pocket may make the difference on whether or not he can buy enough food for his kids.”
Now, we don’t agree with everything President Obama told Leo and the South Lawn audience. That same working-class household the president described most likely would be hurt by climate-related policies he has favored that pick energy winners and losers by making affordable energy less affordable.
The fact is our industry already is advancing climate solutions in at least two big ways: First, the increased use of cleaner-burning natural gas is the chief reason the U.S. is leading the world in reducing energy-related emissions of carbon dioxide. The marketplace, as the president mentioned, is choosing natural gas because it’s abundant and affordable, and as a result U.S. emissions are in decline – without an international agreement or government program, andwithout sacrificing energy and economic growth.
Second, the investment and innovation in the energy space that the president called for on the South Lawn also is already happening. Since 2000, industry has invested $90 billion in emissions-reducing technologies – more than double the amount invested by each of the next three industry sectors:
On this the president is right: Energy policies and energy paths must acknowledge the real-world needs of the American people. Oil and natural gas are our lead energy sources, in a broad mix of sources, because they’re abundant, affordable, portable and energy-rich. They’re the foundation of Americans’ modern standard of living while also playing a significant role in advancing climate goals.
This should be the context as we choose an all-of-the-above energy path that safely and responsibly harnesses America’s oil and natural gas wealth while using other energy sources to meet the demands of individual Americans and the broader economy.
http://breakingenergy.com/2016/10/05/progress-the-president-and-natural-gas/
-
Rail Supplier News from Granite, Alstom, RSI, TRANSCAER and WSP Parsons Brinckerhoff
Oct 10, 2016 | Progressive Railroading
Granite Construction Inc. has obtained a $39 million subcontract from Absher Construction Co. to build Sound Transit's Northgate Station in Seattle. The contract will cover construction of a half-mile of elevated rail structure and associated work. The new station will provide access to a transit center, adjacent park-and-ride facilities, North Seattle Community College, local shopping and nearby homes and businesses. Construction is expected to start this month and wrap up by December 2018.
An Alstom-led consortium known as Expolink has signed a contract with Dubai's Roads and Transport Authority to design and build the city's Red metro line and upgrade the existing line's system. Also called route 2020, the project's total value is $2.9 billion. It involves construction of a 9.3-mile rail line with seven stations. The extended line is expected to begin commercial service in 2020 for the World Expo.
Three new members have been elected to the Railway Supply Institute's board. They are Tracy DeLeon, president of International Decal Management Corp.; Neil Gambow, director and chief technology officer at Kelso Technologies Inc.; and Marise Stewart, director of government and industry relations at Progress Rail/EMD. They will serve three-year terms starting Jan. 1, 2017. Meanwhile, the Greenbrier Cos. Inc.'s Dan O'Neal was elected as secretary-treasurer.
During the 27th Annual Continuing Challenge HazMat Workshop, David Buccolo received the Transportation Community Awareness and Emergency Response (TRANSCAER) 2016 Distinguished Service Award for his "tireless commitment" toward advancing transportation safety. Buccolo, who serves as general manager of the Central California Traction Co., is TRANSCAER's Region IV Coordinator, which involves providing support for emergency response efforts on the West Coast. An instructor in railroad hazardous materials shipping and emergency response and a first responder himself, Buccolo has provided his hazmat and rail expertise and leadership to TRANSCAER for nearly 30 years.
The American Road and Transportation Builders Association honored WSP Parsons Brinckerhoff's Paula Hammond with the Ethel S. Birchland Award. Named after ARTBA's executive director from 1924 to 1928, the award recognizes a woman who has demonstrated outstanding leadership and long-term service in the transportation design and construction industry. Particular focus is given to the individual's dedication to "the advancement of innovation and other women leaders," WSP Parsons Brinckerhoff officials said in a press release. Based in the firm's Seattle office, Hammond serves as a senior vice president and national transportation market leader. The job involves working with transportation agencies across the United States to advance transportation policy and programs. She's served on numerous committees of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, including the high-speed and intercity passenger-rail leadership group.http://www.progressiverailroading.com/supplier_spotlight/news/Rail-supplier-news-from-Granite-Alstom-RSI-TRANSCAER-and-WSP-Parsons-Brinckerhoff-Oct-10--49726
-
There’s No Oxygen Left in This Campaign for a Debate About Carbon
Oct 10, 2016 | Washington Post
By Chris Mooney
It’s becoming more and more clear what role climate and energy issues are going to play in this presidential campaign — a minor one at best. On the one hand, it’s a slight improvement upon the campaign of 2012, in that the subject of our warming planet is now actually coming up peripherally in presidential debates. But the mentions hardly do justice to the issue’s global significance or to just how differently the two candidates would handle the biggest environmental problem of our lifetimes.
Yet in a campaign focused more and more centrally on the character of Donald Trump and his shattering of political norms, it may very well be the conversation that’s occurring is all our discourse can bear.
That became clear in the second presidential debate Sunday night (transcript), where the penultimate question posed was actually about energy.
Audience member Ken Bone asked: “What steps will your energy policy take to meet our energy needs, while at the same time remaining environmentally friendly and minimizing job loss for fossil power plant workers?”
Trump didn’t even address the “environmentally friendly” part. Rather, he continued to blame coal’s decline on the Obama administration’s policies, even as he praised the one energy source that has hastened its demise: Cheap natural gas enabled by the fracking boom.
“Now we have natural gas and so many other things because of technology,” Trump said. “We have unbelievable — we have found over the last seven years, we have found tremendous wealth right under our feet. So good. Especially when you have $20 trillion in debt.”
Trump’s contradictory statements about energy, and his ignoring of the environment and the climate, beg multiple follow up questions — but Clinton didn’t press him on the matter. Granted, she made clear that the climate issue is a key part of how she views global energy — and that she wants wind and solar to boom in the U.S. even more than they have so far.
“I have a comprehensive energy policy, but it really does include fighting climate change, because I think that is a serious problem,” she said. “And I support moving toward more clean, renewable energy as quickly as we can, because I think we can be the 21st century clean energy superpower and create millions of new jobs and businesses.”
And that was it. Even though Trump has been a veritable fount of climate change denial, and even though it is hard to understand how he can simultaneously promote fracking and promise to restore U.S. coal, Clinton did not point these things out. The moderators, pressed for time, asked no follow-ups.
So why does this keep happening?
Possibly because the Clinton campaign knows the climate is a winning issue for them, yet mainly in strategic places and at strategic times — that’s why Clinton will campaign with Al Gore in Florida this week. Meanwhile, the political media appear as uncomfortable as ever with either prioritizing or delving deeply into a science-laden subject that never appears quite urgent enough.
But these aren’t the only or even the most important things going on. In the entire debate Sunday, there was also no mention of Hurricane Matthew, which had just caused many billions of dollars of damage and 21 deaths in this country alone, so far as we know at this point — to say nothing of a searing humanitarian disaster in Haiti.
The hurricane had been the leading story in the news — until, that is, the leaked “Access Hollywood” tape hit. At that point, there was simply no room to talk about anything else.
And so it goes for climate change as well. This might well have been the year for it to debut as a major campaign issue. Yet in a debate in which one presidential candidate threatens to jail the other if he’s victorious, the damage we’re doing to the Earth just couldn’t rise above the damage that’s being done to political discourse.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/10/10/theres-no-oxygen-left-in-this-campaign-to-talk-about-carbon/?utm_term=.a8abd881b373
Industry and Association News
LCSA News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested