Preview Newsletter
ACC PM 10/19/16
-
EPA Regulations Complex and Not Always in Sync with Each Other
Oct 19, 2016 | Specialty Fabrics Review
By Rebecca Post
Paul Matthai, of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), says his agency’s regulations are complicated and often don’t “harmonize” with each other. -
(ACC Mentioned) American Chemistry Council Says Chaffetz is Right to Question Study on Glyphosate
Oct 18, 2016 | Morning Consult
By Jack Fitzpatrick
The American Chemistry Council on Tuesday praised House Oversight Chairman Jason Chaffetz’s skepticism about federal funding for the International Agency for Research on Cancer, as the agency’s research on a widely used herbicide comes under scrutiny. -
(ACC Mentioned) Green Biologics Expands in Europe with Distribution Deal
Oct 19, 2016 | Cosmetics Design Europe
By Simon Pitman
The US division of Green Biologics has signed a distribution deal that will see its Personal Care Intermediates distributed throughout the EU. -
(ACC Mentioned) Headline Hype or Sound Science? New Study Claims U.S. Loses $340B a Year to Chemical-Related Health Problems
Oct 19, 2016 | Chem Info
By Meagan Parrish
A recent study has been grabbing headlines with the claim that health issues related to chemical exposure could be costing the U.S. around $340 billion annually. How does that study hold up to scrutiny? -
Time Magazine Promotes Superstitious Chemophobia
Oct 19, 2016 | Reason (Blog)
By Ronald Bailey
When environmental activists could no longer maintain with a straight face that exposure to trace amounts of synthetic chemicals is a significant cause for cancer in people, the endocrine disruption hypothesis was ginned up. -
Chemical Found in US Everyday Items Linked to Host of Deadly Diseases
Oct 19, 2016 | Huffington Post UK
By Thomas Tamblyn
Hazardous hormone-disrupting chemicals commonly found in plastic bottles, metal food cans, detergents, toys and even cosmetics could be costing the US as much as $340 billion in healthcare. -
Parliament Vote on Waste Policy ‘Sidelines’ REACH
Oct 19, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
A European Parliament committee’s vote in favour of amendments to the waste framework Directive will cause challenges for the chemical industry, Cefic says. -
Tough Fracking Rules Could 'Drive the Price Around Like Crazy' — EIA
Oct 19, 2016 | E&E Energywire
By Jenny Mandel
Forecasting oil and gas pricing is always a risky business, but predicting prices beyond 2040 is especially difficult thanks to global shifts in energy use. -
Rockefeller Blasts Clinton on Fracking, Methane — Emails
Oct 19, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Hannah Northey
A member of the powerful Rockefeller family who has recently become active in opposing oil and gas pipelines allegedly expressed concern with Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton's silence on fracking, methane, and oil and gas subsidies, according to leaked emails. -
Labor to Obama: Let Workers Finish Pipeline
Oct 19, 2016 | E&E Energywire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
Labor groups are again calling on the Obama administration to allow the embattled Dakota Access pipeline to go forward. -
National Rules For NatGas Storage Coming in Wake of SoCalGas Leak, PHMSA Head Says
Oct 19, 2016 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Richard Nemec
A federal interim rule setting national standards for natural gas storage facilities will be released before the end of the year, the head of the U.S. Department of Transportation's (DOT) Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) said on Tuesday as part of the release of a national task force report undertaken after a four-month storage well leak in Southern California (see Daily GPI, Feb. 18). -
NTSB Issues Early Findings in Chlorine Gas Tank-Car Incident
Oct 19, 2016 | Progressive Railroading
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) on Monday released its preliminary report on a tank-car leak that spilled liquified compressed chlorine at the Axiall Corp. rail-car loading facility in West Virginia in August. -
Air Law Section 115 History Might Inform Efforts For Broader EPA GHG Rules
Oct 19, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Dawn Reeves
EPA's decision to pursue power plant greenhouse gas (GHG) rules under section 111 of the Clean Air Act, rather than broader economy-wide GHG rules under section 115, might inform future debate over whether to pursue the broader approach, as the next president -- particularly if it is Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton -- is expected to face increasing pressure to issue a new round of climate rules. -
Texas Appeals EPA's Rejection of Its 'Good Neighbor' Ozone Plan
Oct 19, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Sean Reilly
Texas is challenging U.S. EPA's recent rejection of the state's blueprint for meeting the "good neighbor" provisions of the 2008 ozone standards. -
Scientists Accidentally Discover Efficient Process to Turn CO2 into Ethanol
Oct 17, 2016 | Popular Mechanics (in Real Clear Energy)
By Avery Thompson
Scientists at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee have discovered a chemical reaction to turn CO2 into ethanol, potentially creating a new technology to help avert climate change.
Industry and Association News - There are no clips to report at this time.
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News
Environment News
-
EPA Regulations Complex and Not Always in Sync with Each Other
Oct 19, 2016 | Specialty Fabrics Review
By Rebecca Post
Paul Matthai, of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), says his agency’s regulations are complicated and often don’t “harmonize” with each other. Despite these complexities, Matthai, who presented an overview of EPA regulations Oct. 18 at IFAI’s 2016 Expo in in Charlotte, N.C., says the U.S. Congress generally strives to write environmental laws that do not hurt the economy or hinder business.
The EPA was founded in the early 1970s when the environmental movement began to be embraced by more U.S. citizens. The Clean Water Act was the first regulatory law enacted by Congress and adopted by the EPA. In subsequent years, the U.S. Congress has handed down numerous regulatory laws that the EPA in turn must enforce.
Matthai’s presentation, “Navigating the EPA Regulation Swamp,” covered the following regulations: Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule (GHG), Clean Water Act, Safe Drinking Water Act, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-know Act (EPCRA), Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) and Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA).
In relation to the RCRA, Matthai explains that when textile companies generate hazardous waste, it must be managed according to regulations for a specific type. The waste generators are divided into three categories, according to how much waste is generated in a month.
Large Quantity Generators produce more than 1,000 kg of hazardous waste per month. Small Quantity Generators produce greater than 100 kg of waste per month and Conditionally Exempt Small Quantity Generators product less than 100 kg of waste per month.
Approximately 85,000 chemicals are listed on the TSCA list. The list identifies chemicals as high or low priority for EPA review. Matthai says that many “trade secret” chemicals are on the list, and more emphasis has been put on chemicals that may affect vulnerable populations like children and pregnant women.
In working with the dyes used by textile manufacturers, Matthai says the EPA tries to give the industry enough time to find safer substitute chemicals. His agency tries to give companies ideas on reducing their waste or using safer alternate manufacturing processes.
Some attendees at Matthai’s presentation expressed concerns that “reshoring”—bringing textile manufacturing back to the U.S.—will require the EPA to restructure its processes for working with business. Matthai, however, emphasized that the U.S. Congress sets the EPA regulations and works in an extremely slow manner.
http://specialtyfabricsreview.com/2016/10/18/epa-regulations-complex-and-not-always-in-sync-with-each-other/
-
(ACC Mentioned) American Chemistry Council Says Chaffetz is Right to Question Study on Glyphosate
Oct 18, 2016 | Morning Consult
By Jack Fitzpatrick
The American Chemistry Council on Tuesday praised House Oversight Chairman Jason Chaffetz’s skepticism about federal funding for the International Agency for Research on Cancer, as the agency’s research on a widely used herbicide comes under scrutiny.
The council wrote a letter to the Utah Republican saying it “has serious concerns about the lack of transparency, rigor and relevance” of the IARC program that released a report saying glyphosate, which is used in Monsanto’s “Roundup” weed killer, could cause cancer. “Therefore, we believe IARC warrants greater public scrutiny, particularly as the recipient of significant United States government funding.”
In September, Chaffetz sent a letter to National Institutes of Health Director Francis Collins questioning NIH’s financial support for IARC, which is part of the World Health Institute.
https://morningconsult.com/alert/american-chemistry-council-says-chaffetz-right-question-study-glyphosate/
-
(ACC Mentioned) Green Biologics Expands in Europe with Distribution Deal
Oct 19, 2016 | Cosmetics Design Europe
By Simon Pitman
The US division of Green Biologics has signed a distribution deal that will see its Personal Care Intermediates distributed throughout the EU.
The company has selected Caldic as its distribution partner and will focus on expanding the footprint of high purity chemical that include acetone and nbutanol and associated products through Europe, the Middle East and Africa.
Besides the personal care sector, the increased distribution will also be looking to supply coatings and adhesives as well as the household and food ingredients markets.
Caldic will platform Green Biologics in Europe
“Caldic is an outstanding partner for Green Biologics,” said Timothy G. Staub, Global Vice President of Business Development for Green Biologics.
“Its customer focus and value added services, such as logistics capabilities, bulk storage facilities, and deep knowledge of high value markets and customers, along with a critical presence both in key markets and geographies, makes Caldic critical to our EU launch.”
Although Green Biologics is headquartered in the UK, its US division is in the process of ramping up production of renewable nbutane and acetone from its facility in Little Falls, Minnesota.
The company is currently in the process of completing the final processes to start up production at the facility and says it expects manufacturing to begin by the end of the year.
Certification underlines green credentials
The company says it has made every effort to ensure that the facility is as ecofriendly as possible and as a member of the American Chemistry Council, it has complied with rigid standards set down by the Responsible Care standards , a management and certification code.
The company is also concurrently pursuing REACH certification and has already received USDA BioPreferred status, 100% biobased, for its nbutanol and acetone. ”
Sustainability is an important metric for the industrial, health and personal care markets,” said Floris van Eijndhoven, Director of Industrial and Health and Personal Care at Caldic BV.
“We believe that renewable ingredients are essential for the future success of our customers in these evolving sectors and are pleased to welcome Green Biologics into the Caldic network of suppliers.”
http://www.cosmeticsdesign-europe.com/Business-Financial/Green-Biologics-expands-in-Europe-with-distribution-deal
-
Oct 19, 2016 | Chem Info
By Meagan Parrish
A recent study has been grabbing headlines with the claim that health issues related to chemical exposure could be costing the U.S. around $340 billion annually. How does that study hold up to scrutiny?
The analysis, released this week in The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology, estimated healthcare and lost work costs from 15 medical conditions that research has linked to toxic chemical exposure.
In particular, the research zeroed in “endocrine-disrupting” chemicals including BPA; phthalates; polychlorinated biphenyl (PCB)-like polybrominated diphenyl ethers found in flame retardants; and pesticides like organophosphates.
The study, which was conducted by a team of researchers at NYU Langone Medical Center, then linked exposure to those chemicals to medical issues such as diabetes, obesity, endometriosis, certain cancers, diminished IQ scores, male infertility and birth defects.
Yet, Dr. Joseph Perrone, chief science officer for the Center for Accountability in Science, says the research used to justify the links between these conditions and chemical exposure was cherry-picked.
“The issue here is: What data did they put into this model to arrive at these conclusions? They didn’t do their own studies — they did a literature search,” he explains. “All the papers they pulled out are ones that said ‘These chemicals caused these diseases,’ which by virtue excludes studies that say that these chemicals do not cause these diseases.”
The American Chemistry Council also criticized the study in a released statement that questioned the researchers’ base assumptions.
“The authors have previously conceded that many of the chemicals they cite do not meet the World Health Organization’s widely-embraced definition of an endocrine-disrupting chemical. Instead, they implicate substances that have been shown to interact with the endocrine system similar to the way in which Vitamin D, cocoa and caffeine naturally do,” the ACC statement said.
Perrone also takes issue with how the presence of chemicals was measured in the sample the researchers used.
To measure exposure limits in the population, the study looked at blood and urine samples from a National Health and Nutritional Examination Survey that has been tracking about 5,000 participants since 1999.
But Perrone says that study may have only measured the presence of certain chemicals like BPA at one point during the last few decades, which isn’t necessarily a good predictor for health outcomes.
“If at one point they drank from a plastic bottle and had a higher level of BPA for example, that may not having bearing on whether or not they got cancer later,” Perrone says.
The study concludes by suggesting that people try to limit their exposure to “endocrine-disrupting” chemicals by avoiding plastics and switching to all natural or fragrance-free cosmetics.
And although Perrone calls the research “skewed” he says that exploring the impact of toxic chemicals on human health is a “worthwhile exercise,” and something “the industry is always on the watch for.”
http://www.chem.info/news/2016/10/headline-hype-or-sound-science-new-study-claims-us-loses-340b-year-chemical-related-health-problems
-
Time Magazine Promotes Superstitious Chemophobia
Oct 19, 2016 | Reason (Blog)
By Ronald Bailey
When environmental activists could no longer maintain with a straight face that exposure to trace amounts of synthetic chemicals is a significant cause for cancer in people, the endocrine disruption hypothesis was ginned up. The idea is that chemicals that mimic estrogen are causing epidemics of deformed penises, lower sperm counts, premature development of breasts in girls, shorter anogenital distances in men, diabetes, ADHD, and reduced cognitive function. Today, Time magazine is reporting a correlational study that claims to have sufficiently tortured the data, ah, quantified the economic harm that these estrogen-fueled epidemics is causing.
The researchers had previously calculated the losses from endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) have imposed on hapless Europeans at annual cost of €163 billion (1.28 percent of EU Gross Domestic Product). "We conclude that endocrine disrupting chemical exposures in the EU are likely to contribute substantially to disease and dysfunction across the life course with costs in the hundreds of billions of Euros per year," they report. "These estimates represent only those endocrine disrupting chemicals with the highest probability of causation; a broader analysis would have produced greater estimates of burden of disease and costs."
These intrepid researchers have now turned their attention to the United States. Of course, they find, that the situation is even worse here than across the pond. From the study:
The disease costs of EDCs were much higher in the USA than in Europe ($340 billion [2·33% of GDP] vs $217 billion [1·28%]). The difference was driven mainly by intelligence quotient (IQ) points loss and intellectual disability due to polybrominated diphenyl ethers (11 million IQ points lost and 43 000 cases costing $266 billion in the USA vs873 000 IQ points lost and 3290 cases costing $12·6 billion in the European Union).
Time does acknowledge that the results are correlational (and if you read through the earlier European study you will find that torturing the data will in fact make them confess to anything). However, Time continues, "But while research showing the connection between many chemicals and endocrine disruption remains correlational, many scientists say the burden should still rest on manufacturers to prove a substance is safe before selling it to the public." Pure precautionary principle nonsense.
In any case, a group of real toxicologists in their scathing article, "Endocrine Disruption: Fact or Urban Legend?," have likened endocrine disruption research to homeopathy. Why? Because many endocrine disruption researchers claim that lower doses of EDCs cause more harm than higher doses. No really. The toxicologists make fun of this "interesting hypothesis" by suggesting if it were true then that would mean eating Chinese meal containing low-doses of estrogenic compounds found in soybeans would be far more dangerous than taking a daily birth control pill.
As I report in The End of Doom, the toxicologists note that during the past twenty years hundreds of millions of euros and dollars of taxpayer money have been spent on endocrine disruptor research with essentially no results. They bluntly suggest that all this funding has likely produced "a vested interest of scientists in the endocrine disruption field to keep the endocrine disruption hypothesis on the agenda in order to stay in business." Decades of research and hundreds of millions of dollars in funding have resulted in the publication of more than 4,000 diff erent articles. "Taking into account the large resources spent on this topic, one should expect that, in the meantime, some endocrine disruptors that cause actual human injury or disease should have been identified," the researchers argue. "However, this is not the case. To date, with the exception of natural or synthetic hormones, not a single, man- made chemical endocrine disruptor has been identified that poses an identifiable, measurable risk to human health." They damningly add, "Certainly, there has been much media hype about imaginary health risks from bisphenol A, parabens, or phthalates. However, no actual evidence of adverse human health effects from these substances has ever been established. To the contrary, there is increasing evidence that their health risks are absent or negligible—or imaginary."
They summarize the ideology driving the endocrine disruptor scare: "Perhaps the entire issue of purported health risks of chemical EDs is just another version of the trivial dichotomy natural is good versus man-made is bad." Well, yes.
http://reason.com/blog/2016/10/18/time-magazine-promotes-superstitious-che
-
Chemical Found in US Everyday Items Linked to Host of Deadly Diseases
Oct 19, 2016 | Huffington Post UK
By Thomas Tamblyn
Hazardous hormone-disrupting chemicals commonly found in plastic bottles, metal food cans, detergents, toys and even cosmetics could be costing the US as much as $340 billion in healthcare.
A damning report by the New York Langone Medical Center found that constant low-level exposure to these chemicals could be linked to more than 15 different medical conditions, some deadly.
According to researchers the chemicals are found to slowly build up inside the body after being ingested through direct contact with everyday items such as water bottles, toys or flame retardant furniture.
The research, which looks at the US specifically, took almost three years to complete and found that routine exposure to endocrine-disrupting chemicals could be responsible for increased rates of neurological and behavioural disorders, male infertility, birth defects, obesity, diabetes and even some cancers.
Leonardo Trasande, MD, MPP, an associate professor at NYU Langone said: “Our research adds to the growing evidence on the tremendous economic as well as human health costs of endocrine-disrupting chemicals,”
The team reviewed blood and urine samples from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Study which annually surveys 5,000 volunteers from the US.
Advanced computer models were then used to project the disease totals connected to chemical exposure and then in turn estimate the health costs and lost income for each disease.
Trasande points out that PSB-like chemicals are considerably more prevalent in the US than in Europe where strict regulations have seen many of the endocrine-disrupting chemicals have been banned.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/chemical-found-in-everyday-items-like-water-bottles-could-cause-a-host-of-deadly-diseases_uk_58073af4e4b096d121474bbc
-
Parliament Vote on Waste Policy ‘Sidelines’ REACH
Oct 19, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
A European Parliament committee’s vote in favour of amendments to the waste framework Directive will cause challenges for the chemical industry, Cefic says.
The Industry, Research and Energy Committee (ITRE) voted in support of an amendment to Article 9 of the waste framework Directive. It adds the words: “reduce the content of hazardous substances in materials and products by setting targets and encourage communication about hazardous substances in the supply chain”.
Marco Mensink, Cefic director general, said the committee is trying to make chemical policy through waste policy. “This not only sidelines REACH as the leading legal framework, but confuses Europe's waste policy even more.”
The Directive sets the terms for waste management, explains when waste can be used as a secondary raw material and distinguishes between it and byproducts. But using waste policy to focus on hazardous substances next to REACH brings “great uncertainty” to the chemical industry in Europe, Mr Mensink said.
It will mean Europe must control global production processes and all imports of finished products into the continent, he said, which is “practically impossible without checking every container entering Europe's ports”.
The result is that more goods will be made outside, he said.
Circular economy
The waste framework Directive is one of four amendments on which the ITRE voted. The others are:
the landfill Directive;
the packaging waste Directive; and
the Directives on end-of-life vehicles, batteries and accumulators and waste electrical and electronic equipment.
ITRE said the amendments support the circular economy. But Mr Mensink said those to the waste Directive in question “risk undermining” the latter's delivery.
“To move from a linear to a circular economy, chemistry is needed. When their use is well controlled, hazardous chemicals are necessary for production chains that deliver new materials. REACH is the key tool to assess the use of these chemicals, not waste policy.”
He said that the current legal framework for managing waste in Europe gives member states flexibility, when applying the contents of the Directive. “For example, what is classed as a useful reusable waste substance in one member state is sometimes classed as unusable in another, preventing companies from sending these materials across borders.”
The inconsistent red tape causes uncertainty for industry as it strives to ensure legal compliance, he said. He called for harmonisation to help industry to increase the reuse of waste materials where possible.
“We hope that a broader base of MEPs, member states and the Commission will choose a more balanced and environmentally sound approach,” Mr Mensink said.
In June, Joanna Drake, deputy director general of the Commission's environment directorate, said tracking hazardous substances in the recycling stream must improve.
The Environment, Public Health and Food Safety Committee (Envi) will now debate the amendments and vote. The official day of voting was scheduled for 7 November, but the rapporteur said this is likely to be postponed to January, Cefic said.
This is because around 1,850 amendments to the four Directives have been tabled, and Envi members need time to understand them and discuss the way forward.
Cefic said about 1,300 of them are related to the waste framework Directive.
https://chemicalwatch.com/50390/parliament-vote-on-waste-policy-sidelines-reach
-
Tough Fracking Rules Could 'Drive the Price Around Like Crazy' — EIA
Oct 19, 2016 | E&E Energywire
By Jenny Mandel
Forecasting oil and gas pricing is always a risky business, but predicting prices beyond 2040 is especially difficult thanks to global shifts in energy use.
So says Adam Sieminski, chief of the U.S. Energy Information Administration, the Energy Department's statistical arm that's known for spinning its web of energy data into short- and long-term predictions of how markets will move.
EIA's current big-picture domestic forecast previews energy supply and demand to 2040 and paints a picture of U.S. oil and gas production slowly growing, largely from shale resources, as renewables also supply a growing share of the domestic power mix.
One of the biggest uncertainties in the forecast is the fate of the Obama administration's Clean Power Plan, which if upheld in legal challenges would add to an ongoing shift from coal to natural gas for power generation, and would support a faster growth path for renewable electricity sources like wind and solar.
As the agency looks toward extending its predictions to 2050, Sieminski said the task gets more difficult.
"We have to figure out what we want to put in the post-2040 period for assumptions," Sieminski said in a lunchtime talk hosted by the American Gas Association. "Almost all of the growth in energy consumption is coming from outside the [Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development] — the group of developed countries," he explained, making it harder to peer into the future by looking at the past.
A big question mark after 2040 is the retirement of nuclear power plants, Sieminski said.
As the U.S. nuclear fleet ages, many plants are coming up against the end of their intended life span. To date, life extension efforts have generally dealt with that issue through 2040 through relicensing and other efforts at the state and federal levels. But to look further into the future will require making good guesses — and likely developing alternate scenarios — about whether those plants will continue to operate, he said.
The availability of already-depreciated nuclear plants will shape the need for other power sources.
Another variable that will influence demand for U.S. natural gas is global trade, Sieminski said, as overseas needs will shape industrial manufacturing in the United States.
The agency's base case envisions limited domestic residential, commercial and transportation growth in natural gas demand, Sieminski said, with electrical power and industrial demand as the two major sources of growth for the industry.
For industrial use, "A lot of that growth depends on trade, and trade depends on having the right trade tools in place," Sieminski said.
Keep it in the ground?
In the nearer future, EIA relies on scenarios to capture other uncertainties, such as the growing domestic and global opposition to fossil fuel use.
Sieminski recounted a story of speaking with Chinese officials following the arrival at the Guangdong liquefied natural gas terminal of the first U.S. LNG cargo to be sent to China. Officials welcomed the shipment warmly, he said, with remarks on the historic nature of the event.
Contrast that to the arrival of the first LNG cargo to make harbor in the United Kingdom, he said, where the tanker was met by protesters from the "keep it in the ground" movement.
Domestically, Sieminski said if opposition to hydraulic fracturing were translated into a dramatic reduction in use of the technique, the price impacts would be sharp.
About half the oil and 60 percent of the natural gas produced in the United States today is surfaced using hydraulic fracturing, he said, so "if you were to put really serious constraints on that, you're going to have a reaction in the marketplace."
Grabbing two dinner knives from a place setting, Sieminski illustrated the classic textbook supply-demand curves crossing in a wide "X."
"When you have elasticities that look like that" — he scissored the blades sharply together into a tight "X" — "all it takes is a small increase in demand to drive the price around like crazy."
http://www.eenews.net/energywire/2016/10/19/stories/1060044479
-
Rockefeller Blasts Clinton on Fracking, Methane — Emails
Oct 19, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Hannah Northey
A member of the powerful Rockefeller family who has recently become active in opposing oil and gas pipelines allegedly expressed concern with Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton's silence on fracking, methane, and oil and gas subsidies, according to leaked emails.
Lucy Rockefeller Waletzky, a fourth-generation Rockefeller and Clinton donor, asked Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta in a Feb. 19 email why the candidate hadn't offered a firm position on the practice of hydraulic fracturing and fossil fuel extraction in general.
Waletzky's email, one of thousands WikiLeaks allegedly stole from Podesta's account, was released today on its website.
"In short, she has not offered a single specific proposal to crack down on even the worst excesses of the oil and gas industry's highly polluting practices," wrote Waletzky. "I am also writing you because I'm sensing among a number of donors (current and potential) a growing concern about what we see as a lack of clarity and firmness in Secretary Clinton's position on the air and water pollution from fracking in particular — and fossil fuel extraction in general."
In leaked emails, Clinton allegedly told union members at one event that she wanted to "defend natural gas" and support both repairing and building pipelines. In another email chain, she dismissed the anti-fossil-fuel "keep it in the ground" movement, saying at one event that activists should "get a life" rather than accost her at campaign events (E&ENews PM, Oct. 14).
Yet Waletzky, a physician who said she has studied the effects of fracturing — an oil and gas production technique that involves blasting sand, water and chemicals into the ground — for years, wrote of a growing "hunger" among donors for Clinton to commit on issues such as methane emissions and "fat federal subsidies" to oil and gas drillers, as well as fracking.
After crediting Clinton for an "off-hand" comment she made about the need to curb drilling, Waletzky said the nominee would do better to fall more in line with her former rival, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders (I), and New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D).
"We have looked at her statements in comparison to those of Senator Sanders. There is quite a contrast in the strength of his positions versus hers," she wrote. "... I believe the message of cutting the use of polluting fossil fuels for health and climate reasons will be very attractive to the voters the Secretary badly needs right now. Governor Cuomo's ratings skyrocketed after he banned fracking based on health concerns."
Waletzky's comments and many other emails show pressure on Clinton to come out against fossil fuel production while juggling the demands of unions, industry and Wall Street. Waletzky currently chairs the New York State Council of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation and has chaired the Taconic Region Parks Commission and served as a member of the state parks council.
The Rockefeller Family Fund, a public charity, recently sponsored a conference in Atlanta for property owners, nonprofit groups, law firms and environmental groups to strategize on fighting the use of eminent domain to build new oil and gas pipelines (Greenwire, June 10).
The fund, built on the riches of the Rockefeller oil empire, has also announced plans to divest in fossil fuel companies and has been involved in a number of studies and white papers that pipeline opponents are using at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission — the federal agency that permits new natural gas pipelines — where industry has said reviews are growing longer.
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2016/10/19/stories/1060044531
-
Labor to Obama: Let Workers Finish Pipeline
Oct 19, 2016 | E&E Energywire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
Labor groups are again calling on the Obama administration to allow the embattled Dakota Access pipeline to go forward.
In a letter yesterday, the National Infrastructure Alliance urged President Obama to grant a necessary approval that will allow workers to complete a missing link of the pipeline's route in North Dakota. Ultimately, the project is planned to stretch about 1,100 miles from North Dakota to Illinois.
The alliance represents four construction unions: the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America; International Union of Operating Engineers; Laborers' International Union of North America; and International Association of Bridge, Structural, Ornamental and Reinforcing Iron Workers.
The letter calls on Obama, along with Attorney General Loretta Lynch, Army Secretary Eric Fanning and Interior Secretary Sally Jewell, to take immediate action to grant an Army Corps of Engineers easement for the project to cross beneath Lake Oahe, a dammed section of the Missouri River.
"This unfortunate situation demands your immediate attention," the letter says. "We strongly encourage you to stand up for American workers and American infrastructure by reversing course on your Administration's extralegal action regarding the Dakota Access Pipe Line, which is sending shock waves through the development community and the membership of our unions."
The letter is referring to the Obama administration's surprise announcement in early September that it would withhold the necessary easement while the agency conducted further review. After a federal appeals court last week lifted a temporary injunction within 20 miles of Lake Oahe, the easement is the only remaining approval needed for project backer Energy Transfer Partners to complete the North Dakota section.
In September, government lawyers indicated that a decision would come in "weeks, not months," but the administration could decide the easement wasn't adequately studied and kick off a new review process, which would take months.
According to the infrastructure alliance, the Obama administration's last-minute intervention in the project is "deeply unsettling" and sets a dangerous precedent for future proposals.
"The intervention by the Departments of Justice, Interior, and the U.S. Army to halt a project for an indefinite period of time, using the leverage that the federal government possesses with regard to its easement on Corps property, is unprecedented and without comparison," NIA Executive Director Raymond Poupore wrote. "We can think of no other similar situation."
Another coalition of labor groups sent a similar letter earlier this month, with the heads of five trade unions slamming the administration's involvement (EnergyWire, Oct. 3).
Meanwhile, a handful of non-construction-related labor groups, including National Nurses United and the American Postal Workers Union, have publicly opposed Dakota Access.
http://www.eenews.net/energywire/2016/10/19/stories/1060044489
-
National Rules For NatGas Storage Coming in Wake of SoCalGas Leak, PHMSA Head Says
Oct 19, 2016 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Richard Nemec
A federal interim rule setting national standards for natural gas storage facilities will be released before the end of the year, the head of the U.S. Department of Transportation's (DOT) Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) said on Tuesday as part of the release of a national task force report undertaken after a four-month storage well leak in Southern California (see Daily GPI, Feb. 18).
The Department of Energy (DOE) and PHMSA published a task force report outlining the lessons learned from Southern California Gas Co.'s (SoCalGas) Aliso Canyon facility storage well leak and making 44 recommendations for industry, federal, state and local regulators/governments to reduce the chances of the same thing happening at one of the other more than 400 similar storage facilities nationwide.
Co-chaired by Franklin Orr, DOE undersecretary for science and energy, and Marie-Therese Dominguez, PHMSA administrator, the task force found that while the Aliso Canyon-scale incidents "are rare," the potential consequences from similar incidents "can be significant," requiring additional actions to ensure safe, reliable operations over the long term.
Among the recommendations are three categories of steps to be taken to ensure: well integrity, public health and environmental safeguards, and energy reliability. A key area is avoiding what are called "single points of failure design" in the storage wells as was the case with the SoCalGas well that leaked over the prolonged period.
Except under limited circumstances, facility operators are urged to phase out the single-point-of-failure designs that contributed to the inability to swiftly control and repair the Aliso Canyon leak, Orr said.
Orr and Dominguez underscored the task force report's conclusion that natural gas "plays an important role in the nation's energy landscape" and that ensuring the reliability and safety of the nation's gas infrastructure is crucial.
Dominguez noted that currently gas storage is regulated by the states and through a series of industry written standards by the American Petroleum Institute (API) identified as standard practices 1170 and 1171. The task force report and these existing standards will be taken into consideration in PHMSA's upcoming interim rule for storage, she said.
"These will set national standards for underground gas storage," Dominguez said. "Right now, a lot of work has been done by API and it is very specific to the states and industry operations."
Commenting on the report, American Gas Association (AGA) COO Lori Traweek said, “Natural gas storage is fundamental to our nation’s energy use -- today and into the future. Natural gas storage regulations must recognize this irrefutable fact. We are pleased to see the Interagency Task Force recognize that gas storage cannot be discontinued or replaced without significantly compromising reliability.”
Traweek acknowledged that the report finds that “while incidents at U.S. underground natural gas storage facilities are rare, the potential consequences of those incidents can be significant and require additional actions to ensure safe and reliable operation over the long term.”
“We share that goal,” she said. “Natural gas operators remain focused on enhancing the safety of their underground storage operations.”
Traweek said representatives from AGA, the Interstate Natural Gas Association of America and the American Petroleum Institute met with Dominguez and Orr to discuss the findings of the report. AGA and its members are reviewing the recommendations and will continue to collaborate with federal agencies on data-gathering initiatives. They also will provide technical information on what operators are doing to ensure the integrity of their underground storage wells.
“Beyond federal and state regulation, industry has taken the initiative to work with external stakeholders to develop two recommended practices (RP) -- accredited by the American National Standards Institute -- for underground storage,” she said. “RP 1170 and 1171 provide guidance to operators on how to design, operate, and ensure the integrity of underground storage for natural gas.”
INGAA CEO Don Santa questioned the timing before the root-cause analysis on the Aliso Canyon leak was completed and the task force's call for double barriers in storage wells, while noting the national pipeline operators' association is still evaluating the recommendations and "strongly supports" storage safety advancements.
Separately, a Washington, DC-based API spokesperson also said his organization is reviewing the interagency task force recommendations, which he characterized as recognizing underground gas storage's "critical role in meeting the nation's demands for natural gas."
Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) officials supported the need for federal rules for the more than 400 underground gas storage facilities spread over about 30 states, but they also urged that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission consider various market reforms for the electricity and gas grids that would "reduce future dependence on natural gas and gas storage."
In the midst of the Aliso Canyon leak last January, EDF's Mark Brownstein, vice president for climate and energy programs, called for federal regulators to "get involved," by establishing tighter requirements for inspecting and maintaining the nation's gas storage facilities, and longer term, for policymakers to rethink the role of natural gas in the nation's energy mix (see Daily GPI, Jan. 11).
Singled out in the report are 12 major storage facilities nationwide, including Aliso Canyon, that the task force determined have the potential to greatly impact electricity generation over wide sections of the nation, recommending that the industry, federal and state officials look for ways to "strengthen the planning and coordination efforts to decrease the impacts from any prolonged disruption to the gas storage infrastructure."
In response to a question on the webinar, Orr noted that two of the dozen facilities are in California -- Aliso and Pacific Gas and Electric Co.'s (PG&E) McDonald Island facility in the north -- with the rest clustered mostly in the Gulf of Mexico coastal region, and each facility had impacts individually on up to 2 GW of power generation. "Those are big enough to have a significant effect on the power grid," he said.
"We think that we need to have a better resolution of the kind of data that explains how those facilities [mostly larger, salt dome storage in the Gulf] are connected to power plants," said Orr, adding that the task force report calls for obtaining data that will allow for more detailed analysis of possible vulnerabilities for the grid.
In response to another question, Orr talked about the single-point-of-design issue inherent in many of the nation's more than 12,000 gas storage wells. It refers to the use of a single casing in the wells, and the report is recommending that each well have additional tubing so there is a second barrier if the injection/withdrawal piping springs a leak.
"A significant fraction of the storage wells use just the casing as the primary barrier," he said. "We're recommending moving away from those designs so there is a secondary containment."
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/108142-national-rules-for-natgas-storage-coming-in-wake-of-socalgas-leak-phmsa-head-says
-
NTSB Issues Early Findings in Chlorine Gas Tank-Car Incident
Oct 19, 2016 | Progressive Railroading
The National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) on Monday released its preliminary report on a tank-car leak that spilled liquified compressed chlorine at the Axiall Corp. rail-car loading facility in West Virginia in August.
Tank car AXLX 1702, which had a DOT-105J500W specification, experienced a sudden tank shell crack shortly after it was filled with the hazardous material at the company's facility in New Martinsville, W. Va., on Aug. 27, according to an NTSB press release.
About 2.5 hours after the crack developed, the entire 90-ton load of chlorine gas released from the crack and formed a large vapor cloud that moved south from the Axiall facility along the Ohio River Valley. Five Axiall and three contractor employees were treated for exposure injuries and released; two people were transported to the hospital.
The release caused "significant" vegetation damage downwind from the release, although no water contamination was reported.
Chlorine gas is a toxic hazard that may be fatal if inhaled or absorbed through the skin.
NTSB investigators completed on-scene work at the site and at the Rescar Co. tank-car repair facility in Dubois, Pa. The tank car was built by ACF Industries in 1981.
The investigation is continuing. Others active in the investigation include the Federal Railroad Administration(FRA), Axiall, Rescar and AllTranstek.http://www.progressiverailroading.com/federal_legislation_regulation/news/NTSB-issues-early-findings-in-chlorine-gas-tank-car-incident--49809
-
Air Law Section 115 History Might Inform Efforts For Broader EPA GHG Rules
Oct 19, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Dawn Reeves
EPA's decision to pursue power plant greenhouse gas (GHG) rules under section 111 of the Clean Air Act, rather than broader economy-wide GHG rules under section 115, might inform future debate over whether to pursue the broader approach, as the next president -- particularly if it is Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton -- is expected to face increasing pressure to issue a new round of climate rules.
While the question of whether to pursue rules under section 115 has long been a feature of how to regulate GHGs, a leaked 2014 email purportedly sent to John Podesta, at the time an Obama advisor and now Clinton's campaign chairman, provides new evidence that the issue has long been considered at the highest levels of the administration and advanced by top Democrats.
Although the leaked email shows advocates briefing Podesta on the issue in 2014, sources have said more recently that he continues to be briefed on the issue as discussions and advocacy continues.
Inside EPA has long covered the debate over using section 115, which generally provides EPA with broader economy-wide authority to address GHGs and other domestic pollutants that harm other countries than the sector-based approach inherent in section 111.
While the authority has never been successfully used, debate over the approach is intensifying as more experts are pushing for a Clinton administration to adopt it.
The effort was formally launched in 2013, when the Institute for Policy Integrity (IPI) at New York University law school submitted a petition to EPA to do so. At the time, then-IPI director Michael Livermore said the petition “was not intended to derail” the section 111 performance standards “but to add to the toolkit.”
EPA has not acted on the petition but could do so at any time. Also, IPI could bring litigation to force EPA to respond to its petition, though an IPI source says the group has no plans to bring litigation any time soon -- the same position it took when it first filed the petition.
Instead the group is “very focused” on defending the EPA power sector rules while backing section 115 for future regulatory actions, the source says.
While the Obama administration weighed using the section 115 option, sources say it ultimately declined to do so because it was heavily invested in a section 111 rule and felt that regulating a single sector using existing statutory authority was a more achievable task.
One example of the administration's deliberation on the issue is a document recently released by Wikileaks that it claims is a hacked email from Podesta's personal account.
The Feb. 19, 2014, email was sent shortly after Podesta became a senior counselor to Obama after stepping down from the Center for American Progress (CAP) think tank that he founded. It was sent from Pete Ogden, who at the time had recently left the Obama National Security staff for climate change and environmental policy and is now at CAP.
In it, Ogden notes that he and Heather Zichal, another former White House climate adviser, spoke to Phil Barnett and other staff with then-Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA), “and, after asking a few questions about the timing and what they were hoping to achieve, they seemed to think that it would make sense for them to do a little more research and then have some additional consultations with State and EPA before making a big public push,” the email says. “Phil said he was going to talk [to] Waxman and so you may be hearing again from him about this possible new course, so I just wanted to give you a heads up.”
'Interesting Proposal'
Shortly after the email was sent, California Air Resources Board (CARB) officials and a group of legal scholars recommended that EPA use section 115 to reduce domestic emissions and to require other countries to reduce their GHGs, according to March 14, 2014, remarks by CARB Chairwoman Mary Nichols.
The legal review had been requested by Waxman, (D-CA), who was then the ranking Democrat on the House Energy & Commerce Committee. Waxman in a March 21, 2014, statement said, “This is an interesting proposal and I plan to examine it closely. Climate change is a global problem, so acting in coordination with other nations is important.”
Later that month, EPA and State Department officials said they were weighing the CARB proposal, according to Nichols, who said that Secretary of State John Kerry was “aware of and interested in the possibility” of raising the section 115 proposal to world leaders.
Also, law professors from Columbia University, Yale University, Georgetown University, the University of Virginia, UCLA, Stanford University and Berkeley law schools sent a letter to Waxman and Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) outlining the section 115 strategy and calling it “a significant opportunity” to reduce global emissions.
IPI has downplayed concerns raised in a 2010 report by Resources for the Future (RFF) that rules developed under section 115 would be on shaky legal ground. “Courts usually take a dim view of attempts by agencies to use short, vague statutory language to justify sweeping regulatory changes,” RFF said.
Since then, RFF has reversed course, writing in an October 2016 paper that EPA should consider a 115 climate rule despite the risks, either as a “backup” or “complement” to its power sector and vehicle GHG rules. “Further investigation of [section 115] by both EPA and outside legal and economic analysts is warranted,” RFF says in the new paper, “The Elephant in the Room or the Elephant in the Mousehole?”
But the Ogden email and the subsequent deliberations occurred as EPA was crafting the details of its section 111 proposals to cut GHGs from the power sector -- the existing source performance standards (ESPS) and new source performance standards (NSPS).
EPA in September 2013 proposed its NSPS and then in June 2014 issued its ESPS proposal, a significant milestone that quieted talk of section 115 for several months as focus shifted to the power sector regulations.
EPA finalized both rules in August 2015 and did not raise its section 115 authority when officials went to Paris for the successful climate talks later that year. Those talks resulted in a landmark global agreement to reduce average temperature increases to “well below” 2-degrees Celsius -- an agreement that is poised to take effect Nov. 4, just days before the next round of international climate talks in Morocco.
'Very Limited Discussion'
One former EPA official who worked on climate policy says while EPA was developing the section 111 rules there was “very limited discussion” of section 115 as an alternative. While some were promoting it as a better path forward, “I don't remember, at least at EPA, in depth discussion of 115 and [its] relative merits . . . as compared to 111.”
The source adds that Waxman “latched onto” section 115 and “did try to talk it up with the administration,” but that was after the agency was intensely crafting the ESPS. “But . . . the Waxman staff had some discussions, I know, with the White House, and some discussions, I presume with EPA, though I was never involved in that.”
The source says EPA went with its 111 rules because it was focused on power sector GHG emissions, rather than the broader economy.
Additionally, EPA had entered into a legal agreement with environmental groups and states to issue such rules for both power plants and refiners.
“I think that the decision to focus on the power sector and 111(d) was the right decision for the time, and it gave significant momentum to reducing power sector emissions. But now we need to have more of an economy-wide focus and I think 115 offers a lot there,” the source says.
One source with vast experience working on climate change issues also backs using section 115. The section provides “a potentially powerful tool that all kinds of people are talking about” using. If EPA were to issue a climate rule under the section, “It would put tremendous discretion to the states for how to do it,” including allowing states to issue cap-and-trade rules, direct regulations, emission fees or other policies. “They would really be empowered to take whatever approach they thought was best.”
Many other sources are also currently more bullish regarding using section 115 for future GHG rules.
However, one source that supports a section 115 GHG rule notes that EPA will face a major political decision in moving forward with such sweeping rules. If Clinton wins the presidency, “is she going to want to spend that kind of political capital? It is huge. The usually pro-environmental states may have misgivings. This is economy wide. The technical challenges are formidable. The legal challenges are huge,” and a decision to move forward would be “an enormous drain on EPA. . . . So to me it's not clear.”
The source expects any decision to go forward would not be made during a Clinton first term because “doing it as a first term thing could lead to not having a second term."
Revived Interest
Talk about this option revived in earnest early this year, just before the Supreme Court in February stayed the ESPS pending judicial review -- though the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit held oral arguments on the rule Sept. 27 and most observers expect it to survive at least in part.
As an example of the renewed interest, one D.C. Circuit judge during the arguments even asked a Department of Justice (DOJ) attorney why the agency did not rely on its section 115 authority instead of issuing a section 111 rule. The DOJ attorney largely sidestepped the question about the merits of a 115 rule, arguing that prior Supreme Court cases underscored the agency's 111 authority.
The renewed discussion was largely sparked by a Jan. 14 paper by prominent environmental law professors, including those affiliated with IPI, who offered section 115 as a legal blueprint for EPA to craft an economy-wide GHG cap-and-trade program to broaden the agency's sector-by-sector approach.
Since then, it has gained traction in many quarters, including from industry attorney Brian Potts, who called it Obama's “most powerful and efficient tool” to curb climate change, as well as CAP's Greg Dotson and Joe Romm.
Also, former EPA senior policy counsel Bob Sussman backed the approach in an April 29 blog post for the Brookings Institution. “Section 115 has strengths that no other provision of existing law offers,” he wrote. “Using it will not be easy. But failure to take advantage of its strengths will handicap U.S. policymakers in designing a path to achieve the ambitious GHG reduction targets that the Obama administration has pledged to meet by 2025.”
Sussman, now a consultant and Yale law professor, told Inside EPA that while it is premature to say what a Clinton administration might do on GHG regulations, “she will be expected to hit the ground running” if she wins the Nov. 8 election to the White House.
More recently, Edison Electric Institute's Brian Wolff said in September the utility industry would “welcome” a market-based approach to curb GHGs under section 115.
In August, two prominent climate consultants -- David Bookbinder and David Bailey of Element VI Consulting -- publicly changed their minds to support the viability of section 115 after earlier opposing the Jan. 14 paper that they said would “give EPA completely unconstrained power that we do not think Congress ever intended, and that the courts would never uphold.”
Environmental groups also held internal talks about the merits and pitfalls of using the section 115, and Sen. Tom Udall (D-NM) also backs the approach.
Most of these groups intend to put significant pressure on the next administration to act, especially since Congress is not expected to move broad climate legislation anytime soon.
http://insideepa.com/daily-news/air-law-section-115-history-might-inform-efforts-broader-epa-ghg-rules
-
Texas Appeals EPA's Rejection of Its 'Good Neighbor' Ozone Plan
Oct 19, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Sean Reilly
Texas is challenging U.S. EPA's recent rejection of the state's blueprint for meeting the "good neighbor" provisions of the 2008 ozone standards.
In August, EPA had formally disapproved the part of Texas' implementation plan for limiting pollution that contributes to ozone problems outside the state's boundaries. Among the grounds for their decision, federal regulators faulted Texas for failing to fully analyze the impact of its emissions on ozone nonattainment areas in other states.
The disapproval determination started a two-year clock for EPA to impose a federal implementation plan if the state doesn't provide a satisfactory substitute in the meantime.
The state's petition for review, filed last week with the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, does not spell out the grounds for its appeal. But in previously filed public comments, Texas officials had argued that it was "inappropriate" to label the state's analysis of ozone contributions elsewhere as incomplete when EPA "did not provide timely guidance stating what would constitute a complete analysis."
Ozone, a lung irritant that can worsen emphysema symptoms and help trigger asthma attacks, is created from nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds in sunshine. The 2008 ambient air quality standard for ozone is 75 parts per billion; last October, EPA lowered that threshold to 70 ppb.
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2016/10/19/stories/1060044537
-
Scientists Accidentally Discover Efficient Process to Turn CO2 into Ethanol
Oct 17, 2016 | Popular Mechanics (in Real Clear Energy)
By Avery Thompson
Scientists at the Oak Ridge National Laboratory in Tennessee have discovered a chemical reaction to turn CO2 into ethanol, potentially creating a new technology to help avert climate change. Their findings were published in the journal ChemistrySelect.
The researchers were attempting to find a series of chemical reactions that could turn CO2 into a useful fuel, when they realized the first step in their process managed to do it all by itself. The reaction turns CO2 into ethanol, which could in turn be used to power generators and vehicles.
The tech involves a new combination of copper and carbon arranged into nanospikes on a silicon surface. The nanotechnology allows the reactions to be very precise, with very few contaminants.
"By using common materials, but arranging them with nanotechnology, we figured out how to limit the side reactions and end up with the one thing that we want," said Adam Rondinone.
This process has several advantages when compared to other methods of converting CO2 into fuel. The reaction uses common materials like copper and carbon, and it converts the CO2 into ethanol, which is already widely used as a fuel.
Perhaps most importantly, it works at room temperature, which means that it can be started and stopped easily and with little energy cost. This means that this conversion process could be used as temporary energy storage during a lull in renewable energy generation, smoothing out fluctuations in a renewable energy grid.
"A process like this would allow you to consume extra electricity when it's available to make and store as ethanol," said Rondinone. "This could help to balance a grid supplied by intermittent renewable sources."
The researchers plan to further study this process and try and make it more efficient. If they're successful, we just might see large-scale carbon capture using this technique in the near future.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/green-tech/a23417/convert-co2-into-ethanol/
Industry and Association News - There are no clips to report at this time.
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested