Preview Newsletter

AM ACC 11/10/2016

Industry and Association News

(ACC Mentioned) Environmentalists, Industries Weigh Next Steps Under Trump Presidency
Nov 10, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Suzanne Yohannan

Environmentalists and groups representing major industry sectors are outlining their plans for how to respond to the upcoming Donald Trump presidency, with advocates vowing to fight in the courts and with the Democratic minority in Congress to push strict environmental rules while industry eyes roll-backs of major Obama EPA policies.
(ACC Mentioned) US Industry Executives Pledge To Work With Trump
Nov 9, 2016 | ICIS
By David Haydon

US industry groups including the American Chemistry Council (ACC), the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM) and the American Petroleum Institute (API) issued statements Wednesday pledging to work with President-elect Donald Trump’s administration.

LCSA News- There are no clips to report at this time.

Chemical Management News

New Use Rules for 57 Chemicals, Many Nanotubes, Issued by EPA
Nov 10, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto

New use rules for 57 chemicals, including many nanotubes and some perfluorinated compounds, were issued Nov. 9 by the Environmental Protection Agency.
Asbestos Multiple Exposure Cases: When Words Really Matter
Nov 9, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Peter Hayes

Causation continues to be one of the most heavily litigated issues in asbestos suits, especially when more than one source of exposure to cancer-causing substances is involved.
EPA Approves Herbicide Dicamba For Use On GM Crops
Nov 9, 2016 | Inside EPA

EPA has approved use of the decades-old herbicide dicamba on genetically-modified (GM) cotton and soybean crops in more than 30 states to help farmers combat growing weed resistance to glyphosate-based products, despite environmentalists' claims that the registration will increase use of an older, more toxic, herbicide and spur resistance.
California Sticks With Plastic Bag Ban, Legalizes Marijuana
Nov 10, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Carolyn Whetzel

California voters rejected the plastic bag industry's effort to repeal state legislation banning the single-use carry-out bags used by retailers, but voted down a measure to redirect a bag fee to environmental programs.
EU Panel Closes in on Final Endocrine Disruptor Criteria
Nov 10, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Stephen Gardner

A regulatory committee of European Union country representatives could clear the way in mid-November for the European Commission to adopt criteria that will enable the legal identification of substances that disrupt the endocrine—or hormones—system.
European Union Agency Opens Consultations on Chemicals
Nov 10, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Stephen Gardner

The European Chemicals Agency published calls for comments or evidence on proposed or potential regulatory measures that could affect companies that use chromium compounds, diarsenic trioxide, diarsenic pentaoxide or recycled rubber granules.

Energy News

(ACC Mentioned) Trump's Stunning Victory Puts Major Obama Initiatives in Doubt, Signals All-of-The-Above Energy
Nov 9, 2016 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Carolyn Davis, David Bradley, Charlie Passut, and Alex Steis

Political pundits said major climate change, air and water policies that were enacted during the Obama administration now are in doubt, if Trump moves forward with some of the proposals he outlined during a grueling campaign.
(ACC Mentioned) Trump ‘Clearly’ Favors E&P, Less Regulatory Oversight, Say Experts
Nov 9, 2016 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Carolyn Davis

President-elect Donald J. Trump, set to take office following a stunning upset of Hillary Clinton, is poised to sweep away renewable energy initiatives and stringent oversight launched by the Obama administration and enact an all-of-the-above energy strategy, experts said Wednesday.
Who's In Line For Trump EPA Boss, Energy Czar?
Nov 9, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Robin Bravender

Donald Trump's team will now officially start measuring the drapes in the Oval Office and throughout the executive branch.
Oil, Coal Seen as Winners With Donald Trump Victory
Nov 9, 2016 | The Wall Street Journal
By Bradley Olson, John W. Miller and John W. Miller

Donald Trump’s surprise victory fanned expectations in the energy industry that he would clear the path for new pipelines, end U.S. participation in global climate change pacts and undo environmental regulations to boost American coal mining.
Trump Policies Expected to Help Oil, Gas Industry
Nov 10, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Alan Kovski

Oil and gas industry officials welcomed the election of Donald Trump as a prelude to allowing more development of domestic fossil fuels and the rollback of some regulations.
Coal Resurgent, Renewables in Retreat: Energy With Trump
Nov 10, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Javier Blas and Anna Hirtenstein

If you want a snapshot of what the global energy map will look like under President Donald Trump, look no farther than the stock market.
Trump Site Vows To 'Scrap' Clean Power Plan, Expand Leasing
Nov 10, 2016 | E&E News Daily
By Robin Bravender

President-elect Donald Trump's team has launched www.greatagain.gov, a new clearinghouse for information about his policies and transition to power.
Rare Energy Policy Window for Republicans After Election Sweep
Nov 10, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rachel Leven, Brian Dabbs, Rebecca Kern and Patrick Ambrosio

Republicans have a rare opportunity to dictate energy and environment policy starting in 2017—if they choose to do so—following their electoral sweep.
After Trump Win, Advocates Pledge Hand-To-Hand Fights On Climate Policy
Nov 9, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Doug Obey

Environmental advocates in the wake of Donald Trump's election victory are vowing to mount both defensive and offensive campaigns to protect and continue greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction programs, acknowledging that they will likely face adversaries in the next administration and the Republican-controlled Congress.
Lengthy List Of Obama Climate Initiatives Under Threat From Trump
Nov 9, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Doug Obey

Donald Trump's victory in the presidential election appears likely to delay or scuttle EPA's greenhouse gas (GHG) standards for existing power plants, as well as an array of other climate change regulations that a potential Clinton Administration had been expected to develop, according to analysts and other observers.
Trump Victory Puts Petchems-Heavy Trade Pacts In Play
Nov 10, 2016 | Platts
By John Calton, Nida Qureshi and Chris Ferrell

The election of Donald Trump as US president was having minimal initial impact on domestic petrochemical markets Wednesday, but market sources said to watch potential policy changes after he takes office because of potential ramifications for the industry, particularly on trade agreements.
Trump Win Revives Keystone Hopes, Boosts Dakota Access Outlook
Nov 10, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Meenal Vamburkar and Robert Tuttle

Donald Trump's U.S. presidential election victory came as a positive surprise for pipeline proponents.
Pipeline Developers See Opening After Trump Win
Nov 10, 2016 | E&E News PM
By Hannah Northey

Developers of the Keystone XL oil pipeline, which stalled under the Obama administration, doubled down today on their intent to build the project now that Donald Trump has clinched the White House.
Enviros Gear Up For Riders, Pipeline Fights
Nov 10, 2016 | E&E News Daily
By Hannah Hess

Environmental groups will waste no time licking their wounds after the Republican Party's sweeping victory.
EPA Data Plan Spurs Warnings Over Future Existing Source Methane Rule
Nov 9, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Bridget DiCosmo

Industry groups and at least one state, North Dakota, are continuing to raise questions about EPA's effort to collect information from the oil and gas sector on existing sources of methane in support of a future rulemaking, saying EPA does not have statutory authority to issue such a rule and therefore its final information collection request (ICR) lacks "practical utility."
No Change Expected to Senate Energy Committee Leadership
Nov 10, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rachel Leven

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) is set to continue her leadership of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, following Democrats’ failure to win the Senate in the election.
Pennsylvania Court Stays Parts of New Shale Regulations
Nov 9, 2016 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jamison Cocklin

The Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court has stayed parts of the state's regulatory overhaul for shale drillers to consider the merits of a lawsuit filed by the Marcellus Shale Coalition (MSC) that challenges key provisions of the package.
Voters Reject Washington Carbon Tax Proposal
Nov 10, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Paul Shukovsky

Washington voters definitively rejected what would have been the nation's first direct carbon tax, according to early election returns in this vote-by-mail state.

Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.

Transportation News

(ACC Mentioned) Railroads See Trump Presidency As a Boost: Update
Nov 9, 2016 | Arrgus Media

US railroads view the victory of Republican President-elect Donald Trump yesterday as an opportunity to rein in federal regulation of shipping rates.

Environment News

(ACC Mentioned) Science Committee Subpoena Effort Poised for Repeat: Advocates
Nov 10, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Brian Dabbs

A newly established oversight role at the House Science Committee is likely to roll over into the 115th Congress, as Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) remains at the helm for another term, industry and environmental advocates told Bloomberg BNA.
House, Senate GOP Ready To Work With Trump On Enviro Rollbacks
Nov 10, 2016 | E&E News Daily
By George Cahlink

A stunning upset this week by Republican Donald Trump and GOP victories in both chambers will allow the party to move aggressively to push for environmental rollbacks.
Trump Pledge Means Cuts Ahead on Environmental Regulation
Nov 10, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Renee Schoof

President-elect Donald Trump is expected to fulfill a key campaign promise to American industries to eliminate a wide range of environmental regulations.
GOP Holds Senate Majority as Democrats’ Climate Plan Crumbles
Nov 10, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Dean Scott

Senate Democrats will spend at least the next two years playing defense against Republican-led attacks on Obama administration environmental and climate policies after falling well short of taking the Senate majority.
Gloomy Greens Gear Up For Battle With President Trump
Nov 9, 2016 | PoliticoPro
By Alex Guillén and Elana Schor

Donald Trump’s presidential victory clips the wings of climate hawks who had become a potent political force under President Barack Obama and sets the stage for four years of aggressive grassroots combat against an exultant fossil-fuel industry.
Fierce Opponent of Climate Action to Chair Environment Panel
Nov 10, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Dean Scott and Stephanie Beasley

Republicans who nearly ran the table election night and will hold the Senate will likely bring a fierce opponent of President Barack Obama's climate agenda to head its Environment and Public Works Committee: Wyoming Republican Sen. John Barrasso.
Fate of Obama's Climate Regulations Now in Trump's Hands
Nov 10, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Andrew Childers

President Barack Obama's signature domestic effort on climate change is in significant jeopardy after the Nov. 8 victory of President-elect Donald Trump.
States See Same Climate Paths After Trump Election
Nov 10, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Gerald B. Silverman

States already controlling greenhouse gas emissions will continue unabated despite Donald Trump's presidential victory, but his election could offer a reprieve for those states that had resisted action.
Senate Republicans See Multiple Options to Target Paris Deal
Nov 10, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Dean Scott

President-elect Donald Trump's win Nov. 8 has Republicans mulling an array of options to dismantle U.S. participation in the Paris Agreement, any one of which could deal a devastating and perhaps mortal blow to the first truly global climate pact reached only last December in Paris.
Trump's Victory Throws Cold Water on UN Climate Talks
Nov 10, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Eric J. Lyman

Less than a year after they celebrated the Paris Agreement, climate negotiators from nearly 200 countries meeting again—this time in Marrakech, Morocco—awoke Nov. 9 to the reality of trying to wage a global fight against climate change without the buy-in of the world's largest economy and one of the biggest greenhouse gas emitters.

Industry and Association News

(ACC Mentioned) Environmentalists, Industries Weigh Next Steps Under Trump Presidency

Nov 10, 2016 | Inside EPA

By Suzanne Yohannan

Environmentalists and groups representing major industry sectors are outlining their plans for how to respond to the upcoming Donald Trump presidency, with advocates vowing to fight in the courts and with the Democratic minority in Congress to push strict environmental rules while industry eyes roll-backs of major Obama EPA policies.
Trump’s election opens the door “for a broad push-back on federal regulatory oversight and increased support for domestic production of fossil fuels,” S&P Global Market Intelligence writes in a Nov. 9 post-election analysis. S&P provides financial and industry data and analysis to investors, government agencies and corporations.
S&P notes that Trump during the campaign had frequently called for retracting federal regulations, alleging impediments to domestic energy production. This plan will clear the way for an “all-of-the-above energy policy approach in the months ahead that is focused heavily on domestic fossil fuel development,” S&P says.
On the presidential campaign trail, the Republican candidate Trump vowed to undo much of the Obama EPA's agenda, though his promises on specific issues have often been vague or contradictory, adding to uncertainty over what his environmental agenda will be when he takes office in January. For instance, he said early in his candidacy that he would push to eliminate EPA entirely, but later walked back that pledge and said he would “refocus the EPA on its core mission of ensuring clean air, and clean, safe drinking water for all Americans.”
S&P expects EPA's Clean Water Act jurisdiction rule and its Clean Power Plan greenhouse gas standards for power plants to be top targets for Trump to try to undo. Federal appeals court suits are pending over both rules, and are expected to eventually end up in the Supreme Court. If Trump gets to appoint a ninth justice, that could potentially sway the court in a more conservative direction toward voting against both regulations.
Energy industry groups expect a roll-back of regulations they believe have hindered growth in the sector. The American Energy Alliance (AEA) said in a Nov. 9 statement that Trump’s election offers a chance to “reset the harmful energy policies of the last generation,” arguing Trump’s energy plan places “the needs of American families and workers first.” AEA is a non-profit group that is the advocacy branch for the Institute for Energy Research, which conducts analysis of government regulation of the global energy market, according to AEA’s website.
AEA also noted in a separate statement that Washington state voters yesterday also rejected a ballot initiative to implement a carbon tax. AEA President Thomas Pyle said in a statement that the vote against the tax “signals to lawmakers and carbon tax advocates across the country that when put to a referendum, Americans reject higher energy taxes.” The measure’s failure “should put to rest the talk of a revenue-neutral carbon tax bargain,” he added. If the measure had passed, Washington would have been the first state to adopt a revenue-neutral carbon tax.
'Reasonable' Regulations
The National Mining Association (NMA) also issued a statement Nov. 9, indicating its interest in working with the Trump administration on a number of issues of mutual interest. A “robust mining industry is only possible with reasonable laws and regulations that balance costs with benefits in pursuit of realistic goals,” NMA says.
Meanwhile, the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI), representing the nuclear power sector, expects a Trump presidency to be a boon for the industry. “We encourage President-elect Trump to continue advancing his support for nuclear energy to maintain our nation’s leadership in nuclear technology and its indispensable role in our critical energy infrastructure and environmental interests,” the group said in a post-election statement.
Other energy issues that could get a boost from a Trump administration include EPA's renewable fuel standard, which Trump has said he supports. The Iowa Biodiesel Board in a Nov. 9 statement welcomed the opportunity to work with Trump, noting statements he made during the campaign about biodiesel. “We are optimistic that he will support policies imperative to the growth of biodiesel, including the federal Renewable Fuel Standard,” the board says. “The federal tax incentive for biodiesel is also critical to help us compete against petroleum.”
On toxics, the chemical industry group American Chemistry Council in a Nov. 9 statement on the election said it looks forward to working with the new administration to implement the recently enacted update to the Toxic Substances Control Act “so EPA proceeds in a way that will promote safety and innovation.”
Environmentalists' Response
While industry groups are on the offensive weighing rules for a Trump administration to either scrap or that would loosen existing standards, environmentalists are expecting to play defense in the near future.
In a Nov. 9 email to supporters, Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) President Rhea Suh said while Trump has vowed to rescind commitments in the Paris climate accord, and ran “one of the most stridently anti-environment platforms for any recent major-party nominee,” she planned to push back against attempts to weaken EPA rules.
Trump “will have to contend with an NRDC that wields a far more potent combination of grassroots activism, courtroom power, lobbying expertise and media outreach than we ever have had before,” Suh vowed, adding that on climate change, “the defining challenge of our generation -- failure is not an option.”
The advocacy group Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) is preparing to battle anticipated Trump attempts to weaken environmental protections across the board, according to a PEER official.
PEER plans to work under the premise that “even the president has to follow the law,” the source says. “We expect that to be a significant undertaking for the next four years.” Under Trump, the source says the group expects there to be “a concerted effort to dismantle the public health regulatory protections that exist” now.
PEER often works behind the scenes to help federal, state and local employees, according to the source. This includes aiding in enforcement of environmental laws, such as lawsuits in some instances; helping employees to combat attempts to manipulate science used in environmental policymaking; representing government whistleblowers; and seeking transparency in government agencies through Freedom of Information Act requests and lawsuits, according to the source, who expects PEER's “business to be extremely busy” under a Trump administration.
PEER expects “the abuses of the Bush administration to be repeated, but it’ll be on steroids,” the official says, pointing to the environmental record of New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) -- who is Trump’s transition team head -- as indicative of this. The official argues Christie’s public health and environmental record has been a “disaster.”
PEER on its website says that the Christie administration halted for three years work by a state drinking water advisory panel to state regulators and alleges that environmental work by the state “on virtually every topic has either been dismantled or channeled through this industry-dominated Science Advisory Board.”
“Why wouldn’t we expect the same sort of thing?” under a Trump administration, the official asks.
Defending Policies
Meanwhile, the environmental group Union of Concerned Scientists says in an emailed statement that while the election increases the risk of backtracking on climate change progress, it plans to “continue to stand strong in defense of science-based health and safety protections.”
It says it plans to work at the state and local levels to boost “our use of clean energy and implement large-scale reductions in global warming pollution” in an effort to “help create a tipping point for action at the national level.”
The election has also prompted environmental groups to urge quick action on certain measures by Obama in the waning days of his administration.
In a Nov. 9 statement, the environmental group Greenpeace says Obama “still has the ultimate say in deciding whether the Dakota Access Pipeline moves forward, and water protectors and allies will continue to fight to ensure it is defeated quickly.” The group argues that Trump will surely try to fast-track the project and other fossil fuel initiatives. “This is all the more reason” for Obama to act to halt the pipeline now, it says. “We will not allow Donald Trump to set back all of the progress we have made on climate,” it says.
And NRDC’s Suh says in her email that supporters need to ensure that Obama -- a strong supporter of tackling climate change -- “does whatever he can in the remaining 70 days of his presidency, to put in place even tougher safeguards for our climate, our public lands and our wildlife.”
http://insideepa.com/daily-news/environmentalists-industries-weigh-next-steps-under-trump-presidency

Return to headline | Return to top
(ACC Mentioned) US Industry Executives Pledge To Work With Trump

Nov 9, 2016 | ICIS

By David Haydon

HOUSTON (ICIS)--US industry groups including the American Chemistry Council (ACC), the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM) and the American Petroleum Institute (API) issued statements Wednesday pledging to work with President-elect Donald Trump’s administration.
“AFPM congratulates President-elect Trump on his historic win last night, as well as all the members of the 115th Congress,” the manufacturers' group said in a statement on Wednesday. “We are hopeful and confident that last night's results represent a new opportunity to enact energy policy that will harness innovation in the refining and petrochemical industries.”
The group's president, Chet Thompson, was one of the 1,100 executives who signed a similar pledge in an open letter from the US National Association of Manufacturers.
The ACC also congratulated Trump on his victory, along with those who won races in the US House of Representatives and the US Senate.
“The business of chemistry will be a partner with leaders in Congress and the Trump/Pence administration to ensure the right policies are in place to support robust and responsible energy and infrastructure development that will keep our industry and our economy on a path to strong growth,” the ACC said. “We hope to work with Congress and the Trump administration to chart a path forward on trade that will help American businesses thrive and benefit American workers.”
The API will hold a post-election press conference call on Thursday at 10:00 Houston time (16:00 GMT) to discuss how the energy industry will work with the new administration.
CEO Jack Gerard said on Wednesday that the API looks “forward to working with the new administration on smart energy policies that protect the United States as the global leader in oil and natural gas production, development and refining”.
http://www.icis.com/resources/news/2016/11/09/10052888/us-industry-executives-pledge-to-work-with-trump/

Return to headline | Return to top

LCSA News- There are no clips to report at this time.

Chemical Management News

New Use Rules for 57 Chemicals, Many Nanotubes, Issued by EPA

Nov 10, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report

By Pat Rizzuto

New use rules for 57 chemicals, including many nanotubes and some perfluorinated compounds, were issued Nov. 9 by the Environmental Protection Agency.
The EPA already has allowed the 57 chemicals to go into production, with protective measures outlined either in consent orders their manufacturers agreed to follow or in premanufacture notices (PMN) the original manufacturers submitted to the agency.
The direct final rules adopt those conditions so they apply would apply to other manufacturers that want to make the same chemical.
Of the 57 chemicals, the agency concluded 34 might pose an unreasonable risk to people or the environment.
The agency controlled those potential risks through what are called Section 5(e) consent orders, named for the section of the Toxic Substances Control Act that authorizes the EPA to issue the binding orders.
The 34 chemicals that the EPA said might pose an unreasonable risk included 10 nanotubes and five perfluorinated chemicals.
Direct Final Regulations
The 57 significant new use rules were issued as direct final regulations. Unless the EPA receives—within 30 days of the rules being published in the Federal Register—a notice of intent to object to one or more of the rules, the 57 regulations will be effective 60 days after the Federal Register notice is filed.
Companies that want to make or use a chemical subject to a new use rule must provide the EPA 90 days notice of that intent. The time allows the EPA to review the intended manufacture or use to determine whether it would pose an unreasonable risk that warrants controls.
The 57 new use rules address chemicals that the EPA reviewed prior to passage of the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act (Pub. L. No. 114-182), which amended TSCA on June 22.
That means the EPA has yet to publish a decision under amended TSCA about a new chemical that potentially poses a risk.

http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=100165267&vname=dennotallissues&fn=100165267&jd=100165267

Return to headline | Return to top
Asbestos Multiple Exposure Cases: When Words Really Matter

Nov 9, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report

By Peter Hayes

Causation continues to be one of the most heavily litigated issues in asbestos suits, especially when more than one source of exposure to cancer-causing substances is involved.
In a case involving an industrial worker who alleges his exposures to both asbestos-containing products and smoking caused his lung cancer, the Seventh Circuit is now considering whether a trial court correctly excluded a key causation expert.
The linchpin of the issue in Charles Krik's suit is whether his expert drew the inadmissible conclusion that Krik's “every exposure” to toxins could have caused his cancer, or if the testimony permissibly concluded the cancer was caused by “cumulative exposure” (Krik v. Exxon Mobil Corp., 7th Cir., No. 15-CV-3112, oral argument 12/6/16).
“Cumulative exposure” considers whether all sources combined could have caused the disease, while the “each and every” theory considers if each individual exposure—even to a single asbestos fiber—is a substantial contributing cause, according to Krik's appeals brief.
A pretrial ruling in the case forbade solicitation of “each and every” testimony.
Asbestos litigation is the longest-running and most expensive mass tort in U.S. history. With other suits like Krik's pending, much more than just semantics are at stake.
Did Court Conflate Concepts?
“The overwhelming majority of courts accept the scientific truth that cumulative exposure causes disease,” Jonathan Ruckdeschel of the Ruckdeschel Law Firm in Ellicott City, Md., told Bloomberg BNA. Ruckdeschel is an asbestos plaintiffs’ attorney not directly involved in the Seventh Circuit case.
But in Krik's case, the trial judge got it wrong by conflating the two concepts and lumping all of the expert's testimony in the inadmissible “every exposure” camp, Ruckdeschel said. “In this case, the trial court was misled by the defense presentation,” he told Bloomberg BNA.
“Krik was exposed to one of the dustiest products in the world,” Ruckdeschel said. “So to suggest that a single fiber had anything to do with the Krik case is absurd.”
Distinction ‘Nonexistent’
But the Coalition for Litigation Justice, a group of insurers that filed a friend of the court brief in the case, says the “supposed distinction between any exposure and cumulative exposure, other than the name, is nonexistent.”
The plaintiff's attorneys in Krik's case are attempting to draw an artificial line between “cumulative” and “any exposure” to try and overturn Judge Manish Shah's exclusion of their main causation testimony, the group says in its brief.
Exxon Mobil Corp., one of two corporate defendants in the case, agrees.
“Judge Shah correctly ruled that [Krik's] ‘cumulative exposure’ theory was mere sophistry,” the company said in its own brief.
Charles Krik worked for decades as a pipefitter and boilerman. He also smoked a pack-and-a-half of cigarettes a day for 30 years. After being diagnosed with lung cancer in 2008, Krik sued multiple parties, including Exxon Mobil and Owens Illinois Inc., alleging his occupational exposure to the asbestos-laden products on their work sites was a synergistic cause of his cancer.
Krik's medical expert, Dr. Arthur Frank, sought to testify at trial that Krik's cumulative workplace exposures to asbestos was a substantial contributing factor in causing his disease.
But Judge Shah, citing a pretrial ruling and Frank's testimony at trial, wouldn't allow it.
In that earlier ruling, the judge initially assigned to the case said that, based on Frank's inability “to quantify the extent of” Krik's asbestos exposure, Krik couldn't introduce “any expert testimony espousing the ‘any exposure’ theory, ‘each and every exposure’ theory, and the ‘single fiber’ theory at trial.”
At trial, Frank admitted during questioning outside of the presence of the jury that he believes every exposure to asbestos fibers is a substantial contributing factor to the cumulative exposure that causes cancer.
Based on that answer, and the pretrial ruling, Judge Shah sustained defense objections when Krik's attorneys asked Frank about his methodology and opinion on the cause of Krik's cancer.
The trial judge also barred Frank from answering when Krik's lawyers asked him whether exposures to asbestos while working for Exxon Mobil or Owens Illinois would have contributed to Krik's illness.
Krik's attorneys said that distinction was significant and Frank should have been allowed to offer his opinion to the jury about the “cumulative” cause of Krik's cancer based on the totality of his workplace exposures at Exxon Mobil and Owens, his medical records and his smoking history.
Not Relevant
Counsel for Krik told Bloomberg BNA Judge Shah got it wrong.
“Judge Shah found that because Dr. Frank held the inadmissible opinions about every exposure within the cumulative exposure being a cause, Dr. Frank's causation opinion had to be excluded,” Krik's attorney Robert McCoy, with Cascino Vaughan Law Offices in Chicago, told Bloomberg BNA.
“But cumulative exposure isn't relevant to the specific defendants,” he said.
“Dr. Frank said cumulative exposure is the cause of asbestos related disease. He didn't say it was connected to his opinions on Owens and Mobil. It has nothing to do with whether each individual exposure is a cause.”
“The admission of Dr. Frank's causation opinion is based on evidence about the exposures for each defendant such as asbestos content, duration, proximity, visible dust, scientific literature about causation, medical studies of similar exposures, latency period, and other evidence,” McCoy said.
“Although Dr. Frank holds an opinion which is not admissible and was not presented to the jury, the issue is whether there is sufficient other basis in the record for admission of his causation opinion.”
‘Re-Packaging’
But the defendants say the trial court got it right and that the “cumulative exposure” theory in this case is simply a “repackaging” of “every exposure.”
“Dr. Frank's repackaging of his testimony to attempt to provide Mobil specific opinions did not succeed,” Exxon Mobil argued in its brief.
“Dr. Frank's failure to consider dose is at the heart of his failure to satisfy the Daubert admissibility test regardless of whether he calls it ‘any fiber’ or a ‘cumulative exposure‘ theory,” ExxonMobil said.
In Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharms., 509 U.S. 579 (1993), the Supreme Court set forth the test for courts to apply in evaluating the reliability of expert evidence.
The Coalition for Litigation Justice agrees that the issue turns on dose.
“Under the any exposure theory, no individual, non-background exposures can be eliminated from causation because they all supposedly contributed to the burden of asbestos in the lungs,” it said.
“Under the cumulative theory, no individual, non-background exposures can be eliminated because supposedly each of them cumulatively contributed to the lung burden.”
“Both theories avoid and do not rely on any estimation of the dose involved from an alleged exposure,” the group of insurers said.
Defense attorney Knight Anderson with Tucker Ellis LLP in Cleveland says the Daubert issues raised by Krik and other cases are important.
Anderson devotes a large part of his practice to products liability, mass tort and toxic tort matters, including asbestos defense.
“It is plaintiff's burden to prove that a defendant was a substantial factor in causing the disease and allowing plaintiffs to meet that burden with unscientific generalizations improperly reverses that burden of proof,” Anderson said.
“An expert opinion blaming all exposures because one can't say which exposure in fact caused it or because you can't exclude any exposure as a possible cause is not a reliable scientific methodology, no matter what language one uses to describe it.”
A ‘Strawman’
Asbestos plaintiffs’ attorney Gilbert Purcell with Brayton Purcell LLC in Novato, Calif., says the “each and every” characterization of the testimony that Krik sought to introduce in this case is a “strawman.”
“Defendants say that there has to be some minimum level of exposure and the plaintiffs haven't proven it. That's a mischaracterization of the science,” Purcell, who has been following the case, said. “Total latent aggregate dose is not ‘each and every.’ ”
“Cumulative exposure is the correct model for carcinogenesis; the pathway by which a carcinogen brings about cancer,” he said. “Cumulative exposure is French for ‘total latent aggregate dose’ of carcinogens.”
Not a Low Dose Case
Ruckdeschel, the other plaintiffs’ lawyer who's looked at the case, says it's significant that the Krik case isn't a low-dose or single fiber case.
“The expert wasn't relying on the abstract concept of ‘each and every.’ He wasn't saying all exposures, no matter how slight will be a substantial contributing factor,” Ruckdeschel said. “The allegedly defective testimony came out on cross-examination: If the disease was caused by cumulative exposure, then all exposures contribute to the disease. That's the scientifically accepted truth.”
“But Dr. Frank was not asked if one fiber was a substantial contributing factor,” Ruckdeschel said. “While hypothetically possible, he didn't say it ever happened.”
Oral argument in the case is set for December 6, 2016.
Counsel for Exxon Mobil and Owens did not respond to requests for comment.
Johnson & Bell represents Exxon Mobil.
Riley Safer Holmes & Cancila LLP represents Owen Illinois.

http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=100165250&vname=dennotallissues&fn=100165250&jd=100165250

Return to headline | Return to top
EPA Approves Herbicide Dicamba For Use On GM Crops

Nov 9, 2016 | Inside EPA

EPA has approved use of the decades-old herbicide dicamba on genetically-modified (GM) cotton and soybean crops in more than 30 states to help farmers combat growing weed resistance to glyphosate-based products, despite environmentalists' claims that the registration will increase use of an older, more toxic, herbicide and spur resistance.
EPA Nov. 9 registered Monsanto's dicamba formulation Xtendimax with Vapor Grip for use on GM cotton and soybean crops, but included “very specific and rigorous” measures to prevent pesticide drift, such as occurred early this year in a series of incidents that the agency is investigating as pesticide misuse.
“This registration is for a formulation of dicamba that contains an additive that reduces volatility” and drift, EPA says in a Nov. 9 statement. “This final decision is designed to ensure that weed resistance is successfully managed, including reporting by the registrant to EPA of any suspected resistance, as well as remediation and grower education.”
EPA registered the product despite environmentalists' criticism that allowing use of older herbicides on GM crops drastically increases use of more toxic substances. Advocates have argued that dicamba poses risks to endangered species, migratory birds, and pollinators, and that EPA's risk review ignored evidence of cancer risks to humans.
The pesticide industry and state regulators have largely backed EPA’s April 1 proposed registration and called for easing proposed use restrictions. But this summer, EPA officials pledged they would include strict precautions in any future registration after incidents of dicamba misuse damaged crops through pesticide drift.
In August, EPA issued a compliance advisory “High Number of Complaints Related to Alleged Misuse of Dicamba Raises Concerns.” Agency officials have said the complaints involve use of generic dicamba products that are prone to moving off target to nearby fields through either spray drift or volatilization, and that those products were marketed for uses other than directly on GM cotton and soybeans.
The registration of the dicamba formulation is time limited, which will allow the agency to change the registration to address any problems that occur with either pesticide drift or resistant weeds. The registration includes a host of limits intended to prevent drift, including no aerial application, no application in winds greater than 15 miles per hour, as well as requirements for use of certain nozzles and buffer zones to prevent spray drift.
To address risk of weed resistance, EPA requires the pesticide registrant to report any suspected weed resistance to the agency, and also includes requirements for remediation and grower education.
http://insideepa.com/news-briefs/epa-approves-herbicide-dicamba-use-gm-crops

Return to headline | Return to top
California Sticks With Plastic Bag Ban, Legalizes Marijuana

Nov 10, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report

By Carolyn Whetzel

California voters rejected the plastic bag industry's effort to repeal state legislation banning the single-use carry-out bags used by retailers, but voted down a measure to redirect a bag fee to environmental programs.
The two ballot measures, Propositions 65 and 67, were among four statewide initiatives on the Nov. 8 ballot with environmental implications.
Proposition 53, a constitutional amendment to require voter approve for certain state-financed projects, failed, but voters passed Proposition 64, legalizing the recreational use of marijuana and regulate its cultivation and generate tax revenue to prevent environmental harm.
First Statewide Bag Ban Affirmed
Fifty-two percent of the electorate said yes to Proposition 67, preserving the 2014 plastic bag law (S.B. 270) and 55.4 percent voted against Proposition 65, a measure that sought to block a provision of the law allowing retailers from keeping a 10 cent bag fee for offering customers paper or reusable bags.
Proposition 65, which would have redirected the bag fee to environmental programs, was a competing measure meant to confuse voters, Clean Water Action California Director Miriam Gordon said in a written statement.
“The victory preserves the United States’ first statewide bag ban and will protect California's environment and wildlife,” Clean Water Action said.
Proposition 67 delayed implementation of S.B. 270, which was set be phased in beginning July 1, 2015.
More than 150 communities covering 40 percent of the state have already adopted some type of bag ban. Passage of the measure means retailers throughout the state must immediately stop offering single-use plastic bags, the state's Department of Resources, Recycling and Recovery said.
The law applies to most grocery stores, convenience markets, retail stores with pharmacies and liquor stores.
“With the narrow approval of Proposition 67 California voters have unfortunately set themselves up for a serious case of buyer's remorse,” the American Progressive Bag Alliance, the industry that sponsored the measure, said in a written statement. “Plastic bag bans don't meaningfully reduce overall waste or litter or provide a positive environmental impact, but they do threaten tens of thousands of American manufacturing jobs, hit consumers in the wallet and drive people to use less environmentally friend carryout options.”
The single-use bags are “one hundred percent recyclable” and high reused, the industry group said.
Proposition 64
Proposition 64, a measure to legalize recreational use of marijuana that includes standards to guard against environmental harms from growing cannabis, sailed to victory with 56 percent of the vote. The measure also means that 20 percent of the revenue derived from taxing the sale and cultivation of marijuana will help fund the cleanup and prevention of environmental damage stemming from illegal marijuana crops, including illegal water use and diversion, and pesticide pollution.
Voters rejected a proposed constitutional amendment, Proposition 53, that sought to require voter approval for any single project with a state revenue bond over $2 billion. Proposition 53, which opponents including California Governor Jerry Brown's (D) said could interfere with state and local water projects, failed with only 48.5 percent of the vote.
County Ban on Fracking
In Monterey County, voters approved Measure Z, banning the use of hydraulic fracturing, acidizing and other high intensity oil and gas extraction activities. Passed by 56.2 percent to 44.2 percent, the measure makes Monterey the seventh county in California to ban fracking.
And Monterey is the first major oil producing county in California to ban fracking, Protect Monterey County, the coalition that worked to pass the measure said in a written statement. The oil companies and other industry groups spent nearly $5.5 million trying to defeat the measure, the grassroots coalition said.
The ban applies to new oil and gas wells in the county, not the 1,500 existing oil and wells, mostly in the San Ardo, Calif., oil field operated primarily by Chevron Corp. and Aera Energy LLC.
Measure Z also phases out over five years the use of wastewater injection and wastewater ponds and requires oil companies to clean all wastewater used.

http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=100165252&vname=dennotallissues&fn=100165252&jd=100165252

Return to headline | Return to top
EU Panel Closes in on Final Endocrine Disruptor Criteria

Nov 10, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report

By Stephen Gardner

A regulatory committee of European Union country representatives could clear the way in mid-November for the European Commission to adopt criteria that will enable the legal identification of substances that disrupt the endocrine—or hormones—system.
The commission, the EU's executive body, proposed in June that a substance should be considered an endocrine disruptor if it “has an endocrine mode of action” that is causally linked to “an adverse effect relevant for human health.” The definition was based on a 2002 definition from the World Health Organization.
The commission confirmed in a statement to Bloomberg BNA Nov. 9 that its proposal for the criteria has been modified since June, but said that the “general approach followed by the commission in the draft criteria presented in June 2016 is not changed.”
The commission said a regulatory committee would discuss the criteria Nov. 18.
Biocides And Pesticides
Criteria for the identification of endocrine-disrupting substances are required for the 2012 Biocidal Products Regulation (BPR, (EU) No. 528/2012) and the 2009 Plant Protection Products Regulation ((EC) No. 1107/2009).
The laws would require separate amending acts to be adopted to implement the criteria. Because they are subject to different EU regulatory procedures, the amending act for the Plant Protection Products Regulation would require approval by a vote of the regulatory committee, while the commission can adopt the amending act to the Biocidal Products Regulation after the regulatory committee has given a nonbinding opinion.
It is unclear if the regulatory committee would vote or adopt a nonbinding opinion Nov. 18.
The commission said it “intends to progress as soon as possible on the criteria, and counts on the support of all parties involved.”
Criteria Criticized
The criteria should have been published by the end of 2013, but in late 2015 the commission was found to have breached EU law over the delay.
Under the Biocidal Products Regulation and the Plant Protection Products Regulation, proven endocrine disruptors would be banned. Environmental groups accused the commission of undermining that provision by publishing criteria that would consider a substance an endocrine disruptor only if its “endocrine mode of action” is causally linked to an adverse health effect.
Environmental groups also have criticized the amended version of the criteria.
Vito Buonsante, an advisor with environmental lawyers ClientEarth, told Bloomberg BNA Nov. 9 that for a substance to be labeled an endocrine disruptor under the revised criteria, “basically you need to prove that the adverse effect is caused by the mode of action,” which was a “high burden of proof.”

http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=100165255&vname=dennotallissues&fn=100165255&jd=100165255

Return to headline | Return to top
European Union Agency Opens Consultations on Chemicals

Nov 10, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report

By Stephen Gardner

The European Chemicals Agency published calls for comments or evidence on proposed or potential regulatory measures that could affect companies that use chromium compounds, diarsenic trioxide, diarsenic pentaoxide or recycled rubber granules.
The agency called for comments Nov. 9 on authorization bids by companies that want to continue to use hazardous chromium compounds, which are being phased out under the European Union's REACH law (Regulation No. 1907/2006 on the registration, evaluation and authorization of chemicals).
The authorizations would cover 21 uses of chromium trioxide and other chromium compounds, which are widely used in a range of industrial sectors for chrome plating and other applications. Without continued-use authorizations, using the substances in manufacturing processes in the EU will be prohibited after September 2017.
In addition, the chemicals agency said comments could be submitted on authorization requests for one use of 2,2’-dichloro-4,4’-methylenedianiline, and seven uses of 1,2-dichloroethane. The substances also are being phased out under REACH and can no longer be used in the EU without authorization after November 2017.
In all cases, responses to the calls for comments should focus on potentially safer alternatives to the substances, the agency said.
All the authorization consultations are open through Jan. 9, 2017. In total, phaseout decisions under REACH have been made for 31 hazardous substances, and 59 specific continued-use authorizations have been finalized.
No Further Action Recommended
Comments can be submitted on a draft decision to not take any further action to restrict the presence of diarsenic trioxide and diarsenic pentaoxide in products imported into the European Union, ECHA said.
Diarsenic trioxide and diarsenic pentoxide are among the 31 hazardous substances for which phaseout has been agreed under to REACH. Their use in the EU without authorization has been illegal since May 2015. REACH does not prevent the substances being used outside the EU, or being imported into the bloc incorporated in products, however.
Diarsenic trioxide is used in applications such as glass production, pharmaceuticals and electronics, and it is “not clear” if diarsenic pentoxide is still actively used in production processes, ECHA said.
In a background paper to the consultation, the chemicals agency said such imports might be taking place, but for imported products “there is no use of these substances that would lead to a non-adequately controlled risk,” and therefore no additional restrictions are necessary.
Tire Crumb
The chemicals agency also called for evidence on the use of recycled rubber granules in artificial sports pitches. ECHA said it was asked by the European Commission, the EU's executive arm, to “make a preliminary evaluation if recycled rubber granules used as infill material in synthetic turf may pose a risk to human health.”
The material could contain hazardous substances such as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, and could present a risk if particles are inhaled or absorbed into the skin, ECHA said.
The agency said it was “collaborating with” U.S. agencies and with the International Federation of Football Associations on research into the safety of recycled tire crumb, which has been inconclusively linked with the release of toxic substances.
The diarsenic trioxide, diarsenic pentoxide and recycled rubber granules consultations also are open through Jan. 9, 2017.

http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=100165242&vname=dennotallissues&fn=100165242&jd=100165242

Return to headline | Return to top

Energy News

(ACC Mentioned) Trump's Stunning Victory Puts Major Obama Initiatives in Doubt, Signals All-of-The-Above Energy

Nov 9, 2016 | Natural Gas Intelligence

By Carolyn Davis, David Bradley, Charlie Passut, and Alex Steis

Republican Donald J. Trump will take office in January after scoring a major upset in the presidential election Tuesday, defeating Hillary Clinton.
Political pundits said major climate change, air and water policies that were enacted during the Obama administration now are in doubt, if Trump moves forward with some of the proposals he outlined during a grueling campaign. Among other things, he promised to eliminate 70% of federal regulations, cancel the global climate agreement negotiated last year and bring back energy jobs lost in coal country (see Daily GPI, Nov. 8).
The president-elect has championed every form of U.S. energy development, even those that compete against each other, like coal and natural gas. He has proposed allowing states to regulate energy development over the federal agencies and opening up more federal lands to drilling.
His transition team is said to be eyeing Continental Resources Inc. CEO and founder Harold Hamm, a major GOP contributor and Trump adviser, as energy secretary.
"We are looking forward to President Trump doing what he promised, which is to undo many of the onerous regulations that have plagued our industry throughout an Obama presidency," Hamm said. However, he demurred during an interview on CNBC Wednesday when asked about whether he had discussed the appointment, noting he had a company to run.
"With Democrats no longer able to filibuster nominees, Trump should have little trouble getting his picks confirmed," Politico.com said Wednesday. "Energy priorities like pipeline construction may get prominent billing in any Trump infrastructure bill, alongside likely rollbacks of environmental rules that he could not achieve without cooperation from Congress."
Trump's stunning victory could lead to a reversal of several big energy rules now tied up in the courts, including the Clean Power Plan (CPP) and Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule.
Also potentially lost could be regulations tied up in court that are designed to reduce methane emissions from hydraulic fracturing.
Friendlier Administration, Say Experts
Lawyers at Baker Botts LLP see a Trump administration as being friendlier to oil, natural gas and coal development, infrastructure buildout and energy exports, while slashing environmental policy enacted by President Obama.
“The election of Donald Trump is likely to have a considerable impact on U.S. environmental policy as President-elect Trump has made no secret of his belief that American business is overregulated,” said Baker Botts partner Steven L. Leifer. "President-elect Trump has said he will cut funding to the Environmental Protection Agency and roll back several recent EPA initiatives, including the Clean Power Plan and the Waters of the United States rule,” otherwise known as WOTUS.
Leifer added that Trump's belief that there is too much frivolous litigation by environmental groups means the country could see efforts to shift enforcement of the coal ash rule out of the hands of private parties and into the purview of state regulatory agencies.
Trump will also likely remove impediments for U.S energy development and infrastructure. “President-elect Trump has said that America should focus on developing its fossil fuel reserves to achieve energy independence,” which may lead to withdrawing the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) rule, “now in litigation, purporting to regulate hydraulic fracturing on federal lands.
“As well, President-elect Trump has expressed a more favorable attitude towards energy projects such as the Keystone Pipeline," Leifer said. "With respect to federal lands, he favors keeping them in federal hands, which places him at odds with mainstream Republicans who support turning over ownership of a portion of those lands to the states.”
In fact, on the campaign trail this past May, Trump told a Bismarck, ND, energy industry audience that one of the first things he planned to do in his "first 100 days" agenda in the White House was to invite TransCanada Corp. to re-apply for the Keystone XL oil pipeline, which he plans to approve, but on renegotiated terms that would give the U.S. treasury a lot more money for the green light (see Daily GPI, May 26).
TransCanada officials on Wednesday said Trump's election could be the spur Keystone needs. The Obama administration rejected the northern segment of the pipeline last year, which would have carried up to 730,000 b/d to southern Nebraska, then connect the supplies to systems moving south (see Shale Daily, Nov. 6). The pipeline giant said it was "evaluating ways to convince the new administration on the benefits, the jobs and the tax revenues this project brings to the table. TransCanada remains fully committed to building Keystone XL."
Baker Botts partner Jason Bennett sees a boost for oil, natural gas and coal development. “We anticipate an initial period of uncertainty while energy policy is more closely formulated and direction is provided to the agencies. Federal agencies will likely continue current Obama administration policies until directed otherwise," he said. “We anticipate that President-elect Trump will provide support for oil and gas drilling and the coal industry as sources of high wage middle class jobs.”
Bennett also believes the energy export process will be streamlined under Trump. “A likely reduction of the constraints on U.S. exports of hydrocarbons,” including more permissive liquefied natural gas export policies. “Over the medium term, a reduction in regulation in the energy sphere and a promotion of investment in energy infrastructure and activities."
Bracewell LLC's Policy Resolution Group (PRG) experts said Wednesday that Trump's election was a "watershed moment" that would change politics as the country knows it going forward.
Trump is "clearly" in favor of enhanced exploration and production in the United States and the impact on domestic energy security policy, said Bracewell's Scott Segal. Trump's bullishness on domestic energy is seen in his key energy adviser Hamm. And Trump already has reached out to the industry at recent energy conferences, "delivering a message of strong development," that would include lifting restrictions on developing public lands. He also favors dropping EPA authority over hydraulic fracturing and other shale processes.
"Let me be clear about this," Segal said. "Mr. Trump is not a fan of the EPA or its proposed regulations on greenhouse gases," including the CPP, now facing court challenges.
"I am certain CPP will be revoked, the only question is how...I'm quite confident in hearing from those close to the campaign that they do intend to make good on that promise...They will do it in a way to withstand legal scrutiny..." I think the environmental community will have a hard time challenging that. EPA is legally required to do CPP, but that's an uphill battle."
PRG partner Salo Zelermyer said during the Bracewell webinar that as far as environmental overreach, CPP "will be issue No. 1" for the incoming Trump administration. Upstream methane rules not yet final also "are on the chopping block," along with the BLM fracturing regulations. In addition, WOTUS rules are causing "much angst," and could be rolled back.
Pro-Business, Pro-Fossil Fuels
"There are few details regarding a likely Trump energy strategy, but clearly, President Trump will be pro-business and thus pro-fossil fuels," said experts at ESAI Energy LLC. "Furthermore, we expect an approach that tends toward 'energy‐autarky.' That is, policies or nonpolicies that encourage the development of domestic energy sources with an objective of greater self‐sufficiency and less reliance on foreign sources..."
According to ESAI, the global oil market's "most pressing issue today" is the potential for a deal by the end of this month to hold oil production flat by the 14-member Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, OPEC. "As the election results sink in, one can connect this dot with Mr. Trump's election, albeit with a loose, perhaps easily breakable connector."
Trump's election "subtly shifts the balance of power in the oil market," according to ESAI. "A Trump presidency that is pro-business will encourage oil development, permit pipelines, reduce corporate profit taxes and generally make U.S. oil more competitive. This is a distinct departure from the anticipated climate friendly Obama-Clinton policies."
Many analysts may believe weaker post-election oil prices will encourage an OPEC deal, but that may not be the case.
"OPEC’s power is in its ability to keep producing at low prices," ESAI noted. "Raising oil prices will only strengthen the U.S. oil sector, intensifying competition, with an industry that now has the full backing of the president and a Republican Congress. This means if a good OPEC deal is unreachable, the Saudis are more likely to walk away under the pretense of taking a 'wait and see' attitude regarding the new president, while continuing to keep the pressure on U.S. shale.
"This also may give the Kingdom a bargaining chip down the road when regional security issues come up between the Saudis and the new president. So, now may not be the time for an OPEC deal. If indeed an OPEC deal falls off the table or is agreed in word but not deed, the recovery in crude prices will be delayed and constrained in 2017."
Dodd-Frank Headed for Chopping Block?
Among the regulatory items apparently destined for the chopping block is the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, the sweeping legislation passed six years ago in the wake of the Great Recession (see Daily GPI, July 22, 2010).
Of particular interest to the energy industry, the law marked the first time that the over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives market would be regulated by the federal government. It required OTC transactions to be traded on regulated exchanges much like stock, and to be cleared in clearinghouses in order to limit excessive speculation in markets. But, from the beginning, the road to full implementation of the controversial regulation was a rocky one (see Daily GPI, May 25, 2011; Nov. 22, 2010; Sept. 30, 2010).
"President-elect Trump has called for the total repeal or a partial dismantling of Dodd-Frank," Baker Botts partner Jonathan Shapiro said Wednesday morning. "If that remains the plan, it is not at all clear today how or when he could get that done; what, if any, subset of Dodd-Frank would remain standing; and whether that process would bring still other reforms or other legislative accommodations."
One possible successor to Dodd-Frank is the Financial CHOICE Act, which was introduced by Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-TX), chairman of the House Financial Services Committee. Hensarling, who was returned for another term in Tuesday's election, has said the bill would end Dodd-Frank's "taxpayer-funded bailouts of large financial institutions; relieves banks that elect to be strongly capitalized from growth-strangling regulation that slows the economy and harms consumers; imposes tougher penalties on those who commit financial fraud; and demands greater accountability from Washington regulators." The Financial Services Committee passed the bill in a 30-26 vote Sept. 13.
If it is still in limbo when Trump takes office, his administration would likely remove government roadblocks to the 1,200 mile Dakota Access oil pipeline. Following up on protests from the Standing Rock Sioux Native American tribe, Obama has stalled the project, directing the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to see if there is a way of bypassing the contested path of the pipeline which is 70% completed.
The president-elect likely will have the opportunity of nominating two Republicans to fill the two vacant seats on the five-member Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, naming one of them to be chairman. In addition the term of Commissioner Colette D. Honorable will expire in June, 2017, giving him the opportunity to name a third Republican. Current Democratic Chairman Norman Bay has pursued aggressive enforcement policies at FERC, rendering decisions and high-dollar penalties against traders from banks and industry.
Reaction and Consequences
"The natural gas pipeline industry looks forward to working with President-elect Trump and the new Congress to ensure that our nation’s energy policies continue to facilitate the development of natural gas and the pipeline infrastructure needed to transport this abundant, clean-burning, domestic fuel to American consumers," said Don Santa, CEO of the Interstate Natural Gas Association of America.
"Natural gas is critical to rebuilding our manufacturing economy and lowering consumer energy costs. Our industry stands ready to help America reach its energy potential -- while creating jobs and economic prosperity -- by continuing to serve as the indispensable link between natural gas producers and consumers."
The American Chemistry Council said Trump's victory was "a clear call by the American people that they demand the kind of change that will produce results in Washington and economic growth across the country.
“Thanks to our country's vast shale resources, the chemical industry is driving a manufacturing renaissance and can be a major contributor to growing our nation's economy and creating good, high-paying jobs that can sustain communities and provide families with a secure livelihood," the American Chemistry Council said. "The business of chemistry will be a partner with leaders in Congress and the Trump/Pence administration to ensure the right policies are in place to support robust and responsible energy and infrastructure development that will keep our industry and our economy on a path to strong growth...
"The $175 billion in investment in new factories and expanded production capacity by chemical producers, thanks to domestic shale gas, has positioned the U.S. to substantially grow its role as a premier supplier of essential materials for markets around the world, but reaching that potential will require sound trade frameworks. We agree that trade should be fair, and also know firsthand that trade can unlock potential in our economy and create jobs here at home. We hope to work with Congress and the Trump administration to chart a path forward on trade that will help American businesses thrive and benefit American workers."
Western Energy Alliance (WEA) President Tim Wigley said the organization "is overjoyed that we will not be experiencing a third term of the Obama administration. President-elect Trump understands that overregulation is killing American opportunity, and his plans to spur development of domestic shale oil and natural gas will create hundreds of thousands of blue-collar jobs while delivering widespread prosperity and low energy prices for consumers.
"We look forward to working with President-elect Trump's administration to roll back many unlawful regulatory orders and to a federal government that is not beholden to the environmental lobby while ignoring the working class," Wigley said. He later added that the WEA anticipates "good policies moving forward such as the Keystone XL and Dakota Access pipelines, liquefied natural gas exports, and energy projects on non-park, non-wilderness federal lands."
Expect the Trump administration to be "unpredictable" and "think outside the box," said Bracewell’s Segal. Trump is likely to seek advice not only from the regulatory community but also from the business community to refine his agenda.
"I believe his administration will rely heavily on corporate America" to grasp the issues that have limited economic growth in the country, Segal said. Trump's Cabinet likely will include "guys that will have real world experience..."
Former Texas Republican Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, who also discussed the incoming administration during the Bracewell webinar, discussed the role for Congress during a Trump administration.
"I definitely think Congress will be a major force," she said. "Trump is an outsider, he ran as an outsider, he won as an outsider," but Congress is going to act as a governor to control his actions in shaping the promises he made. The Republican members of Congress and Trump "mostly agree on the economic policies...Congress has to work to shape that into what will be a good result…”
"My Republican colleagues and I took the message to the international community last year that the American people do not support President Obama's climate commitments as part of the Paris agreement, but nobody wanted to believe us," said Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK), who chairs the Environment and Public Works Committee.
"The message can no longer be ignored: Americans do not support it when their president sidesteps Congress. They also do not support economically damaging mandates that have no measurable impact to climate change. The president's 'commitment' has been opposed by the majority of Congress and its legal soundness is questioned by the Supreme Court.
"Now a Republican administration will fill the vacant seat on the Supreme Court, which will decide the final fate of the Clean Power Plan. If the president's carbon mandates were in place, the president's Paris commitment would fall short by 45%, but now it could be as great as 60%."
Inhofe said he "warned" Secretary of State John Kerry earlier this month that a future administration would have "numerous options to forego President Obama's political commitments" under the climate agreement. "The fact that it will soon be in force is of no consequence. President Obama's climate legacy has been solidified with Tuesday's election results and will be remembered for being built on hollow commitments."
Environmental groups also weighed in. Sierra Club urged donations to fight Trump’s agenda, while American Rivers on Wednesday underscored "the importance of clean water and healthy rivers to the well-being of all Americans" and vowed to safeguard clean water supplies and defend rivers from harmful development.
"Whether you are a Republican, Democrat, Green or Independent, we all need clean and safe water," President Bob Irvin said. "Nothing in the election results changes the fact that clean water and healthy rivers are more important than ever for our families and communities. As a nation, we need to focus on what unites us, not divides us. At American Rivers, we will redouble our efforts to protect and restore rivers because theyare essential to our nation’s economy and environment, and the health and well-being of every American."
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/108380-trumps-stunning-victory-puts-major-obama-initiatives-in-doubt-signals-all-of-the-above-energy

Return to headline | Return to top
(ACC Mentioned) Trump ‘Clearly’ Favors E&P, Less Regulatory Oversight, Say Experts

Nov 9, 2016 | Natural Gas Intelligence

By Carolyn Davis

President-elect Donald J. Trump, set to take office following a stunning upset of Hillary Clinton, is poised to sweep away renewable energy initiatives and stringent oversight launched by the Obama administration and enact an all-of-the-above energy strategy, experts said Wednesday.
Political pundits said major climate change, air and water policies that were enacted during the Obama administration now are in doubt, if Trump moves forward with some of the proposals he outlined during a grueling campaign. Among other things, he promised to eliminate 70% of federal regulations, cancel the global climate agreement negotiated last year and bring back energy jobs lost in coal country (see Shale Daily, Nov. 8).
The president-elect has championed every form of U.S. energy development, even those that compete against each other, like coal and natural gas. He has proposed allowing states to regulate energy development over the federal agencies and opening up more federal lands to drilling.
His transition team is said to be eyeing Continental Resources Inc. CEO and founder Harold Hamm, a major GOP contributor and Trump adviser, as energy secretary.
"We are looking forward to President Trump doing what he promised, which is to undo many of the onerous regulations that have plagued our industry throughout an Obama presidency," Hamm said. However, he demurred during an interview on CNBC Wednesday when asked about whether he had discussed the appointment, noting he had a company to run.
"With Democrats no longer able to filibuster nominees, Trump should have little trouble getting his picks confirmed," Politico.com said Wednesday. "Energy priorities like pipeline construction may get prominent billing in any Trump infrastructure bill, alongside likely rollbacks of environmental rules that he could not achieve without cooperation from Congress."
Trump's stunning victory could lead to a reversal of several big energy rules now tied up in the courts, including the Clean Power Plan (CPP) and Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule.
Also potentially lost could be regulations tied up in court that are designed to reduce methane emissions from hydraulic fracturing.
Friendlier Administration, Say Experts
Lawyers at Baker Botts LLP see a Trump administration as being friendlier to oil, natural gas and coal development, infrastructure buildout and energy exports, while slashing environmental policy enacted by President Obama.
“The election of Donald Trump is likely to have a considerable impact on U.S. environmental policy as President-elect Trump has made no secret of his belief that American business is overregulated,” said Baker Botts partner Steven L. Leifer. "President-elect Trump has said he will cut funding to the Environmental Protection Agency and roll back several recent EPA initiatives, including the Clean Power Plan and the Waters of the United States rule,” otherwise known as WOTUS.
Leifer added that Trump's belief that there is too much frivolous litigation by environmental groups means the country could see efforts to shift enforcement of the coal ash rule out of the hands of private parties and into the purview of state regulatory agencies.
Trump will also likely remove impediments for U.S energy development and infrastructure. “President-elect Trump has said that America should focus on developing its fossil fuel reserves to achieve energy independence,” which may lead to withdrawing the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) rule, “now in litigation, purporting to regulate hydraulic fracturing on federal lands.
“As well, President-elect Trump has expressed a more favorable attitude towards energy projects such as the Keystone Pipeline," Leifer said. "With respect to federal lands, he favors keeping them in federal hands, which places him at odds with mainstream Republicans who support turning over ownership of a portion of those lands to the states.”
In fact, on the campaign trail this past May, Trump told a Bismarck, ND, energy industry audience that one of the first things he planned to do in his "first 100 days" agenda in the White House was to invite TransCanada Corp. to re-apply for the Keystone XL oil pipeline, which he plans to approve, but on renegotiated terms that would give the U.S. treasury a lot more money for the green light (see Daily GPI, May 26).
TransCanada officials on Wednesday said Trump's election could be the spur Keystone needs. The Obama administration rejected the northern segment of the pipeline last year, which would have carried up to 730,000 b/d to southern Nebraska, then connect the supplies to systems moving south (see Shale Daily, Nov. 6). The pipeline giant said it was "evaluating ways to convince the new administration on the benefits, the jobs and the tax revenues this project brings to the table. TransCanada remains fully committed to building Keystone XL."
Baker Botts partner Jason Bennett sees a boost for oil, natural gas and coal development. “We anticipate an initial period of uncertainty while energy policy is more closely formulated and direction is provided to the agencies. Federal agencies will likely continue current Obama administration policies until directed otherwise," he said. “We anticipate that President-elect Trump will provide support for oil and gas drilling and the coal industry as sources of high wage middle class jobs.”
Bennett also believes the energy export process will be streamlined under Trump. “A likely reduction of the constraints on U.S. exports of hydrocarbons,” including more permissive liquefied natural gas export policies. “Over the medium term, a reduction in regulation in the energy sphere and a promotion of investment in energy infrastructure and activities."
Bracewell LLC's Policy Resolution Group (PRG) experts said Wednesday that Trump's election was a "watershed moment" that would change politics as the country knows it going forward.
Trump is "clearly" in favor of enhanced exploration and production in the United States and the impact on domestic energy security policy, said Bracewell's Scott Segal. Trump's bullishness on domestic energy is seen in his key energy adviser Hamm. And Trump already has reached out to the industry at recent energy conferences, "delivering a message of strong development," that would include lifting restrictions on developing public lands. He also favors dropping EPA authority over hydraulic fracturing and other shale processes.
"Let me be clear about this," Segal said. "Mr. Trump is not a fan of the EPA or its proposed regulations on greenhouse gases," including the CPP, now facing court challenges.
"I am certain CPP will be revoked, the only question is how...I'm quite confident in hearing from those close to the campaign that they do intend to make good on that promise...They will do it in a way to withstand legal scrutiny..." I think the environmental community will have a hard time challenging that. EPA is legally required to do CPP, but that's an uphill battle."
PRG partner Salo Zelermyer said during the Bracewell webinar that as far as environmental overreach, CPP "will be issue No. 1" for the incoming Trump administration. Upstream methane rules not yet final also "are on the chopping block," along with the BLM fracturing regulations. In addition, WOTUS rules are causing "much angst," and could be rolled back.
Pro-Business, Pro-Fossil Fuels
"There are few details regarding a likely Trump energy strategy, but clearly, President Trump will be pro-business and thus pro-fossil fuels," said experts at ESAI Energy LLC. "Furthermore, we expect an approach that tends toward 'energy‐autarky.' That is, policies or nonpolicies that encourage the development of domestic energy sources with an objective of greater self‐sufficiency and less reliance on foreign sources..."
According to ESAI, the global oil market's "most pressing issue today" is the potential for a deal by the end of this month to hold oil production flat by the 14-member Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, OPEC. "As the election results sink in, one can connect this dot with Mr. Trump's election, albeit with a loose, perhaps easily breakable connector."
Trump's election "subtly shifts the balance of power in the oil market," according to ESAI. "A Trump presidency that is pro-business will encourage oil development, permit pipelines, reduce corporate profit taxes and generally make U.S. oil more competitive. This is a distinct departure from the anticipated climate friendly Obama-Clinton policies."
Many analysts may believe weaker post-election oil prices will encourage an OPEC deal, but that may not be the case.
"OPEC’s power is in its ability to keep producing at low prices," ESAI noted. "Raising oil prices will only strengthen the U.S. oil sector, intensifying competition, with an industry that now has the full backing of the president and a Republican Congress. This means if a good OPEC deal is unreachable, the Saudis are more likely to walk away under the pretense of taking a 'wait and see' attitude regarding the new president, while continuing to keep the pressure on U.S. shale.
"This also may give the Kingdom a bargaining chip down the road when regional security issues come up between the Saudis and the new president. So, now may not be the time for an OPEC deal. If indeed an OPEC deal falls off the table or is agreed in word but not deed, the recovery in crude prices will be delayed and constrained in 2017."
Dodd-Frank Headed for Chopping Block?
Among the regulatory items apparently destined for the chopping block is the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, the sweeping legislation passed six years ago in the wake of the Great Recession (see Daily GPI, July 22, 2010).
Of particular interest to the energy industry, the law marked the first time that the over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives market would be regulated by the federal government. It required OTC transactions to be traded on regulated exchanges much like stock, and to be cleared in clearinghouses in order to limit excessive speculation in markets. But, from the beginning, the road to full implementation of the controversial regulation was a rocky one (see Daily GPI, May 25, 2011; Nov. 22, 2010; Sept. 30, 2010).
"President-elect Trump has called for the total repeal or a partial dismantling of Dodd-Frank," Baker Botts partner Jonathan Shapiro said Wednesday morning. "If that remains the plan, it is not at all clear today how or when he could get that done; what, if any, subset of Dodd-Frank would remain standing; and whether that process would bring still other reforms or other legislative accommodations."
One possible successor to Dodd-Frank is the Financial CHOICE Act, which was introduced by Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-TX), chairman of the House Financial Services Committee. Hensarling, who was returned for another term in Tuesday's election, has said the bill would end Dodd-Frank's "taxpayer-funded bailouts of large financial institutions; relieves banks that elect to be strongly capitalized from growth-strangling regulation that slows the economy and harms consumers; imposes tougher penalties on those who commit financial fraud; and demands greater accountability from Washington regulators." The Financial Services Committee passed the bill in a 30-26 vote Sept. 13.
If it is still in limbo when Trump takes office, his administration would likely remove government roadblocks to the 1,200 mile Dakota Access oil pipeline. Following up on protests from the Standing Rock Sioux Native American tribe, Obama has stalled the project, directing the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to see if there is a way of bypassing the contested path of the pipeline which is 70% completed.
The president-elect likely will have the opportunity of nominating two Republicans to fill the two vacant seats on the five-member Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, naming one of them to be chairman. In addition the term of Commissioner Colette D. Honorable will expire in June, 2017, giving him the opportunity to name a third Republican. Current Democratic Chairman Norman Bay has pursued aggressive enforcement policies at FERC, rendering decisions and high-dollar penalties against traders from banks and industry.
Reaction and Consequences
"The natural gas pipeline industry looks forward to working with President-elect Trump and the new Congress to ensure that our nation’s energy policies continue to facilitate the development of natural gas and the pipeline infrastructure needed to transport this abundant, clean-burning, domestic fuel to American consumers," said Don Santa, CEO of the Interstate Natural Gas Association of America.
"Natural gas is critical to rebuilding our manufacturing economy and lowering consumer energy costs. Our industry stands ready to help America reach its energy potential -- while creating jobs and economic prosperity -- by continuing to serve as the indispensable link between natural gas producers and consumers."
The American Chemistry Council said Trump's victory was "a clear call by the American people that they demand the kind of change that will produce results in Washington and economic growth across the country.
“Thanks to our country's vast shale resources, the chemical industry is driving a manufacturing renaissance and can be a major contributor to growing our nation's economy and creating good, high-paying jobs that can sustain communities and provide families with a secure livelihood," the American Chemistry Council said. "The business of chemistry will be a partner with leaders in Congress and the Trump/Pence administration to ensure the right policies are in place to support robust and responsible energy and infrastructure development that will keep our industry and our economy on a path to strong growth…
"The $175 billion in investment in new factories and expanded production capacity by chemical producers, thanks to domestic shale gas, has positioned the U.S. to substantially grow its role as a premier supplier of essential materials for markets around the world, but reaching that potential will require sound trade frameworks. We agree that trade should be fair, and also know firsthand that trade can unlock potential in our economy and create jobs here at home. We hope to work with Congress and the Trump administration to chart a path forward on trade that will help American businesses thrive and benefit American workers."
Western Energy Alliance (WEA) President Tim Wigley said the organization "is overjoyed that we will not be experiencing a third term of the Obama administration. President-elect Trump understands that overregulation is killing American opportunity, and his plans to spur development of domestic shale oil and natural gas will create hundreds of thousands of blue-collar jobs while delivering widespread prosperity and low energy prices for consumers.
"We look forward to working with President-elect Trump's administration to roll back many unlawful regulatory orders and to a federal government that is not beholden to the environmental lobby while ignoring the working class," Wigley said. He later added that the WEA anticipates "good policies moving forward such as the Keystone XL and Dakota Access pipelines, liquefied natural gas exports, and energy projects on non-park, non-wilderness federal lands."
Expect the Trump administration to be "unpredictable" and "think outside the box," said Bracewell’s Segal. Trump is likely to seek advice not only from the regulatory community but also from the business community to refine his agenda.
"I believe his administration will rely heavily on corporate America" to grasp the issues that have limited economic growth in the country, Segal said. Trump's Cabinet likely will include "guys that will have real world experience..."
Former Texas Republican Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, who also discussed the incoming administration during the Bracewell webinar, discussed the role for Congress during a Trump administration.
"I definitely think Congress will be a major force," she said. "Trump is an outsider, he ran as an outsider, he won as an outsider," but Congress is going to act as a governor to control his actions in shaping the promises he made. The Republican members of Congress and Trump "mostly agree on the economic policies...Congress has to work to shape that into what will be a good result…”
"My Republican colleagues and I took the message to the international community last year that the American people do not support President Obama's climate commitments as part of the Paris agreement, but nobody wanted to believe us," said Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK), who chairs the Environment and Public Works Committee.
"The message can no longer be ignored: Americans do not support it when their president sidesteps Congress. They also do not support economically damaging mandates that have no measurable impact to climate change. The president's 'commitment' has been opposed by the majority of Congress and its legal soundness is questioned by the Supreme Court.
"Now a Republican administration will fill the vacant seat on the Supreme Court, which will decide the final fate of the Clean Power Plan. If the president's carbon mandates were in place, the president's Paris commitment would fall short by 45%, but now it could be as great as 60%."
Inhofe said he "warned" Secretary of State John Kerry earlier this month that a future administration would have "numerous options to forego President Obama's political commitments" under the climate agreement. "The fact that it will soon be in force is of no consequence. President Obama's climate legacy has been solidified with Tuesday's election results and will be remembered for being built on hollow commitments."
Environmental groups also weighed in. Sierra Club urged donations to fight Trump’s agenda, while American Rivers on Wednesday underscored "the importance of clean water and healthy rivers to the well-being of all Americans" and vowed to safeguard clean water supplies and defend rivers from harmful development.
"Whether you are a Republican, Democrat, Green or Independent, we all need clean and safe water," President Bob Irvin said. "Nothing in the election results changes the fact that clean water and healthy rivers are more important than ever for our families and communities. As a nation, we need to focus on what unites us, not divides us. At American Rivers, we will redouble our efforts to protect and restore rivers because they are essential to our nation’s economy and environment, and the health and well-being of every American."
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/108389-trump-clearly-favors-ep-less-regulatory-oversight-say-experts

Return to headline | Return to top
Who's In Line For Trump EPA Boss, Energy Czar?

Nov 9, 2016 | E&E Greenwire

By Robin Bravender

Donald Trump's team will now officially start measuring the drapes in the Oval Office and throughout the executive branch.
Fresh off last night's upset victory, in which the Republican toppled Democrat Hillary Clinton's bid for the White House, the Trump campaign is shifting into full-fledged transition mode. There's an all-hands meeting planned for this afternoon at the team's transition headquarters in Washington, D.C.
What has been a small transition operation is slated to expand quickly now that Trump has clinched the presidency, and team members will soon be dispatched into federal agencies to interview officials, gather information and prepare detailed policy agendas. Meanwhile, shortlists of names for top Cabinet posts are being compiled, and interest groups, members of Congress and others will continue to press their preferences for key jobs.
One thing Trump insiders stress: The next administration will mark a drastic departure from past iterations of the executive branch. While Trump is already relying on some veterans in the energy world, and could pick some for top government jobs, there will be plenty of fresh blood in the mix.
"When he has been on the campaign trail, when he's been talking about the need to 'drain the swamp,' for example, he's looking for people to come in and solve the problems," said a source close to the Trump campaign. If the Trump team interviews candidates who say, "I'm not sure if we can actually do that," the source said, "I think there's a strong likelihood that they might look at the person and say, 'Next, please.'"
People familiar with the campaign are also expecting Republicans who were wary of throwing their support behind the GOP nominee to now come looking for jobs. "I think the vast majority of people out there who have been reluctant to publicly support Mr. Trump will be looking through their contact list and reaching out to people who they think are involved in the campaign in particular," the source said.
The Clinton team, meanwhile, has become the latest operation to have laid the groundwork for a government that will never materialize. Those who worked on the Clinton campaign or were already jockeying for top jobs in a Democratic administration will be looking for another line of work.
Mike Leavitt, a former U.S. EPA administrator who led Mitt Romney's 2012 transition team, described in a recent interview what it's like to construct an executive branch only to watch those plans dissolve.
"It was a profound disappointment. We built a great ship that never sailed," Leavitt said. "We had it down to 3 o'clock on the afternoon after the election we would start with decisions, and we had decisions teed up. And we went to election night thinking that at 3 o'clock the next afternoon, the following things would happen. ... I woke up thinking, 'Today is day 11; we would have done this, and we would have done that.' I came to realize that every four years, somebody goes through this."
Meanwhile, Republican energy and environment circles are already abuzz with rumors about who's in the running for top jobs. Here's a look at who's in the mix:EPA
Trump has appointed well-known climate skeptic Myron Ebell to lead his EPA transition team and has promised to overturn the Obama administration's climate policies. Trump has even floated abolishing EPA entirely, although that would likely be an uphill climb politically. At the very least, he's expected to pursue dramatic reforms at the agency.
Contenders for the highly politicized job of EPA boss include two top state attorneys who are helping to lead the legal charge to overturn President Obama's Clean Power Plan in court. West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey and Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt are rumored candidates to lead the agency under Trump.
Other possibilities include Craig Butler, director of Ohio EPA; Kathleen Hartnett White, former head of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality; and Rep. Andy Harris (R-Md.).DOE
At the Energy Department, some sources expect an energy industry insider to become secretary, while others are pushing for Republican lawmakers with a deep knowledge of the inner workings of the complex agency. Energy lobbyist Mike McKenna is leading Trump's DOE transition team.
Trump adviser and oil tycoon Harold Hamm is often cited as a leading contender for the agency's top job.
Other prospects include David Hill, executive vice president and general counsel for NRG Energy Inc., who was DOE's general counsel during the George W. Bush administration; and J. Larry Nichols, co-founder of Oklahoma City-based Devon Energy Corp.Interior
A broad range of Westerners and public lands insiders are rumored to be in the running to lead the Interior Department. Former George W. Bush administration Interior official David Bernhardt is leading Trump's Interior transition team.
Idaho Republican Gov. Butch Otter is one possibility for the job. The former Idaho congressman told E&E News in September that he would "be proud to serve in a Trump administration."
Other Western Republican governors floated as possible picks include Wyoming's Matt Mead, South Dakota's Dennis Daugaard and New Mexico's Susana Martinez.
Current and former Republican members of Congress who might be picked include Rep. Rob Bishop of Utah, chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee; Sens. Lisa Murkowski and Dan Sullivan of Alaska; Oklahoma Sen. Jim Inhofe; Rep. Don Young of Alaska; retiring Wyoming Rep. Cynthia Lummis; and Idaho Sens. Mike Crapo and James Risch.
Other names floated include Tony Clark, a Republican commissioner on the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission who was previously chairman of the North Dakota Public Service Commission, and Pruitt, the attorney general of Oklahoma.White House gigs
In addition to nominating a new chairman for the White House Council on Environmental Quality, the Trump administration is expected to keep the "energy czar" post that the Obama administration set up in the White House. Under Obama, the czar duties were given to Carol Browner, then Heather Zichal, John Podesta and Brian Deese.
A possibility for energy czar in a Trump White House could be Mike Catanzaro, a longtime Republican aide on Capitol Hill who is now an energy lobbyist and is helping to lead Trump's energy policy transition team.
At CEQ, one name in the mix is Marty Hall, vice president of energy policy at FirstEnergy Corp. and former CEQ chief of staff during the George W. Bush administration.
For more analysis, watch E&E News reporters' postmortem on what election 2016 means for energy and environment issues.
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/stories/1060045514/search?keyword=Who%27s+in+line+for+Trump+EPA+boss%2C+energy+czar%3F

Return to headline | Return to top
Oil, Coal Seen as Winners With Donald Trump Victory

Nov 9, 2016 | The Wall Street Journal

By Bradley Olson, John W. Miller and John W. Miller

Donald Trump’s surprise victory fanned expectations in the energy industry that he would clear the path for new pipelines, end U.S. participation in global climate change pacts and undo environmental regulations to boost American coal mining.
The prospect that the president-elect would roll back years of Obama administration policies buoyed investors in fossil fuels companies Wednesday—while sending shares of top wind and solar power firms tumbling.
The S&P 500 Energy Sector Index was up about 1.5% overall midday to 517.28.
Scott Sheffield, chief executive of Pioneer Natural Resources Co., said Mr. Trump’s victory will perk up the country’s stagnant drilling boom by making it easier to build pipelines that unlock areas rich in oil and gas, such as the Marcellus Shale formation in Pennsylvania and Ohio.
“His message about creating jobs is why he broke the blue wall” and attracted votes from Democrats in some states, Mr. Sheffield said.
Shares in Energy Transfer Equity L.P., the Dallas-based pipeline company building the hotly contested Dakota Access Pipeline, jumped 18% to $16.52 amid hopes that Mr. Trump will give a green light to the project.
The 1,170-mile pipeline linking the North Dakota oil fields and Texas has become mired in protests and extra environmental reviews by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers because of its route across the Missouri River and lands considered culturally sensitive to the Standing Rock Sioux tribe.
An Energy Transfer spokeswoman said Wednesday that the company expects the pipeline to begin moving oil in the first quarter of 2017.
During the campaign, Mr. Trump invited TransCanada Corp., the Calgary-based company that proposed the transcontinental Keystone XL pipeline linking Canada’s oil sands to the Texas Gulf Coast, to reapply to build that project, which was rejected by the Obama administration in 2015 after seven years in regulatory limbo.
“TransCanada remains fully committed to building Keystone XL,” said company spokesman Mark Cooper. “We are evaluating ways to engage the new administration on the benefits, the jobs and the tax revenues this project brings to the table.”
Green energy companies fared less favorably as investors braced for Mr. Trump to reverse Mr. Obama’s renewable power and climate policies.
Shares of SunPower Corp. fell 14% to $6.32, while SolarCity Corp. was off 5% to $19.75, andVivint Solar Inc. nearly 9% off at $2.92. Other clean-energy stocks were also trading lower, including Tesla Motors Inc., whose shares dropped 4% to $186.58, and wind farm developer Pattern Energy Group Inc., which was down nearly 7% to $19.66 in midafternoon trade.
Still, some rooftop solar executives voiced optimism, saying green power enjoys support from a bipartisan majority of consumers. “We do not see this election as changing its course,” Ed Fenster, chairman and co-founder of San Francisco-based Sunrun Inc., whose shares fell 6% to $4.69.
Mr. Trump’s election immediately called into question whether the U.S. will stay committed to an agreement to combat climate change signed by nearly 200 nations last year in Paris. Mr. Trump, who has called climate change a hoax, has said he would cancel the accord, and cut off U.S. aid to a $100 billion global fund to help poorer nations address climate change.
“Climate change policy is going to come to a screeching halt,” said Robert McNally, president of energy-advisory firm the Rapidan Group and a former adviser to President George W. Bush. “The Paris Agreement from a U.S. perspective is a dead agreement walking.”
Mr. Trump has promised to reverse Obama-era environmental regulations on mining and burning coal that are widely blamed in America’s coal country for the wave of bankruptcies, mine closures and layoffs the industry has suffered through this decade.
Analysts say the main culprit for coal’s decline is natural gas, which has flooded the market since the development of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, and is unlikely to wane, as Mr. Trump has also promised to liberalize fracking.
Still, some coal executives said they expected a more level playing field under Mr. Trump.
“So be it. That’s good for America,” said Robert Murray, chief executive CEO of Murray Energy Corp., regarding competition from natural gas. “But we do need to eliminate the subsidies for the makers of windmills and solar panels.”
Some energy experts expect that a Trump administration may also reconsider economic sanctions that the Obama administration imposed against Russia. That would be a boon to Exxon Mobil Corp., which invested billions in Russian exploration projects that have been put on hold since 2014.
“We intend to work constructively with the president,” said Exxon spokesman Alan Jeffers.
Oil man Harold Hamm, the chief executive of Continental Resources Inc. and one of Mr. Trump’s key campaign energy advisers, said Wednesday that he would support Mr. Trump taking a harder line on geopolitical rivals in the energy industry, like Saudi Arabia, who he said the U.S. had coddled in the past.
“Some of the countries, Saudi Arabia in particular, have been treated too kindly, because of the large supply of oil,” he said. “I don’t think that may be the case in the future.”
Mark Ammerman, a former banker and longtime energy deal maker in Houston, said executives he spoke with as election results became clear -- even some who voted for Mr. Trump -- were shocked by the results.
“Now what people want to know is, ‘Will he do what he said he was going to do?’” he said. “There is skepticism out there that he was just saying what he had to say to win.”
—Amy Harder, Ted Mann, Timothy Puko and Cassandra Sweet contributed to this article.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/oil-coal-seen-as-winners-with-trump-victory-1478693338

Return to headline | Return to top
Trump Policies Expected to Help Oil, Gas Industry

Nov 10, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report

By Alan Kovski

Oil and gas industry officials welcomed the election of Donald Trump as a prelude to allowing more development of domestic fossil fuels and the rollback of some regulations.
Along with those changes, the new administration will likely extricate the federal government from litigation over some regulations. Attorneys offered Bloomberg BNA some cautionary notes about policy uncertainties.
A few oil and gas associations indicated that they anticipated improvements in relations between the federal government and oil and gas companies. Tim Wigley, president of the Western Energy Alliance, was especially blunt.
“Western Energy Alliance is overjoyed that we will not be experiencing a third term of the Obama Administration. American producers have been deluged by regulatory agencies bent on making it more difficult to produce American energy,” Wigley said in a statement issued Nov. 9.
Pipelines, Exports, Energy Projects
“We anticipate good policies moving forward such as the Keystone XL and Dakota Access pipelines; liquefied natural gas exports; and energy projects on non-park, non-wilderness federal lands,” Wigley said.
John Stoody, vice president of government and public relations at the Washington, D.C.-based Association of Oil Pipe Lines, told Bloomberg BNA that oil pipelines pass current environmental requirements “with flying colors.”
So if the process is allowed to work without political interference—a reference to the problems of Keystone XL and Dakota Access, in particular—the pipelines can be built, to the benefit of American workers and consumers, Stoody said.
Exactly what a Trump administration might do is uncertain. During their contest for the presidency, neither Donald Trump nor Hillary Clinton spoke in depth about energy, said Denver-based attorney Mark Barron of law firm Baker & Hostetler LLP.
“They didn't talk very much about the specifics of any energy policy,” Barron said. Companies want predictability, not uncertainty, he added.
Fracking Fight Could End
Bureau of Land Management fracking regulations have been blocked by a U.S. district court in a case now before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit (Wyoming v. Jewell, 10th Cir., No. 16-8068, filed 6-27-16).
Barron said the Trump administration could accept the district court's decision and withdraw its appeal. It would not happen quickly. The decision would come from political appointees in the Interior Department after they have been approved by the Senate, Barron said.
Thomas Jackson, a Washington, D.C.-based special counsel at Baker Botts LLP, agreed that the federal parties could give up the fight but added, “However, under that scenario, the litigation may continue to go forward because the environmental intervenors would want to continue to press the appeal.”
A second scenario, Jackson said, “is that Interior could ask for a voluntary remand by the court on the grounds that the new administration wants to reconsider the rule in light of the district court ruling. The court might be inclined to grant such a motion, although the status of the rule might be murky.”
Jackson added, “Interior might still have to take formal rulemaking action to officially get the rule off the books.”
Sage Grouse Litigation Tricky
Another complicated court fight is over 2015 land management plans in several Western states to protect the greater sage grouse.
The land-use plans by the BLM and the U.S. Forest Service were designed to keep the bird from being listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act, but they frustrated so many public and private parties that they became the targets of at least seven lawsuits. Environmental advocacy groups sued to get the bird listed anyway.
The federal government could try to resolve the activists’ lawsuit by agreeing to make changes to the plans, said Steven Leifer, a Baker Botts LLP attorney who chairs the law firm's environmental department. “But I don't see the Trump administration moving in that direction,” Leifer said in an e-mail to Bloomberg BNA. “They are likely to be happy with the status quo.”
As for the objections of various industry groups to the protections for the sage grouse, Leifer suggested that a Trump administration would favor those aspects of the protections that relied on voluntary agreements—a generally pro-landowner, pro-business approach, as the attorney put it.
Offshore energy leasing also is tricky. Randall Luthi, president of the National Ocean Industries Association, said his oil and gas association looked forward to working with Trump, but all of Luthi's references to opening up more offshore lands for exploration were expressed as hopes, not firm expectations.
Luthi argued in particular for more exploration in the Beaufort and Chukchi seas north of Alaska. It remains unknown whether the Obama administration will decide before the end of 2017 to allow more oil and gas leasing in the Arctic offshore in the future.

http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=100165262&vname=dennotallissues&fn=100165262&jd=100165262

Return to headline | Return to top
Coal Resurgent, Renewables in Retreat: Energy With Trump

Nov 10, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report

By Javier Blas and Anna Hirtenstein

If you want a snapshot of what the global energy map will look like under President Donald Trump, look no farther than the stock market.
Glencore Plc, the world's top coal trader, surged more than 5 percent on Nov. 9. Vestas Wind Systems A/S, the world's biggest wind-turbine maker, plunged as much as 13 percent. The swing foretells a story of fossil fuels making a comeback, while the fight against climate change—and investment in wind and solar power—languishes.
“De-carbonisation, which has been the organizing principle of Obama's energy policy, came to a screeching halt last night,” said Bob McNally, president of consultant Rapidan Group in Washington and a former senior energy official at the White House under Republican President George W. Bush.
In his only major energy policy speech ahead of the elections, Trump said that he would rescind “job-destroying” environmental regulations within 100 days of taking office and cancel the climate deal reached last year in Paris.
“A Trump administration will focus on real environmental challenges, not the phony ones we've been looking at,” Trump told supporters in May in North Dakota, the birth-place of the U.S. shale revolution.

To be sure, Trump has offered few clues on how he plans to implement his plans. Energy and climate policy has taken a back-seat to immigration, the economy and debate about the candidate's fitness for office. And some of his proposals are contradictory, like his pledge to boost both natural gas and coal, two fuels that compete against each other in the power generation market.
Yet, few doubt who's likely to win and lose, particularly as Trump can rely on supportive lawmakers in Congress to push his agenda.
“The result is undoubtedly a blow for the renewable energy industry,” said Matt Loffman, an analyst at energy consultant Douglas-Westwood in Houston. “The historic election result is perhaps welcome news for a hydrocarbon industry that has been on the ropes for over two years.“
Coal prices already are enjoying a renaissance after China, the world's largest consumer, cut domestic production, forcing power plants to buy overseas. The cost of thermal coal in the Australian port of Newcastle, a benchmark for Asia, has more than doubled since January to a four-year high of $114.75 a ton.
Shares of big coal miners such as Anglo American Plc, BHP Billiton Plc and Rio Tinto Plc rose between 2 percent and 4 percent on Nov. 9. Wind turbine makers Gamesa Corp. Tecnologica SA and Nordex SE fell. Solar panel makers plunged in New York, led by SunPower Corp., First Solar Inc. and Canadian Solar Inc.
As coal enjoys a comeback, the biggest loser could be the fight against climate change. Under President Barack Obama, the U.S. rescued a two-decade old process the United Nations promoted to rein in pollution, forging a climate change deal last December. Along with China and more than 190 other countries, the so-called Paris agreement accord set out a framework for all nations to cut emissions.

It would be difficult but not impossible for Trump to pull out of the Paris accord. While the Senate never voted on the Paris deal, it's part of the 1992 UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, which the U.S. ratified under Republican President George H.W. Bush. Trump would have to renounce the 1992 treaty and risk bringing down the entire UN process to scrap Paris. The U.S. would have to give three year's notice to withdraw from Paris.
But Trump doesn't need to cancel Paris to derail the process, effectively hampering the growth of renewable energy, analysts and campaigners said.
Yukari Takamura, a professor at Nagoya University in Japan who has followed climate change talks for more than a decade, said the Obama administration took a lead that contributed “enormously” to the Paris deal. “Lack of such leadership might slow down the progress” by unsettling the investors who need to fund renewable developments, she said.
As Trump shapes his energy agenda, the first clue about his priorities could come with his selection for secretary of energy. Obama surrounded himself with policy experts and academics such as Steven Chu and Ernest Moniz. Trump has relied so far on the advice of Harold Hamm, the founder and chief executive officer of Continental Resources Inc., one's of America's largest shale oil producers.

Whoever his choice as energy secretary, the global fossil fuels industry, which over the last four years has been on the defensive with Obama, is likely to find a friend in the White House.
“The oil and gas industry is a clear winner with the new president,” said Alexandre Andlauer, head of oil at research firm Alphavalue in Paris. “U.S. Oil companies have a better future today than yesterday.”

http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=100165229&vname=dennotallissues&fn=100165229&jd=100165229

Return to headline | Return to top
Trump Site Vows To 'Scrap' Clean Power Plan, Expand Leasing

Nov 10, 2016 | E&E News Daily

By Robin Bravender

President-elect Donald Trump's team has launched www.greatagain.gov, a new clearinghouse for information about his policies and transition to power.
The website broadly sketches out Trump's plans for the stretch between Election Day and Inauguration Day on Jan. 20.
Trump plans to "deploy Agency Review Teams to each federal agency to ensure a smooth transition between administrations. Simultaneously, the incoming administration will identify, vet, and select candidates for approximately 4,100 presidential appointments."
Announcements for top positions will occur during that transition period, while "nominations of individuals for Senate-confirmed appointments, confirmation of nominees, and appointments to positions not requiring Senate confirmation will begin after January 20, 2017."
Come Inauguration Day, "the Trump Administration will be ready to hit the ground running due to the planning and hard work that has been underway since the Conventions," the website says.
The website also broadly sketches out Trump's top policy priorities, under a tab titled "Making America Great Again," taken from his campaign slogan.
The administration will "make America energy independent," it says, by making "full use of our domestic energy sources, including traditional and renewable energy sources."
The Trump team pledges to open onshore and offshore leasing on federal lands and waters, to streamline permitting for all energy projects, to "end the war on coal, and rescind the coal mining lease moratorium," to eliminate U.S. EPA's Waters of the U.S. rule, and to "scrap the $5 trillion dollar Obama-Clinton Climate Action Plan and the Clean Power Plan."
Under Trump, the website says, "America's environmental agenda will be guided by true specialists in conservation, not those with radical political agendas. We will refocus the EPA on its core mission of ensuring clean air, and clean, safe drinking water for all Americans. It will be a future of conservation, of prosperity, and of great success."
Trump is also promising dramatic regulatory reform in an effort that "will include a temporary moratorium on all new regulation, canceling overarching executive orders and a thorough review to identify and eliminate unnecessary regulations that kill jobs and bloat government."
The website also promises to work to reform the tax code and to pursue a "reliable and efficient transportation network."
http://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2016/11/10/stories/1060045537

Return to headline | Return to top
Rare Energy Policy Window for Republicans After Election Sweep

Nov 10, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report

By Rachel Leven, Brian Dabbs, Rebecca Kern and Patrick Ambrosio

Republicans have a rare opportunity to dictate energy and environment policy starting in 2017—if they choose to do so—following their electoral sweep.
Congressional Republican leaders touted intentions to rescind landmark environmental rules, and industry cheered them on. However, some approached the prospect of forcing partisan bills throughout next session cautiously, even as environmentalists signaled they are ready to fight.
“I don't think we should act as if we're going to be in the majority forever. We've been given a temporary lease on power, if you will. And I think we need to use it responsibly,” Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said at a Nov. 9 press conference in Washington, D.C.
“I think what the American people are looking for are results, and to get results in the Senate, as all of you know, it requires some Democratic participation and cooperation,” McConnell said.
The Republicans kept control of the Senate and the House in the Nov. 8 election, and Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump took the White House in a stunning defeat of Hillary Clinton (D). Now it is up for debate whether these results should serve as a mandate for change, specifically rolling back landmark climate action.
The Results
Republicans kept their Senate majority with a 51-48 margin as of Nov. 9, and House Republicans retained their House majority with a 239-193 margin, as Trump won many of the major fossil fuel producing states, including West Virginia.
Republicans in and out of congressional leadership said these results signified that the American people want change. House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) said a unified Republican government will give the party the ability to address problems such as coal mining layoffs and rules like the blockbuster Clean Water Rule.
Some political observers told Bloomberg BNA it is possible that the shift to a Republican-controlled Washington could lead to different types of legislation making their way out of Congress. That shift could begin in the lame duck, Kevin Book, managing director at the energy analysis firm ClearView Energy Partners LLC, told Bloomberg BNA.
Book pointed to the broad energy bills currently in conference as a prime example of an area where there could be less incentive for Republicans to compromise. That could mean no movement on the high priority bill in the lame duck, he said.
“Republicans in the House might have been willing to swallow a consensus bill, and might still be willing to swallow a consensus bill, but they're probably less willing now because they have a chance of carving out some stronger provisions that they can get through a president who will sign it,” Book said.
In the next session, while it is hard to guess, the shift could translate to the all-of-the-above energy strategy returning to center stage for legislation, Luke Popovich, a spokesman for the National Mining Association, told Bloomberg BNA. That could translate into bills such as those on carbon capture and sequestration that focus on using fossil fuels more “responsibly” gaining momentum, he said.
Lost Bills May Reappear
And environmental and climate change advocates told Bloomberg BNA that they are bracing for a barrage of industry-friendly bills. Those range from legislation to scale back Endangered Species Act protections to ones that would return federal lands to the states and loosen federal mining regulations.
For example, legislation such as the Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny Act (H.R. 427), which would require congressional approval of some regulatory actions could reappear, Yogin Kothari, a Union of Concerned Scientists policy adviser, said.
That bill passed the House in 2015 with unanimous Republican support but only two Democratic votes in favor.
“We anticipate some of these kinds in the House very early on in the next Congress,” Kothari said. “We are prepared to push back on interference in the federal regulatory process.” Kothari also pointed to a moratorium on regulations that cost the economy more than $100 million, among other criteria, as a likely priority for Republicans.
Going Nuclear
But when it comes to Congress, moving full steam ahead with an entirely Republican agenda without Democratic consensus may prove difficult. Especially in the Senate.
Chris Vieson, a partner at PSW Inc. and former director of floor operations for former House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.), cautioned that even with a Republican-stacked Congress and executive branch, the Senate will still need to reach 60 votes to move bills.
Some Democrats need to be on board with those bills unless McConnell chooses to alter the rules and get rid of the filibuster altogether, Vieson said. The Senate leader seemed to brush off the prospect of no filibusters at his press conference, reminding reporters that Republicans are temporarily in control.
Getting rid of filibusters could have negative consequences, Vieson said.
“Then you'd basically just have two majority ruled bodies,” Vieson said. “Our democracy wasn't set up to have one running over the other.”
Also, the White House
But many politicians and political observers, including McConnell and Popovich, emphasized that many of the changes to energy and environment policy wouldn't need to be executed by Congress at all.
Some actions—such as rescinding the coal leasing moratorium put in place in January by Interior Secretary Sally Jewell—could be done using Trump's executive authority.
McConnell, for example, said he hoped Trump would drop the Clean Power Plan, which limits carbon dioxide emissions from power plants, on “day one.”
“We will likely see the new president use that same pencil, but on the eraser end of it and erase those regulations that have put the government squarely against the development of coal and fossil energy,” Popovich said.
Environmentalists Ready to Fight
Environmentalists are preparing to fight, either way. On a Nov. 9 call with reporters, representatives of key environmental groups said this push to roll back environmental regulation isn't new. Some pointed to the 2000 transition from President Bill Clinton to George W. Bush as an example.
“We stopped the roll backs,” Anna Aurilio, Washington, D.C. director for Environment America, said.
Environmentalists also told reporters that the election results didn't signify an anti-climate action sentiment from the public. The election was close, and “a close election is not a mandate,” Kevin Curtis, executive director of the NRDC Action Fund, said on a Nov. 9 call with reporters.
Curtis later added, “Progress is not linear.”

http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=100165265&vname=dennotallissues&fn=100165265&jd=100165265

Return to headline | Return to top
After Trump Win, Advocates Pledge Hand-To-Hand Fights On Climate Policy

Nov 9, 2016 | Inside EPA

By Doug Obey

Environmental advocates in the wake of Donald Trump's election victory are vowing to mount both defensive and offensive campaigns to protect and continue greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction programs, acknowledging that they will likely face adversaries in the next administration and the Republican-controlled Congress.
As part of those vows, advocates are pledging to defend EPA's GHG standards for existing power plants, citing the administrative and legal difficulties the Trump administration would face in seeking to repeal the regulation.
But environmentalists also say they must play political defense in the Senate by relying on its filibuster procedures to resist GHG and other environmental rollbacks, and they are suggesting that state and local venues may present some of their best opportunities to engage in hand-to-hand battles to advance climate-friendly policies.
“We will fight and we will resist, but we will not cower in a defensive posture for the next four years,” Sierra Club's Michael Brune told supports in a Nov. 9 email. “We've fought against long odds many times before -- and won,” he added, referencing successful efforts by his group's Beyond Coal campaign to defeat roughly 180 coal plants during the George W. Bush administration.
Brune called the combination of President-elect Trump and a Republican Congress a “poisonous combination,” but he suggested advocates may bring utility rate cases and other actions to advance renewable energy. They “can't stop [state utility] regulators and local governments from choosing clean energy when it's the cheapest and smartest option,” he said.
He also suggested groups would pursue cooperation with cities and the private sector. “They can't stop cities from going to 100-percent clean energy. They can't stop the private sector that wants to be part of the climate solution, not the problem . . . . We'll have to adjust many of our strategies, but we won't allow our progress on climate and clean energy to be stopped.”
He and other advocates sounded a similar note at a Nov. 9 press event where they acknowledged shock from Trump's victory but downplayed the notion that the election was a referendum on climate change policy. They noted, for example, that not a single question on the topic came up during presidential debates between Trump and Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton.
'Seen This Show Before'
Even while striking a defiant tone, environmentalists also acknowledged that Trump's victory -- based in part on his pledge to scrap the Paris climate deal and said that climate change is a “hoax” invented by China -- puts advocates in a threatened position at least on par with what they faced after prior electoral defeats of Democratic allies in presidential or congressional elections.
“I have seen this show before,” Natural Resources Defense Council's (NRDC) Kevin Curtis said, referencing setbacks in 1980, 1994 and 2000. In “every single instance,” the American public resisted environmental rollbacks.
Trump's defeat of Clinton, however, is the first Democratic presidential election defeat since the inception of major U.S. climate regulatory programs, a fact raised by reporters who queried advocates to respond to whether the EPA's existing source performance standards (ESPS) rule is doomed due to a hostile executive branch.
“We do not consider the [ESPS] dead,” NRDC's David Goldston said in response, claiming it will be upheld by the courts and that overturning it would require an administrative process that Trump could not defend in court. “President-elect Trump . . . cannot just snap his fingers and wish away regulations,” Goldston said, adding, “there is an actual process” in which his administration would have to explain why information in a voluminous administrative record for the ESPS is “no longer true.”
Brune, meanwhile, noted during the event that the underlying GHG endangerment finding on which the regulation is based holds the executive branch responsible for protecting the public from climate change, and he essentially threatened litigation against any attempts to overturn it. “We do expect President-elect Trump to comply.”
At the same time, advocates say they must mobilize public support at all levels against attempts to rollback GHG and other programs. That will help maintain a critical mass of senators willing to block congressional attacks on GHG rules or other environmental protections using the Senate's filibuster rules.
“One of the magic numbers right now is the number 41,” said League of Conservation Voters' Gene Karpinski, referencing to the number of lawmakers needed to deny 60 Senate votes to enact such legislation. “We need to build a strong firewall in the Senate to make sure that 41-plus senators . . . including some Republicans . . . stand up” against such proposals.
Environment America's Anna Aurilio during the event sounded similar themes, saying her group will “stand tall” against attacks on bedrock environmental laws, but “that is not where we need to be. We need to be continuing to push ahead and we will push ahead in the states, in local governments and with the public.”
http://insideepa.com/daily-news/after-trump-win-advocates-pledge-hand-hand-fights-climate-policy

Return to headline | Return to top
Lengthy List Of Obama Climate Initiatives Under Threat From Trump

Nov 9, 2016 | Inside EPA

By Doug Obey

Donald Trump's victory in the presidential election appears likely to delay or scuttle EPA's greenhouse gas (GHG) standards for existing power plants, as well as an array of other climate change regulations that a potential Clinton Administration had been expected to develop, according to analysts and other observers.
“Trump's victory bodes ill for the Clean Power Plan under almost any scenario,” says ClearView Energy Partners in a post-election analysis of energy policy scenarios, echoing similar assessments from former Capitol Hill staff that the power plant rule is just one of a host of GHG initiatives now under threat.
Even so, one former Hill Republican staffer cautions that it could take much of Trump's four-year term to reverse Obama climate polices.
“I think they just stop the regulatory treadmill,” the source says. But the source adds that, particularly with respect to already final GHG rules, “It's an aircraft carrier, you can't just turn it around on a dime.”
ClearView in its Nov. 9 analysis cites three promises Trump will be in a position to implement -- scrapping the power plant existing source performance standards (ESPS), abandoning the Paris climate deal and ending U.S. support for the Green Climate Fund.
But ClearView also notes that the Trump administration does not necessarily have to repeal the ESPS to essentially neuter it, even if it survives court challenges. “[T]he Trump administration could discretionarily enforce the rule, green lighting relatively lenient State Implementation Plans,” it says.
Other likely impacts of Trump's victory are a scuttling of planned expansion of GHG rules to other industries, including the oil and gas sector, refineries and airlines. Observers prior to the election had cited those measures as a Clinton administration priority. Further, Trump could significantly shift the course of an ongoing mid-term review of EPA and Department of Transportation light-duty vehicle GHG and fuel economy standards.
Another former Hill GOP staffer says it is plausible that Trump could seek to loosen those vehicle standards, which automakers have criticized as burdensome, though ClearView also advances one scenario where the Trump administration might simply finalize current vehicle standards for model years 2022-2025 without strengthening them.
Several Obama administration officials had cited the mid-term review as an opportunity to not just defend but strengthen the rules, and EPA has suggested many fuel economy technologies are being adopted by the auto sector more quickly than expected.
Climate Efforts
Additional Obama administration climate efforts that now appear in jeopardy include its climate change National Environmental and Policy Act (NEPA) guide, which ClearView says could be revised or rescinded; its social cost of carbon and methane cost-benefit estimates that a Trump administration could rework; and a moratorium on coal leasing that the next administration could lift.
“Everything that can be slowed down will slow down” with respect to EPA rules, the second Hill staffer says, adding that proposed rules will be re-evaluated, and final rules will either be revised or implemented with “a lot of administrative discretion.”
ClearView in its analysis says it does expect resistance from environmentalists if a Trump administration delays application of GHG rules to other sectors, noting that advocates “may sue to compel regulatory action.” But it also notes that such “'sue and settle' lawsuits can take years to emerge.”
Perhaps the one silver lining for advocates is that Republicans do not have 60 votes in the Senate to fully reverse environmental policies. Its “a Republican Senate but not a 60-vote Republican Senate,” the second source says.
Additionally, ClearView says it “still cannot rule out” the possibility of a “carbon surcharge” that is enacted as part of a broader tax reform effort, largely in response to the need to find revenue to offset corporate tax cuts. However, the analysts note that Trump has made “public statements opposing the idea.”
http://insideepa.com/daily-news/lengthy-list-obama-climate-initiatives-under-threat-trump

Return to headline | Return to top
Trump Victory Puts Petchems-Heavy Trade Pacts In Play

Nov 10, 2016 | Platts

By John Calton, Nida Qureshi and Chris Ferrell

The election of Donald Trump as US president was having minimal initial impact on domestic petrochemical markets Wednesday, but market sources said to watch potential policy changes after he takes office because of potential ramifications for the industry, particularly on trade agreements.

Crude futures rose slightly Wednesday after steep declines seen overnight as traders responded to Trump's victory, and the dollar rebounded after sharp initial declines.

A US olefins producer source said the petrochemical market is more stable than other commodities and will not see much reaction to Trump's election as president.

But moving forward, policy implications will be be watched closely, market sources said.
"I think there will be a positive impact short term, less [Environmental Protection Agency] regulations and better energy policies," a trading source said. "Possible negative longer-term issues with trade barriers as the petrochemical industry will need to export lots of material."

A polymer trading source said any changes to trade agreements could have a big impact on the market, but it will likely be a year or so before any true fallout or results are seen.
The North American Free Trade Agreement between the US, Canada and Mexico has been in place for more than two decades, but drew criticism from Trump during the election campaign and could be a potential target for renegotiation or even termination under his administration.

The US chemicals sector has reaped huge benefits from NAFTA, which slashed duties of 12%-20% on all imports of chemicals, petrochemicals and creams.

The Trans-Pacific Partnership signed in February with 11 other countries including Japan, Canada and Australia could also face a similar fate. Trump routinely criticized the deal during his campaign, and there has been growing belief that it would not be approved by Congress.

Key aromatics, benzene, toluene and mixed xylene markets Wednesday showed minimal reactions to Trump's election win. US benzene was being talked higher day on day, while toluene and mixed xylene talks are around the same. US spot benzene was being talked in the $2.26-$2.35/gal range on a DDP US Gulf Coast basis, US spot toluene was being talked in the $1.82-$1.95/gal range and US spot mixed xylene pricing was being bid around $1.96/gal, against no offers, according to market updates.

Sources attributed higher indications in the benzene market to the rebound in crude from earlier levels.

Movement in energy is an important factor for BTX markets as traders hedge deals against energy and because of ratios that provide "good" indicators on potential short term price movement, sources have said.

Ethylene prices were also seeing minimal changes, but have dropped 23% or 6.625 cents/lb since reaching 28.875 cents/lb FD USG on October 28, while propylene prices have dropped 16% or 6.25 cents/lb since reaching 38 cents/lb FD USG on October 26. Sources cite the drop in olefins to a combination of lower feedstock demand, end-of-year inventory management and upcoming startups.

Additional length in the market is attributed to three US Gulf Coast producers scheduled to have steam crackers restart in November after planned maintenance outages, with two of them heard to be already in process of doing so, sources said.

Polymer prices also were talked mostly stable to pricing seen over the past week.
http://www.platts.com/latest-news/petrochemicals/houston/trump-victory-puts-petchems-heavy-trade-pacts-21029193

Return to headline | Return to top
Trump Win Revives Keystone Hopes, Boosts Dakota Access Outlook

Nov 10, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report

By Meenal Vamburkar and Robert Tuttle

Donald Trump's U.S. presidential election victory came as a positive surprise for pipeline proponents.
Energy Transfer Partners LP's controversial Dakota Access Pipeline is likely to be the immediate beneficiary. TransCanada Corp.’s Keystone XL project, rejected by the Obama administration a year ago, could be resurrected. A Republican-controlled government would likely expedite project approvals and permitting by regulators.
Trump has said he would reduce the federal government's role in energy and environmental policy, while encouraging more infrastructure projects including pipelines to better connect production with markets and consumers. Energy Transfer shares jumped the most since February, and TransCanada's the most since March.
“Obama killed the deal. Hillary wasn't warm to it at all,” Bart Melek, the head of commodity strategy at TD Securities in Toronto, said of Keystone XL. “This is something that's accretive.”
A year after President Barack Obama's refusal to approve the $8 billion Keystone XL project to connect the Canadian oil sands with refineries on the Gulf of Mexico, the $3.8 billion Dakota Access line to ship crude from the Bakken shale hasn't fared very well either. The project is facing escalating opposition from environmental groups and has been stalled by the administration's pending review.
Profit Share
Trump has said he'd approve Keystone XL—for a share of the profits. TransCanada said it remains fully committed to building the line and is looking at ways to engage a Trump administration on the project's benefits, including a $3 billion boost to the U.S. economy, a total of 42,000 jobs and tens of millions of dollars in property taxes, according to an e-mailed statement. The Calgary-based pipeline giant's shares rose as much as 3.3 percent in Toronto, the most intraday since March 10.
As for Dakota Access, if it hasn't received the go-ahead by the time Trump is sworn in, the new administration would be expected to grant it, said Christine Tezak, managing director of research at ClearView Energy Partners LLC in Washington.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is unlikely to keep holding up the last leg of the project, said Ethan Bellamy, an analyst at Robert W. Baird & Co., in a note. Energy Transfer shares surged as much as 15 percent, the most intraday since Feb. 16.
Starting Soon
“We remain focused on completing construction of this important energy infrastructure project with the expectation it will be in service in the first quarter of 2017,” Vicki Granado, a spokeswoman for Energy Transfer, said in an e-mailed statement.
The Army Corps hasn't made any changes to its review process and won't speculate on the effect of the election, Kamil Sztalkoper, a spokesman, said in a statement.
A revival of Keystone XL may help ease the pressure on Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's government to approve controversial pipelines projects to link the landlocked oil sands to the coast, such as TransCanada's proposed $13 billion Energy East line that has faced mounting opposition in Quebec. The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers said it wouldn't comment on the politics of another country, but noted the U.S. is the industry's largest customer.
“Our challenge is getting that energy to the world and the only way we can do that is through more energy infrastructure, such as pipelines, which will enable us to deliver oil and natural gas to more customers at home and abroad,” Tim McMillan, the association's president and chief executive officer, said in a statement.
Broadly speaking, a Trump administration will encourage oil and gas infrastructure, said Erika Coombs, an analyst at BTU Analytics LLC. The projects will continue to encounter obstacles and delays on the state and local levels, she said, but it'll be harder for opposition to get on the national stage.
“It's a step in the direction of more infrastructure getting built,” Coombs said. “The opposition doesn't still have the same support from the government at the executive level.”
With assistance from Jonathan N. Crawford.

http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=100165251&vname=dennotallissues&fn=100165251&jd=100165251

Return to headline | Return to top
Pipeline Developers See Opening After Trump Win

Nov 10, 2016 | E&E News PM

By Hannah Northey

Developers of the Keystone XL oil pipeline, which stalled under the Obama administration, doubled down today on their intent to build the project now that Donald Trump has clinched the White House.
"We are evaluating ways to engage the new administration on the benefits, the jobs and the tax revenues this project brings to the table," said Mark Cooper, a spokesman for TransCanada Corp.
Cooper in a statement touted 9,000 construction jobs the 1,700-mile pipeline would create, as well as "tens of millions of dollars in annual property taxes to counties along the route" and $3 billion to boost the U.S. gross domestic product. The line would carry 830,000 barrels of mostly diluted bitumen from the oil sands of northern Alberta to the Gulf of Mexico.
Trump in the past has voiced his support for the cross-border pipeline, declaring at a rally in January that "all conservatives want the Keystone pipeline; I want it," signaling a reversal of the Obama administration's rejection of the project last year.
Trump went on to say the United States should receive a quarter of the profits TransCanada Corp. makes from the pipeline or ownership rights in exchange for using eminent domain to ensure the project's completion.
Trump's statement appeared to puzzle American Petroleum Institute President Jack Gerard, who said in September that he didn't "understand how you'd do that, or what that means" and he "would still need some clarification" (E&ENews PM, Sept. 26).
Support for Keystone XL is cemented in the Republican Party's platform. This summer, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said Trump would sign legislation approving Keystone XL if elected (Greenwire, July 22).
http://www.eenews.net/eenewspm/2016/11/09/stories/1060045524

Return to headline | Return to top
Enviros Gear Up For Riders, Pipeline Fights

Nov 10, 2016 | E&E News Daily

By Hannah Hess

Environmental groups will waste no time licking their wounds after the Republican Party's sweeping victory.
For the short term, they will be on the lookout for riders attacking key climate regulations and reaching out to President-elect Donald Trump's transition team to talk about opportunities to work together. In the 72 remaining days of the Obama administration, they will be asking the president to protect more public lands and review fuel economy standards.
Once Trump moves into the White House, environmentalists think low oil prices and the decreasing cost of solar and wind energy could help them buy time in some fights, like the legal challenge to U.S. EPA's Clean Power Plan and Trump's pledge to withdraw the nation from its commitments under the Paris climate agreement.
"Regardless of last night's results, there are some things that Trump can't change," Sierra Club Executive Director Michael Brune told reporters at the National Press Club yesterday.
"[Trump] can't change the fact that the world is heating up and that we are reaching a tipping point. He can't change the fact that clean energy is cheaper than dirty fuels, like coal and gas and nuclear power all over the country. He can't change the fact that the Sierra Club and many others will keep fighting to close down coal plants and gas plants and replace them with clean energy," Brune said.
He added, "The markets, the American people are moving this country beyond dirty fuels and towards clean energy, and Donald Trump can't reverse that tide."
During the administration of Republican George W. Bush, the Sierra Club defeated 184 proposed new coal-fired power plants, Brune boasted. He said, "We can and will do similar work under the Trump administration."
They also plan to continue fighting new natural gas pipelines.
Environment America's Anna Aurilio said the fight against the Dakota Access project will continue. Activists energized by that battle will be prepared to take on any proposed expansion of energy exploration on public lands or waters, she said.
Brune stressed that environmentalists have found unlikely allies for pipeline fights in Minnesota and Georgia.
"It's why you see tea party activists standing next to environmentalists talking about eminent domain and how we should not be ceding our property rights nor our environmental values to further extraction of fossil fuels. And we expect that coalition to strengthen as more and more proposals for fossil fuel extractions move forward," Brune said.
Green groups will also be pressuring the Obama administration to protect millions of acres around the Grand Canyon in Arizona, parts of Utah, the Arctic and swaths of offshore ocean areas, Aurilio said.
League of Conservation Voters President Gene Karpinski suggested environmentalists would continue to organize in congressional districts and use the courts to both promote positive developments and block bad actions. Another tool will be shareholder resolutions on climate aimed directly at corporations.
"But it starts fundamentally with the premise that the public supports moving forward, doesn't support going backward. We need to organize and mobilize that public to block bad things from happening in Congress, to win in those boardrooms and to win in all those state and local communities to build in the future," Karpinski said.
Alliances forged between environmental groups, labor and social justice groups during the campaign can continue into the Trump administration, said Sky Gallegos, executive vice president of political strategy for NextGen Climate Action.
Environmentalists compared the feeling of defeat to the 1994 Republican takeover of Congress or Ronald Reagan's sweeping presidential victory in 1980. But they argued that their coalition has grown since then, inspired largely by concern about the changing climate.
"In every single instance, the special interests and their congressional and political supporters insisted that there was a mandate for environmental rollbacks, and in every single instance, they were proven wrong by the American public," said Kevin Curtis, executive director of the Natural Resources Defense Council Action Fund.
http://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2016/11/10/stories/1060045542

Return to headline | Return to top
EPA Data Plan Spurs Warnings Over Future Existing Source Methane Rule

Nov 9, 2016 | Inside EPA

By Bridget DiCosmo

Industry groups and at least one state, North Dakota, are continuing to raise questions about EPA's effort to collect information from the oil and gas sector on existing sources of methane in support of a future rulemaking, saying EPA does not have statutory authority to issue such a rule and therefore its final information collection request (ICR) lacks "practical utility."
Additionally, industry groups are seeking a multitude of revisions to the final ICR, which EPA submitted Sept. 29 for White House Office of Management & Budget review, such as an extended time frame for operators to respond to the request, definitional changes, and adjustments to the industry recipient list to correct what groups say are errors that could impede the results of the ICR.
Environmentalists are urging EPA to use the ICR to collect additional information on hazardous air pollutants that they say would be helpful to meet regulatory requirements promptly upon completion of the data collection effort.
Citing EPA's statement that that it is proposing the ICR "to 'enable the development of effective standards for the entire industry under [Clean Air Act] CAA Section 111(d)'," North Dakota's Department of Health (NDDH) says in Oct. 31 comments submitted on the final ICR, "The NDDH believes that EPA lacks authority to take such an action."
NDHH, which is the agency that implements air regulations in the state, says that the air law does not permit EPA to "develop standards for the entire industry" because section 111(d) limits EPA's authority to regulations which establish a procedure under which states establish plans for EPA approval.
"That plain statutory language does not grant EPA authority to set industry-wide emissions standards for oil and gas facilities and doing so would be in excess of EPA's statutory authority as well as arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, and otherwise unlawful."
NDHH reiterates North Dakota's legal criticisms of EPA's June 3 new source performance standards (NSPS) targeting methane and volatile organic compounds (VOC) for the sector, saying that because the NSPS issued under section 111(b) is unlawful, EPA cannot then issue standards under 111(d).
Those criticisms include that EPA failed to make an endangerment finding specific to methane from the oil and gas sector, as opposed to a general greenhouse gas finding; the source category was unlawfully broad; EPA's use of a social cost of methane is unlawful; the rule's definition of "well-site" is inappropriate; and other concerns.
North Dakota and others are suing EPA in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in State of North Dakota, et al., v. EPA to challenge the NSPS rule, which the agency issued under section 111(b), triggering impetus for a rule targeting methane and VOCs for existing sources under section 111(d).
Industry's Concerns
In a similar vein, GPA Midstream Association, which represents gas processors, says in Oct. 31 comments that EPA does not "have the legal authority to collect this information," and "as such, the ICR does not satisfy the 'practical utility' requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act" for clearing OMB review. "In this instance, because EPA has no ability as a matter of law to make use of the expansive data EPA is seeking to collect, OMB lacks authority to approve EPA's request."
The group charges that EPA's purpose for promulgating the ICR has no "practical utility" because Congress intended to limit its authority under section 111(d) to prevent EPA from regulating any pollutant emitted from a source category subject to section 112 of the air law, or air toxics regulations. EPA has already regulated the oil and gas sector under section 112, the comments say. "Thus EPA cannot issue guidelines under Section 111(d) for existing oil and gas facilities," the group says, and also reiterates that EPA cannot move to cut methane from the sector without first having issued an endangerment finding under section 111.
Additionally, GPA Midstream Association says if OMB does allow the ICR to proceed, EPA should extend the deadline to respond to the ICR by at least 120 days, revise its definition of "gathering and boosting compressor station facility" to conform with existing regulatory definitions, and make changes to clarify the sampling methods that should be used in ICR responses.
American Petroleum Institute says in Oct. 31 comments that OMB should hold off approving the ICR until EPA can show that the contact information of the recipients listed in the request is accurate, saying that failure to do so could result in an ICR that is biased toward large operators and not representative of the industry. Additionally, API asks EPA to extend the deadlines for responding to the ICR by 180 days.
Data Collection
American Gas Association (AGA), which represents the distribution sector, says in Oct. 28 comments that because the section 111(b) new source rules excluded gas utility operations downstream of the local distribution company (LDC) custody transfer station, an existing source rule cannot target those facilities.
"The proposed ICR is intended to obtain data to help EPA develop a proposed ESPS for natural gas facilities, but we understand that under the ICR submitted to OMB, EPA still proposes to collect data from some facilities that will notbe subject to the ESPS," the AGA comments say.
AGA estimates only two to four of the storage facilities targeted in the ICR are located upstream of the LDC custody transfer station and will potentially be subject to the upcoming ESPS, and raises questions over the 96 otherwise exempt facilities subject to the ICR. "We question whether EPA can show that this is truly necessary to obtain a 'statistically valid sample' that will have practical utility in developing the ESPS," the comments say.
Earthjustice meanwhile in Oct. 31 comments says it supports the ICR but asks EPA to strengthen the collection of data on hazardous air pollutants data to ensure that "this ICR is as efficient and as useful as possible to the agency as it fulfills its regulatory obligations to reduce methane and achieve as many health benefits as possible from that action, and also to reduce communities' exposure to hazardous air pollutants directly and ensure much-needed protection for local public health."
http://insideepa.com/daily-news/epa-data-plan-spurs-warnings-over-future-existing-source-methane-rule

Return to headline | Return to top
No Change Expected to Senate Energy Committee Leadership

Nov 10, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report

By Rachel Leven

Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) is set to continue her leadership of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, following Democrats’ failure to win the Senate in the election.
The major energy bill currently in conference remains a priority on all sides to get to the president's desk in the lame duck, former and current Senate energy committee aides and observers told Bloomberg BNA.
But under a Murkowski chairmanship, some issues from the bill could be revisited in another energy bill in 2017.
“Sen. Murkowski feels like this was certainly a good step forward,” Kaleb Froehlich, former senior counsel to Murkowski on the Senate energy committee and now vice president at Cassidy & Associates in Washington, told Bloomberg BNA, referring to the energy bill (S. 2012). “This shouldn't be a once-in-a-decade exercise.”

As of midday Nov. 9, Republicans kept the Senate by a 51-47 margin and, less surprisingly, preserved their majority in the House in the Nov. 8 election. A spokeswoman for Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) told Bloomberg BNA in an e-mail the senator hopes to retain her position as ranking member on the Senate energy committee.
Energy Bill to Be Completed
The energy bill, which the Senate and House are currently working on in conference, is still a top priority for the current chairman and ranking member to get to the president's desk this session, Froehlich and a Cantwell spokeswoman told Bloomberg BNA.
Chris Vieson, partner at Public Strategies Washington Inc. who served as director of floor operations for former House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.), told Bloomberg BNA there appears to be a good chance of getting it done in the lame duck.
Given the incentive to finish the bill and what is largely status quo in Congress after the election, the bill likely won't be significantly reopened or shifted, Froehlich said. Vieson agreed.
Froehlich said areas where Murkowski sees room for improvement or some major issues such as permitting reform in the energy bill, could be revisited in 2017.
Other areas Murkowski sought to address, such as getting a 20-mile gravel road through Izembek National Wildlife Refuge in southwestern Alaska built, could remain on her agenda depending on whether an omnibus funding package is put together by the Dec. 8 deadline or if another continuing resolution is sent to President Barack Obama's desk.
Murkowski may also look to focus on additional priorities more intensely in 2017. Western water issues, oil development in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and a funding fix for firefighting are all also possibilities for her agenda, Froehlich said.
Presidential Dynamics?
Who is president matters, as well, Froehlich said. However, it isn't clear how well Murkowski will work with Donald Trump. Murkowski in October came out against the then-Republican presidential nominee following the release of a video in which Trump made comments objectifying and degrading women.
However, nominees that must go through the Senate energy committee could face a tougher vetting by Murkowski in 2017.
She will likely be securing firmer commitments from Interior Department and Energy Department officials up for confirmation, after having major disagreements with Interior Secretary Sally Jewell's handling of Western issues such as King Cove road issues, Froehlich said.
“She sort of didn't feel the reciprocation from this administration at times,” Froehlich said, adding the ideal nominees will know Western issues and Alaska or be “willing to learn.”

http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=100165233&vname=dennotallissues&fn=100165233&jd=100165233

Return to headline | Return to top
Pennsylvania Court Stays Parts of New Shale Regulations

Nov 9, 2016 | Natural Gas Intelligence

By Jamison Cocklin

The Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court has stayed parts of the state's regulatory overhaul for shale drillers to consider the merits of a lawsuit filed by the Marcellus Shale Coalition (MSC) that challenges key provisions of the package.
MSC filed its lawsuit last month, seeking declaratory judgment that sections of the regulatory package are unlawful (see Shale Daily, Oct. 14). It also filed an application for summary relief and expedited review, asking the court to stay the sections it's challenging until the legality of the provisions are decided.
MSC attorneys have argued that those sections violate state law and harm members. In an order granting preliminary injunctive relief on Tuesday, Judge P. Kevin Brobson enjoined the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) from implementing some of the regulations. He found that the enjoined provisions could cause irreparable harm to MSC's members and noted that regulators might not have the authority to implement them.
The DEP began drafting the regulations about five years ago, and they went into effect Oct. 8. Less than a week later the MSC filed its lawsuit. The new rules are designed to reduce impacts on public resources, such as schools and parks, help prevent spills, strengthen waste management and require stronger well site restoration.
MSC President David Spigelmyer said the industry group agreed with the court’s decision “to preliminarily stay unlawful, burdensome and costly portions of the challenged regulations from going into effect until this matter can be fully decided in the courts. Our industry supports fair, consistent and clear regulations that ensure environmental and public safety. All seven provisions that the MSC has challenged conflict with DEP's statutory authority granted by the General Assembly as well as [state] Supreme Court precedent and bring immediate harm to our industry."
The court stayed a section that would require more stringent well site restoration standards in its entirety and another that require existing impoundments to be closed or upgraded within 12 months. It also enjoined part of the public resources protection provision that would require operators to conduct a review of the impacts drilling would have on parks, forests, rivers, national landmarks, schools and drinking water protection areas. The court stayed those regulations for schools, playgrounds and species of special concern. The court also enjoined rules that would require operators to monitor and remediate damage to wells owned by other companies or those without an owner.
However, the court denied the MSC's challenge to monthly waste reporting, spill remediation and the onsite processing of drill cuttings.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/108388-pennsylvania-court-stays-parts-of-new-shale-regulations

Return to headline | Return to top
Voters Reject Washington Carbon Tax Proposal

Nov 10, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report

By Paul Shukovsky

Washington voters definitively rejected what would have been the nation's first direct carbon tax, according to early election returns in this vote-by-mail state.
Initiative 732 would have imposed a carbon emission tax on fossil fuels while simultaneously reducing both sales taxes and business and occupation taxes. Late-night returns Nov. 8 showed 58.5 percent of voters rejected the measure and 41.5 percent favored it. About 1.9 million votes had been counted; there are 4.3 million registered voters in the state.
The tax would have been levied on the carbon content of fossil fuels sold or used in the state and of electricity consumed in the state, including power imported from elsewhere.
Yoram Bauman, founder and co-chair of the initiative campaign, conceded defeat late Nov. 8 in an e-mail: “While we did not pass the nation's first carbon tax, many states around the country are looking at I-732 as a model and we expect a nationwide movement to take root in the years ahead.”
‘Awakened a Sleeping Giant.’
Bauman told Bloomberg BNA in October that he had sought to avoid ideological arguments over whether the carbon tax would expand or contract government by crafting a law with the intent to be revenue neutral. It would have phased in a one percentage point reduction in the state sales tax and implemented a partial sales tax exemption for low-income families to address inherent regressivity—all paid for by a phased-in tax on carbon emissions.
But the approach fractured the state's environmental movement, and many joined with organized labor and minority-rights organizations in preferring an approach that would spend revenue collected from putting a price on carbon on investment in the creation of a clean-energy economy.
At an election night union rally in Seattle, Washington State Labor Council Secretary-Treasurer Lynne Dodson told Bloomberg BNA that the defeat of I-732 provides an opportunity to find climate change solutions “that invest in a clean-energy economy. They identified the right problem, just not the right solution. We have to be investing in clean-energy solutions—in solar, in wind. We also have to make sure that whatever solution we have, that we are not leaving behind workers and communities of color that have already been most impacted by climate change.”
Audubon Washington, the state office of the National Audubon Society, was the only major conservation organization to support the initiative. In an election night e-mail, Gail Gatton, the group's executive director, wrote: “While tonight's outcome is disappointing, Audubon members and supporters all across Washington rose to the occasion and said yes to a cleaner, better future. We have awakened a sleeping giant, and we look forward to continuing the fight for commonsense climate solutions for birds and for people.”
Investing in Post-Carbon Economy
The Sierra Club, which didn't support the measure, said in a Nov. 8 e-mail: “Voters of Washington State rejected a measure that would have put a price on carbon, known as Initiative I-732, because it lacked direct investments in climate mitigation, green jobs and communities hardest hit by climate change. We must learn from this experience and work together to deliver solutions that invest directly into climate mitigation, clean energy jobs and communities long exploited by the fossil fuel industry.”
Conservation groups working through a coalition called the Alliance for Jobs and Clean Energy are discussing such a solution for proposal to the state Legislature in the upcoming session that would not only put a price on carbon, but also invest in a post-carbon economy.

http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=100165235&vname=dennotallissues&fn=100165235&jd=100165235

Return to headline | Return to top

Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.

Transportation News

(ACC Mentioned) Railroads See Trump Presidency As a Boost: Update

Nov 9, 2016 | Arrgus Media

Washington, 9 November (Argus) — US railroads view the victory of Republican President-elect Donald Trump yesterday as an opportunity to rein in federal regulation of shipping rates.
But chemicals shippers that are battling railroads over a number of proposed new federal regulations say a Trump presidency will actually help them by creating a free market for shipping rates while increasing manufacturing and improving infrastructure.
Trump's triumph shocked many Americans after early polling indicated Democrat Hillary Clinton was favored to win. The US House of Representatives and Senate will also remain in Republican control, altering the prospects for federal environmental rules and other policies of outgoing President Barack Obama.
Trump "understands many of the economic challenges facing this country," the Association of American Railroads (AAR) said. "As such, we hope he will move quickly on issues such as comprehensive tax reform that reduces the corporate rate, a review and reform of the broken regulatory system and an embracement of fair and open trade."
Once Trump becomes president, he will have the power to appoint three members to the Surface Transportation Board (STB) and potentially shift its focus away from rail regulatory reforms that have been started under its current Democratic-controlled majority. The board, expanded to five members from three by Congress in legislation last year, is structured to have a majority of its members from the president's party, meaning all of Trump's appointments will be Republicans and likely less willing to regulate carriers. And with Republicans also in control of the Senate, Trump will more easily be able to push his nominees through.
AAR had recently complained to Congress that STB was overstepping regulatory boundaries set in a reauthorization act passed in December 2015. "We look forward to continued dialogue on our most important issues — including stopping unfounded regulatory efforts at the US Surface Transportation Board — and are eager to begin a new legislative session," AAR said.
But many aspects of a Trump presidency are unknown, and with a corporate-friendly attitude he might be sympathetic to the perspective of large shipping interests such as the American Chemistry Council (ACC) and National Industrial Transportation League.
Pointing to the country's vast shale gas resources, ACC said it can work with new administration to create a "manufacturing renaissance" and work with the new administration to develop energy resources and infrastructure.
"Our nation's outdated freight rail regulations can no longer be allowed to shield the rail industry from the free market at the expense of manufacturers, farmers and energy producers and our ability to grow the US economy," ACC said. "We look forward to working with the Trump administration and the next Congress to ensure the STB uses its Congressional mandate to adopt meaningful reforms that will put an end to regulatory protections for the rail industry and will promote greater competition amongst rail carriers."
STB chairman Dan Elliott and vice-chair Deb Miller are Democrats and Republican member Ann Begeman is due to leave at the end of the year.
A Trump presidency also means new leadership at the Federal Railroad Administration and the US Department of Transportation.
Trump and Clinton had both promoted more infrastructure spending that could bolster US ports, highways, bridges, and other projects to relieve freight bottlenecks.
Trump had promised to "implement a bold, visionary plan for a cost-effective system of roads, bridges, tunnels, airports, railroads, ports and waterways, and pipelines in the proud tradition of president Dwight Eisenhower, who championed the interstate highway system."
Railroads are mostly funded with private money, but improvements to ports and other infrastructure could relieve congestion and allow more profit for carriers. Improvements to roads and highways would bolster trucking and possibly intermodal traffic for railroads.
The American Trucking Associations today said it is looking forward to working with Trump on "long-term, sustainable infrastructure funding, tax reform and fair and free trade." The group said it has already begun meeting with the Trump transition team.
Trump is also likely to attempt a rollback of many Obama environmental policies and has promised to gut the Clean Power Plan for reducing CO2 emissions from power generation. This could stimulate coal demand for railroads, but low natural gas prices have also played a large role in the demise of coal.
http://www.argusmedia.com/news/article/?id=1346867

Return to headline | Return to top

Environment News

(ACC Mentioned) Science Committee Subpoena Effort Poised for Repeat: Advocates

Nov 10, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report

By Brian Dabbs

A newly established oversight role at the House Science Committee is likely to roll over into the 115th Congress, as Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) remains at the helm for another term, industry and environmental advocates told Bloomberg BNA.
The committee is likely to keep Environmental Protection Agency and Interior Department rulemaking in its cross hairs, environmental advocacy groups said. Another two years of subpoena-heavy investigations into scientific analyses relating to climate change from both federal agencies and advocacy groups is also a distinct possibility, they said.
Science Committee Republicans granted Smith unilateral subpoena power at the outset of the 114th Congress after the full House Republican caucus paved the way for that rule change.
Congress traditionally uses limited subpoena power, often requiring committee majorities to seek approval from the minority side or at least obtain committee consent through a vote. Smith has led the committee with subpoena power exempt from bipartisan consultation.
Science Committee Republicans will stay largely intact, aside from the retirement of Randy Neugebauer (R-Texas).
Industry Heartened
The committee this Congress aimed to ensure that EPA and other regulatory actions reflected the best-available science, American Chemistry Council spokesman Scott Jensen told Bloomberg BNA.
“We hope the committee will continue to focus on promoting the use of credible science in government policy-making,” he said. This can be achieved by “by preventing bad policies, practices or conclusions from other regions, particularly from the [European Union] or from [International Agency for Research on Cancer], from infiltrating U.S. science programs and ensuring that U.S. research funding is dedicated to projects and programs that will have a meaningful impact on public health.”
A committee subpoena in July sought information from New York and Massachusetts attorneys general and eight environmental groups over allegations that Exxon Mobil Corp. willfully obscured climate science. Exxon didn't respond to a comment request, and the American Petroleum Institute, which represents Exxon, declined comment.
The committee also subpoenaed the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in 2015 over climate communications, prompting the agency to brief the committee. A committee spokeswoman declined to comment to Bloomberg BNA when asked whether Smith will continue to push that level of oversight under an administration led by President-elect Donald Trump.
Climate Change Advocates Brace
The Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), one of those groups subpoenaed by Smith, is concerned about a repeat of the committee's oversight emphasis next Congress, Yogin Kothari, a UCS advocate based in Washington, DC, told Bloomberg BNA.
“I anticipate him to focus on regulations and public health protection. That's not our hope,” said Kothari. “We do hope that the committee focuses more on science and competitiveness. The Science Committee doesn't need to carry water for industry.”
The association of scientists released roughly 1,300 pages of already publicly available documents to the committee in response to the subpoena, said Kothari, noting that the committee hasn't yet responded to that release.
Kothari said Smith is likely to push forward in the 115th Congress with the Secret Science Reform Act, a bill that would add requirements for EPA research disclosures linked to regulatory action, and America Competes reauthorization, which supporters say aims to strengthen energy innovation.
Meanwhile, Aaron Mintzes, an Earthworks advocate, said the committee is poised to investigate the EPA and the Bureau of Land Management hydraulic fracturing policies and research. The committee is also likely to attack the United Nations climate change deal reached in Paris last year, referring to an international pact that Smith has repeatedly criticized.
Top Democrat Skeptical
Despite the concerns articulated by advocates for climate change action, Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-Texas), the Science Committee Ranking Member, said a Trump presidency may lead Smith to shift gears.
“He's primarily been focused on investigating the Obama Administration over the past couple of years, using his expanded subpoena and deposition powers. I would imagine that there will be much less interest on his part in carrying out a similar investigative agenda against a Trump Administration,” she told Bloomberg BNA. “I thus am hopeful that the Chairman will return the Committee to a constructive legislative agenda that advances our nation's research, development, and innovation enterprise.”
Committee Democrats will lose Reps. Alan Grayson (D-Fla.) and Donna Edwards (D-Md.), both of whom ran unsuccessfully for Senate seats. That will leave vacant top Democratic posts on the Energy and Space subcommittees.

http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=100165236&vname=dennotallissues&wsn=498107000&searchid=28797799&doctypeid=1&type=date&mode=doc&split=0&scm=DELNWB&pg=0

Return to headline | Return to top
House, Senate GOP Ready To Work With Trump On Enviro Rollbacks

Nov 10, 2016 | E&E News Daily

By George Cahlink

A stunning upset this week by Republican Donald Trump and GOP victories in both chambers will allow the party to move aggressively to push for environmental rollbacks.
The results, at least for now, are not expected to upend either party's leadership — although retirements, term limits and the outcomes of a few races will affect green issues.
"I definitely think Congress is going to be a major force because, of course, Donald Trump is an outsider, ran as an outsider, won as an outsider. I think Congress is going to be the governor, if you will, meaning to shape the promises that Donald Trump made," said former Texas Republican Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison yesterday.
Some hard-line conservatives had talked about ousting House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) over his lukewarm support of Trump during the campaign.
But yesterday he seemed to suggest more of a partnership and embraced the billionaire in the election afterglow. He said Trump's coattails helped the GOP limit losses in the House to less than half a dozen seats.
"Donald Trump will lead a unified Republican government. And we will work hand in hand on a positive agenda to tackle this country's big challenges," said Ryan, marking a stunning reversal after the speaker refused to campaign with Trump this fall.
Adopting the president-elect's populist rhetoric, Ryan said the House GOP would work with Trump to "bring relief" to farmers and ranchers who feel "harassed" by U.S. EPA and the Interior Department. Ryan also said he would look for ways to aid laid-off coal miners.
Ryan has scheduled GOP leadership elections for next week, and no clear challenger to him has surfaced. The speaker, who is a prolific fundraiser and popular with most members in the caucus, said he has already spoken to Trump twice since the election and that they have begun working on their shared legislative goals.
Rep. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.), one of the first lawmakers to back Trump, said any opposition to Ryan has "dissipated." He said Ryan, in a members-only call yesterday, made it clear he is "genuinely enthused" about working with Trump to enact legislation.
Cramer said the speaker faced no pushback on the call over his earlier criticism of Trump.'Friend in the White House'
Cramer said Trump will seek to overturn policies or actions related to the Clean Water Act, limits on fracking, the coal mining stream protection rule and the Clean Power Plan. And he said Trump is unlikely to enforce the Paris climate accord.
Cramer, a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, said the GOP Congress may look to make changes to landmark environmental legislation, such as the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act, to narrow their scope.
Cramer said he is excited to have a "friend in the White House." However, he also would not rule out a Senate run in 2018, when Democratic Sen. Heidi Heitkamp is up for re-election.
"Never say what you'll never do," he joked.
Ryan yesterday singled out National Republican Congressional Committee Chairman Greg Walden (R-Ore.) and his staff for praise, saying they had done a "phenomenal job."
Walden's success could give him an edge in the race to become the next chairman of the Energy and Commerce Committee, where Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.) is term limited.
Walden and Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill.) have been lobbying members for the seat for months. Aides say that in a race between two respected lawmakers, members might opt to reward Walden for keeping a solid majority.
House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) also spoke with Trump yesterday, suggesting they might find common ground on moving an infrastructure bill, something the GOP president-elect campaigned on.
Pelosi has yet to announce leadership elections for her caucus, but she and much of the current Democratic leadership will seek to return.
One Democratic donor grumbled yesterday that the party needs to shake up its leadership in the House. The top three House Democrats — Pelosi, Minority Whip Steny Hoyer of Maryland and Rep. James Clyburn of South Carolina — are all in their 70s. The donor said it would be difficult to cast the Democrats as the party of change with such seasoned leaders.
"The Democratic money doesn't know where the fuck to go," said the donor, who spoke on condition of anonymity. "Who's our bench now? Who's going to run [for president] four years from now?"Senate outlook
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) believes Republicans will "enthusiastically" back their new standard-bearer.
McConnell also said he talked with New York Sen. Chuck Schumer, who will become the new Democratic leader in the next Congress, about trying to find common ground. He called Schumer "smart" and someone he respects.
McConnell noted that compromise is necessary in the Senate, where 60 votes are required to pass most legislation. "I think overreaching after an election is, generally speaking, a mistake," he added.
Schumer also spoke with Trump yesterday over the phone to congratulate the president-elect, suggesting in a statement that he wants to find shared goals they can work on.
Missing from the Senate next year will be two moderate Republicans, Sens. Kelly Ayotte of New Hampshire and Mark Kirk of Illinois, who both lost re-election.
Both believed in climate change and had offered at least some support for the Clean Power Plan. They also helped create the Senate Energy and Environmental Working Group last year.
Vice President-elect Mike Pence, a former House GOP conference chairman, could be involved with outreach between the Trump White House and congressional Republicans.
McConnell said he has invited Pence to attend weekly Senate policy luncheons. He said Vice President Dick Cheney used to drop by and used the meetings to become an unofficial "Senate liaison" during the George W. Bush administration.
Hutchison noted that Pence and Ryan are "joined at the hip." She added of the vice president, who is popular with the GOP establishment as a bulwark against Trump, "I think he's going to be a great force."
http://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2016/11/10/stories/1060045551

Return to headline | Return to top
Trump Pledge Means Cuts Ahead on Environmental Regulation

Nov 10, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report

By Renee Schoof

President-elect Donald Trump is expected to fulfill a key campaign promise to American industries to eliminate a wide range of environmental regulations.
“A critical part of the Rust Belt revolution, as some are now calling it, may have been reaction to the second Obama term, especially regulatory overreach,” said Salo Zelermyer, a partner with the Policy Resolution Group at Bracewell LLP in a webinar about the election Nov. 9. That reaction probably came from manufacturers as well as some traditional Democratic voters, such as some union members, he said.
The Trump transition team has a guide for rolling back regulations in each agency, Zelermyer said. While the Clean Power Plan, which puts the first limits on carbon emissions from power plants, is the top target, the Trump administration also is expected to consider how to eliminate regulations on oil and gas, coal mining, energy efficiency and other areas.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), said the coal industry would be a beneficiary of regulatory cuts. Both the Senate and House of Representatives remain under Republican control as a result of the election.
“One of the things I hope the new president, he mentioned this during the campaign, will do is take a look at all of the unilateral actions the president took both through executive orders and regulatory overreach of one kind or another, and the coal industry is a perfect example of that, and see how much he can undo,” McConnell said at a news conference.
Cuts to EPA, Regulations
Trump's environmental policies sketched out during the campaign included big—though unspecified—funding cuts to the Environmental Protection Agency.
Brent Fewell, a former senior EPA official and founder of the Earth & Water Group, an environmental law firm in Washington D.C., said Trump has “provided strong hints of how he will govern on environmental matters.”
“Regulatory reform no doubt will be a major focus—not a rollback, but common sense reform that balances the economy with environmental protection,” Fewell said.
The Bureau of Land Management's regulations for hydraulic fracturing, now under judicial review, are another possible target of the Trump administration, attorneys said.
“I think the fracking rules he could just stop that or make them more industry-friendly. Now that he has Congress he can pretty much do whatever he wants if Congress will agree,” Brian Potts, a partner at Perkins Coie LLP in Madison Wis., told Bloomberg BNA.
ClearView Energy Partners LLC, a policy research group, said in a Nov. 9 report that the Trump administration could use executive branch authority to make many changes, including slowing down renewable energy leasing on federal lands and waters, lifting a moratorium on federal coal leasing and revising the 2015 ozone standard.
“We view Trump's victory as generally positive for fossil energy extraction, midstream infrastructure and downstream processing; generally neutral for renewable fuels, power and storage; negative for electric vehicles; and disruptive for climate policy and international oil company investment in Iran,” ClearView said in a summary.
U-Turn on Climate
Trump also has called for cuts in climate spending that would amount to $100 billion over the next eight years, a figure his campaign said resulted from its estimate of all Obama administration spending, U.S. projected contributions to a global climate fund for poor countries, and Trump's estimate of savings to the economy if climate polices were reversed.
Environmental groups said they'd work to preserve the environmental regulations of the Obama administration.
“Make no mistake about it, and we've been here before…we'll stop the rollbacks,” Anna Aurilio, D.C. director for Environment America, said in a statement.
And Gene Karpinski, president of the League of Conservation Voters, said, “We are eager to get right back to work defending President Obama's tremendous progress in fighting climate change, protecting treasured public lands, and ensuring all communities have access to clean air and water.”
Renewable Energy Future
One area where there might be agreement is on production tax credits for renewable energy, said Scott Segal, a Bracewell attorney and lobbyist who also spoke at his firm's Nov. 9 webinar.
The tax credits for renewables are popular programs, and Trump has never said he would reject them on ideological, free-market grounds, Segal said.
At the same time, Trump has promised to boost coal, oil and natural gas.
“America is sitting on a treasure trove of untapped energy—some $50 trillion dollars in shale energy, oil reserves and natural gas on federal lands, in addition to hundreds of years of coal energy reserves,” Trump said at the Shale Insight conference, a gathering of natural gas producers in Pittsburgh Sept. 22, promising to “lift the restrictions on American energy, and allow this wealth to pour into our communities.”
The Republican president-elect has said he does not accept the scientific view that human actions—mostly burning fossil fuels—are causing climate change.
Tom Pyle, president of the American Energy Alliance in Washington, D.C., a group that endorsed Trump, said the Republican president-elect would “shatter the status quo with respect to energy policy.”

Trump has promised to reverse policies that unjustly target the use of our natural gas, oil and coal resources because he knows that affordable energy is the lifeblood of a strong economy and is essential to job creation, not just in the energy industry, but throughout the economy,” Pyle told Bloomberg BNA in an e-mail.

Pyle also said Trump likely would consider downsizing the Department of Energy and ending government support for renewable energy development, relying on the market for energy decisions.
With assistance from Amena Saiyid and Andrew Childers

http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=100165260&vname=dennotallissues&fn=100165260&jd=100165260

Return to headline | Return to top
GOP Holds Senate Majority as Democrats’ Climate Plan Crumbles

Nov 10, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report

By Dean Scott

Senate Democrats will spend at least the next two years playing defense against Republican-led attacks on Obama administration environmental and climate policies after falling well short of taking the Senate majority.
Republicans will likely end up with a 52-48 majority when the 115th Congress opens in January; Democrats gained one seat by toppling Sen. Mark Kirk (R-Ill.) and in New Hampshire, Gov. Maggie Hassan (D) has declared victory over Sen. Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.) who conceded late Nov. 9. A runoff is pending in a Louisiana Senate contest, though likely to produce a Republican winner.
Democrats failed in three contests where reliable advocates of climate action were on the ballot. Two of those races included Democrats who voted for Senate cap and trade legislation the last time it was brought to the Senate floor in 2008: Evan Bayh of Indiana and Wisconsin's Russ Feingold. Both former senators went down to defeat early on election night.
There was some good news for Democrats in Illinois, where Democratic Rep. Tammy Duckworth was the winner over incumbent Kirk; Kirk was considered the most endangered Republican of any of the vulnerable incumbents in recent months.
Democrats held on in Nevada—keeping a seat long held by Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid—but lost in Pennsylvania, where Republican incumbent Pat Toomey won a close race over Democrat Katie McGinty, the former head of the state's Department of Environmental Protection.
Here's a state-by-state rundown of key races where Republican incumbents were vulnerable in the 2016 race.
• Nevada: Democratic challenger, former Nevada Attorney General Catherine Cortez Masto, claimed victory over Republican Joe Heck, winning 47.1 percent of the vote to Heck's 44.7 percent. The Nevada election was one of the most competitive in the nation as it would decide the successor to Reid, who is retiring after 30 years in the Senate.
• Pennsylvania: Toomey beat McGinty, a strong supporter of climate action who also served as chairwoman of the White House Council on Environmental Quality under President Bill Clinton. Toomey won roughly 49 percent; McGinty just over 47 percent.

• Indiana: Republican Rep. Todd Young claimed a win over Democrat Bayh, who was seen as the favorite for much of the summer. Bayh voted for the 2008 Senate cap and trade bill, which fell on a procedural vote, the last big climate bill to be brought to the floor.
• Florida: Incumbent Republican Sen. Marco Rubio won his re-election bid, defeating Democratic challenger Patrick Murphy. Rubio was an early target of environmental groups for being skeptical that humans are causing climate change and blasting climate advocates in March for launching a “crusade” that is “just not good public policy.”
• Wisconsin: Incumbent Republican Sen. Ron Johnson defeated Democratic challenger Feingold in a rematch of their race from six years ago. Johnson, chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, is critical of what he considers to be overzealous environmental regulations under the Obama administration. Feingold, like Bayh, had also voted for the 2008 Senate cap and trade bill.
• New Hampshire: Democrat Hassan claimed victory over Republican Ayotte with a lead of only several hundred votes after election night. Ayotte was seen as moderate on environment and climate issues, so it is unclear that defeating her improves the odds for environment and climate bills. Ayotte was the first Republican to back the Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Power Plan. The League of Conservation Voters gives Ayotte a score of 56 percent in the 2015 National Environment Scorecard, higher than two Senate Democrats: Joe Manchin (W.Va.) and Heidi Heitkamp (N.D.).

http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=100165261&vname=dennotallissues&fn=100165261&jd=100165261

Return to headline | Return to top
Gloomy Greens Gear Up For Battle With President Trump

Nov 9, 2016 | PoliticoPro

By Alex Guillén and Elana Schor

Donald Trump’s presidential victory clips the wings of climate hawks who had become a potent political force under President Barack Obama and sets the stage for four years of aggressive grassroots combat against an exultant fossil-fuel industry.
As Trump’s shocking win began to sink in Wednesday, green groups that had coalesced behind Hillary Clinton — some more slowly than others — began to cast themselves in the role of scrappy fighters. Even as Obama’s bid to curb carbon emissions looks ready to go up in smoke, activists vowed to fight Trump and ascendant congressional Republicans bent on rolling back more environmental safeguards.
“Above all, we’re ready to protect the significant climate progress of recent years,” Environmental Defense Fund President Fred Krupp tweeted Wednesday. “Defense is our middle name.”
David Goldston, government affairs director for the Natural Resources Defense Council Action Fund, noted that Democrats have picked up at least one seat in the Senate, keeping the GOP further from a filibuster-proof majority that would allow lawmakers to easily undo major environmental rules. ”The president doesn’t get to rule by fiat,” Goldston said. “It’s not simple to undo regulations.”
Former Republican EPA administrators have warned that Trump’s environmental agenda could have drastic consequences. And the GOP sweep Tuesday puts them in charge of both Congress and the White House for the first time since the Supreme Court’s 2007 ruling saying EPA must regulate greenhouse gases if they pose a threat. Senate Democrats are facing a tough 2018 map, where they will be defending seats in at least nine states Trump won on Tuesday.
Friends of the Earth spokeswoman Kate Colwell vowed that “the environmental resistance will stand against Trump,” hinting that greens would only grow rowdier in its pushback against the new administration.
"The next four years will not be easy, but we have fought hostile administrations before," Colwell said in a statement, noting that “the environmental movement is stronger than we have ever been” following Obama’s year-old rejection of the Keystone XL pipeline and other organizing victories.
But Clinton’s collapse in Rust Belt states that Obama won point to their party’s lingering difficulty connecting with blue-collar voters that could empower building trade unions that urged Democrats to support Keystone, Dakota Access and other job-creating fossil-fuel infrastructure projects. Green groups will surely face new questions from Democrats about selling a climate-friendly agenda to voters who appeared to repudiate it broadly at the ballot box on Tuesday.
Bill McKibben, the 350.org co-founder who rocketed to unprecedented influence in the environmental world thanks to his group’s role in taking down Keystone, had little hope to offer on Wednesday given scientists' warnings that the world needs to quickly and dramatically reduce its carbon output to have any chance of reversing global warming.
“I don't immediately see the path forward,” McKibben said by email. “We have such a short window to deal with climate change, and it feels to me like it got significantly narrower last night.”
Jamie Henn, the strategy director at 350.org, proposed that green groups focus on strengthening the grassroots protest energy that prodded Obama to kill Keystone and stall Dakota Access.
“No matter how this plays out, we're going to need a massive movement to defend the progress we've made and look for openings where we can,” Henn said by email. “We've shown the ability to hold up fossil fuel projects on the ground.”
Trump has urged the company behind Keystone to find a way to resurrect the project so that he could legally approve it, albeit with “a piece of the profits” for U.S. taxpayers. A spokesman for pipeline sponsor TransCanada said Wednesday that the company is "evaluating ways to engage the new administration" on the benefits of reviving the project.
Dakota Access also appears pulled back from the brink of indefinite delay by a Trump presidency. The New York developer reported owning as much as $50,000 in shares of the pipeline’s backer on financial disclosure forms last year, and some of his top advisers are longtime champions of the $3.7 billion project.
"A tremendous amount of anxiety is now flowing over many Nebraska farmers, ranchers and Native allies around [the Keystone] pipeline,” Jane Kleeb, founder of the green group Bold Alliance, said by email.
“This same anxiety is very real for landowners across the country who now must hope that Donald Trump was just using words on the campaign trail and will take property rights and climate change seriously,” added Kleeb, the incoming chair of the Nebraska Democratic Party.
Oil and gas lobbyists, a great number of whom kept their pocketbooks closed for Trump while weighing whether Clinton’s more predictably centrist style would be preferable, now face the best of all possible outcomes. President Trump is poised to be held to conservative energy orthodoxy by one of the strongest Republican Congresses in history, where lawmakers spent the last eight years fighting federal agencies tooth and nail on rule after rule and working to open more federal lands and waters to oil drilling.
The post-election landscape points to one outcome: A rapid reversal of Obama’s climate agenda, followed by years of feet-dragging on any efforts to defend those rules or force action via lawsuits.
“It’s virtually certain the Clean Power Plan will be revoked,” Jeff Holmstead, a George W. Bush-era EPA air chief who now works at Bracewell, said of Obama’s signature emissions proposal. “I’m quite confident based on everything I’m hearing from people close to the campaign or transition that they’ll make good on that promise.”
Holmstead added that he thinks environmentalists would have a “hard time” challenging any Trump regulatory revocation because they would have to argue that Obama’s rule was precisely how the law required EPA to regulate.
Trump's precise blueprint to reverse Obama’s actions on climate change is unclear. But legal experts have some idea of what could happen.
First, he likely would pull back Obama-era regulations working their way through the courts — most notably the Clean Power Plan, the landmark EPA rule targeting carbon dioxide emissions from power plants. That rule was stayed in an unprecedented move by the Supreme Court earlier this year and is pending review before the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals.
Legal experts from both sides agree that the Trump administration could ask the D.C. Circuit to send the CPP back to EPA for reconsideration, assuming judges have not yet ruled by Jan. 20. It’s unclear whether the court would approve such a request, and environmentalists and other groups supporting the CPP would fight it fiercely.
To reverse any Obama rules already in place, Trump would have to direct his administration to go through a whole new notice-and-comment rulemaking process explaining how the new version fixes flaws in the old, and environmentalists would be able to challenge any of those new rules in court.
Trump has also vowed to review EPA’s scientific conclusion in 2009 that greenhouse gases threaten public health, the underlying basis of all its Obama-era climate rules. Even if Trump leaves that finding in place, it could in theory be satisfied with rules that require relatively minimal efforts to reduce emissions from coal plants by boosting efficiency.
Trump could take similar actions with other rules, including the separate regulation related rule setting carbon limits for new power plants, the Waters of the United States rule, and the 2015 ozone standard. If Obama moves to set areas in the offshore Atlantic and Arctic permanently off-limits to drilling, as some environmentalists were suggesting before Trump's stunning win, the new president would likely try to reverse that move too.
The Interior Department has been working on a rewrite of the stream protection rule, a key coal mining regulation. If that is finalized in Obama’s final days in office, the regulation would be vulnerable to a Congressional Review Act veto that could block any future update under any president.
https://www.politicopro.com/energy/story/2016/11/gloomy-greens-gear-up-for-battle-with-president-trump-137373

Return to headline | Return to top
Fierce Opponent of Climate Action to Chair Environment Panel

Nov 10, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report

By Dean Scott and Stephanie Beasley

Republicans who nearly ran the table election night and will hold the Senate will likely bring a fierce opponent of President Barack Obama's climate agenda to head its Environment and Public Works Committee: Wyoming Republican Sen. John Barrasso.
Barrasso would succeed current EPW Chairman Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), who is term-limited under Republican Senate rules. Most expect the same level of opposition to climate change policies and what Republicans argue was overzealous environmental regulations under Obama.
The crucial difference: Barrasso, unlike Inhofe, will hold the gavel with a Republican in the White House and continued Republican control of the House, making it a near certainty that he and other opponents of the Paris climate pact, Obama climate and environmental regulations, and international climate funding will be on the offensive. The committee also is likely to spend much of early 2017 confirming President-elect Donald Trump's (R) nominee to administer the Environmental Protection Agency.
Barrasso also shares Inhofe's skepticism over the links between human activity and climate change. One slight distinction: Inhofe represents an oil state, while Wyoming is a coal state, suggesting more of an emphasis within EPW on the coal industry, which might be welcomed by coal state Republican Sen. Shelley Moore Capito (W. Va.), who is the most senior committee Republican after the new chairman.
“Barrasso is a solid yes as chairman,” a Republican EPW committee aide told Bloomberg BNA Nov. 9, adding that the ranking Democrat on the committee is a little less clear.
Asked to elaborate on the prospective chairman's agenda, Barasso's spokeswoman, Laura Mengelkamp, said Nov. 9 the senator would have no comment “at this time.”
Minority Spot Opens for Carper
With Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-Calif.) retiring, the top Democratic spot would fall to the most senior Democrat left, Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.).
But Carper also could opt to stay on as ranking minority member at the Committee on Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs, an arguably less divisive committee.
Carper is still not showing his cards, however. He insists he's focused on work in the lame-duck session—the agenda includes keeping the government open after mid-December—when the House and Senate resumes the 114th Congress after the election.
“I have not yet made a decision and think we have a lot of important work to accomplish in the 114th Congress before we start planning what we will do in the 115th,” Carper said in a prepared statement.
A Path for Senator Whitehouse?
Democrats could also eye a more combative Democrat for the EPW minority post such as Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), a leading Senate advocate of climate action who has taken on Exxon and other fossil fuel companies for their alleged efforts to undercut climate science and low-ball climate risks to the companies from investors and the public.
Whitehouse would have to leapfrog other Democrats with more seniority—Sens. Ben Cardin (D-Md.) and Bernie Sanders (I/D-Vt.) but they also have options for ranking committee slots elsewhere. Whitehouse might have more enthusiastic backing among many environmental groups that see him as more passionate on the climate issue than the more measured Carper.
Continued Cooperation on Infrastructure?
Infrastructure investment was one area where Inhofe and Boxer, the departing ranking Democrat, agreed and the peace on that front is unlikely to be disrupted by a change in committee leadership, Jack Schenendorf, former House transportation committee chief of staff, told Bloomberg BNA.
“I'd be quite surprised if things deteriorated in any substantial way,” he told Bloomberg BNA.
Jeff Davis, a senior fellow at the Eno Center for Transportation, said Barrasso is unlikely to pursue a dramatically different approach on transportation than Inhofe. Barrasso was a member of the conference committee that negotiated a five-year surface transportation reauthorization law known as the FAST Act and was especially supportive of a provision that created a new formula funding program for freight.
Carper is seen by those tracking infrastructure and transportation as continuing to show strong interest in establishing new funding mechanisms for infrastructure, if he takes the top committee Democratic slot. Last year, Carper voted against the $305 billion FAST Act because he said its non-transportation-related-pay-fors were a “grab bag of budget gimmicks.”
Carper, a former governor of Delaware and former chairman of the National Governors Association, previously floated a proposal to raise federal gas and diesel taxes to replenish the Highway Trust Fund that supports federal highway and transit programs.
The Delaware senator told Bloomberg BNA earlier this year that he would be tracking provisions in the FAST Act that provide states with incentives to experiment with different user fee models like vehicle-miles-traveled.
Senate EPW won't have another major transportation reauthorization legislation like the FAST Act on its plate again this Congress. But as with other congressional committees with oversight authority of the Department of Transportation, the environment committee could be pulled into deliberations on any major infrastructure proposal released by the next administration.
President-elect Trump has laid out plans to pursue within the first 100 days of his presidency a $1 trillion infrastructure plan that would give tax breaks to private investors for lending money to states and municipalities launching new projects.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=100165239&vname=dennotallissues&fn=100165239&jd=100165239

Return to headline | Return to top
Fate of Obama's Climate Regulations Now in Trump's Hands

Nov 10, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report

By Andrew Childers

President Barack Obama's signature domestic effort on climate change is in significant jeopardy after the Nov. 8 victory of President-elect Donald Trump.
Trump has vowed to undo the Clean Power Plan, the first ever carbon dioxide standards for power plants, and with Republican control of Congress and a vacant U.S. Supreme Court seat to fill, he has several options to roll back Obama's climate efforts, attorneys said.
Brian Potts, a partner at Perkins Coie LLP in Madison, Wisc., said Trump would have three options for killing off Obama's signature climate regulation: allowing a conservative U.S. Supreme Court to kill the rule, initiating a new rulemaking to revoke the carbon dioxide standards, or working with congressional Republicans to amend the Clean Air Act to explicitly bar regulation of greenhouse gases under the statute.
“The problem for Clean Power Plan advocates is anyone of those three spells doom for the Clean Power Plan,” Potts told Bloomberg BNA.
The Clean Power Plan (RIN:2060-AR33) is currently under review by a 10-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, which heard arguments Sept. 27 (West Virginia v. EPA, D.C. Cir. en banc, No. 15-1363, 9/27/16).
The Supreme Court had already intervened to stay the rule just prior to Justice Antonin Scalia's death, and Trump will be able to fill that vacancy, ensuring the high court's conservative tilt should litigants seek to have the court rule on the Clean Power Plan.
Beyond repealing the rule, the Trump administration could simply signal that it would not implement the rule at all, although that may trigger additional lawsuits from environmental groups.
“The easiest thing would be to just signal he's not going to enforce it. So if a state does not produce an implementation plan on schedule, if we ever get a schedule back, he could indicate no action would be taken,” Michael Gerrard, director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia Law School in New York city, told Bloomberg BNA.
Amending the Law
With control of both chambers of Congress, Republicans could reopen the Clean Air Act for the first time since 1990 to explicitly bar regulation of greenhouse gases under the statute. However, that approach could come with its own pitfalls.
“That's now something that is on the table that wasn't on the table before,” Jim Rubin, a partner at Partner, Dorsey & Whitney LLP in Washington, D.C., told Bloomberg BNA.
Though banning greenhouse gas regulation under the Clean Air Act would kill all of the EPA's climate change regulations, not just emissions standards for power plants, it could actually spur more climate change litigation, this time targeting utilities directly.
The Supreme Court in 2011 found that the existence of the EPA's authority to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act displaced states’ ability to bring common law nuisance claims against power plants they had argued were contributing to climate change (Am. Elec. Power Co. v. Connecticut, 131 S. Ct. 2527, 2011 BL 161239, 72 ERC 1609 (2011)).
In that opinion, the court had specifically cited Section 111(d) of the act, which is the basis for the EPA's Clean Power Plan. Undercutting the EPA's Clean Air Act authority could have the effect of spurring an additional wave of common law nuisance claims against power companies, even though such lawsuits are unlikely to prevail, Rubin said.
Advocates Seek Positives
Despite Trump's victory, environmental groups argued the Clean Power Plan's fate isn't sealed yet.
“No, we don't consider the Clean Power Plan dead,” David Goldston, director of government affairs at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said during a press conference with several environmental groups.

Goldston said the lengthy process to revoke EPA rules still presents a significant hurdle to the Trump administration if it seeks to roll back Obama's climate regulations.
“As president, [Trump] cannot just snap his fingers and wish away regulations,” Goldston said.
Despite grim prospects, environmental advocates insisted that the Clean Power Plan could still survive judicial scrutiny or potentially be sent back to the EPA for revisions, which would open up new opportunities for advocacy groups to pressure the Trump administration to act on climate change.
“We're going to continue to defend it, insist that any changes follow the law and have a basis in fact,” Sean Donahue of the Washington, D.C., offices of Donahue & Goldberg LLP, who represents environmental groups in the Clean Power Plan litigation, told Bloomberg BNA.
“We don't think the American people voted to ignore climate change yesterday and to ignore the environment. We're going to do our job, which is to do our best to defend those things.”
However, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) called repealing the Clean Power Plan a top priority during a Nov. 9 press conference.
“Day one would be a good idea,” he said.
With assistance from Patrick Ambrosio

http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=100165266&vname=dennotallissues&fn=100165266&jd=100165266

Return to headline | Return to top
States See Same Climate Paths After Trump Election

Nov 10, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report

By Gerald B. Silverman

States already controlling greenhouse gas emissions will continue unabated despite Donald Trump's presidential victory, but his election could offer a reprieve for those states that had resisted action.
“I think that dynamic is not changed by this election,” Kenneth Kimmell, president of the Union of Concerned Scientists, which is based in Cambridge, Mass., told Bloomberg BNA.
Kimmell said states acted because they wanted to address the dangers of climate change and become leaders in “the clean energy economy,” not because they were under pressure from the federal government. States like California and the nine states in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative went beyond federal requirements under Democratic and Republican administrations and are expected to continue on their current course, environmentalists and academics said.
“We may see a return to the situation that prevailed during the Bush-Cheney era, when, in the face of a hostile administration, states took many actions on their own,” Michael Gerrard, director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University in New York, told Bloomberg BNA in an e-mail.
“There will also be a major role for cities, especially on the climate adaptation front,” he said.
1981?
Daniel Riesel, principal at Sive, Paget & Riesel based in New York City, likens the situation to 1981, when Ronald Reagan took office and attempted to undo Jimmy Carter's environmental regulations. He said the attempted retrenchment resulted in increased state activism and citizen-driven lawsuits.
“States and municipalities have found it to be good politics to advance environmental causes in the face of congressional gridlock, and there can be no doubt that they will increase their regulatory programs and may engage in creative programs to reduce climate warming gases, abate the proliferation of solid and hazardous waste, and attempt to encroach upon the jurisdiction of what they will perceive as a moribund federal environmental agency,” he told Bloomberg BNA in an e-mail.
“Another factor that was not so forcefully present in 1981 is a corporate awareness that they are also the custodians of the environment,” Riesel said.
California
“California will continue to lead nationally and globally on these issues,” California Air Resources Board Chairman Mary D. Nichols told Bloomberg BNA in an e-mail from Sacramento.
Many California climate programs, like the state's landmark Global Warming Solutions Act (A.B. 32) and greenhouse gas emissions standards for passenger cars, predate the Obama administration's programs. A Trump administration, however, could deny California requests for Clean Air Act waivers needed to implement additional vehicle standards beyond federal requirements.
The state's climate policies also could suffer if federal tax credits for solar and wind energy and for electric vehicles are eliminated, Ethan Elkind, a law professor at both the University of California, Los Angeles and the University of California, Berkeley, said in a Legal Planet blog post.
California relies on the federal tax credits and research programs to lessen the economic burden of transitioning to clean energy, he said.
“Without that support, California's policies will likely become more expensive and potentially politically unpopular,” Elkind said.
Northeast
The nine RGGI states are in the midst of a program review that could very well tighten the greenhouse gas emissions cap for the cap-and-trade program. The program has endured throughout Republican and Democratic administrations in both Washington and at the state level.
“I do expect the New England states will continue their energy planning,” with or without federal support, Christopher Recchia, commissioner of the Vermont Department of Public Service, told Bloomberg BNA..
“Most of us have had to do so on our own anyway because of the stalemate that has been operating in Congress for many years,” he said. “While we look forward to a federal partner, it's not critical that we have one,” Recchia said.
Vicki Arroyo, executive director of the Georgetown Climate Center based in Washington D.C., said “we expect that states will continue to transition to clean energy and promoting efficiency.”
“These changes have been driven largely by state policies and market forces that are unlikely to change,” she told Bloomberg BNA in an e-mail.
“Based on early conversations with senior state officials today from some red and blue-led states, I expect we will see a number of states and cities continuing to lead in promoting clean energy and increasing resilience to climate impacts,” she said.
Washington State
Washington Gov. Jay Inslee (D), a climate hawk since his days as a congressman, is expected to continue taking whatever executive action he can to circumvent the state Senate, where Republicans hold a tenuous majority.
A revenue-neutral carbon tax initiative—which would have been the first such tax in the United States—failed at the ballot box with 59 percent voting no. Initiative 732 had no provisions for investing in a post-carbon economy. Supporters of the initiative said its failure to pass opens up the opportunity for new alliances with organized labor and communities of color who opposed the initiative and are seeking a seat at the table to shape a sustainable economy.
Jennifer Smokelin, an attorney in the Pittsburgh office of Reed Smith LLP, said the defeat of the Washington carbon tax may portend weaker state action, particularly since Washington is considered a green state.
She told Bloomberg BNA in an e-mail that the Trump victory may “take the urgency out of any action” by states.
Southeast
Republican-dominated states in the South and Southeast regions are not expected to act on climate change.
Frank Rambo, the head of the Southern Environmental Law Center's Clean Energy and Air Program in Charlottesville, Va., told Bloomberg BNA that he didn't foresee any state-level action in Southeastern states, “given the political makeup of the region.”
One exception, Rambo said, was an effort in Virginia being led by Gov. Terry McAuliffe (D) under an executive order (No. 57) issued in June. McAuliffe's effort convenes a workgroup charged with recommending ways to reduce carbon pollution from Virginia's power plants under the state's existing authority to address such emissions.
In addition, Rambo said there is some movement to address climate change in the region without legislation, as the increasing use of certain renewable sources of energy such as solar installations is being driven by economics. “A lot of this stuff has a momentum all of its own,” he said.
Florida
Florida Gov. Rick Scott (R) and a Republican-controlled legislature have shown little or no interest in policies to hold down carbon emissions.
Scott was a vocal ally of Trump during the presidential campaign, and the state eliminated programs such as a solar panel tax rebate, automobile emissions standards and a governor's Florida Energy and Climate Commission shortly after Scott was first elected in 2010.
“State leaders in much of the country are rightfully more concerned with ensuring affordable energy for their citizens and less so with implementing costly regulations that will have negligible climate impacts,” Chris Warren, a spokesman for the conservative-leaning Institute for Energy Research, told Bloomberg BNA in an e-mail.
“I think President-elect Trump will have a positive impact on state efforts against federal overreach, particularly with the Clean Power Plan,” which sets federal limits on carbon dioxide emissions from power plants, he said.
Colorado
It would be “a fool's errand” for an individual state like Colorado to pursue measures designed to combat climate change during a Trump administration, Kathleen Sgamma, vice president of government and public affairs for the Western Energy Alliance, an oil and gas industry association in Denver, told Bloomberg BNA.
She said that Secretary of State John Kerry once conceded that even if the U.S. were to eliminate all fossil fuel use in the country, it would have no effect on the global climate because of increasing greenhouse gas emissions in China and India.
“So if the U.S. going down to zero would have no effect on the climate, just imagine how futile it would be for an individual state to handicap its own economy for an even more miniscule environmental effect,” she said.
Sgamma said she believes that if Trump remains true to his promise to halt the EPA's Clean Power Plan, it will “make it harder for a state to do something.”
“I would think the first thing that will happen in a Trump administration is that there will be no more pressure from the federal government on the states to do something the Administration considers to be unconstitutional,” she said.
If states want to “go it alone” with respect to climate change measures, “if they want to kill their economy and make it harder for blue collar workers to have jobs, then Oklahoma and Texas are more than happy to take up that additional economic opportunity.”
Taryn Finnessey, senior climate change specialist in the Colorado Department of Natural Resources in Denver and advisor to Gov. John Hickenlooper (D), said the incoming Trump administration will indeed present challenges for states, and present a “stark contrast” with what a Clinton administration would have done on climate change.
In the absence of federal action, “we will see states step up to the plate” and “do what they can for the people in their state.”
Hickenlooper has committed to having “the cleanest air in the nation,” Finnessey said, “and that doesn't change in a Trump administration.”
With assistance from Andrew Ballard in Raleigh, N.C., Adrianne Appel and Martha Kessler in Boston, Tripp Baltz in Denver, Leslie Pappas in Philadelphia, Carolyn Whetzel in Los Angeles, Chris Marr in Atlanta, Paul Shukovsky in Seattle and Nushin Huq in Houston.

http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=100165259&vname=dennotallissues&fn=100165259&jd=100165259

Return to headline | Return to top
Senate Republicans See Multiple Options to Target Paris Deal

Nov 10, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report

By Dean Scott

President-elect Donald Trump's win Nov. 8 has Republicans mulling an array of options to dismantle U.S. participation in the Paris Agreement, any one of which could deal a devastating and perhaps mortal blow to the first truly global climate pact reached only last December in Paris.
With Trump's win and a Republican-controlled House and Senate assured in 2017, the strategies include a frontal assault on the Paris pact by having the Senate hold a sort of no-confident vote on the deal.
Republican aides told Bloomberg BNA a more likely path would have Trump make good on his vow to rescind U.S. participation in the deal between nearly 200 nations, simply by withdrawing or delaying Obama administration climate rules—a sort of wither on the vine approach that would undercut the Paris deal.
The strategies are under early discussion even as climate negotiators from nearly 200 nations just opened a two-week UN climate summit in Marrakech to take the first steps to implement the Paris deal.
“The administration coming in has already indicated that the Paris Agreement is something that is not a priority—they have no qualms with not following through with the agreement or submitting to the Senate [that] agreement to let the Senate figure it out,” one Republican Senate Environment and Public Works Committee aide told Bloomberg BNA.
“The Paris Agreement has as dire a future as the Clean Power Plan” does at this point, the aide said, referring to the Environmental Protection Agency's carbon pollution limits for power plants. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) told reporters Nov. 9 the EPA power plant limits will be targeted on “day one” after Trump takes office and the 115th Congress opens in January.
White House Stresses Continuity
A U.S. State Department spokeswoman declined to comment in response to a Bloomberg BNA request. But State Department deputy spokesman Mark Toner, when asked about Trump's vow to renegotiate or even withdraw from international agreements, said he would refrain from speaking “on behalf [of] or for the incoming administration.”
“We're going to work with them, we're going to brief them up as much as we possibly can on all the issues of interest to them,” Toner told reporters Nov. 9.
Asked how the White House would reassure foreign governments that the U.S. would remain committed to the Paris pact and other international agreements, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest added that the current administration remains “committed to implementing those policies through January 20th.”
“Second, there is … a tradition, particularly with regard to executive agreements of successive presidents preserving some element of continuity,” he told reporters at his Nov. 9 briefing. “I don't know whether or not that will apply in this case.”
But Obama “will have an opportunity to talk to President-elect Trump about some of these policies” as well as “some of the benefits” they provide, Earnest said.
Barriers to Ratification Vote
President Barack Obama negotiated the Paris Agreement using his executive authority, sidestepping the need for Senate ratification but angering congressional Republicans in the process.
Some including Myron Ebell of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, who is advising Trump on EPA transition matters, argued in the run-up to the election that Trump should send the Paris Agreement to the Senate where Republicans in January are expected to hold a 52-48 majority.
But it's unclear just what a Trump administration would be submitting, since much of the deal—including the U.S. pledge to cut its emissions up to 28 percent by 2025 from 2005 levels—is nonbinding. Other options, according to Senate Republican aides, include having Trump issue an executive memorandum or other formal order announcing the U.S. does not consider itself in any way bound by the Paris deal.
A former Senate Democratic aide said none of those formal moves would really be necessary for Trump to signal U.S. withdrawal.
“The U.S. is not going to participate and you can forget about reductions” in greenhouse gas emissions pledged by the U.S. in the run-up to the 2015 Paris pact, the aide told Bloomberg BNA. “Now there probably will be some [emissions] reductions due to changing natural gas prices and what have you, but the Paris Agreement won't be the driver” of further progress in U.S. emissions cuts, the aide said.
Republicans in the end “won't bother” with anything remotely resembling a ratification vote, the aide said. Trump, backed by congressional Republicans can simply opt “to just turn it off” by withdrawing climate rules that underpin the pact, he said.

http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=100165264&vname=dennotallissues&fn=100165264&jd=100165264

Return to headline | Return to top
Trump's Victory Throws Cold Water on UN Climate Talks

Nov 10, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report

By Eric J. Lyman

Less than a year after they celebrated the Paris Agreement, climate negotiators from nearly 200 countries meeting again—this time in Marrakech, Morocco—awoke Nov. 9 to the reality of trying to wage a global fight against climate change without the buy-in of the world's largest economy and one of the biggest greenhouse gas emitters.
“The world will now have to move forward without the U.S. on the road toward climate risk mitigation and innovation on clean technology,” Hans Joachim Schellnhuber, director of Germany's Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research, said in reaction to the presidential election of Republican Donald Trump.
And Zou Ji, deputy director-general of China's National Center for Climate Change Strategy and International Cooperation, said the U.S.-China partnership would have to be revamped in the wake of the election results.
“Under President Trump, climate cooperation between the U.S. and China will need a new strategy with new priorities and highlights,” Ji said.
Trump ran and won on a platform critical of climate action, calling it a “hoax” and promising to “cancel” the year-old Paris Agreement, the world's first global climate accord.
Trump's options for technically withdrawing the U.S. from the pact after he takes office in January could be limited from a legal perspective, but perhaps not from a practical perspective. The consequences of a decision to simply ignore the U.S. vow made under President Barack Obama to reduce emissions by 26 percent to 28 percent by 2025 compared to 2005 levels is yet to be determined.
The U.S. is the world's second-largest greenhouse gas emitter, after China. Much of Obama's plans to reduce emissions—including his signature Clean Power Plan—could be halted under a Trump administration.
Stiff Upper Lips
Most of the Nov. 9 public statements in Marrakech, where the UN is holding the follow-up to last year's Paris summit, centered on a belief that the process will move forward regardless of what a Trump administration does.
But some negotiators and UN officials at the talks acknowledged varying degrees of nervousness about having a climate skeptic in the White House.
“Many other countries were determined to move forward, but when George W. Bush was president, progress was slow,” said one senior official with the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, who asked not to be further identified. “The situation is different now, it's true, but nobody will be pleased if the U.S. plays an obstructionist role.”
In 2001, Bush withdrew the U.S. from the Kyoto Protocol, the only country among the 36 industrialized nations required to take action under that treaty that did not ratify it. With the U.S. outside the treaty, it did not have the wide-ranging impacts its architects intended.
The Paris Agreement—which seeks to limit global warming to no more than 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) with a stated goal to “pursue efforts” for a 1.5-degree Celsius (2.7 degrees Fahrenheit) limit—was built on the foundation of a high-profile bilateral agreement between the U.S. and China, the world's two-largest emitters, to take on domestic emissions reduction targets.
‘Lot of Bluster’
In Marrakech Nov. 9, formal remarks focusing on the presidential election results mostly expressed confidence that the climate negotiation process would move forward regardless of potential changes in the U.S. position, or to express hope that Trump would change his tune once he talks office.
“President-elect Donald Trump has been the source of a lot of bluster on climate change over the last year,” Hilda Heine, president of the Marshall Islands, told delegates. “But now that the election campaign has passed and the realities of leadership settle in, I expect he will realize climate change is a threat to his people and to whole countries which share seas with the U.S., including my own.”
European Council president, Donald Tusk, and Jean-Claude Juncker, president of the European Commission, congratulated Trump on his victory in a letter, and called to “strengthen transatlantic relations” in several areas between the European Union and the U.S., including climate change. “We should spare no effort to ensure that the ties that bind us remain strong and durable,” the letter said.
Renewable Markets Watch
Tina Johnson, policy director for the U.S. Climate Action Network, said renewable energy markets were waiting on positive signals from Trump.
“President-elect Trump has the opportunity to catalyze further action on climate that sends a clear signal to investors to keep the transition to a renewable-powered economy on track,” Johnson said.
But May Boeve from the environmental group 350.org did not mince words, saying Trump's victory would force other countries to be more ambitious.
“Trump's election is a disaster, but it cannot be the end of the international climate process,” Boeve said in a briefing. “We won't give up the fight and neither should the international community. Trump will slam the brakes on climate action, which means we must to throw all of our weight on the accelerator.”
U.S. Delegation
The U.S. delegation in Marrakech kept a low profile in the wake of the election results. David Waskow, director of the International Climate Initiative for the World Resources Institute, told Bloomberg BNA that it was important to remember that Obama sent the current delegation to Marrakech.
“They are still working for President Obama,” Waskow said. “They will still play a constructive role here.”
Aside from the reaction to the Trump victory, work on Marrakech continued on several other fronts.
The Ad Hoc Working Group on the Paris Agreement continued debating key parts of the Paris Agreement “rule book,” including transparency and finance issues, and several countries proposed extending the session by one or two days to make more progress.

http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=100165256&vname=dennotallissues&fn=100165256&jd=100165256

Return to headline | Return to top

Add recipients

Suggested