Preview Newsletter
ACC AM 11/21/16
-
Obama Blueprint Aims To Cement His Regulatory Legacy
Nov 18, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Hannah Hess
The White House yesterday released its latest regulatory agenda, a sweeping plan for the remaining months of President Obama's term. -
Amended Toxics Law Boosts Chances of Criminal Charges
Nov 21, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
Information-forcing provisions of the amended Toxic Substances Control Act increase the situations in which the Environmental Protection Agency could charge a company with criminally concealing chemical risk data and violating the law, an EPA attorney said Nov. 18. -
Agency's Regulatory Agenda Reflects 'Aggressive' TSCA Work
Nov 21, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
The US EPA's semi-annual update to its regulatory agenda reflects its continued focus on implementing the new TSCA. And, according to the agency's accompanying statement of priorities, it is "working aggressively to carry out the requirements of the new law." -
US EPA Proposes Snurs For Two Alkylpyrrolidones
Nov 21, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By David Stegon
The US EPA has proposed a significant new use rule (Snur) for the alkylpyrrolidones N-ethylpyrrolidone (NEP) and N-isopropylpyrrolidone (NiPP). -
EU Seeks Comments on Restricting Fragrance Ingredient
Nov 21, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Stephen Gardner
The European Commission Nov. 17 called for comments to be submitted through Feb. 20, 2017, on a restriction of the use of the fragrance ingredient 2-furaldehyde, or furfural, in cosmetic preparations sold in the European Union. -
(ACC Mentioned) Obama Administration Removes Beaufort, Chukchi Seas From 2017-2022 OCS Lease Plan
Nov 18, 2016 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Charlie Passut
The Obama administration removed the Beaufort and Chukchi seas from its five-year offshore oil and gas leasing program on Friday but kept 10 potential lease sales in the Gulf of Mexico (GOM) and one in Alaska's Cook Inlet. -
Energy Lobbyist Leaves DOE Landing Team
Nov 18, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Robin Bravender
Mike McKenna, an energy lobbyist who has been leading President-elect Donald Trump's Energy Department transition team for months, has left that post. -
McKenna Departs As Trump Transition's Energy Chief
Nov 18, 2016 | Inside EPA
Industry lobbyist Mike McKenna has left his post as leader of President-elect Trump's energy transition, possibly over the incoming administration's requirement that team members revoke their lobbying licenses. -
48 Nations Vow to End Fossil Fuel Use by Mid-Century
Nov 21, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Eric J. Lyman
The climate diplomacy road map for the next two years came into clearer focus Nov. 18 near the close of the United Nations’ Marrakech climate change conference, although representatives from nearly 200 countries delayed many substantive decisions for future talks. -
Trump Isolated on Climate as World Works on Fossil Fuel Limits
Nov 21, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Jessica Shankleman
Donald Trump's opposition to the fight against global warming could leave the U.S. stuck in the past as countries from Europe, Asia and even the Middle East pursue an energy revolution in which renewables offer a better bang for their buck. -
Cleantech Industry Ponders Trump Presidency
Nov 21, 2016 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Melody M. Bomgardner
U.S. companies that make renewable chemicals, fuels, and energy are bracing for policy changes under the incoming Trump administration. Although the president-elect is skeptical about climate change, trade groups say they believe the Republican leadership will support investment in cleantech R&D and manufacturing to create jobs and boost energy security. -
Trump Can Ax the Clean Power Plan by Executive Order
Nov 20, 2016 | The Wall Street Journal
By David B. Rivkin Jr. And Andrew M. Grossman
President Obama pledged to wield a pen and phone during his second term rather than engage with Congress. The slew of executive orders, enforcement memorandums, regulations and “Dear Colleague” letters comprised an unprecedented assertion of executive authority. -
Fracking-Induced Oklahoma Quakes Spawn New Class Case
| BNA Daily Environment Report
By Steven M. Sellers
Residents of Pawnee, Okla., the site of a powerful magnitude 5.8 earthquake over Labor Day weekend, filed a class complaint against oil and gas companies Nov. 17 -
Lawsuit Likely Over Boulder County, Colorado Fracking Ban
Nov 21, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tripp Baltz
Boulder County, Colo. extended its moratorium on hydraulic fracturing on an “emergency basis” to the end of January, prompting the state's leading oil and gas association to say it is weighing legal action. -
Regulate Fracking Before It Starts in Georgia, Group Says
Nov 21, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Chris Marr
Stricter regulation of oil and gas drilling, including hydraulic fracturing rules, could be on the agenda for Georgia's next legislative session if environmental advocates get their wish. -
Environmentalists Get A Dose Of Good News
Nov 17, 2016 | Politico
By Michael Grunwald
Even though President Obama’s historic Clean Power Plan was stayed by the Supreme Court and appears doomed in the Trump Administration, the electric sector is getting so green so fast that it has already met the plan’s 2024 goal for slashing carbon emissions and its 2030 target for reducing coal use, new data show. -
Analyst: Need For Dakota Access Pipeline Declining
Nov 18, 2016 | Fuelfix
By Jordan Blum
The need for the controversial and delayed Dakota Access Pipeline is falling along with the production of oil from the Bakken Shale in North Dakota and Montana, said Sandy Fielden, Morningstar’s director of oil and products research. -
(ACC Mentioned) 12,000 US Schools Are Within a Mile of a Hazardous Chemical Facility
Nov 21, 2016 | Truth-Out
By Elizabeth Grossman
On April 17, 2013, an explosion and fire at the West Fertilizer Company plant in West, Texas, killed 15 people and injured hundreds. -
Jury Awards 4 Workers $16M For 2013 Plant Explosion
Nov 18, 2016 | AP (In Chem.Info)
Four workers injured in a deadly 2013 petrochemical plant explosion in south Louisiana have been awarded a total of $16 million by a jury. -
Diplomats Confront New Threat to Paris Climate Pact: Donald Trump
Nov 18, 2016 | The New York Times
By Coral Davenport
Diplomats from around the world converged here this week with the plan to put details on last year’s Paris climate accordand move the globe closer to controlling the industrial emissions that are heating the planet. -
Fight Against Global Warming Advances Despite Trump’s Skepticism
Nov 19, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Jessica Shankleman
More than 190 nations including the U.S., China and Saudi Arabia vowed to step up their efforts to fight global warming despite concerns that U.S. President-elect Donald Trump will pull the richest polluter out of the process when he takes office next year. -
Third-Party Building Efficiency Funding Has Promise: Reicher
Nov 21, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By William H. Carlile
The idea of bringing private-sector investment to improving the energy efficiency of buildings deserves a look from the incoming Trump administration, Google's former director of climate change and energy initiatives told a conference of energy service companies.
Congressional Hearings - There are no relevant hearings to report at this time.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
-
Obama Blueprint Aims To Cement His Regulatory Legacy
Nov 18, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Hannah Hess
The White House yesterday released its latest regulatory agenda, a sweeping plan for the remaining months of President Obama's term.
It includes tools to support U.S. EPA's Clean Power Plan, and rules on renewable fuels, ozone pollution, water infrastructure and coal mining.
The fall issue of the biannual "Unified Agenda of Federal and Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions" details both short- and long-term plans for every agency in the government.
President-elect Donald Trump has vowed to unwind Obama's policies on the environment, though legal experts have predicted those efforts would be met with a barrage of lawsuits (Greenwire, Nov. 11).
History suggests Trump will pause rulemaking efforts, freezing pieces of Obama's regulatory legacy not completed before inauguration. Trump's team may initiate rulemaking to undo other actions.
The transfer of power could delay efforts related to endangerment findings that obligate EPA to limit emissions from the aviation sector.
EPA for the first time published its schedule for proposed greenhouse gas emissions standards and test procedures for aircraft and aircraft engines. A notice of proposed rulemaking is planned for January 2018 — one year after Trump takes office.Greenhouse gases
While the Clean Power Plan remains stayed by the Supreme Court as it undergoes legal review, EPA is moving ahead with regulatory action it says will support states developing plans to cut carbon pollution from the power sector.
In December, the agency expects to finalize model carbon-trading rules. Also coming by the end of the year are six amendments governing the process for acting on state plans to meet carbon dioxide limits under Section 111(d) of the Clean Air Act.
The Clean Energy Incentive Program, meant to encourage early renewable power development and low-income energy efficiency projects, is on track for next year. But the agenda did not provide a specific date.
EPA plans to next month finalize a rule to require industrial facilities to submit reports on excess emissions, performance tests and other data electronically, part of a goal to modernize environmental oversight.
The agency's Office of Air and Radiation will hand off major revisions of emissions monitoring and reporting requirements for coal-fired power plants under its acid rain program to the Trump administration. A notice of proposed rulemaking is due November 2017.
In addition to work underway on aircraft engine emissions standards, EPA plans to issue a proposed endangerment finding, under Clean Air Act Section 231, on releases from aircraft operating on leaded fuel by December 2017.
EPA is also moving forward with major methane emission guidelines for existing oil and natural gas operations, despite intense opposition from the industry and Republicans on Capitol Hill. EPA is in the process of collecting data from companies, with no date set for a notice of proposed rulemaking.
Corporate automakers have already asked Trump for tweaks to EPA's greenhouse gas emissions and corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards.
As part of an ongoing midterm review, the Trump administration will have the authority to decide whether to increase, loosen or maintain the 2022-25 fuel economy standards.
The agency still expects to release renewable fuel volume requirements for 2017 and the biodiesel volume for 2018. That should be completed by year's end, the administration said. Lobbyists say they expect it before Thanksgiving.
EPA plans to finalize updates to its greenhouse gas-reporting program before the end of the year, with proposed changes including a requirement that underground coal mines measure methane emissions more frequently.
That action was originally scheduled for October. Today, the agency published a final rule for a proposal to phase out heat-trapping refrigerants.Air quality
The agenda lists relatively few new initiatives. Instead, EPA's Office of Air and Radiation appears focused on pushing through rulemakings already in the pipeline.
EPA put to rest one of the highest-profile items on the agenda two months ago when it published revised guidance on how states can get a pass on air pollution violations outside of their control because of "exceptional events" (Greenwire, Sept. 19).
Still in the works, however, is a closely watched package of changes to the regional haze program that seeks to improve visibility in national parks and wildlife refuges.
The final draft went to the Office of Management and Budget's Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs early this month for a standard review. Perhaps optimistically, given that the package is already behind schedule, EPA hopes to make it final by month's end.
On Wednesday, the agency published proposed implementation regulations for the 2015 ambient air quality standard for ozone. The updated agenda does not give a timetable for issuing the final version.
EPA, by next month, plans to finalize regulations that would drop emergency affirmative defense provisions from state and federal operating permits issued under the Clean Air Act.
Also scheduled for completion by year's end are updated emissions standards for grain elevators. An initial draft ran into stiff opposition from agricultural interests. As of this morning, the final version remained under review at OIRA.
That agency recently completed a review of proposed radon emissions standards for uranium operations, meaning that issuance of the final rule could come this month (E&ENews PM, Nov. 9).
In a lesser-known area of EPA's portfolio, the Office of Air and Radiation is mulling a proposed rule for release next May that would set noise standards for high-speed trains.Energy efficiency
At the Department of Energy, several rules are being delayed from the spring but remain on schedule to be finalized before Trump's inauguration.
The department is moving the release of a final rule on light bulbs, for example, from December to January. The standard is expected to phase out most incandescent and compact fluorescent bulbs in favor of LEDs.
Similarly, a final rule to establish the first-ever standards for ceiling fans is now scheduled for release this month after originally being planned for July.
Other rules delayed by DOE include one on portable air conditioners, which is now scheduled for final action in December. The previous timeline had it in August.
A major rule requiring DOE to establish revised standards for reducing fossil energy use in all new federal buildings is scheduled for release this month.
DOE did not specify the timeline for a final rule on residential gas furnaces. The comment period for an agency proposal is set to end Tuesday.
"I expect they'll have a lot of comments on that one, which will take some time to consider and respond to, pushing the final rule off into 2017," said Andrew deLaski, executive director of the Appliance Standards Awareness Project.
The gas furnace rule is one of the most closely watched at DOE because of its potential energy savings and a history of court challenges. The issue was a sticking point in competing energy bills this year in the House and Senate.
Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz pledged to finalized 14 efficiency rules by the end of 2016. So far, DOE has finalized five.Drilling, land management
The Bureau of Land Management this month plans to issue a final rule updating how it revises its resource management plans. It could have a major impact on managing activities like energy development, mining, grazing and recreation.
The proposal has drawn the ire of some state and local leaders, who have raised concerns that it would cut local involvement out of the federal planning process and move the agency away from managing lands for multiple uses (E&E Daily, June 20).
Separately, BLM is punting until February on issuing a final rule governing royalties for oil shale developed on public lands in Wyoming, Colorado and Utah.
Oil shale development is currently in an experimental stage, but federal reserves in these three states are massive. If companies can find a way to economically produce it, royalty rates could mean a windfall to communities (Greenwire, March 22, 2013).
Interior's Bureau of Ocean Energy Management next month plans to finalize updates to its 36-year-old regulations governing air emissions from offshore oil and gas activity.
BOEM by next August plans to issue "a complete rewrite" of federal regulations concerning the financial responsibility of offshore oil and gas drilling facilities.
The impetus for the change is the 2010 Deepwater Horizon rig explosion at BP PLC's Macondo well, which killed 11 crew members and sparked the worst environmental disaster in U.S. history.
In addition, the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement is proposing to develop a rule next July updating standards for offshore oil-spill response plans.Coal and mining
The Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement plans to publish the highly controversial stream protection rule in the next two weeks, seven years to the month after it started the rulemaking process.
The restrictions on coal mining near waterways have spent more than five months under review at OIRA, but OSMRE released the rule's final environmental impact statement this week (E&ENews PM, Nov. 15).
OSMRE also plans to take final action in December on new permit fees covering administrative and enforcement costs in jurisdictions where the agency is the primary regulator.
An uncertain fate awaits for other proposed rules at OSMRE in 2017 under the Trump administration. There are no actions planned for new permit requirements to avoid coal companies idling a mine to avoid reclamation.
New standards for coal dam impoundments and disposal of coal ash in mine reclamation won't see much action until a new administration.
OSMRE plans to act sometime in January on its proposal to change requirements surrounding the practice of self-bonding — when a company promises to clean up mines without collateral if it meets certain financial criteria (E&ENews PM, Aug. 16).
BLM is waiting until 2017 to take final action on a rule altering coal management rules that include increasing lease modification size, extending mine life spans and clarifying the royalty rate on highwall mining operations.
This month, EPA plans to release a rule to address potential impacts to groundwater from "significant changes" in uranium mining technology, particularly in-situ recovery (Greenwire, Oct. 21).
The Department of Labor's Mine Safety and Health Administration only has one rule set to be finalized before Obama leaves office — requirements for pre-emptive workplace examinations to address hazardous conditions at non-coal mines.
The Trump administration will inherit proposed rules aimed at reducing miner exposure to crystalline silica dust and equipment diesel exhaust (Greenwire, June 24).Endangered species
The only significant rule the Fish and Wildlife Service may be able to complete before the end of the Obama administration would implement a near-total ban on the salamander trade in the United States, a move intended to prevent the spread of a deadly fungal disease that has decimated wild salamanders in Europe.
The agency estimates that the ban could cost pet companies, which staunchly oppose the regulation, up to $3.8 million annually and prevent the import of 228,000 salamanders.
Other FWS rules the White House considers significant — such as critical habitat designations for the yellow-billed cuckoo and rufa red knot — are only in the proposed rule stage and are therefore unlikely to be finished before Trump takes office.
FWS also may finish adding the Kentucky arrow darter, plants in the Florida Keys and potentially dozens of other species to the endangered or threatened species lists.
The agency intends to downlist the Florida manatee from endangered to threatened and delist the Yellowstone grizzly, as well, according to the regulatory plan.
NPS may finalize restrictions on dog walking in the Golden Gate National Recreation Area. Several groups have sued the agency to block the rule (Greenwire, April 7).Water
The Army Corps is getting started on a regulation to require landowners and developers wishing to legally challenge a wetland designation on their land to first exhaust all administrative options.
The measure comes in response to the May 31 Supreme Court decision in Army Corps of Engineers v. Hawkes Co. Inc., which found that so-called approved jurisdictional determinations are considered "final agency actions" and thus subject to judicial review. The Army Corps is aiming to issue a final rule in March.
The agency, which operates many reservoirs and dams around the country, is also scheduled to issue a rule by the end of this month on how it can allocate surplus water to municipalities and industries.
If the new administration allows, EPA will release its much-anticipated revisions to the 1991 Lead and Copper Rule next June, the agenda said, with a final decision due by December 2018.
The 25-year-old rule has been criticized for allowing water utilities to manipulate water tests for lead and not requiring the full removal of lead service lines.
One proposal coming next month would ban the use of lead pipes, plumbing fixtures, solder and flux as directed under the Reduction of Lead in Drinking Water Act of 2011.
The rule would redefine the meaning of "lead free" plumbing materials from 8 percent or less lead material to 0.25 percent or less.
EPA's Office of Water sent a flurry of regulations to the White House for review in August, including a rule to set up a massive infrastructure loan program and another to collect data on unregulated pollutants. A final rule for the data collection is set for the end of the month.
A proposed rule to establish fees for the Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA) program is also due in November, with a final rule expected next July.FERC, NRC
There are a handful of outstanding proposals and notices of inquiry at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission involving cybersecurity and data sharing.
Among them is a proposal to implement provisions of the Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act, which Obama signed into law in December.
The law added a section to the Federal Power Act to improve the security and resiliency of energy infrastructure in the face of emergencies (Greenwire, June 16).
Under the rule, the commission would implement procedures for identifying sensitive information and language that would bar it from being disclosed. The rule also calls for imposing sanctions on federal employees who knowingly or willfully release that information, including being fired or prosecuted.
The proposed rule, while not retroactive, is important because an inspector general report last year found FERC and its former Chairman Jon Wellinghoff shared sensitive — but not likely classified — information about hypothetical attacks on the electric grid without the proper clearance.
At the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, more than two dozen noncontroversial rules await finalization or implementation. One would require nuclear plant operators to prepare for disasters that reach far beyond the facilities' design, such as large fires, power outages or explosions.
The measure stems from the NRC's yearslong effort to protect U.S. reactors from the events that unfolded after the massive earthquake and tsunami in Japan in 2011. The rule would take effect in October 2017.
Other top-items issues include rules that would bolster cybersecurity at nuclear facilities and ensure plant operators are fit for duty and language that would boost emergency preparedness at small modular reactor sites.Agriculture
The Department of Agriculture will hand off to the Trump administration proposed rules on conservation compliance for farm programs, adjustments to the Conservation Reserve Program and a promotion program for organic foods. It plans to finish guidelines for commercial filming in wilderness areas of national forests.
A final rule for conservation compliance, linked to crop insurance and other programs in the 2014 farm bill, is due in August 2017. Adjustments to the Conservation Reserve Program, such as allowing grasslands to be enrolled, are also due that month.
The organic checkoff proposal, a promotion program funded through a fee paid by producers, is due in October 2017, the new agenda said.
Changes to USDA's procedures under the National Environmental Policy Act, such as expanding the actions subject to categorical exclusions, will come out in a final rule by February 2017, the administration said.
The Forest Service said it plans to publish a handbook on management of invasive species in national forests but didn't put a date on that proposal.
EPA said it will continue a review of how best to group different types of crops for the use of pesticides. The administration didn't put an end date on that process, underway since 2007. On tap for this month are changes to certification requirements for pesticide applicators.
A handful of agriculture-related rules at EPA will carry over until next year. Those include a proposal on procedures for hearings on pesticide registrations, due in June.
Rules for the amount of oil farms can store without being subject to federal spill prevention rules are also due in June. Expanded data requirements for assessing the risk of pesticides to pollinators are due in May.Oceans
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration appears likely to complete only two significant rules before Trump takes over.
One would set aside critical habitat for two populations of Atlantic sturgeon. The other would put into place a system to trace the journey of imported seafood from the place it was caught to its arrival in the United States.
The seafood import monitoring program is a cornerstone of the Obama administration's plan to combat seafood fraud, which often goes undetected because of a convoluted supply chain (E&ENews PM, Feb. 4).
One other notable NOAA rule near the finish line would expand the boundary of a marine sanctuary off the North Carolina coast.
The first protected area of its kind, the Monitor National Marine Sanctuary, was created in 1975 at the site of a wrecked Civil War Union ship (Greenwire, Jan. 8).Chemicals
EPA's proposal for a procedural rule regarding evaluating chemical risks under the recently reformed Toxic Substances Control Act is slated for release in December.
The agency's highly anticipated list of priority chemicals to tackle under the new TSCA is also still expected in December.
EPA expects to propose a rule to add natural gas facilities to the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) in January, with a final rule expected in August 2018.
The agency expects a final rule for formaldehyde off-gassing standards in wood products this month. A final rule on toluene diisocyanates (TDI), used in coatings and adhesives, is also likely this month, as is a rule on nonylphenols and nonylphenol ethoxylates.
In December, EPA expects to issue a final rule on chemicals treated as "nanoscale materials" during manufacturing, import and processing.
Many other EPA chemicals' rulemakings are slated for after the inauguration. The agency's long-delayed proposal to require public and commercial buildings to follow certain lead standards is on track for release next April.
This month, the agency extended a comment period to update the Hazard Communication Program and Regulatory Framework. EPA says it will issue a final rule in June.
The agency says it plans to issue a second proposal on long-chain perfluoroalkyl carboxylate and perfluoroalkyl sulfonate this month, with a final rule slated for July.
EPA says it will propose banning or restricting the manufacturing of the carcinogen trichloroethylene (TCE), and the compounds N-Methylpyrrolidone (NMP) and methylene chloride next month.
The agency pushed a degreasing rule proposal regarding TCE to March, with a final rule expected in July 2018, the agenda said.
The agency plans a notice of proposed rulemaking on the use of polychlorinated biphenyl in fluorescent light ballasts in schools and day cares by January.
A proposal for chemical manufacturers' confidential business information claims under the new TSCA is slated for April, with a final rule expected in May 2018.
A reporting requirement for the supply, use and trade of mercury under the new TSCA has a notice of proposed rulemaking set for June, with a final rule expected in June 2018.
For its proposed rule issued this week on adding nonylphenol ethoxylates, or NPEs, to the TRI, EPA expects a final rule in June (Greenwire, Nov. 17).
The agency expects to respond to a request from the Toxics Use Reduction Institute to add 25 chemicals to the TRI with a proposed rule in April and a final rule in 2018.Tribes
At Interior's Bureau of Indian Affairs, a rule revising oil and gas mining leases for the Osage reservation will enter the proposed rulemaking stage in December.
BIA previously published a final rule in May 2015, but because of a court order, BIA needed to amend the rule to include part of a prior version that remains operative.
The agency plans to propose a rule called "Indian Electric Power Utilities" this month in an effort to update language from a 1991 regulation.
No substantive changes are anticipated, and the rule will affect only three tribal facilities: Colorado River, Mission Valley and San Carlos Apache.
Reporters Dylan Brown, Gabe Dunsmith, Marc Heller, Corbin Hiar, Christa Marshall, Hannah Northey, Sean Reilly, Cecelia Smith-Schoenwalder, Tiffany Stecker and Scott Streater contributed.
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2016/11/18/stories/1060046034
-
Amended Toxics Law Boosts Chances of Criminal Charges
Nov 21, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
Information-forcing provisions of the amended Toxic Substances Control Act increase the situations in which the Environmental Protection Agency could charge a company with criminally concealing chemical risk data and violating the law, an EPA attorney said Nov. 18.
The amendments, however, increase the burden of proof on the agency to establish whether concealment, alteration or destruction of chemical risk data are criminal violations, John Gregory, senior counsel with the EPA's Office of Criminal Enforcement told an American Bar Association committee.
What position the Trump administration will take on the amended chemicals law or its enforcement is unknown, said Mark Garvey, a senior attorney with EPA's Office of Civil Enforcement.
“We're as interested as you in finding out what that will be,” Garvey told the American Bar Association's Pesticides, Chemical Regulation and Right-to-Know Committee during a policy briefing.
Felonies and Penalties
Gregory said Congress added a felony penalty to TSCA allowing the EPA to seek higher-than-typical penalties for violations that pose an imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury.
The language in that provision, however, “ratchets up the government's burden to show that the defendant generally understood the unlawfulness of [the] action” even if they don't know the exact law at issue, he said.
The Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act (Pub. L. No. 114-182), which amended TSCA on June 22, increased the authority the EPA has to order chemical manufacturers and processors to provide toxicity and other data about their chemical, Gregory said. Concealing, altering or destroying data could result in criminal violations of TSCA, he said.
Similarly, if companies reviewing their data uncover substantial risk information they should already have provided the EPA, they need to communicate with the agency in accordance with Section 8(e) of TSCA, Gregory said.
The EPA could pursue criminal violations under a TSCA Section 16 criminal penalty provision that authorizes the EPA to pursue misdemeanor charges against an individual or company that knowingly or willfully violates the law, he said.
That provision is essentially the same under the original and amended law, except the amendments doubled the maximum criminal fines from $25,000 to $50,000, Gregory said.
New Endangerment Provision
“The second, and arguably more important update, is the addition of a new felony endangerment provision,” Gregory said.
The amendments added the provision for situations in which an individual or company causes “imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury,” he said. The maximum fine for an individual found guilty of such a criminal violation is $250,000, or imprisonment of up to 15 years, or both.
An organization that commits a violation may be fined up to $1 million, he said. The Lautenberg Act's provision is nearly identical to the knowing endangerment criminal penalty provisions of the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act and Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, he said.
The U.S. Supreme Court has interpreted the knowing endangerment standard to mean the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was aware of the facts that constitute the offense and knowingly chose to act unlawfully, Gregory said.
The defendant doesn't have to know the specific law being violated, but must be aware of engaging in something unlawful, he said. The person or institution's conduct must be voluntary and intentional and not a mistake, accident or the result of negligence, Gregory added.
Increased Burden on EPA
The burden of proof in the final version of the Lautenberg Act differs, however, from the burden the government faces under the air, water and waste acts, he said.
Those laws require the government to prove the defendant knew the actions were unlawful, Gregory said.
The Lautenberg Act requires the government to prove the defendant knew the actions were illegal and willfully violated the law, he said.
The imminent endangerment provision's requirement that the government prove the defendant “knowingly and willfully” violated the law differs from the standard in the misdemeanor provision, which requires the government to prove the defendant either knowingly or willfully violated the law, he said.
“This is a significant departure; this increases the burden on the government,” Gregory said.
‘Often Insurmountable’ Burden
John Gibson—as an assistant attorney general for New York State—analyzed the knowing endangerment provision of the Clean Air Act in a 2011 article in the Fordham Environmental Law Review.
In some situations, the Clean Air Act requires the government to prove a violation was both knowing and willful, he wrote.
That dual burden of proof “is often insurmountable,” Gibson wrote.http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=100736493&vname=dennotallissues&fn=100736493&jd=100736493
-
Agency's Regulatory Agenda Reflects 'Aggressive' TSCA Work
Nov 21, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
The US EPA's semi-annual update to its regulatory agenda reflects its continued focus on implementing the new TSCA. And, according to the agency's accompanying statement of priorities, it is "working aggressively to carry out the requirements of the new law."
Consistent with the EPA's implementation plan, the agenda includes proposals for several TSCA 'framework' rules. These include ones on:prioritisation of substances for risk evaluation;procedures for evaluating existing chemical risks;reporting requirements for designating substances as active or inactive on the TSCA inventory (the 'inventory reset');the administration of fees under the act; andprocedures for the review of confidential business information (CBI) claims.
Notwithstanding the substantial activities to implement the new TSCA law, the agenda items continue to reflect the priorities that Wendy Cleland-Hamnett of the Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) laid out at the beginning of the year.
Proposals are in the pipeline for several significant new use rules (Snurs), additions to the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), and Section 6 rules for trichloroethylene (TCE) and for N-methylpyrrolidone (NMP) and methylene chloride.
Several rules are scheduled for finalising. These include:formaldehyde emission standards for composite wood products;nanoscale materials reporting and record-keeping requirements; andSnurs for toluene diisocyanates (TDI) and certain nonylphenols and nonylphenol ethoxylates (NP/NPEs).
And the agency's long-term action plan continues to list the reassessment of use authorisations for polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and hydraulic fracturing (fracking) chemicals and mixtures among the focus area.
https://chemicalwatch.com/51138/agencys-regulatory-agenda-reflects-aggressive-tsca-work
-
US EPA Proposes Snurs For Two Alkylpyrrolidones
Nov 21, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By David Stegon
The US EPA has proposed a significant new use rule (Snur) for the alkylpyrrolidones N-ethylpyrrolidone (NEP) and N-isopropylpyrrolidone (NiPP).
The proposed Snur applies to all uses of NiPP, and all uses of NEP except for its ongoing uses as a reactant, in silicone seal remover, coatings, consumer and commercial paint primer and adhesives.
It would require manufacturers, importers and processors of NEP and NiPP to notify the EPA at least 90 days before starting or resuming any new uses of these chemicals.
NEP has a wide variety of potential applications as a chemical intermediate in cosmetics, paints and printing inks, paint strippers, pharmaceuticals, adhesives and cleaners for polymeric residue, in adhesives and reprographic agents and as a replacement for N-methylpyrrolidone (NMP) in coating and cleaning applications.
The EPA does not know of any ongoing uses of NiPP as of the posting of the proposed rule.
Alkylpyrrolidones are a group of organic chemicals with cyclic amides that are often used as solvents.
The Snur proposal is based on a 2015 assessment of NMP. This is another alkylpyrrolidone that has shown risk of serious adverse effects associated with exposure from its use in paint and coating removal. Given the structural similarity of NEP and NiPP to NMP, their similar physico-chemical properties, and the toxicity associated with NMP, the EPA is concerned that any significant new uses of these similar chemicals could result in new exposures and potential risks.
A proposed TSCA Section 6 rule to address risks posed by NMP in paint removal applications is currently under review at the Office of Management and Budget (OMB).
The EPA will accept public comments on the proposed Snur for 60 days.
https://chemicalwatch.com/51137/us-epa-proposes-snurs-for-two-alkylpyrrolidones
-
EU Seeks Comments on Restricting Fragrance Ingredient
Nov 21, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Stephen Gardner
The European Commission Nov. 17 called for comments to be submitted through Feb. 20, 2017, on a restriction of the use of the fragrance ingredient 2-furaldehyde, or furfural, in cosmetic preparations sold in the European Union.
The restriction would limit the concentration of furfural in cosmetics to a maximum concentration of 0.001 percent. The restriction should be put in place because furfural has been linked to tumor formation and is classified in the EU as a category 2 carcinogen, the commission said.
Furfural is an organic compound distilled from crop waste. It is used in perfumes and also as a solvent and in pesticides. Its use in cosmetics in the EU is currently not restricted.
If agreed, the restriction of furfural in cosmetics would be adopted through an amendment to Annex II of the EU Cosmetics Regulation ((EC) No 1223/2009).
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=100736475&vname=dennotallissues&fn=100736475&jd=100736475
-
(ACC Mentioned) Obama Administration Removes Beaufort, Chukchi Seas From 2017-2022 OCS Lease Plan
Nov 18, 2016 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Charlie Passut
The Obama administration removed the Beaufort and Chukchi seas from its five-year offshore oil and gas leasing program on Friday but kept 10 potential lease sales in the Gulf of Mexico (GOM) and one in Alaska's Cook Inlet.
The Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) and its parent agency, the Department of Interior (DOI), announced publication of a final proposal for the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) Oil and Gas Leasing Program for 2017-2022. The agencies said the Beaufort and Chukchi were removed from the leasing program after "analyzing the best available scientific data" and input from more than 3.3 million public comments.
"The plan focuses lease sales in the best places -- those with the highest resource potential, lowest conflict, and established infrastructure -- and removes regions that are simply not right to lease," said DOI Secretary Sally Jewell. "Given the unique and challenging Arctic environment and industry's declining interest in the area, foregoing lease sales in the Arctic is the right path forward."
BOEM Director Abigail Hopper concurred, adding that the plan "was informed by robust stakeholder engagement and the best available science. The proposal makes available more than 70% of the economically recoverable resources, which is ample opportunity for oil and gas development to meet the nation's energy needs."
Jewell may approve the final leasing program after a minimum of 60 days. If she approves the plan, it would take effect on July 1.
A draft version of the 2017-2022 leasing program, containing 14 potential lease sales in eight planning areas, was unveiled in January 2015. The draft version included 10 potential lease sales in the GOM, three in offshore Alaska (one each in the Beaufort and Chukchi seas and the Cook Inlet) and one in the Atlantic Ocean, covering areas offshore Virginia, North Carolina, South Carolina and Georgia. After receiving criticism from coastal communities and the military, the Obama administration removed the Atlantic sale from the program last March.
The federal agencies said the one sale in the Cook Inlet would cover the northern portion of the Cook Inlet Planning Area. On its decision to keep Cook Inlet in the program, the agencies called the offshore area "a mature basin with a long history of oil and gas development in state waters, where existing infrastructure could support new activity.
"The design of this program area balances the protection of endangered species by taking into account the beluga whale and the northern sea otter critical habitat, with the availability for leasing of areas with the greatest industry interest and existence of oil and gas resources."
Conversely, the Beaufort and Chukchi seas were removed due to the "fragile and unique Arctic ecosystem," as well as because of a decline in industry interest, the agencies said.
"Based on consideration of the best available science and significant public input, the DOI's analysis identified significant risks to sensitive marine resources and communities from potential new leasing in the Arctic. Moreover, due to the high costs associated with exploration and development in the Arctic and the foreseeable low projected oil prices environment, demonstrated industry interest in new leasing currently is low."
Case in point, Royal Dutch Shell plc, once the biggest leaseholders in offshore Alaska, said last May that it will abandon all but one of its leases in the Chukchi, and was evaluating its holdings in the Beaufort. At the time, the international major cited an "unpredictable" regulatory environment and disappointing initial drilling results.
Shell, ConocoPhillips, Italy's Eni SpA and Iona Energy Inc. together relinquished about 350 leases, covering 2.2 million acres of drilling rights, in the Chukchi before a May 1 deadline to do so.
Under the proposed 2017-2022 leasing program, two annual lease sales would be conducted for acreage in the Western, Central and Eastern regions of the GOM not under moratorium. "This is a shift from the traditional approach of one sale per year in each of the Western Gulf and the Central Gulf and periodic sales in the Eastern Gulf," the agencies said.
By comparison, the OCS Oil and Gas Leasing Program for 2002-2007 called for 20 lease sales: five each in the Western and Central GOM, three in the Beaufort, two in the Eastern GOM, two in the Cook Inlet (including the Shelikof Strait), two in the Chukchi (including the Hope Basin) and one in Alaska's Norton Basin. Meanwhile, a revised OCS Oil and Gas Leasing Program for 2007-2012 included 16 sales, some of which were later cancelled: 11 area-wide sales in the Western and Central GOM, one sale in the Mid-Atlantic 50 miles offshore Virginia, two special interest sales in the Cook Inlet and one sale in the Chukchi.
The vast majority of U.S. offshore oil production occurs in the GOM.
Lucas Frances, spokesman for the Arctic Energy Center (AEC), called the decision to remove the Beaufort and Chukchi seas from the leasing program "a body blow for the Native communities, businesses, elected officials, military experts and other Alaskans who repeatedly have pleaded with the White House to allow offshore energy development in the Arctic.
"Having been told that local views would take priority, they have now seen that the exact opposite is true and their wishes have been ignored in the name of legacy building. As a result of this decision, people across Alaska will be looking to the Trump administration to quickly tear up the lease plan and implement an entirely new schedule, which includes the Arctic and helps secure the state's future."
The AEC, through a campaign by the Arctic Coalition, had lobbied DOI to keep the Arctic in the leasing program. The coalition's 20 members include the Independent Petroleum Association of America, the Alaska Oil and Gas Association and the largest native-owned corporation in the State of Alaska, the Arctic Slope Regional Corp.
Other industry groups also derided the plan. American Energy Alliance President Thomas Pyle said the nation’s share of oil production from federal lands and waters had reached its lowest point in decades.
"As a farewell gift to the ‘Keep It in the Ground’ activists, President Obama has delivered the most anemic offshore leasing plan in U.S. history,” Pyle said Friday, adding that Obama’s legacy “is one of intentionally undermining America’s energy production and economic growth by holding our vast energy resources under lock and key.
“We look forward to President-elect Trump's pro-energy and pro-growth outlook."
The American Chemistry Council added that the final version of the leasing program “reflects [the Obama administration’s] short-sighted policy of limiting access to oil and natural gas on federal lands. American manufacturers rely on secure and affordable energy supplies to compete globally, yet DOI has repeatedly withdrawn or withheld from development major portions of the OCS.”
Environmental groups were divided in their reaction to the news -- showing support for the removal of the Beaufort and Chukchi seas from the leasing program but disappointment at the continuing inclusion of the GOM.
"We are hopeful that this announcement will help chart a new course forward in the Arctic Ocean," said Jacqueline Savitz, a vice president of environmental group Oceana. "The decades-long push to drill in the Arctic has put this unique and diverse ecosystem at risk, cost tens of billions of dollars and created significant controversy without providing the promised benefits.
"Companies have been given every opportunity to find oil and have failed at every turn because of the extreme conditions and limited window for operations there. We now have the opportunity to put the old arguments behind us and work together toward a sustainable future for the Arctic region."
But Lindsey Allen, executive director of Rainforest Action Network, said the revised program "locks the Gulf into another five years of corporate giveaways -- with decades more of climate pollution, offshore oil spills, devastation to fisheries, and health impacts to local communities. A true transition from fossil fuels doesn't allow for energy sacrifice zones, especially when we know the climate can't handle further fossil fuel development.
"Along with the Arctic and the Atlantic, we need permanent protection for all our coasts to have a fighting chance at stabilizing the climate."
BOEM currently manages about 3,400 active OCS oil and gas leases, covering more than 18 million acres, the vast majority of which are in the GOM. According to the agency, OCS oil and gas leases accounted for about 16% of domestic oil production and 5% of domestic natural gas production in 2015.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/108499-obama-administration-removes-beaufort-chukchi-seas-from-2017-2022-ocs-lease-plan
-
Energy Lobbyist Leaves DOE Landing Team
Nov 18, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Robin Bravender
Mike McKenna, an energy lobbyist who has been leading President-elect Donald Trump's Energy Department transition team for months, has left that post.
"Although I have reluctantly decided that I cannot continue on the transition in an official capacity, I am excited about continuing to work to make America great again," McKenna said today in a statement.
"I am very grateful to the Trump Transition Team for the opportunity to work with them and for America. The transition team is comprised of some of the finest people our Nation has. Over these last few months, I have been proud to play a small part in getting the Trump Administration ready to make the changes the federal government needs. I am especially proud of the excellent work of my colleagues working on the Energy Team," he added.
McKenna's departure comes after the Trump transition team announced that members of the so-called agency landing teams would be required to de-register as lobbyists before heading into agency offices. The DOE team is expected to enter the building next week. Those working in the Trump administration will be banned from lobbying for five years after leaving office.
"This lobbying ban has really upset the apple cart," said a source close to the transition.
Other top energy and environmental staffers — Mike Catanzaro and Myron Ebell — remain on the team, working on energy policy and heading U.S. EPA's transition team, respectively, that source said. Catanzaro has been a registered lobbyist at CGCN Group; Ebell of the Competitive Enterprise Institute is not a registered lobbyist. It's unclear whether Catanzaro has de-registered or plans to, or whether either of them will go on to work in the Trump administration after the transition.
McKenna, the president of MWR Strategies, is well-known in Republican energy circles. He was director of policy and external affairs for the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality under then-Gov. George Allen (R) and was an external relations specialist at the Energy Department during the George H.W. Bush administration.
His lobbying clients in 2016 include Koch Cos. Public Sector LLC, Southern Co. Services, Dow Chemical Co. and Competitive Power Ventures Inc., according to public disclosures.
It's unclear who will step in as the head of DOE's transition team. The Trump transition press office did not respond to a request for comment.Clean Power Plan 'dead'; Paris an 'annoyance'
In an interview aired today on RealClearEnergy, McKenna spoke broadly about how the incoming Trump administration might move quickly to unravel the Obama administration's energy and environmental policies.
Of the Clean Power Plan to cut power plants' greenhouse gas emissions, McKenna said, "I think there's a bunch of different ways to scrap the plan." A legal fight over that rule is now playing out in court.
The Trump team could simply drop an "appeal to the Supreme Court and take the lower court ruling," or "delay implementation" until a new rule is written, McKenna said. "There's all kinds of different ways to go at it," he said. "But it's dead, and if you're a utility or a state thinking about that, even if a Democratic administration comes in in 2021, as a practical matter, it means you're looking at compliance dates way in the out years, 2032, '35."
As for the Paris climate deal, McKenna said, Trump has options, too.
"You could give it to the Senate and let them hash it out as a treaty. You could try to withdraw your signature. You could do an executive order that withdraws your signature so that you remove any question about whether it binds the United States. But the right answer in a non-legally binding situation like Paris and the right answer on that option list is do nothing, and I expect that's what the Trump administration is ultimately going to chose to do with Paris is do nothing, ignore it, pay no attention to it. Just treat it as an annoyance that comes around every year or so."
The Trump team will also be carefully scrutinizing Obama administration rules that haven't yet been fully implemented or finalized, he said.
For rules that are already finalized and where implementation is ongoing, he said, "that's probably closed," in terms of repeal. But other rules — like the ozone standard that hasn't yet been implemented, and those pending finalization — "are very much live questions," he said.
The Clean Power Plan and EPA's Clean Water Rule will be at the "top of the list" for rollbacks, he added.
The Trump team will also be looking to revisit executive orders.
"A lot of the government exists on executive orders that get re-upped from one president to another," McKenna said. Unraveling those executive orders could have implications for the Keystone XL pipeline, which President Obama rejected.
"Lyndon Johnson coughed up an executive order that said in circumstances in which pipelines cross international boundaries, the State Department has approval rights," he said. "George Bush re-ups that. Nobody thinks about Keystone, but we wind up talking about Keystone. That's an executive order that's spread now across 50 years, probably deserves a couple minutes of thought."
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2016/11/18/stories/1060046020
-
McKenna Departs As Trump Transition's Energy Chief
Nov 18, 2016 | Inside EPA
Industry lobbyist Mike McKenna has left his post as leader of President-elect Trump's energy transition, possibly over the incoming administration's requirement that team members revoke their lobbying licenses.
But in a statement he provided to Inside EPA, McKenna does not state a reason for his departure, saying only he is “grateful” for the opportunity to work with the team, which he said is “compromised of some of the finest people our Nation has.”
“Over these last few months, I have been proud to play a small part in getting the Trump Administration ready to make the changes the federal government needs. I am especially proud of the excellent work of my colleagues working on the Energy Team,” he says.
“Although I have reluctantly decided that I cannot continue on the transition in an official capacity, I am excited about continuing to work to make America great again.”
He adds in an email that his departure is “not that big [of a] deal” and that he is glad to have had the experience.
McKenna, who runs MWR Strategies, joined the team in September, when Trump's victory was considered a long shot. He has also worked in the Virginia environment department for then-Gov. George Allen (R) and for the Department of Energy under President George W. Bush.
He has also been active in efforts against the Obama administration climate policies. For example, in March 2015 he wrote a memo urging states to “just say no” to writing a compliance plan for EPA's existing power plant greenhouse gas rule -- part of an effort to force EPA to soften the requirements in the then-proposed regulation.
E&E News, which first reported the news, quoted a source who said that Trump's ban on lobbyists working for the transition team “has really upset the apple cart.”
The report says that Myron Ebell, a climate denier with the Competitive Enterprise Institute who is heading the EPA transition, and Mike Catanzero, a lobbyist, remain on the team, though it is unclear whether Catanzero has already deregistered or plans to.
http://insideepa.com/news-briefs/mckenna-departs-trump-transitions-energy-chief
-
48 Nations Vow to End Fossil Fuel Use by Mid-Century
Nov 21, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Eric J. Lyman
The climate diplomacy road map for the next two years came into clearer focus Nov. 18 near the close of the United Nations’ Marrakech climate change conference, although representatives from nearly 200 countries delayed many substantive decisions for future talks.
The two week summit—at times dominated by hand-wringing over the election of climate skeptic Donald Trump as the next U.S. president—produced declarations reiterating international commitment to the goals of last year's Paris Agreement, the first-ever global climate pact that seeks to help avoid the biggest impacts of a changing climate.
The most substantive involved 48 poor and developing economies that comprise the Climate Vulnerable Forum, who on Nov. 18 vowed to phase out fossil fuel in their countries between 2030 and 2050.
“We don't know what countries are still waiting for to move towards net carbon neutrality and 100% renewable energy,” Costa Rica Environment Minister Edgar Gutierrez said in a statement. “All parties should start the transition, otherwise we will all suffer.”
Other members of the forum include Afghanistan, Cambodia, Ethiopia, Morocco and the Philippines.
That pledge showed that countries most vulnerable to climate change and least responsible for the greenhouse gas emissions that cause it are still willing to take a leadership role, said Jennifer Morgan, executive director of Greenpeace International.
“Those on the front line of climate change are setting the pace, and their commitment to 100 percent renewable energy shows leadership and vision, just what we need from all countries,” Morgan told Bloomberg BNA.
Work Left for Next Year
The talks delayed most of the decision-making on implementing the Paris accord until 2017 and 2018, when the so-called “rulebook” will be completed.
“We've now kicked things back at least to the next climate summit, a year from now,” said Tracy Carty from Oxfam, referring to the December 2017 talks in Bonn, Germany, at the headquarters of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.
Among key issues left undecided are identifying revenue streams for the $100 billion-per-year Green Climate Fund set to become active in 2020; setting guidelines for monitoring, reporting, and verifying emissions reductions and whether industrialized and unindustrialized countries will be required to follow the same rules in that area and developing a mechanism that will push countries to strengthen their emissions reductions pledges.
“We didn't expect it to be finished in these two weeks,” Jonathan Pershing, head of the U.S. delegation in Marrakech, told Bloomberg BNA. “What we expected to happen was that we'd set up key questions we wanted to answer, put hither a timetable for answering them, and start down that work path.”
‘Protecting the Paris Agreement’
Manuel Pulgar-Vidal, who was the president of the COP-20 summit in Lima two years ago, said it would be difficult to judge the success of the latest talks until the follow-up work is complete.
“The irreversible momentum will only build as market signals and commitments across all sectors of society continue pouring in,” said Pulgar Vidal, now working as WWF International's leader on climate and energy practice. “That must happen in the next two years.”
Alden Meyer from the Union of Concerned Scientists agreed.
“The Marrakech talks succeeded in protecting the Paris Agreement from the threat represented by Donald Trump,” he said. “But what the process needs in order to be successful is the kind of concrete action that will decided over the next couple of years.”
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=100736501&vname=dennotallissues&fn=100736501&jd=100736501
-
Trump Isolated on Climate as World Works on Fossil Fuel Limits
Nov 21, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Jessica Shankleman
Donald Trump's opposition to the fight against global warming could leave the U.S. stuck in the past as countries from Europe, Asia and even the Middle East pursue an energy revolution in which renewables offer a better bang for their buck.
While Trump has promised to “cancel” the Paris deal and stimulate coal production once he takes over as U.S. president in January, others including the European Union, China and Saudi Arabia are vowing to press ahead with actions that will support renewable energy at the expense of fossil fuels.
Envoys from more than 190 countries on Nov. 18 are due to wrap up two weeks of discussions in Marrakech, Morocco, affirming efforts to clean up the world's energy supply and limit climate change. They say Trump won't be able to reverse a drop in the cost of wind and solar power, which is tipping the economics away from the most polluting fuels.
“Trump is isolated,” said Alden Meyer, who has followed the talks for more than two decades for the Union of Concerned Scientists, an advocacy group. “Not one single country has said if Trump pulls the U.S. out of Paris, they will join him in leaving—not one.”
The talks in Marrakech this week were working on a number of technical measures that would help put flesh on the 13-page Paris Agreement, which was sealed in December. Those include:
• A rulebook for how the voluntary limits on emissions agreed upon in Paris will be assessed and overseen
• A Paris Committee on Capacity Building, which will start work in 2017 helping developing nations build their ability to rein in emissions and adapt to climate-related harm
• A decision to review a “loss and damage” mechanism that would compensate the poorest nations for the worst impacts of climate change
• A partnership among nations aimed at spurring use of renewable energy
• A political call in the form of the Marrakech Action Proclamation due to be endorsed by the nations present, emphasizing the group is “more united” than ever on implementing the Paris deal
The meeting, which started last week, is scheduled to finish late Nov. 18 with a detailed statement on what was agreed by consensus among the nations attending.Jonathan Pershing, the U.S. State Department envoy at the talks, said late Nov. 17 that the bulk of the work in Marrakech is finished and “the remaining discussions are largely procedural.” He declined to speculate what Trump might do, asserting that it's in the U.S. interest to stick with Paris. His EU counterpart said the U.S. would lose out by renouncing it.
Green Revolution
“The world is on the brink of an energy revolution,” European Union Climate Commissioner Miguel Arias Canete said at the meeting.
“We will change the way we produce and consume energy,” he said. No matter what the result of the U.S. presidential election, “when you take office, you have to see what the global trends are. If you go against the global trend, you make a mistake.”
Ministers from some of the nations worried that they'll be submerged by rising seas pleaded with Trump to rethink the pledges he made during his campaign.
“Politics has entered the discussion in a way that has again put our ultimate success in doubt,” said Thoriq Ibrahim, environment minister for the Maldives and chairman of the Alliance of Small Island States. “We can understand the concern and frustration expressed by so many here and around the world that worry what the future may hold.”
Even Saudi Arabia, the world's biggest oil exporter, emphasized its willingness to clean up emissions, ratifying the Paris deal during the talks and highlighting plans it has in place to diversify its economy away from fossil fuels.
Saudi Support
“We have developed plans to combat climate change with a view to creating a dynamic economy that no longer relies heavily on oil,” Khalid Al-Falih, minister of energy, industry and mineral resources, said in Marrakech on Nov. 16.
China, which for decades frustrated progress at these talks, emerged as the developing world's leading advocate for action. Its delegates spoke publicly against Trump's suggestion that climate change is a hoax aimed at constraining the U.S. economy and expressed concern that the next U.S. administration may sit on the sidelines of the environmental movement as it did when President George W. Bush renounced the Kyoto climate accord in 2001.
“We hope the U.S. will continue to play its role in the climate change process,” China's Vice Foreign Minister Liu Zhenmin said in Marrakech. “Of course people worry they will not repeat the experience of the Kyoto Protocol.”
Africa's Assertion
Edna Molewa, the South Africa environment minister, said Paris represented an “irreversible” step for all nations.
“There can be no backtracking on commitments by developed countries and no attempt to renegotiate the terms of the pact that we reached in Paris,” Molewa said, speaking on behalf of her country, China, Brazil and India.
On Nov. 16, as outgoing U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry made an impassioned plea for the U.S. to remain in the process, more than 350 businesses, from Kellogg Co. to Nike Inc. issued an open letter to Trump urging support for the Paris Agreement. He suggested Trump may soften his views once he understands the consequences of going against the rest of the world on the issue.
“Some issues look a little bit different when you're in office than when you're on the campaign trail,” Kerry said. “Climate change shouldn't be a partisan issue. It isn't a partisan issue for our military. It isn't a partisan issue for our intelligence community.”
With assistance from Ewa Krukowska.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=100736469&vname=dennotallissues&fn=100736469&jd=100736469
-
Cleantech Industry Ponders Trump Presidency
Nov 21, 2016 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Melody M. Bomgardner
U.S. companies that make renewable chemicals, fuels, and energy are bracing for policy changes under the incoming Trump administration. Although the president-elect is skeptical about climate change, trade groups say they believe the Republican leadership will support investment in cleantech R&D and manufacturing to create jobs and boost energy security.
“Even if you discount climate change initiatives, there is strong support for U.S.-based energy efficiency and domestic energy production,” says Paul Winters, spokesman for the Biotechnology Innovation Organization (BIO), a trade group that represents many producers of biobased chemicals. “Innovation and support for science are still popular.”
One area that biofuel and solar firms are watching closely is the fate of renewable investment and production tax credits. Even if the credits stay in place, changes to corporate tax rates could impact their effectiveness, according to BIO and the Solar Energy Industries Association.
Also being watched are grants and loan guarantees from the U.S. departments of energy and agriculture—often worth tens or hundreds of millions of dollars—to locate big plants in the U.S. Those programs may be scaled back or broadened to include nonrenewable industries.
The future for sustainable transportation is up in the air, according to Tammy Klein of the consulting firm Future Fuel Strategies. “Trump has been supportive of biofuels, and I expect the Renewable Fuels Standard program will largely stay intact,” she says. The RFS mandates that refiners blend biofuels made from sugars, oils, and biomass into gasoline and diesel fuel.
But if Republicans strip EPA’s ability to regulate CO2 emissions, auto fuel economy rules may be loosened, Klein warns, to the detriment of investment in new electric vehicle technology.
States may take up the mantle of supporting cleantech manufacturing. Already, makers of advanced biofuels such as cellulosic ethanol can market their fuels in California and Oregon, which have low-carbon fuel mandates. And both Iowa and Minnesota offer a per-lb tax credit for production of biobased chemicals.
https://cen.acs.org/articles/94/i46/Cleantech-industry-ponders-Trump-presidency.html
-
Trump Can Ax the Clean Power Plan by Executive Order
Nov 20, 2016 | The Wall Street Journal
By David B. Rivkin Jr. And Andrew M. Grossman
President Obama pledged to wield a pen and phone during his second term rather than engage with Congress. The slew of executive orders, enforcement memorandums, regulations and “Dear Colleague” letters comprised an unprecedented assertion of executive authority. Equally unparalleled is the ease with which the Obama agenda can be dismantled. Among the first actions on President Trump’s chopping block should be the Clean Power Plan.
In 2009 Congress rejected a cap-and-trade scheme to regulate greenhouse-gas emissions. The Environmental Protection Agency then devised a nearly identical scheme to mandate shifting electricity generation from disfavored facilities, like those powered by coal, to those the EPA prefers, like natural gas and renewables. No statute authorized the EPA to seize regulatory control of the nation’s energy sector. The agency instead discovered, in an all-but-forgotten 1970s-era provision of the Clean Air Act, that it had that power all along.
To support its preferred policy, the agency was compelled to “interpret” the statute in a way that contradicts what it acknowledges is the “literal” reading of the text and clashes with decades of its own regulations. It also nullifies language blocking regulation for power plants because they are already regulated under an alternative program. By mangling the Clean Air Act to intrude on areas it was never meant to, the regulation violates the constitutional bar on commandeering the states to carry out federal policy.
These defects are why the Supreme Court put the EPA’s plan on hold while an appeals court in Washington, D.C., considers challenges brought by the energy industry and 27 states. These legal challenges now appear to have been overtaken by events. President Trump can immediately issue an executive order to adopt a new energy policy that respects the states’ role in regulating energy markets and that prioritizes making electricity affordable and reliable. Such an order should direct the EPA to cease all efforts to enforce and implement the Clean Power Plan. The agency would then extend all of the regulation’s deadlines, enter an administrative stay and commence regulatory proceedings to rescind the previous order.
That would leave the D.C. appeals court—which some supporters of the plan are still counting on for a Hail Mary save—or the Supreme Court with little choice but to send the legal challenges back to the agency. While the Clean Power Plan could technically linger in the Code of Federal Regulations for a year or so, it would have no legal force.
When an agency changes course, it must provide a reasoned explanation to address factual findings supporting its prior policy. In certain instances that requirement may impose a real burden. For example, a rule rescinding the EPA’s “Endangerment Finding” regarding the effects of greenhouse gases would have to address the evidence underlying it. A failure to provide a satisfactory explanation of a change in policy may render a rule “arbitrary and capricious” and vulnerable to legal challenge.
Environmentalist groups have already vowed to bring suit to defend the Clean Power Plan, but a challenge would be toothless. The aggressive legal positions underlying the Obama administration’s most controversial rules—including the Clean Power Plan, the Waters of the United States rule, and the FCC’s Open Internet order—will make it easier to rescind them. That’s because rejecting the assertion of legal authority underlying such a rule is enough to justify a policy change. If the agency’s view is that it simply lacks the power to carry out a rule, then it follows that the rule must be withdrawn.
Even if a court were to find that the EPA’s interpretation of the Clean Air Act underlying the plan is permissible, that would still not compel the Trump EPA to accept that interpretation as the only permissible one. And even if a court were to rule—erroneously, in our view—that the Clean Power Plan does not violate the Constitution’s vertical separation of powers, that would still not absolve the executive branch of the responsibility to consider that constitutional issue for itself and then act accordingly.
President Obama may soon come to understand that the presidential pen and phone is a double-edged sword.
Messrs. Rivkin and Grossman, who practice appellate and constitutional law in Washington, D.C., represent the state of Oklahoma and the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality in their challenge to the Clean Power Plan.
http://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-can-ax-the-clean-power-plan-by-executive-order-1479679923
-
Fracking-Induced Oklahoma Quakes Spawn New Class Case
| BNA Daily Environment Report
By Steven M. Sellers
Residents of Pawnee, Okla., the site of a powerful magnitude 5.8 earthquake over Labor Day weekend, filed a class complaint against oil and gas companies Nov. 17 (Adams v. Eagle Road Oil LLC, Okla. Dist. Ct., No. CJ-2016-78, filed 11/17/16).
The complaint, filed in Oklahoma District Court, Pawnee County, seeks compensatory and punitive damages against Eagle Road Oil LLC, Cummings Oil Co. and other unnamed defendants for damage to homes and personal property.
James Adams and other plaintiffs claim the injection of wastewater from oil and gas operations into deep wells near Pawnee caused a series of earthquakes, including the Sept. 3 quake, the largest in the state's history.
Eagle Road and Cummings “were by far the biggest polluters in the area, having dumped hundreds of thousands of barrels of waste per month over past year,” Scott Poynter, of Poynter Law Group in Little Rock, Ark., told Bloomberg BNA Nov. 18. Poynter represents Adams.
Eagle Road Oil, based in Tulsa, Okla., is an affiliate of Jericho Oil Corp. Cummings Oil Co. is based in Oklahoma City. Requests for comment sent to all three companies didn't receive an immediate reply.
Poynter said other companies may be added as defendants as evidence is developed in the case.
‘Ultrahazardous’ Activity
The complaint contends the drilling operations near Pawnee were negligent and constituted an “ultrahazardous activity” for which Eagle Road and Cummings should be held strictly liable.
The claimed damages include real and personal property losses, market devaluation and emotional distress.
Poynter said in an e-mail that Adams, the named plaintiff, has “large cracks” in the sheetrock, brick and mortar of his home, and that “hundreds” of other structures in the area sustained similar damage.
A related earthquake case is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma, where a Sierra Club suit challenges fracking operations in Oklahoma (Sierra Club v. Chesapeake Operating LLC, W.D. Okla., No. 16-cv-00134, filed2/16/16).
The complaint in that case, filed in February, claims that fracking and other underground oil and gas activities pose imminent risks to the environment. Four oil and gas companies are named as defendants in the citizen suit filed under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, a federal law governing solid waste disposal.
Oklahoma experienced a surge in earthquakes beginning in 2009. The state recorded 167 temblors that year, increasing to 5,838 last year, according to data from the Oklahoma Geological Survey.
A magnitude 5 quake struck Oklahoma Nov. 7. That quake was centered near Cushing, the site of a huge oil storage facility.
Poynter Law Group as well as Weitz & Luxenberg and Steel, Wright, Gray & Hutchinson represents James Adams and other plaintiffs.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=100736490&vname=dennotallissues&fn=100736490&jd=100736490
-
Lawsuit Likely Over Boulder County, Colorado Fracking Ban
Nov 21, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tripp Baltz
Boulder County, Colo. extended its moratorium on hydraulic fracturing on an “emergency basis” to the end of January, prompting the state's leading oil and gas association to say it is weighing legal action.
The Boulder Board of County Commissioners adopted a resolution Nov. 17 extending the moratorium that was set to expire the next day. The extension allows for a public hearing to determine the status of the moratorium, which was first adopted in February 2012 and has been extended several times since then.
The board also directed county staff to develop amendments to its proposed oil and gas regulations after researching several areas relating to financial bonding, environmental cleanup, baseline testing and handling of produced water and waste from drilling activities, including hydraulic fracturing, or fracking.
Fracking involves the high-speed injection of water, sand and chemicals into tight shale formations deep underground to stimulate the production of trapped oil and natural gas.
Rule Amendments
Kim Sanchez, chief planner in the Boulder County's land use department, said the county's planning commission had said the emergency extension of the moratorium is necessary “while we are actively working on amendments to our oil and gas regulations.”
The Colorado Oil and Gas Association said the emergency extension was “yet another” moratorium from the county and it is “reviewing all the options,” including possible legal action.
“After 57 months of studying and attempting to rewrite their local process, Boulder County has deemed it necessary to declare an ‘emergency moratorium’ to consider finishing their rewriting of the process,” Doug Flanders, director of policy and external affairs at the association, told Bloomberg BNA Nov. 18. “Common sense should dictate that the county may not have a very good understanding of the definition of ‘emergency.’”
“This seems to be more about being fearful of actually making a decision and addressing the issue rather than actually getting the work done and finding a reasonable solution,” he added.
In a Nov. 17 statement, Elise Jones, chair of the Boulder County Board of Commissioners, said the county “must ensure that we have the absolute best protections in place before we can move forward.”
In May, the Colorado Supreme Court ruled a five-year moratorium on fracking and the storage of fracking waste in Fort Collins, Colo. was a matter of mixed state and local concern and was subject to preemption by the state's Oil and Gas Conservation Act (City of Fort Collins v. Colo. Oil & Gas Ass'n, 369 P.3d 586, 82 ERC 1549, 2016 BL 138407 (Colo. 2016)).
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=100736495&vname=dennotallissues&fn=100736495&jd=100736495
-
Regulate Fracking Before It Starts in Georgia, Group Says
Nov 21, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Chris Marr
Stricter regulation of oil and gas drilling, including hydraulic fracturing rules, could be on the agenda for Georgia's next legislative session if environmental advocates get their wish.
Georgia's history of oil and gas drilling is all but non-existent, but exploration companies have secured mineral leases around northwest Georgia in recent years, hoping to tap into potentially abundant natural gas in the Conasauga shale, the Georgia Water Coalition said in its latest “Dirty Dozen” report.
The annual report highlights what the coalition sees as noteworthy threats to the state's streams, lakes and groundwater, and the potential of fracking with little regulatory oversight has the coalition concerned.
“I don't think drilling is imminent, but if natural gas prices go up and it becomes economically viable to produce in the Conasauga shale, then I think we'll see that,” Joe Cook of the Coosa River Basin Initiative, a part of the water coalition, told Bloomberg BNA on Nov. 17.
The coalition is working to get a bill drafted and recruit state legislators to sponsor it for the 2017 session, which begins Jan. 9. Cook said he has heard positive feedback initially from Republican legislative leaders. Ten city and county governments so far approved resolutions in favor of tightening the state's oil and gas law.
The coalition wants the state to require groundwater monitoring around fracking wells, disclosure of chemicals used for fracking, and proper disposal of fracking fluids, in addition to more public notice and public comment requirements, according to its report.
Current law allows the state to permit oil or gas wells within 15 days of request with no public comment period, Cook said.
Little Testing, No Production
The state has no history of producing oil and gas and limited history of companies drilling test wells—the most recent being three or four years ago, state geologist Jim Kennedy told Bloomberg BNA on Nov. 18. Kennedy handles permitting oil and gas wells for the state's Environmental Protection Division.
“In Georgia there's very little interest as far as I can see in exploring for gas, and zero interest in oil. I imagine that's because the price of gas is so low,” Kennedy said.
The state continues to see “wildcatters” speaking to property owners about leasing their mineral rights, he said. Interest in drilling could revive if oil and gas prices rebound, but it is hard to predict when that might happen, he said.
The most recent test wells were drilled near Dalton, Ga., in the northwest part of the state near the Tennessee border. Buckeye Exploration Co., based in Chandler, Okla., drilled two vertical wells without the use of hydraulic fracturing, Kennedy said.
At one site, Buckeye hit groundwater and stopped. At the other it drilled to its full permitted depth of 5,000 feet. The company hasn't requested a permit for a production well, he said.
Kennedy acknowledged the state's oil and gas drilling law, which dates to 1975, might be due for an update, but added it is possible the revisions could be made through an EPD rulemaking process instead of legislation.
The threat of fracking to groundwater is already limited by separate regulations, he said, pointing to the state's underground injection control regulations.
Any permit requests for fracking would be subject to the underground injection rules, which require the types of protections the water coalition seeks, even though the current regulations don't specifically refer to oil and gas drilling, according to Kennedy.
“It's more implied rather than explicit,” he said.
Any proposed legislation would need to win the approval of a Republican-controlled state House and Senate and Gov. Nathan Deal (R). State legislators haven't had a chance to establish much of a track record on oil and gas issues.
Lawmakers did approve a bill (H.B. 1036) in the 2016 session temporarily blocking state permitting of petroleum pipelines while a legislative study committee evaluates the permitting process.
The bill's passage led to Kinder Morgan suspending its planned $1 billion, 360-mile Palmetto Pipeline from South Carolina to Florida.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=100736491&vname=dennotallissues&fn=100736491&jd=100736491
-
Environmentalists Get A Dose Of Good News
Nov 17, 2016 | Politico
By Michael Grunwald
Even though President Obama’s historic Clean Power Plan was stayed by the Supreme Court and appears doomed in the Trump Administration, the electric sector is getting so green so fast that it has already met the plan’s 2024 goal for slashing carbon emissions and its 2030 target for reducing coal use, new data show.
The primary cause of the sharp decline in power-plant emissions is clear: Utilities are rapidly abandoning coal for cleaner-burning natural gas and zero-emission renewables. It’s also clear that this shift, driven by rising prices for coal and falling prices for climate-friendlier alternatives, is happening independently of Obama’s controversial climate rules, which were only finalized in August 2015 and then suspended by the Court six months later. Even if President-Elect Trump fulfills his pledge to withdraw from the Paris climate deal, the U.S. is on track to fulfill its pledges under that deal, a glimmer of good news for environmentalists mourning his election.
What is not clear is whether Trump, who has vowed to undo the Clean Power Plan and end Obama’s “war on coal,” can reverse the decline of coal or even slow it down. Trump has called global warming a made-in-China hoax, and the energy section of his transition website reads like an ode to fossil fuels. But since his election, Trump and other pro-coal Republicans, including Senate Majority Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, have tried to lower expectations of a coal-country renaissance, acknowledging that coal’s problems extend beyond Obama’s EPA.
Those problems have gotten even more severe this year. An analysis of government energy data provided to POLITICO by the Sierra Club, which has led a national Beyond Coal campaign to try to kill the industry, shows that U.S. power plants are on track to emit 1.76 billion metric tons of carbon this year, a 27 percent reduction from 2005. That’s already below the Clean Power Plan’s interim goal for 2024, and most of the way to the 32 percent reduction the plan envisions for 2030. If you subtract emissions from the 71 operating coal plants that already have announced retirement dates, the electric sector has just about met the plan’s final emissions goals 15 years early, even though the plan does not now have and may never have any legal teeth to compel compliance.
Scientists have said the world needs to cut emissions 80 percent by 2050 to avoid the worst effects of global warming, so the electric sector still has far to go, the rest of the U.S. economy even farther, and the rest of the world still farther. There are even disparities within the electric sector; the data show that nine fossil-fueled states, all won by Trump except Colorado, have not yet whittled their coal fleets enough to meet their 2024 emissions goals. While several western and northeastern blue states have pledged to go coal-free and are well on their way, red states like Kansas, North Dakota, West Virginia and Wyoming are as coal-dependent as ever.
But the overall trend is unmistakable. Power-plant coal consumption in 2016 is projected to drop to 640 million short tons, down 38 percent from 2005. That’s significantly lower than the EPA expected after 15 years of Clean Power Plan implementation, and with another 15 percent of the remaining coal fleet already scheduled to shut down, those numbers will drop much lower. In fact, the Sierra Club found that if the unprecedented rate of coal retirements over the last three years continues, the power sector will be completely coal-free by 2022.
That’s unlikely, but after a spate of bankruptcy filings by coal giants like Arch, Alpha, and Peabody, experts believe Trump’s vision of a revived coal industry with plentiful new jobs is even less likely. Last year, two thirds of all new U.S. power generating capacity came from wind and solar, and just about all of the rest came from natural gas. Megan Berge, a Washington attorney who represents power companies, says they’re abandoning coal primarily because wind and solar prices have dropped by more than two thirds in the Obama era, while gas prices have hovered near historic lows. Federal tax credits for renewables and state mandates promoting renewables have contributed as well. Obama’s new carbon rules, designed to accelerate the clean-energy trend, haven’t had a chance to do much.
“There’s a lot of excitement about rolling back the Clean Power Plan, but as a practical matter, the impact on power generation should be minimal to none,” Berge said.
The problem for the coal industry is that power-plant investment decisions are usually based on price, and coal is no longer a cheap choice. Even in fossil-fueled red states like Kentucky, Ohio, Indiana, and Nebraska, utilities and regulators have chosen to retire aging and uneconomic coal plants rather than pour ratepayer dollars into expensive modern pollution controls. Climate activists like former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg, who has donated $80 million to the Sierra Club’s Beyond Coal campaign, argue that the market forces squeezing coal are stronger than anything Trump can do to prop up the industry. Coal is even struggling in China, and it’s not because that government fears eco-activists.
“Coal is dying because of economics, not politics, and it’s not coming back,” Bloomberg said in a statement.
Then again, coal’s sour economics are not totally disconnected from politics. Obama has defended his regulations on mercury, ozone, soot, and other coal-fired pollutants as common-sense measures to stop corporate vandals from defacing America’s air and water, but they’ve also helped upend the business case for coal. Coal powered half the U.S. grid before Obama, and now powers just one third. The industry has lost 68,000 jobs in the last five years, and National Mining Association vice president Luke Popovich says Obama deserves a lot of the blame.
Popovich said the damage from most of Obama’s EPA regulations is already done, and the industry does not expect Trump or the Republican Congress to undo them. But he said Trump’s transition team has reiterated that the president-elect will get rid of the Clean Power Plan, along with a new rule restricting mining discharges in streams and Obama’s moratorium on coal leases in the Powder River basin. In general, Popovich said that the industry doesn’t expect Washington to revive its fortunes, but it does expect that Washington will stop attacking it.
“Nobody’s saying coal will go back to 50 percent of the market, but we think under Trump the industry could stabilize,” he said. “Under Obama, we’ve been in the boxing ring fighting not only our opponents in the marketplace, but the government. Now the government will be leaving the ring, so we can compete more fairly.”
But if coal power used to be a dominant heavyweight in the ring, it now has the look of a lumbering tomato can—and a particularly risky bet. A Texas utility recently argued in court that it should tax relief because a coal plant it spent $2 billion building just three years ago was already a relic of the past—and the court agreed, assessing its value at less than $500 million. Four years ago, investors decided to spend $700 million on new scrubbers for a Pennsylvania plant rather than retire it; they recently warned that the plant is at risk of default, and they’re now trying to sell it for a huge loss. Florida Power & Light just agreed to pay $450 million to buy a coal plant for the sole purpose of shutting it down and escaping an expensive power contract; it’s replacing the electricity with new solar plants.
In the Obama era, utilities have announced the retirement of about one third of the nation’s coal fleet, and Beyond Coal has set a goal of retiring half the fleet by the end of next year. But while Trump can’t repeal market forces, he can help make the economic climate less hostile to coal if he defangs the EPA. It really matters whether the industry dies quickly, dies slowly, or merely stagnates; a new report by the Germany-based policy center Climate Analytics found that for the world to meet the long-term goals set in Paris to limit warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, the U.S. and other developed nations will have to phase out coal entirely by 2030.
That would be a heavy lift. But it’s hard to fathom just how far coal has fallen since utilities were planning scores of new plants early in the Bush administration, or even since coal stocks were flying high amid a frenzy of mergers early in the Obama administration. The industry has argued that coal keeps the lights on, that coal keeps electric bills low, but so far, the shift away from coal has not produced darkness or soaring power prices. It has produced lower U.S. emissions, which has never happened before during a period of economic growth.
Trump and the Republican Congress will have a lot of power to influence energy policy on the supply side, by easing obstacles to mining and drilling. And they could roll back some of Obama’s efforts to increase demand for clean energy through subsidies for research and deployment as well as tougher oversight of dirty energy. By scrapping the Clean Power Plan, they could remove a looming force for change in coal-friendly states.
But many of the most consequential battles over coal have been fought in obscure hearings of state utility commissions and environmental agencies, and the Sierra Club, often fighting alongside dollar-conscious power consumers like big-box stores, manufacturers, and hospitals, has had the numbers on its side. Bruce Nilles, director of the group's Beyond Coal campaign, vowed that even as the political climate changes in Washington, his litigators and activists will keep winning those battles on the ground.
“Let’s be clear: The coal industry is on the decline, and Donald Trump can’t save it,” Nilles said. “We are not going to go backwards.”
http://www.politico.com/agenda/story/2016/11/environmentalists-get-a-dose-of-good-news-000233
-
Analyst: Need For Dakota Access Pipeline Declining
Nov 18, 2016 | Fuelfix
By Jordan Blum
The need for the controversial and delayed Dakota Access Pipeline is falling along with the production of oil from the Bakken Shale in North Dakota and Montana, said Sandy Fielden, Morningstar’s director of oil and products research.
While the completion of the Energy Transfer Partners-led pipeline project is being delayed under the Obama administration, it will almost certainly be approved once Donald Trump take office, Fielden wrote in an analyst note.
However, the lower oil production levels coupled with the glut of crude coming from West Texas mean there will be less demand for the pipeline once it comes into service next year, Fielden wrote.
The $3.8 billion, nearly 1,200-mile pipeline runs from North Dakota to terminal and refining hubs in Illinois. From there, it connects to an existing pipeline system that will ship the crude to Nederland, Texas and all the Gulf Coast refineries.
The existence of the pipeline likely will encourage some additional Bakken production. “However, any upside in North Dakota will be tempered by competition for refiners’ attention in the Midwest and Gulf Coast, with the Gulf Coast market looking oversupplied,” Fielden wrote.
Even if the Dakota Access Pipeline isn’t a big earner in the near future, it still holds long-term value, said Brandon Blossman, an energy analyst with Tudor, Pickering, Holt & Co. in Houston. Energy Transfer is banking on the pipeline being the primary channel for Bakken crude for many years to come.
“Over time, getting a piece of infrastructure in the ground is going to be valuable. Period,” Blossman said. “These are 50-year projects.”
http://fuelfix.com/blog/2016/11/18/analyst-need-for-dakota-access-pipeline-declining/
-
(ACC Mentioned) 12,000 US Schools Are Within a Mile of a Hazardous Chemical Facility
Nov 21, 2016 | Truth-Out
By Elizabeth Grossman
On April 17, 2013, an explosion and fire at the West Fertilizer Company plant in West, Texas, killed 15 people and injured hundreds. It also destroyed more than 150 buildings around the plant. Among these were the West Intermediate School for 4th and 5th graders, located about 550 feet (170 meters) away from the fertilizer plant, and West High School, about 1,150 feet (350 meters) away. In addition, the explosion and fire, fueled by fertilizer-grade ammonium nitrate -- known to explode when exposed to heat and pressure -- caused substantial damage to the nearby West Elementary School and West Middle School.
Also located right across the road from the plant and its fertilizer tanks were a playground and a basketball court -- about 360 and 250 feet (110 and 76 meters) respectively from the plant fence line. Fortunately, the incident occurred at 7:51 p.m., long after students and staff had left the buildings, and on a day without evening activities. In its investigation, the US Chemical Safety Board determined that had the schools been occupied at the time of the explosion, fatal injuries would likely have been extensive.
What's more, additional analysis by CSB researchers has found that the proximity of these West, Texas, schools to a hazardous chemical facility was not unique. In fact, the researchers found that nearly half of the 40 businesses in Texas that have fertilizer-grade ammonium nitrate on site are located within a half mile (0.8 kilometers) of a school. A Center for Effective Government analysis published early this year also found that nearly one in 10 US children -- 4.9 million children -- go to the approximately 12,000 schools nationwide that are within one mile (1.6 kilometers) of a facility that uses or stores dangerous chemicals. These are industrial sites using chemicals that the US Environmental Protection Agency considers hazardous enough to require the companies have emergency plans in place in case of toxic chemical release or other dangerous incident.
Another analysis by the Political Economy Research Institute at the University of Massachusetts Amherst found that schools located near industrial that release high volumes of toxic chemicals -- and report these releases to the EPA under the agency's Toxics Release Inventory program -- put "thousands of schools and hundreds of thousands of children at risk" of exposure to hazardous air pollutants. Among these are chemicals known to adversely affect respiratory and neurological health -- including lead, mercury and compounds associated with fossil fuels. CFEG and others have consistently found that these facilities are disproportionately located in and around minority and low-income populations.
There are indeed "thousands of these schools" all across the US, says CSB recommendations specialist Veronica Tinney, who examined this situation in a paper recently published by Environmental Health Perspectives. "I don't think a lot of people know that these facilities are often located so close to schools," she adds.
But some people, like Pam Nixon, who lives in West Virginia's Kanawha Valley -- not far from Charleston, and home to one of the country's highest concentrations of chemical plants -- are all too aware of this proximity. The plants there use and manufacture highly hazardous chemicals, many of which go into pesticides and plastics production, and have a history of accidents involving these toxics.
"We have emergency sirens that go off once a month. You can hear them all along the valley," says Nixon, who is president of a local group called People Concerned About Chemical Safety. These are usually drills, but not always. "I live midway between a Dow Union Carbide facility and the Dow facility in Institute[West Virginia]. Every year the schools have a sheltering-in-place drill, so students and parents and teachers are able to shelter quickly and be able to cover the windows, to secure children in the buildings whenever there's a chemical release from a facility," she says. "I used to live in Institute and lived through a number of what were called conflagrations and explosions and chemical releases that caused us to have shelter-in-place."
"In terms of existing schools, there's nothing on the books to address these hazards. People just didn't think about this when they were locating these schools." –Ronald White
These incidents are far from a thing of the past. On Saturday, August 27, 2016, a chlorine gas leak at an Axiall chemical plant in New Martsinsville, West Virginia, caused community evacuations, closed highways and cancelled several schools' sports events. (Chlorine, which is extremely toxic in its gaseous form, can cause breathing, lung and vision problems as well as nausea and burns, and can explode if it comes into contact with other common chemicals, including ammonia, natural gas or turpentine.) On August 31, a fire and chemical release at a chemical plant in Gallipolis Ferry, West Virginia (about an hour's drive from Charleston) caused Beale Elementary School students and staff to shelter in place. Children were on the playground at the time, the school principal told WSAZ News Channel 3. "The students reacted marvelously, they had no problem with it. They just assumed it was a drill so they weren't panicky," she said. Then, on October 21, a chemical release at an Atchison, Kansas, plant caused local public school evacuations and an elementary school to shelter in place. And in 2014, the Freedom Industries chemical spill into the Elk River near Charleston affected the entire community, including shutting down schools where students complained of dizziness and burning eyes and noses.
No Rules or Regulations
There is no federal law or regulation that restricts or otherwise specifies how close schools can be to facilities that use or store hazardous materials, says Ronald White, an independent environmental health science consultant and co-author of the CFEG report Living in the Shadow of Danger.
"In terms of existing schools," White explains, "there's nothing on the books to address these hazards. People just didn't think about this when they were locating these schools." Actually, no federal agency currently even has the authority to prohibit school siting near facilities with hazardous chemicals, write CSB's Tinney and co-authors. White calls the situation "a tragedy waiting to happen."
The US Environmental Protection Agency "has done quite a bit of work on schools and hazards in school siting," says Tinney. But, she says, the agency doesn't have the authority to specify what happens at local schools.
For example, the EPA has developed voluntary School Siting Guidelines, released in 2011 under the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. But these only apply to new schools. In fact these guidelines say very clearly, "The school siting guidelines are NOT designed for retroactive application to previous school siting decisions." The guidelines include recommendations to consider air and water pollution and soil contamination, whether from a legacy source -- pollution that first occurred some time ago -- or an ongoing activity like agricultural pesticide application. They also recommend considering the frequency and intensity of nearby "safety hazards … (e.g., explosion vs. flooding)." The guidelines mention industrial pollution hazards, but again these are recommendations, not requirements.
The EPA has also developed a "Healthy School Environments Assessment Tool." However, it focuses primarily on hazards in school buildings or on school grounds rather than on hazards that may be located nearby in a school's neighborhood or community.
The regulations that do exist about locating schools near environmental hazards are at the local level. But again, these focus on new schools, not ones already built. In a report for the EPA published in 2006, Rhode Island Legal Services researchers found that only 14 states actually had policies that specifically prohibit locating a school "near sources of pollution or other hazards that pose a risk to children's safety." They also found that about two dozen states had no requirement that environmental hazards be investigated before choosing a potential school site. And only 12 states had rules that required public input on new school siting, something the researchers considered essential to evaluating these hazards.
State-level rules that do exist specify that new schools can't be built near facilities that use, store, release or dispose of toxics that range from petroleum products to pesticides. Some include heavy traffic areas and airports.
In the Kanawha Valley, Nixon says, a new elementary school was built in 2011 and "is located within less than 2 miles [3.2 kilometers] of Charleston chemical plants. I do not believe it was discussed that it was within a 2-mile radius of a chemical plant. There wasn't any discussion about the location." The chemical plants, she says, are just "part of the landscape. They're just there."
"It would be better if the schools were not so close to where you can see the plants in the background," Nixon says. "Usually it's people in the community that inform the company that whatever's been released has reached the community. If the wind was blowing, the chemicals could be right there on kids outside before anyone knew about it."
West Virginia requires schools to have crisis response plans that include shelter-in-place and evacuation procedures. Beale Elementary's protocol involves sealing doors with plastic, turning off air conditioning and discarding any cafeteria food that could have been contaminated. The state also has policies regarding siting schools near certain environmental hazards, but given the concentration of chemical plants, many schools are still located nearby.
Safer Technology, Safer Chemicals
Even though thousands of schools across the country are in a position to be affected by an emergency incident at a hazardous chemical facility, "you're not going to tear these schools down," says White. "Then the answer is: Let's make these [industrial] facilities safer. Institute safer technologies. This is something we need to do, not just for schools but for the entire community."
Michele Roberts, national co-coordinator for the Environmental Justice Health Alliance for Chemical Policy Reform, and her colleagues advocate for use of safer chemicals and manufacturing processes by industries.
"What we're pushing for," Roberts says, "is what we're calling a 'just transition.' We want to make sure our workers, our students, our young people who are being educated in these areas, that their health is considered and their safety is considered, by having safer businesses, safer processes."
Roberts, too, has looked at where schools are located around the country, especially in low-income neighborhoods and communities of color. "There is no policy in place that we know of that protects schools form being located within a 1- to 3-mile [1.6- to 4.8-kilometer] radius from some of our nation's most egregious operations," she says. Places where Roberts, White and others have found these hazards clustered include Los Angeles County, Houston and other communities along the Gulf Coast.
Roberts describes being in Wilmington, Delaware, recently -- where she says there are schools up and down the Route 9 industrial corridor -- working on science education with school kids and recalls, "An 11-year-old that was part of that youth and science work we're doing was appalled to know that schools can be located within the vulnerability zone," the area that would be affected if there was a chemical release or other such emergency.
Inherently safer industrial processes are also part of the public conversation going on in West Virginia, says Nixon. A new methanol processing plant is being planned for the Institute area, and people are concerned that it will likely be very close to a local college, she explains. "That community has a long history of explosions and leaks and sheltering in place," she says, so there's concern about bringing in a plant without inherently safer design.
The "issue is so complex," CSB's Tinney acknowledges. Solutions, she explains, will require working with land-use planning officials, school districts, and state and local environmental and health authorities. Tinney also agrees that inherently safer technologies for existing chemical plants, refineries and other industrial facilities are key.
In the wake of the West, Texas, tragedy, President Obama issued Executive Order 13560. It directed federal agencies to work with companies that use and store hazardous chemicals to reduce those dangers. The order hasn't yet produced substantive changes; the EPA is now considering new requirements that could include asking companies to look at safer technologies that would reduce risks to surrounding communities.
Responding to this issue, the American Chemistry Council -- the trade association representing the US chemical industry -- has pointed to its "Responsible Care" program, required for ACC members but otherwise voluntary, and says this has reduced the number of "incidents that resulted in a product spill, fire, explosion or injury by 55 percent since 1995." ACC also says, "Over the past decade, our members have invested almost $13 billion in chemical facility security enhancements under the Code." But, as Senator Barbara Boxer -- who has been outspoken on this issue -- pointed out in a statement and Senate hearing in 2014, "[i]n the 602 days since the West, Texas, tragedy, there have been 355 chemical accidents, resulting in 12 deaths and almost 1,500 hospitalizations."
Yet, says White, the issue of schools in danger zones often gets pushed "to the back burner," unless an emergency occurs. He also says it's unlikely that the rules the Obama administration has been working on to update emergency planning requirements for hazardous chemical facilities will address this issue, especially regarding existing schools.
Currently, the entire issue of environmental hazards that affect schools is addressed by a patchwork of local laws and voluntary initiatives. There "is no federal, state, or local agency that is authorized, funded, and staffed to protect children in these settings from environmental health hazards," say Healthy Schools Network executive director Claire Barnett and George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Science professor of pediatrics Jerome Paulson in a paper just published by Environmental Health Perspectives. Yet, says White, there should be "some requirement that these schools are aware of what procedures to take should there be an accident.
"Unfortunately, even that is not happening with any consistency," White says. "But if parents knew, there would be more pressure."
http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/38400-12-000-us-schools-are-within-a-mile-of-a-hazardous-chemical-facility
-
Jury Awards 4 Workers $16M For 2013 Plant Explosion
Nov 18, 2016 | AP (In Chem.Info)
NEW ORLEANS (AP) — Four workers injured in a deadly 2013 petrochemical plant explosion in south Louisiana have been awarded a total of $16 million by a jury.
This week's verdict follows a separate late September trial in which four other workers were awarded $13.6 million for injuries suffered at the Williams Olefins Geismar plant. Two people died in the ground-rattling June 2013 blast southeast of Baton Rouge. The U.S. Chemical Safety Board said there were 167 reported injuries.
In Tuesday's verdict, the jury assigned just over 83 percent of the fault for the explosion to Williams Co. Inc., an Oklahoma-based business, and 16 percent of the blame to Sabic Petrochemicals, a Saudi energy company that was added as a co-defendant in the latest lawsuit. Two plant officials were assigned less than 1 percent of fault.
"Williams has made too many reckless choices that led to this explosion," Kurt Arnold, an attorney for Houston-based Arnold & Itkin. The firm represents about 80 of the injured workers.
As it did after the first trial, Williams Olefins said it will appeal.
"Williams Olefins has admitted in numerous legal-related filings and ensuing reports, its responsibility for the accident. But, there was never any intent to injure anyone. We think the verdict does not comport with the law and will therefore appeal," the company's emailed statement said.
Susan LeBourdais, a spokeswoman for Sabic Petrochemicals, said in an email Thursday that the company does not comment on pending litigation, "except to say that we intend to pursue all available remedies."
http://www.chem.info/news/2016/11/jury-awards-4-workers-16m-2013-plant-explosion
-
Diplomats Confront New Threat to Paris Climate Pact: Donald Trump
Nov 18, 2016 | The New York Times
By Coral Davenport
MARRAKESH, Morocco — Diplomats from around the world converged here this week with the plan to put details on last year’s Paris climate accordand move the globe closer to controlling the industrial emissions that are heating the planet.
Instead, with the election of Donald J. Trump — and his threat to withdraw the United States from the accord — shellshocked negotiators confronted potentially deep fissures developing in the international consensus on climate change. On the sidelines of the negotiations, some diplomats turned from talking of rising seas and climbing temperatures toward how to punish the United States if Mr. Trump follows through, possibly with a carbon-pollution tax on imports of American-made goods.
“A carbon tariff against the United States is an option for us,” Rodolfo Lacy Tamayo, Mexico’s under secretary for environmental policy and planning, said in an interview here. He added, “We will apply any kind of policy necessary to defend the quality of life for our people, to protect our environment and to protect our industries.”
Forcing United States industries to turn to cleaner energy sources with the hammer of an import tariff is not far-fetched. Countries imposing costs on their own industries to control carbon emissions could tell the World Trade Organization that United States industries are operating under an unfair trade advantage by avoiding any cost for their pollution.Continue reading the main storyThe Trump White HouseStories on the presidential transition and the forthcoming Trump administration.It’s Not Just the White House. Change Is in the Air on Wall St., TooNOV 19A Bleak Outlook for Trump’s Promises to Coal MinersNOV 19Enthusiasm for Trump in Poland Is Tempered by Distrust of PutinNOV 19‘Never Trump’ Stalwarts Try to Focus on Policy, Not the ManNOV 19Why Democrats Now Need the F.B.I. Director, James ComeyNOV 18
See More »
AdvertisementContinue reading the main story
The tax would be calculated based on the amount of carbon pollution associated with the manufacturing of each product. That would impose a painful cost on the heaviest industrial polluters, particularly on exporters of products containing steel and cement.
“The Paris Agreement is meant to get everyone on board in one structure where you can address climate change together,” said Dirk Forrister, the president and chief executive of the International Emissions Trading Organization, a nonprofit organization that consults with governments and companies. “But if one big country backs out it could trigger a whole wave of trade responses.”
He added: “There is no need to start a trade war over climate change. But it might happen.”
The Marrakesh summit meeting was expected to conclude late Friday or early Saturday with a declaration that all governments will continue to carry out and strengthen the Paris accord, and a timetable for adopting the details of the pact, such as a global system to monitor and verify carbon emission reductions at the national level.
In Washington, the Obama administration has pressed forward with its environmental agenda as if Mr. Trump had not been elected. An offshore drilling plan unveiled Friday assumes continued bans on oil and gas exploration in the Atlantic and Arctic Oceans — which the Trump administration could easily reverse.
But diplomats are quietly going off their agendas to begin planning how to react if Mr. Trump chooses to reject the Paris Agreement. The pact, as it stands, contains no enforcement measures, such as economic sanctions, for countries that do not comply. But individual governments could put trade sanctions in place on their own or in concert.
In Mexico, which is already preparing for a newly adversarial relationship with an American president who has threatened to build a wall along the border, government officials said they have begun considering the idea of a carbon tariff.
Canada, the United States’ largest trading partner, is also discussing a tariff. Some Canadian provinces, including Ontario and Quebec, already have carbon tax policies that include fees imposed on fossil-fueled energy generated across provincial borders.
“I see that extending across the Canadian border if the U.S. pulls out of Paris,” said Lisa DeMarco, a senior partner with DeMarco, Allan, a Toronto-based climate law firm that advises Canadian provinces and international businesses.
“If you want to sell your goods in Canada, you’d have to meet the same emissions standards,” she said.
In France, Nicolas Sarkozy, the former French president who is campaigning to hold that office again, suggested this week that the European Union impose a carbon tariff on American imports if Washington withdraws.
Supporters of Mr. Trump’s climate change policies say they are not worried.
“It’s an empty threat,” said Thomas J. Pyle, the president of the Institute for Energy Research, an organization partly funded by the billionaire libertarian brothers Charles and David Koch and which Mr. Trump has cited as influential in shaping his energy and climate proposals.
Economists widely agree that the most effective way to attack climate change is to tax or otherwise put a price on planet-warming pollution. Most of the world’s major economies, including the European Union and China as well as Canada and Mexico, have already begun to put domestic carbon pricing programs in place.
The European Union’s “cap-and-trade” system capped carbon pollution levels and created a market for companies to buy and sell permits to pollute. China plans to implement a similar program next year and Mexico, which already taxes carbon pollution, is on track to put in place its own cap-and-trade program by 2018.
Canada’s national carbon pricing system, set to go into force by 2019, allows its provinces to mix cap-and-trade programs and carbon taxes.
With Congress unwilling to pass either a carbon tax or a cap-and-trade program, President Obama pushed for climate change regulations to limit carbon emissions while encouraging states to create their own cap-and-trade programs to comply.
Mr. Trump, who has called climate change a hoax invented by the Chinese, campaigned on a promise to dismantle the Obama administration’s climate rules and put coal miners back to work. But since he was elected, he has not commented publicly on his climate plans. Mr. Trump’s transition team did not respond to a request for comment.
While some politicians are already responding belligerently, other European officials are taking a wait-and-see approach. “In the European Union we have a strong climate policy,” said Miguel Arias Cañete, the bloc’s commissioner on climate action. “But we don’t think it is appropriate yet to speak to a U.S. carbon tariff, because the new U.S. president has not yet taken a public position on climate.”
And a trade war may be a price too high for countries whose economies depend on American consumers and suppliers. Asked if Beijing would consider a carbon tariff against the United States, Liu Zhenmin, China’s lead climate negotiator, said, “Addressing climate change should not become an obstacle for trade. China will continue to promote free trade.”
Chinese negotiators appear to be hoping for the best.
“A wise leader will follow the global and historical trend,” Xie Zhenhua, a Chinese negotiator, said.
The idea that other nations might punish the United States with a pollution import tax is a switch. President Obama’s failed cap-and-trade bill in 2010 included a carbon tariff on imports from other countries. The United States hoped to use trade sanctions to punish other countries, particularly China, for polluting and push them toward global climate talks.
Now the policy could be reversed and used against the United States, as much of the rest of the world economy moves ahead with pricing carbon, while Washington prepared to roll back its climate change plan.
Economists warn that a carbon tariff now could backfire.
“Is he the sort of person who would back down or would he retaliate?” Robert N. Stavins, the director of Harvard University’s environmental economics program, asked about Mr. Trump. “He seems like the kind of person who would retaliate. And then you’d have a trade war.”
Mr. Stavins added, “That would be an example of the cure being worse than the disease.”
Other experts agreed that choosing to impose a carbon tariff should be done with care for the consequences.
“A carbon tariff is a power tool,” Mr. Forrister said. “It’s not one that any country would use lightly. Things would have to get pretty serious for any country to take it out of the toolbox and use it. But given the current situation it’s a possibility that they would do it.”
Mr. Tamayo, the Mexican official, said that for the moment, Mexico is more focused on linking its forthcoming cap-and-trade program with similar programs in California and Quebec.
“For now,” he said, “we hope to build bridges, not walls.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/19/us/politics/trump-climate-change.html?mtrref=www.realclearenergy.org&gwh=6AB1BC07AEDA717D4212CB11C77CE616&gwt=pay&_r=0
-
Fight Against Global Warming Advances Despite Trump’s Skepticism
Nov 19, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Jessica Shankleman
More than 190 nations including the U.S., China and Saudi Arabia vowed to step up their efforts to fight global warming despite concerns that U.S. President-elect Donald Trump will pull the richest polluter out of the process when he takes office next year.
Envoys and more than 50 national leaders in Marrakech, Morocco, agreed on Friday to a roadmap for developing a rulebook by 2018 that will strengthen the landmark Paris Agreement signed last year to limit fossil-fuel emissions and keep temperature increases to 2 degrees Celsius by the end of the century.
Even delegations that previously frustrated progress at the United Nations talks went out of their way to urge Trump to cast aside his skepticism and embrace cleaner forms of energy. Trump said before the election that the idea of climate change is a hoax invented by China and that he’d scrap the Paris accord.
“We’re really confident” Trump will help efforts to tackle climate change, Thani Ahmed Al Zeyoudi, climate change and environment minister for the United Arab Emirates, said in an interview in Marrakech shortly before the talks concluded.
“Trump is coming from the private sector,” he said. “He’s a businessman and he sees there are huge business opportunities” from this.
India and Brazil kept the talks running past midnight, disagreeing over how to move forward on a list of issues from Paris, such as negotiating a long-term climate finance goal and timeframes for countries’ carbon-reduction targets.
During the talks, Saudi Arabia ratified the Paris accord, and 48 of the most vulnerable countries vowed to fuel their economies with 100 percent renewable energy by between 2030 and 2050. China’s envoy noted it was U.S. Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush who started the climate talks long before officials in Beijing were engaged in the issue. Trump’s transition team has offered scant comment on the issue.
Temperatures Rising
Even with the Paris agreement, temperatures are set to rise by as much as 3.4 degrees Celsius by 2100 from pre-industrial levels, according to a United Nations report this month. That would mark the quickest shift in the climate since the end of the last ice age some 10,000 years ago, threatening to upend economies worldwide with more powerful storms and frequent droughts.
“We don’t know what countries are still waiting for to move towards net carbon neutrality,” said Edgar Gutierrez, Costa Rica’s environment and energy minister. “All parties should start the transition, otherwise we all suffer.”
The talks in Marrakech this week were focused on a number of technical measures that would help put flesh on the 13-page Paris Agreementsealed in the French capital in December.
Those include:
• a roadmap to write a rulebook by 2018 for how the voluntary limits on emissions agreed upon in Paris will be assessed and overseen,
• a pledge by Germany, Italy, Sweden and Belgium for $81 million that the Adaptation Fund requested to pay for projects in its pipeline,
• a Paris Committee on Capacity Building that will start work in 2017 helping developing nations build their ability to rein in emissions and adapt to climate-related harm,
• a decision to review a “loss and damage” mechanism that would compensate the poorest nations for the worst impacts of climate change,
• a partnership among nations aimed at spurring use of renewable energy,
• a political call in the form of the Marrakech Action Proclamation endorsed by the nations present, emphasizing the group is “more united” than ever on implementing the Paris deal.
Next year’s talks will be hosted by Fiji but held at the UN headquarters in Bonn, Germany.
Delegates drawn mostly from energy and environment ministries appeared to grow increasingly confident that they could still deliver on the ambitions of Paris even if Trump renounced it.
“The transformation to a climate-friendly world agreed on in Paris is well underway and can no longer be halted,” German Environment Minister Barbara Hendricks said on Friday as the talks drew to a close.
China, which helped prevent an agreement in 2009, said that even without all countries aboard, the UN process would advance just as it did after the U.S. renounced the Kyoto climate accord in 2001.
http://news.bna.com/deln/lpages/lpages.adp?pg=breaking_news&bn_product=deln#urn:bna:000001587a15de8aaddd7fbf76380000
-
Third-Party Building Efficiency Funding Has Promise: Reicher
Nov 21, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By William H. Carlile
The idea of bringing private-sector investment to improving the energy efficiency of buildings deserves a look from the incoming Trump administration, Google's former director of climate change and energy initiatives told a conference of energy service companies.
“There are lots of questions about what Donald Trump might do in this area,” said Dan Reicher, but the cost- and energy-savings approach of third-party investment might appeal to him.
Trump would understand the Energy Service Company (ESCO) business because his career has been focused on developing and operating buildings, Reicher said in an address at an annual meeting of the National Association of Energy Service Companies in Scottsdale, Ariz.
Role of ESCOs
ESCOs contract with private and public entities to provide energy efficiency retrofits. The national association said that these companies have used performance-based contract business models and implemented more than $50 billion in energy efficiency retrofits over the last 30 years.
Reicher was co-chair of President Obama's Energy and Environment Team and served in the Clinton administration as an assistant secretary of energy for renewable energy and energy efficiency. He currently is the executive director of the Steyer-Taylor Center for Energy Policy and Finance at Stanford University.
Public and Private Buildings
The fundamental concept of ESCOs involves third-party investment in the energy upgrade of a public or private building.
The challenge will be to convince Trump that this kind of investment is worthwhile, Reicher said.
But this should not be difficult because the more successful ESCOs are in the federal building context, and the use of private investment to reduce the federal energy bill leaves money for other federal priorities, he said.
Tommy Shallenberger of San Diego, a regional manager for Synergy Companies, said the concept “seems to be in line with Trump's campaign, which is a no-nonsense, business-oriented, bottom-line approach.”
Another speaker, Dan Lashof, said that businesses and state and local governments must step in to maintain the momentum on fighting climate change if the Trump administration withdraws federal support for those efforts as Trump has pledged.
Lashof, chief operating officer of NextGen Climate America, a non-profit group that calls for a level playing field so that low-carbon energy sources can compete with fossil fuels, said deployment of cleaner sources of energy is not moving fast enough to meet the challenge of climate change.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=100736498&vname=dennotallissues&fn=100736498&jd=100736498
Congressional Hearings - There are no relevant hearings to report at this time.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested