Preview Newsletter
ACC PM 11/21/16
-
Who Is Myron Ebell?
Nov 21, 2016 | E&E Climatewire
By Evan Lehmann
Andrew Moylan was about to make waves. So he arranged a meeting with Myron Ebell, to lay out his plan to push Republicans toward supporting a carbon tax. -
Early Disconnect Between Industry Rhetoric And Actions Under The New TSCA?
Nov 21, 2016 | Environmental Defense Fund
By Richard Denison
It was more than a bit heartening that, even post-election, chemical industry representatives have been publicly urging that the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) implementation of the new Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) should continue apace. -
(ACC Mentioned) Obama Taps Ex-Trade Group Official For Chemical Safety Board
Nov 21, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Gabriel Dunsmith
President Obama on Friday nominated a Department of Transportation official to fill an open seat on the U.S. Chemical Safety Board, the nation's chemical watchdog agency. -
While Unlikely To Be Carcinogenic, The Herbicide Glyphosate Is A Symptom Of A Deep Social Pathology
Nov 21, 2016 | Forbes
By Geoffrey Kabat
On both sides of the Atlantic a battle is raging between starkly opposed views of what science tells us about risks to our health emanating from our surroundings, including our food, water, and the wider environment. -
OECD Revises Basis Of Chemicals Assessment Work
Nov 21, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Emma Chynoweth
The OECD is preparing proposals to revise two Council Acts to better reflect its evolving work on chemicals safety. They are for: -
European Commission Consults On Restricting Furfural In Cosmetic Products
Nov 21, 2016 | Chemical Watch
The European Commission has begun consulting on a proposal to restrict the use of 2-furaldehyde in cosmetic products. -
(ACC Mentioned) DOI Cuts Most Alaska Tracts In Latest 2017-22 OCS Leasing-Plan Move
Nov 21, 2016 | PennEnergy
By Nick Snow
The US Department of the Interior released a proposed final program (PFP) for the 2017-22 US Outer Continental Shelf oil and gas leasing that removed all tracts offshore Alaska. National oil and gas associations, other business organizations, and members of Alaska’s government immediately criticized the Nov. 18 action. -
Senate Weighs Response To House Offer
Nov 21, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Geof Koss
Senate energy reform bill conferees are reviewing a Friday counteroffer from House negotiators, as efforts to break a decadelong stalemate on major energy legislation come down to the wire. -
Trump's Energy Team Overhauled
Nov 21, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Robin Bravender
President-elect Donald Trump's energy and environmental transition staff has been drastically reshaped. -
Trump To Take Reins Of An Unsteady Global Energy Market — IEA
Nov 21, 2016 | E&E Climatewire
By Umair Irfan
The Trump administration stands to have an outsized influence on volatile global energy markets, but it's still too soon to tell just how, according to the head of the International Energy Agency. -
McCarthy Optimistic EPA Mission Will Be Sustained Under Trump
Nov 21, 2016 | E&E Energywire
By Rod Kuckro
In her first interview since Election Day, U.S. EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy fiercely defended President Obama's efforts to curb greenhouse gas emissions and said states, cities, utilities and major corporations will continue expanding their use of clean energy regardless of how President-elect Donald Trump redirects her agency. -
Police, Protesters Clash At Dakota Access Pipeline
Nov 21, 2016 | AP (In Fuel Fix)
Tension flared anew on the Dakota Access pipeline as protesters tried to push past a long-blocked bridge on a state highway, only to be turned back by a line of law enforcement using water cannon and what appeared to be tear gas. -
CEO Shuns Reroute Plan As Protests Turn Violent
Nov 21, 2016 | Los Angeles Times (In E&E Greenwire)
By Nigel Duara
The head of Energy Transfer Partners LP, the company building the Dakota Access oil pipeline, said Friday that it likely will not be rerouted but that he hoped to meet with the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe chairman to ease his concerns over construction. -
DHS Attacks Emerging 'Internet Of Things' Security Concerns
Nov 21, 2016 | E&E Energywire
By Blake Sobczak
Robert Silvers is spearheading the Department of Homeland Security's effort to seal cybersecurity gaps in the "internet of things." -
Trump Infrastructure Plan 'Not A Panacea' — Industry
Nov 21, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Ariel Wittenberg
Trade groups that would benefit from President-elect Trump's $1 trillion infrastructure plan say it's not enough to cure the nation's transportation woes. -
Addressing Outdated Regulations Will Help Keep The U.S. Steel Industry Moving
Nov 21, 2016 | The Hill - Congress Blog
By Philip K. Bell
Rebuilding our nation’s infrastructure is a hot topic in Washington again, and as it should be, it also appears to be a top priority for the incoming administration. Our system for moving goods has been neglected for far too long and is in dire need of an update. -
AAR Calls On STB To Stop Major Rulemakings For The Time Being
Nov 21, 2016 | Logistics Management
By Jeff Berman
Pending the United States Senate confirming a “full slate” of board members appointed by President-elect Donald Trump to the United States Surface Transportation Board (STB), the Association of American Railroads (AAR) said last week that the STB should take a pause on its various planned regulatory proposals. -
DAPL Protests Could Become Face Of Climate Change Movement
Nov 21, 2016 | Christian Science Monitor (In E&E Climatewire)
By Henry Gass
Native American protests against pipelines and water pollution could become an integral part of the broader climate change movement. -
GOP States Urge Trump To Scale Back EPA Rules, Enforcement
Nov 21, 2016 | Inside EPA
Five Republican-led states are urging President-elect Donald Trump to scale back EPA's rulemaking and enforcement efforts, calling on the incoming administration to “return environmental leadership to the states” by abandoning what they describe as unnecessary or duplicative action such as the Obama administration's climate agenda. -
Tax Policy May Help U.S. Meet Goals Under Trump
Nov 21, 2016 | The Washington Post (In E&E Greenwire)
By Stephen Stromberg
A veteran Japanese climate negotiator has pointed to obscure U.S. tax policy as a potential roadblock for President-elect Donald Trump's plans to withdraw from the 2015 Paris accord. -
As Marrakech Climate Talks End, Countries Vow To Fight On
Nov 21, 2016 | E&E Climatewire
By Jean Chemnick
Global climate negotiations dominated by the threat of Donald Trump ended this weekend with diplomats downplaying the threat of Donald Trump.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News
Environment News
-
Nov 21, 2016 | E&E Climatewire
By Evan Lehmann
Andrew Moylan was about to make waves. So he arranged a meeting with Myron Ebell, to lay out his plan to push Republicans toward supporting a carbon tax.
Moylan was giving early notice to one of Washington's biggest critics of climate science. He didn't expect the bespectacled Ebell to lend his support. Still, Moylan described what happened next as "unusual."
"Myron just cut right to the chase and said, 'Listen, you're wrong, and we're going to beat you,'" recalled Moylan, now executive director of the libertarian R Street Institute.
The encounter, which occurred several years ago, encapsulates Ebell's unmoving attitude against climate action or even a willingness to discuss it, according to people who have tried.
Now, after a career of advancing theories that question the scientific underpinnings of global warming, he is overseeing U.S. EPA's transition into President-elect Donald Trump's administration. It's not lost on many observers, liberal and conservative alike, that Ebell is not a scientist and has never worked for the agency whose environmental mission he has attacked for years.
Environmentalists have called his selection a "sick joke." Even some Republicans wonder how someone who has spent most of his career at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank, could be thrust into a prominent role that includes interviewing agency staff, identifying potential employees and designing a new direction for EPA under a president who has threatened to shrink its authority.
"Given that Arrhenius sussed out the mechanics of global warming in the 19th century, it's kind of sad that we have a physics denier leading the environmental transition for a 21st-century president," said Bill McKibben, founder of 350.org, an environmental group leading efforts to end the use of fossil fuels.
He was referring to the Swedish physicist Svante Arrhenius, who in 1896 pioneered the "greenhouse law," a mathematical formula that is still used to calculate carbon dioxide's impact on temperatures.
Ebell declined to comment for this story. But it's likely that he would welcome a debate with McKibben about how much the Earth is warming, or not warming, because of human activity. It's also plausible that Ebell would feel victorious at the end.
Those who know him shrug off the idea that Ebell is a hired gun for the fossil fuel industry. He's a true believer, they say.
Professionally, he's fought with lawmakers and criticized the pope. He's declared war, and victory, over climate advocates. And he takes partial credit for convincing Republicans to avoid action on warming.
Away from work, Ebell is married to a Sunday school teacher, and he has four grown children. Along the way, he has stumbled financially on his house and with the IRS.
Before all of that, he was a bookish kid who shot mule deer.A homestead on fire
Ebell grew up in the sagebrush hills of eastern Oregon, in a town settled by gold miners at the beginning of the Civil War. Baker City is nestled in a small bowl at 3,500 feet, and tall mountains climb toward the sky in most directions.
It's closer to Idaho geographically, and politically, than to the liberal coastline and Portland. Ebell would have seen the strong influence of the federal government, which owns more than half the land in Baker County, on policies affecting cattle grazing, land access and wildfire.
To this day, Ebell criticizes the "bicoastal urban elite" who insist on being "hysterical" about the idea that climate change affects everything from storms to drought. Environmentalism isn't about protecting nature, he has said, but about advancing "eco-imperialism."
The Ebells homesteaded their Oregon farm in the 1860s. It grew to several thousand acres, and to this day, a creek and other features carry his family name. Ebell's childhood property, named Sky Ranch, is still in the family. Much of its evergreen forest burned in a wildfire last August.
Ebell was there, watching the trees crackle with flame from the base of small Cassidy Mountain at his cousin's barn lot. He blamed the government, not climate change. Mismanaged federal forests left too much tinder in the mountains, and rules preventing roads slowed response times, said John Ebell, the cousin.
"He knows what the problems are," he said of Myron.
As children, they sometimes hunted deer together and rode horseback. They grew apart in high school because of divergent interests. Myron was focused on "learning and book reading," said John Ebell, who preferred fixing tractors and other machinery.
Ebell left his family's remote mountain home in 1971 to attend Colorado College. But he carried his childhood convictions with him.
After graduating, he attended the London School of Economics, where he earned a master's degree, according to a two-page biography written by Ebell. He appears to have been unhurried during that period of his life, taking postgraduate classes at Cambridge University and the University of California, San Diego.
The first professional job Ebell lists on his biography is assistant to the chairman of the National Taxpayers Union. News reports suggest that occurred sometime in the late 1980s.
By 1990, then in his late 30s, he was representing the National Inholders Association as a lobbyist. The group fought against federal policies on behalf of people with cabins and other property in national parks and forests — so-called inholders.
It was then that Ebell first tussled with former Rep. Barney Frank, the Democratic gay lawmaker from Massachusetts.
Ebell arranged for himself to testify, at the last minute, about private easements to public lands. At one point, he called environmental groups "radical," and Frank, who was acting chairman of the subcommittee, pushed him to cite those that were and were not on the fringe.
Ebell: "Well ... some are more radical than others."
Frank: "Why don't you start with the most radical and we'll go from there."
Ebell later provided a list in writing.Ebellian or Orwellian?
He kept appearing in Congress, though usually in the audience. In 1994, Democratic Senate staffers summoned three U.S. Capitol Police officers when Ebell refused to remove fliers from a press table describing Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt as secretary "of the inferior." Ebell was verbally reprimanded.
Six months later, in early 1995, Ebell showed his willingness to antagonize authority again. This time, he poked the top Republican. In a leaked memo, he claimed that House Speaker Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) was going to be a "big problem" on loosening the Endangered Species Act. The memo said Gingrich has "soft feelings for cuddly little critters."
Ebell also served as a legislative assistant to former Rep. John Shadegg (R-Ariz.) and as policy director at Frontiers of Freedom.
At about that time, Ebell and his family ran into financial trouble. Public records show that his house in Prince George's County, Md., was foreclosed on in 1996. He had purchased it eight years earlier for $130,000. The Maryland Department of Assessment & Taxation lists the current owner as Citicorp Mortgage Inc., but court records from last year involving the bank say Ebell and his wife "are the owners of the property."
Ebell and his family still live in the house.
His finances were again pulled into public view in 2011, when the IRS applied a federal tax lien to his finances in the amount of $114,780. Court records indicate that Ebell satisfied that debt in 2013.
Ebell began working on climate policy in earnest just before he joined the Competitive Enterprise Institute in 1999.
A year earlier, he and 12 other people representing the fossil fuel industry and conservative groups wrote the "Global Climate Science Communications Action Plan." The memo by the American Petroleum Institute outlines a strategy to "undercut" mainstream findings on global warming. Its goal was to persuade journalists, teachers and others to highlight scientific uncertainties in climate change.
Over the years, Ebell has argued that warming is a good outcome, especially for Minnesotans and other northerners who face bitter winters. He said a report released this year by the National Intelligence Council is "filled with gems of junk science." And he promised to make the idea of a carbon tax politically "toxic" in 2012, so that Republicans would think twice before supporting initiatives like the one proposed by Moylan, of the conservative R Street Institute.
In person, Ebell sometimes talks with razor blades. Those who have dealt with him, even Republicans, say he tends to categorize people as adversaries or allies. There isn't often an in-between.
He has been known to treat those on the right who accept the scientific underpinnings of rising temperatures as "traitors" and "enemies," according to sources.
"He's very Orwellian," said one Republican. "If there's a Republican who wants to be constructive [on climate policy], they're an enemy."
Some believe that Ebell's dissenting voice can benefit serious discussions about climate action. One Republican, who believes that warming deserves Congress' attention, said meaningful legislation should be shaped by everyone in the debate, even those who question the science.
"I think his value is that he shares such a passion. It will help thread the needle" on drafting policy, the Republican strategist said. "You need both opposing viewpoints to get to the art of the possible."
To others, Ebell seems to be eagerly impolite, especially in the world of think-tankers who are used to having their ideas challenged, if it happens, in a starched-shirt kind of way.
Or he's just blunt.
That's how Moylan sees him, even after the meeting in which Ebell promised to fight his carbon tax idea tooth-and-nail. He describes Ebell as a smart, honest, and "exceedingly interesting" person. He also happens to be rigidly adhered to his worldview.
"I think he understands other people's viewpoints; I think he just dismisses them," said Moylan.
Reporters Emily Holden and Kavya Balaraman contributed.
http://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2016/11/21/stories/1060046062
-
Early Disconnect Between Industry Rhetoric And Actions Under The New TSCA?
Nov 21, 2016 | Environmental Defense Fund
By Richard Denison
Richard Denison, Ph.D., is a Lead Senior Scientist.
It was more than a bit heartening that, even post-election, chemical industry representatives have been publicly urging that the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) implementation of the new Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) should continue apace.
So it pains me greatly to be reading that some in industry are aggressively pressing the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to block at least one of EPA’s proposals to restrict certain very high-risk uses of trichloroethylene (TCE), which focuses on TCE’s use in commercial vapor degreasing operations. As reported late last week by Inside EPA (subscription required), industry representatives have asked OMB not to even allow EPA to issue its proposal for public comment, despite the fact that the industry and the rest of the public have yet to see it.
These are the first risk reduction actions EPA is proposing to take under the Lautenberg Act, which passed earlier this year with strong bipartisan support. Industry supported the new law, saying it accepted the need to give EPA stronger authority to identify and restrict dangerous uses of chemicals in order to help restore public confidence in the nation’s chemical safety system. So why are some now seeking to block the very first actions taken under the new law? This type of behavior— fighting even limited steps by EPA to address even the riskiest of chemicals—is what brought about this crisis in confidence in the first place.
Bear in mind that TCE is a very nasty chemical. A 2013 review of thousands of scientific studies by EPA scientists concluded that TCE is carcinogenic to humans by all routes of exposure and poses additional hazards, including immunotoxicity, neurotoxicity, and adverse effects on the developing heart. TCE’s strong link to cancer has been confirmed by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), EPA’s Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS), the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), and the National Toxicology Program (NTP).
We’ve blogged earlier about EPA’s TCE risk assessment – the first issued by EPA’s toxics office in three decades – and its initial efforts to address the extremely high risks identified in that assessment. Earlier this year, EPA sent two draft proposed rules to OMB that would restrict those uses of TCE that EPA found to pose excessive risks to workers and consumers:One, sent to OMB on July 27, is aimed at TCE’s use as a spotting agent in dry cleaning and in commercial and consumer aerosol spray degreasers.The other, sent to OMB on September 30, is aimed at TCE’s use in commercial vapor degreasing.
Both proposals remain under OMB review as of this writing. And now it appears industry representatives are urging OMB to block at least the latter proposal from going forward even for public comment.
Lest there be any doubt about the need to restrict these uses, consider the breadth and magnitude of risks identified by EPA:Acute developmental effects: Exposures that exceed, often by large margins, the level identified as “safe” for all or most exposure scenarios for workers, bystanders and consumers. This is the case even for low-end exposure estimates in settings that employ local exhaust ventilation. Exceedances range from 2-170,000 times the “safe” level.Cancer:Degreasing: Risk exceeding 1 in 10,000 for all exposure scenarios, even including low-end exposure estimates in settings that employ local exhaust ventilation.Spot cleaners: Risk exceeding 1 in 10,000 for most (5 of 8) exposure scenarios, with all scenarios exceeding 1 in 1,000,000 and all but one exceeding 1 in 100,000.Chronic non-cancer effects:Developmental, kidney, immuno, autoimmune, reproductive and neurotoxicity:Degreasers: Exposures that exceed, often by large margins, the level identified as “safe” for all exposure scenarios for workers and most for bystanders. This is the case even for low-end exposure estimates in settings that employ local exhaust ventilation. Exceedances range from 2 to 140,000 times the “safe” level.Spot cleaners: Exposures that exceed, often by large margins, the level identified as “safe” for nearly all exposure scenarios for workers and most for bystanders. An exception is low-end exposure estimates in settings that employ local exhaust ventilation. Exceedances range from 1.1 to 14,300 times the “safe” level.
Given the huge magnitude of these risks, EPA’s proposal to restrict these uses should be a no-brainer. One might have hoped that industry would have accepted this, even out of its own self-interest.
If industry is serious about rebuilding the public’s trust and confidence in their chemicals and products containing them, it needs to stop attacking EPA at every turn and let it do its job.
http://blogs.edf.org/health/2016/11/21/early-disconnect-between-industry-rhetoric-and-actions-under-the-new-tsca/
-
(ACC Mentioned) Obama Taps Ex-Trade Group Official For Chemical Safety Board
Nov 21, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Gabriel Dunsmith
President Obama on Friday nominated a Department of Transportation official to fill an open seat on the U.S. Chemical Safety Board, the nation's chemical watchdog agency.
Rachel Meidl serves as deputy assistant administrator for DOT's Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. She assumed her current post in 2015 after serving three years as the director of regulatory and technical affairs at the American Chemistry Council.
Meidl oversees rulemaking, radioactive materials, special permits, risk management and other issues at PHMSA. She also works to develop "safe, secure and environmentally sound" transportation guidelines for hazardous materials, according to her LinkedIn page.
While at ACC, Meidl worked on litigation and policy to "expand ... the reach, influence and public recognition of the U.S. and global chemical industry," according to her public profile.
She also managed ACC's hazardous materials guidelines and gave input on efforts to reform the Toxic Substances Control Act as well as U.S. EPA's Risk Management Program and its Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program. Environmental groups have criticized ACC for trying to water down EPA's chemical assessment programs (Greenwire, Sept. 20).
A source close to CSB indicated that Meidl's appointment may break deadlocks on the board, especially over governance issues.
CSB currently has four members — all of whom are Democratic appointees — and one open seat. Unlike other government boards, CSB has no partisan membership requirement. Members' terms are likewise unstaggered, meaning any member whose term ends before January 2021 could be replaced by President-elect Donald Trump.
But Senate confirmation for Meidl during the lame duck would be "truly stunn[ing]," the same source said, due to Republican animosity toward Obama's appointees.
The president's move accompanied a host of other federal nominations, which included naming famed cellist Yo-Yo Ma to the John F. Kennedy Centennial Commission.
"I am honored that these talented individuals have decided to serve our country," Obama said in a statement. "They bring their years of experience and expertise to this Administration, and I look forward to working with them."
"ACC believes the Chemical Safety Board has an important role to play in investigating and preventing incidents at chemical facilities," the trade group said. "To fulfill its statutory mission, the CSB needs a full complement of capable individuals to serve on the Board."
Meidl, in addition to a spokesman for CSB, did not respond to a request for comment in time for publication.
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2016/11/21/stories/1060046100
-
While Unlikely To Be Carcinogenic, The Herbicide Glyphosate Is A Symptom Of A Deep Social Pathology
Nov 21, 2016 | Forbes
By Geoffrey Kabat
On both sides of the Atlantic a battle is raging between starkly opposed views of what science tells us about risks to our health emanating from our surroundings, including our food, water, and the wider environment.
This battle often pits advocates, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), politicians, and partisan scientists, who have little ability or inclination to evaluate the evidence on its merits, against scientists and regulators who confine themselves to evaluating the evidence but are typically characterized as corrupt apologists for industry. Confining oneself to the scientific issues simply does not have the same impact in the public arena as holding up the specter of an imminent threat to our well-being, and the less sensationalist party in this lop-sided contest is often left to tear its hair out in frustration.
At the moment, a major focus in this battle is glyphosate, the most widely used herbicide (i.e., weed killer) in the United States. Glyphosate is the active ingredient in Monsanto’s Roundup, and a number of major crops have been genetically engineered to be resistant to Roundup.
In response to a new report alleging a cancer risk from trace residues of glyphosate, which has sparked renewed pressure from anti-pesticide NGOs, this past June the European Union voted against re-registering glyphosate for agricultural use in Europe but agreed to an 18-month extension of the license. In the U.S. glyphosate is also at the center of a tangled regulatory battle.
Glyphosate and compounds containing the chemical, like Roundup, have been reviewed for health effects by a number of health agencies, including the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), the Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO), Germany’s Institute for Environment and Human Security (BfR), and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). These agencies have concluded that glyphosate is unlikely to pose a carcinogenic risk to humans.
However, in March 2015, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified glyphosate as a “probable carcinogen.” IARC stated that its determination was based on “clear evidence of cancer in experimental animals, limited evidence for cancer for humans from real-world exposures, of exposed farmers, and also strong evidence that it can damage the genes and other toxicological studies.”
A number of other recent determinations by IARC have perplexed both scientists and the public, most famously those pertaining to coffee, red meat, and cell phones. It has become clear that IARC takes a very different approach to assessing carcinogens than most other agencies. Rather than taking into account real-world exposure to an agent and what is known about its ability to cause cancer at various exposure levels – risk assessment – IARC’s assessment takes into account the potential to cause cancer under theoretical conditions – hazard assessment. This approach is considered outmoded and unscientific by many scientists and regulatory agencies (accepted manuscript Boobis A, Cohen, S, Dellarco V, et al. “Classification schemes for carcinogenicity based on hazard-identification have become outmoded and serve neither science nor society,” Regulatory Toxicology and Pharmacology, Oct. 2016).
Under IARC’s “hazard assessment,” weak and difficult-to-interpret findings can be given undue weight and can take precedence over other stronger types of evidence that do not point to a threat, such as that from epidemiologic studies in humans and whole animal studies.
Furthermore, for all IARC’s claims of impartiality and rigor, in the case of glyphosate, its assessment is slipshod when it comes to critically examining what the key human and animal studies actually show.
Animal carcinogen testing involves taking a given strain of mice or rats and dividing them into different groups – usually receiving different doses of the substance under study as well as a control group that is given a placebo. The experiment runs for the lifespan of the test animals – 1-2 years. As animals die, their tissues are examined by a pathologist. And at the end of the study, remaining animals are sacrificed and their organs are examined. Benign and malignant changes in different organs are recorded.
What is crucial in evaluating the evidence from these studies is to look at all of the findings within each study for meaningful differences in the incidence of tumors between the exposed groups and the control group. A further expectation is that if tumors are caused by the agent, one should see a greater “tumor yield” at higher exposure levels, referred to as a “dose-response relationship.” It is also important to compare what is found in male test animals with what is found in female animals. Finally, one needs to compare the results of different studies conducted in the same animal species to see whether there is consistency. Above all, one is looking for consistency and for a strong signal indicating that there is unambiguous evidence of the effect one is looking for.
In an article in the European Journal of Cancer Prevention, this past August the biostatistician Robert E. Tarone critically examined IARC’s glyphosate assessment as well as the published articles cited by the Agency. Tarone spent most of his career at the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and then at the International Epidemiology Institute, which was founded by former NCI scientists. He was also a statistical editor for the Journal of the National Cancer Institute.
Tarone’s exacting reexamination of the studies evaluated by IARC is a “lesson from the master” on how to review evidence rigorously and not be fooled by what one wants to find.
Commenting on IARC’s highlighting certain results from studies of Sprague-Dawley rats, Tarone writes: “The highlighting of selective marginally significant tumor increases in a single study without noting the complete absence of supporting evidence of tumor increases in two other studies using the same rat strain is a highly questionable scientific practice. Once again, a synthesis of the data from all three rat studies does not provide evidence in support of the hypothesis that glyphosate is associated with increased liver or thyroid C-cell tumor rates in Sprague–Dawley rats.” This is only one of the many examples in which the results highlighted by IARC do not withstand careful scrutiny.
Tarone concludes his discussion of animal studies as follows: “Glyphosate would not have been classified by IARC as a probable human carcinogen except for the Working Group’s conclusion that there was sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in animals. When all relevant data from the rodent carcinogenicity studies of glyphosate relied upon by the Working Group are evaluated together, it is clear that the conclusion that there is sufficient evidence that glyphosate is an animal carcinogen is not supported empirically. Even a conclusion that there is limited evidence of animal carcinogenicity would be difficult to support on the basis of the rodent carcinogenicity assays of glyphosate reviewed by the IARC Working Group.”
As far as the epidemiology is concerned, as mentioned earliers, there is a general consensus that the evidence that glyphosate is a human carcinogen is weak. IARC points to an association of glyphosate exposure with an increased risk of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL). But Tarone comments: “…the case made by IARC for a possible role of glyphosate in the etiology of NHL is quite weak. For example, the only significant finding reported for NHL and glyphosate in a US study (De Roos et al., 2003) is of questionable evidentiary weight. Glyphosate was one of 47 different pesticides evaluated for associations with NHL in this pooled analysis of case–control studies, and each pesticide was assessed using two different statistical methods. A significant association was reported between glyphosate and NHL for only one of the statistical methods applied.”
IARC’s questionable finding that glyphosate is a “possible carcinogen” has been taken up by advocates and NGO’s concerned about pesticides, including the National Resources Defense Council. A bizarre episode showcases the clash of different interest groups and interpretations regarding glyphosate. In October 2015, the EPA briefly released a report, labeled “final report,” stating that glyphosate is not likely a carcinogen. But the agency quickly took the report down, saying it was a draft that was not meant to be published. The EPA’s unexplained actions have provoked a firestorm of suspicion and charges that the agency is caving in to anti-pesticide activists, as well as counter-charges that the agency is unduly influenced by commercial giants like Monsanto. A new meeting of the EPA Science Advisory Panel is scheduled for December. But changes to the make-up of the panel have provoked concern as to whether the Agency will give an unbiased assessment of the issue. A Congressional Committee is now investigating the EPA’s process regarding glyphosate.
All of this points up just how politicized questions like the safety/carcinogenicity of glyphosate have become. The subtle and difficult-to-interpret results of animal experiments and studies of agricultural workers easily lend themselves to what different specialists with different points-of-view may wish to find in them. Meanwhile the overlay of strong beliefs and ideological commitments threatens to obscure what the science has to say on a question of enormous economic importance.
What is at stake in this latest iteration of the clash over environmental threats is enormous. First, there is the possibility that a product that is cheap, safe, and effective will be restricted or banned, reducing crop yields and requiring substitution of products about which less is known and which may pose a greater danger. Second, controversies like this cause unnecessary confusion and alarm in the public and divert attention from issues that really do matter. Third, by doing so, they add to the already considerable distrust of science.
Geoffrey Kabat is an epidemiologist at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine and the author of Getting Risk Right: Understanding the Science of Elusive Health Risks, which has just been published by Columbia University Press.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/geoffreykabat/2016/11/21/while-unlikely-to-be-carcinogenic-the-herbicide-glyphosate-is-a-symptom-of-a-deep-social-pathology/#7e588d50ae6e
-
OECD Revises Basis Of Chemicals Assessment Work
Nov 21, 2016 | Chemical Watch
By Emma Chynoweth
The OECD is preparing proposals to revise two Council Acts to better reflect its evolving work on chemicals safety. They are for:
· cooperative work on the evaluation and risk reduction of existing chemicals. Here the OECD's work has moved on from the high production volume programme to general cooperation on specific chemicals, like perfluorinated compounds, and new methods, such as integrated approaches to testing and assessment (Iatas); and
· the pollution release and transfer registers (PRTRs), where the organisation is aiming for greater harmonisation between the 40+ countries implementing the system. Its long-term aim is to enable comparison between countries, and provide data that might measure progress towards the sustainable development goals. The revised act will also see the OECD developing best practice for operating PRTRs.
The decision to revise the two acts was taken at November's joint meeting of the Chemicals Committee and Working Party on Chemicals, Pesticides and Biotechnology. It is expected that draft proposals will be presented at its next meeting mid-2017.
The joint meeting decided to continue work on socio-economic impact assessment of chemicals. A workshop is planned for 2017, building on a meeting in June this year at Echa. This looked at what countries are already doing and the challenges they have faced, including how to link social-economic impact assessments to risk assessments. A report of the meeting will be published mid-December. The OECD will publish four working papers on the topic in early January.
The OECD's Bob Diderich says that the group will develop methodology for the valuation of non-cancer and environmental endpoints, and countries will continue to exchange experience of estimating the social-economic impacts of managing chemicals.
The joint meeting agreed to organise a workshop towards the end of next year on sustainable plastics from a chemicals perspective. Mr Diderich says the decision has been driven by the discussion on plastics in oceans – and will look at how to assess the sustainability claims made on plastics by considering their chemical content.
The joint meeting also discussed cooperation with the OECD's waste management and water quality groups.
For waste, the chemicals unit could investigate methods for tracking chemicals in the supply chain – linking it to Unep's chemicals in products activity – as part of the work on circular economy.
For water, the collaboration could involve emerging pollutants and possible policy responses. Such a project would contribute to Saicm's work on environmentally persistent pharmaceutical products. This was adopted as an emerging policy issue at the fourth International Conference on Chemicals Management (ICCM4).
The next joint meeting will make a decision on whether to take part in these joint initiatives, when they will have been discussed by OECD's waste and water groups.
https://chemicalwatch.com/51133/oecd-revises-basis-of-chemicals-assessment-work
-
European Commission Consults On Restricting Furfural In Cosmetic Products
Nov 21, 2016 | Chemical Watch
The European Commission has begun consulting on a proposal to restrict the use of 2-furaldehyde in cosmetic products.
The modification to the cosmetic Regulation would see the substance – otherwise known as furfural – limited to a maximum concentration in a product of 0.001%.
Furfural is used in fine fragrances, shampoos, toilet soaps and other toiletries, as well as in oral care products.
The modification includes transition periods of nine months for placing products on the market and 12 months for withdrawing them. The proposal says these are necessary to allow the industry to adjust. In particular, it adds, modifying a fragrance composition is a complex process that requires time to get a "satisfying olfactory result".
The consultation is aimed at interested parties. These include authorities in EU countries, cosmetic products manufacturers, furfural producers and relevant industry and consumers associations. The closing date for comments is 20 February 2017.
In 2013 the International Fragrance Association (Ifra) updated its code of practice to restrict the use of furfural in toiletries and household products.
https://chemicalwatch.com/51134/european-commission-consults-on-restricting-furfural-in-cosmetic-products
-
(ACC Mentioned) DOI Cuts Most Alaska Tracts In Latest 2017-22 OCS Leasing-Plan Move
Nov 21, 2016 | PennEnergy
By Nick Snow
The US Department of the Interior released a proposed final program (PFP) for the 2017-22 US Outer Continental Shelf oil and gas leasing that removed all tracts offshore Alaska. National oil and gas associations, other business organizations, and members of Alaska’s government immediately criticized the Nov. 18 action.
The PFP offers 11 potential lease sales in four planning areas—10 sales in portions of three Gulf of Mexico program areas that are not under moratorium and one sale offshore Alaska in the Cook Inlet program area. Sales in the Beaufort and Chukchi seas were removed after receiving extensive public input and analyzing the best available scientific data, DOI officials said.
“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,” Interior Sec. Sally Jewell said.
Oil and gas industry association leaders disagreed. “Today’s announcement is a short-sighted decision that ignores America’s long-term energy security needs,” American Petroleum Institute Pres. Jack N. Gerard said.
“Our national energy security depends on our ability to produce oil and gas here in the US, and this decision could very well increase the cost of energy for American consumers and close the door on creating new jobs and new investments for years,” Gerard said. “We hope that the incoming administration will reverse this decision—consistent with the will of American voters.”
‘Politically expedient program’
National Ocean Industries Association Pres. Randall B. Luthi said, “The arrogance of the decision is unfathomable, but unfortunately not surprising.”
By following the same political calculus that resulted in the removal of Atlantic OCS Lease Sale 260 from the proposed program in March, “the administration has chosen a politically expedient agenda that bows to the wishes of antifossil fuel activists and has completely discounted the opinion of the people with the most at stake,” Luthi said (OGJ Online, Mar. 15, 2016).
In its announcement, DOI said the PFP makes available areas containing about 70% of the US OCS’s economically recoverable reserves. Independent Petroleum Association of America Pres. Barry Russell said it actually places more than 80% of offshore federal acreage—including Atlantic waters, the eastern Gulf of Mexico, and Alaska’s energy-rich waters—off-limits for future development.
Russell noted that the US Energy Information Administration has said that the US needs more energy, specifically oil and gas, to meet its future demands. “Instead, this administration is abandoning America’s energy potential and is threatening our role as a global energy superpower,” Russell said. “This final offshore program raises serious questions as to why this administration, at the 11th hour, chose to ignore recommendations by its own energy data agency.”
Other business organizations called elimination of the Beaufort and Chukchi sea tracts from the next 5-year OCS plan a serious mistake. “Today’s announcement limiting offshore energy production is one of the final nails in the coffin of the Obama administration’s antigrowth energy agenda,” said Karen A. Harbert, president of the US Chamber of Commerce’s Institute for 21st Century Energy.
“In doing so, [it] is ignoring the will of the American people who understand that offshore energy production is good for American jobs, economic growth, and energy security,” Harbert said. “In particular, this plan is an affront to the people of Alaska and the Gulf States, whose concerns have been ignored by this administration.”
National Association of Manufacturers Vice-Pres. of Energy and Resources Policy Ross Eisenberg said, “This was the wrong decision. The future of a strong manufacturing sector is inextricably linked to energy access. The final 5-year plan ignores that reality and slams the door on promising opportunities.”
‘Short-sighted policy’
“The administration’s final plan reflects its short-sighted policy of limiting access to oil and gas on federal lands,” the American Chemistry Council said in a Nov. 18 statement. “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. Public lands are important suppliers of domestic energy, and any sensible long-term policy must include offshore resources.”
Alaska’s congressional delegation, who are all Republicans, condemned Interior’s decision to eliminate Beaufort and Chukchi sea lease sales from the 2017-22 federal OCS program. “President Obama is well aware that the vast majority of Alaskans want OCS development, and I am infuriated that he has once again ignored our voices to side with the factions who oppose it,” said Sen. Lisa Murkowski, who chairs the Energy and Natural Resources Committee.
“Why the president is willing to send all of those benefits overseas is beyond explanation,” Murkowski said. “And it is even more stunning that just one day after urging the new administration to stand up to Russia, he continues to cede leadership on Arctic energy production to them.”
Sen. Dan Sullivan said, “With this action, the Obama administration is once again capitulating to the demands of extreme environmental groups over Alaskans and their fellow Americans who want good-paying jobs, energy independence, and a strong economy. For nearly 8 years, this administration has given lip service to an ‘all-of-the above’ energy strategy, when their actions say the opposite.”
“Today’s announcement—politically driven and meant to appease the nation’s most extreme environmental groups—represents some of the worst decision making we’ve seen over the last 8 years,” said Rep. Don Young, who is a House Natural Resources Committee member.
Alaska’s government formally nominated the Beaufort and Chukchi seas and Cook Inlet for inclusion last month in the 2017-22 OCS management program that DOI’s Bureau of Ocean Energy Management was preparing (OGJ Online, Oct. 12, 2016). The action was necessary to assure that one lease sale in each area remain in the program, Gov. Bill Walker (I) said in a letter to Jewell.
‘Should have been easy’
Expressing disappointment with DOI’s latest decision, Walker said on Nov. 18 that the state government supports a plan that balance subsistence concerns with the need for economic development. “There is enough opportunity and protection in the plan that it should have been an easy decision to move forward with our proposal,” he said.
The state nominated the Beaufort and Chukchi seas to ensure Alaskans’ interests were protected in this process, Walker said. The nominations provided subsistence protection, as well as benefits under the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act, he noted. “With the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System three-quarters empty, we must spur more oil production,” Walker said. “When Alaska became a state, the federal government mandated that we live off of our resources—but we must be able to access them.”
In Barrow, Arctic Slope Regional Corp. (ASRC), the state’s largest private employer, also said it was disappointed with DOI’s decision. “This plan ignores the needs and voices of the Inupiat who support responsible OCS development,” it said.
“Critical habitat designations, coupled with a ban on OCS development in the Arctic, will continue to endanger our communities with no regard for the future health of our people and region,” ASRC said. “This plan cripples our ability to answer the mandate from Congress under the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 1971 which requires us to return benefits to our people.”
A spokesman for the Arctic Energy Center said, “Today’s announcement is 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.”
The spokesman predicted, “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.”
Other groups also expressed hope that the incoming administration will be able to reverse DOI’s Nov. 18 2017-22 OCS program decision.
http://www.pennenergy.com/articles/ogj/2016/11/doi-cuts-most-alaska-tracts-in-latest-2017-22-ocs-leasing-plan-move.html
-
Senate Weighs Response To House Offer
Nov 21, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Geof Koss
Senate energy reform bill conferees are reviewing a Friday counteroffer from House negotiators, as efforts to break a decadelong stalemate on major energy legislation come down to the wire.
The House proposal "reflects policies that represent the current bipartisan consensus in the House," said House Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton (R-Mich.) and House Natural Resources Chairman Rob Bishop (R-Utah) in a joint statement Friday evening.
"We welcome any suggestions from the Senate and remain open to continuing to work with our Senate colleagues and concluding this conference in a productive manner," said the pair.
The proposal comes after Senate Energy and Natural Resources Chairwoman Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and ranking member Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) told reporters last week that the House had signaled a desire to pare back the scope of the conference talks.
Among the items in doubt were provisions to address natural gas exports, efficiency, innovation, critical minerals, pipeline permitting, hydropower and a sportsmen's package (E&E Daily, Nov. 18).
House and Senate aides declined to comment on the contents of the new language, but it has the support of Energy and Commerce ranking member Frank Pallone (D-N.J.), said a panel Democratic aide, who described it as a "unified bipartisan counteroffer."
Democratic support suggests the House has followed through on expectations to scale back the scope of the conference push given that Pallone has never been particularly enthusiastic about the House bill.
During opening remarks at the sole public meeting of the energy conference, Pallone in September pledged to continue working on the effort but warned that "we must be honest with ourselves about our limited ability to resolve highly contentious and complex matters in the short time frame we have."
After huddling with Murkowski, Cantwell, Pallone and Upton last week, Bishop suggested that the areas that have been agreed to are relatively minor.
Still, Murkowski and Cantwell said drought and forest management issues were among the more contentious areas on which negotiators had made progress in recent weeks.
Following the election, Republican conferees on both sides of the Capitol have acknowledged that the appetite for making concessions to Democrats and the Obama-led White House has diminished. President-elect Donald Trump is seen as more receptive to GOP energy priorities.
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2016/11/21/stories/1060046099
-
Trump's Energy Team Overhauled
Nov 21, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Robin Bravender
President-elect Donald Trump's energy and environmental transition staff has been drastically reshaped.
The transition team announced today that Thomas Pyle, president of the American Energy Alliance, will be taking over as head of the Energy Department transition operation. Doug Domenech, former Virginia secretary of natural resources and a George W. Bush administration Interior Department staffer, will lead Interior's transition operation.
The Trump team said Myron Ebell, a well-known climate skeptic and the head of the U.S. EPA transition operation, continues to lead that agency's team.
Several top transition team members have departed as others have taken their slots on teams overseeing energy policies and on the so-called landing teams expected to arrive this week in DOE, the Interior Department and other agencies. The shake-ups come after the Trump team announced a crackdown on registered lobbyists last week and amid a broader staffing overhaul made when Vice President-elect Mike Pence replaced New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie as head of the transition team.
The landing teams are expected to interview current agency officials about ongoing policies and make recommendations for the incoming administration about how to reverse current policies and advance its own agenda following Trump's inauguration.
Pyle is taking over for Mike McKenna, an energy lobbyist and president of MWR Strategies, who left his post last week as head of the DOE landing team (Greenwire, Nov. 18).
Pyle isn't currently a registered lobbyist but has lobbied in the past for Koch Industries, the National Petrochemical and Refiners Association (now called American Fuel and Petrochemical Manufacturers), and other groups. He worked on Capitol Hill for former House Majority Whip Tom DeLay (R-Texas), as staff director for the House Western Caucus and as a legislative aide to former California Republican Rep. Richard Pombo.
Domenech has taken over the lead on the Interior team, which was previously headed by another former Bush Interior official, David Bernhardt.
It's unclear whether Bernhardt is still involved in the operation. He dropped a lobbying client Friday — a signal that he planned to continue working with the transition. Bernhardt did not respond to a request for comment (E&ENews PM, Nov. 18).
Domenech is director of the Fueling Freedom Project of the Texas Public Policy Foundation. The project's stated mission is to "explain the forgotten moral case for fossil fuels."
Domenech was previously secretary of natural resources in Virginia under then-Gov. Bob McDonnell (R). During the Bush administration, he served at Interior as deputy chief of staff and White House liaison.
At least one of Trump's energy policy aides has left the transition team.
Mike Catanzaro, a lobbyist at CGCN who had been working on energy policy for the transition, stepped down late last week.
"Mike felt like his time on the Trump transition had run its course and came to the decision that it was time to focus on his work at CGCN Group. While he was honored to serve on the transition team, he never harbored any hope or intention of joining the Trump administration," a source familiar with Catanzaro's thinking said.
Rebecca Rosen, vice president of policy and government affairs at Oklahoma-based oil and gas company Devon Energy Corp., was said to be working on energy policy with Catanzaro. Devon reported Friday that Rosen would no longer be lobbying for the company, according to public disclosures, a possible signal that she intends to continue to work for the transition.
The names of additional members of Trump transition landing teams are expected to be announced this week.
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2016/11/21/stories/1060046098
-
Trump To Take Reins Of An Unsteady Global Energy Market — IEA
Nov 21, 2016 | E&E Climatewire
By Umair Irfan
The Trump administration stands to have an outsized influence on volatile global energy markets, but it's still too soon to tell just how, according to the head of the International Energy Agency.
"From the sheer size of the U.S. economy, the role of the United States in international affairs is so important that if there are any changes, it will have implications for the U.S. energy markets and beyond," said IEA Executive Director Fatih Birol. "Where we stand now, I personally do not know what the new [Trump] policies are, if any, and how they will affect markets, and I don't want to speculate what those policies are."
He spoke last week at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington presenting IEA's annual World Energy Outlook last week that projects future changes in global energy production and use.
IEA, a 29-country energy cooperation consortium, assembled the report before the outcome of the U.S. presidential elections (EnergyWire, Nov. 17).
The World Energy Outlook projected that coal's growth rate would slow to a crawl, about 0.2 percent per year, while natural gas use would expand by more than 50 percent and renewable energy would make up the majority of new energy capacity, driven by subsidies, declining prices and climate change concerns.
However, President-elect Donald Trump has pledged to cancel the Paris Agreement on climate change and ramp up U.S. fossil fuel development.
He will take office as multiple intersecting forces converge in global energy markets: A glut of oil has dropped crude oil prices around the world. New renewable energy capacity last year outpaced new coal, oil, gas and nuclear generation combined. The shale gas boom is edging coal out of the market in North America.
Meanwhile, the global economy has grown over the past two years while emissions held steady. And much of the world is still figuring out how it will meet its climate change commitments forged late last year.
With all these factors at play, small changes in energy policy could have big impacts on the fight against climate change, since two-thirds of the world's greenhouse gas emissions come from the energy sector.
Birol said that with the U.S. market saturated with fuel, many energy developers in North America are looking to export, particularly liquefied natural gas. "We think there's a second revolution coming, this time driven by a huge amount of LNG coming to the market," he said.
At the same time, the world is getting hungrier for energy, and China has the largest appetite. China is already the leader in wind, solar and hydropower, and half of all new nuclear reactors under construction are in China.
Countries in Southeast Asia are also building new coal plants and could become customers for U.S. coal. About one-third of these plants use subcritical boilers, an outdated and inefficient technology, and each new plant locks in about 40 years of use. Cheap coal means these countries will be less inclined to look for cleaner options.
This does not bode well for the climate fight, since even the pledges under the Paris Agreement wouldn't limit greenhouse gases enough to keep the planet from warming above a 2-degree-Celsius target.
These pledges also lack an enforcement mechanism, so Trump's threats to withdraw from the treaty may play a bigger symbolic role than a practical one since fossil fuels will likely persist for decades, just in different proportions. "There is no guarantee that [countries] will do what they say they will do," Birol said.
He also emphasized that there is still much uncertainty about what the next administration will do in terms of energy.
"Governments across the world come and go, and this is a normal thing. And the governments may change energy policies, and that's also normal," he said. "When those policies become real, we will consider them."
http://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2016/11/21/stories/1060046055
-
McCarthy Optimistic EPA Mission Will Be Sustained Under Trump
Nov 21, 2016 | E&E Energywire
By Rod Kuckro
In her first interview since Election Day, U.S. EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy fiercely defended President Obama's efforts to curb greenhouse gas emissions and said states, cities, utilities and major corporations will continue expanding their use of clean energy regardless of how President-elect Donald Trump redirects her agency.
"I don't feel deflated," McCarthy said about the Nov. 8 election results.
"No one person or no one administration is going to really be able to [make] a significant dent in the trajectory that we already see happening," McCarthy told E&E News. "That change is not going to happen through one administration deciding that they want to change the way in which the world is going."
In the coming weeks, McCarthy's EPA will start working with a Trump transition team led by Myron Ebell, a well-known skeptic of man-made climate change out of the libertarian Competitive Enterprise Institute (ClimateWire, Nov. 21). In a memo to EPA staff just after the election, McCarthy said "we're running — not walking — through the finish line of President Obama's presidency." The agency's critics took that to mean EPA plans to shove a spate of regulations through the door before Trump's January inauguration.
"I don't think we have any surprises" in the final nine weeks, McCarthy said. "I mean, our regulations are out there. People know what we're working on."
McCarthy's tenure — at 3 ½ years — ends at a critical time for the agency, with major air and water rules mired in litigation and facing an onslaught of fresh political scrutiny. After the Senate confirmed McCarthy in July 2013, she was thrown into the middle of an escalating battle royal over how to regulate carbon dioxide emissions across the electricity sector. She was tasked with shepherding the agency's Clean Power Plan, Obama's signature climate policy, across the finish line before he left office and with enough time to survive the first round of court challenges.
The feisty former EPA air policy chief staked much of her tenure as EPA administrator on getting states, regions and electric utilities with vastly different approaches to energy behind the carbon rule. As McCarthy prepares for her replacement, the rule faces twin headwinds that most analysts consider virtually insurmountable: an antagonistic Trump administration and the likelihood of a more conservative U.S. Supreme Court.
Corporate automakers have already asked Trump for changes to EPA's fuel efficiency standards, perhaps a sign of things to come. But McCarthy isn't putting on hold a final push to strengthen federal regulations around air and water. Last week, EPA published guidelines for complying with a tighter national ozone standard. And the agency is moving forward with major methane emissions guidelines for existing oil and natural gas operations, despite intense Republican opposition.
"Over time, you know, [the Trump] administration, like all others, will learn as it goes on," McCarthy said "And my job is to give them an appropriate transition, and then trust that they're going to listen and learn as they should, and as any administration should. And then make decisions that are thoughtful.
"I want everybody to just keep doing the work of the agency," she said. "We're going to do our best to make sure that it's solid, it follows the science and the law. We're going to be confident in that, but we will never stop."Utility of the future
Even if a Trump administration abandons the Clean Power Plan or the global Paris climate accord, McCarthy said, she hopes that a new team of EPA leaders "will see that the efforts that we've taken on climate are providing stability in the U.S. in terms of business interests."
McCarthy and her air chief, Janet McCabe, pressed the business case for regulation in 2014 and 2015 as they put the final touches on the Clean Power Plan. Lower-carbon natural gas, carbon-free nuclear power, and flexibility for states or regions to customize plans for meeting emissions targets would be the bridge to cleaner forms of energy technology.
"And so even if this next administration doesn't want to provide the kind of federal leadership on climate that this administration did, the energy world is still going to go towards clean energy, making a transition," McCarthy said. "The Clean Power Plan acknowledged that we were going in the direction in which the world was heading, not changing that direction.
"Where the utilities are now is far beyond where we anticipated that they would be in terms of investing in clean energy under the Clean Power Plan," she said.
"Utilities are very smart, so resilient," she said. "As soon as the rule is done, and the gun goes off, they run to see how fast they can change what they do and make money on it."
McCarthy said she is "pretty confident" that states and cities will continue to act on climate preparedness. States have been developing renewable portfolio standards and energy efficiency standards for a long time, she noted, even as Washington squabbled over national standards.
"In the absence of federal leadership, what you're going to see is states continuing to step up," she said.
"If you look at even the states that are most vocal in wanting the Clean Power Plan to go away, they're still operating in the same clean energy market as the ones that are trying to promote it," McCarthy said. "These are regional issues, not individual state issues, because of the way the energy markets work. They don't respond to partisan politics because clean air and clean water and clean land is what everybody wants."
McCarthy predicted that large businesses are going "to be increasingly noisy" as more and more are "actively engaged in issues of sustainability and issues of climate change."
"They see it as a tremendous business risk," she said.'Value judgments' left to the states
To regulate carbon emissions, the nation's environmental regulator has been drawn into the complex world of U.S. electricity markets. There, U.S. states and utilities face a dizzying array of economic forces that have pushed electricity prices down and pitted low-carbon forms of energy against each other. That has put pressure on nuclear power plants, the largest form of zero-carbon baseload electricity in the United States. Analysts today say as much as 15 percent of the nation's aging nuclear fleet could close ahead of schedule in the next decade.
An E&E News series last week showed how McCarthy and her top advisers handled new information about the troubled nuclear fleet in 2013 and 2014. As EPA developed its carbon rule, they were warned that reactors that were needed to meet carbon emissions targets were under greater threat of closing than had been recognized. EPA acknowledged nuclear power's role in staving off rising carbon emissions. But in the end, agency officials left out the industry's major request: a rule that would encourage states to support existing nuclear plants by giving them credit for the zero-carbon energy that relicensed reactors would produce in the future.
The agency grafted into its policy a best-case scenario for nuclear capacity and made a decision to leave the contentious nuclear issue up to politically divided states.
In the interview with E&E News late last week, McCarthy said EPA had considered something "a little bit more aggressive" for nuclear power, but the law limited the ability to act. "And so the simple fact is that we couldn't do as much as people asked us to do or we had originally thought was appropriate to do," she said, "because of legal constraints and the way the structure of the rule is under the law."
McCarthy said that the preamble to the Clean Power Plant notes that if competitive regional markets didn't become friendlier to nuclear power, some reactors wouldn't renew their operating licenses. States have tools, such as direct subsidies for nuclear that are being considered in New York and Illinois, she said. "We made that signal as clear as we could to the states; those are value judgments that are best left up to them," she said.The critics
McCarthy pushed back on the proposition that agency critics have been able to drown out the emphasis on its public health mission and paint EPA as anti-business and a job killer.
"I don't know whether they've been that successful in doing that," she said. "Frankly, I don't know why they would want to, because a lot of the rules we've done — in fact, I would argue, all of them — have been done in a way that advances us economically and allows us to grow. We were just talking about the Clean Power Plan. Where are the jobs in the United States growing right now? It is in clean energy. That's where you see the advances," she said.
It was easier to talk about clean air and garner support for EPA actions when people thought of the smog in Beijing in the past decade or Los Angeles 20 years ago, she said.
"But now we know just how important from a public health perspective small amounts of particulate are," she said. "And we're not going to ignore that just because people can't see it." Calling it "an education issue," McCarthy asserted that the agency is saving lives and preventing illness.
McCarthy said she might leave a note for her successor asking him or her "to take care of an agency that really is vital to this country."
The most challenging thing about the job, she said, is that "even when you're off, you're not."
"The states are going to be calling for help," she said. "The business community is going to want permits. Individual communities are going to be worried about pollution and want answers. The main message is, just keep working."
After Inauguration Day, McCarthy plans to return to the Boston area, spend some time with her family and relax. "And then I'll hit the ground running again," working on climate issues, she said.
"That's what I hope to do," she said. "I may be leaving, but I'm not retiring."
http://www.eenews.net/energywire/2016/11/21/stories/1060046064
-
Police, Protesters Clash At Dakota Access Pipeline
Nov 21, 2016 | AP (In Fuel Fix)
CANNON BALL, N.D. — Tension flared anew on the Dakota Access pipeline as protesters tried to push past a long-blocked bridge on a state highway, only to be turned back by a line of law enforcement using water cannon and what appeared to be tear gas.
Sunday’s skirmishes began around 6 p.m. after protesters removed a burned-out truck on what’s known as the Backwater Bridge, not far from the encampment where they’ve been for weeks as they demonstrate against the pipeline. The Morton County Sheriff’s Department estimated 400 protesters sought to cross the bridge on state Highway 1806.
A live stream early Monday showed a continued standoff, with large lights illuminating smoke wafting across the scene.
The sheriff’s department said in a statement around 1 a.m. Monday that approximately 100 to 200 protesters were on the bridge or in the vicinity. It said law enforcement officers “had rocks thrown at them, burning logs and rocks shot from slingshots,” and that one officer had been hit on the head by a thrown rock.
At least one person was arrested. Protesters said a gym in Cannon Ball was opened to aid demonstrators who were soaked on a night the temperature dipped into the low 20s or were hit with tear gas.
Rema Loeb told The Associated Press he was forced to retreat from the bridge because he feared being doused with water on the freezing night. Others, he said, needed medical treatment after being hit with tear gas.
“It’s been just horrible,” said the 83-year-old Loeb, who traveled from Massachusetts about two weeks ago to join the protests.
The 1,200-mile, four-state pipeline is being built to carry oil from western North Dakota to a shipping point in Illinois. But construction of the $3.8 billion pipeline has been protested for months by the Standing Rock Sioux, whose reservation lies near the pipeline route, and the tribe’s allies, who fear a leak could contaminate their drinking water. They also worry that construction could threaten sacred sites.
Energy Transfer Partners has said no sites have been disturbed and that the pipeline will have safeguards against leaks, and is a safer method of transport for oil than rail or truck. The company has said the pipeline is largely complete except for the section under Lake Oahe.
The bridge lies near where protesters had set up camp on private property owned by the pipeline developer, Energy Transfer Partners, before they were forcibly removed by law enforcement Oct. 27. It’s also about a mile from an uncompleted section under Lake Oahe, a Missouri River reservoir, where work has been on hold by order of federal agencies.
Tara Houska, an organizer with Honor the Earth, told the Bismarck Tribune that the Cannon Ball gym was opened to aid people who had been doused with water or tear gas.
Phone calls to the sheriff’s department late Sunday went to an answering machine.
On Friday, Kelcy Warren, the chief executive of Dallas-based Energy Transfer Partners, said the company is unwilling to reroute the pipeline.
http://fuelfix.com/blog/2016/11/21/police-protesters-clash-at-dakota-access-pipeline/
-
CEO Shuns Reroute Plan As Protests Turn Violent
Nov 21, 2016 | Los Angeles Times (In E&E Greenwire)
By Nigel Duara
The head of Energy Transfer Partners LP, the company building the Dakota Access oil pipeline, said Friday that it likely will not be rerouted but that he hoped to meet with the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe chairman to ease his concerns over construction.
CEO Kelcy Warren said the company does not have alternatives to the $3.8 billion pipeline plan, which has drawn outrage from the Standing Rock Sioux.
"There's not another way. We're building at that location," Warren said.
Warren wants to meet with Standing Rock Sioux Chairman Dave Archambault to address the tribe's concerns that the pipeline could contaminate drinking water and damage cultural sites.
Archambault said he's willing to meet with Warren but does not expect it to make a difference.
"We already know what he's going to say — that this is the cleanest, safest pipeline ever," the chairman said. "What he doesn't know is that this is still an issue for Standing Rock and all indigenous people" (AP/San Francisco Chronicle, Nov. 18).
Last night, over 400 protesters at the tribe's reservation in North Dakota clashed with police as they tried to enter what they called sacred lands, which are under the control of the Army Corps of Engineers.
Police stopped the protesters from entering the lands as requested by the corps.
Police used tear gas and a water cannon on the protesters as temperatures dipped into the 20s.
The Morton County Sheriff's Department called the situation a riot and said protesters tried to set multiple fires to the Backwater Bridge (Nigel Duara, Los Angeles Times, Nov. 20). — CS
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2016/11/21/stories/1060046084
-
DHS Attacks Emerging 'Internet Of Things' Security Concerns
Nov 21, 2016 | E&E Energywire
By Blake Sobczak
Robert Silvers is spearheading the Department of Homeland Security's effort to seal cybersecurity gaps in the "internet of things."
Silvers, assistant secretary for cyber policy at DHS, is rushing to defend an expanding corner of the internet that includes billions of devices, from smart cars to thermostats. Last Tuesday, his office released six voluntary principles to lock down the internet of things before security flaws in individual devices snowball into a national security crisis.
"As more and more types of systems come online, including, for example, the control systems that drive clean water and energy to our homes, we are creating a national dependency," Silvers told E&E News in an interview Friday. "We're counting on networks to function properly to carry out our day-to-day, life-sustaining activities."
"Internet-of-things security has therefore become a matter of homeland security," he said.
Silvers was quick to point out that internet-of-things innovations, far from being a boogeyman, carry tremendous economic potential for the United States. "So we celebrate it," he said, "but we also want to secure it, so it's built to last."
The new DHS guidance is aimed squarely at internet-of-things manufacturers and "high-level" business adopters, rather than casual consumers. Silvers said that was a deliberate move to get the message out to those who carry the most impact, rather than consumers who might not have the time or technical expertise to secure their devices. An average American "is not going to spend many hours trying to update the software in his washer/dryer machine," Silvers pointed out.
The strategic document urges internet-of-things manufacturers to consider security while designing products from the get-go, rather than trying to find and fix vulnerabilities later (though the security principles cover that, too). DHS also wants companies to prioritize securing "smart" devices that pose the greatest risk to business if they fail, ensuring that they're only "carefully and deliberately" connected to the internet.
A recent cyberattack on domain name service host Dyn Inc. drew its power from an army of thousands of "smart," web-linked devices such as CCTV cameras and routers. That Oct. 21 attack temporarily blocked millions of Americans from accessing popular sites like GrubHub and Twitter.
The Dyn "distributed denial of service" attack wasn't the first warning sign for the internet of things. A cyberattack on Ukraine's power grid last December disabled many devices that, while not facing the public internet, were designed with nearly no cyber safeguards. Hackers in that incident were ultimately able to cut off power to about a quarter of a million people for several hours.
"The Ukraine incident is a cautionary flag of the type of harm that could be inflicted through an internet-of-things security failure," Silvers said. "The incident itself was more about a theft of administrator credentials, but as more critical infrastructure systems like the grid are connected to the internet, you can very easily foresee a scenario in which an adversary attempts to leverage that connection."
Silvers acknowledged that the internet-of-things space "is not monolithic," and credited some vendors of "smart" products for figuring security into their construction.
U.S. lawmakers and electricity regulators have grappled with how to encourage that kind of security-by-design without issuing new binding cybersecurity rules (EnergyWire, Nov. 17).
"We've got to make sure that when these devices are being built, that security is baked in," said Rep. Will Hurd (R-Texas), chairman of the Information Technology Subcommittee in the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, at a Bipartisan Policy Center event Friday. "I think folks are starting to realize that."
Silvers, a political appointee, said he would remain "very focused" on cybersecurity work through the final days of President Obama's second term but declined to speculate how Republican President-elect Donald Trump would handle the fast-growing world of connected devices. "Internet of things security is a problem set that has risen to national prominence during this administration, and I'm sure it's something that the next administration is going to have to confront, as well," he said.
http://www.eenews.net/energywire/2016/11/21/stories/1060046071
-
Trump Infrastructure Plan 'Not A Panacea' — Industry
Nov 21, 2016 | E&E Greenwire
By Ariel Wittenberg
Trade groups that would benefit from President-elect Trump's $1 trillion infrastructure plan say it's not enough to cure the nation's transportation woes.
Trump has promised to trigger $1 trillion in infrastructure investment with legislation in his first 100 days that would give $137 billion in tax credits to private companies interested in building and managing highways and other types of infrastructure.
The plan would largely support revenue-generating infrastructure like airports and toll roads that could guarantee companies returns on their investments.
Trade groups say they welcome any capital investments, but the plan won't be enough to fix crumbling roads and transit systems.
"It's not a panacea," said Matt Jeanneret, American Road and Transportation Builders Association's senior vice president of communications.
Trump's plan favors projects in urban areas, where enough revenue can be generated to pay investors. That's good news for cities, but "it's not going to work in all states," Jeanneret said.
"You have to have a traffic flow to generate a revenue stream," he said.
Patrick Jones, president of the International Bridge, Tunnel and Turnpike Association, agreed.
"I am bullish on toll facilities, and I think we will see much more tolling around the country," he said, "but there are going to be projects where the region or the city or the state doesn't have sufficient traffic to support toll revenues where people are willing to pay."
Both Jones and Jeanneret pointed to tolls on Interstate 495 and I-95 in Virginia as examples of where high demand helps tolling work well. That system was made possible by Trump transportation transition team leader Shirley Ybarra, a former Virginia secretary of transportation credited with developing the public-private partnerships that led to highway deals.
But, Jones noted, the plan wouldn't work for "pass-through states" where highway traffic is sparse.
Those places need federal funding, not financing.
"The rural states are sort of the perfect poster child for having a federal program, because it would be challenging for them to generate the tax revenue on their own, and many of their highway travelers come from out of state," he said.
Jeanneret agreed. "It's important to distinguish between funding and financing," he said. "We need both, but the reality is that a tax credit financing plan will have limited application."
Federal infrastructure cash comes from the Highway Trust Fund, which has been in chronic need of a sustainable funding source.
The $305 billion Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act, which passed last year, authorizes five years' worth of funding, but it draws from one-time sources like the Federal Reserve Bank and selling oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.
So far, Trump's team hasn't unveiled plans for the trust fund, although it has expressed interest in tax reform, which could benefit the fund.
Incoming Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) has said he wants to use repatriation of overseas profits to pay for infrastructure. The idea has support among some Republicans, though many conservatives want to change the tax code to become revenue-neutral (E&E Daily, Nov. 10).
Many in the transportation industry expressed hope that tax reform could supplement Trump's financing plan.
"In isolation, funding is a challenge, but in conjunction with comprehensive tax reform, it could be a possibility," said Bud Wright, executive director of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials.
But he also expressed fear that Trump's emphasis on the financing plan could take priority over finding a sustainable source for the trust fund, especially if debates over tax reform get too heated.
"We are somewhat concerned, but we will be working hard to make sure there is an understanding in Congress and in the administration about what financing can accomplish and what it can't," Wright said. "As they are talking about what they intend to achieve, we want to be in their ear making sure they understand that while financing is a complementary piece, it can't be the entire solution."
Despite their concerns about relying solely on financing, many in the industry appreciate Trump's putting a strong emphasis on improving infrastructure in his campaign speeches and his plans for his first 100 days in the White House.
"We're certainly pleased that he has spoken out about it with a good deal of passion and energy," Jones said.
Kurt Nagle, CEO of the American Association of Port Authorities, noted that while the plan "is not a slam-dunk," Trump is not the first to propose less investment than the industry wants.
"Our funding concerns are not new," he said. "We had these needs before the election, and if anything, there is more opportunity to see a comprehensive package with a Republican-majority Congress and president than we had before."
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2016/11/21/stories/1060046088
-
Addressing Outdated Regulations Will Help Keep The U.S. Steel Industry Moving
Nov 21, 2016 | The Hill - Congress Blog
By Philip K. Bell
Rebuilding our nation’s infrastructure is a hot topic in Washington again, and as it should be, it also appears to be a top priority for the incoming administration. Our system for moving goods has been neglected for far too long and is in dire need of an update. And while much of the focus will rightfully be on repairing roads and bridges, we cannot afford to overlook badly outdated transportation policies that are also failing us.
Thankfully, the U.S. Surface Transportation Board is off to a good start and is working on regulatory reforms that will help address ongoing issues that are important to manufacturers who depend on freight rail. The preservation of a strong rail industry is extremely important to the member companies of the Steel Manufacturers Association (“SMA”). For many steel producers, the railroads are highly valued customers. And most steelmakers also rely on the railroads to transport a significant portion of their raw materials and finished steel products.
SMA’s member companies account for over 75 percent of domestic steelmaking capacity and operate 127 steel plants across North America, including major operations in Florida, Texas, Ohio and Pennsylvania just to name a few.
Like many other industries, steelmaking is extremely competitive. U.S. producers compete not only with one another, but also with producers overseas. While our industry has gone through many tough changes, competition has helped make steel producers stronger, more efficient, and better prepared to deliver value to shareholders and customers.
We also believe that competition is healthy for the industries that SMA members do business with – including the rail carriers that are so critical to moving raw materials and finished goods. That is why we have joined with other manufacturers as part of the Rail Customer Coalition to support the STB’s effort to adopt free market principles and streamline its process for resolving freight rail problems.
Under one of the Board’s proposals, rail customers will for the first time have an effective means to seek competitive bids for service through reciprocal or competitive switching. For more than a century, switching has worked well for both railroads and customers in Canada. As Canadian Pacific Railway recently stated, railroads that provide competitive switching to its customers are “the two most efficient carriers in the industry today, demonstrating that a low-cost, service-focused carrier can increase revenues, operate efficiently and reinvest in infrastructure in a competitive environment.”
The Board is also trying to cut red tape out of its procedures for resolving rate issues in markets that lack competitive transportation options. The current system is a bureaucratic nightmare, with rate cases taking an average of three and a half years and more than $5 million to complete.
With these reforms, we think the STB is on the right course to ensure that freight rail carriers can benefit from greater competition and continue to make investments to help serve our industry well into the future. We strongly urge the new administration and Congress to support the vitality of the U.S. steel industry and to keep the STB moving forward.
Philip K. Bell is President of the Washington, D.C. based Steel Manufacturers Association (SMA). Prior to leading the SMA, Phil served as Director of External Communications and Public Affairs for Gerdau Long Steel North America based in Tampa, Fla.
http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/economy-budget/306973-addressing-outdated-regulations-will-help-keep-the-us
-
AAR Calls On STB To Stop Major Rulemakings For The Time Being
Nov 21, 2016 | Logistics Management
By Jeff Berman
Pending the United States Senate confirming a “full slate” of board members appointed by President-elect Donald Trump to the United States Surface Transportation Board (STB), the Association of American Railroads (AAR) said last week that the STB should take a pause on its various planned regulatory proposals.
Pending the United States Senate confirming a “full slate” of board members appointed by President-elect Donald Trump to the United States Surface Transportation Board (STB), the Association of American Railroads (AAR) said last week that the STB should take a pause on its various planned regulatory proposals.
"The policy landscape in Washington, D.C. dramatically shifted on Election Day, and as such, the freight rail industry believes the STB should suspend its misguided quest to reregulate freight rail," said Edward R. Hamberger, AAR president and CEO at last week’s RailTrends conference hosted by Progressive Railroading magazine and independent railroad analyst Tony Hatch. "Now is not the time for midnight regulations, let alone the enactment of the unfounded proposals currently arising from the STB that will surely fail to meet the rigorous examination promised by future leaders."
Hamberger explained that the AAR’s request is akin to actions taken by Jay Rockefeller, former Senator from West Virginia and Chair of the Senate Committee on Commerce Science and Transportation and frequent AAR adversary, when Rockefeller and House counterpart Henry Waxman called on the Federal Communications Commission in 2008 to halt any complex and controversial items until then President-elect Barack Obama took office.
Perhaps the biggest regulation the AAR is focused on is competitive access, also referred to as competitive switching, which is a situation in which a railroad that has physical access to a specific shipper facility switches rail traffic to the facility for another railroad that does not have physical access. And the second railroad compensates that railroad that has physical access in the form of a per car switching charge, with the shipper facility gaining access to an additional railroad.
The AAR is steadfastly against it, saying new regulations like this are a step backward from the deregulatory path that has allowed railroads to make the capacity investments required to meet customer demand and further modernize a nationwide rail network that benefits shippers and consumers. And it has said that forced access is an ill-conceived approach that compromises the efficiency of the entire network by gumming up the system through added interchange movements, more time and increased operational complexity.
In 2015, Congress decided the STB should have five members to ensure there were different viewpoints as it considered various issues, but at the moment there are three board members and that number will be down to two in January, with those two finding themselves in the minority at some point in 2017.
“I think it would be prudent for two members of a five-member board to hit the pause button,” said Hamberger. “I hope they will take a little bit of time to allow a new Congress and administration to weigh in on these issues.”
What’s more, Hamberger noted that a pause is needed as the regulations addressed by the STB are not run of the mill proceedings, explaining they are very substantial and significant and could very much change the underlying economic structure of the industry.
As for the STB’s stance on the AAR’s request, STB Chairman Daniel Elliott said at RailTrends that the STB looks forward to welcoming its new board members when they are added and will work to make the new transition as smooth as possible.
Addressing the switching mandate, the STB head said that it is an attempt to breathe life to a statutory remedy that was enacted by Congress and has remained virtually dormant to precedents established by the STB’s predecessor, the Interstate Commerce Commission, with the proposed rules mirroring the language of the statute to grant reciprocal switching only when it is possible and in the public interest or necessary for competitive rail service.
Stifel analyst John Larkin commented in a research note that Elliot’s comments seemed to suggest that the “natural progression of hot issues, such as the controversial proposed reciprocal switching rule, would likely result in the AAR getting their wish.”
http://www.logisticsmgmt.com/article/aar_calls_on_stb_to_stop_major_rulemakings_for_the_time_being
-
DAPL Protests Could Become Face Of Climate Change Movement
Nov 21, 2016 | Christian Science Monitor (In E&E Climatewire)
By Henry Gass
Native American protests against pipelines and water pollution could become an integral part of the broader climate change movement.
Officials and members of the tribes believe that the strength of the protest against the Dakota Access pipeline might be an indication of the larger role these communities will play in voicing support for greener policies. While climate change is only a portion of the opposition against the pipeline, it also connects with larger global movements that are pushing to address the issue.
According to Bob Gough, secretary of the Intertribal Council on Utility Policy, these are issues that matter deeply to both the indigenous people and the rest of the world.
"Indigenous people around the world are taking a stand in a time of rapidly accelerating climate change. This becomes the tip of the spear, the case in point of where the fossil fuel industry is threatening life itself," he added.
Gaakumiwidood Gakiweron, a member of the Ojibwa tribe in Ontario, said, "We have always spoken about environmental issues. I think we're slowly being heard, because you guys are starting to see the effects [of climate change] in the environment" (Henry Gass, Christian Science Monitor, Nov. 17). — KB
http://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2016/11/21/stories/1060046053
-
GOP States Urge Trump To Scale Back EPA Rules, Enforcement
Nov 21, 2016 | Inside EPA
Five Republican-led states are urging President-elect Donald Trump to scale back EPA's rulemaking and enforcement efforts, calling on the incoming administration to “return environmental leadership to the states” by abandoning what they describe as unnecessary or duplicative action such as the Obama administration's climate agenda.
In a letter to Trump dated Nov. 16, the environment chiefs of North Carolina, North Dakota, Nebraska, West Virginia and Alabama -- all states currently with GOP governors -- call for a moratorium on new EPA rules and a review of “overreaching” policies such as the power plant greenhouse gas standards known as the Clean Power Plan, and the agency's controversial Clean Water Act jurisdiction rule.
“Our country still needs the EPA, but not the EPA of recent years. We need research targeted at our specific, clear environmental challenges. This can best be done by coordinating industry-level initiatives that cross state lines, which can be defined by measurable success. We must put an end to the idea that more regulation is always good, and instead allow state and local experts to improve the environment,” the letter says.
While the letter joins a broad GOP call for Trump to reverse a host of high-profile Obama EPA rulemakings, it also seeks a smaller role for the agency in enforcement actions, arguing that federal efforts often duplicate or conflict with state-led enforcement.
“When the federal government becomes overly involved in environmental matters that were originally intended to be administered by the states, the result is both unwarranted federal overreach and wasteful duplication of effort. For example, EPA enforcement, in addition to state enforcement efforts, often results in duplicate investigations with no benefit to the environment or the economy. Second-guessing state efforts is not an effective means for the EPA to provide productive oversight,” the letter says.
Finally, the states say the Trump EPA should work more closely with states when it does craft new rules and initiatives, in contrast to the Obama administration's “preference for bringing special interest groups into the rulemaking process in lieu of a broader stakeholder process that includes state governments.”
However, environmental groups are already pushing back against the request for a more lenient EPA, including a coalition of North Carolina environmental groups that issued a statement highlighting the apparent re-election loss by the state's Gov. Pat McCrory (R) -- though he is contesting challenger Roy Cooper's (D) lead in counted votes.
There should be no question that the environmental community in North Carolina stands strong and united against the past efforts of the McCrory administration and his appointees to erode the safeguards protecting clean air, clean water, and public health. This letter speaks neither for us nor for the new administration, which can speak for itself,” the statement says.
http://insideepa.com/news-briefs/gop-states-urge-trump-scale-back-epa-rules-enforcement
-
Tax Policy May Help U.S. Meet Goals Under Trump
Nov 21, 2016 | The Washington Post (In E&E Greenwire)
By Stephen Stromberg
A veteran Japanese climate negotiator has pointed to obscure U.S. tax policy as a potential roadblock for President-elect Donald Trump's plans to withdraw from the 2015 Paris accord.
Mutsuyoshi Nishimura notes that U.S. negotiators assured countries that as long as two federal tax rules remain in play following President Obama's departure from office, the United States will be able to meet the bulk of its Paris pledge.
The U.S. committed to slashing emissions 26 to 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025.
The tax rules, known as the production tax credit and the investment tax credit, subsidize solar and wind developments across the country. Parts of these programs have been on the books since 1992, and the credits have backers among Republicans and Democrats.
Congress extended the subsidies last year. Though fossil-fuel-fired power plants must be aggressively phased out to meet long-term emissions goals, Nishimura and others say the subsidies will still significantly affect renewables development during the Trump era.
But Nishimura also warned that Trump may attempt to "destroy the science" behind climate change.
"There are lots of skeptics, particularly in the Anglo-Saxon world," he said. "They would be animated, they would be emboldened."
On the international stage, the U.S. under Trump could be seen "as a spoiler of pristine planetary civilization," Nishimura added.
"Another reality President Trump will face when visiting Paris, visiting Frankfurt, he will have huge demonstrations" (Stephen Stromberg, Washington Post, Nov. 20). — GD
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2016/11/21/stories/1060046086
-
As Marrakech Climate Talks End, Countries Vow To Fight On
Nov 21, 2016 | E&E Climatewire
By Jean Chemnick
MARRAKECH, Morocco — Global climate negotiations dominated by the threat of Donald Trump ended this weekend with diplomats downplaying the threat of Donald Trump.
The two weeks of talks in the ochre city were supposed to set ground rules for the landmark Paris climate change accord nations signed last year — a "homework" Conference of the Parties, or COP in U.N. lingo. But when the Republican real estate developer who promised to kill the Paris Agreement won the U.S. election on day two of the summit, it quickly became the "Trump COP."
Still, negotiators and international climate policy experts gathered here insist that the carbon reduction initiatives, new pledges and incremental progress made here demonstrate to the world that Paris will stand, no matter what the incoming leader of the world's largest economy chooses to do.
"I think that the COP itself was a signal of continued intent and focus. It was a signal that the U.S. election didn't change things," U.S. Special Envoy for Climate Change Jonathan Pershing said after the gavel came down on the conference's decision four minutes past midnight Saturday morning. "It was a statement that the commitment of the world is significant. It was a very clear signal of domestic action and global action. It was great."
Participants privately acknowledged that the business in the negotiating rooms of the Bab Ighli conference venues was overshadowed by concern over what the next four years could bring without America's participation in the deal. Publicly, though, they insisted by turns that the United States might not pull out after all and that the world would carry on regardless.
"We should not be fixated on a Trump presidency," said Leon Charles, a veteran former negotiator for Grenada. "I think we need to continue to build momentum for climate action."
Giovanni La Via, who represented the European Parliament at the conference, noted that last year's deal was the product of more than 20 years of work on the part of global negotiators and is supported by global energy market trends.
"Paris was not made in one day, and it will not be undone in one or four years," he said.Vulnerable nations taking big steps
To make their case that Paris implementation is still on track, diplomats pointed to new offerings by non-U.S. parties to the U.N. process.
Perhaps the most significant was the announcement by 48 of the world's poorest and most vulnerable countries Friday that they would turn in more ambitious targets to Paris before 2020 and will shift to 100 percent renewable energy use by 2050.
The pledge was supported by China and Germany — two of the rising leaders on climate mitigation and adaptation funding — in the likely event that the U.S. withdraws its support next year.
Observers said the "Marrakech Call" showed small countries taking on more direct leadership over the response to climate change, which is an existential problem for many of them.
"It is moving to see that, despite their relative poverty, the world's most vulnerable countries leading the world in delivering the goals of the Paris Agreement," said Mohamed Adow, international climate lead at Christian Aid. "It's sad that it is the countries suffering first and worst from climate change that need to go furthest and fastest to show the world what needs to be done. But thank heavens they have done."
Jennifer Morgan of Greenpeace lauded the commitment for being the first time countries have adopted the advocacy community's call to shift to 100 percent renewables, a goal that some analysts say would be difficult or impossible for economies like the United States.
She called China and Germany's presence "significant, because they are the leaders in the renewable energy revolution going on right now."Climate world bids Obama team adieu
The conference also produced the Marrakech Action Proclamation for Our Climate and Sustainable Development, a declarative statement reaffirming the goals of Paris.
Issued eight days after Trump's victory, its apparent purpose is to show a united front against the incoming president's promise to withdraw the United States from the process.
"Our task is to rapidly build on that momentum, together, moving forward purposefully to reduce greenhouse gases and to foster adaptation efforts," the proclamation declares.
A few decisions were made, as well, including approving a work plan for a mechanism to help vulnerable countries deal with current impacts of climate change, known as "loss and damage." Negotiators also decided that the Moroccan presidency of the climate talks and the Fijian presidency of the coming round would prepare for a "facilitative dialogue" to inform the next round of national pledges to the Paris deal.
Others were put off for later, including a process to make decisions on issues from transparency of nations' emissions plans to ratcheting up their ambitions. A decision over whether to extend a fund aimed at helping poor countries build resilience to climate change also was put off until early next year.
By the end of the conference, 111 nations had become parties to the Paris deal, of the nearly 200 that originally signed it. And members of the Obama administration were given something of a heroes' send-off. Negotiators congregated around Pershing and his deputy Trigg Talley, chatting and shaking hands, and Pershing was invited to address the plenary hall.
He maintained that it wasn't a bittersweet moment. Having attended every conference since 1990, Pershing said, he might find himself at the one in Bonn, Germany, next year. And he said the post-election pall was already lifting.
"At the beginning of the week, the election was the discussion, and by the end of the week, the climate change issue was the discussion," he said.
But with Trump's inauguration nine weeks away and with GOP majorities maintained in both chambers of Congress, it seems likely the president-elect will have the last word.
http://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2016/11/21/stories/1060046057
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested