Preview Newsletter
AM ACC 12/26/2016
-
(ACC Mentioned) Chemical Activity Barometer Ends Year With Gain, ACC Says
Dec 23, 2016 | Chemical Engineering
By Scott Jenkins
The Chemical Activity Barometer (CAB), a leading economic indicator developed by the American Chemistry Council (ACC; Washington, D.C.; www.americanchemistry.com), ended the year on a strong note, posting a monthly gain of 0.3% and a year-over-year gain of 4.4%. -
EPA Toxics Chief Vows Issuance Of TSCA Framework Rules Under Obama
Dec 26, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Bridget DiCosmo
EPA toxics chief Jim Jones is vowing that the agency will issue proposed rules to establish processes for prioritizing and evaluating chemicals already in commerce required by the updated Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) before President Barack Obama leaves office... -
First of Three Critical Chemical Rules Moves Toward Release
Dec 26, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
The Environmental Protection Agency's proposed approach to prioritizing chemicals for risk evaluation has moved a step closer to release. -
(ACC Mentioned) California: DTSC Floats Landmark Chemical Alternatives Guide
Dec 23, 2016 | Inside EPA
California's recently issued draft guidance for how companies should assess safer alternative compounds to replace toxic materials in consumer products is getting some attention. -
(ACC Mentioned) Researchers Find Bisphenol A in Canned Pet Food
Dec 23, 2016 | Consumer Affairs
By Amy Martyn
Despite claims that it is dangerous to human health, the plastics industry and the Food and Drug Administration have insisted throughout the years that Bisphenol-A, a chemical used to make hard plastics and the lining of canned foods, is perfectly safe for humans to ingest. -
Minnesota Beats Rest of Country in Banning Germ-Killer
Dec 25, 2016 | AP (In The Washington Post)
By Steve Karnowski
Minnesota’s first-in-the nation ban on soaps containing the once ubiquitous germ-killer triclosan takes effect Jan. 1, but the people who spearheaded the law say it’s already having its desired effect on a national level. -
You Don’t Need to Actively Avoid BPA
Dec 23, 2016 | Slate
By Michael P. Holsapple
Those making the traditional green-bean casserole over the holidays might see a label on their can of green beans or mushroom soup that reads, “BPA-free lining.” BPA, or bisphenol A, is an industrial chemical used to make plastics and resins, which are often used in containers... -
Glyphosate for Breakfast?
Dec 23, 2016 | Epoch Times
By Conan Milner
Glyphosate is by far the most heavily used chemical weed killer in human history. It’s so pervasive, it’s difficult to avoid ingesting it on a daily basis. Researchers have found glyphosate residue in food, tap water, rainwater, and rivers, and in urine and breast milk. -
New Substances Listed as Hazardous by EU, Require New Labeling
Dec 26, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Stephen Gardner
Twenty-six hazardous chemicals would be subject to restrictions under the European Union's REACH law, according to a draft regulation the European Commission issued Dec. 22 in line with the World Trade Organization's Technical Barriers to Trade Agreement. -
Trump’s Fossil-Friendly, Pro-Business Team Ready to Take Reins
Dec 23, 2016 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Carolyn Davis
Donald Trump may face a fight in Congress during the confirmation process for some of his Cabinet picks, with bipartisan concerns about ExxonMobil Corp. CEO Rex Tillerson, his unorthodox choice to become secretary of state. -
There's Profit in Destroying Things the Shale Boom Left Behind
Dec 26, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Jim Polson
When business is bad for the coal industry, it's good for Mark Loizeaux. -
Direct Employment in Natural Gas Development Declines by One-Third in Pennsylvania
Dec 23, 2016 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Charlie Passut
Jobs in Pennsylvania directly tied to natural gas development declined by about one-third in the second quarter, according to data from the state Department of Labor and Industry (DLI). -
Pipeline Uncertainty Illustrates Broader Concerns for Tribes
Dec 25, 2016 | AP (In The Washington Post)
By Mary Hudetz
For hundreds of protesters, it was cause to cheer when the Obama administration this month declined to issue an easement for the Dakota Access pipeline’s final segment. -
Railroad in Fiery Derailment Agrees to Changes
Dec 23, 2016 | AP (In The New York Times)
The nation's largest freight railroad has agreed to more thorough inspections and maintenance improvements after a fiery oil train derailment in Oregon and the discovery of more than 800 potential safety violations across its sprawling network. -
Industry Sees Chance to Ease Air Toxics Rules With Boiler Decision
Dec 26, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Andrew Childers
Industry groups hope the incoming Trump administration will take the opportunity to revise how the Environmental Protection Agency sets toxic pollutant standards across the board after a federal appellate court sent emissions limits for industrial boilers back to the agency... -
Special Counsel Warns Against ‘Any Effort to Chill Scientific Research’ Amid Climate Concerns
Dec 23, 2016 | Washington Post
By Chris Mooney
The Office of Special Counsel, an independent U.S. agency that protects whistleblowers and investigates prohibited practices that affect government employees, declined this week to further investigate a questionnaire sent from the Trump transition team to the Energy Department. -
States Will Lead on Climate Change in the Trump Era
Dec 26, 2016 | New York Times
By Editorial Board
State governments will serve as an important bulwark against any attempt by President-elect Donald Trump to roll back the progress the United States has made in addressing climate change. And that’s good news for the planet. -
Greens Ready for Trump War
Dec 24, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
Environmental groups are ready for a fight with President-elect Donald Trump.
Congressional Hearings - There are no relevant hearings to report at this time.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation News
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) Chemical Activity Barometer Ends Year With Gain, ACC Says
Dec 23, 2016 | Chemical Engineering
By Scott Jenkins
The Chemical Activity Barometer (CAB), a leading economic indicator developed by the American Chemistry Council (ACC; Washington, D.C.; www.americanchemistry.com), ended the year on a strong note, posting a monthly gain of 0.3% and a year-over-year gain of 4.4%. This represents a significant improvement over the first half of the year, and a pace not seen since September 2010, ACC said in its latest Weekly Chemistry and Economic Report. In summary, the CAB continues to signal further gains in U.S. business activity well into the second quarter 2017, the ACC report says.
All data are measured on a three-month-moving-average basis. The CAB has four primary components, each consisting of a variety of indicators: production; equity prices; product prices; and inventories and other indicators. In December all of the four core categories for the CAB improved. Production-related indicators were positive. Overall trends in construction-related resins, pigments, and related performance chemistry were positive and suggest further gains in housing next year. Other indicators, including equity prices, product prices, and inventories, were also positive. The diffusion index was stable at 65%.
The ACC report also included data on U.S. specialty chemicals market volumes, which rose 0.4% in November. This follows a revised 0.1% gain in October and a 0.2% gain in September. Volumes have generally been moving up since May. All changes in the data are reported on a three-month moving average basis. Of the 28 specialty chemical segments we monitor, 21 expanded in November, up from 15 expanding in October. Seven markets experienced decline. During November, large gains (1.0% and over) were only in cosmetic chemicals, mining chemicals, oilfield chemicals, and specialties. Smaller monthly gains occurred in market volumes for adhesives & sealants, biocides, construction chemicals, dyes, flame retardants, flavors & fragrances, food additives, foundry chemicals, industrial & institutional cleaners, lubricant additives, paint additives, paper additives, plastic compounding, and printing ink.
Also, the U.S. Chemical Production Regional Index (U.S. CPRI) rose 0.2% in November, following flat growth in October and a 0.2% decline in September, the ACC report says. In November, chemical production rose across all regions, with the highest gain in the Ohio Valley region. Chemical production was mixed over the same three-month period. There were gains in the production three-month moving average output trend of fertilizers, consumer products, plastic resins, other specialties, industrial gases, chlor-alkali, and other inorganic chemicals. These gains were partially offset by declines in the production of organic chemicals, pharmaceuticals, synthetic rubber, pesticides, coatings, adhesives, and manufactured fibers.
http://www.chemengonline.com/chemical-activity-barometer-ends-year-with-gain-acc-says/?printmode=1
-
EPA Toxics Chief Vows Issuance Of TSCA Framework Rules Under Obama
Dec 26, 2016 | Inside EPA
By Bridget DiCosmo
EPA toxics chief Jim Jones is vowing that the agency will issue proposed rules to establish processes for prioritizing and evaluating chemicals already in commerce required by the updated Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) before President Barack Obama leaves office, though EPA missed a Dec. 19 statutory deadline for issuing the rules.
“We're still on for meeting the commitment we made with the framework rules,” Jones told Inside EPA during a Dec. 22 interview, adding, “we still plan on being able to pull that off” in the coming weeks.
EPA sent the proposed rules to the White House Office of Management & Budget (OMB) last month, and the prioritization proposal cleared OMB Dec. 22 but has not yet been issued, according to OMB’s website. The evaluation rule was submitted Nov. 11 and remains under review as of press time, the website says.
Both draft rules are viewed as essential for implementing the updated TSCA as they will guide EPA’s risk evaluation and screening process as it works to meet its new mandate to assess the thousands of chemicals grandfathered under the previous iteration of TSCA.
EPA said it planned to issue the proposals by mid-December, along with a third so-called framework proposal for establishing a system by which the agency will collect user fees from industry to supplement funding for orchestrating various duties under the reform law.
The statutory deadline for the risk evaluation and prioritization proposals would have been Dec. 19, or 180 days from the law’s June 22 effective date when Obama signed it.
Chemical Reviews
EPA also in a Federal Register notice published Dec. 19 formally announced that the first 10 chemicals it will review under TSCA section 6 -- which covers existing chemicals -- are: 1,4 dioxane; 1-bromopropane; asbestos; carbon tetrachloride; cyclic aliphatic bromide cluster; methylene chloride (MC); n-methylpyrrolidone (NMP); pigment violet 29; trichloroethylene (TCE); and tetrachloroethylene.
The agency is also working on proposed rules under section 6(a) to manage risks from certain uses of three chemicals: MC, NMP and TCE. One of its two TCE proposals, aiming to restrict use as a spotting agent and aerosol spray degreaser, cleared OMB review Dec. 5. Its remaining TCE proposal, sent to OMB in September, focuses on TCE used in vapor degreasing and remains under review.
The agency on Oct. 24 also submitted for pre-publication review a separate TSCA proposed rule on MC and NMP uses in paint and coatings that is still undergoing review
Jones in the interview with Inside EPA noted that only a few weeks remain in the Obama administration, and said that the agency is still working to issue those proposed rules.
“You always wish you could have gotten further along,” he said of the agency's progress.
Pointing out that the TSCA section 6(a) rules will be the first issued since a federal appeals court in 1991 threw out EPA’s attempted ban on the known carcinogen asbestos, Jones said, “I wish we had been able to finalize the rules that we are now just proposing for section 6. Despite that fantasy, that would've been really awesome. I'm still incredibly proud of how we're able to hit the ground running after the law passed.”
The chemical solvents industry opposes the section 6(a) proposed rules and is hopeful that the incoming Trump administration will not finalize the rules, with one industry source previously telling Inside EPA that they are “hopeful we will have a more receptive audience” to calls to scrap the rulemaking.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/epa-toxics-chief-vows-issuance-tsca-framework-rules-under-obama
-
First of Three Critical Chemical Rules Moves Toward Release
Dec 26, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
The Environmental Protection Agency's proposed approach to prioritizing chemicals for risk evaluation has moved a step closer to release.
The White House Office of Management and Budget cleared the proposed rule Dec. 22. Jim Jones, assistant administrator for chemical safety and pollution prevention at EPA, told Bloomberg BNA the agency expects to release the prioritization and two other proposed rules on or about the same day, most likely in January.
“We're very confident the three of them will be published before the end of this administration,” Jones said during a recent interview.
The first of the remaining two other rules would propose a process by which the EPA would update the inventory of chemicals allowed to be either made in, or imported into, the U.S.
That rule would describe a straightforward process that chemical manufacturers, and perhaps processors, would use to identify which chemicals they have made, used or imported over the last 10 years, Jones said. The EPA would use that information as it determines which chemicals are high or low priorities for risk evaluation.
The third rule would propose the EPA's process to evaluate chemical risks.
The Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act (Pub. L. No. 114-182), which revised the Toxic Substances Control Act in June, requires the EPA to release all three rules as final regulations by June 2017.
The law also requires the EPA to issue a fourth rule, which would require chemical manufacturers and perhaps processors to pay fees to help the agency recoup some of its chemical oversight costs.
The Lautenberg Act did not include a deadline for the EPA to issue that rule, although the income it would generate is vital to the agency's ability to carry out its many new responsibilities under the law.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=102466986&vname=dennotallissues&fn=102466986&jd=102466986
-
(ACC Mentioned) California: DTSC Floats Landmark Chemical Alternatives Guide
Dec 23, 2016 | Inside EPA
California's recently issued draft guidance for how companies should assess safer alternative compounds to replace toxic materials in consumer products is getting some attention.
As Inside Cal/EPA's Curt Barry reports, the chemical industry, environmentalists and a crowd of other stakeholders are poring over the guidance ahead of a Jan. 10 public webinar and a written comment deadline Jan. 20.
The document by the California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), and how the state implements the green chemistry regulations, may influence how companies go about following and complying with the reformed Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), underscoring once again how influential California's policies are.
DTSC released the draft guidance Dec. 12 to help companies comply with the department's pioneering Safer Consumer Products (SCP) program. The department says the document will “help responsible entities navigate the SCP Alternatives Analysis process and provide useful approaches, methods, resources, tools and examples of how to fulfill SCP's regulatory requirements.”
Under the state program, DTSC identifies "priority products" containing chemicals of concern for which responsible entities must identify, evaluate and adopt better alternatives.
According to the department, the program requires an Alternatives Analysis (AA) that considers "important impacts throughout the product's life cycle and follows up with specific actions to make the product safer. The Department prepared the Draft Alternatives Analysis Guide to help responsible entities conduct an AA to meet the regulatory requirements."
The proposed alternatives analysis guidance document contains numerous issues for companies to consider when deciding whether alternative chemicals are available to analyze for certain products; as well as multiple factors to be considered when reviewing potential substitute chemicals. These include product function and performance; legal issues; lifecycle impacts; and exposure pathways and assessment.
The American Chemistry Council is “carefully reviewing” the 238-page document, according to a spokeswoman. "Considering the importance of the guidelines and given the coinciding holiday season, our review and comments will likely require more time than the allotted six-week comment period," the spokeswoman says. "As we want to be sure to provide adequate feedback on such a consequential document, we are requesting that the comment period be extended."
Environmentalists, meanwhile, are focusing on “the guidance's clarity so that impacted businesses will know exactly what is expected of them and will therefore be able to proceed with their alternatives assessment with all care and expediency,” one advocate says.
In July, DTSC proposed to regulate children's foam-padded sleeping products containing the flame retardants tris(1,3-dichloro-2-propyl) phosphate (TDCPP) or tris(2-chloroethyl) phosphate (TCEP) as its first priority product under the program.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/california-dtsc-floats-landmark-chemical-alternatives-guide
-
(ACC Mentioned) Researchers Find Bisphenol A in Canned Pet Food
Dec 23, 2016 | Consumer Affairs
By Amy Martyn
Despite claims that it is dangerous to human health, the plastics industry and the Food and Drug Administration have insisted throughout the years that Bisphenol-A, a chemical used to make hard plastics and the lining of canned foods, is perfectly safe for humans to ingest.
Industry spokesmen say that BPA is a safe and effective means of packaging food to protect it from contamination. They argue that finding an equally effective alternative would take years of research.
Some 90 percent of Americans are estimated to have BPA in their bloodstream, leading environmental groups to launch an aggressive but so far unsuccessful lobbying campaign to ban the chemical from food packaging.
Sure, the FDA did agree to pass a rule stipulating that BPA cannot be used in infant formula packaging, baby bottles or sippy cups in 2013, but even then the agency asserted it wasn’t doing so for safety reasons. In fact, the FDA only agreed to ban the chemical in baby products at the request of the manufacturers. “FDA’s action is based solely on a determination of abandonment,” meaning the industry said it had stopped using BPA, “and is not related to the safety of BPA,” the agency wrote in 2013.Still being found
Given the official stamp of approval, it should be no surprise that researchers are continuing to find BPA in products across the board, including products designed for some of our most vulnerable populations.
Researchers at the University of Missouri recently fed 14 dogs canned food, rather than the bagged food that the pets normally ate, for two weeks. They found that even in cases in which the canned food was labeled “BPA-free,” that the presence of BPA in the dogs’ blood samples increased an average of almost threefold after the two-week period.
The increased presence of BPA in pets has implications for both dogs' health and humans. “We also found that increased serum BPA concentrations were correlated with gut microbiome and metabolic changes in the dogs analyzed,” study co-author Cheryl Rosenfeld told Science Daily. "Increased BPA may also reduce one bacterium that has the ability to metabolize BPA and related environmental chemicals."
Researchers have previously warned that products advertised as BPA-free aren’t necessarily any better. Hard plastics and canned food liners, even those not made with BPA, often contain bisphenols or other endocrine-disrupting chemicals. Baby teething
Another study published earlier this month evaluates baby teethers for the presence of BPA. Previous research has suggested that BPA exposure is especially dangerous for small children and babies.
The research team in this case soaked 59 different teethers in purified water to evaluate whether the teethers leached the chemicals. The results, published in the American Chemical Society this month, show that small amounts of bisphenols, benzophenones and parabens leached from the teethers, even from teethers that were labeled as “BPA-free.”
“Almost 90 percent of the teethers we bought were labeled as BPA-free, but we found BPA in almost every product and most were labeled as non-toxic,” Study author Kurunthachalam Kannan, a research scientist at New York State Department of Health, told CBS News. “We were finding more than 15 to 20 toxic chemicals in all of the them.”
Plastics industry trade group the American Chemistry Council, meanwhile, continues to say there is nothing to worry about. “It should be noted that all the chemicals studied here are shown to be at extremely low exposure levels and well-below government set safe levels,” the group wrote in response to the baby-teether study.
https://www.consumeraffairs.com/news/researchers-find-bisphenol-a-in-canned-pet-food-122316.html
-
Minnesota Beats Rest of Country in Banning Germ-Killer
Dec 25, 2016 | AP (In The Washington Post)
By Steve Karnowski
Minnesota’s first-in-the nation ban on soaps containing the once ubiquitous germ-killer triclosan takes effect Jan. 1, but the people who spearheaded the law say it’s already having its desired effect on a national level.
The federal government caught up to Minnesota’s 2014 decision with its own ban that takes effect in September 2017. Major manufacturers have largely phased out the chemical already, with some products being marketed as triclosan-free. And it’s an example of how changes can start at a local level.
“I wanted it to change the national situation with triclosan and it certainly has contributed to that,” said state Sen. John Marty, an author of Minnesota’s ban.
Triclosan once was widely used in anti-bacterial soaps, deodorants and even toothpaste. But studies began to show it could disrupt sex and thyroid hormones and other bodily functions, and scientists were concerned routine use could contribute to the development of resistant bacteria. And University of Minnesota research found that triclosan can break down into potentially harmful dioxins in lakes and rivers.
The group Friends of the Mississippi River and its allies in the Legislature, including Marty, got Gov. Mark Dayton to sign a ban in 2014 that gave the industry until Jan. 1, 2017, to comply.
In September, the FDA banned triclosan along with 18 other anti-bacterial chemicals from soaps nationwide, saying manufacturers had failed to show they were safe or more effective at killing germs than plain soap and water. However, the FDA allowed the use of some triclosan products such as Colgate Total toothpaste, saying it’s effective at preventing gingivitis.
Marty and Trevor Russell, the water program director for Friends of the Mississippi River, acknowledged they can’t take direct credit for the FDA’s action because that rulemaking process began in 1978, though it didn’t finalize the rule until after a legal battle with the Natural Resources Defense Council.
However, the Minnesota men hope their efforts helped turn opinions against the chemical and are confident the state’s ban helped prod manufacturers to accelerate a phase-out that some companies such as Procter & Gamble and Johnson & Johnson had already begun.
Most major brands are now reformulated, said Brian Sansoni, spokesman for the American Cleaning Institute, a lobbying group. Soaps containing triclosan on store shelves are likely stocks that retailers are just using up, he said.
Russell noted he recently found Dial liquid anti-bacterial hand soap at two local Wal-Marts, two supermarkets and a Walgreens.
The industry is now submitting data to the FDA on the safety and effectiveness of the three main replacements, benzalkonium chloride, benzethonium chloride and chloroxylenol.
“Consumers can continue to use these products with confidence, like they always have,” Sansoni said.
By going first, Russell said, Minnesota can identify any issues with implementing the ban and share it with the rest of the country.
The Minnesota Department of Health will remind consumers and businesses of the ban’s start.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/minnesota-beats-rest-of-country-in-banning-germ-killer/2016/12/23/801b5efe-c92d-11e6-acda-59924caa2450_story.html?utm_term=.99da5d6659e8
-
You Don’t Need to Actively Avoid BPA
Dec 23, 2016 | Slate
By Michael P. Holsapple
Those making the traditional green-bean casserole over the holidays might see a label on their can of green beans or mushroom soup that reads, “BPA-free lining.” BPA, or bisphenol A, is an industrial chemical used to make plastics and resins, which are often used in containers that store food and beverages.
Specifically, most metal food and beverage cans have a thin interior coating that contains BPA. This coating protects the can from corrosion, and as a result, prevents contamination from dissolved metals or life-threatening bacteria. We can probably all agree that nobody is hoping for a side of botulism with their holiday meal.
BPA is also an endocrine disruptive chemical (EDC), which can cause adverse health effects by interfering with how our normal hormone systems work, either by mimicking natural hormones or by altering their production or breakdown.
Some research has shown that BPA can seep into food or beverages from containers that are made with BPA. You may have seen many products touting that they are BPA-free.
As a professor in food science and human nutrition, I recognize the long-held belief that the presence of certain additives in our foods can greatly affect the safety of our foods. There is no question we need to develop the best possible scientific methods to assess whether these chemicals can cause adverse health effects.
Others and I have tried to do just that. In fact, I was co-author of a report on the outcome of a workshop where more than 240 scientists gathered in April 2013 to analyze data generated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program. These scientists came from government, industry, academia, and nonprofit organizations to collect the insights of multiple stakeholders who were involved in testing the effects of EDCs.
There is no question that we need to develop the best possible scientific methods to assess whether these chemicals can cause adverse health effects.
So, should you worry? For complex decisions such as whether to use BPA, a risk-and-benefit analysis can often shed light. In the case of BPA, the benefits are clearer than the risks.
When considering the safety of any substance, however, it is important to understand what is known as a “dose-response relationship.”
Generally speaking, this concept refers to the fact that as the dose of a potentially harmful chemical we are exposed to increases, so, too, does the severity of the harmful response. This means the relative safety of almost every substance—even water or oxygen—is a function of the dose to which we are exposed. Importantly, this also means that the mere presence of a chemical does not mean it will be harmful.
In the U.S., the Food and Drug Administration regulates food contact chemicals using a risk-based approach, which takes into account the actual exposure conditions under which a chemical causes harm. For every chemical, however harmful it may be at high doses, there becomes a dose level that is so low that there will not be a harmful response in a living organism. In the world of risk assessment, that point is called the No Observed Adverse Effect Level (NOAEL).
The FDA’s conclusion about BPA came in the fall of 2014, after it had completed a four-year review of more than 300 scientific studies. The existing NOAEL for BPA in food packaging was 0.0005 grams per kilograms of body weight, per day, which the review supported. One gram equals 0.035 ounces, so 0.0005 grams equals 0.00000175 ounces. A standard slice of bread weighs about one ounce.
Because of the uncertainty associated with BPA, the FDA added some additional conservatism to lower the “margin of exposure” by another thousandfold to 0.000005 grams per kilogram of body weight per day. The FDA considers this standard to be sufficiently protective.
The agency declared that the available information continues to support the safety of BPA for the currently approved uses in food containers and packaging. The FDA, however, did amend its regulations to prohibit the use of BPA-based materials in baby bottles, sippy cups, and infant formula packaging.
The importance of the FDA integrating the additional conservatism into a safe “margin of exposure” was reinforced in some recent scientific publications, which highlighted the possibility for unusual effects at low doses of BPA.
Given the uncertainty of the current scientific debate, several leading scientific organizations in the U.S. have launched a research program to study the effects of BPA on all of the potential target organs associated with suspected sensitivity to this chemical.
The study will involve 12 academic investigators with the necessary experience to study the effects of BPA, and the core part of this study is being done at the FDA National Center for Toxicological Research according to the most rigorous study guidelines. The CLARITY-BPA (Consortium Linking Academic and Regulatory Insights on BPA Toxicity) Study will provide the most robust assessment and hopefully greater “clarity” about the toxicity associated with BPA, including the possibility for unusual effects at low doses of BPA.
Hundreds of scientific papers have been written to address the potential impacts of EDCs, including BPA. Because the studies vary greatly in their findings, and because key results have proven difficult to consistently reproduce, there is still uncertainty about the impacts of EDCs.
OK, I know what you’re thinking. If the scientists can’t agree, and the CLARITY-BPA study is still underway, why shouldn’t we just take steps to eliminate the presence of all EDCs in our environment, including BPA?
That’s a good question, but there are some important considerations.
First, as noted above, BPA has played a very important role in food safety as a lining in canned goods—think about protection against heavy metal contamination and against microbial contamination (e.g., botulism). Second, replacing BPA can be complicated. Although concerns have been raised about the use of BPA, there is no question that it has been extensively studied—in fact, it is one of the most studied chemicals.
As noted in a recent report, “BPA-based epoxy is being replaced with ‘regrettable substitutions’ in that there is very little data in the published scientific literature for BPA replacements, and the data is not publicly available from the FDA.” The safety profile of BPA is known. We know very little about the safety for these substitutes.
Finally, let’s look at an actual report that tested products for the presence of BPA from grocery store outlets in four states. As only a single number was provided for each product in each state, I decided to use the highest amount of BPA for three products that was reported in parts per billion (ppb): cream of mushroom soup—83 ppb; green beans—18 ppb; and turkey gravy—125 ppb. To put “ppb” into context, think 1 inch in 16 miles, or one minute in two years.
Based on the conservative “margin of exposure” determined by the FDA, as highlighted above, and on the levels of BPA reported above, a 70 kg person, or about 154 pounds, would have to consume over 14 cans of cream of mushroom soup, or over 64 cans of green beans per day, or over nine cans of turkey gravy per day to be vulnerable to adverse health effects associated with exposure to BPA.
In short, you are far more likely to experience potential adverse health consequences by failing to eat in moderation than you are by consuming the extremely small concentrations of BPA found in canned foods.
This story was originally published on the Conversation and is republished here with permission.
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2016/12/bpa_s_protections_still_outweigh_the_risks.html
-
Dec 23, 2016 | Epoch Times
By Conan Milner
Glyphosate is by far the most heavily used chemical weed killer in human history. It’s so pervasive, it’s difficult to avoid ingesting it on a daily basis. Researchers have found glyphosate residue in food, tap water, rainwater, and rivers, and in urine and breast milk.
The herbicide is best known as the main ingredient in Monsanto’s RoundUp, but other chemical companies now manufacture glyphosate to meet the demand of American agriculture. Agricultural use of glyphosate in the United States grew from 27.5 million pounds in 1995, to nearly 250 million pounds in 2014, according to a February report in Environmental Sciences Europe.
A new report by Food Democracy Now in collaboration with the Detox Project explores the levels of this herbicide found in 29 of America’s favorite processed foods, including cereals, crackers, cookies, and corn chips.
The Need for Testing
The Food Democracy Now report is significant because up to now, little attention has been paid to how much glyphosate we consume.
In 2014, the Government Accountability Office, a congressional watchdog agency, called on federal food regulators to examine glyphosate’s lingering presence in the food supply.
Although the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had been testing for levels of various pesticides for years, they had never tested for glyphosate, possibly because they considered it safe. In February 2016, the agency announced that it would start testing for glyphosate levels in cereals, vegetables, milk, and eggs.
However, in November 2016, the FDA decided to shelve the project indefinitely, due to disagreements over testing methodology. But the agency said none of the products they had tested thus far had demonstrated levels that warranted any concern.
Some of the available data on glyphosate levels in food comes from Narong Chamkasem, a senior chemist at the FDA, who recently released some results from his independent work examining honey. He found glyphosate in all 10 samples he tested, and some samples had concentrations more than double the 50 parts per billion (ppb) allowed by the European Union (the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency [EPA] has no standards for glyphosate in honey).
Food Democracy Now’s report sheds a little more light on how much glyphosate we might be consuming every day. The analysis was performed by Anresco Laboratories in San Francisco, an FDA-registered facility that has performed food safety testing since 1943. Of the 29 products they tested, glyphosate levels ranged from eight ppb to over 1,100 ppb.
Considering that the EPA allows up to 700 ppb of glyphosate in drinking water, most of the foods analyzed in the report show little cause for official alarm in the United States. But some research suggests the chemical may still be dangerous to our health in amounts smaller than regulators permit.
For example, a two-year study on rats published in 2015 found that just .05 ppb of glyphosate changed the function of more than 4,000 genes.
GMO-Free, Yet High in Glyphosate
According to conventional wisdom, organic food is believed to contain the least amount of glyphosate, because the chemical is not allowed to be used in organic production. Conventionally grown foods that do not contain genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are typically considered to be the next best option, while foods containing GMOs (especially those rich in genetically engineered corn or soy) are believed to have the most glyphosate, because heavy use of the chemical is a big part of what makes bioengineered crops successful.
But the data from the Food Democracy Now report tells a different story.
In response to the public push to label foods that contain genetically engineered ingredients, Cheerios went GMO-free in 2014. In a statement, the company explained that the small amount of corn starch they use in the Cheerios formula no longer comes from a bioengineered source, and their sugar now comes from cane rather than genetically engineered sugar beets.
Yet Cheerios scored the highest amount of glyphosate in the Food Democracy Now analysis—1125.3 ppb. Third-highest was Honey Nut Cheerios, which scored 670.2 ppb, behind Stacy’s Simply Naked Pita Chips by Frito-Lay (a non-GMO certified product), which scored 812.53 ppb.
The report points to the practice of pre-harvest spraying as evidence for Cheerios’ high score. The main ingredient of the iconic breakfast cereal is oats, and while oats are not genetically engineered, crops may be sprayed with glyphosate just before harvesting—another patented use for this ubiquitous chemical.
It’s not just oats. Growers of wheat, flax, and other non-GMO crops may also give their fields a spritz of glyphosate a few days before harvesting. This practice not only controls weeds for the next season, but it also prevents mildew, allowing the grain to dry evenly and within a time frame most convenient for the farmer.
Pre-harvest spraying is especially useful to farmers in cooler climates, allowing them to make the most of a short growing season. However, if too much of an antibacterial herbicide ends up on the food, the process could be more of a curse than a blessing.
“When I talked to European scientists about the levels we found, they were shocked,” said Dave Murphy, founder and executive director of Food Democracy Now. “They couldn’t believe the American government would allow it and that the people would stand for it.”
Organic Is Not the Lowest
Glyphosate use in the United States increased sixteenfold between 1987 and 2007, and today traces of the chemical are found far from the farm. It is so widespread that unless you live in a bubble and grow your own food, it’s impossible to avoid the chemical completely.
Its meteoric rise owes to the proliferation of crops engineered to resist it. According to data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), 93 percent of all soybeans and 89 percent of corn planted by farmers in the United States are genetically engineered to be herbicide-tolerant, as are much of the nation’s cotton, canola, and sugar beet crops. When plants are altered to tolerate glyphosate, the trait allows farmers to use multiple applications of the weed killer throughout the season without harming crops.
Since GMOs do not have to be labeled in the United States, we don’t know for sure which products contain genetically engineered ingredients. However, it stands to reason that any corn- or soy-based snack not labeled “organic” or “GMO-free” probably comes from glyphosate-resistant crops.
A likely suspect is Cool Ranch Doritos, which scored 481.27 ppb. However, others from this suspect category don’t rank very high. Kellogg’s Corn Flakes, for example, scored 78.9 ppb, and its sugar-laden cousin Frosted Flakes scored 72.8 ppb.
Two organic products evaluated in the report ranked at the lower end of the scale, but neither of them were on the top-five list of products found to contain the least glyphosate. Kashi Organic Promise cereal scored 24.9 ppb, while Whole Foods 365 Organic Golden Round Crackers scored 119.12 ppb.
Is It Safe?
In 2015, the World Health Organization’s (WHO) cancer research agency IARC declared that glyphosate “probably” causes cancer, citing “limited evidence” that the herbicide may cause non-Hodgkin lymphoma in humans and “convincing evidence” that it causes cancer in laboratory animals.
The EPA came to a similar conclusion over 30 years ago, but reversed its decision in 1991 due to not having enough evidence, just as bioengineered crops were first being planted in American fields.
The WHO seemed to backtrack on some of its cancer claims earlier this year. In a May 2016 meeting discussing the impact of pesticide residues, a panel of experts from the United Nations and WHO concluded that “glyphosate is unlikely to pose a carcinogenic risk to humans from exposure through the diet.”
The EPA is also still trying to work out the safety question. On Dec. 13 to 16, the agency held a web meeting, open to reporters, where a diverse panel of experts gathered to decipher what the research picture reveals about glyphosate’s carcinogenic potential. A spokesperson for the EPA said the agency’s new risk assessment of glyphosate will be available to the public in spring 2017.
Monsanto Co. says it has no doubt that glyphosate is safe and routinely dismisses any arguments that say otherwise. In a statement, the agrochemical giant accused IARC of overlooking “decades of thorough and science-based analysis by regulatory agencies around the world and selectively interpreted data to arrive at its classification of glyphosate.”
“No regulatory agency in the world considers glyphosate to be a carcinogen,” Monsanto stated.
Monsanto and regulators claim that glyphosate is safe for humans based on the fact that the chemical functions differently than conventional herbicides. Glyphosate’s plant-killing ability works by shutting down something called the shikimate pathway. Since the shikimate pathway is a feature found in plant cells but not human cells, there is theoretically nothing for people to worry about.
But the key piece missing from the official safety story is that the shikimate pathway is also found in bacteria. Emerging science is showing that much of our health depends on the proper balance of bacterial colonies in our microbiome, and some researchers suggest that consumption of foods containing even small amounts of glyphosate may cause significant harm over time.
According to Murphy, it isn’t just speculation that glyphosate is an antibiotic—that’s one of its patented uses.
“This means it also kills the human microbiome. It alters your stomach’s microflora, and it exposes you to disease,” Murphy said.
An Antibiotic Herbicide
Glyphosate’s antimicrobial patent was granted in 2010, and the industry has proposed it as a possible treatment for microbial infections. But constant consumption may have negative side effects. A 2013 study found that glyphosate at concentrations of .075 parts per million kills beneficial gut flora in chickens.
http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/2190679-glyphosate-for-breakfast/
-
New Substances Listed as Hazardous by EU, Require New Labeling
Dec 26, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Stephen Gardner
Twenty-six hazardous chemicals would be subject to restrictions under the European Union's REACH law, according to a draft regulation the European Commission issued Dec. 22 in line with the World Trade Organization's Technical Barriers to Trade Agreement.
The chemicals recently had their classifications changed so that they are considered to be carcinogenic, mutagenic or reprotoxic (CMR) category 1A or 1B in the EU. Under this designation, the chemicals become subject to certain restrictions that apply to all category 1A and 1B CMRs under REACH (Regulation No. 1907/2006 on the registration, evaluation and authorization of chemicals).
The draft regulation would list the 26 chemicals in Annex XVII of REACH. The listing would specify concentration limits for some of the substances. It would clarify that they are required to carry certain hazard labels and should be used in general for professional purposes only, though exceptions or exemptions are allowed, such as in medicines or cosmetics in line with applicable laws.
Among the chemicals is bisphenol A, which is widely used in the manufacture of polycarbonate plastics and in other applications such as tin can linings and thermal paper. A move for bisphenol A from Category 2 to Category 1B for reproductive toxicity was approved in February.
Bisphenol A is also a suspected endocrine disruptor. In a separate exercise, it is set to be listed in January as a substance of very high concern under REACH. In addition, under a separate REACH restriction, published in the EU Official Journal Dec. 13, bisphenol A will be restricted in thermal paper to a concentration of no more than 0.02 percent by weight as of Jan. 2, 2022.
The draft regulation would add the following chemicals to REACH Annex XVII:
• ,2-benzenedicarboxylic acid, dihexyl ester, branched and linear;
• 1,2-dichloropropane;
• 3,7-dimethylocta-2,6-dienenitrile;
• bisphenol A;
• brodifacoum (ISO);
• bromadiolone (ISO);
• chlorophacinone (ISO);
• coumatetralyl (ISO);
• dicyclohexyl phthalate;
• difenacoum (ISO);
• difethialone;
• disodium octaborate anhydrous;
• e-glass microfibers of representative composition;
• flocoumafen (ISO);
• gallium arsenide;
• lead powder and lead massive;
• phenol, dodecyl-, branched;
• perfluorononan-1-oic acid, and its sodium and ammonium salts;
• phenol, 2-dodecyl-, branched;
• phenol, 3-dodecyl-, branched;
• phenol, 4-dodecyl-, branched;
• phenol, (tetrapropenyl) derivatives;
• tetrahydro-2-furyl-methanol;
• tributyltin compounds;
• triflumizole (ISO);
• and warfarin (ISO).
The commission, the EU's executive, said under the Technical Barriers to Trade Agreement, WTO members could submit comments on the draft regulation on the CMRs through Feb. 21, 2017.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=102466993&vname=dennotallissues&fn=102466993&jd=102466993
-
Trump’s Fossil-Friendly, Pro-Business Team Ready to Take Reins
Dec 23, 2016 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Carolyn Davis
Donald Trump may face a fight in Congress during the confirmation process for some of his Cabinet picks, with bipartisan concerns about ExxonMobil Corp. CEO Rex Tillerson, his unorthodox choice to become secretary of state.
However, the global wheeler dealer, who has expanded the reach of the world's biggest Big Oil company, may prove more adept at the "art of the deal" than Trump ever could have imagined, while the overall regulatory regime of the incoming administration becomes more business friendly.
That's the thinking of Tudor, Pickering, Holt & Co.'s (TPH) Dave Pursell, head of macro research. He discussed the incoming administration during a wide-ranging interview with NGI. Until now, the real estate tycoon has proffered few detailed policies, with many drawing their insight based on the company he plans to keep in his cabinet and as advisers.
"Trump is a bit of an empty vessel," Pursell said. "He doesn't have a policy for 'X, Y and Z.' So, who he surrounds himself with is probably more important than any president in my lifetime. It's why there's so much focus on everybody who gets on the elevator at Trump Tower."
All things considered, Trump's energy team is "predominantly fossil-friendly, pro-business and ideologically aligned with a deregulatory agenda," said ClearView Energy Partners LLC Managing Director Christi Tezak. "To the extent that Trump’s selection of executives and military leaders reflects presidential willingness to decentralize decisionmaking, the Trump administration may also prove well positioned to swiftly initiate rollbacks and revisions of President Obama's energy and environmental policy legacy."
Tillerson 'Intriguing' Pick
The choice to run State was a surprise, one that Pursell is feeling more comfortable about all the time.
"When Tillerson's name was mentioned, my first reaction was 'wow, that’s actually pretty interesting. Way better than Romney.' Romney was governor of Massachusetts. Tillerson's been negotiating in competitivenegotiations with the kind of countries that aren't on many people's bucket lists of places to go visit.
"And he's not just negotiating with a country," because ExxonMobil also has to be competitive in its dealmaking, "because it’s not just Exxon. It's BP and Shell and Total and Statoil and Chevron. So you've got to be competitive. The only thing Tillerson has is a balance sheet and the ability to execute, and, quite frankly, Exxon's integrity -- that they do what they say they're going to do. Once you negotiate with a country, you have to follow through with what you said," or there aren't any more deals.
The career ExxonMobil executive would be able to "negotiate with the full force of the United States, and by that I mean the United States dollar, the United States economy, the United States military...He's going to be a very effective negotiator."
The real question becomes, what is the policy? Tillerson won't set policy. Trump sets the policy and Tillerson would implement it.
"I think he's an intriguing selection," Pursell said. "And it's hugely controversial because he's Big Oil and he's Exxon, buddies with Russia's Vladimir Putin."
The brouhaha over Tillerson's relationship with Putin, which goes back years, is overblown, said the TPH executive. "Look, you're not going to have a big contract in Russia if you haven't thrown back a couple vodkas with Putin. I've worked in Russia. That's the way it is. That doesn’t make him a bad guy."
Besides, Tillerson "is smarter than everybody on Capitol Hill," Pursell said. "There’s no question. And he's going to intimidate those guys because he's smarter than they are." Few people can "hold a candle to this guy."
At ExxonMobil's annual meetings, Tillerson has had to contend with some shareholders who express their anger about how the company is run. Often, more than one shareholder will shout questions and concerns at the CEO, whether it's about the threat of climate change or a perceived lack of transparency by the company. Tillerson has never taken the bait, instead attempting to reassure the critics. That calm but forceful demeanor should come in handy as the top U.S. diplomat, Pursell said.
In any situation, whether with the president-elect's Cabinet or with world leaders, Tillerson will be the "adult in the room," Pursell said. He likely won't react imprudently or aggressively, but be methodical about what he wants to say and what he intends to do.
Tillerson actually could be the "best bet on climate" of anyone within the Trump administration, according to Obama official Jonathan Pershing, U.S. Special Envoy for Climate Change. He discussed the pick recently at the University of California, Berkeley.
"I myself would not have picked an oil exec as my head of the State Department, but having said that, he may be a person who can generate something real," Pershing said. Although Pershing has never worked as an oil industry executive, "I spent five years working on oil and gas in Alaska. So you can get good people doing climate change out of the oil industry."
Tillerson's nomination could indicate more backing by the incoming administration for diplomatic engagement overseas than the "isolationist overtones of his campaign initially suggested," Tezak said. "Our description of international supermajors may seem flippant, but the geographic dispersion of large-scale hydrocarbon resources requires integrated oil company executives to negotiate significant and long-term capital commitments with sovereigns in far-flung capitals."
Diplomacy thus is a "core competency, not just for risk management reasons, but also because oil company executives must variously compete with and partner with investor-owned and state-controlled enterprises from all over the world," she said. Most oil company executives, including Tillerson, "tend to favor, rather than shun, multilateral institutions that contribute to geopolitical stability and facilitate trade."
Based on his views to date, Tillerson might not push any climate change views, but if he makes it through the confirmation process, "his institutionalist pragmatism could potentially soften Trump’s campaign-era rhetoric" regarding, among other things, the United Nations Paris agreement.
Looser Regulatory Grip Forecast
Campaign promises to loosen the regulatory grip on industry are likely to be kept, after heavier oversight by the Department of Interior and Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) since President Obama took office eight years ago.
"As an analyst, what do I care about?" Pursell asked. "Do they take some of the teeth out of the EPA? Everybody worries about the Secretary of Energy," which is to be run by former Texas Gov. Rick Perry. "But actually, the Secretary of the Interior and head of the EPA matter way more," Pursell said.
For example, the EPA during Obama's tenure has used the Endangered Species Act (ESA) "as an impediment to development. Using the ESA creates an extra-high hurdle for all environmental impact statements. So, we might see a more common sense regulatory approach." EPA foe Scott Pruitt, Oklahoma attorney general, was picked to run the agency.
ClearView's Tezak expects Pruitt as "more likely to change the pace, rather than the direction, of federal environmental policy, which tends to be a one-way ratchet." ClearView's team regards EPA as a "limiting," i.e. restrictive agency rather than business-friendly.
"From what we understand, most of the EPA’s 15,000 employees signed up for its mission of protecting public health and welfare; we suspect that very few of them joined the EPA with the goal of facilitating drilling and mining," Tezak said. "For this reason, some career staff who are nearing retirement age may head for the exits. We don’t expect junior staff to follow suit just yet, although we would anticipate more significant turnover if Trump were to win a second term in 2020."
The current EPA regime, has "felt like, at least to some, that the EPA was blocking everything, and in that case you're guilty until proven innocent as developer," Pursell said. "Our sense is there's a lot that the EPA can do, the way they manage the current laws on the books. With Trump's election, in our view, that's a positive for pipeline developments, for oil and gas development potentially."
The Interior pick, Rep. Ryan Zinke (R-MT), has voiced opposition to some energy regulations, criticizing the final rule by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) -- which he would oversee -- to reduce natural gas venting and flaring.
"Could BLM expedite permits or at least not slow play permits on federal land?," Pursell asked. "We think that's more of a Rocky Mountain, Powder River Basin issue. The answer there is probably 'yes.'"
Pipeline Permitting to Improve?
Tweaking regulations to improve natural gas supply may not move the needle from a macro standpoint. But expediting pipeline permits in the Permian Basin and Oklahoma's stacked reservoirs, would be "the real development areas that we care about," Pursell said. "Pipelines inevitably will be needed to get that oil and gas to market. Is that going to be easier or harder? I think it is going to be easier to do that" under a Trump administration.
Trump's appointments to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission may alter the path of pipeline and liquefied natural gas (LNG) facility approvals, Tezak said. Approvals "could speed up a bit," while the Commission's "generally enabling approach to natural gas pipeline permitting" is unlikely to change. However, "increasingly aggressive environmental opposition requires FERC to prepare increasingly detailed (and more time-consuming) environmental reviews. FERC may choose to tighten up its current permissive approach to late interventions by green-leaning groups and move more quickly between the conclusion of its environmental reviews and its final orders."
As far as LNG permitting, an Energy Department under Perry could adopt a "just say yes" process that could delay or eliminate the Obama administration's protocols.
With Zinke running Interior, the agenda could include a rewriting of the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management's Five Year Program for offshore oil and gas leasing; the resumption of regular oil, gas and coal lease sales by the Bureau of Land Management; oversight of wildlife protections under the ESA; and lifting Obama’s moratorium on western coal leasing.
"You could have a regulatory framework that doesn't have as much teeth in it," Pursell said. "Fewer or less onerous regulations could streamline that process. The protesters are not going away. They've found a way to win, if 'win' means they sit in their commune and have no energy and they grow hemp and make clothes out of it and smoke what’s not turned into clothes," Pursell said jokingly. "But if going back to 1812 is victory, then, that's what they're doing..."
The protesters "have been emboldened. So the question is, ‘can the administration take some of the edges off the playbook or remove a couple of plays out of the Environmental Protection Agency's playbook?’"
Trump also campaigned to rewrite the corporate tax code. His pre-election economic plans also included a special one-off tax holiday that would allow U.S. corporations to repatriate funds held overseas with a 10% payment, versus the current 35% rate.
"That may be less important because the oil and gas companies never actually make cash flow," Pursell said. "But some of them do. If you repatriate the cash, are there stipulations that it has to be redeployed?" If that were the case, that would mean "more plants and capital" and potentially more mergers and acquisitions.
"One of the stipulations around that repatriation of cash, I suspect, is there will be some incentives not to leave it on balance sheets. We'll see how that goes."
No Coal in Stockings
At least one campaign promise, to bring back coal mining jobs, isn't going to fly, Pursell said. It's unlikely that more coal-fired power plants will be built, even though Trump promised to put laid off coal miners back to work.
"Nobody's going to build a coal plant," the TPH executive said. "My tag line is, 'the invisible hand of the market is greener than EPA. Cheap natural gas prices have taken more coal-fired power plants out of the market than the EPA and Greenpeace combined. Cheap gas makes power cheap. It makes no sense to really lean into it and build a whole new batch of coal-fired power plants in a world where they probably can't compete competitively."
Pursell expects that comment will prompt telephone calls from people who run coal-fired power plants. But he stands by the statement.
"Could there be a few coal-fired power plants built here and there? Maybe. But it's not going to be like the wave of combined-cycle gas plants that were built 15 years ago. We would argue those plants are still woefully underutilized. You don't need a whole lot of new plants unless you've got grid congestion issues or whatever. But gas continues to take shares of coal and alternatives as well."
Energy attorneys at LeClairRyan are skeptical about Trump's plans to expand oil and natural gas drilling, while putting coal miners back to work. James P. Guy II, head of the firm's energy industry team, discussed the election's implications with Gwen E. Richard, Roy M. Palk and John A. McKinsey.
"While the Obama administration's anti-coal strategies burdened coal production and consumption, the coup de grace was delivered by plentiful, low-priced gas," Guy and his team said. "The long planning horizon for the development of electric generation infrastructure makes generators cautious. Even a four-year guarantee of coal-friendly policies, with the possibility of a four-year extension, may not be enough incentive for multibillion-dollar investments in power stations that are built to operate for 40 years or more."
The incoming president's 100-day action plan "is a healthy mix of gimme, doable and stretch goals," Guy said. Renewable energy subsidies and valuations likely will decline at the federal level, while coal may "return to growth mode, especially in the western region of the U.S., where extraction costs are less and supply is more plentiful, with a chance of new coal power plant construction."
Oil and gas pipeline projects "will thrive," with one of the first beneficiaries possibly full approval of the controversial Keystone XL pipeline to carry heavy oil from Canada to the Gulf Coast. "Transmission line and other infrastructure investment may benefit significantly as it is one of the few points of agreement across the aisle in Washington."
Supply and Demand Trump Election
Overall, Pursell is feeling positive about the state of the energy industry going forward. And it has nothing at all to do with Trump.
"I'm optimistic, and it's independent of who's in the Oval Office," he said. "At the end of the day, a friend of mine in Canada said, 'you guys in America, it doesn't matter who's in the Oval Office. You are bigger than whoever occupies it for four years.; I kind of agree with that. I'm optimistic because supply and demand fundamentals are tightening," and the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries are "going to execute, and prices are going to go higher next year.
"Do less regulations match my libertarian sensibilities? Yeah, it makes me feel better. But it's a secondary reason to be optimistic. It's supply and demand fundamentals."
One worry is what Trump's team does about trade, which could be a big negative if he were to attempt to renegotiate or pull out of global agreements.
"What oil and gas guys worry about is the economy," Pursell said. "If Trump does something on trade that is massively negative, then that hurts global demand. We're just not going to know until he gets settled in. I don’t know how to assess that. Quite frankly, I don't think that we know what his policies are going to be. The trade part of this is probably the most troubling. Because if you go too far, then you have trade wars and that could create economic paralysis."
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/108845-trumps-fossil-friendly-pro-business-team-ready-to-take-reins
-
There's Profit in Destroying Things the Shale Boom Left Behind
Dec 26, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Jim Polson
When business is bad for the coal industry, it's good for Mark Loizeaux.
Loizeaux took over his father's demolition company 40 years ago and he has never seen boom times like today, knocking down so many power plants.
“Fully 70 percent of the projects we have under contract, pending or are bidding, are power plants,” he said. “It's unheard of.”
Cheap natural gas from shale has put a mountain-size dent in coal-power generation, and many nuclear stations are coming to the end of their lives. More than 430 U.S. plants, 160 of them coal-burners, have been retired during the past two years and at least two dozen more are slated for closing through 2018, according to data from the Energy Information Administration.
While there is buzz that the coal industry can rebound with the help of the new Trump administration, these plants were closed, or tagged for retirement, long ago. Annual U.S. coal production is at its lowest since at least 1986, and that means more work for companies that remove the generators, sell the scrap, and make it possible that a new plant, new industry or new park can be built in their places. The work is mostly done by small, closely held companies that have been doing it for years.
Knockdown Projects
“We're moving into the decade of coal-fired powerhouse demolitions,” said Patrick Wurtzel, vice president of operations for Bierlein Cos., based in Midland, Mich. Power plants account for half the company's knockdown projects, up from about five percent a decade ago, he said.
Demolitions are going on across the U.S., and can run from a few hundred thousand dollars into tens of millions, according to regulatory filings. Removal of Xcel Energy Inc.’s 1,067-megawatt Tolk coal-burning plant in Texas will cost about $35.8 million, according to an estimate provided to Texas regulators in a 2014 rate case.
Nuclear power plants, too, provide opportunities for demolition companies. Five U.S. nuclear stations have shuttered in the past five years with three more slated to close by 2019.
Radioactivity makes decommissioning of nuclear plants more expensive. Duke Energy Corp. in 2013 estimated a cost of $1.18 billion to remove its Crystal River Nuclear Plant in Florida. Decommissioning CMS Energy Corp.’s smaller Big Rock Point nuclear plant in Michigan cost about $390 million, according to the American Nuclear Society.
Three Years
Demolishing one large power plant can take three years, said Ron Froh, chief executive officer of Commercial Liability Partners LLC, which buys plants and hires contractors to clear the site for resale.
“They're good for redevelopment,” Froh said. Cleared sites often have a high-voltage grid, are close to water and could have rail or barge access, he said.
Knockdown companies frequently have colorful origin stories. Loizeaux's Phoenix, Md.-based Controlled Demolition Inc. started when his father, a forester, was awarded contracts to remove shade trees in the city of Baltimore infected by Dutch Elm disease. Blasting the stumps expanded into blasting rock. In 1947, he was asked to take down a chimney.
Fall That Way
“He thought, ‘Well, it's not much different than a tree. If I could make a notch in the bottom, I could make it fall that way,’” said Loizeaux, who started working summers and weekends in the business when he was six.
David Griffin Jr., president of Greensboro, N.C.-based D.H. Griffin Cos., said his firm started when his parents tore down a church, salvaging the lumber to build their first home in 1959. The company now employs more than 1,000 people.
Like other demolition companies, Griffin bases his bids, to a degree, on the price of scrap.
“If you look at a 15-year snapshot: In 2000, scrap was $75 a ton,” he said. “In 2008, scrap was $525 a ton and today, scrap's $225 a ton. That's a pretty wild 15-year ride.”
Loizeaux used to scour sites for Admiralty brass, which is mostly copper and zinc and cupronickel, a silvery corrosion-resistant alloy used in coins, boats and older power plants.
“Those are the goodies you want to see,” Loizeaux said.
Hazardous Materials
The discards are often hazardous materials: asbestos, PCBs in transformers, lead paint and spilled chemicals. When Bierlein tore apart the Big Rock Point nuclear power plant near Charlevoix, Michigan, everything went to a radioactive disposal site, Wurtzel said.
“The biggest challenge is always going to be environmental remediation,” Loizeaux said.
The iconic wrecking ball, celebrated by singers from Bruce Springsteen to Miley Cyrus, is obsolete, Griffin said. Engineers now use excavators that can reach 130 feet (40 meters) to pull down tons of steel or concrete with a swipe, or they employ carefully orchestrated explosions.
Nuclear plants, with their special dangers, are always more complicated. Although federal rules allow empty reactors to sit half a century while radioactivity ebbs, Entergy Corp. in November proposed handing over its Vermont Yankee reactor, along with its decommissioning fund of about $600 million, to N.Y.-based NorthStar Group Services Inc. The company plans to begin dismantling the plant in 2021 and market the site for redevelopment.
French reactor maker Areva SA will dismantle the reactor first, reducing radioactivity in the plant by 90 percent, said Scott State, NorthStar's CEO. The plan is subject to state and federal approval.
Cool Challenges
“There are cool technical challenges in each of these projects,” says Mark Fallon, CEO of Envirocon Inc., a Missoula, Mont.-based general contractor that's decommissioned chemical weapons sites and uranium plants. “You're working with a capable and intrepid group of people.”
Fallon prepares a bid by estimating the cost of the task and adjusting for “stuff you throw away and stuff you might be able to sell.” A bid on a big coal-burning plant can take a half dozen people two weeks to a month, he said.
For Loizeaux's Controlled Demolition, which had several chimneys to take down this month, the payoff is swift.
“My brother before he retired used to say, ‘You know very quickly if you've done a good job,’” he said. “‘In a matter of seconds.’”
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=102466981&vname=dennotallissues&fn=102466981&jd=102466981
-
Direct Employment in Natural Gas Development Declines by One-Third in Pennsylvania
Dec 23, 2016 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Charlie Passut
Jobs in Pennsylvania directly tied to natural gas development declined by about one-third in the second quarter, according to data from the state Department of Labor and Industry (DLI).
In a Marcellus Shale update released Thursday, DLI reported that direct employment in natural gas development totaled 19,623 in 2Q2016. The agency added that over the last nine years, with the boom in Marcellus development, direct employment in the sector grew to the current total after starting the period at 9,017 jobs -- an increase of 10,606 jobs overall.
"This increase in direct employment led to an additional estimated 6,284 jobs at suppliers and 9,839 jobs at companies that provide goods and services to the industry's employees," DLI said. The agency added that 52,531 people were employed in either natural gas extraction development, by suppliers to the industry, or at ancillary companies that provide goods and services to industry employees.
But according to StateImpact Pennsylvania, DLI data showed direct employment in the sector totaled 28,926 in 2Q2015, and there were 72,675 jobs in related industries. That means direct jobs and related jobs declines by rates of 32.1% and 27.7%, respectively.
DLI said it calculated the latest employment figures using data from six data classifications at the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics -- specifically, the North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes for cured petroleum and natural gas extraction (NAICS 211111), natural gas liquid extraction (21112), drilling oil and gas wells (213111), support activities for oil and gas operations (213112), oil and gas pipeline and related structures construction (237120) and pipeline transportation of natural gas (486210). The state agency said it also used IMPLAN, a macroeconomic model that estimates the economic and fiscal effects of investments.
"This new methodology replaces the previous one published in the Marcellus Shale Fast Facts, which sought to track employment change over time through the use of the six core industries and an additional 29 ancillary industries considered to be related to Marcellus Shale activity," DLI said.
"While the majority of Marcellus Shale related employment was found in these core and ancillary industries, not all establishments in these industries were involved in Marcellus Shale, which led to an over estimation of actual Marcellus Shale activity employment levels."
DLI said that under the previous methodology, all workers involved with highway construction, steel mills and coal-fired electric power plants, as well as those classified as truck drivers and sewage treatment plant operators, were included in the Marcellus Shale job figures.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/108847-direct-employment-in-natural-gas-development-declines-by-one-third-in-pennsylvania
-
Pipeline Uncertainty Illustrates Broader Concerns for Tribes
Dec 25, 2016 | AP (In The Washington Post)
By Mary Hudetz
For hundreds of protesters, it was cause to cheer when the Obama administration this month declined to issue an easement for the Dakota Access pipeline’s final segment. But that elation was dampened by the uncertainty of what comes next: a Donald Trump-led White House that might be far less attuned to issues affecting Native Americans.
“With Trump coming into office, you just can’t celebrate,” said Laundi Germaine Keepseagle, who is 28 and from the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation, where the demonstrators have been camped out near the North Dakota-South Dakota border.
Anxiety over the 1,200-mile pipeline illustrates a broader uncertainty over how tribes will fare under Trump following what many in Indian Country consider a landmark eight years.
President Barack Obama has won accolades among Native Americans for breaking through a gridlock of inaction on tribal issues and for putting a spotlight on their concerns with yearly meetings with tribal leaders.
Under his administration, lawmakers cemented a tribal health care law that includes more preventive care and mental health resources and addresses recruiting and retaining physicians throughout Indian Country.
The Interior Department restored tribal homelands by placing more than 500,000 acres under tribes’ control — more than any other recent administration — while the Justice Department charted a process approved by Congress for tribes to prosecute and sentence more cases involving non-Native Americans who assault Native American women. Before Obama, a gap in the laws allowed for such crimes to go unpunished.
In addition, the federal government settled decades-old lawsuits involving Native Americans, including class-action cases over the government’s mismanagement of royalties for oil, gas, timber and grazing leases and its discrimination against tribal members seeking farm loans.
“In my opinion, President Obama has been the greatest president in dealing with Native Americans,” said Brian Cladoosby, chairman of the Swinomish Tribe north of Seattle and president of the nonpartisan National Congress of American Indians, based in Washington, D.C. “The last eight years give us hope going forward with the relationships we have on both sides of the aisle.”
Trump, meanwhile, rarely acknowledged Native Americans during his campaign and hasn’t publicly outlined how he would improve or manage the United States’ longstanding relationships with tribes.
His Interior secretary pick, Republican Rep. Ryan Zinke of Montana, sponsored legislation that he says would have given tribes more control over coal and other fossil fuel development on their lands.
But some of Trump’s biggest campaign pledges — including repealing health care legislation and building a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border — would collide with tribal interests.
In Arizona, Tohono O’odham Nation leaders have vowed to oppose any plans for a wall along the 75-mile portion of the border that runs parallel to their reservation. And the nonprofit National Indian Health Board in Washington says it’s aiming to work with lawmakers to ensure the Indian Health Care Improvement Act remains intact.
The law, which guarantees funding for care through the federal Indian Health Services agency, was embedded in Obama’s health care overhaul after consultation with tribes.
The government’s role figures prominently in Native Americans’ daily lives because treaties and other binding agreements often require the U.S. to manage tribal health care, law enforcement and education.
Some tribal members say they’re unsure how much Trump understands or cares about their unique relationship with the federal government.
“I think there was a great hope that we had here in Indian Country with the direct dialogue that President Obama had established with tribal nations,” said Duane “Chili” Yazzie, president of the Navajo Nation’s Shiprock Chapter. “If a similar effort to communicate with us were carried on by the Trump administration, I would be surprised.”
Though most reservations lean Democratic in presidential elections, Trump does have some supporters in Indian Country. They hope the businessman can turn around lagging economies in rural reservations, such as the 27,000-square-mile Navajo Nation, which covers parts of Utah, New Mexico and Arizona.
“Trump is pro-job growth, and tribes need a healthy dose of business creation,” said Deswood Tome, a former spokesman for the tribe from Window Rock, Arizona. “To do that, a lot of federal barriers must be removed. We’re the only ethnic group who have so much federal control in our lives.”
The Dakota Access pipeline illustrates another chasm between Obama and Trump.
This fall, the pipeline dispute led Obama’s administration to begin tackling a final piece of its Indian Country agenda: guidelines for how cabinet departments should consult with tribes on major infrastructure projects.
A top complaint from the Standing Rock Sioux was that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers failed to properly consult with them before initially approving a pipeline route that ran beneath Lake Oahe, the tribe’s primary source of drinking water.
After the administration halted construction on the project in September to review the complaint, it held seven meetings with tribal leaders and began drafting a report on how federal officials should consult with tribes.
U.S. Interior Secretary Sally Jewell said the report will be completed before Obama leaves office, and she expects it to have a lasting impact, even with an incoming administration that promises to undo some of the president’s policies.
What’s unclear is whether Trump, who once owned stock in the pipeline builder, will seek to reverse the Army’s decision this month to explore alternate routes.
A spokesman said only that the president-elect plans to review the move after he takes office. However, Trump’s transition team said in a recent memo to campaign supporters and congressional staff that he supports the pipeline’s completion.
In the meantime, Standing Rock Sioux Chairman David Archambault has begun lobbying for a meeting with Trump to make a case for his tribe’s opposition to the project, which the chairman says threatens not just water but sacred cultural sites.
“You have to respect Mother Earth; she’s precious,” Archambault said. “You can still believe in capitalism, and you can still invest in infrastructure projects, but these infrastructure projects should be focused toward renewable energy rather than fossil fuel development.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/pipeline-uncertainty-illustrates-broader-concerns-for-tribes/2016/12/25/1ddb5d76-cabc-11e6-85cd-e66532e35a44_story.html?utm_term=.c2e01a9d198e
-
Railroad in Fiery Derailment Agrees to Changes
Dec 23, 2016 | AP (In The New York Times)
The nation's largest freight railroad has agreed to more thorough inspections and maintenance improvements after a fiery oil train derailment in Oregon and the discovery of more than 800 potential safety violations across its sprawling network.
Details on the agreement between the Federal Railroad Administration and Union Pacific Railroad were obtained by The Associated Press.
Sixteen tank cars from a Union Pacific train hauling North Dakota crude through the Columbia River Gorge derailed in early June along a curve in the tracks near Mosier, Oregon. The accident sparked a massive fire that burned for 14 hours and prompted the evacuation of nearby areas.
No one was injured. But federal officials said the railroad wasn't following its own inspection rules to ensure the track was safe. A closer examination of the tracks would have caught a series of broken bolts that allowed the rails to move too far apart where the accident occurred, officials said.
The investigation into the accident is continuing.
The more than 800 potential violations against Union Pacific were found as part of a two-year examination of tracks across the U.S. used to haul crude. They include some of the same lax inspection problems blamed in the Mosier derailment, federal officials said.
Enforcement actions against the company have not been finalized.
Spokeswoman Calli Hite says Union Pacific is committed to making its lines safer and has fixed the problems identified by the government as potential violations. She characterized the agreement disclosed Friday as the result of a collaborative effort with federal railroad officials.
"All of the issues, the 800 that were noted, have been addressed," she said. "We did everything as soon as we talked to them and knew we needed to do it."
Federal Railroad Administrator Sarah Feinberg said the agreement raises the bar on safety.
"This compliance agreement requires Union Pacific to go above and beyond existing regulations," she said.
The oil industry has become heavily reliant on trains in recent years because of limited pipeline capacity in the booming oil patch of the Northern Plains and the oil sands region of western Canada.
Omaha, Nebraska-based Union Pacific operates more than 32,000 miles of track across 23 states.
The safety measures included in the agreement with the FRA will apply to all rail lines used to haul oil and other hazardous liquids, passengers, explosives, radioactive materials and poisonous gases. That includes about 22,500 miles of tracks, Hite said.
They include an inventory of all curves in the track that are three degrees or greater across that network and walking inspections every 120 days on tracks that have the type of bolts involved in the Mosier accident. Those inspections have to occur every 30 days in the part of the network that includes the Columbia River Gorge.
Previously, Union Pacific said it would voluntarily take some of the same steps within the gorge, a designated national scenic area popular with boaters and windsurfers along the Oregon-Washington border.
The safety agreement was welcomed by Oregon elected officials including Gov. Kate Brown and U.S. Senators Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley. All have called for a halt to oil trains traveling through the gorge.
Wyden and Merkley said in a statement Friday that "banning oil trains....is the only way to completely eliminate future derailments."
The Democratic lawmakers added that they would closely monitor the railroad agency after President-elect Donald Trump takes office next month to ensure the terms of the Union Pacific agreement are upheld.
At least 27 oil trains have been involved in major derailments, fires or oil spills in the United States and Canada in the past decade, according to an AP analysis of accident records.
The trains travel through more than 400 counties across the U.S. to reach refineries on the West, East and Gulf coasts, according to the AP analysis.
A 2013 derailment killed 47 people when a runaway oil train from North Dakota jumped the tracks and exploded in Lac-Megantic, Quebec.
Damage from that accident has been estimated at $1.2 billion or higher.
The U.S. Transportation Department says it assessed more than $15 million in civil penalties against the U.S. railroad industry this year for safety violations and other infractions, a slight increase over 2015.
Of the major railroads, BNSF Railway racked up the most penalties in 2016, totaling $3.4 million from 1,349 violations. Union Pacific had $3 million in penalties from more than 1,222 violations. Pending violations were not included.
http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2016/12/23/us/ap-us-oil-train-accidents.html?_r=0
-
Industry Sees Chance to Ease Air Toxics Rules With Boiler Decision
Dec 26, 2016 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Andrew Childers
Industry groups hope the incoming Trump administration will take the opportunity to revise how the Environmental Protection Agency sets toxic pollutant standards across the board after a federal appellate court sent emissions limits for industrial boilers back to the agency for correction (U.S. Sugar Corp. v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 11-1108, 12/23/16).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has previously ruled that the EPA's toxic pollution requirements for large industrial boilers, which are used in a variety of industries, were flawed, siding with arguments made by environmental groups, but its Dec. 23 decision left those rules in place while the EPA makes the necessary corrections, denying requests from industry and environmental groups to rehear arguments in the case.
The decision was not unexpected, but it gives the incoming Trump administration a chance to not only revise the maximum achievable control technology standards for boilers, commonly known as Boiler MACT, but also make other changes to the process for setting toxic pollutant limits for a variety of industries, said Lisa Jaeger, senior counsel at Bracewell LLP in Washington, who represents the Council of Industrial Boiler Owners in the litigation.
For example, Jaeger said the Trump EPA could take the remanded boiler standards as an opportunity to set emissions standards or work practices for periods when equipment malfunctions, something the current EPA has declined to do in favor of using its enforcement power. That approach could then be applied to other toxic pollutant standards for other industries.
“What we're hoping is the new administration takes a sensible approach to the still-pending issues such as how MACTs are written,” Jaeger told Bloomberg BNA.
Other attorneys involved in the litigation were not available for comment, but environmental advocates who had challenged the Obama EPA's standards as too weak are likely to oppose any push by the Trump administration to roll back public health protections.
Standards Remain in Place
The D.C. Circuit's decision to remand the boiler standards for correction partially reverses its June decision vacating the rules after the court found that the EPA erred in setting the toxic pollutant standards for various classes of boilers by excluding some of the best performing units when calculating the emissions limits, which could lead to more stringent requirements in the future (U.S. Sugar Corp. v. EPA, 830 F.3d 579, 2016 BL 245584, 82 ERC 2107 (D.C. Cir. 2016)).
“Vacating the standards at issue here would unnecessarily remove many limitations on emissions of hazardous air pollutants from boilers and allow greater emissions of those pollutants until EPA complete another rulemaking and implements replacement standards,” the court said in its Dec. 23 decision.
The boiler standards apply to more than 14,000 boilers found at petroleum refineries, chemical plants and other industrial facilities. The EPA estimated it would cost industry $1.6 billion annually to comply with the emissions standards.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=102466995&vname=dennotallissues&fn=102466995&jd=102466995
-
Special Counsel Warns Against ‘Any Effort to Chill Scientific Research’ Amid Climate Concerns
Dec 23, 2016 | Washington Post
By Chris Mooney
The Office of Special Counsel, an independent U.S. agency that protects whistleblowers and investigates prohibited practices that affect government employees, declined this week to further investigate a questionnaire sent from the Trump transition team to the Energy Department.
The memo asked for the names of staffers who attended international climate change meetings or interagency meetings related to the economic consequences of climate change.
In a letter to Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Carolyn Lerner, the special counsel, noted that the Trump transition team had said the questionnaire “was not authorized” and that “transition officials are not considered federal employees” legally.
“The Energy Department also stated it did not provide employee names to the President-elect’s transition officials, and no Department employee has reported a prohibited personnel action resulting from the questionnaire,” Lerner continued.
However, Lerner also elaborated on the kinds of practices that will be prohibited once the Trump government (like any government) takes over, noting that “any effort to chill scientific research or discourse is inconsistent with the intent of the” 2012 Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act. In early 2017, Lerner said, the office will “contact the incoming heads of all agencies and offer training on the whistleblower law, the Hatch Act, and the other laws enforced by OSC,” as part of a program to train and certify government employees and agencies for compliance with whistleblower laws.
Lerner’s letter was provided by Blumenthal’s office. The Office of Special Counsel declined to comment for this story.
Blumenthal, who sent the original letter requesting the investigation with eight Democratic Senate colleagues, said in an interview that “the special counsel is saying, we have no clear jurisdiction here because the transition team is not an official governmental entity, and employees for the transition team are not federal officials.”
“But,” he continued, “the tone of the letter clearly is to take seriously the concerns we’ve raised, and in effect, sort of raise a warning, or an alarm, about this practice.”
There the matter might have ended — for now — but Blumenthal also drew attention to reports in The Washington Post this week that at the State Department, transition team inquiries have focused on the funding of environmental organizations and programs devoted to “gender-related staffing, programming, and funding.”
According to The Post’s reporting, the State Department’s Bureau of Oceans and International Environmental and Scientific Affairs was asked last week by the Trump transition team, “How much does the Department of State contribute annually to international environmental organizations in which the department participates?”
According to another story in The Post, meanwhile, on Wednesday, the transition team sent a request to a range of State Department offices for information on programs that “promote gender equality, such as ending gender-based violence, promoting women’s participation in economic and political spheres, entrepreneurship, etc.”
“They seem to be continuing the practice, of asking very pointed and loaded questions, seemingly as part of an agenda,” Blumenthal said. “And if they continue that, we’ll pursue it.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2016/12/23/special-counsel-warns-against-any-effort-to-chill-scientific-research/?utm_term=.bda7c7cf2e94
-
States Will Lead on Climate Change in the Trump Era
Dec 26, 2016 | New York Times
By Editorial Board
State governments will serve as an important bulwark against any attempt by President-elect Donald Trump to roll back the progress the United States has made in addressing climate change. And that’s good news for the planet.
Over the last decade or so, most states have reduced their greenhouse gas emissions by promoting energy efficiency and renewable fuels. These trends should continue as clean energy costs continue to decline and, in some parts of the country, fall below the cost of dirtier fuels like coal.
The Brookings Institution reported this month that between 2000 and 2014, 33 states and the District of Columbia cut carbon emissions while expanding their economies. That list includes red states run by Republican legislatures, like Alaska, Georgia, Tennessee and West Virginia.
It’s hard to know how Mr. Trump will change climate policy, but it is almost certain that he won’t advance it. He told The Times last month that he has an “open mind” about climate change, but has also called it a “hoax.” The people he has chosen to lead the Environmental Protection Agency, the Department of Energy and the Department of Interior — the three agencies with the greatest influence on energy policy — have either denied or expressed skepticism that human activity is causing global warming, something that virtually all scientists agree on.
And many people expect him to walk away from President Obama’s commitments under the Paris climate agreement and get rid of or weaken the E.P.A.’s Clean Power Plan, which requires states to lower carbon emissions from the electricity sector. He and his appointees might also try to water down fuel economy regulations for cars and trucks, and cut clean energy tax incentives and research spending.
States could blunt much of that damage. Even now, many states will be able to meet the Clean Power Plan’s targets by following through on planned investments and increasing energy efficiency, according to M. J. Bradley and Associates, a research and consulting firm. Some populous states have set targets that are even more ambitious and appear to be on track to meet them.
California and New York plan to cut greenhouse gas emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. Hawaii hopes to get all of its electricity from renewable sources by 2045. This month, Charlie Baker, the Republican governor of Massachusetts, proposed new rules for power plants and vehicles to make sure the state achieves its goal of a 25 percent cut from 1990 levels by 2020. Emissions are already down by around 20 percent.
Cheap natural gas, which has increasingly replaced coal as a fuel source, has had a lot to do with this progress, but so has the drop in the cost of wind and solar power — 41 percent in the case of land-based wind turbines and 64 percent for solar, between 2008 and 2015, according to the Energy Department. The cost of batteries has dropped by almost three-fourths. In some states, including Iowa, Illinois, Kansas, Nebraska and parts of Texas, new wind turbines can generate electricity at a lower cost, without subsidies, than any other technology, according to a report published this month by researchers at the University of Texas at Austin.
Solar panels have not reached that point yet in the United States, but developers of big solar installations in countries like Chile, Morocco and the United Arab Emirates have signed contracts to sell electricity for much less than conventional fossil fuel plants charge, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance.
States are also beginning to put a price on carbon emissions to increase the cost of older fuels and encourage cleaner sources of energy, which Congress has refused to do. California has a cap and trade system in which electric utilities, fuel distributors and other businesses have to buy emission permits through auctions or from one another. New York and eight other Eastern states have a similar program for power plants. And this month, Gov. Jay Inslee of Washington proposed a tax of $25 per metric ton on carbon emissions to increase education funding.
Lawmakers, environmental groups and individuals who care about climate change ought to fight every effort to take the country backward on this issue. But it will be just as important for them to support states that are trying to advance the cause.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/26/opinion/states-will-lead-on-climate-change-in-the-trump-era.html?_r=0
-
Dec 24, 2016 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
Environmental groups are ready for a fight with President-elect Donald Trump.
Trump’s victory in November’s presidential election was a shock to the green movement, which is now consolidating opposition to a GOP-controlled government bent on undoing President Obama’s environmental agenda.
If the initial reaction was depression and despair, environmental activists now sound energized to take on Trump.
“Our goal is to channel that sense of outrage into political pressure,” said Jamie Henn, the co-founder of climate group 350.org.
“We’re happy people are venting on Facebook, but we’d much rather they start marching in the streets.”
There are signs that opposition to Trump is helping environmental groups raise money and add members.
Henn’s group has gained 50,000 new members since the election, and a petition drop at Trump Tower this month — an event that might normally draw only several dozen people — attracted three times that amount, he said.
The green movement is laying the groundwork for a multi-faceted campaign to stymie Trump's energy agenda and defend Obama's environmental legacy.
Leaders say they will fight Trump on Capitol Hill, in the courts, and in the hearts and minds of voters around the country. That means kicking up rowdy confirmation fights over his Cabinet picks and holding the line against Trump attacks on Obama's work.
Trump’s choices of Scott Pruitt to lead the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Rick Perry to head the Energy Department and Exxon Mobil CEO Rex Tillerson to be secretary of State built on his campaign promise to roll back environmental regulations as president.
Environmental groups have held rounds of meetings and conference calls since Election Day to plot a strategy against Trump, Henn said.
Their first order of business is tackling the Cabinet picks, especially Pruitt and Tillerson.
Environmentalists view Pruitt as an existential threat to the EPA. He, like Trump, has publicly doubted the science behind climate change and, in his position as attorney general of Oklahoma, is among the country’s most aggressive litigants against EPA rules.
Lobbying efforts against Pruitt will start as soon as Congress returns. Groups will zero in on Republican senators with moderate streaks on climate change, such as Susan Collins (Maine), Jeff Flake (Ariz.) and Lindsey Graham (S.C.). They hope to flip enough votes to block Pruitt on the Senate floor.
“We’re playing to win,” Melinda Pierce, the Sierra Club's legislative director, said.
“We want to defeat Pruitt’s nomination, and in order to do that we need 51 votes. … There is a focus, not only on making sure Democrats are fully aware of how extreme and what a threat [Pruitt] poses to the environment; there is also a focus of peeling off some Republicans from Trump.”
Outside groups are likely to act to support Democrats on the front lines on Capitol Hill. Incoming Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) this month tweeted that he will “oppose” Pruitt’s nomination, the first time he definitively ruled out voting for a Trump nominee and an indication that the party is gearing up to fight him next month.
Greens’ objections to Tillerson at State might be more self-evident: The deep ties between the longtime CEO of Exxon Mobil and Russian President Vladimir Putin are well documented. Activists hope to turn his confirmation hearings into a probe of Exxon’s history on climate science, and Henn said 350.org will storm Capitol Hill offices when his nomination begins moving.
The confirmation fights are only the first that environmentalists will wage. The movement is preparing for a wave of legislative and executive assaults on Obama rules, from executive actions signed by Trump to congressional resolutions undoing newly issued regulations.
Pierce predicted Republicans will begin moving Congressional Review Act (CRA) challenges to Obama's rules by mid-February. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has already promised a CRA resolution against a new coal-mining rule in 2017, a vote that is likely to test greens’ influence with Republicans in Congress.
They are also bracing for battles over GOP bills to curb federal rulemaking power. House Republicans have made a habit of passing these bills — such as the Regulations from Executives in Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act, legislation to give Congress a say over some rules — only to see them wither in the Senate or White House.
The GOP has a long list of environmental rules it hopes to undo, from the coal-mining rule, to limits on methane emissions at oil and gas drilling sites, to major regulations on power plant carbon emissions and federal jurisdiction over waterways, both of which have been frozen by federal courts.
Activists hope a confluence of factors — the legal framework that manages federal rulemaking procedures and the sheer volume of rules the GOP hopes to undo — will slow down Republican efforts to revert Obama’s climate legacy.
They say they’re preparing legal action to preserve rules that Trump looks to quash early.
“To undo something, you have to go through the same process it takes to write a rule — you don’t just get rid of them with the swipe of a pen,” said Marty Hayden, the vice president of policy and legislation at Earthjustice, an environmental law firm.
“If they don’t follow the law on that, then we’ll see them in court at the end of the day when they finalize something.”
Environmentalists have been through this before and are dusting off their playbook from the George W. Bush years, when the Republican looked to slow-play environmental regulation and undo the work of his Democratic predecessor.
After taking office, President Bush stopped a Clinton-era rule on arsenic in drinking water, though the standard was reinstated after a regulatory review. He also undid a rule on mining clean-up and tried to overturn Clinton standards on forest protection, an effort rejected by the courts.
“The wanting-to-unravel-things isn’t new,” Hayden said. But he predicted that Trump will learn “it’s harder to turn the ship than you think.”
“[The federal government] isn’t a little motor boat; this is like the Queen Mary,” he said.
Greens will be scouring the administration for signs of overreach that they can use against Trump in the court of public opinion.
Polls show the environment is usually a second-tier issue for voters. But activists say the GOP will hit a nerve if it moves too quickly or goes too far on environmental policy.
“Our job is to put this in the spotlight and keep it there so people say, ‘This may not be my top issue, but what Trump is doing is ridiculous,’ ” Henn said.
“It’s harder to say ‘be a little bit better’ with Hillary Clinton,” he said of efforts to push Clinton, who had a climate change plan, further left than she already was.
“With Trump it’s easy. We can paint in broad brushstrokes now in a way that will be be helpful.”
http://www.thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/311670-greens-ready-for-trump-war
Congressional Hearings - There are no relevant hearings to report at this time.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested