Preview Newsletter
ACC PM 2/14/2017
-
(ACC Blog) ICCA at the First Meeting of the SAICM Intersessional Process, Brasilia, 7-9 February
Feb 14, 2017 | American Chemistry Matters
By Greg Skelton
Representatives from the International Council of Chemical Associations (ICCA) joined leaders from government and non-governmental organizations in Brasilia from 7 – 9 February to review progress toward meeting the objectives of the Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management (SAICM), and to consider the future of SAICM. -
Senate Democrats Urge Delay on Pruitt Nomination Pending Court Hearing
Feb 14, 2017 | Inside EPA
By David LaRoss
Senate environment panel Democrats are urging GOP leadership to delay an imminent floor vote on Oklahoma Attorney General (AG) Scott Pruitt's nomination to be the next EPA administrator, saying senators should wait until after an Oklahoma court holds an “emergency” hearing on a suit seeking documents from his tenure as AG. -
Pruitt, Ethics Lawyers Will Get to Know Each Other
Feb 14, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Kevin Bogardus
Scott Pruitt will have to take a cautious but not untrodden path to avoid conflicts of interest if he's confirmed as U.S. EPA administrator. -
Top 10 Reasons to Oppose Scott Pruitt for EPA Head
Feb 14, 2017 | Environmental Working Group
By Scott Faber
This week the full Senate will likely decide whether to confirm President Trump’s nominee to run the Environmental Protection Agency, Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt. -
(ACC Mentioned) Industry Calls for More Clarity in California Alternatives Analysis Guide
Feb 14, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By David Stegon
A number of industry groups have called on California’s Department of Toxic Substances (DTSC) to clarify multiple parts of the draft Safer Consumer Products programme alternatives analysis guide. -
Pucker Up for a Dose of Lead
Feb 14, 2017 | Environmental Working Group
By Galen Roth
On Valentine's Day, sweethearts bestow millions of lipstick-stained kisses. But those smooches could include a dose of lead. -
US House Considers Bill Expanding Reporting on Agency Animal Testing
Feb 14, 2017 | Chemical Watch
The US House of Representatives is considering a measure aimed at improving federal agency reporting of animal testing and alternative test method use. -
(ACC Mentioned) Chemical Plant Boom Spurred by Fracking Will Bring Smog, Plastic Glut, and Risks to Worker's Heath, New Report Warns
Feb 14, 2017 | Desmog
By Sharon Kelly
On the heels of the shale gas rush that's swept the U.S. for the past decade, another wave of fossil fuel-based projects is coming — a plastic and petrochemical manufacturing rush that environmentalists warn could make smog worse in communities already breathing air pollution from fracking, sicken workers, and expand the plastic trash gyres in the world's oceans. -
Efficiency, Gas Fueling Drop in Energy Costs
Feb 14, 2017 | E&E TV
By OnPoint
How does the evolving political landscape in Washington affect the outlook for natural gas, renewables, efficiency and coal in the United States? During today's OnPoint, Colleen Regan, head of environmental markets and cross-sector research for North America at Bloomberg New Energy Finance, and Lisa Jacobson, president of the Business Council for Sustainable Energy, discuss the findings outlined in Bloomberg's fifth annual "Sustainable Energy in America Factbook." Regan and Jacobson talk about the emerging trends in the natural gas, coal and renewable energy industries. -
Senate Won’t Get to Methane Rule Vote This Week
Feb 14, 2017 | Politico Pro - Whiteboard
By Nick Juliano
The Senate will not have time this week to take up a resolution blocking an Obama administration rule to limit methane emissions from oil and gas drilling, putting off action on the House-passed measure until at least the end of the month. -
Pa. Clears the Way for Mariner East 2 Project
Feb 14, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Mike Lee
Pennsylvania regulators issued the final permits yesterday for Sunoco Logistics Partners' Mariner East 2 pipeline, clearing the way for construction to begin. -
Drilling Restarts on Dakota Access Pipeline
Feb 14, 2017 | Fuel Fix
By David Hunn
If activists are looking to organize again in North Dakota against work starting up on the Dakota Access Pipeline, they’ll have time. -
100% Renewables Bill Gaining Support
Feb 14, 2017 | E&E Climatewire
By Daniel Cusick
A bill that would require Massachusetts to meet 100 percent of its energy needs with renewable resources is gaining momentum in the state Legislature, with more than a quarter of the commonwealth's lawmakers backing the bill, according to clean energy advocates. -
Experts Link Gas Well to Explosion That Injured Family
Feb 14, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Mike Soraghan
Texas oil and gas inspectors say they still don't know what caused a water well to blow up in 2014, badly burning a man and his daughter. -
Changes to Power Sector Spur Emissions Decline — EPA
Feb 14, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Hannah Hess
Total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions decreased 2.2 percent between 2014 and 2015, according to a draft U.S. EPA inventory published today.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
-
(ACC Blog) ICCA at the First Meeting of the SAICM Intersessional Process, Brasilia, 7-9 February
Feb 14, 2017 | American Chemistry Matters
By Greg Skelton
Representatives from the International Council of Chemical Associations (ICCA) joined leaders from government and non-governmental organizations in Brasilia from 7 – 9 February to review progress toward meeting the objectives of the Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management (SAICM), and to consider the future of SAICM.
Learn more about the first meeting of the SAICM intersessional process.
SAICM and its innovative, multi-stakeholder framework have brought together a diverse range of stakeholders to collaborate on addressing a wide range of issues and topics relative to chemicals management. It is well known that partnerships have played an integral role in advancing sound chemicals management globally. SAICM’s key value comes from its bridge-building and consensus-building framework to help global issues related to sound chemicals management.
ICCA has been a strong supporter of SAICM and a committed SAICM stakeholder from the beginning. Two voluntary initiatives – the Responsible Care® Global Charter and the Global Product Strategy – are ICCA’s contributions to SAICM implementation. The Charter reflects a commitment by more than 60 national and regional chemical associations, and CEOs of more than 400 of the world’s leading chemical companies, to institutionalize the sound management of chemicals in every aspect of their operations.
3 things you need to know about ICCA’s commitment to sound chemicals management:
We’ve developed the right tools. ICCA has developed a set of innovative tools and materials designed to help countries implement best practices in risk assessment and product stewardship into their own national chemical safety legislation.
We’re making real progress. ICCA works with companies and associations across the globe to spread and strengthen the Responsible Care ethic. Today, more than two-thirds of associations and their members are implementing the product stewardship principles embodied by Responsible Care and the Global Product Strategy.
We’re helping to move the UN’s sustainable development agenda forward. The products and technologies that depend on chemistry will play a critical role in meeting the challenges and targets set out across the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. The capacity to manage chemicals safely also features in a meaningful way in all three dimensions of sustainable development – environmental, social and economic. The UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development provides an opportunity to amplify the role chemical manufacturers have long played as innovators, solution providers, and drivers of economic growth, while at the same time, advancing sound chemicals management.
SAICM Beyond 2020
The trust and cooperation developed through the SAICM multi-stakeholder approach will continue to pay dividends as new issues emerge and work continues that requires the cooperation of all stakeholders.
Moving forward to 2020 and beyond, SAICM activities should be prioritized to focus on those that can make the biggest contribution to sound chemicals management, particularly in countries that lack the capacity to do so.
To achieve this, stakeholders should work with governments to support the creation of regulatory and framework and institutional capacity that will enable responsible production, handling and use of chemicals throughout their lifecycle, and that will accelerate and intensify the deployment of innovative products and technologies to address global challenges.
https://blog.americanchemistry.com/2017/02/icca-at-the-first-meeting-of-the-saicm-intersessional-process-brasilia-7-9-february/
-
Senate Democrats Urge Delay on Pruitt Nomination Pending Court Hearing
Feb 14, 2017 | Inside EPA
By David LaRoss
Senate environment panel Democrats are urging GOP leadership to delay an imminent floor vote on Oklahoma Attorney General (AG) Scott Pruitt's nomination to be the next EPA administrator, saying senators should wait until after an Oklahoma court holds an “emergency” hearing on a suit seeking documents from his tenure as AG.
The 10 minority members of the Senate Environment & Public Works Committee sent a Feb. 13 letter to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) seeking a delay on Pruitt's confirmation vote to allow legislators to consider any documents released after the Feb. 16 court hearing.
“Granting this request -- to schedule consideration of Mr. Pruitt’s nomination at a time that permits Senators to receive and review the information we previously requested -- is compelled, in our view, by the Senate’s obligation to provide advice and consent on Mr. Pruitt’s nomination. These records are needed for the Senate to evaluate Mr. Pruitt’s suitability to serve in the position for which he has been nominated,” the letter says.
It is signed by EPW ranking member Sen. Tom Carper (D-DE), Democratic Sens. Kamala Harris (CA), Tammy Duckworth (IL), Kirsten Gillibrand (NY), Ben Cardin (MD), Cory Booker (NJ), Ed Markey (MA), Sheldon Whitehouse (RI) and Jeff Merkley (OR), as well as Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT), who caucuses with Democrats.
According to press reports McConnell filed cloture for Pruitt and five other nominees late on Feb. 13 setting the stage for confirmation votes in the coming days.
Pruitt is second on the cloture list, which could allow his vote before the Senate is scheduled to leave for its Presidents' Day recess on Feb. 17. However, Democrats could delay that by taking the full 30 hours allowed for debate on each nominee, as they have with other of President Donald Trump's more controversial picks.
McConnell's office did not respond to a request for comment by press time.
Pruitt's Records
The letter is Democrats' latest bid to publicize documents from Pruitt's time as Oklahoma's top attorney -- including emails they hope will strengthen claims that his office used verbatim talking points from the oil and gas industry in comments to EPA on its proposed rules for the sector.
Senate Democrats sought release of those materials prior to Pruitt's confirmation hearing, but he rebuffed requests to provide them voluntarily, saying instead that the proper venue would be to seek their release under Oklahoma's Open Records Act.
That effort picked up steam Feb. 7, when the American Civil Liberties Union and other open records supporters sued Pruitt's office in state court, saying it has unlawfully ignored open-records requests they filed in 2015 for the same documents Democrats sought for the recent EPW hearing.
Democrats urged McConnell to delay Pruitt's floor vote after the complaint was filed, but the majority leader did not respond to their request.
But the court has now scheduled an expedited hearing on Feb. 16 where it will consider the groups' claims, which the EPW minority argues could lead to a release of documents as soon as that day.
“We now have reason to believe this information is likely to be produced in the very near term . . . the District Court of Oklahoma County’s expedited hearing schedule, and the clarity with which the Oklahoma Open Records Act establishes [the groups'] right to obtain the documents, indicates that the Court is likely to order the timely release of additional information,” the senators' letter says.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/senate-democrats-urge-delay-pruitt-nomination-pending-court-hearing
-
Pruitt, Ethics Lawyers Will Get to Know Each Other
Feb 14, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Kevin Bogardus
Scott Pruitt will have to take a cautious but not untrodden path to avoid conflicts of interest if he's confirmed as U.S. EPA administrator.
The Republican Oklahoma attorney general has sued EPA early and often over several of its rules, with many of those lawsuits still pending against EPA. As part of the nomination process, Pruitt signed an ethics agreement stating that he would seek authorization to intervene in matters involving his home state, which includes that litigation, during his first year as EPA chief.
Checking with EPA lawyers before he weighs in on issues he previously litigated doesn't go far enough for critics of President Trump’s nominee. Democratic senators and environmental groups say that Pruitt — an EPA critic who has raised hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from the oil and gas industry — is too conflicted to lead the agency.
"He tried to overturn those rules, saying they were unconstitutional and contrary to federal laws, but yet he is asking the American people to believe that he will have an open mind about those rules," John Walke, clean air director for the Natural Resources Defense Council, told E&E News. "Those are diametrically opposed, incompatible views."
Republicans have touted that Pruitt has answered ethics questions surrounding his nomination. At a committee vote on the EPA nominee earlier this month that Democrats boycotted, Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) compared the Oklahoma attorney general's ethics agreement to one signed by Lisa Jackson, President Obama's first EPA chief.
Suggesting Pruitt's critics would never be satisfied, Inhofe said, "The other side just happens not to like the answer."
A Jan. 16 letter from Kevin Minoli, an EPA principal deputy general counsel and the agency's designated agency ethics official, said Pruitt's ethics agreement is not the same as but is "very similar" to Jackson's arrangement, in which she, too, agreed that during her first year as administrator, she would seek authorization before jumping into issues involving her home state of New Jersey.
Democrats have pushed Pruitt to go further — to forever recuse himself from Oklahoma matters, as Carol Browner did with Florida issues when she was President Clinton's EPA chief.
Minoli, however, said in his letter that Pruitt following one example or another of prior administrators doesn't result in his being in or out of line with agency ethics rules.
"Those comparisons do not demonstrate compliance or non-compliance with the federal ethics requirements," Minoli said.
Jeff Holmstead, who led EPA's air and radiation office during the George W. Bush administration, said Democrats' complaints regarding Pruitt's potential conflicts don't hold up, given how wide-ranging the agency's rules are that have been targeted by the Oklahoma attorney general.
"All this litigation is about rules that have general applicability. They don't uniquely affect Oklahoma," said Holmstead, now a partner at Bracewell LLP.
"If he was suing EPA over EPA's refusal to give grant money to Oklahoma, that would be a particular matter, and he would have to recuse himself."
To recuse or not recuse
Pruitt was pressed repeatedly by Democrats at his confirmation hearing last month on whether or not he would recuse himself from pending litigation against EPA that he played a part in as Oklahoma's attorney general. In response, Pruitt said that he would listen to career attorneys at the agency and would step back if told to do so.
"I will recuse if directed by the EPA ethics counsel, career staff at EPA ethics," Pruitt said. "They have been there, and I will follow their counsel and guidance."
Consequently, Pruitt might find himself talking to EPA ethics lawyers quite a lot.
The Oklahoma attorney general has been involved in several major cases against EPA rules that are still pending — including litigation over the Clean Power Plan, the Waters of the U.S. rule and mercury standards, to name some. Since his nomination, Oklahoma has slowly been asking the courts to remove Pruitt from litigation that he is involved in against EPA.
According to Minoli's letter, if Oklahoma were a party to a lawsuit against EPA, Pruitt as agency chief would have to seek authorization to participate in that case, under his ethics agreement. In addition, Pruitt would be subject to state bar rules. He is a member of the Oklahoma Bar Association, which has restrictions on conflicts of interest.
NRDC's Walke said bar rules could be a hindrance for Pruitt at EPA.
"He is subject to ethics rules as a federal employee, and he is subject to bar rules for the bar or bars where he is a member," Walke said, noting that Jackson wasn't a lawyer like Pruitt. "An attorney may not switch sides on the matter that the attorney has already litigated."
Holmstead disagreed with that assessment, considering Pruitt would be EPA's administrator, not its general counsel.
"He will not be a lawyer for EPA. He will be the head of the agency," Holmstead said. "He is not going to EPA to be EPA's lawyer."
What seems to be clear is that Pruitt and EPA attorneys are bound to be in close contact. Jackson frequently had to seek ethics advice early on in her tenure as EPA administrator, according to documents obtained by E&E News under the Freedom of Information Act.
Obama's first EPA chief was given at least four "impartiality determinations" relating to air quality standards, pesticide products, a Clean Water Act permit fee rule and a regulationinvolving the Toxics Release Inventory. All of those matters involved Jackson's former employer, the state of New Jersey, where she was commissioner of environmental protection and former Gov. Jon Corzine's (D) chief of staff.
Further, even before she was confirmed as administrator, Jackson sought authorization on whether or not she could participate in two specific lawsuits involving the Garden State and EPA. Later in 2009, Jackson secured an "ethics determination" to participate in coal mining issues, given that she owned stock in Bank of America, which had a policy not to do business with companies engaged in mountaintop-removal mining.
Pat Hirsch, who signed off on Jackson's determinations as EPA's then-acting general counsel, said the documents show how the ethics process is supposed to work.
"It is meant to protect the public from conflicts of interests but also protect the person from being hauled up in front of whoever," said Hirsch, who is now retired from federal service. "You want the ability to review them ahead of time. You want them to come to you and ask you questions, so you can get ahead of any problems and protect them and the public."
Asked if Pruitt should recuse himself from matters involving pending litigation involving his state and EPA, Hirsch said that might be advisable.
"He might want to do that, but whether it is a legal requirement under the ethics rules, I don't think there is," Hirsch said. "To avoid the appearance of impropriety, that's the key. If you want to avoid the appearance of impropriety, you have go beyond what's legally required."
Pruitt's critics have said the internal ethics process at EPA may not be strong enough to handle the Oklahoma attorney general's potential conflicts. Walke questioned whether career employees at EPA could tell their top political boss to stay out of certain matters.
"It seems highly implausible that a subordinate is going to tell his boss and the head of the agency to do something that he has said that he was not going to do," Walke said, adding that Pruitt would have to obey any ruling from EPA ethics officials.
Pruitt could soon be at the agency. The Senate may vote on his confirmation this week; the Oklahoma attorney general is expected to be approved on a party-line vote.
Click here to read Jackson's impartiality and ethics determinations.
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2017/02/14/stories/1060050037
-
Top 10 Reasons to Oppose Scott Pruitt for EPA Head
Feb 14, 2017 | Environmental Working Group
By Scott Faber
This week the full Senate will likely decide whether to confirm President Trump’s nominee to run the Environmental Protection Agency, Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt.
Here are the top 10 reasons to oppose him for the nation’s top environmental job.
1. Pruitt misled the Senate. There’s little question that Pruitt made misleading statements to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee about his record as attorney general, his litigation history, and the role of the Oklahoma attorney general in environmental enforcement. The remaining question is whether the Justice Department will investigate his statements, as EWG has requested.
2. He told senators to “go FOIA yourselves,” referring to the Freedom of Information Act. Rather than respond to written questions, Pruitt told senators to file an open records request 18 times – or as Sen. Ed Markey of Massachusetts said, to “go FOIA yourself.” In addition, Pruitt won’t release 3,000 emails between his office and the energy interests he’ll regulate if confirmed.
3. He sued the EPA or supported lawsuits against it more than two dozen times. Pruitt told the Senate committee he only sued the EPA 10 times to block public health protections. In fact, his office actually sued the EPA 17 times and filed supporting briefs nine other times. So, that’s 26 times Pruitt went to court to block the EPA’s environmental protection actions.
4. He took money from regulated industries. As Oklahoma’s attorney general and head of the Republican Attorneys General Association, Pruitt helped collect millions of dollars in political donations from industries he is now supposed to regulate. What’s more, he won’t commit to recusing himself from matters related to these lawsuits.
5. He’s a longstanding climate change doubter. Pruitt testified to the Senate that he did not think climate change was a “hoax” and that humans played some role. But Pruitt has consistently used the fossil fuel industry’s playbook to sow doubt about climate science, saying “reasonable minds can disagree about what is actually happening, whether it is happening number one, whether there is a change in climate that is occurring.”
6. He can’t name a single regulation he supports. When asked by senators, Pruitt could not name one regulation he supports. He couldn’t even say whether removing lead from gasoline was a good idea, or whether or not lead was safe for kids. And he said it would be “inappropriate” to say whether the EPA should finally ban asbestos.
7. He rolled back water quality protections. Pruitt claimed a 2013 agreement was a “historic” breakthrough to clean up a scenic river. In fact, Pruitt’s bad deal gave polluters more time to pollute and suspended enforcement actions.
8. He let poultry polluters off the hook. After receiving political donations from poultry polluters, Pruitt stopped pursuing litigation against them. As a state senator, he helped weaken a state law regulating poultry operators, allowing dozens of new chicken houses near rivers. After he took office as attorney general, a poultry waste lagoon subject to his oversight overflowed after a storm, fouling nearby creeks and lakes with chicken manure.
9. He disbanded the state’s environment protection unit. Pruitt disbanded the attorney general’s environmental protection unit. As a result, environmental prosecutions in Oklahoma came to a halt. Now there are reports that the Trump administration may shutter the EPA’s enforcement unit. Sound familiar?
10. Even former Republican EPA administrators say he’s unqualified. Christie Todd Whitman, President George W. Bush’s EPA administrator, said Pruitt is a “denier of climate change” who “doesn’t believe in regulation.” William Reilly, who led the EPA under President George H.W. Bush, said someone who is so “determinedly contemptuous” of science “cannot effectively lead” the EPA.
http://www.ewg.org/planet-trump/2017/02/top-10-reasons-oppose-scott-pruitt-epa-head
-
(ACC Mentioned) Industry Calls for More Clarity in California Alternatives Analysis Guide
Feb 14, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By David Stegon
A number of industry groups have called on California’s Department of Toxic Substances (DTSC) to clarify multiple parts of the draft Safer Consumer Products programme alternatives analysis guide.
The comments – submitted by the American Chemistry Council (ACC), Consumer Specialty Products Association (CSPA), the Phosphorous, Inorganic and Nitrogen Flame Retardants Association (Pinfa) and others – echo concerns expressed in comments last November that the guidance does not provide industry with sufficient information to ensure compliance with the SCP’s requirements.
“We remain very concerned that the guidance continues to lack sufficient clarity for evaluating decisions made by a responsible entity,” said the CSPA.
The guide aims to help companies navigate the SCP’s regulatory requirement for manufacturers of ‘priority products’ to complete an alternatives analysis. Completed AAs will help inform the DTSC’s possible regulatory response to limiting or preventing potential harm from chemicals in named products.
But the ACC said that the DTSC has not made the compliance obligations required of manufacturers immediately clear in its guidance. It also does not provide clear pathways or options for them to achieve compliance which may lead to potential confusion, said the trade group.
“Our view is that medium to small businesses unfamiliar with the SCP programme will find their review of the regulations and accompanying guide to be time-consuming and confusing, and that achieving an understanding of compliance obligations will be well beyond the reach of these entities without deployment of significant dedicated staffing and retention of expert consultants,” the ACC said.
The Auto Alliance added the draft document provides “over broad” guidance that, combined with DTSC’s previous statements that the alternatives analysis process would be iterative, could create an “unworkable, unlimited data collection scheme”.
“The multiple rounds of data gathering, which DTSC appears to require, will frustrate this purpose by greatly increasing uncertainty, as well as costs for responsible entities,” it said.
Areas for improvement
The ACC called on the agency to carefully review its draft to ensure that the guide does not create new requirements that constitute regulations.
It also said that clarity could be improved by:
ensuring there is clear guidance on how to demonstrate where there is a lack of functionally acceptable, technically and economically feasible alternatives in the first state of an alternatives assessment;
clarifying procedures for asserting and substantiating confidential business information (CBI);
defining additional key terms in the glossary;
making clear when no new data – as opposed to information – need be obtained or generated; and
providing increased guidance as to what the DTSC considers to be ‘available’ information.
In separate comments, the Dow Chemical Company recommended the DTSC:
clarify the scope of the AA as it relates to relevant factors;
add further guidance for cases where a simple chemical replacement is not possible; and
include a better definition of what is meant by “impact assessment”.
However, the NGO Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) praised the DTSC for creating a guide that “is advisory, non-binding, and provides resources to assist stakeholders in performing an alternatives analysis under the SCP regulation.”
“We support the department’s approach to the guide and believe that it provides useful advice and guidance on resources, approaches, methods, tools, and examples to help meet the regulatory and statutory requirements for AAs.”
Meredith Williams, deputy director of the SCP programme, told Chemical Watch the guide will be finalised well before the first priority product is named, which is targeted for 1 July. She added that the DTSC will regularly update and augment the guide as the practice of alternatives analysis evolves and additional tools, approaches and examples are identified and developed.
“We are in the process of evaluating the comments submitted and determining how best to address them," Dr Williams said. "These comments, as well as continued input from our stakeholders, will only strengthen the AA guide."
https://chemicalwatch.com/53559/industry-calls-for-more-clarity-in-california-alternatives-analysis-guide
-
Feb 14, 2017 | Environmental Working Group
By Galen Roth
On Valentine's Day, sweethearts bestow millions of lipstick-stained kisses. But those smooches could include a dose of lead.
Lead is a nervous system toxin with no safe level of exposure, and the dangers of lead in drinking water and old paint rightfully cause the most concern. But many brands of lipstick also contain lead.
Lead can contaminate the mineral pigments that color lipsticks – particularly red lipsticks. In 2012, the Food and Drug Administration tested several hundred lipsticks from 20 popular brands. FDA scientists found lead in every one.
The European Union prohibits lead in cosmetics, and Canada limits its use in cosmetics. Lead is especially dangerous for pregnant women and those of childbearing age because it can cross from the mother’s blood into the placenta, causing permanent damage to the developing fetus’ brain. Babies exposed to lead are vulnerable to learning, language and behavioral difficulties. Lead has no place in products applied to the lips or anywhere else on the body.
Until manufacturers eliminate lead contamination or warn lipstick users of its presence, buyers should be wary. Lead content in the products tested by the FDA ranged widely, so it is clear that some companies are more careful than others. Manufacturers don’t have to disclose the presence of lead on the label, so consumers who want to avoid it should either skip wearing lipstick or find safer choices EWG’s Skin Deep® database.
Under current law, cosmetics companies like Mary Kay can put anything, including lead, in their products, and don't even have to disclose it. Sens. Dianne Feinstein of California and Susan Collins of Maine, and Reps. Frank Pallone and Leonard Lance, both of New Jersey, have introduced bipartisan legislation to subject the most dangerous cosmetics chemicals to FDA scrutiny.
It's long past time for Congress to finally subject cosmetics and other personal care products to FDA review. Getting to work on updating the law, which has been largely unchanged since 1938, would be a great Valentine's Day present.
http://www.ewg.org/enviroblog/2017/02/pucker-dose-lead
-
US House Considers Bill Expanding Reporting on Agency Animal Testing
Feb 14, 2017 | Chemical Watch
The US House of Representatives is considering a measure aimed at improving federal agency reporting of animal testing and alternative test method use.
The Federal Accountability in Chemical Testing Act would amend the Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (Iccvam) Authorization Act of 2000 to require agencies submitting biennial reports to include details on how many animals they used and for what tests.
Congressman Ken Calvert (R–California) introduced the so-called FACT Act. He says it would improve reporting by federal agencies like the EPA, FDA, and NIH about their efforts to replace "inefficient, multi-million-dollar animal tests with faster, less costly and more effective alternative methods" for assessing the safety of chemicals, drugs, cosmetics and other substances.
"The FACT Act will ensure that Congress has the information necessary to determine if federal agencies are meeting their mandates to replace expensive and unnecessary animal testing whenever possible, because evidence suggests they are not," he added.
The bill (HR 816) was introduced 2 February with bipartisan support. It has been referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
https://chemicalwatch.com/53534/us-house-considers-bill-expanding-reporting-on-agency-animal-testing
-
Feb 14, 2017 | Desmog
By Sharon Kelly
On the heels of the shale gas rush that's swept the U.S. for the past decade, another wave of fossil fuel-based projects is coming — a plastic and petrochemical manufacturing rush that environmentalists warn could make smog worse in communities already breathing air pollution from fracking, sicken workers, and expand the plastic trash gyres in the world's oceans.
“Thanks to abundant supplies of natural gas, the U.S. chemical industry is investing in new facilities and expanded production capacity, which tends to attract downstream industries that rely on petrochemical products,” the American Chemistry Council's President and CEO, Cal Dooley, said in a January press release. “As of this month, 281 chemical industry projects valued at $170 billion have been announced, about half of which are completed or under construction.”
A new Food and Water Watch report, How Fracking Supports the Plastic Industry, calls attention to the dark side of those plans, warning of air and water pollution and the risk to people's health, especially for those taking jobs in the plastics industry.
The Pollution and Health Risks of Petrochemical Plants
“The petrochemical boom does more than generate plastic that is overfilling our landfills and spilling into the oceans; the manufacturing process itself releases numerous pollutants into our air, water and land,” the report finds. “On top of that, many of the proposed new ethane cracker projects are co-located with fracking and drilling operations, potentially compounding the pollution problems that residents already endure.”
Converting ethane, a by-product of shale gas drilling, to plastic requires ethane “crackers” — massive plants that use heat or steam to “crack” the ethane gas into ethylene, which is then converted to polyethylene, generally sold in plastic pellets.
Shell plans to start construction of one of the nation's largest ethane crackers this year in Pennsylvania, home to the Marcellus shale drilling rush. “It is the first new facility of its type to be constructed outside of the Gulf Coast in two decades,” the report points out.
“Although the cracker plant will bring pollution to the region, the industry, its supporters and Pennsylvania Governor Tom Wolf all tout that it will bring jobs,” the report adds. “What they fail to mention is that these jobs are potentially dangerous and hazardous to health.”
Plastic plant workers suffer from higher rates of brain cancer than workers in other industry, the report says, noting that workers are exposed to known carcinogens and neurotoxins like benzene, toluene, and xylene and may have an elevated risk of liver disease and other ailments.
Emissions from petrochemical plants have also been linked to elevated levels of toxins in the blood of people living nearby. Allen LeBlanc, a resident of Mossville, Louisiana, with high levels of dioxin in his blood — which researchers traced to nearby petrochemical plants and refineries — described his disabling health problems to the Intercept in 2015.
“Living here has messed me up,” he said. “If I could have another life, I’d take it.”
In Louisiana, the Food and Water Watch report notes, 13 petrochemical plants released 4.9 million pounds of toxic materials into the environment in 2015, according to Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) records. But that's nothing compared to Texas, where the state's 28 petrochemical plants reported over 13.8 million pounds of toxic releases the same year to the EPA.
The air pollution from the plants can make breathing more difficult for people living nearby, the report adds, and increase their chances of developing cancer. “Several studies have demonstrated that people’s exposure to petrochemical facility pollutants is associated with heightened cancer risks, acute irritative symptoms (such as nausea and eye and throat irritation) and respiratory-related illnesses, especially for children,” the report says.
From Fracking Boom to Cracking Boom
The shale gas targeted by drillers is mostly made of methane gas — the fuel purchased by power plants and used for home heating and cooking, which is also a powerful greenhouse gas. However, what comes out of a gas well isn't pure methane, but a blend that also includes chemicals like butane, propane, and ethane — and ethane is a key building block for plastics.
Since the shale rush began, U.S. ethane production numbers have soared, with the Energy Information Administration now projecting production of over 1.7 million barrels of ethane a day in 2018, up from less than a million barrels a day just five years earlier. North Dakota's Bakken shale formation is so ethane-rich that leaks and venting from drilling and fracking there was responsible for a spike in ethane levels in the Earth's atmosphere, researchers concluded last year.
Twenty new or expanded ethane cracker projects have been proposed since the shale rush started, the new Food and Water Watch report says.
“The proposed cracker projects could conceivably boost polyethylene production by as much as 50 percent, taking it to more than 42 billion pounds a year,” On Earth reported in 2014 — when just 10 new plants had been proposed. “That’s fully six pounds of this one particular form of plastic for every man, woman, and child on earth.”
The Glut of Cheap Plastic to Come
Cheap new plastic discourages recycling — which means more trash winds up in landfills or contaminating the seas. For years, scientists have warned that the world's oceans are becoming a plastic soup, with ocean gyres where plastic and other debris build up (also known as “garbage patches”) covering a quarter of the earth's surface. By 2050, the world's oceans are predicted to contain more plastic than fish (by weight), an Ellen MacArthur Foundation report concluded last year.
“The fracking-driven industry expansion will likely generate even more ocean plastics as more ethane crackers come online and produce more plastic resins,” the Food and Water Watch report concludes.
Making all that plastic also creates enormous amounts of smog, the report points out. “In 1999, when Houston’s ozone levels were the highest in the nation, the state of Texas conducted several studies that found large industrial leaks,” the report notes. “The worst originated from cracker plants producing ethylene and propylene.”
“In addition to asthma, long-term exposure to smog has been connected to premature deaths in adults and to low birth weight in babies,” it adds.
That's a particular problem in states that already suffer from smog problems. Shell's ethane cracker will be built about 30 miles outside Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. It's projected to emit 522 tons of volatile organic compounds [VOCs] — precursors to smog — which would mean that it would be western Pennsylvania's largest source of VOCs.
Nonetheless, Shell's ethane cracker was granted multiple tax breaks — including the largest tax break in state history, worth $1.65 billion over 25 years — by state officials who argue that the economic benefits to the region make it all worthwhile. Shell predicts that the plant will employ 600 workers — a powerful message in a swing state where a thirst for job creation is often cited as a key reason that Donald Trump won Pennsylvania's 20 electoral college votes in November.
For its part, Food and Water Watch argues that fracking has already harmed the state's drinking water, air quality, and increased the speed of climate change. “The last thing that Pennsylvanians need is another way for the oil and gas industry to capitalize on shale at the expense of their health and well-being,” the report concludes.
https://www.desmogblog.com/2017/02/14/chemical-plant-boom-spurred-fracking-smog-plastic-glut-risks-worker-heath-report-warns
-
Efficiency, Gas Fueling Drop in Energy Costs
Feb 14, 2017 | E&E TV
By OnPoint
How does the evolving political landscape in Washington affect the outlook for natural gas, renewables, efficiency and coal in the United States? During today's OnPoint, Colleen Regan, head of environmental markets and cross-sector research for North America at Bloomberg New Energy Finance, and Lisa Jacobson, president of the Business Council for Sustainable Energy, discuss the findings outlined in Bloomberg's fifth annual "Sustainable Energy in America Factbook." Regan and Jacobson talk about the emerging trends in the natural gas, coal and renewable energy industries.
Transcript
Monica Trauzzi: Hello and welcome to OnPoint. With me today are Lisa Jacobson, president of the Business Council for Sustainable Energy, and Colleen Regan, head of environmental markets and cross-sector research for North America at Bloomberg New Energy Finance. Thank you both for joining me today.
Lisa Jacobson: Thank you for having us, Monica.
Colleen Regan: Thanks for having us.
Monica Trauzzi: So both of your organizations have joined forces for the fifth time and just released your "Sustainable Energy in America Factbook." It's particularly important at this moment where we see a lot of political and policy change happening in Washington.
While campaigning we heard President Trump talk a lot about the coal industry and making promises to revitalize the industry and bring jobs back. What are your expectations for the coal-fired power capacity moving forward, Colleen, and how dramatically could that change if the administration were to place incentives behind coal?
Colleen Regan: Great question. Thanks for that. One of the things that we highlight in this fact book is we look at natural gas, renewables and energy efficiency more broadly. One of the things that we found this year is that natural gas and renewables are really eating into coal-fired power plants' share of generation in the United States.
We've seen a lot of retirements recently. We lost 22 gigawatts of coal just in the past two years and there's a number of retirements that are also already in the pipeline for the next five years. So we're really seeing coal lose out.
For example, in 2007 coal was almost half of U.S. power generation and in 2016 that fell to only 30 percent. Meanwhile, natural gas over the same time frame grew from 22 percent to 34 percent. This is an economic story. There's no subsidies. There's not a huge impact from environmental policies there.
This is really about low price natural gas as a result of the so-called shale revolution, which is competing with coal-fired power plants. I don't particularly see a change coming in that respect because President Trump has also said he wants to support natural gas and it's hard to support natural gas while also keeping coal-fired power plants open because they do compete directly in many areas of the country, such as the Appalachian Basin and Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Ohio. So any subsidy or help for natural gas is going to hurt coal directly.
Monica Trauzzi: So in terms of natural gas in the trends that you saw in 2016, there's a lot of policy uncertainty right now. How does that impact what we might see what the forecast is for this year and then moving into 2018?
Colleen Regan: Policy is definitely an uncertainty here. I personally haven't been able to read the tea leaves so I'm not sure what's coming our way in the next two years, but I would say that in the near term we're really just thinking about what are the relative economics of these two different fuel sources, coal and natural gas.
In the near term you might see an uptick in coal-fired power generation because it's winter and we're seeing slightly higher natural gas prices. That's really what the question's about in the near term is what are the relative economics of these two.
So it's possible you could actually see coal generation increase a little bit in the next year perhaps just because of those higher natural gas prices, but we have to remember that we're continuing to invest in natural gas, in natural gas infrastructure, production is staying steady even though prices were low and natural gas drillers are becoming more productive. So this is going to continue to compete with coal-fired generation going further.
Monica Trauzzi: Lisa, how do your member organizations use the data that's in the fact book to make investments and future plans?
Lisa Jacobson: They use it every day. Not only do they want to have an insight into those long-term trends going on in their own industry sectors, they want to understand it in the context of U.S. energy as a whole, as well as what we really see as the growth sectors of the energy economy right now, which are energy efficiency, natural gas and renewable energy.
Also, an interesting aspect of the fact book is it covers a lot of technologies that might be relatively small now. Say energy storage or fuel cells or combined heat and power, but we can see, given the interest in the marketplace and the policy direction especially at the state and regional level, might play a much larger role.
So we could also look at things like alternative fuels or transportation. We're seeing big changes in that marketplace. There's an interconnection between the power sector and the transportation sector because the marketplace is looking to be more reliable, affordable and integrated.
So it's really an exciting time. So this data not only helps them better understand the marketplace that they're investing in, it also helps them communicate based on facts to policymakers that make very critical decisions that impact the regulatory and investment climate that they're making those decisions within.
Monica Trauzzi: The Trump administration is aggressively seeking to minimize regulation governmentwide. Could support for deregulation help renewable energy and power markets grow?
Lisa Jacobson: I think, number one, businesses need a clear, reliable path to make investments within, as I said before. So anything that we can create, more predictable, straightforward and reliable project cycle, which will involve regulatory issues, is going to be very helpful for business investment and for job creation here at home.
So I think to the extent that the Trump administration is talking about regulatory issues and wants to look at the whole landscape in order to create more jobs and economic opportunity in the energy sector, that's a very positive thing.
Monica Trauzzi: You mentioned efficiency. I'm curious what the numbers are on efficiency and how it's impacting economic growth and productivity.
Colleen Regan: So we've done some looking at overall GDP growth and total primary energy consumption, which I think is a great way of exploring the impact of efficiency. You can also look at dollars invested and we've done that as well in the fact book, but if you look at how the economy is growing and whether or not we're continuing to increase our energy consumption, that's generally been the conventional wisdom. You can't grow the economy without also increasing how much energy you consume, but we're not actually seeing that.
So if you look at just the past 10 years, we've increased our GDP in real terms by 12 percent while total energy consumption's actually fallen by 3.6 percent. So you've seen a huge improvement in our actual energy productivity. A lot of that has to do with certainly structural changes in the economy do influence that, but it also has to do with the energy efficiency investments that utilities are making across the spectrum.
So in electricity, but also in natural gas. We have seen utilities increase the amount of investments that they're making in those areas as well.
Monica Trauzzi: There's a lot of uncertainty certainly around the Clean Power Plan — well, maybe less so on the Clean Power Plan. I think it's pretty certain that it won't be around for long, but in terms of what might replace the Clean Power Plan, what that might look like. Is that changing what utilities are doing and what utilities are seeking to do on investment?
Colleen Regan: Do you want me to take that? I have a few thoughts and if you want to add —
Lisa Jacobson: Yeah, I can add to it afterwards; sure. Go ahead.
Colleen Regan: So obviously we don't know exactly what's going to happen with the Clean Power Plan. I will highlight though one of the things we do share in the fact book, which was a really exciting finding, is that power-sector greenhouse gas emissions are already 24 percent below 2005 levels. The Clean Power Plan goal was to get 32 percent below 2005 levels in 2030. So in other words, we're 75 percent of the way there and we still have 15 years to go.
So whether or not that's in place, I think doesn't really matter for the long-term trajectory of the U.S. power sector. We're building natural gas and renewables in hydro and we're not building coal.
So if you look at just the past 25 years, over 90 percent of power-sector generating capacity additions have been renewables, natural gas and hydro. You haven't really seen other technologies play a role there.
Meanwhile, as I mentioned earlier, we're retiring coal-fired power plants. So I think this trajectory is going to continue. Utilities and corporate off takers are choosing to build natural gas and renewables, which obviously reduces our carbon footprint.
Monica Trauzzi: Do you want to add before I ask you about the —
Lisa Jacobson: Well, I guess I would just say it might be obvious, but these are long-term planning decisions. So year in, year out is not really going to influence things. If you look at the past decade, the past 15 years, this trend is clear. Renewables and natural gas has been what has built, plus significant uptakes in energy efficiency.
So that's going to be baked in for years to come and it's not easily reversed. So I think there's a lot to be proud of. Also I would say while these changes have occurred, the fact book also shows that consumers and businesses are getting lower prices in the energy marketplace, whether that be a lower percentage of their household income spent on energy or just the U.S. being very competitive with other countries on energy pricing. These are benefits to the economy. They're benefits to consumers. They're creating jobs.
So therefore, when utilities or others think about decisionmaking on a long-term scale, they're going to be looking at what is the most beneficial to them across many different factors and the economy, reliability, affordability and the environment matter.
Monica Trauzzi: I want to get one final question in. When we talk about what could potentially replace the Clean Power Plan, one of those things is a carbon tax and there seems to be a discussion happening or at least a meeting that occurred at the White House on a potential carbon tax solution. What is your organization's take on that and is that the right direction?
Lisa Jacobson: Well, number one, I think it's extremely encouraging to have such prominent dignitaries talking about the need to look at greenhouse gas emissions, to look at it from a market-oriented perspective and to think about what it means for households because part of the program that they proposed was a carbon tax, but it would provide a lot of that revenue back to households.
So a key thing here as we reduce our emissions as a country, it needs to be sustainable and it will only be sustainable if consumers don't get hurt by it. I thought that was a very intriguing aspect of the proposal.
My organization, we've looked at many different ways to address climate change and to reduce greenhouse gas emissions or carbon emissions. They've always looked for market-based approaches. So I think we're going to be giving that proposal a hard look and look forward to working with the Trump administration and Congress and how to execute on it.
Monica Trauzzi: If that's what they choose.
Lisa Jacobson: Right. We'll see.
Monica Trauzzi: A lot to be seen. We'll end it there. Thank you both for coming on the show and a pleasure to have two women on the panel today.
Colleen Regan: Thank you, Monica.
Lisa Jacobson: Thanks.
Monica Trauzzi: And thanks for watching. We'll see you back here tomorrow.
http://www.eenews.net/tv/videos/2201/transcript
-
Senate Won’t Get to Methane Rule Vote This Week
Feb 14, 2017 | Politico Pro - Whiteboard
By Nick Juliano
The Senate will not have time this week to take up a resolution blocking an Obama administration rule to limit methane emissions from oil and gas drilling, putting off action on the House-passed measure until at least the end of the month.
Due to procedural rules, there is time for only one Congressional Review Act resolution to get through the chamber before a recess that begins at the end of this week, and the Senate today began debating a separate resolution to block a rule requiring background checks for gun purchases by mentally disabled Social Security recipients.
That means Senate action on the Bureau of Land Management’s methane rule will come after Congress returns from the weeklong President’s Day recess.
Senators also are continuing to negotiate timing on confirmation votes for several of members President Donald Trump’s Cabinet, including Rep. Ryan Zinke for Interior secretary, Rick Perry for Energy secretary and Scott Pruitt for EPA administrator.
Democrats are asking for a vote on Pruitt, the Oklahoma Attorney General, to be delayed until they receive copies of emails between his office and a variety of fossil fuel interests. As of now, debating time on Pruitt’s nomination would expire around the same time Thursday that an Oklahoma judge has scheduled a hearing in a lawsuit seeking those records, Sen. Tom Carper told reporters.
He also suggested that Democrats may agree to quicker votes on less controversial nominees like Perry or Zinke in exchange for delaying the Pruitt vote.
“That’s probably above my pay grade,” Carper said. “But I wouldn’t be surprised if that’s something that’s being discussed by leadership.”
https://www.politicopro.com/energy/whiteboard
-
Pa. Clears the Way for Mariner East 2 Project
Feb 14, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Mike Lee
Pennsylvania regulators issued the final permits yesterday for Sunoco Logistics Partners' Mariner East 2 pipeline, clearing the way for construction to begin.
The 350-mile, $2.5 billion pipeline is designed to carry natural gas liquids such as propane and butane that are produced in the Marcellus Shale formation. It will start in Ohio and continue across West Virginia and Pennsylvania to Sunoco's Marcus Hook storage facility in Philadelphia.
Most of the new pipeline will travel in a right of way used by the existing Mariner East pipeline.
Once the new line is finished, Sunoco will be able to transport 345,000 barrels a day to Marcus Hook, where it is converting and expanding an old refinery into a hub for gas liquids storage and exports.
"By keeping these natural resources in Pennsylvania for storage, processing and distribution to local, regional and international markets, Mariner East 2 offers Pennsylvania the opportunity to develop its own manufacturing economy rather than sending jobs and investment elsewhere," Sunoco said in a statement.
Sunoco is controlled by Dallas-based Energy Transfer Partners LP, which has faced controversy over its pipelines in North Dakota and Texas (Energywire, Nov. 1, 2016; Energywire, May 10, 2016).
The process in Pennsylvania has been controversial, too. Environmentalists have been pressing Gov. Tom Wolf (D) to slow down or stop drilling in Pennsylvania and have used the pipeline permitting process as a way to block energy development (Climatewire, July 25, 2016).
The Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection held five public hearings and received 29,000 public comments in a process that lasted 2½ years.
The DEP issued water obstruction and encroachment permits for the 17 counties that the line will cross, as well as erosion and sediment control permits, according to a news release. DEP Secretary Patrick McDonnell said the agency will monitor construction to make sure the pipeline is built safely.
http://www.eenews.net/energywire/2017/02/14/stories/1060050000
-
Drilling Restarts on Dakota Access Pipeline
Feb 14, 2017 | Fuel Fix
By David Hunn
If activists are looking to organize again in North Dakota against work starting up on the Dakota Access Pipeline, they’ll have time:
A federal judge on Monday refused to stop construction on the last stretch of the pipeline. Drilling under Lake Oahe, meanwhile, and construction of the oil pipeline under the reservoir could take as much as two months to finish, the company said.
Dallas-based Energy Transfer Partners, the primary owner and operator of the controversial Dakota Access Pipeline, started drilling immediately upon receiving permission from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers last Wednesday, a spokeswoman said on Monday. Energy Transfer estimates it will finish the horizontal drilling within 60 days. The pipeline will run as much as 115 feet below the bottom of Lake Oahe, it said. It will take another 23 days to fill the line with crude from North Dakota’s Bakken oil field to a pipeline hub in Patoka, Ill.
North Dakota protest leaders called last week for activists to return in haste to the Standing Rock Sioux camps north of the reservation.
http://fuelfix.com/blog/2017/02/14/drilling-restarts-on-dakota-access-pipeline/
-
100% Renewables Bill Gaining Support
Feb 14, 2017 | E&E Climatewire
By Daniel Cusick
A bill that would require Massachusetts to meet 100 percent of its energy needs with renewable resources is gaining momentum in the state Legislature, with more than a quarter of the commonwealth's lawmakers backing the bill, according to clean energy advocates.
The "100 Percent Renewable Energy Act," introduced last month by three Democratic lawmakers, calls on Massachusetts to meet all of its electricity demand using renewables by 2035, followed by a complete phaseout of fossil fuels — including for heating and transportation — by 2050.
While aimed primarily at protecting Massachusetts from the environmental downsides of burning fossil fuels, including emissions of greenhouse gases, the bill also would increase energy security by reducing the state's reliance on imported fuels, advocates say.
A 100 percent renewables policy would also spur economic development and job growth by "stimulating public and private investments in clean energy and efficiency projects," according to language filed in the House and Senate.
"This legislation provides a bold step by placing the Commonwealth on a path to a cleaner and more sustainable future," Rep. Sean Garballey, one of the bill's co-sponsors, said in a statement when the bill was dropped Jan. 20. "It encourages job creation, protects and sustains our natural resources, reduces our carbon footprint and would benefit the health and well-being of our citizens in immeasurable ways."
If passed, the measure would build on existing state law already aimed at making deep cuts to carbon pollution and expanding the commonwealth's renewable energy portfolio.
They include the 2008 Massachusetts Global Warming Solutions Act, which mandates an 80 percent reduction in greenhouse gases from 1990 levels by 2050, and the more recent Energy Diversity Act.
The Massachusetts energy diversity law, signed last August by Republican Gov. Charlie Baker, commits the state's utilities to procure 1,600 megawatts of offshore wind energy by 2027, while also expanding hydropower imports and spurring investment in technologies like battery storage that can be coupled with renewables.
Clean energy advocates say a combination of factors, including environmental concerns and sharply falling costs for renewables, has made wind, solar and other emissions-free energy alternatives the "go-to" option for many communities and businesses.
"The supporters of his bill have joined the growing number of stakeholders and leaders who recognize the need for rapid transition to clean, renewable energy to tackle our environmental challenges," said Rob Sargent, energy program director at Environment America, a national advocacy organization based in Boston. "With a can-do attitude, powering our state entirely with clean, renewable energy is as feasible as it is necessary."
Organizations like Environment America have argued that state and local energy policymaking will become even more critical as the federal government shifts to a more pro-fossil-fuels agenda under the Trump administration and a Republican-controlled Congress. Clean energy advocates have also championed the rapidly expanding market for renewable energy within the private sector as more companies, including Fortune 500 firms, commit to purchase large amounts of wind, solar and other emissions-free power.
If the Massachusetts bill passes, it would place the commonwealth atop a handful of states that have made recent moves to strengthen their renewable energy portfolios. Currently, Vermont has the most ambitious renewable portfolio standard, requiring 75 percent of electricity to come from renewables by 2032, followed by California and New York (50 percent by 2030), Maine and Oregon (40 percent by 2017 and 2040, respectively), and Rhode Island (38.5 percent by 2035).
A number of U.S. cities have also pledged to meet all of their electricity demand using renewable energy. They include San Francisco; San Diego; Salt Lake City; and Grand Rapids, Mich., according to the Sierra Club's Ready for 100 campaign, which is challenging cities across the United States to set 100 percent clean energy targets.
http://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2017/02/14/stories/1060049988
-
Experts Link Gas Well to Explosion That Injured Family
Feb 14, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Mike Soraghan
Texas oil and gas inspectors say they still don't know what caused a water well to blow up in 2014, badly burning a man and his daughter.
But experts hired by attorneys for Cody Murray and his family have laid out in court documents a case of complete neglect by a company that drilled an oil and gas well nearby.
In a series of reports, the experts say the company that drilled it, Fairway Resources LLC, knew it was poorly sealed, allowing gas and even drilling mud to leak into the neighborhood water supply.
The reports also fault the analysis of state regulators who say testing was "inconclusive" on the source of the gas. They say officials failed to account for chemical changes that occur as production changes and the gas moves through the subsurface and into groundwater.
"The evidence in this case is compelling and clear. Fairway cut corners when constructing a well, and it caused the contamination of my clients' water wells, and the explosion that severely burned my clients," said Chris Hamilton, the Murrays' Dallas-based attorney.
The state agency that regulates oil and gas is the Texas Railroad Commission. Spokeswoman Ramona Nye said the agency is not familiar with the findings of Murray's experts. The agency has not determined a cause for the blast.
"The Railroad Commission is investigating whether area oil and gas operations may have impacted water conditions," Nye said. "Our staff has not received reports regarding the fire's cause."
One of the three statewide elected commissioners who oversee the agency last year declined to comment on the case (E&E News PM, June 3, 2016).
Fairway Resources Chairman Lester Stephens declined to comment because the matter is in litigation.
The flash fire occurred in August 2014 near Perrin, Texas, a rural community about an hour outside Fort Worth. Murray went to his shed to check on a malfunctioning water well pump. When he opened the door, a methane cloud in the air ignited.
He suffered second- and third-degree burns on 22 percent of his body. His 4-year-old daughter, Alyssa, was in the yard in her mother's arms and was also burned. So was his father, Jim, who'd been standing behind him.
Before the fire, Murray's neighbor Richard Singleton had complained to the Railroad Commission about fouled water in his well. But inspectors had repeatedly told him the problem couldn't be oil and gas.
An E&E News review of thousands of pages of Texas Railroad Commission records obtained under state open records laws showed significant gaps in the investigation and suggested at least one Fairway well wasn't fully examined (Energywire, June 1, 2016).
Testing
The Fairway well, named JT Cook #2, is about 750 feet from Singleton's back door and about 2,000 feet from Murray's water well. It was completed about a month before Singleton started noticing problems and about 10 months before the explosion at Murray's water well.
Murray and Singleton sued Fairway and another company, EOG Resources Inc., which has settled. The suit names several Fairway entities, including one that is a wholly owned subsidiary of the investment firm Goldman Sachs. Trial is set for Oct. 12.
Hamilton retained Cornell University engineering professor Anthony Ingraffea, Ohio State University geochemist Thomas Darrah, Ohio State University hydrogeologist Franklin Schwartz and Zacariah Hildenbrand, a biochemist at the University of Texas, Arlington. Their reports were attached to a motion in the case filed last month.
Ingraffea is well-known to oil and gas industry trade groups, who have long criticized him as being in league with environmentalists and opponents of drilling. His fee was donated to PSE Healthy Energy Inc., a research group that studies the effects of drilling.
Ingraffea said Fairway's well construction was "bare-bones." The company failed to install a device, called a Bradenhead gauge, that would monitor pressure in the wellbore and help detect leaks. It was designed with a minimal cement seal at the bottom of the well. But it was actually constructed with even less.
He noted that other wells in the area had much more extensive cement seals.
"This well was designed and constructed in such a careless fashion," Ingraffea wrote, "that the risk of these mechanisms [leaks] occurring, always present in wells of this type, was intensified."
Darrah compared water from neighborhood wells with the natural gas from the Fairway well using sophisticated noble gas analysis and determined that they match.
"The JT Cook #2 oil and gas well displays a geochemical match to samples of groundwater in the Singleton's and Murray's water wells in all of the measured data," Darrah wrote.
Schwartz said Texas Railroad Commission officials assumed that any gas leaking from a gas well into a water supply would match the gas coming out of the wellhead. He said that fails to account for changes that would occur in the gas as it rises to the aquifer.
"This assumption is wrong because it ignores the fact that the composition of free gases moving in the subsurface and gases dissolved in groundwater are not static but change as a consequence of physical, chemical and isotopic processes," Schwartz wrote.
Hildebrand said he matched sludge found in Murray's and Singleton's water wells to a byproduct of a drilling mud additive called Chem Seal used in the Fairway well.
http://www.eenews.net/energywire/2017/02/14/stories/1060049835
-
Changes to Power Sector Spur Emissions Decline — EPA
Feb 14, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Hannah Hess
Total U.S. greenhouse gas emissions decreased 2.2 percent between 2014 and 2015, according to a draft U.S. EPA inventory published today.
In 2015, greenhouse gas emissions were 6,586.2 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent, EPA found. Since 2005, the nation's net greenhouse gas emissions have dropped 11.2 percent, largely due to changes in the power sector.
The 606-page draft inventory shows trends in U.S. greenhouse gas emissions and removals between 1990 and 2015 and will be open for public comment until March 17.
The final report is scheduled to be released April 15 and submitted to the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change.
EPA attributes the decreased emissions in large part to declining carbon dioxide emissions from fossil fuel combustion in the power sector.
EPA points to three main factors: the ongoing transition from coal to natural-gas-fired power plants; an unusually warm winter, in which households and businesses used less fuel for heating; and a slight decrease in electricity demand.
Carbon dioxide accounted for 81 percent of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions in 2015. Activities related to fuel combustion, including electricity generation, transportation and consumer use, accounted for 93 percent of carbon dioxide emissions, the draft inventory says.
CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion declined from 5,561.8 million to 5,410.6 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent between 2014 and 2015.
Transportation emissions rose slightly between 2014 and 2015, while emissions decreased across several industrial sectors. Overall emissions from the transportation sector were responsible for 32 percent of CO2 emissions, while electricity generation accounted for 35 percent.
The United States pledged to cut emissions between 26 and 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025 as part of its commitment to the Paris climate agreement.
Methane emissions declined from 659.4 million to 654.9 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent between 2014 and 2015. Overall methane emissions have decreased 16.7 percent since 1990.
The biggest methane emitters in 2015 were domestic livestock production and natural gas systems, the draft says. Emissions from those two sources surpassed landfills, the top methane source in 2014, accounting for 25.4 and 24.4 percent, respectively, of methane emitted in 2015.
Hydrofluorocarbons, a short-lived warming pollutant, increased about 4 percent from 2014 to 2015 as manufacturers of refrigerants have replaced ozone-depleting chemicals with HFCs.
Forest fires were the largest source of nitrous oxide in 2015.
Helping to reduce emissions: Forests, urban tree planting, agricultural soils and landfilled yard trimmings offset 5.9 percent of emissions in 2015.
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2017/02/14/stories/1060050036
Industry and Association News
LCSA News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested