Preview Newsletter
ACC PM 3/1/2017
-
(ACC Mentioned) Recycling vs. Incineration: How to Maximise the Value of Plastic Waste?
Mar 1, 2017 | Recycling International
By Kirstin Linnenkoper
'In Austria, every 20th job is a green job,' according to Christian Holzer of the country’s ministry of Environment. This means that more than 11% of the nation’s GDP is being generated in this sector, he pointed out at the Identiplast conference, held last week in Vienna. -
Senate Confirms Zinke for Interior Secretary
Mar 1, 2017 | Politico Pro
By Esther Whieldon and Annie Snider
The Senate confirmed Rep. Ryan Zinke Wednesday as Interior secretary, installing the former Navy Seal into a Cabinet role that will require him to try to balance President Donald Trump's goal of boosting fossil fuel production while protecting vast amounts of federal land in the West. -
Tables are Turned as State AGs Set Their Sights on Pruitt
Mar 1, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Amanda Reilly
Scott Pruitt, who sued U.S. EPA more than a dozen times as Oklahoma's chief legal officer, will likely soon find himself on the other side of lawsuits filed by his Democratic attorneys general. -
(ACC Mentioned) US State Legislative Activity Unrestrained by TSCA Reform
Mar 1, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
State legislative activity on chemicals remains as high as ever despite the passage of the Lautenberg Chemical Safety Act, according to industry groups. -
Chemical Romance: EPA Valentine’s Day Meeting
Mar 1, 2017 | Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families
By Liz Hitchcock in Policy & Regulation
Most Valentine’s Days come and go, with some more memorable than others. I was in a meeting this week with a group of lawyers, lobbyists and EPA staff, where more than one speaker referred to “the big EPA Valentine’s Day meeting,” so I guess this was one of the memorable ones. -
European Commission Stalls Again on EDC Criteria Vote
Mar 1, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Vanessa Zainzinger
The European Commission has refrained from asking the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed (PAFF) to vote on the latest proposed criteria to identify endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs). -
Recycled Rubber Crumb Health Risk 'Very Low', Echa Says
Mar 1, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Clelia Oziel
Substances in rubber crumb, used on artificial sports pitches in Europe, pose very low health risk to users and workers who install and maintain them, Echa says. -
Executive Order Coming Next Week
Mar 1, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Hannah Hess
President Trump will sign an executive order against U.S. EPA's Clean Power Plan next week, a White House spokeswoman said today. -
AGs Ask EPA to Drop Methane Information Request
Mar 1, 2017 | Politico Pro - Whiteboard
By Alex Guillen
Eleven state attorneys general today asked EPA to halt its ongoing direction for oil and gas companies to answer questions related to Obama-era plans for methane emission regulations. -
Cracking Appalachia’s Ethane Code Part 1: Shell First to the Party
Mar 1, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Carolyn Davis
The Appalachian Basin's shale formations helped to birth the natural gas renaissance in North America, and the region now is poised to join the Gulf Coast as a major petrochemical hub, a group of experts said Monday. -
Keystone XL Still Faces Speed Bumps Despite Support from Trump
Mar 1, 2017 | Politico Pro
By Ben Lefebvre
President Donald Trump’s push to revive the Keystone XL pipeline is running into new hurdles — some of which he erected himself. -
Commentary: Administration Should Support LNG Development
Mar 1, 2017 | Fuel Fix
By Charlie Riedl
As Congress works to finish confirmation of key members of President Trump’s cabinet, it’s worth noting that one important issue has so far largely passed with relatively little exploration; the question of how much and how quickly the new Administration will allow natural gas to be shipped overseas. -
Kinder’s Elba Island LNG Export Project Takes JV Partner
Mar 1, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Joe Fisher
Investment funds managed by EIG Global Energy Partners (EIG) have taken a 49% joint venture (JV) stake in Elba Liquefaction Co. LLC (ELC). -
Early EPA Testing Shows Potential to Reduce Strontium in Drinking Water
Mar 1, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Lara Beaven
Preliminary EPA testing shows two technologies could allow water utilities to reduce levels on strontium in drinking water, though questions remain about how one technology works and whether the methods would be cost-effective -- issues that will play into the agency's final determination on whether an enforceable strontium standard is necessary. -
White House Proposes Cutting EPA Staff by One-fifth, Eliminating Key Programs
Mar 1, 2017 | Washington Post
By Juliet Eilperin and Brady Dennis
The Office of Management and Budget has suggested deep cuts to the Environmental Protection Agency’s budget that would reduce its staff by one-fifth in the first year and eliminate several programs, according to multiple individuals briefed on the plan. -
Trump Takes Hatchet to EPA
Mar 1, 2017 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
President Trump has launched the opening salvo in his assault on the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) Recycling vs. Incineration: How to Maximise the Value of Plastic Waste?
Mar 1, 2017 | Recycling International
By Kirstin Linnenkoper
'In Austria, every 20th job is a green job,' according to Christian Holzer of the country’s ministry of Environment. This means that more than 11% of the nation’s GDP is being generated in this sector, he pointed out at the Identiplast conference, held last week in Vienna.
Austria has a plastic recycling rate of just under 30% while some 70% of material serves waste-to-energy operations, Holzer said, citing 2014 figures. ‘I cannot stress enough the need for landfill taxation or, better yet, a full-on landfill ban,’ the official said. ‘We have already enacted a ban in Austria, with good results,’ Holzer added. The ‘key challenge’ is to achieve both high quality material, and a higher quantity of recycling. ‘Somehow, this must be possible,’ Holzer said with confidence.
He advocated the importance of strengthening the market for recycling by increasing the confidence in recycled products as well as stimulating the willingness of companies to incorporate recycled content.
The 'bridge' that is energy recovery
‘Waste-to-energy plants will make us less dependent on fossil fuel imports,’ asserted Ella Stengler, managing director of the Confederation of European Waste-to-Energy Plants. Also, about 50% of the energy produced by energy recovery plants is renewable.
The 483 incineration plants across Europe processed 88.6 million tonnes of household, commercial and industrial waste that remained after recycling in 2014, Stengler contended. This is enough to supply 17 million inhabitants with electricity and 15 million inhabitants with heat per year.
She called energy recovery a ‘bridge’ towards the circular economy. As she put it: ‘We are the guys you need after recycling and reuse and redesign.’
Who is the bad guy?
‘I want to contradict something that has been said earlier; namely that incineration is not the bad guy,’ commented Hugo Maria Shally, head of the EU’s Eco Innovation Unit. ‘It’s basic chemistry; you burn the material so you waste the material. The value disappears,’ he argued.
He slammed waste-to-energy as a being nothing more than a ‘euphamism’. Shally concluded: ‘Granted, incineration is necessary for a transitional period, but that’s it. Don’t overstate capacity.’
'Not a big impact'
Despite the debate, the word circular economy is a ‘powerful concept’, remarked Craig Cookson of the American Chemistry Council. ‘from what I can tell US companies are certainly trying to incorporate circular economy principles into their products and services,’ he told delegates.
However, it is not having a big legislative impact. ‘There is more focus on extended producer responsibility schemes, with producers trying to stimulate voluntary initiatives,’ Cookson explained.
Especially the state of Oregon was said to be ‘ahead of the curve’, followed closely by Minnessota. Still, generally speaking, the government is not yet ‘warming’ to the circular economy lobby.
The full Identiplast conference review will be published in #2 of Recycling International.
http://www.recyclinginternational.com/recycling-news/10381/plastic-and-rubber/austria/recycling-vs-incineration-how-maximise-value-plastic-waste
-
Senate Confirms Zinke for Interior Secretary
Mar 1, 2017 | Politico Pro
By Esther Whieldon and Annie Snider
The Senate confirmed Rep. Ryan Zinke Wednesday as Interior secretary, installing the former Navy Seal into a Cabinet role that will require him to try to balance President Donald Trump's goal of boosting fossil fuel production while protecting vast amounts of federal land in the West.
The fifth-generation Montana native will lead an agency that manages one-fifth of the nation's land and is composed of nine massive bureaus, each with its own culture and mandates to oversee national parks, wildlife refuges, major Western hydropower dams, tribal lands and areas ripe for oil drilling and other energy development.
"The Interior has one of the most complex and varied missions of the entire federal government," said Lynn Scarlett, global managing director for public policy at The Nature Conservancy, and a former Interior deputy secretary under the George W. Bush administration. It's a position which will require Zinke to perform "an endless balancing act between the conservation purposes of the agency, the recreation access purposes (and) the resource extraction requirements," she added.
Compared to many of Donald Trump's other nominees who faced resistance from Democrats, Zinke breezed through his confirmation process and was confirmed on a bipartisan 68-31 vote, with backing from 17 Democrats, including Sens. Michael Bennet (Colo.), Heidi Heitkamp (N.D.), Tim Kaine (Va.) and Jon Tester (Mont.).
While environmental groups have been critical of Zinke's pro-fossil fuel stance and his record voting against endangered species protections, they focused most of their opposition campaigns on nominees like EPA administrator Scott Pruitt, who they fear would do far greater damage to their climate change, clean energy and conservation efforts.
"Zinke is really bad, but given the horrific standard that Trump has established so far, he's actually a little better than the rest of them," Kierán Suckling, executive director of the Center for Biological Diversity, said when Zinke's nomination was announced.
In addition to land management, Interior is tasked with implementing the Endangered Species Act, which some Republican lawmakers are hoping to overhaul in this Congress. The department is also home to the U.S. Geological Survey, an agency that, among other things, conducts scientific research on climate and land use changes.
"Throughout the agencies, scientists are afraid that their work will be defunded, suppressed or they won't be able to communicate, and I think that's something that will be a big test of Ryan Zinke: is he willing to stand up for the scientists in his agency and listen to them and take their advice?" said Adam Markham, deputy director of the energy and climate change program at the Union of Concerned Scientists.
During his confirmation hearing, Zinke said he believes the climate is changing, but said he there was still debate over the role that human activity played in it.
One of Zinke's first acts is likely to be to end Interior's freeze on new coal leases with the swipe of a pen. Trump is expected to issue an executive order in the coming days directing Zinke to do just that. Zinke has also pledged to smooth the path for more oil and gas development on federal land and offshore areas, and he's likely to seek to reverse President Barack Obama's late-term decision to ban new offshore drilling leases in parts of the Arctic and Atlantic oceans.
Zinke has criticized the Interior's minerals and drilling permitting process, but has defended the underlying environmental review law used in the process. Among other things, Zinke will need to persuade agencies under his jurisdiction to improve their cooperation, a challenge his predecessor failed to meet.
Among Zinke's earliest tests at Interior will be his response to pressure from the Utah delegation to endorse their call for Trump to revoke the Bears Ears National Monument that Obama created at the end of his term. Zinke is expected to visit Utah soon, and will likely make it his first stop of a multi-state tour.
While the fate of the monument is unclear, Zinke has been a supporter of Washington's role in overseeing federal lands — a position that may have helped him win the nomination, since he drew the backing of Donald Trump, Jr, who like Zinke is a sportsman.
Zinke, who was first elected to the House in 2014, has characterized himself as a Teddy Roosevelt Republican on public lands issues, which puts him in conflict with the GOP platform and several of his former lawmaker colleagues on Capitol Hill. Still, Zinke believes land should be tapped for multiple purposes where appropriate, and he supports efforts to increase the mineral and energy production on federal property.
Some Western Republican lawmakers want the land handed over to the states where energy resources could be developed much quicker but outdoor recreation groups fear that doing so would effectively cut them off from those areas.
"I'm particularly concerned about public access," Zinke said at his confirmation hearing. "I'm a hunter, a fisherman. But multiple use is also making sure that what you are going to do, you know and you go in with both eyes open. That means sustainability. That means that it doesn't have to be in conflict if you have recreation over mining, you just have to make sure that you understand what the consequences of each of those uses are."
Even if Zinke can find a balanced approach to land use, he may find his hands tied on with the agency's massive infrastructure backlog, the biggest of which is at National Parks. Zinke has repeatedly indicated he plans to tackle the Park Service's multi-billion dollar infrastructure deficit, but that's likely to be a challenge given the White House effort to shrink spending across all non-defense areas of the government.
Interior will also have a key role to play in the next few years on several major Western water issues — an area Zinke has little experience with and will need to staff up quickly.
States in the lower Colorado River basin are tinkering on the brink of a first-ever shortage declaration and are poised to finalize a deal aimed at heading off the worst-case scenario in the massive river basin that is home to nearly 40 million people and a major slice of the country’s agricultural output. But they need a federal partner to help finish the agreement.
Meanwhile, Interior also has a key role to play in negotiating a new water sharing deal with Mexico, ideally before the current one expires at the end of this year. Zinke will also find himself caught in the middle of California water wars, as his department implements contentious language approved by Congress in December that aims to rebalance how water is shared between endangered fish species in the sensitive Sacramento-San Joaquin Bay-Delta and farmers and cities in the central and southern portions of the state.
https://www.politicopro.com/energy/story/2017/01/senate-confirms-zinke-for-interior-secretary-146626
-
Tables are Turned as State AGs Set Their Sights on Pruitt
Mar 1, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Amanda Reilly
Scott Pruitt, who sued U.S. EPA more than a dozen times as Oklahoma's chief legal officer, will likely soon find himself on the other side of lawsuits filed by his Democratic attorneys general.
Democrats opposed to Pruitt's efforts to dismantle President Obama's environmental regulations are putting up their dukes.
"My office will stand firmly in the way if Scott Pruitt and the Trump administration threaten to gut the progress we've made in protecting our environment and tackling the dire impacts of climate change," New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman pledged in a statement. "We won't hesitate to protect New Yorkers — even if that means stepping up enforcement ourselves, and bringing litigation against the federal government — because too much is at stake."
State attorneys general have already signaled a willingness to mix it up, as evidenced by litigation filed quickly last month over President Trump's executive order on immigration.
"In the past, there wouldn't be collaboration until a law was signed," said Paul Nolette, a political science professor at Marquette University who studies state attorneys general. "Now it's immediate. It provides the kind of frame that progressive and Democratic attorneys general are going to use during the Trump administration."
Environmentalists say they are looking to state lawyers to be aggressive not only in suing the Trump administration but also in taking a bigger role in environmental enforcement and in filing environmental and common law actions in state courts.
They're expected to build on the collaborations formed during the George W. Bush administration, which also took on a deregulatory agenda. During the Bush administration, Democratic attorneys general and environmentalists succeeded in giving EPA the authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions in the landmark Massachusetts v. EPA Supreme Court decision.
The case signaled the "birth of a new type of activism, trying to fight against the Bush deregulatory agenda," Nolette said. "And I see that very much kind of coming back in vogue amongst Democratic attorneys general in the Trump administration."
AGs to watch
Attorneys general along both coasts will likely be key in leading the opposition to the Trump environmental agenda, legal experts said.
"If you're an attorney general from California or Oregon or Washington, it's relatively easier in terms of the very green constituency to be green all the time," said Howard Learner, executive director of the Midwest-based Environmental Law & Policy Center.
Emerging leaders include Schneiderman and Maura Healey of Massachusetts, both of whom are already heavily involved in the investigations of Exxon Mobil Corp.'s climate change activity. Washington state Attorney General Bob Ferguson, who's led the legal battle against the immigration order, is also poised to play a key role.
Maryland Attorney General Brian Frosh is also eyeing a bigger role in litigation against the Trump administration after Maryland's Democratic-led General Assembly last month voted to approve giving Frosh blanket authority to sue the federal government. The prior law required the attorney general to obtain approval from the Legislature or governor, currently a Republican, Larry Hogan.
Frosh and state Democratic leaders said concerns about the future of natural resources, including the Chesapeake Bay, partly drove the push for expanded legal authority.
In California, Nolette said, former Rep. Xavier Becerra's willingness to give up a leadership role in Congress to be state attorney general signals that the Golden State will play a more active role than it played with Kamala Harris as attorney general. Harris was elected to the Senate in November, and Becerra became attorney general in January.
"He's a smart guy," Nolette said. "He knows where the action's going to be, and he knew that that position was going to be one in which he could advance progressive policy goals."
While the action will be concentrated on the coasts, environmentalists are looking to Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan to join with coastal attorneys general in taking a pro-environmental position in litigation.
Madigan, who has served as attorney general since 2003, aligned with environmental groups to clean up the Chicago River and has signed on to recent coalition letters urging the Trump administration to uphold air and water regulations.
"For a Midwestern attorney general who comes from a coal state, she's very good on clean air, clean water issues, pro-consumer protection and very involved in issues involving consumer finance," Learner said. "She wouldn't be the equivalent of an attorney general from California on the environment, but Attorney General Madigan has been a strong environmental leader."
Climate change
One early case where state attorneys general could be key is the litigation over the Clean Power Plan, the Obama administration's landmark climate change rule targeting carbon dioxide emissions from existing power plants.
"Their roles are critical," said Joanne Spalding, a senior managing attorney at the Sierra Club who handles climate change litigation.
The Clean Power Plan case is pending before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. If the Trump administration, which plans to eliminate the rule, drops its defense in court, Democratic attorneys general and environmental groups could continue to defend the rule in the D.C. Circuit and the Supreme Court.
"They've been active on the climate front. I see them as continuing to be active and helping to defend Obama regulatory initiatives," Spalding said. "And they also have to really step up because if, as we are assuming will happen, EPA switches sides, it will be left to the intervenors to support the Obama EPA actions to defend those rules in court."
Along with the Clean Power Plan, Michael Gerrard, director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia Law School, said he also expected state attorneys general to jump into litigation over the consideration of climate change in major federal actions.
Under Obama, the White House Council on Environmental Quality issued a guidance instructing federal agencies to take warming into account in environmental reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act. President Trump could target that guidance through an executive order.
A coalition of Democratic state attorneys general led by Schneiderman also yesterday vowed to "aggressively" oppose the Trump administration's efforts to unravel the Obama administration's Clean Water Rule, which clarified which streams receive automatic protection under the Clean Water Act.
While environmentalists expect to also file numerous suits against the Trump administration, states are "always valued plaintiffs" in litigation because they have an easier lift to show legal standing to sue, Gerrard said.
He pointed to Massachusetts v. EPA, where the Supreme Court granted plaintiffs standing because Massachusetts could point to miles of coastline that would be affected by climate change.
"The fact that a state was one of the plaintiffs made a big difference," Gerrard said.
The ongoing immigration suit also shows that Democratic attorneys general are willing to lay out a wide variety of legal arguments against Trump administration policies and see what sticks, Nolette said.
"The kitchen sink is being thrown at it, every possible thing you can imagine," Nolette said. "That's another one of the advantages that the AGs have."
Learner of the Environmental Law & Policy Center said environmentalists are also looking to state attorneys general to bring citizen suits against polluters and to bring lawsuits in state courts as well as federal.
Sabin Center's Gerrard said state attorneys general may turn to state common laws in the absence of greenhouse gas regulations on the federal level.
In the 2011 case American Electric Power Co. v. Connecticut, the Supreme Court ruled that national greenhouse gas regulation belongs in EPA's realm. EPA actions, the court said, pre-empt litigation that attempts to curtail emissions through federal common law, such as nuisance lawsuits.
The opinion didn't speak to using state common laws to litigate against emitters of heat-trapping gases, but nobody has yet brought such a case.
The Supreme Court "left open the possibility of state common law nuisance cases against greenhouse gas emitters even though the court said that that theory was not viable against emitters under federal common law," Gerrard said. "We'll see if any states try it."
'A friend in Scott Pruitt'
Republican attorneys general, for their part, see an ally in Pruitt as EPA administrator.
"I sincerely believe West Virginia will have a friend in Scott Pruitt," the state's attorney general, Patrick Morrisey, said in a statement. "Scott's principled approach will respect the law and reinforce the EPA's core mission to protect our air and water without unconstitutional and job killing overreach, which has brought tremendous harm to West Virginia during the past eight years."
In Oklahoma, where Pruitt sued EPA over various air and water regulations on the grounds that the federal government was usurping state control, Michael Hunter became the new attorney general as of Feb. 20.
Hunter most recently served as the secretary of state, a position he held after serving as first assistant attorney general under Pruitt.
His background also includes secretary of the Commissioners of the Land Office, a $4 billion public land and investment trust in the state, and general counsel to the Oklahoma Corporation Commission, which regulates the state's public utilities and energy companies.
Under Hunter, the attorney general's office will likely intervene in litigation brought by Democratic attorneys general where necessary to protect states' rights, but it won't turn into "some sort of energy activist organization," said Oklahoma Oil & Gas Association President Chad Warmington, who has known Hunter for many years.
In general, Warmington added, "I don't see that the EPA will be as much of an issue for him as attorney general."
"I don't anticipate that the Oklahoma attorney general's office will wade into as many of these, if any, lawsuits against the EPA because we've got Scott Pruitt," Warmington said, "who I think clearly demonstrated that he wants to have the EPA live well within the legal constructs set out for it by Congress."
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2017/03/01/stories/1060050763
-
(ACC Mentioned) US State Legislative Activity Unrestrained by TSCA Reform
Mar 1, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
State legislative activity on chemicals remains as high as ever despite the passage of the Lautenberg Chemical Safety Act, according to industry groups.
Many in industry had looked to TSCA reform to stem the growth of state-level legislation on chemicals in products. But, at the American Chemistry Council’s GlobalChem conference in Washington DC last week, a panel of speakers – including representatives from the chemicals industry, a downstream user group and the legal community – agreed that state activity appears not to have been diminished by increased federal oversight of chemicals.
“Activity is as busy this year as we’ve seen it anywhere,” ACC vice president of state affairs and political mobilisation, Rudy Underwood, told conference attendees.
Perennial legislation on flame retardants, ingredient disclosure (particularly for cleaning products) and establishing lists of reportable chemicals of concern remain in play this year across the country. But speakers said new issues – and states that do not frequently consider chemicals policies – are also coming to the fore.
Mississippi and West Virginia, for instance, have introduced measures to ban certain flame retardants in children’s products and upholstered furniture. And Iowa has proposed a bill to ban triclosan in cleaning products.
Meanwhile, in Hawaii the legislature has proposed more than ten separate bills to address oxybenzone – a common sunscreen ingredient linked to concerns for coral organisms.
There has also been an uptick in legislation focused on fluorochemistries, particularly in food packaging.
Expanding policies
Other states are seeking to expand on existing chemicals policies.
In Vermont, a measure has been introduced in the House and Senate (HB 268/S103) that comprises the “wish list of every nonprofit that wants to regulate the chemicals industry”, according to the Toy Industry Association’s director of state affairs, Owen Caine.
At around 80 pages in length, it covers “every aspect of the economy”, said Mr Caine. Among a number of hazardous waste requirements, it would also “dramatically expand” Vermont’s children’s product reporting requirements to cover all consumer products, with some exceptions.
The measure also seeks to:
require the removal of reportable substances from children’s products within six years of a manufacturer’s first report to the state;
ban the manufacture or sale of dental floss or food contact materials containing perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS); and
establish an interagency committee to identify substances of concern and propose measures that address risks they may pose, in consultation with a citizen advisory panel.
“There is literally no part of the economy or supply chain that isn’t affected by this legislation – it is incredibly damaging and poses huge regulatory burdens on anyone who does business in Vermont,” said Mr Caine.
Meanwhile, he pointed out that the New York Department of Environmental Conservation recently announced it will require cleaning product ingredient disclosure under a decades-old law, and has labelled these new guidelines as a test case for other kinds of products.
“This is an example of ... ignoring the legislature”, he said. With bills slow to pass, it appears New York has moved to a regulatory authority that “loosely has the authority” to act.
Now that TSCA has been reformed, said Mr Caine, stakeholders are looking for “other ways to get at the information – and ultimately restrictions” on chemicals.
https://chemicalwatch.com/53943/us-state-legislative-activity-unrestrained-by-tsca-reform
-
Chemical Romance: EPA Valentine’s Day Meeting
Mar 1, 2017 | Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families
By Liz Hitchcock in Policy & Regulation
Most Valentine’s Days come and go, with some more memorable than others.
I was in a meeting this week with a group of lawyers, lobbyists and EPA staff, where more than one speaker referred to “the big EPA Valentine’s Day meeting,” so I guess this was one of the memorable ones.
This year, a great group of public health advocates and chemical industry lobbyists were thanked for spending our Valentine’s Day talking about chemicals with the EPA staff.
In December, EPA named the first ten chemicals they will review and regulate under the Lautenberg Chemical Safety Act signed in June. The meeting was part of the process of identifying the “scope” of their review of those chemicals—which hazards, exposures, conditions of use, and “potentially exposed and susceptible subpopulations” will be included in its risk evaluation.
The stakes are high – What’s inside the scope will be subject to an “unreasonable risk” determination. What’s left outside will either be ignored by EPA or could be subject to a test order to develop more data on hazard and exposure if the public makes a big enough push.
On Valentine’s Day, EPA heard comments from worker, environmental, health affected, and consumer groups assembled in person and on the phone. I have to say that it was an impressive group!
Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization was well represented by founder Linda Reinstein and ADAO board member Brent Kynoch of the Environmental Information Association. Both presented compelling testimony for a long overdue ban on asbestos, with Linda dedicating her testimony to Lou Williams, who she calls a Mesothelioma Warrior.
Comments from Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) scientist Jennifer Sass about the health effects of the solvent chemicals under EPA review—methylene chloride (DCM), N-Methylpyrolidone (NMP), trichloroethylene (TCE) and perchloroethylene (PERC)—gave a real world sense of the multiple ways that the public is exposed to and harmed by these toxic chemicals.
Noting the exposures that workers take home on their skin, hair, and clothing, Jen urged that the EPA’s review include risk estimates for children and other family members. In the spirit of Valentine’s Day, Jen also presented greetings from Wisconsin-based Citizens for Safe Water Around Badger (CSWAB) that asked EPA to clean up and regulate heart-toxic chemicals like TCE.
Drawing sympathetic laughter from the (East Coast) room, Alaska Community Action on Toxics director Pam Miller noted that the meeting began at 5 am in Anchorage. She was up before dawn to talk about Hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD) and other persistent organic pollutants that are now “ubiquitous in northern and Arctic environments and found in marine fish, seabirds, ringed seals, beluga whales, and polar bears…. species that are vital for the physical, spiritual, and cultural sustenance as traditional foods of Indigenous peoples of the north and Arctic.”
Pam further urged EPA to “move forward expeditiously and with comprehensive considerations of aggregate exposures and concern for vulnerable populations of developing children, pregnant women, workers, those with chronic illnesses, and elders.”
Maureen Swanson, director of children’s environmental health for the Learning Disabilities Association of America, emphasized the importance of examining the potential effects on fetal and children’s brain development of the solvents that EPA has listed—1 bromopropane, methylene chloride, NMP, carbon tetrachloride, perchloroethylene and trichloroethylene—given the vulnerability of the developing brain to even low-level exposures to toxic chemicals.
Swanson urged EPA to “consider men and women of childbearing age as a vulnerable population in assessing the risks of these solvents, since both men’s and women’s exposures to toxic solvents are linked to lasting problems with brain development, cognition and behavior in their children.”
Noting that most of the chemicals in EPA’s first ten could be used in furnishings—in materials, manufacturing, and/or home use—Stephanie Schweickert from the North Carolina Conservation Network expressed support for strong regulations for these chemicals to protect vulnerable populations, workers, and families, all of whom may be using these chemicals in the workplace or exposed to them in their homes.
Jennifer Coleman, health outreach director from Oregon Environmental Council, made a strong case for EPA filling any data gaps, noting that “..lack of data is what gave rise to disclosure laws in Oregon and Washington and other states requiring manufacturers of children’s products to disclose the use of chemicals of concern.”
NRDC’s Daniel Rosenberg summed up the importance of the work ahead of EPA, saying that “(t)he next year, and the next four years, will coincide with when most of the crucial decisions will be made that lay the groundwork for implementation of the New TSCA and determine whether the revised program will truly protect public health.”
It is critical that we all remain vigilant and involved, to ensure that those decisions keep the health of our families and communities front and center.
http://saferchemicals.org/2017/03/01/chemical-romance-epa-valentines-day-meeting/
-
European Commission Stalls Again on EDC Criteria Vote
Mar 1, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Vanessa Zainzinger
The European Commission has refrained from asking the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed (PAFF) to vote on the latest proposed criteria to identify endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs).
At the meeting on 28 February, the Commission exchanged views on the newest version of its proposal, which was published in early February. This followed a meeting in December at which it did not call for a vote.
In its recent meeting the Commission “took stock of the progress made”, a spokesperson says. But NGOs suspect it decided against a vote because it became clear that its draft proposal would not raise a qualified majority of supporting member states.
According to provisional positions submitted by PAFF members, only 11 member states would have been in favour of the proposal with Germany, the Netherlands and Spain among them.
Eight member states were against the proposal, including Denmark, France and Sweden. And nine, including Belgium and the UK, said they would abstain. The majority of them asked for a draft legal Act, which the Commission separated from the criteria proposal in its latest amendment, to be tabled again.
This concerns changing the plant protection products (PPP) Regulation from referring to "negligible exposure" to "negligible risk" in relation to exceptions for active substances with endocrine disrupting properties.
This derogation has been controversial. NGO Pan Europe says it would “effectively ensure that no identified endocrine disrupting pesticides will be banned”.
Some member states would have voted against the proposal because they want the derogation change put to the vote at the same time as the identification criteria, Health & Environment Alliance (HEAL) says. The Commission might need to approach the Secretariat-General for permission to combine the two texts for a joint vote, it says.
And the European Consumer Organisation (Beuc) is also dissatisfied. The meeting shows that after five encounters and three revisions, member state experts “are still unconvinced by the Commission’s flawed approach. So are we. What we need is more than just a few cosmetic changes to the text,” Beuc chemicals policy officer, Pelle Moos, says.
“An EU definition needs to capture all chemicals that may disrupt the hormonal system - those chemicals we know are endocrine disruptors and those we suspect. This is the only way to truly protect consumers’ health from endocrine disruptors in pesticides, but also in cosmetics or toys.”
And French environment minister Ségolène Royal has said the Commission’s proposal is “still not acceptable”. She says Brussels ignored requests from France to take into account suspected endocrine disruptors, and include plausibility of their health effects in the proposal.
There is no scheduled date for further discussion on the criteria, the Commission spokesperson says.
https://chemicalwatch.com/53897/european-commission-stalls-again-on-edc-criteria-vote
-
Recycled Rubber Crumb Health Risk 'Very Low', Echa Says
Mar 1, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Clelia Oziel
Substances in rubber crumb, used on artificial sports pitches in Europe, pose very low health risk to users and workers who install and maintain them, Echa says.
The European Commission asked the agency to do the evaluation, focusing on polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) – which are already extensively restricted by EU legislation.
Despite the conclusion, Echa suggests measures to improve information for users of synthetic turfs, and said changes to REACH should be considered to ensure rubber granules are only supplied with very low concentrations of harmful chemicals.
The findings echo those from the Dutch National Institute for Public Health and the Environment (RIVM), which said in December that adverse health effects from the use of recycled rubber granules are "negligible". However, it has recommended a stricter standard for PAH content of the material.
Meanwhile, in the US, three federal agencies are conducting an investigation into the safety of recycled tyre crumb. Industry groups there say they are "confident" the EPA will also find no links to negative health effects.
Echa says its preliminary evaluation shows concern for lifetime cancer risk "is very low", given the concentrations of PAHs typically measured in European sports grounds. Concern from metals is negligible and none have been identified from the concentrations of phthalates, benzothiazole and methyl isobutyl ketone.
In addition to these volatile organic hydrocarbons (VOCs), semi-volatile organic hydrocarbons (SVOCs) are also found in the granules, Echa says. But there is “at most a very low level of concern from exposure" through skin contact, ingestion and inhalation.
Echa says there were several uncertainties in its findings and suggests the following action:
consider changes to REACH to ensure rubber granules are only supplied with very low concentrations of PAHs and other hazardous substances;
owners and operators of existing fields should measure concentrations of PAHs and other substances in the rubber granules and publish comprehensive information;
producers of rubber granules and interest organisations should develop guidance to help manufacturers and importers of (recycled) rubber infill test their material;
European sports and football associations and clubs should work with producers to provide communication about the substances; and
owners and operators of existing indoor fields with rubber granule infills should ensure adequate ventilation.
The agency also recommends that people take basic hygiene measures, after using artificial turf.
https://chemicalwatch.com/53950/recycled-rubber-crumb-health-risk-very-low-echa-says
-
Executive Order Coming Next Week
Mar 1, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Hannah Hess
President Trump will sign an executive order against U.S. EPA's Clean Power Plan next week, a White House spokeswoman said today.
Communications aide Kelly Love confirmed the plans in an email to E&E News but could not be more specific about the date.
Details on how Trump might instruct the administration to go about weakening the controversial climate rule are under wraps.
The action could cancel former President Obama's Climate Action Plan or lift the former administration's moratorium on federal coal leasing (Climatewire, Feb. 21).
Since the Feb. 17 swearing in of EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, who used to be attorney general of Oklahoma, companies and environmentalists have been watching for a directive that would begin the long bureaucratic slog of unwinding the Clean Power Plan.
A few hours after Pruitt addressed EPA employees in his first speech as administrator, Oklahoma asked the federal court considering the Clean Power Plan to remove him from the litigation (E&E News PM, Feb. 21).
During remarks to Congress last night, the president affirmed he still plans to act on his campaign-trail promises to help the coal industry.
"We're going to stop the regulations that threaten the future and livelihoods of our great coal miners," he said.
The Obama administration unveiled regulations in August 2015 aimed to dramatically curtail greenhouse gas emissions from power plants and eventually revamp the energy industry.
Billed by Obama as "the biggest, most important step" ever taken to address climate change, the program calls for a 32 percent reduction in carbon emissions from power plants by 2030 from 2005 levels.
Implementation of the Clean Power Plan has been on hold since February 2016, when the Supreme Court issued a stay in response to a request from a broad array of states, utilities and industry groups.
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2017/03/01/stories/1060050757
-
AGs Ask EPA to Drop Methane Information Request
Mar 1, 2017 | Politico Pro - Whiteboard
By Alex Guillen
Eleven state attorneys general today asked EPA to halt its ongoing direction for oil and gas companies to answer questions related to Obama-era plans for methane emission regulations.
EPA finalized its Information Collection Request just days after the election. The ICR requires oil and gas companies to answer a litany of technical questions and is the first step toward regulating methane emissions from existing oil and gas operations.
The AGs note EPA itself predicted it would cost companies more than $42 million and 284,000 hours to comply with the request.
“We believe the EPA's requests to be an unnecessary and onerous burden on oil and gas producers that is more harassment than a genuine search for pertinent and appropriate information,” the letter says.
EPA's request "comes at a time when the oil and gas industry is recovering from its most significant economic downturn in decades," it adds. "Many of the company can ill-afford the time and expense to comply with yet another empty regulatory burden."
The signatories include EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt’s successor as Oklahoma attorney general, Mike Hunter.
https://www.politicopro.com/energy/whiteboard
-
Cracking Appalachia’s Ethane Code Part 1: Shell First to the Party
Mar 1, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Carolyn Davis
The Appalachian Basin's shale formations helped to birth the natural gas renaissance in North America, and the region now is poised to join the Gulf Coast as a major petrochemical hub, a group of experts said Monday.
(Part 1 of 3)
A webinar hosted by NGI’s Shale Daily, "Cracking the Ethane Code in Appalachia," delved into all sides of the petrochemical equation. Last spring a unit of Royal Dutch Shell plc made a final investment decision (FID) to build a multi-billion dollar cracker about 30 miles northwest of Pittsburgh, officially signaling that the region will be a major hub. Sited on 400 acres in Beaver County, adjacent to the Ohio River in Potter and Center townships, the project as designed would have capacity to produce 1.6 million metric tons/year (mmty) of polyethylene and 1.5 mmty of ethylene. Construction would require 6,000 people at its peak, while another 600 permanent employees would staff the facility when it becomes operational in the early 2020s.
Shell's project will not only be huge, but transformational in all ways, said an all-star panel of experts during the one-hour webinar. Joining NGI Associate Editor Jamison Cocklin, who was the moderator, were Consol Energy Inc.'s Don Rush, vice president of marketing, and James Cooper, senior petrochemical adviser to the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers trade group. Also joining in the conversation were Denise Brinley, special assistant to the secretary of the Pennsylvania Department of Community and Economic Development (DCED), and Danielle Sandusky, president of Denver-based Level 2 Energy, a risk management firm.
Appalachian ethane production went from virtually nil in 2010 to about 20% of the national total, at around 300,000 b/d at its peak, Level 2 Energy’s Sandusky said.
"It's quite a robust slice of what we've got in the U.S.," she said. "There is definitely ample supply there to feed a world-scale cracker. But early on, there was almost no outlet other than the gas stream, essentially...The gas stream is still the best decision for those without a cost transport commitment or they are in a situation where they might shut in because they’re bumping into their pipeline specs...
"The fundamentals have been really robust for all of the other components so that's really brought along all of the ethane...I think that's what's really brought Shell to take on the risk of building a project of that size" and that level of investment.
The project "is generational," said Cocklin, who covers Appalachia for NGI. "The last project to be built of this size was Heinz Field," the 1.49 million-square foot stadium/entertainment venue developed by the Pittsburgh Steelers. "Local officials said that building the cracker is like building six or seven of those stadiums." Seven ethylene crackers are scheduled for service along the Gulf Coast in Texas and Louisiana, which remains the nation's No. 1 hub for petrochemical activity. However, Shell's facility would anchor a "second wave" of domestic development in the next decade. Although it has delayed an FID, PTT Global Chemical has proposed a similar facility for Ohio, while Braskem has one on the drawing table for West Virginia.
$6 Billion Price Tag Likely
Shell's cracker sets the stage and provides another much needed end use for Appalachian liquids production. It initially had put a $5 billion price tag on the ethane cracker, but the investment now looks like it will be closer to $6 billion, Brinley said, speaking for Pennsylvania’s economic development arm.
"The number is creeping up," she said. "We're looking at an approximately $6 billion investment made by Shell for the region. It's an extremely important project to our state. I believe it is the first project of its kind since perhaps World War II in terms of scale and magnitude."
DCED is certain the region has enough resources "to fulfill both needs from construction to workforce...We're accelerating on both of those fronts, both at the building trades level, as well as workforce and economic development to fulfill the facility jobs.: The DCED also is "working hand-in-hand with Shell on ensuring that we can provide what they need when they are ready to begin operating the plant.
"What we don’t have a clear vision on yet is the multiplier effect and what the supply chain will look like, the ripple effect that comes out of a massive plant like this. We’re working on articulating those finer points as well, because we believe that the best benefit for the region -- and I’ll speak for my colleagues in West Virginia and in Ohio in hopes that they agree with me -- that using the resource right here in the region creates the most economic impact and long-term benefit to our citizens for jobs and all of the associated benefits that come along with utilizing the resource right where it’s being pulled out of the ground."
A Hub Near The Action
Shell's facility would be as large as the projects now located along the Gulf Coast and around the world, as "world-class" is considered to be a facility with capacity of about 1.5 mmty-plus, Cooper said, speaking for the petrochemical manufacturer’s group.
"You are going to find around the country, as far as new projects being developed, that it’s going to have a very meaningful impact in the region," he said. "What's really unique about this situation is that for the first time in a long time, you are going to see things 'co-located' all along the manufacturing supply chain, which is going to be a very meaningful situation in the United States especially.
"You’ll have stuff coming out of the ground in the Marcellus and Utica, you are going to see it being processed with a lot of separation technology going into feedstocks in a variety of things, including ethylene production. And then you are going to see not just the ethane cracker that's going up," but a lot of ancillary benefits. With a 20-to-30-year commitment, the region likely would gain related businesses.
"You are probably going to see a polyethylene unit, you might see an ethylene glycol unit and you might see a couple different derivatives units in addition to this," Cooper said. "We’re pretty excited to watch this all unfold..."
Anchor Shippers Ready
Pittsburgh-based Consol is one of nearly a dozen Appalachian gas producers that already have inked multi-year, confidential supply agreements with Shell for the cracker. Other producers signing agreements covering 10-20 years include Antero Resources Corp.; Ascent Resources LLC; Eclipse Resources Corp., Hilcorp Energy Co.; Noble Energy Inc., and Penn Energy Resources LLC.
As an anchor shipper, Consol "expects to provide meaningful volumes on a daily basis for the cracker for over a decade after the facility goes into service," Rush said. From the standpoint of the "producer community, it was clear years ago that there would be ample ethane supply for some major projects. There's been a lot of work both on Consol's end and some of our peers in educating the midstream and the downstream companies, as well as local governments and states.
"However, like any project of this size and capital commitment, companies are prudent. They take their time studying why they need it, wait for some further certainty that the ethane will be, can be here for the long-haul.
"For this project in general, you have to give Shell really all of the credit," he said. "Being the first mover...they had the foresight to act on the fundamentals that were at work here in the Appalachian Basin and to use their resources to take this from concept to actually getting it down the road to fruition. We think they have a huge advantage going forward..."
Consol was a natural participant in the cracker project, Rush said. It's one of the biggest leaseholders in the Marcellus and Utica shales, with more than 1 million net acres. "And also we're 150 years old, so we have a substantial track record folks could look to with confidence that we are a trusted business partner for the long haul here...
"With Consol being in this area for a very long time, we immediately recognized the value that a world-scale cracker would provide in terms of not only the ethane price and production assurance but what it would do for the region, what it can provide for a generation of folks in the Tri-State area" of Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia. "We really wanted to make sure that we got onboard early and played our part in ensuring that a project like this got off the ground."
Consol has seen the market evolve a lot in its history, and it’s attempted to change with the times, Rush said. "We don't have a lot of these firm commitments to transport our gas to other basins. We have a very unique acreage footprint, with some wet side of the play, some on the dry side of the play. It has allowed us to process and extract ethane from our gas streams whenever we're able to make money...When it doesn’t make sense to do that way, we put it back in the gas stream and sell it as Btus.”
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/109583-cracking-appalachias-ethane-code-part-1-shell-first-to-the-party
-
Keystone XL Still Faces Speed Bumps Despite Support from Trump
Mar 1, 2017 | Politico Pro
By Ben Lefebvre
President Donald Trump’s push to revive the Keystone XL pipeline is running into new hurdles — some of which he erected himself.
Trump has repeatedly boasted about the steps he took in his first days in office to get Keystone back on track, including giving his administration a 60-day deadline to decide on approving TransCanada’s new application to build it. But Keystone proponents are grappling with dramatic shifts in the oil market, as well as heightened public opposition and potentially costly new requirements Trump and congressional Republicans want to impose on the company and the imported oil it would transport.
Some analysts say the emergence of alternate shipping routes and shifting economics mean the project may never see the light of day.
“TransCanada may have a hard time to get producers and customers signed up for their pipeline,” said Rusty Braziel, president of energy consulting shop RBN Energy and author of "The Domino Effect."
“Its breakfast has already been eaten. People are starting to eat its lunch, and I don’t know if it’s going to make it to dinner.”
TransCanada re-submitted its application for a permit to build across the U.S.-Canada border two days after Trump signed a series of memos and an executive order promoting construction of pipelines such as Keystone, which then-President Barack Obama rejected in 2015, and Dakota Access, which Obama put on hold in his final months in office.
The Trump administration has since signed off on Dakota Access, and Energy Transfer Partners, its lead developer, resumed construction almost immediately with the goal of having oil flowing by April. TransCanda is still waiting on its approval and will have more work to do once it has that in hand.
TransCanada still needs to get Nebraska regulators to sign off on the pipeline’s route through the state, where anti-Keystone activism has been strongest. It needs to reach agreements with companies to produce the TK barrels of oil per day the conduit would carry. And it needs to determine how to comply with Trump’s dictate that the pipeline be built with American steel, not to mention his campaign trail pledge that "I want a piece of the profits.”
The company says it is on track.
“The commercial team is busy now negotiating with customers,” TransCanada spokesman Terry Cunha said. As for the pipeline itself, he added, “Nothing's changed. It’s the same design, same location, everything is the same.”
Everything, that is, except that the US oil and gas market — and even public opinion on the project — are now all drastically different. Since Keystone was first proposed in 2008, oil prices have been cut in half while opposition to the pipeline has more than doubled.
A poll the Pew Research Center poll conducted in early February showed 48 percent of Americans opposed the project, more than double from 2013. Support has even fallen among Republicans, who are traditionally Keystone’s strongest proponents, to 76 percent last month, down from 83 percent in 2013.
Meanwhile, Republicans are considering a tax reform plan that may impose a new tariff on imports, including the crude Keystone would carry to U.S. refineries from Alberta’s oil sands.
Any increase in Canadian crude prices would deal a blow to producers in Alberta. TransCanada first pitched Keystone XL in 2008, back before the U.S. shale boom had reached full force and domestic benchmark oil prices averaged nearly $100 per barrel. At that price, importing heavy, difficult-to-process crude oil from Canada made more sense.
With oil prices now expected to stay between $50-$60 per barrel for at least the next few years, there may be less of a rush to sign up to receive more expensive Canadian crude even before an import tariff gets added.
Canadian energy company executives are worried enough about what any such tax would do that they asked the Alberta government to lobby their case in the U.S.
“We’re trying to get as much as time as we can with as many Congressional members as we can,” Alberta Premier Rachel Notley said in an interview.
Keystone XL proponents note that U.S. oil prices could change as drastically as they did once domestic production came unto its own, making Canadian crude more economically desirable.
“You have to be careful about how you interpret today’s market,” said Sen. John Hoeven, a North Dakota Republican whose state Keystone XL would run through. “What’s the market in a year from now, or two years from now? [The success of KXL] will depend on prices.”
Still, Hoeven adds, “If oil stays at $50-$60 [per barrel], you’ll likely see a slowdown” in interest.
The Trump administration’s “America First” agenda also may cause problems for the project, despite the president’s support for it.
When Trump signed the order calling for the revival of Keystone XL, he signed another saying that pipeline companies must use U.S.-made steel in their projects. He's been boasting about the order as a way to revive manufacturing in the country.
“We put you heavy into the pipeline business because we approved, as you know, the Keystone Pipeline,” Trump told U.S. Steel chief executive Mario Longhi at a Feb. 23 meeting. “But they have to buy ... steel made in this country and pipelines made in this country.”
TransCanada had said earlier that 50 percent of the pipeline’s steel would be made in Arkansas. But where it will get that other 50 percent — or whether U.S. steel makers could even build a few more hundreds of miles of 36-inch diameter pipe — is an open question. TransCanada is waiting for the Secretary of Commerce to draft a plan on how to implement Trump's steel executive order to understand its impact on Keystone XL, Cuhna said.
But a bigger problem for TransCanada might be that current U.S. oil prices are already chasing potential KXL customers out of the Canadian oil patch.
Exxon Mobil in a regulatory filing last week wrote off from its proved oil reserve list the entirety of the 3.5 billion barrels it had previously said was economically recoverable from its Kearl, Alberta, oil sands project. The write-off indicates that at current oil prices, the company doesn’t see mining and processing bitumen into heavy oil as economically viable.
In January, Norway’s Statoil completed a sale of its Canadian oil sands assets, cashing in pennies on the Canadian dollar. Statoil took in $832 million Canadian on the sale; it paid $2.2 billion Canadian for the assets in 2007.
“Exxon’s announcement that it is writing down 3.5 billion barrels of its tar sands reserves is yet another sign that the time for tar sands expansion projects like Keystone XL is over,” said Anthony Swift, Canada project director for environmental advocacy group Natural Resources Defense Council. “The Trump Administration is trying to revive a controversial project at a time when the market case for the pipeline can no longer be made.”
Refiners at the other end of the pipe are also less certain to sign up.
U.S. refinery companies like Valero and Marathon Petroleum are awash in domestic crude. And though Valero said it remains on board as an anchor Keystone XL customer, its executives said in a recent earnings call that TransCanada needed to “drum up customer support” for the revived project.
Meanwhile, fuel makers that do want Canadian crude can get it from rail cars or other pipelines.
Pipeline giant Kinder Morgan plans to more than double the capacity of its Trans Mountain line that brings Canadian oil sands crude from Alberta to the west coast of British Columbia, from where it can then go to the U.S. west coast .
Meanwhile, Enbridge Energy Partners in the past several years has quietly expanded a number of its pipelines to bring more oil from Canadian crude to the U.S. oil storage hub in Cushing, Okla.
Although these projects might on some points compete with Keystone XL, TransCanada’s Cunha said, they will ultimately serve different markets and different customers.
https://www.politicopro.com/energy/story/2017/02/keystone-xl-back-on-track-but-with-even-more-hurdles-149853
-
Commentary: Administration Should Support LNG Development
Mar 1, 2017 | Fuel Fix
By Charlie Riedl
As Congress works to finish confirmation of key members of President Trump’s cabinet, it’s worth noting that one important issue has so far largely passed with relatively little exploration; the question of how much and how quickly the new Administration will allow natural gas to be shipped overseas.
In one sense the lack of scrutiny is understandable. The Obama Administration supported export as a part of its ‘all of the above’ energy policy, a position the energy-secretary in waiting, Rick Perry, has already endorsed.
However, closer examination would suggest a more complex and concerning picture. A small cadre of Democrat Senators has repeatedly argued that selling US gas overseas will lead to an increase in domestic prices, the latest in an ongoing campaign to slow or completely stop U.S. LNG exports.
The logic of the case seems credible; ‘Increased competition must invariably lead to increased prices, including for consumers’. But the problem with the position is that it relies on a flawed premise for its starting point, that the United States has insufficient natural gas reserves.
A quick look at the numbers shows the exact opposite. According to latest estimates from the Government’s Energy Information Administration, the U.S. has proven reserves of 324.3 trillion cubic feet (Tcf) of natural gas. To put that number in context we produced roughly 28.7 Tcf in 2015, approximately 1.4 Tcf more than we used. By 2040, the EIA predicts we will still only require just over 30Tcf.
The key point that opponents have repeatedly failed to acknowledge is that allowing export will help stimulate further domestic production. And with such a significant resource base, that in effect means we are only considering shipping the United States’ surplus overseas, gas which would not otherwise be used.
The U.S. has in fact been sending natural gas to Mexico and Canada through pipelines for some time and, significantly, there is no evidence to show any correlation with higher domestic prices. An analysis of the data in fact shows that export via pipelines increased from 1.07 Tcf in 2010 to 1.75Tcf in 2015. During that period, Henry Hub natural gas spot prices, the U.S. benchmark for natural gas, decreased by approximately 40 percent.
The Department of Energy has also commissioned several studies exploring the economic impact of shipping different volumes of LNG abroad. And while it did find that export may lead to some marginal prices rises over time, the papers’ primary conclusion was that increases would be more be than offset by a growth in domestic income and wellbeing and that ultimately the “US would experience net economic benefits from increased export.”
It’s worth stressing that the benefits are not insubstantial. Each new export terminal represents billions of dollars of investment into the local economy and will generate nearly $11 million in new tax revenues annually. It’s estimated that the industry could create up to 450,000 jobs by 2035 and that collectively it will generate as much as $86 billion in net benefits to the U.S. economy. Seven projects are slated for Texas alone, potentially providing a major financial boost to the state.
Any further potential delays in approving, building and exporting U.S. will see the benefits outlined above, lost. Global demand for LNG is finite and other countries around the world are also working to develop their own industries. Congress has a renewed opportunity to streamline the permitting process, signaling to potential buyers that the U.S. LNG exports are a long term solution for their energy needs.
Thankfully, plans are already underway to assist the industry’s growth. Senators Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and John Barrasso (R-WY) have worked for over two years to expedite the approval process for new terminals, attempting to introduce a system which is more efficient, transparent and predictable. Their efforts could be critical in ensuring the future success of the industry. Once Governor Perry is confirmed we hope that he and the Department of Energy will work with Congress to support the creation of a new industry which has such significant potential for Texas and the United States.
Charlie Riedl is executive director of the Center for Liquefied Natural Gas (CLNG).
http://fuelfix.com/blog/2017/03/01/commentary-administration-should-support-lng-development/
-
Kinder’s Elba Island LNG Export Project Takes JV Partner
Mar 1, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Joe Fisher
Investment funds managed by EIG Global Energy Partners (EIG) have taken a 49% joint venture (JV) stake in Elba Liquefaction Co. LLC (ELC).
ELC plans to ultimately own 10 liquefaction units and other equipment to be constructed as part of the Elba Liquefaction Project at Kinder Morgan Inc.’s (KMI) existing Southern LNG Co. LLC Elba Island LNG facility near Savannah, GA. KMI had been considering taking a partner in the project for a while.
EIG made an upfront cash payment of $385 million, consisting of reimbursement to KMI for EIG’s 49% share of prior ELC capital expenditures, excluding capitalized interest, and a payment of $170 million in excess of capital expenditures in consideration of the value created by KMI in developing the project to this stage, KMI said Tuesday after the market closed.
The project is expected to cost $1.3 billion, excluding capitalized interest. EIG plans to fund its share of future expenses necessary to complete construction and commission the liquefaction facility.
The project, which began construction on Nov. 1, is supported by a 20-year contract with a unit of Royal Dutch Shell plc, said KMI CEO Steve Kean.
“As we have told the market in past months, this JV is another strategic step toward achieving our stated goals of strengthening our balance sheet and positioning the company for long-term value creation,” Kean said.
Initial liquefaction units are expected to be placed in service in mid-2018, with final units coming online by early 2019. In 2012, the Elba Liquefaction Project received authorization from the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) to export to free trade agreement (FTA) countries, and on Dec. 16, 2016, DOE issued non-FTA export authority.
The project is expected to have a total capacity of 2.5 million tonnes/year of LNG for export, equivalent to 350 MMcf/d.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/109585-kinders-elba-island-lng-export-project-takes-jv-partner
-
Early EPA Testing Shows Potential to Reduce Strontium in Drinking Water
Mar 1, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Lara Beaven
Preliminary EPA testing shows two technologies could allow water utilities to reduce levels on strontium in drinking water, though questions remain about how one technology works and whether the methods would be cost-effective -- issues that will play into the agency's final determination on whether an enforceable strontium standard is necessary.
EPA in 2014 issued a proposed determination that a Safe Drinking Water Act maximum contaminant level was necessary for strontium, citing concerns about the chemical's interaction with calcium, including substituting for calcium in bones, which affects skeletal development.
But in 2015 the agency announced that it was postponing a final decision on strontium, after drinking water utilities argued the element is not being detected at harmful levels and that treatment technologies to remove it may also remove beneficial calcium.
EPA said it was “delaying the final determination for strontium in order to consider additional scientific data and decide whether there is a meaningful opportunity for health risk reduction by regulating strontium in drinking water.” Commenters that sought a delay raised concerns about the relationship between occurrence and health risk, the relative source contribution of strontium, the costs and benefits of a potential strontium regulation and the feasibility of treating strontium, EPA said.
The agency has derived a non-cancer health reference level (HRL) for strontium of 1.5 miligrams per liter (mg/L). HRLs are risk-derived concentrations against which to evaluate the occurrence data to determine if contaminants may occur at levels of public health concern.
There is very little information available on treatment options for removing strontium from drinking water, Darren Lytle of EPA's Office of Research and Development said on a Feb. 28 EPA webinar. But both laboratory tests and full-scale treatment tests show promising results, he said.
In the jar tests, EPA researchers added lime to change the pH of the water, which had the added effect of lowering the amount of strontium in the water. In a jar test with water from a private well that had strontium concentrations of 4.2 mg/L, strontium levels decreased to under 1 mg/L and achieved an 80 percent removal rate, Lytle said.
A second jar test, with water starting with a strontium level of 10.9 mg/L, also showed increased strontium removal up to a pH of about 10 or 10.5, but after that point, the strontium increased, Lytle said. Researchers could not get the removal rate above 80 percent nor could they get the strontium level down to 1.5 mg/L, indicating there may be a saturation point, he said.
Full-Scale Tests
The full-scale removal tests were done at water utilities that were removing calcium from their source water to reduce its hardness, but the removal of calcium appears to have a linear relationship to the removal of strontium, Lytle said.
The full-scale tests occurred at eight treatment plants, with four using ion exchange technology and four using lime to soften the water. Most of the systems using ion exchange were small systems, he said.
The source water coming into the ion exchange plants ranged from about 13 mg/L to 27.6 mg/L. Some of the source water was sent through ion exchange softeners and some bypassed the softeners but was later blended back into the softened water.
Water that went through the ion exchange had strontium levels that were near zero, Lytle said, but the finished, blended water had strontium levels of 3-4 mg/L. This shows that ion exchange is efficient in removing the strontium, but utilities would have to increase the amount of water they send through the machines in order to get down to 1.5 mg/L, he said. That would likely increase water treatment costs.
Source water at the plants using lime softening had source water with strontium levels ranging from 2.68 mg/L to 15.2 mg/L, and the finished water also showed a range of strontium, Lytle said. For the site with source water levels of 2.68 mg/L, the finished water levels were about 1.5 or 1.6 mg/L, he said. A site that started at 3.5 mg/L had finished water with levels near zero. And a site that started with strontium levels of 15.2 mg/L ended with strontium levels in the 3 to 5 mg/L range, he said.
Researchers still do not understand why there are differences in the removal rates, although it appears lime softening may be less effective when strontium levels are higher, Lytle said. It could be hard to meet a 1.5 mg/L level if you have high start levels, although utilities with lower levels could effectively use lime softening he said.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/early-epa-testing-shows-potential-reduce-strontium-drinking-water
-
White House Proposes Cutting EPA Staff by One-fifth, Eliminating Key Programs
Mar 1, 2017 | Washington Post
By Juliet Eilperin and Brady Dennis
The Office of Management and Budget has suggested deep cuts to the Environmental Protection Agency’s budget that would reduce its staff by one-fifth in the first year and eliminate several programs, according to multiple individuals briefed on the plan.
The plan to slash EPA’s staff from its current level of 15,000 to 12,000, which would be done through a buyout offer that could spur early retirements, is one of several changes for which the new administration has asked agency staff for comment by midday Wednesday.
Other proposals, according to individuals briefed on the cuts who asked for anonymity because the decision is not yet final, include eliminating project grants to clean up brownfields, or abandoned industrial sites; a national electronic manifest system for hazardous waste; environmental justice programs and the Energy Star energy-efficiency program. Climate-change initiatives and funding for Alaskan native villages are also targeted for zero funding, according to one draft document.
The agency’s Office of Research and Development could face a cut of up to 42 percent, according to an individual apprised of the administration’s plans.
S. William Becker, executive director of the National Association of Clean Air Agencies, said in an email that the proposed cuts would devastate critical federal financial support for communities across the country.
“These cuts, if enacted by Congress, will rip the heart and soul out of the national air pollution control program and jeopardize the health and welfare of tens of millions of people around the country,” Becker said.
The EPA did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Any such cuts would have to be codified through the congressional appropriations process and would likely face resistance from some lawmakers. But the initial proposal reflects an overall push by the administration to boost federal funding for defense while cutting back on discretionary spending elsewhere, including at EPA.
Greenpeace spokesman Travis Nichols said in an email it is not accidental that the cutbacks would disproportionately affect poorer Americans and minorities.
“While this ‘zero out’ strategy would impact nearly every community in the United States, a close examination shows the burden of these cuts will fall hardest on the health of low-income Americans and people of color,” Nichols said. “This is environmental racism in action.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/03/01/white-house-proposes-cutting-epa-staff-by-one-fifth-eliminating-key-programs/?utm_term=.1725f2203f9f
-
Mar 1, 2017 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
President Trump has launched the opening salvo in his assault on the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Trump is tearing into the EPA’s budget by a reported 24 percent, which if approved by Congress would slash the agency’s $8.1 billion budget to George H.W. Bush-era levels and reduce the EPA’s workforce by one-fifth.
Trump and his newly installed EPA administrator, Scott Pruitt, are also beginning an aggressive regulatory rollback at the agency, taking aim at climate change programs instituted or expanded under President Obama.
The president on Tuesday signed an executive order asking the EPA to rewrite a controversial water jurisdiction rule that was central to the agency’s regulatory efforts under the Obama administration.
The moves are in line with Trump’s rhetoric during the presidential campaign, when he promised to hobble an agency he considered bloated, overreaching and a threat to jobs in the United States.
Between the EPA actions and other executive orders fast-tracking two contentious pipeline projects, Democrats and environmentalists are bracing for bigger attacks on Obama’s climate legacy.
“I always took him very seriously when it came to his desire to dismantle the Clean Air and the Clean Water Act, and he’s going to try to go through with it,” Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) said.
Trump’s budget proposal, Schatz said, is “radical, it’s extreme and we will fight it. And of course a budget is a declaration of political objectives and not a binding document, so the committees will have their way with it, and I know we’ll have a fight.”
During the campaign, Trump promised to take a much more conservative approach to environmental issues as president.
He pledged to end the water rule and the Clean Power Plan, allow the Dakota Access and Keystone XL pipeline projects to move forward, reform the EPA’s regulatory power and expand fossil fuel development in the United States. So far, he’s made progress on many of those goals, ratcheting up the stakes for environmentalists.
“I think what we’re seeing is him continuing to put polluters first over the health of the American people over the last 24 hours,” said Alex Taurel, the deputy legislative director at the League of Conservation Voters.
Rep. Raúl Grijalva (Ariz.), the top Democrat on the Natural Resources Committee, said Trump’s actions will lead to an EPA that “can’t carry out the legal mandate.”
“If this budget is enacted the way he wants it, he’s effectively dealt a very significant death blow to the EPA,” he said.
Trump’s actions and proposals have encouraged his industry supporters and EPA critics on Capitol Hill, with many longtime opponents of the water rule claiming victory following the executive order signing on Tuesday.
Likewise, some conservatives welcomed his budget proposal.
“President Trump has come into office on a campaign promise of controlling the cost and size of government, and the fact that he’s taking a bullseye on the EPA, that’s good news,” said Rep. Evan Jenkins (R-W.Va.), a member of the Appropriations Committee panel that sets the EPA’s budget.
Rep. Hal Rogers (R-Ky.), a former chairman of the Appropriations Committee, said a proposed $2 billion cut to the agency is “in the neighborhood” of what he would like to see.
“I think they’ve overreached by a zillion points,” he said of the EPA.
“They’ve overreached their authority, as the courts have held, and the regulations they’ve imposed on American business have killed thousands of jobs, and they need to be reined back in severely.”
Even so, questions remain about the feasibility of Trump’s plan.
Democrats are certain to oppose the deep cuts Trump will propose for the agency. Rep. Betty McCollum (Minn.), the top Democrat on the EPA appropriations panel, said Republicans are going to have to haul the cuts over the finish line themselves.
“These are their ideas. If they’re such good ideas, they can defend them and put up the votes for them,” she said.
“I don’t see why any Democrat, from what we’ve been hearing, would be supportive of the direction that President Trump wants to take the country.”
Some key Republicans have also come out against the early contours of Trump’s budget plan, which would institute a $54 billion cut to domestic programs to pay for an equal increase in defense spending. Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) on Tuesday called that proposal “dead on arrival” in Congress.
A few GOP appropriators, too, seem uneasy about slashing the EPA’s budget when the agency has absorbed sizable spending cuts over the last six years.
“I’d like to look and see what actually gets out of committee,” Rep. Tom Cole (R-Okla.) said.
“EPA has been cut by over 20 percent in the last few years. The discretionary budget has been lowered pretty dramatically compared to how it was in 2009, and it’s under what [Speaker] Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) thought it would be in his budget.”
Though they’ve often trimmed the EPA’s annual budget, many Republicans have previously balked at the idea of slashing the agency’s spending all at once: fifty-six Republicans last year voted against a floor amendment to cut the agency by 17 percent.
“If they’re trying to get rid of the regulatory regime and a few things like that, you could probably make some cuts,” Rep. Mike Simpson (R-Idaho) said of Trump’s plan.
But, he said, “I don’t know if they can be as big as what they’re talking about.”
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/321684-trump-takes-hatchet-to-epa
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested