Preview Newsletter
ACC PM 3/21/2017
-
(ACC Mentioned) Chemical Activity Indicates Higher Equity Prices Ahead
Mar 21, 2017 | Value Walk
By Davidson
The Chemical Activity Barometer (CAB), a leading economic indicator created by the American Chemistry Council (ACC), posted its strongest year-over-year gain in nearly seven years. -
(ACC Mentioned) Flexible Packaging Recycling Pilot Seeks MRF Partner
Mar 21, 2017 | Recycling Today
By Staff
Materials Recovery for the Future (MRFF), a research initiative of the Foundation for Chemistry Research and Initiatives, a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization established by the Washington-based American Chemistry Council, has announced plans to partner with a U.S. material recovery facility (MRF) and its service area to pilot curbside recycling of flexible packaging. -
(ACC Mentioned) MRFF Seeks MRF Partnership for Flexible Packaging Recycling Pilot
Mar 21, 2017 | Waste Dive
By Cole Rosengren
Materials Recovery for the Future (MRFF), an initiative from the Foundation for Chemistry Research and Initiatives, is looking to partner with a material recovery facility in the U.S. to create a curbside recycling program for flexible film packaging, as reported by Waste Today Magazine. -
(ACC Mentioned) Sen. Lankford Introduces Bill Applying TSCA Science Standards to APA
Mar 21, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Maria Hegstad
Sen. James Lankford (R-OK) has introduced a bill that would amend the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) by applying scientific standards in the revised Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) to all federal agencies that use science in their decisionmaking, saying it would ensure EPA and other agencies use "unbiased" data to develop their rules. -
Cefic Director Identifies Areas to Reduce REACH 'Burden'
Mar 21, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
The EU's REACH Regulation is functioning "relatively well", but there is room for progress, Cefic's director of chemicals policy says. -
Clean Power Plan Hovers in Background of Gorsuch Hearing
Mar 21, 2017 | E&E Climatewire
By Emily Holden
Democrats will try to pin down Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch on how much deference he would give federal agencies like U.S. EPA, they showed yesterday during the first day of a hearing to advance him. -
Repeal of Obama Drilling Rule Stalls in the Senate
Mar 21, 2017 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama and Devin Henry
The GOP’s effort to roll back contentious Obama-era regulations is hitting a snag. -
Pipeline Threatened with 'Physical Attacks'
Mar 21, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
The Dakota Access pipeline has faced "coordinated physical attacks" and is not yet handling oil, recent court filings revealed. -
Oil Could Flow Through Dakota Access ‘Sometime This Week,’ Company Says
Mar 20, 2017 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
Oil could begin flowing through the Dakota Access pipeline “sometime this week,” the company’s developers said in a court filing Monday night. -
PHMSA Orders Inspection of Crude Pipeline Adjacent to Leaky Cook Inlet NatGas Line
Mar 21, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Joe Fisher
An oil pipeline that runs parallel to a leaking natural gas pipeline in Alaska’s Cook Inlet has drawn the scrutiny of the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA). -
Plugging, Disclosing Leaks Becoming Routine at Aliso Canyon
Mar 21, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Richard Nemec
In the past three months, Southern California Gas Co. (SoCalGas) has reported various leaks at its closed Aliso Canyon underground natural gas storage complex. -
Stand with Workers, Oppose Any Attempt to Repeal OSHA’s Injury Recordkeeping Rule
Mar 21, 2017 | The Hill - Congress Blog
By Debbie Berkowitz
The Congressional Review Act resolution that passed the House and is now being considered by the Senate would repeal an OSHA rule clarifying the responsibility of large employers in dangerous industries to keep complete and accurate injury records. -
Trump Admin Delays Energy Efficiency, Climate Rules
Mar 21, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Christa Marshall and Camille von Kaenel
The Trump administration is further delaying some energy efficiency and climate rules issued at the end of the Obama administration. -
U.S. CO2 Emissions Down 3% as Shale Gas Supply Surges, Renewables Displace Coal
Mar 21, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Carolyn Davis
U.S. carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions in 2016 fell more than anywhere else in the world, down 3% year/year, driven by a flood of shale natural gas supply and renewable power increasingly displacing coal, the International Energy Agency (IEA) said. -
9th Circuit Upholds EPA's Haze Plan Authority
Mar 21, 2017 | Inside EPA
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit has rejected tribes' lawsuits challenging EPA's power to impose plans for reducing haze-forming emissions from air pollution sources, issuing a ruling that upholds a plan tribes and some environmentalists challenged as too weak and a second ruling backing a plan one tribe said was too strict.
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) Chemical Activity Indicates Higher Equity Prices Ahead
Mar 21, 2017 | Value Walk
By Davidson
The Chemical Activity Barometer (CAB), a leading economic indicator created by the American Chemistry Council (ACC), posted its strongest year-over-year gain in nearly seven years. The 5.5 percent increase over this time last year reflects elevated consumer and business confidence and an overall rising optimism in the U.S. economy.
“The index provides a longer lead (performs better) than the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER). The CAB leads by two to fourteen months, with an average lead of eight months. (see the 1948-2017 chart vs. US Recession Periods)
The CAB is a composite index which is comprised of indicators drawn from a range of chemicals and sectors, including chlorine and other alkalies, pigments, plastic resins and other selected basic industrial chemicals. It first originated through a study of the relationship between the business cycles in the production of selected chemicals and cycles in the larger economy. Other specific indicators used include:
Hours worked in chemicals;
Chemical company stock data; publicly sourced, chemical price information;
End-use (or customer) industry sales-to-inventories; and
Several broader leading economic measures (building permits and ISM PMI new orders).”
Man-made chemicals and products derived from chemicals have permeated and raised modern standards of living for more than 100yrs. Transportation, health maintenance, shelter, education, safety and likely any facet of life one could imagine has been made less costly, safer and more convenient through the use of plastics. It should be no surprise that an indicator such as the CAB should be sensitive to economic activity.
The current rise began April-May 2016 after US corporations had adjusted to the strong US$. It has accelerated since the Presidential election. The SP500 is generally correlated with the CAB but for periods in which market psychology differs from economic trends. Such a period occurred after Sept 11, 2001, “9/11”. Markets continued to fear terrorism’s impact on economic activity while the Chemical Activity Barometer showed that Sept 2001 was the month the recession ended. It took another 12mos for the SP500 to bottom. This is the best example we have of market psychology so diverged from economic conditions in our recent history. It shows why, for long-term Value Investors, economic activity provides the best insight when making investment decisions.
The current trend in the Chemical Activity Barometer is a forecast for better economic news than many expect. This should result in higher equity prices as investors become more optimistic.
http://www.valuewalk.com/2017/03/chemical-activity-indicates-higher-equity-prices-ahead/
-
(ACC Mentioned) Flexible Packaging Recycling Pilot Seeks MRF Partner
Mar 21, 2017 | Recycling Today
By Staff
Materials Recovery for the Future (MRFF), a research initiative of the Foundation for Chemistry Research and Initiatives, a 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization established by the Washington-based American Chemistry Council, has announced plans to partner with a U.S. material recovery facility (MRF) and its service area to pilot curbside recycling of flexible packaging. MRFF says it will offer technical assistance and financial stewardship to help upgrade the U.S. MRF that participates in the pilot.
The partner facility must process at least 20 tons per hour and meet other essential criteria, according to MRFF. Interested communities or managers of MRFs that meet these criteria should contact Susan Graff, vice president, Resource Recycling Systems, at sgraff@recycle.com before April 7, 2017.
To assist the collective decision to enter into a pilot partnership, RRS developed an economic feasibility model for adding flexible packaging to a MRF’s sorting capabilities. The model provides customized outputs that assess the costs and benefits associated with adding flexible packaging to single-stream recycling systems in a pro forma format.
“With this pilot, we aim to demonstrate the potential to capture flexible film packaging and use the material as a feedstock for U.S. manufacturing while improving the quality of other recycling streams processed at MRFs,” says Stephen Sikra, section head, global research and development, The Procter and Gamble Co., headquartered in Cincinnati.
Flexible packaging is currently present in MRF infeed from curbside collection, but MRFs typically pay to ship the material to a landfill rather than recover it for energy production or remanufacture. Flexible packaging is projected to grow because its consumer benefits and affordability are widely recognized, so collection and recycling strategies are critical, according to MRFF.
Additionally, participating in this new pilot is expected to benefit our MRF partner by improving the quality of paper products through the removal of unintended flexible packaging, MRFF says.
“Flexible packaging is often disposed of as a contaminant of paper products,” says Graff, MRFF project director. “MRFs were not originally designed to sort this lightweight format into a high-quality product.”
She adds, “The members of Materials Recovery for the Future—manufacturers, brands, retailers and recyclers—are actively working to pilot a system that helps the recycling industry develop a new flexible product and better serve consumer demand for recycling.”
The MRF flexible packaging pro forma will vary by location depending on the availability of local end markets and by the sort quality. To further improve the value proposition for those factors, RRS is conducting advanced optical sorter testing with equipment manufacturers, as well as a commodity end use market assessment with a goal of describing product bale specifications for the Association of Plastic Recyclers.
“The intent of the pilot is to help communities that want to recover potentially valuable materials instead of landfilling them and partner with innovators in the MRF industry to recycle this material,” says Jeff Wooster, global sustainability director for Midland, Michigan-headquartered Dow Packaging and Specialty Plastics and MRFF chairperson. “Dow is committed to working in partnership with communities and industry to recycle all their packaging, and this pilot will be a major step towards making this a reality.”
The MRFF project members include Amcor, The Dow Chemical Co., LyondellBasell Industries, Nestlé Purina PetCare and Nestlé USA, PepsiCo, Plum Organics, Procter & Gamble, SC Johnson, Sealed Air and Target, as well as the Association of Plastics Recyclers, Flexible Packaging Association, the Plastics Industry Association and the American Chemistry Council.
http://www.recyclingtoday.com/article/mrff-seeks-mrf-partner-plastic-flexible-packaging-pilot/
-
(ACC Mentioned) MRFF Seeks MRF Partnership for Flexible Packaging Recycling Pilot
Mar 21, 2017 | Waste Dive
By Cole Rosengren
Dive Brief:
Materials Recovery for the Future (MRFF), an initiative from the Foundation for Chemistry Research and Initiatives, is looking to partner with a material recovery facility in the U.S. to create a curbside recycling program for flexible film packaging, as reported by Waste Today Magazine.
The pilot aims to add flexible packaging to the participating MRF's sorting capabilities. If done successfully, the facility would be able to recover film and use it as a feedstock for manufacturing while also reducing contamination of other recyclables.
MRFF is looking for a partner facility that is able to process 20 tons per hour. The success of the pilot will also depend on sort quality and on end market availability in proximity to the MRF.
Dive Insight:
The foundation behind MRRF was established by the American Chemistry Council, which has a vested interested in expanding recovery options for this growing part of the waste stream. Flexible packaging's lighter weight and lower cost has made it attractive to manufacturers and consumers alike. Yet recovery options for the material are still limited and no clear recycling solution is currently available.
The larger MRFF initiative includes a range of major members from the manufacturing and recycling sectors, many of which are also involved in parallel pilot projects to find the best solution for improving this material's recycling potential. One is Energy Bag in Nebraska, which collects hard-to-recycle plastics in special orange bags and sends them to be used as fuel in a cement kiln. Dow Chemical, involved in all of these pilots, has also developed a polymer modifier called RETAIN that helps break down certain layers of flexible packaging to expedite the recycling process.
This is the latest effort to update the capabilities of existing MRFs to adapt to changes in the waste stream and recover more value. The Closed Loop Fund recently issued a request for proposals to fund systems for enhanced recovery of post-consumer polypropylene plastic. The Carton Council of North America has also begun experimenting with artificial intelligence and robotic systems for carton sorting at a MRF in Denver.
http://www.wastedive.com/news/mrff-seeks-mrf-partnership-for-flexible-packaging-recycling-pilot/438581/
-
(ACC Mentioned) Sen. Lankford Introduces Bill Applying TSCA Science Standards to APA
Mar 21, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Maria Hegstad
Sen. James Lankford (R-OK) has introduced a bill that would amend the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) by applying scientific standards in the revised Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) to all federal agencies that use science in their decisionmaking, saying it would ensure EPA and other agencies use "unbiased" data to develop their rules.
The legislation introduced earlier this month, S. 578, could complicate pending efforts in the House to advance bills specifically targeting what GOP lawmakers claim are flaws in EPA's gathering of "secret science" to inform its rules, and alleged bias on its scientific advisory panels. Lankford says his goal is to address concerns about science across all agencies, not just at EPA.
Lankford's bill, known as the Better Evaluation of Science and Technology Act, would specifically adopt the science standards established in the updated TSCA and amend the APA to apply them to all agencies.
The overhauled TSCA law enacted last June includes language in section 26 that requires EPA when conducting assessments of chemicals' risks to "use scientific information, technical procedures, measures, methods, protocols, methodologies, or models, employed in a manner consistent with the best available science."
Known as known as the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety Act for the 21st Century (LCSA), the reform law says EPA must, among other things, consider the reasonableness of the data and methods, uncertainty and variability in the data and approach and the extent of peer review. The language also requires that EPA staff to base its decisions "on the weight of the scientific evidence," though it does not define the phrase. S. 578 would place the same requirements on all federal agencies as they analyze information to inform their policies.
Lankford in a March 9 statement said his bill is vital because "The American people should be confident that when agencies regulate, they rely on up-to-date, accurate, and unbiased information."
The senator, chair of the Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs Committee, also held a March 9 hearing on issues about agencies' use of science. "The testimony from today's hearing confirmed that when agencies issue regulations that place legally-binding requirements on the American people, the data the agency uses should be publicly available for independent third-party review," he said. "We should all agree that transparent, verifiable, and reproducible science must be a foundational part of all good science and the rulemaking process."
Potential Revisions
During the hearing, Lankford appeared to indicate he could be open to revisions to his bill. The chemical industry, for instance, has been vocal in its concerns that EPA does not intend to change its risk analysis practices in light of the scientific standard language in the updated TSCA, pointing to EPA's proposed rule on how it will conduct risk evaluations of existing chemicals under its new TSCA authorities.
The American Chemistry Council's (ACC) Nancy Beck in her written testimony for the hearing said that the new TSCA reflects "the first time Congress directed a Federal Agency to consider not only the best available science but also the weight of the scientific evidence (WoE). . . . EPA now has a mandate to apply high quality, reliable and relevant scientific information."
Beck describes ACC's "great concern" that "EPA appears to be interpreting these scientific standards as implying that 'business as usual' is consistent with the standards."
She said, "EPA is reluctant to explicitly incorporate the best available science and WoE standards into the framework rules that it is developing to implement the LCSA. Instead, the Agency has suggested that simple reliance on existing guidelines and current practices are sufficient to meet the standards in Section 26."
EPA has until June to develop criteria and a final implementing rule outlining how agency staff will evaluate existing chemical substances and determine whether they present an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment, without consideration of costs or other non-risk factors, including an unreasonable risk to identified susceptible subpopulations under the conditions of use.
WoE is used to describe the strength of the scientific inferences that can be drawn from a given body of evidence, specifically referring to how studies are selected, the quality of the studies evaluated, and how findings are assessed and integrated. According to the Jan. 13 proposed version of the rule, EPA uses WoE in programs including its Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) program and Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program, and in the classification of carcinogens.
In the preamble of the proposal, EPA says it is providing a description of how the agency has consistently interpreted and applied that concept and is "not proposing to modify this process as part of this rule" nor proposing to codify it, saying the process will evolve with scientific innovation.
One industry source told Inside EPA in January that, "It isn't so much the language [on WoE] as the description that was troubling" because it appears to reflect EPA's intention to rely on its current WoE practices, which the new law sought to revise, pointing out that WoE concerns were in part what led to a high-profile set of criticisms from the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) on EPA IRIS assessments.
WoE Definition
Beck told Lankford at the hearing that EPA should adopt the WoE definition that then-Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA), entered into the Congressional Record last June as part of the process for updating TSCA -- a definition which includes use of a systematic review approach as recommended by NAS.
Beck quoted that definition in her written testimony as "a systematic review method that uses a pre-established protocol to comprehensively, objectively, transparently, and consistently, identify and evaluate each stream of evidence, including strengths, limitations, and relevance of each study and to integrate evidence as necessary and appropriate based upon strengths, limitations, and relevance."
Another witness at the hearing, Andrew Rosenberg of the Union of Concerned Scientists, told Lankford that WoE is "more than just tallying up the studies."
While Rosenberg agreed there should be clear guidance from EPA on how it will conduct its reviews, he said that it would be inappropriate to weigh all possible studies equally in an evaluation.
Beck in her testimony noted EPA's draft assessment of 1-bromopropane, performed by the toxics office as part of its TSCA work plan program, as concerning because it does not utilize such a systematic review approach.
"The 1-bromopropane draft risk assessment is not consistent with the best available science or the WoE approach envisioned under the LCSA," Beck writes in her written testimony. "If EPA chooses to simply follow current practices, the Agency will embark on a process that is not consistent with the new Section 26 science standards."
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/sen-lankford-introduces-bill-applying-tsca-science-standards-apa
-
Cefic Director Identifies Areas to Reduce REACH 'Burden'
Mar 21, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
The EU's REACH Regulation is functioning "relatively well", but there is room for progress, Cefic's director of chemicals policy says.
Speaking on Monday at Chemical Watch's Global Business Summit in Amsterdam, Erwin Annys said that REACH, which has been in force for ten years and is now undergoing its second review, is delivering.
There are four areas the European Commission should look at carefully in order to help "reduce the burden" for industry, Mr Annys said. These are:
helping SMEs with the 2018 registration deadline: industry is "grateful" for what Echa is doing, he said, but it is important to note there are the 28 national helpdesks where companies can get additional help in their own language;
evaluation: the Commission and Echa need to reflect further on cost sharing. "We hear more and more that within substance information exchange forums (Siefs), companies are not willing to pay for the tests required under evaluation – we have to reflect on how to tackle this in best way";
authorisation process: addressing how it can be improved and the burden can be reduced for SMEs; in addition, how the process can be improved for the broader group of so-called 'process chemicals' so that the same results can be obtained in an easier way. Industry has to produce the proof of adequate control or minimisation of exposure (depending on the authorisation route). "We need to find a common agreement on how detailed this has to be"; and
creating a level playing field: EU companies respecting the rules in Europe have to be protected so that articles containing substances banned in the EU are not imported from outside.
Dossier criticism
Mr Annys said that authorities have criticised the quality of registrants' dossiers, noting problems with substance identity, missing data, insufficient justifications and chemical safety reports (CSRs), but he has called for them to consider how much work registrants must undertake during the process.
"Some of the bigger companies have up to 2,000 registrations. Over ten years this is 200 substances a year, meaning more or less one substance registration a day."
In addition to this, he said members of Siefs are losing time with lengthy legal discussions in the European Council on the standard proposal of the Cefic contract with issues around confidential information in dossiers.
In its comments to the Review consultation, Cefic said the authorisation process must be streamlined and the Commission should provide an implementing regulation to "simplify" low-volume authorisation applications.
Cefic also urged authorities to step up enforcement efforts, as EU and non-EU companies face different rules. The REACH enforcement Forum tries to resolves these difficulties, but there is still "room for improvement" and comparable enforcement is "essential" for a level playing field, Cefic said.
Positive aspects
It also said it welcomed the comments made by some authorities about the benefits and positive achievements of REACH, and that as well as its criticisms, it also strives to highlight "the positive elements of the REACH implementation and encourages the Commission and other stakeholders to communicate more strongly about the benefits and the good functioning of REACH. This will help building further trust amongst all stakeholders, including the general public."
https://chemicalwatch.com/54584/cefic-director-identifies-areas-to-reduce-reach-burden
-
Clean Power Plan Hovers in Background of Gorsuch Hearing
Mar 21, 2017 | E&E Climatewire
By Emily Holden
Democrats will try to pin down Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch on how much deference he would give federal agencies like U.S. EPA, they showed yesterday during the first day of a hearing to advance him.
Gorsuch would fill the spot of conservative Justice Antonin Scalia, who died last February. He could break ties between justices appointed by Republicans and Democrats. And he could rule on how much power the president has to pursue or forgo climate action.
Green groups have closely scrutinized Gorsuch's records on cases involving the environment and how much flexibility the executive branch should have in interpreting and carrying out federal laws. Most alarming to them, Gorsuch has roundly criticized the Chevron doctrine, which says judges should defer to federal agencies when laws are ambiguous. That doctrine would be key if the Supreme Court reviews EPA's Clean Power Plan or greenhouse gas regulations from a future administration.
The Judiciary Committee's ranking member, Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), said yesterday that Congress "relies on agency experts to write the specific rules, regulations, guidelines and procedures necessary to carry out laws we enact." Those are what ensure the ability of the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act to protect the environment from pollution, she said.
Congress in the Clean Air Act gave EPA the power to regulate air pollutants. The Supreme Court ruled that means EPA has authority to limit greenhouse gas emissions. A subsequent EPA finding declared carbon emissions a danger to public health. Based on that finding, EPA proposed climate standards for power plants.
Climate advocates worry that Gorsuch would oppose those standards, arguing against Chevron.
In a short opening statement yesterday, Gorsuch said he would maintain the independence of the court system and the "rule of law," but did not speak specifically to his outlook on agency power. He reminded that justices with different philosophies often agree in court decisions. He noted that he has decided cases in favor of Native Americans seeking to protect tribal lands and to compensate victims of nuclear waste pollution by corporations.
"I have ruled for disabled students, prisoners and workers alleging civil rights violations," he said. "Sometimes, I have ruled against such persons, too. But my decisions have never reflected a judgment about the people before me — only my best judgment about the law and facts at issue in each particular case."
Senators today will spend at least 10 hours asking him questions. They will continue tomorrow. Then, on Thursday and possibly Friday, they will hear testimony from 28 witnesses, including various legal scholars, colleagues and advocates for women's issues, human rights and the environment.
The Judiciary Committee plans to advance Gorsuch's nomination on April 3. Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) said Senate leaders intend to hold a floor vote within 24 hours but definitely before the Easter recess, which begins the following weekend.
Grassley said he thinks all 52 Republicans and some Democrats will support Gorsuch, although he expects a lot of votes against him, too. Under current Senate rules, Republicans would need at least eight Democrats to vote to consider Gorsuch's nomination in order to overcome a filibuster. After that, they could confirm him with a simple majority.
"When this guy is done, people will have a difficult time justifying a vote against him," Grassley told reporters after adjourning.
Gorsuch's 'cold dissent'
In answering questions, Gorsuch will have to explain his legal philosophy but be careful not to tip his hand as to how he would rule on specific cases. The dayslong hearing will be a media frenzy, as interests in every sector look to glean insight into how Gorsuch would operate.
Yesterday, more than 100 journalists packed the 1970s-style, wood-paneled hearing room on Capitol Hill. Police officers lined the halls, and TV cameras flanked the tables. As Gorsuch took his seat, a cacophony of camera shutters went off, making him laugh and triggering photographers to take even more pictures.
Democrats repeatedly noted that Gorsuch was going through the process meant for President Obama's nominee, Merrick Garland, whom Republicans refused to consider last year.
With the direction of the country's highest court hanging in the balance, public attention is heightened. Protesters in "Stop Gorsuch" T-shirts watched silently for short periods of time before being ushered out to make space for other visitors, including young students on school trips. Supporters wore red, white and blue "Confirm Gorsuch" pins.
Democrats questioned how Gorsuch would rule on women's reproductive rights and labor laws. Several brought up a case in which he dissented from two other judges on a three-judge panel who ruled in favor of a truck driver who was fired after leaving a trailer full of meat on the side of the road in below-zero weather when his brake lines were frozen.
Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) quipped that it was cold, but "not as cold as your dissent, Judge Gorsuch."
Other Democrats, including Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, argued that Gorsuch would continue a Supreme Court trend of favoring big business over the public interest. They pegged Gorsuch as being against "the little guy," using the words of a recent New York Times editorial.
"I don't think that can hold water," Grassley said. "I think he'll demonstrate that very clearly tomorrow. Our research shows he's a person who calls the shots the way they should."
Republicans argued that Gorsuch would follow in the footsteps of Scalia, promoting a philosophy that the Constitution should be interpreted as it was written in the late 1700s. They said he would preserve the separation of powers and protect against executive overreach.
A 'family of pioneers'
In his carefully recited opening remarks, Gorsuch spoke of his wife and daughters and his mentors, including Supreme Court Justices Byron White, Anthony Kennedy and Scalia. He said he also admired Justice Robert Jackson, "a famously fierce advocate for his clients as a lawyer" who reminded him that "when you become a judge, you fiercely defend only one client, the law."
"By their example, these judges taught me about the rule of law and the importance of an independent judiciary, how hard our forebears worked to win these things, how easy they are to lose, and how every generation must either take its turn carrying the baton or watch it fall," Gorsuch said.
Gorsuch also spoke of his father.
"He showed me, too, that there are few places closer to God than walking in the wilderness or wading a trout stream — even if it is an awfully long drive home with the family dog after he encounters a skunk," Gorsuch said.
He highlighted his Western roots, adding that his grandmother "came from a family of pioneers" and taught him to fish and tie a fly.
It's customary for senators to introduce Supreme Court nominees from their home state. Sen. Cory Gardner (R-Colo.) yesterday testified in Gorsuch's support. The other senator from Colorado, Democrat Michael Bennet, called for considering Gorsuch's confirmation in the "manner his predecessor deserved but was denied," taking a jab at Republicans for not taking up Garland's nomination.
Neal Katyal, former acting solicitor general under the Obama administration, said he, "like many Americans," is "outraged" that Garland isn't sitting on the bench today. He called it a "tragedy of national proportions" that will be hard to get over, but said Gorsuch is one of the few judges who could help the country to move forward.
He has a "first-rate intellect" and is a "fair and decent man," Katyal said.
"As a judge, he's shown a resolute commitment to the rule of law and the judiciary's independence," Katyal said.
http://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2017/03/21/stories/1060051787
-
Repeal of Obama Drilling Rule Stalls in the Senate
Mar 21, 2017 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama and Devin Henry
The GOP’s effort to roll back contentious Obama-era regulations is hitting a snag.
Some Republican senators are coming out against a resolution that would repeal an Interior Department regulation governing oil and natural gas drilling on federal land. The rule is designed to cut down on the release of methane, a potent greenhouse gas.
A measure canceling the rule passed the House in February on a vote of 221-191. That’s the slimmest margin for any of the resolutions the House GOP has passed this year under the Congressional Review Act (CRA) reversing regulations from the Obama administration.
Despite support from Senate leadership and the oil and gas industry, the methane legislation has not come up for a vote in the upper chamber, and its future there is uncertain.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) told The Hill that a CRA resolution, which prevents the government from writing any future rule that is “substantially the same” as the one overturned, is too blunt an instrument in this case.
“I think we can replace it with a better reg, rather than a CRA,” Graham said.
Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) said she is “leaning against” the resolution.
“I have not made a final decision, but I am leaning against it based on what I’ve heard so far,” Collins said last week.
Spokesmen for Sens. Cory Gardner (R-Colo.) and Rob Portman (R-Ohio) said they’re undecided on whether to vote for the measure. Opponents of the resolution have pressured both of them to oppose it.
Democratic Sens. Heidi Heitkamp (N.D.) and Joe Manchin (W.Va.) are also undecided. They are both running for reelection next year in deep red, energy-heavy states and have broken with their party numerous times this year to vote for GOP-backed legislation and presidential nominations.
The lobbying fight over the resolution has been fierce.
The drilling industry supports the measure, saying it would undo a costly regulation that threatens jobs and their operations on public land. They also say the rule is duplicative with regulations passed by many states.
The American Council for Capital Formation, which is backed in part by fossil fuel interests, started a multimedia advertising campaign this week focused on Washington, D.C., and the home states of senators who are undecided on the CRA resolution.
“I think this has become somewhat of a debate — a policy debate issue among environmental activists. That’s why we’re weighing in, as we see the economic and jobs benefits,” Robert Dillon, the group’s vice president for communications and a former Senate staffer, said.
“We wouldn’t get in and spend our time and money if we didn’t think it was needed. If we thought our votes were there, we would put our resources somewhere else. We think it’s important, so we’re putting a little muscle behind it.”
Groups like the Independent Petroleum Association of America say the way to stop methane venting and flaring is to approve more pipeline infrastructure, rather than a new federal mandate.
“IPAA continues to educate Senate offices on the costly and duplicative burden that the [Bureau of Land Management] rule, which is essentially an air quality rule and is outside the congressionally given authority of the BLM, places on U.S. independent producers’ businesses,” said Neal Kirby, the organization’s spokesman.
Supporters of the methane rule have urged senators to vote against the CRA resolution for a host of reasons, including the economic impact of the rule.
Methane is a key component of natural gas. Supporters of Interior’s rule say capturing methane and putting it on the natural gas market will lead to a bigger financial return for both drillers and American taxpayers, who own the land on which the companies drill.
In a six-figure ad campaign targeting on-the-fence Republicans, the Environmental Defense Fund Action said of the measure, “It’s common sense to protect tax dollars while cutting waste and protecting our health.”
A group of local officials from Western states — which contain the vast majority of public land holdings — sent a letter to senators in February urging them to oppose the resolution.
They said the rule “will cut natural gas waste on federal and tribal lands, will help ensure a fair return to local governments and the taxpaying public, will put our energy resources to good use and will clean up our air.”
Chris Saeger, the executive director of the Western Values Project, said that argument has been appealing to many lawmakers.
“This rule unites people who care about a traditional set of issues related to air quality, but also people who don’t want to see the American government waste resources and tax dollars,” he said.
“The story that we’re continuing to tell is one that has appeal to people on both sides of the aisle.”
The methane resolution is stalling just as the Trump administration and congressional Republicans begin ramping up their focus on Interior Department rules.
Congress has sent President Trump a resolution undoing a Bureau of Land Management planning rule, though he hasn’t signed it yet. The Trump administration last week announced that it would repeal a major bureau rule for hydraulic fracturing on federal land.
In Congress, opponents of the methane rule are optimistic that they’ll be able to overturn it — though they acknowledge there’s work to be done.
“We are not where we need to be, but we’re working on it,” said Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn (R-Texas). “We’re not ready.”
Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), a cosponsor of the legislation, predicted Democratic support would help push the resolution over the top.
“You’ve got some Democrats who would be dramatically enhanced if they support it,” he said.
“There’s no rational reason not to vote for it,” added Rep. Rob Bishop (R-Utah), chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee and sponsor of the House’s legislation. He said neither Graham nor Collins understands that additional pipeline capacity would obviate the need for the rule.
“Sen. Graham doesn’t live in the West, and doesn’t understand these issues, clearly.”
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/324860-repeal-of-obama-drilling-rule-stalls-in-the-senate
-
Pipeline Threatened with 'Physical Attacks'
Mar 21, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
The Dakota Access pipeline has faced "coordinated physical attacks" and is not yet handling oil, recent court filings revealed.
In a status report submitted last night to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, lawyers for Dakota Access referenced "recent coordinated physical attacks along the pipeline that pose threats to life, physical safety, and the environment."
Most of the document was redacted, and no further details were available.
Company lawyers previously estimated that the pipeline could be ready for oil as soon as yesterday. According to last night's report, oil is not yet flowing but may be soon.
"These coordinated attacks will not stop line-fill operations," the filing said. "With that in mind, the company now believes that oil may flow sometime this week."
Crowdfunding litigation
Meanwhile, an American Indian tribe is seeking assistance in its legal battle against the pipeline.
The Cheyenne River Sioux Tribe yesterday kicked off a crowdfunding campaign to "offset the costs of hiring attorneys and expert witnesses in the case." The tribe has been challenging the project in court since last summer, represented by the law firm Fredericks Peebles & Morgan.
The fundraising campaign is through CrowdJustice, the same platform used to raise funds for legal battles against the Trump administration's recent travel bans.
Former U.S. EPA spokeswoman Liz Purchia, who recently launched the public affairs firm Riff City Strategies, is publicizing the effort.
Cheyenne River recently suffered a blow at the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, which rejected the tribe's request for an emergency injunction blocking pipeline activity on religious freedom grounds. While an appeal moves forward in that court, broader environmental claims are proceeding at the district court.
http://www.eenews.net/energywire/2017/03/21/stories/1060051780
-
Oil Could Flow Through Dakota Access ‘Sometime This Week,’ Company Says
Mar 20, 2017 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
Oil could begin flowing through the Dakota Access pipeline “sometime this week,” the company’s developers said in a court filing Monday night.
The two-page filing with the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals — a weekly update on the project’s status ordered by a judge in February — was mostly redacted due to “recent coordinated physical attacks along the pipeline that pose threats to life, physical safety, and the environment,” the document said.
But the company’s lawyers told the judge any potential violence “will not stop” work to put oil into the pipeline. Energy Transfer Partners “now believes that oil may flow sometime this week.”
A spokesperson for the company did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the filing.
Oil entering the pipeline will be a significant milestone in the saga surrounding Dakota Access, a 1,172-mile project stretching from North Dakota to Illinois with a daily capacity of 570,000 barrels of oil.
Two Native American tribes are still fighting the project on environmental and cultural grounds and have asked a federal judge to rule on the validity of the permits issued to build it. An appeals court this weekend rejected the tribes’ emergency request to halt work on the project.
One of the tribes, the Cheyenne River Sioux, on Monday said it would crowdsource funds from supporters to keep its legal fight up and running.
Developers and the federal government said they followed the law — and were deferential to the tribes — during the permitting and construction of the the pipeline. The company has said it will begin operating the pipeline as soon as its route is completed.
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/324918-oil-could-flow-through-dakota-access-sometime-this-week-company
-
PHMSA Orders Inspection of Crude Pipeline Adjacent to Leaky Cook Inlet NatGas Line
Mar 21, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Joe Fisher
An oil pipeline that runs parallel to a leaking natural gas pipeline in Alaska’s Cook Inlet has drawn the scrutiny of the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA).
PHMSA told Hilcorp Alaska LLC, owner of both pipelines, Friday it is requiring the external inspection of the 14-mile crude pipeline, which is in operation. “The investigation stems from a gas leak on Hilcorp’s parallel natural gas pipeline that was first reported by Hilcorp...on Feb. 7, 2017. That leak continues to discharge natural gas (methane) into the waters of Cook Inlet, PHMSA said.
The crude pipeline is known as the Middle Ground Shoal (MGS) Hazardous Liquid System. It transports produced liquids (oil and water) from Hilcorp’s offshore A Platform in Nikiski, AK. From the MGS onshore facility, crude oil is piped to the Tesoro Kenai Refinery.
“Hilcorp will work with PHMSA and other state and federal agencies to ensure a thorough and timely response to the concerns in the proposed order. Hilcorp continues to focus on addressing the natural gas pipeline leak and ensuring the safety of our responders in the field,” the company said in a statement.
The ongoing leak on the natural gas pipeline is located about 2.6 miles from the A Platform and about 4.6 miles from the MGS onshore facility, as measured along the pipeline alignment.
PHMSA said the leak on the natural gas pipeline is the third since June 2014. The leak in June 2014 was followed by one in August of the same year. “The previous operator determined that those leaks were caused by rocks contacting the pipeline in areas where the pipeline was not continuously supported by the seabed,” PHMSA said.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/109827-phmsa-orders-inspection-of-crude-pipeline-adjacent-to-leaky-cook-inlet-natgas-line
-
Plugging, Disclosing Leaks Becoming Routine at Aliso Canyon
Mar 21, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Richard Nemec
In the past three months, Southern California Gas Co. (SoCalGas) has reported various leaks at its closed Aliso Canyon underground natural gas storage complex. The latest incident, albeit small, happened Friday with a "minor leak" in an eight-inch diameter above-ground pipeline.
Last Friday's incident was not connected to any of the 86 Bcf capacity, 3,600-acre underground storage facility's 114 storage wells, all of which have been undergoing testing and upgrades. A large methane leak was plugged at the the facility in February 2016.
SoCalGas crews isolated the pipeline to stop the leak and repairs were completed last Friday night. In distributing its "communication notification” to area residents, SoCalGas also listed a series of similar small incidents dating back to Dec. 24, when a utility inspection crew using infrared cameras identified "a very small" leak from a two-inch opening in the same storage well (SS 25) that was the source the four-month leak last year.
These developments are unfolding as state officials told NGIMonday that 41 Aliso Canyon storage wells have passed allsix required tests and can resume gas injections if and when SoCalGas is authorized by the state to resume operations. On Tuesday. state lawmakers held a hearing on a proposal (SB 57) to require the California Public Utilities Commission and the Department of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources (DOGGR) to complete an ongoing root cause analysis of the four-month leak before any operations at Aliso can resume.
Several local fire and environmental representatives support the bill, along with an increasingly vocal contingent from the nearby Porter Ranch community, which is lobbying to have the state's largest gas storage field closed permanently, even though California energy officials consider it an essential part of the region's electrical and gas grid reliability.
Although the storage field has operated mostly unnoticed for 45 years, Porter Ranch residents, many of whom chose last year to leave their homes during the methane leak at SoCalGas shareholders' expense, argue that the storage field is the source of alleged "severe health problems," some of which have been corroborated by public health professionals.
Supporting the proposed legislation, the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors earlier this month filed a lawsuit seeking a court order requiring that a root cause analysis be required as part of the "comprehensive safety review" of Aliso Canyon's viability which is required by law (SB 380).
A DOGGR spokesperson said this week that the six-month period for re-testing is ongoing for wells that passed an initial phase of tests for noise and temperature and were then isolated from the Aliso Canyon reservoir. "Those wells either will be scheduled for plugging and abandonment or for completing the second phase of tests required for potential future injection," he said.
However, the root cause analysis, which has grown in importance among lawmakers, local officials and residents, "is ongoing with no definitive completion date," according to the DOGGR spokesperson.
The December leak at storage well SS 25 turned out to have emitted one cubic foot of gas over four days and was stopped with the installation of a two-inch valve. Another incident on Jan. 5 involved about two gallons of diesel fuel being released from a construction contractor's fuel storage tank at the Aliso Canyon turbine replacement project construction site.
More recently, on March 7, salt water solution was released from an Aliso tank, spilling a mixture that was 97% water and 3% potassium chloride, a common salt compound, and the local county HAZMAT unit confirmed that the fluid did not affect a creek or any waterways in the area. "The fluid is used by crews to isolate wells from the storage reservoir and allows them to safely perform work on the wells," SoCalGas said in its listing of incidents distributed to the community.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/109834-plugging-disclosing-leaks-becoming-routine-at-aliso-canyon
-
Stand with Workers, Oppose Any Attempt to Repeal OSHA’s Injury Recordkeeping Rule
Mar 21, 2017 | The Hill - Congress Blog
By Debbie Berkowitz
The Congressional Review Act resolution that passed the House and is now being considered by the Senate would repeal an OSHA rule clarifying the responsibility of large employers in dangerous industries to keep complete and accurate injury records. Fundamentally, this is about whether the government can sanction employers in the most dangerous industries for hiding serious workplace injuries and keeping fraudulent records.
Contrary to a claim by Stephen E. Sandherr in a March 20 opinion piece attacking OSHA’s injury recordkeeping rule, this rule it is not an overreach. OSHA simply clarified a long-standing obligation that has been enforced by every administration over the past 45 years. When OSHA clarified its rule, it was not controversial. They received few comments, and industry groups supported the rule, stating that without this OSHA rule, there would likely be a “huge detrimental impact on worker safety and health.”
So let’s not turn worker safety into a partisan issue. Previous administrations, both Democratic and Republican, found widespread underreporting of injuries by many employers—which masks job hazards and jeopardizes worker health and safety. Complete and accurate injury and illness records are a critically important tool that employers and government use to identify and eliminate job hazards, which kill more than 4,800 workers a year and seriously injure almost three million more.
In fact, these employer injury records are the basis for the government statistics on workplace injuries, which guides both the government and industry decisions on prevention strategies. That’s why, just this week, two former commissioners of the Bureau of Labor Statistics—one who served under President George W. Bush and another who served under President Barack Obama—joined together to urge the Senate to oppose this resolution, which they warned would “likely have unintended and unfortunate consequences on the integrity of injury data” gathered by the BLS.
The OSHA clarifying rule does not impose any new costs or obligations on employers, nor does it affect small businesses. The rule only covers larger employers in the most dangerous industries. This rule does not kill jobs, it prevents jobs from killing workers.
If OSHA cannot enforce injury recordkeeping requirements, underreporting will proliferate and worker health and safety will pay the price. Rather than do the bidding of corporate lobbyists, the Senate should stand with this nation’s workers and oppose any attempt to repeal this rule.
Debbie Berkowitz is a senior fellow on worker safety and health with the National Employment Law Project. She formerly served as chief of staff and senior adviser in the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).
http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/labor/324970-senate-stand-with-workers-oppose-any-attempt-to-repeal-oshas-injury
-
Trump Admin Delays Energy Efficiency, Climate Rules
Mar 21, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Christa Marshall and Camille von Kaenel
The Trump administration is further delaying some energy efficiency and climate rules issued at the end of the Obama administration.
Five Energy Department rules and procedures on energy efficiency and a Transportation Department rule on highway planning will be pushed back for months, according to notices in the Federal Register.
The rules were first stalled on Jan. 20 by a blanket Trump order freezing all last-minute Obama rules for two months. The freeze is scheduled to end today, but agencies say they need to give senior officials still trickling in additional time for review. The extended delays range from two to six months.
One efficiency rule on ceiling fans will be stalled until September. Test procedures for walk-in coolers and freezers, compressors, and central air conditioners and heat pumps will be delayed until the summer. DOE also moved to push back a construction standard for federal buildings.
The Federal Highway Administration is deferring one of the last climate-related rules of the Obama administration, which would require local and state transportation planners to measure and account for the greenhouse gas emissions of highway projects receiving federal funding (Greenwire, Jan. 10).
Lauren Urbanek, a senior energy policy advocate at the Natural Resources Defense Council, called the changes "unacceptable."
"It's very clearly established in case law that it's not OK to delay the effective date of a rule without proper notice and comment, and that hasn't been done here," Urbanek said.
Andrew deLaski, executive director of the Appliance Standards Awareness Project, said the delays signal the administration may try to roll back federal efficiency standards. He also found them puzzling because they only alter the "effective dates" of rules and not other key dates governing enforcement of them, such as their compliance dates.
The changes for walk-in coolers, compressors and central air conditioners push back the effective dates of test procedures that are used for labeling and for manufacturers to certify compliance with DOE. The lags could create confusion and increase regulatory costs, said deLaski.
The effective date of a final efficiency rule for ceiling fans has been delayed from today to September. But federal law dictates that a separate compliance date, currently set for 2020, remains intact for ceiling fans, deLaski said.
The effective date determines when a standard goes into the Code of Federal Regulations, while the compliance date is when manufacturers must import or produce only products meeting a specified efficiency level.
The walk-in cooler/freezer delay might change how companies plan to comply, said Stephen Yurek, president and CEO of the Air Conditioning, Heating and Refrigeration Institute.
"While AHRI supports the process used by the Department of Energy to update rules on the test procedure for walk-in coolers/freezers and residential central air conditioners, today's announcement of a delay in the effective date creates an unusual situation for our member companies, in that the effective date and the compliance date will essentially be the same. It is possible that, given this, some of our members might avail themselves of the [federal] provision that allows individual companies to seek a six-month extension for compliance," Yurek said.
DOE did not respond to a request for comment.
Climate
The highway rule, which was originally intended to come into effect on Feb. 17, is now scheduled to go live on May 20. A spokesman for the agency said the decision was made to give new appointees more time to review it.
Top Republicans argue that Congress did not give the highway agency the authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions. A broad industry coalition including the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, the American Road & Transportation Builders Association and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce last month urged Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao to strike the greenhouse gas metric from the package of highway performance measures and reissue a final rule.
But environmentalists have framed the measure as a long-term strategy to lower vehicle emissions by encouraging public transportation and dense housing.
As for other agencies, U.S. EPA announced last week that it would delay five rules (Greenwire, March 17). House Democrats yesterday in a letter said the postponements flout the Administrative Procedure Act (E&E Daily, March 21).
http://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2017/03/21/stories/1060051829
-
U.S. CO2 Emissions Down 3% as Shale Gas Supply Surges, Renewables Displace Coal
Mar 21, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Carolyn Davis
U.S. carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions in 2016 fell more than anywhere else in the world, down 3% year/year, driven by a flood of shale natural gas supply and renewable power increasingly displacing coal, the International Energy Agency (IEA) said.
The 3% decline from 2015, or by 160 million metric tons, came even as the domestic economy grew by 1.6%, the worldwide energy watchdog said in its annual report.
"Emissions in the United States last year were at their lowest level since 1992, a period during which the economy grew by 80%," IEA researchers said.
Globally, energy-related CO2 emissions were flat for the third straight year in 2016 even as the worldwide economy grew 3.1%, signaling a "continuing decoupling of emissions and economic activity."
Emissions fell not only on coal-to-gas switching, growing renewable power generation and improvements in energy efficiency, but on structural changes in the worldwide economy.
"These three years of flat emissions in a growing global economy signal an emerging trend and that is certainly a cause for optimism, even if it is too soon to say that global emissions have definitely peaked," said IEA Executive Director Fatih Birol. "They are also a sign that market dynamics and technological improvements matter. This is especially true in the United States, where abundant shale gas supplies have become a cheap power source."
Global emissions from the energy sector stood at 32.1 gigatonnes last year, the same as the previous two years, according to IEA estimates. CO2 emissions were down not only in the United States but also in China, the world's two-largest energy users and emitters, and they were stable in Europe, offsetting increases in most of the rest of the world.
Coal demand fell worldwide but the drop was "particularly sharp" in the United States, with demand down 11% from 2015. For the first time, electricity generation from natural gas was higher than from coal last year in the United States, IEA said.
During 2016, renewables supplied more than half the global electricity demand growth, with hydro accounting for half of that share. The overall increase in the world's nuclear net capacity last year was the highest since 1993, with new reactors coming online in the United States, China, South Korea, India, Russia and Pakistan.
"With the appropriate policies, and large amounts of shale reserves, natural gas production in the United States could keep growing strongly in the years to come," according to IEA. "This could have three main consequences: it could boost domestic manufacturing, supply more competitive gas to Asia through liquefied natural gas exports and provide alternative gas supplies to Europe." IEA last detailed U.S. gas prospects last November in its annual World Energy Outlook.
Meanwhile, in China, emissions last year fell by 1% as coal demand declined while the economy expanded by 6.7%. IEA cited several reasons for the declining trend including an increasing share of renewables, nuclear and natural gas in the power sector, "but also a switch from coal to gas in the industrial and buildings sector that was driven in large part by government policies combating air pollution."
Two-thirds of China's electricity demand growth, which was up 5.4%, was supplied by renewables, mostly hydro and wind, as well as nuclear. Five new nuclear reactors were connected to the grid in China, increasing its nuclear generation by 25%.
"In China, as well as in India, the growth in natural gas is significant, reflecting the impact of air quality measures to fight pollution as well as energy diversification," said Birol. "The share of gas in the global energy mix is close to a quarter today, but in China it is 6% and in India just 5%, which shows they have a large potential to grow."
In the European Union, emissions were "largely stable" in 2016 as gas demand rose about 8% and coal demand fell 10%. Renewables also played a significant, but smaller, role. The UK saw a significant coal-to-gas switching in the power sector, thanks to cheaper gas and a carbon price floor, researchers said.
"Market forces, technology cost reductions and concerns about climate change and air pollution were the main forces behind this decoupling of emissions and economic growth," according to IEA. "While the pause in emissions growth is positive news to improve air pollution, it is not enough to put the world on a path to keep global temperatures from rising above 2 degrees C."
To take full advantage of the potential of technology improvements and market forces, IEA said "consistent, transparent and predictable policies are needed worldwide."
In related news, the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) on Monday said CO2 emissions could be reduced by 70% by 2050 and "completely phased out" by 2060 with a net positive economic outlook. The Berlin-based agency presented its case that increasing deployment of renewable energy and energy efficiency in the Group of 20, or G20, countries and globally "can achieve the emissions reductions needed to keep global temperature rise to no more than 2 degrees C, avoiding the most severe impacts of climate change."
Renewable energy now accounts for 24% of global power generation and 16% of primary energy supply, according to IRENA. To achieve decarbonization, it said by 2050, renewables should be 80% of power generation and 65% of total primary energy supply.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/109819-us-co2-emissions-down-3-as-shale-gas-supply-surges-renewables-displace-coal
-
9th Circuit Upholds EPA's Haze Plan Authority
Mar 21, 2017 | Inside EPA
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit has rejected tribes' lawsuits challenging EPA's power to impose plans for reducing haze-forming emissions from air pollution sources, issuing a ruling that upholds a plan tribes and some environmentalists challenged as too weak and a second ruling backing a plan one tribe said was too strict.
A three-judge panel issued the two March 20 rulings in the cases Vincent Yazzie, et al. v. EPA, et al., and Hopi Tribe v. EPA, et al., defending EPA's right to impose a federal implementation plan (FIP) for the Navajo Generation Station, a power plant which is situated on Navajo land in Arizona and is part-owned by the federal government and several utilities. The plant is a key supplier of power to operate water distribution systems in Arizona.
The FIP imposes an alternative to traditional best available retrofit technology (BART) that would otherwise be necessary to limit haze, allowing the plant to operate with existing less-stringent controls on condition that it ceases burning coal by 2044. Although the Clean Air Act requires such alternatives to be “better than BART,” tribes and environmentalists say the plan fails this test, allowing unlawful pollution far beyond air law deadlines.
Both cases center on EPA's discretion to impose a FIP on tribal land. The court finds that EPA has the right to impose a BART alternative under its tribal authority rule (TAR), regardless of whether the tribe in question has air law authority to craft its own clean air plans, if the tribe has failed to supply its own tribal implementation plan (TIP).
In his unanimous opinion for the court in Yazzie, Judge John Owens finds that air law deadlines applicable to state implementation plans (SIPs) do not apply in this situation. He writes, “the TAR grants the EPA wide discretion to determine what rulemaking is required to protect air quality on tribal lands. Nothing in the TAR requires the FIP to comply with the regional haze deadline applicable to a SIP.”
He further finds that EPA has wide discretion to determine what is “better than BART” in this situation. “In light of the discretion that the EPA enjoys, we cannot conclude that, under these unique circumstances, the EPA acted arbitrarily and capriciously,” he concludes.
Meanwhile, Judge Mary Schroeder in her unanimous opinion in Hopi rejected the tribe's assertions that it was unlawfully excluded from the technical review and consultation process EPA pursued for the Navajo station. The Hopi tribe opposes the closure of the plant in 2044, citing the economic harm that would result -- a position at odds with other tribal groups litigating the issue in Yazzie, including the Navajo Nation.
The Hopi say they were unlawfully excluded from deliberations of the Technical Working Group (TWG), a body on which the Department of Interior -- but not EPA -- was represented. The Hopi tribe are required to name the relevant federal agency in litigation, but have failed to do so here, Schroeder says.
Further, “The record shows that the EPA did, in fact, consult with the Hopi Tribe throughout the rulemaking process. The Tribe was invited to group consultations, there was a hearing on their reservation and all parties were aware at all times of the Hopi’s economic interests,” she writes.
“Consultations took place before and after EPA considered the TWG Agreement. Therefore, regardless of the scope of enforceability of any duty to consult on part of the EPA, the EPA surely complied.”
https://insideepa.com/the-daily-feed
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