Preview Newsletter
PM ACC (test) 13/6/17
-
(ACC Mentioned) Building Code Fight Draws Renewed Interest
Jun 14, 2017 | E&E Daily
By Geof Koss
The perennial dispute over energy efficiency standards for buildings continues to simmer, with proponents reiterating their support for Senate language that has been floating around for several years. -
(ACC Mentioned) Canada: MDIs in DIY Products Are Risk to Respiratory Health
Jun 14, 2017 | Chemical Watch
Canada has confirmed a preliminary conclusion that five methylenediphenyl diisocyanates (MDIs) found in consumer products represent an unacceptable risk to human health. -
(ACC Mentioned) Failure to Consider American Glyphosate Study Could Undermine IARC's
Jun 14, 2017 | Horticulture Week
By Matthew Appleby
American research not considered by International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), could change its conclusion that glyphosate is "probably carcinogenic" according to the American Chemical Council. -
Costco Starting to Take Stock of Toxic Chemicals
Jun 14, 2017 | Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families
By Laurie Valeriano and Mike Schade
Costco members got some welcome news this month about its “Smart Screening” program to address toxic chemicals in some of the products the company sells. -
Fast Fashion Fills Waterways With Plastic Microfibers
Jun 14, 2017 | The Epoch Times
By Tara MacIsaac
Fleece sweaters, yoga pants, and other clothing made of synthetic materials release thousands of plastic microfibers every time they are washed. -
US Agency Releases Draft Toxicological Profiles
Jun 14, 2017 | Chemical WAtch
The US Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) has released draft toxicological profiles for four substances for public comment. -
(ACC Mention) Anthony Hilton: US Shale Revolution Makes Fracking a Must for UK Industry
Jun 14, 2017 | The Evening Standard
By Anthony Hilton
From a standing start just under 20 years ago, Jim Ratcliffe, its multi- billionaire founder, chairman and major shareholder — bought chemical plants when they were no longer wanted from the likes of ICI in 2001, BP in 2005 and BASF, Bayer, Dow Solway and Norsk Hydro at other times, rationalised them, ran them better, invested in them and created an empire. -
Judge: Tesoro Won’t Have To Pay $2.4M In Fines For Deadly Refinery Blast
Jun 14, 2017 | ChemInfo
By Meagan Parrish
A judge in Washington state has thrown out $2.4 million in fines that were issued against Tesoro Corp after a 2010 blast killed seven workers at one of the company’s refineries. -
LNG Trade to Drive Global Price Convergence by 2035 — BP
Jun 14, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Jenny Mandel
Analysts have long speculated on the potential for new U.S. shale gas supplies that buck traditional contract provisions to dramatically reshape global markets for the fuel. -
Lawmakers, Environmentalists Voice Concern over Proposed EPA Cuts
Jun 14, 2017 | Chicago Tribune
By Javonte Anderson
With Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt expected to testify before Congress on Thursday in support of the Trump administration's proposed EPA budget cuts, members of Congress, EPA employees and environmental groups are voicing their concerns. -
The Energy 202: Paris and Kyoto Have a Lot More in Common Than You Might Think
Jun 14, 2017 | The Washington Post
By Dino Grandoni
To the consternation of much of the rest of the world, a Republican president has pulled out of a long-deliberated international climate agreement. Democrats howled in protest. -
Interior Halts Restrictions on Methane Emissions
Jun 14, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Ellen M. Gillmer
The Trump administration has indefinitely postponed upcoming deadlines for oil and gas companies to slash greenhouse gas emissions on public lands. -
States See Effects of EPA's Ozone Delay
Jun 14, 2017 | Inside EPA
States are starting to see the effects of EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt's recent decision to delay implementing Obama-era ozone standards -- even as summer heat raises concerns about harmful levels. -
EPA Inspector General Probes EPA Computer Air Model
Jun 14, 2017 | Inside EPA
EPA's Office of Inspector General (IG) is investigating the agency's methods for evaluating the effectiveness of its computer modeling for air emissions, with a specific focus on the American Meteorological Society/EPA Regulatory Model (AERMOD), used by the agency to estimate emissions but often criticized by states and industry.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) Building Code Fight Draws Renewed Interest
Jun 14, 2017 | E&E Daily
By Geof Koss
The perennial dispute over energy efficiency standards for buildings continues to simmer, with proponents reiterating their support for Senate language that has been floating around for several years.
In a letter sent yesterday to the leaders of the House Energy and Commerce and Senate Energy and Natural Resources committees, a coalition of industry and professional associations back the building code provisions in comprehensive efficiency legislation (S. 385) authored by Sens. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) and Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), as well as a House companion (H.R. 1443) sponsored by Reps. David McKinley (R-W.Va.) and Peter Welch (D-Vt.).
"As groups representing the manufacturing, building design and construction, and the millions of jobs within those sectors, we strongly support the important role that consensus-based model energy building codes play at the state level in assisting the adoption of efficiency technologies for homes and commercial buildings," wrote the American Chemistry Council, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the American Institute of Architects and 18 other groups yesterday.
The provisions in the bills "strengthen national model codes that are already certified, adopted and in-use by 44 states and several localities around the U.S.," making the largest consuming sources of energy more efficient, while ensuring that stakeholders have a say in the standard-setting process.
The Shaheen-Portman provisions were part of a broader energy package that passed the Senate last year but died in the closing days of the 114th Congress after formal conference committee talks collapsed. Senate Energy and Natural Resources Chairwoman Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) and ranking member Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) have vowed to resurrect the measure and try again this Congress.
A competing bipartisan measure that was included in the House's energy package last year has already been reintroduced, setting up the familiar showdown. The bill (H.R. 2361), sponsored by Reps. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) and Kurt Schrader (D-Ore.), would have required the Energy Department to employ a "simple payback" period of 10 years, as well as other technical requirements, in setting building codes.
Its supporters, including the National Association of Home Builders and American Gas Association, flagged their support for the bill last month (E&E News PM, May 5).
https://www.eenews.net/eedaily/stories/1060055989/search?keyword=%22American+Chemistry+Council%22
-
(ACC Mentioned) Canada: MDIs in DIY Products Are Risk to Respiratory Health
Jun 14, 2017 | Chemical Watch
Canada has confirmed a preliminary conclusion that five methylenediphenyl diisocyanates (MDIs) found in consumer products represent an unacceptable risk to human health.
The substances are used primarily in the production of polyurethane products, such as adhesives, coatings, insulation foams, flexible packaging laminates and foam slabs for furniture. They are also used as adhesives in the production of engineered wood products, such as oriented strand board.
But there is evidence that they cause cancer, as well as sensitising the respiratory tract and skin.
In its final screening assessment, the Canadian government concluded that the five substances meet the human health criterion set out in section 64 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 (Cepa, 1999). The assessment focused on the risk of acute respiratory toxicity, associated with exposure to certain polyurethane foam (SPF) spray products for DIY activities. The products were based on a two-component system and a low-pressure spray mechanism.
The government's conclusion will result in the substances being recommended for addition to the list of toxic substances in Schedule 1 of the Act, which triggers regulatory measures to manage the risk.
The proposed risk management action currently under consideration is to work with experts, manufacturers and trade groups – such as the American Chemistry Council's (ACC) Center for the Polyurethanes Industry (CPI), the Canadian Plastics Industry Association (CPIA) and the Retail Council of Canada (RCC) – to develop a code of practice under section 55 of Cepa.
This would be used to create standardised information and recommendations regarding the products, to inform DIY users about proper personal protective equipment (PPE) and other conditions needed for the safe use of low-pressure two-component SPF consumer products.
The five MDIs are: 4,4′-MDI; 2,2′-MDI; 2,4′-MDI; mixed MDI; and pMDI.MDAs
In the same assessment, the Canadian government concluded that two methylenediphenyl diamines (MDAs) – 4,4'-MDA and pMDA – did not meet section 64 criteria. The substances are primarily used in manufacture of MDIs.
But the government has proposed adding significant new activity (Snac) provisions to them. These would designate as significant new activities:the manufacture of consumer products or cosmetics with concentrations of the substances exceeding 0.1% by weight;other activities related to consumer products or cosmetics, where the concentration of either substance in the product is 0.1% by weight or more and the total quantity of the substance in the product is greater than 10kg; and uses involving more than 1,000,000kg of either substance, or those involving quantities of 100,000kg or more if fewer than three enumerated pollution control measures are implemented.
If adopted, these provisions would require any person engaging in a named activity to submit a significant new activity notification (Snan) at least 90 days prior to the import, manufacture or use.
The government has initiated a 60-day public consultation period for the proposal. Interested parties have until 9 August to submit comments.
The conclusions were made in a final screening assessment. They confirmed preliminary conclusions made in 2014.
https://chemicalwatch.com/56859/canada-mdis-in-diy-products-are-risk-to-respiratory-health
-
(ACC Mentioned) Failure to Consider American Glyphosate Study Could Undermine IARC's
Jun 14, 2017 | Horticulture Week
By Matthew Appleby
American research not considered by International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), could change its conclusion that glyphosate is "probably carcinogenic" according to the American Chemical Council.
The International Agency for Research on Cancer's (IARC) rules on assessing substances for carcinogenicity say it can consider only published research.
New data from a large American study, had not been published when it produced its report concluding glyphosate was "probably carcinogenic" in 2015.
A legal case against Monsanto, taking place in California, involves 184 individual plaintiffs who cite the IARC assessment and claim exposure to RoundUp gave them cancer. They allege Monsanto failed to warn consumers of the risks. Monsanto denies the allegations.
Monsanto said the data on glyphosate could and should have been published in time to be considered by IARC, and that the failure to publish it undermined IARC's classification of glyphosate.
American Chemistry Council (ACC) president and chief executive Cal Dooley said: "These allegations suggest that an IARC Monograph has become nothing more than a rubber stamp for predetermined outcomes.
"We encourage all countries and organisations that support the Monographs programme to join us in calling for an investigation into whether IARC officials knowingly withheld data that proved a lack of association between glyphosate and cancer, and other monographs should be evaluated to determine whether similar manipulation has taken place.
"Today’s revelations lend even greater urgency to the need for fundamental reform of IARC’s Monographs program, and because IARC’s glyphosate monograph is fatally flawed and no longer credible, it should be immediately withdrawn."http://www.hortweek.com/failure-consider-american-glyphosate-study-undermine-iarcs-carcinogenic-conclusion/plant-health/article/1436541
-
Costco Starting to Take Stock of Toxic Chemicals
Jun 14, 2017 | Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families
By Laurie Valeriano and Mike Schade
Costco members got some welcome news this month about its “Smart Screening” program to address toxic chemicals in some of the products the company sells. According to new updates to Costco’s website, the company is now testing products such as clothing, furniture, personal care products, cleaning products, and others for certain toxic chemicals of “regulatory and social concern” and keeping products containing other harmful chemicals off its shelves entirely.
Notable Improvements, Details of Smart Screening Program Revealed
Although Costco hasn’t yet adopted a public safer chemicals policy with goals and timelines for reducing toxic chemicals, the company deserves credit for publicly disclosing actions it’s taking to test for and reduce harmful chemicals in key product categories as part of its “Smart Screening” program. The company announced on its website that:
“Over the last three years Costco has been updating the Costco Restricted Chemical List (RSL) to keep up with the ever-growing global regulatory changes and challenges for chemical restrictions in consumer products. We continue to work with the chemical and consumer product industries to increase our understanding in this area and to find more environmentally friendly alternatives for chemicals and practices of concern…”
“Costco is working with major third-party laboratories to test certain items for chemicals of regulatory and social concern. We call it the Costco Smart Screening Program. The program’s protocols include testing for the presence of certain chemicals in a number of product categories. Each product category has its own list of chemicals of concern (COCs) and RSL…”
“Children’s and adult apparel, bedding, home goods, pet beds, furniture, personal care products, cleaning products, Kirkland Signature food packaging, Kirkland Signature Baby Wipes, and Kirkland Signature Diapers are now physically tested against a list of over 300 COCs…”
Costco also says it has begun the process of partnering with an academic institution to support its efforts. These are positive steps in the right direction for Costco, which we congratulate. This comes only a few months after Costco first began to publicly reveal some limited information about its efforts. Clearly Costco is listening to its members who have been contacting the company and now providing more information about its chemical program!Opportunity for Improvement: What Chemicals Are Being Evaluated and Restricted?
Retailers like Costco are responding to the growing consumer demand for safer products and consumers’ desire to support retailers that consider the health and environmental impact of their products. Wal-Mart, Target, and CVS Health have adopted safer chemical policies and soon Best Buy will too. We’re happy to see Costco announce that it is beginning to make progress in addressing toxic chemicals in the products they sell, but there is still room for improvement.
Last November, Costco received an “F” on Mind the Store’s retailer report card that rated the nation’s eleven largest retailers on their actions to develop safer chemicals policies and eliminate toxic chemicals in products they sell. Costco’s new actions will certainly help improve its score in our next report card that we plan to update and release in November. We hope Costco will continue to improve and expand its work on chemicals in the months to come, for example by developing a safer chemicals policy with clear goals and timeframes.
While Costco has been making some notable progress that it is now finally disclosing, we can’t fully assess what this initiative means for consumers and the marketplace without knowing the complete list of chemicals the company is testing for and/or restricting in its products. It is unclear for example to what extent the Smart Screening program is set up primarily to ensure its suppliers are in compliance with laws and regulations, which are unfortunately inadequate. Retailers like Costco can go beyond legal compliance to help transform the marketplace towards safer products.
We hope Costco will respond to the rising consumer demand for transparency and make public the list of chemicals it is addressing just like CVS Health, Target, and Walmart have done already.
Once Costco does, we’ll know more about whether this is news we can truly celebrate.
http://saferchemicals.org/2017/06/14/costco-starting-to-take-stock-of-toxic-chemicals/
-
Fast Fashion Fills Waterways With Plastic Microfibers
Jun 14, 2017 | The Epoch Times
By Tara MacIsaac
Fleece sweaters, yoga pants, and other clothing made of synthetic materials release thousands of plastic microfibers every time they are washed. These microfibers are accumulating in waterways all over the world, entering the bodies of aquatic organisms and eventually humans.
Mark Browne, an ecologist at the University of New South Wales in Australia, first discovered the problem in 2011. He recalled a meeting he had with Nike representatives shortly thereafter as part of his efforts to get clothing companies to look for solutions. They asked him if microfibers are the new asbestos. Browne said, “It’s probably more abundant than asbestos.”
The rise of fast fashion has spread cheap polyester—the worst culprit—far and wide. Greenpeace reported in March that within the past 15 years, people have started buying 60 percent more clothing items and keeping them only half as long. About 60 percent of those items are polyester. Brands like H&M and Zara have led the trend, according to Greenpeace.
In a single city with a population of 100,000, up to 88,000 pounds of microfibers can enter local waterways every year, according to a study by researchers at the University of California–Santa Barbara. These microfibers accumulate in the local waterways, but also travel to the oceans, where there is already an estimated 1.4 million trillion fibers. They account for 85 percent of pollution on shorelines, according to Browne’s research.
The effects of microfibers on human health, through ingestion of aquatic organisms as well as other exposure, is not yet well understood. Studies have shown the fibers can negatively impact the immune and reproductive systems of marine animals.
Microfibers can also get tangled with other fibers in the intestinal tract, resulting in a non-biodegradable gut blockage, the University of California study noted.
“This can give the organism a false sense of satiety and affects their ability to process real food, potentially leading to starvation,” it states.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is currently studying the impacts of microfiber consumption on human health.Challenges in Solving the Problem
The textile industry faces greater challenges in solving this problem than the cosmetic industry has in addressing the much-publicized microbead pollution problem.
The University of California study states: “While the cosmetic industry was able to replace microbeads with natural alternatives such as sand and nut shells that provided the same function as their plastic counterparts, the apparel industry faces a more difficult situation. Alternatives to synthetic textiles are limited and struggle to mimic the performance capabilities of materials like polyester.”
Browne said even natural fibers that are treated come with problems and aren’t necessarily better. Chemicals used to treat and dye wool, cotton, and bamboo, for example, may also have negative environmental impacts. He calls for peer-reviewed research on each mitigation approach to see which is really most effective.
But little progress has been made since he discovered the problem six years ago, Browne said. “Unfortunately, rather than science being supported and actually improving our understanding and giving people solutions, what’s actually happened is we’ve had an awful lot of greenwashing on the issue.”
‘Greenwashing’ and Misinformation
Several companies have marketed products, from special laundry bags to washing machine filters, as solutions to the microfibers problem. But Browne accused these companies of greenwashing—that is, promoting initiatives or products as eco-friendly without doing what’s genuinely needed for the environment.
He would also like to see the money used to fund NGO awareness campaigns—which he said spread misinformation—instead spent on research for solutions.
“We’ve had a whole lot of people jump on the bandwagon and confuse the issue,” Browne said.
Consumers play an important role, and if they think the problem is solved by a special laundry bag, there may be little incentive for clothing companies to invest in further research and development. Browne said Nike representatives told him they would only act on the issue if the public demands it. Nike did not respond to inquiries as of press deadline.
The Guppy Friend laundry bag is one of the leading products sold as a solution to this problem. It is said to capture microfibers, which can be removed from the bag by hand after the wash.
Its makers, Alexander Nolte and Oliver Spies, said they are selling their bag not as a final solution or to interfere with finding other solutions, but to mitigate the problem as much as possible in the meantime.
Nolte said via email: “We know that this is not the final solution. It’s rather meant to raise awareness about the microfiber issue and at the same time, it is a reliable, hands-on solution to actively prevent microfibers from entering our oceans.”
Browne criticized the bag, saying it does not have robust, peer-reviewed research to back it up as a proven solution. He also wondered whether the plastic bag could itself shed microplastics.
Nolte said he and Spies have worked with the German Textile Research Institute, the University of California, and other institutions to test the bag, finding it can capture the majority of fibers released from garments. Describing the bag, Nolte said, “The mesh is made out of monofilaments, which are more like sticks than threads, and thus does not release fibers itself.”
Some solutions suggested by researchers at the University of California include using front-loading washing machines and producing more durable clothing. Their study found that 430 percent more fibers are released by top-loading washers than by front-loaders. Cheaper garments can shed some 40 percent more fibers than higher-end garments.
http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/2256710-fast-fashion-fills-waterways-with-plastic-microfibers-2/
-
US Agency Releases Draft Toxicological Profiles
Jun 14, 2017 | Chemical WAtch
The US Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) has released draft toxicological profiles for four substances for public comment.
These are:antimony;molybdenum;silica; and2,4-D (2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid).
The ATSDR is congressionally mandated to develop toxicology profiles for hazardous substances, found at National Priorities List (NPL) sites. Each peer-reviewed document draws from available literature on the substance’s properties to characterise the toxicologic and adverse health effects of analysed substances.Antimony
Antimony, when mixed into an alloy, is used in lead storage batteries, solder, sheet and pipe metal, bearings, castings and pewter.
The draft profile indicates that the metal can cause heart problems and lung effects in workers, including lung cancer. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (Iarc) has determined antimony trioxide as a group 2B substance (possibly carcinogenic) and antimony trisulfide as group 3 (not classifiable).
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Osha) has set a limit of 0.5 mg/cubic meter for antimony in workroom air. The EPA has determined that exposure to drinking water of 0.01 mg/L is not expected to cause health effects for one to ten day exposures; the corresponding lifetime exposure level is 0.006 mg/L.Molybdenum
According to the draft profile, an intake of 45 μg/day of the element molybdenum is recommended for adults. However, exposure to high levels can be harmful.
Concerns from long-term exposure to dust in the air include damage to the nasal cavity, epiglottis and lungs. Studies suggest that ingesting very large volumes can damage reproductive systems and may cause kidney and liver damage.
The National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (Niosh) has established a level of 5,000 mg/cubic meter for insoluble compounds and 1,000 mg/cubic meter for soluble compounds that it considers "immediately dangerous and likely to cause death or immediate or delayed permanent adverse health effects".
Molybdenum is principally found as an oxide or sulfide compound, and is widely used to make steel alloys.Silica
Silica is a naturally occurring compound that comes in many forms. Silica sand and gravel are used for building and construction, hydraulic fracturing, ceramics and abrasives. Crystal quartz forms of silica are used in jewellery, electronics, and the optical component industry.
Health effects from certain silica forms are found in workers exposed for long periods of time, or from extremely heavy exposure over a short period of time (acute silicosis).
The draft assessment says that the greatest risks to human health from exposure to crystalline silica include silicosis and lung cancer. The Department of Energy (DOE), Niosh and Osha have all set limits for exposure in occupational settings.2,4-D
2,4-D is the active ingredient in many herbicide products. Although animal studies have indicated a number of effects – including liver and kidney effects, decreased breast milk production and blood alteration – the ATSDR says harmful effects are not likely to be experienced when manufacturer’s instructions are followed.
Comments on the four draft profiles will be accepted until 11 September.
https://chemicalwatch.com/56860/us-agency-releases-draft-toxicological-profiles
-
(ACC Mention) Anthony Hilton: US Shale Revolution Makes Fracking a Must for UK Industry
Jun 14, 2017 | The Evening Standard
By Anthony Hilton
From a standing start just under 20 years ago, Jim Ratcliffe, its multi- billionaire founder, chairman and major shareholder — bought chemical plants when they were no longer wanted from the likes of ICI in 2001, BP in 2005 and BASF, Bayer, Dow Solway and Norsk Hydro at other times, rationalised them, ran them better, invested in them and created an empire. Remarkably, given the capital intensity of the industry and the huge costs involved, he achieved all this while keeping Ineos private.
But now that empire is under threat. Earlier this week it was disclosed that the company is to invest €2 billion (£1.76 billion) expanding its European petrochemicals capacity, though there is still some debate about where this massive new plant will be sited. However, Belgium, rather than somewhere in the UK, seems to be the favourite.
Now, on one level this massive investment looks and is a show of strength. But on another, it illustrates how Europe’s petrochemical industry is vulnerable as never before because of the shale oil and gas boom in the US, which has made energy costs there just a fraction of those in Europe.
Once you have built a major chemical complex, your main (in many ways, your only) worry is the cost of the raw material you need to feed into it. This can account for half or more of total production costs, and is similarly crucial for other energy-intensive industries such as refining, iron and steel, glass, cement and paper.
Until a few years ago Europe and America paid more or less the same amount for their petrochemical feedstock — the US had a slight advantage but not so great after transport and other costs had been factored in. (Middle East plants, sited right by the oilfields, did have such a price advantage but lacked scale.)
This is no longer the case thanks to the fundamental changes across the Atlantic. The Marcellus field, which spreads over several states and is just one of many in the US, produces 15 billion cubic feet of gas a day which is almost twice the UK’s entire consumption. But the result is that US prices have disconnected from the rest of the world and the subsequent feedstock prices have given American chemical plants so vast a price advantage that, on paper at least, there’s no way Europe can compete. It is staring down the barrel of bankruptcy, not now, but in a few short years, unless it can find some way to get its raw-material costs down to American levels.
Thus far, the effect has been muted — and the European industry has had a little time — because the US petrochemical industry was originally not built for indigenous US gas and oil supplies but instead located near ports and configured to process supplies of oil from the Middle East.
But this is changing fast. There has been virtually no big petrochemical investment in Europe in the past decade whereas in the US since 2010 some $85 billion of petrochemicals projects have been completed or are under construction. Spending on chemical capacity to 2022 will exceed $124 billion, according to the American Chemistry Council, creating 485,000 jobs during construction and more than 500,000 permanent jobs, adding between $80 billion and $120 billion in economic output. After years where chemical capacity has run neck and neck with Europe, the American industry is about to dwarf it.
So this is the backdrop to the Ineos investment, and what is special is that this new plant will be supplied by a fleet of purpose-built liquefied natural gas tankers of sufficient number and size to create what Ratcliffe calls a “virtual pipeline” of US gas supply across the Atlantic. Even that, however, is not the key to the economics of the deal — rather it is that Ratcliffe has taken advantage of the fact that the US chemical plants seeking to use gas are still being built, and as a result we have been in a period where prices have been artificially low.
Seizing the moment, he has secured a decades-long supply contract at rock-bottom cost, low enough to cover a major chunk of his transport costs which he hopes will enable him, for a while, to live with US competition.
But the rest of Europe’s industry — here and on the Continent — has, for the most part, not been so fleet of foot. As a result it faces an existential challenge. Unless it can secure similarly low feedstock prices it will be forced to shrink dramatically, raise its efficiency and specialise.
This, in turn, will add further fuel to the debate on fracking in the UK, because it is the declared view of Ineos and presumably other energy-intensive firms, that only UK-produced shale gas can deliver feedstock at the price the industry needs to survive.
Hence Ineos, without courting publicity, has assembled some interesting onshore fracking licences with a particular focus on the East Midlands where test drilling is now taking place.
Perhaps because this is an area which at one time drew its prosperity from the Nottingham coalfield, local opinion has been largely supportive, helped — no doubt — by Ineos’s decision to give local communities a 2% cut of revenues.
But it also serves as a reality check for the country.
A post-Brexit Britain is going to have to exploit every source of wealth to stay afloat. In this, energy costs are key because you can’t make anything without energy. That means fracking whether people like it or not.
http://www.standard.co.uk/business/anthony-hilton-us-shale-revolution-makes-fracking-a-must-for-uk-industry-a3564971.html
-
Judge: Tesoro Won’t Have To Pay $2.4M In Fines For Deadly Refinery Blast
Jun 14, 2017 | ChemInfo
By Meagan Parrish
A judge in Washington state has thrown out $2.4 million in fines that were issued against Tesoro Corp after a 2010 blast killed seven workers at one of the company’s refineries.
The explosion happened at a facility about 70 miles north of Seattle and was triggered when a 40-year-old heat exchanger ruptured while workers were attempting to put parallel heat exchangers back online after routine cleaning. Vapors in the air ignited, setting off an explosion that caused a fire so hot it burned for hours.
Investigators such as the U.S. Chemical Safety Board found several gaps in state and federal regulations that cover refinery safety. The CSB’s assessment also accused Tesoro of not fully evaluating the effects of hydrogen under high heat and pressure on steel components like the heat exchanger.
A state administration judge in Washington, however, said there was not enough evidence that Tesoro side-stepped existing regulations for equipment maintenance and inspection to make the company pay the fines issued by the state’s Department of Labor and Industries.
“The Department has failed to show by a preponderance of the evidence that Tesoro committed any of the alleged violations,” the judge wrote in his decision.
According to Reuters, the decision will still have to be reviewed by the Washington state Board of Industrial Insurance Appeals.
A spokesperson for Tesoro said the judge’s decision was confirmation that the company had properly complied with safety protocol.
“Rigorous maintenance and inspection programs are integral to that core value, and our programs are based on industry best practices as the judge’s proposed decision and order acknowledges,” she said.
https://www.chem.info/news/2017/06/judge-tesoro-wont-have-pay-24m-fines-deadly-refinery-blast
-
LNG Trade to Drive Global Price Convergence by 2035 — BP
Jun 14, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Jenny Mandel
Analysts have long speculated on the potential for new U.S. shale gas supplies that buck traditional contract provisions to dramatically reshape global markets for the fuel. Now BP PLC is saying it expects this vision to unfold over the next two decades.
In its latest Energy Outlook, released yesterday, BP predicts that natural gas use worldwide will grow faster than oil or coal at 1.6 percent per year between 2015 and 2035, accounting for a growing share of world energy as countries increasingly turn away from coal to fuel power plants.
Liquefied natural gas (LNG), the supercooled form of the fuel that can be transported on tanker ships between major markets, will grow seven times faster than pipeline gas over that time frame, according to BP's "most likely" scenario, growing from about one-third of all gas trade to about half by 2035.
"The significance of the growing importance of LNG-based trade is that, unlike pipeline gas, LNG cargoes can be redirected to different parts of the world in response to regional fluctuations in demand and supply. As a result, gas markets are likely to become increasingly integrated across the world," the company said in its new assessment.
Unlike pipeline gas trade, a growing global market for LNG will incentivize traders to redirect cargoes from low-priced markets to more lucrative areas, the company says. And as the LNG market grows and more reliable market figures emerge, long-term contracts will increasingly be priced according to spot gas markets, knitting markets together still more.
In the past, LNG buyers in Asia have paid a premium over rates in other markets, at times double or triple the rates paid by buyers in Europe. That pricing differential has been based in part on the fact that Asian LNG trades traditionally use contracts that link its price to oil indexes, a now-outdated metric based on a time when natural gas was largely a byproduct of oil production. Competition matters, too; in Europe, where pipelines from Russia supply the majority of natural gas, LNG was priced closer to pipeline gas.
But a surge of LNG from the United States that entered world markets under new, less-restrictive contracts, and an unexpected softening of economic growth in China and around the world in recent years, has contributed to a glut of LNG supply on world markets. Activity in spot markets ticked up, and long-term gas buyers in Europe and Asia pushed the sellers of both pipeline gas and LNG for better pricing and more favorable terms.
Today, buyers in Japan, South Korea and China are working together in pursuit of greater leverage in LNG contract negotiations. A main point of contention is the "destination clauses" common in long-term LNG contracts that limit deliveries to pre-agreed ports, meaning buyers cannot easily resell cargoes if their needs change or if more favorable deals appear on the spot market.
BP's analysis suggests that buyers will ultimately win significantly more control in the global gas trade, bringing greater parity across markets.
The company sees a special role for the U.S., though. It predicts that Australia, a major world LNG supplier, will primarily feed the Asian market where it has an advantage in shipping distances, but U.S. cargoes will be directed around the world as marginal supplies in Europe, Asia, and South and Central America. "As such, U.S. gas prices are likely to play a key role in anchoring gas prices in a globally integrated market," BP said.Alternate realities
BP's forecasting exercise is based on the company's assessment of a "most likely" combination of policies and market forces driving world energy markets, and in that forecast it sees natural gas growing at a fast clip, driven by low prices in the U.S. and strong demand linked in part to its low emissions profile.
But both more aggressive and less aggressive world climate policies could tamp down the growth rate for gas, BP says. In the "slower gas" scenario, more robust world demand for coal in the U.S., China and elsewhere would hold back growth in gas. Gas use would continue to rise, and coal use would continue to fall in this scenario, BP says, but both would happen at lower rates.
Alternately, the forecast includes "faster transition" and "even faster transition" scenarios for world movement away from fossil fuels and toward renewables in an effort to combat climate change. Those scenarios both push gas demand growth lower than in the pro-coal scenario, both limiting natural gas growth to less than half of its profile under the "most likely" conditions. "Both stronger and weaker policy assumptions [pose] potential threats" to the role of gas in the world energy mix, BP concluded.
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2017/06/14/stories/1060055982
-
Lawmakers, Environmentalists Voice Concern over Proposed EPA Cuts
Jun 14, 2017 | Chicago Tribune
By Javonte Anderson
With Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt expected to testify before Congress on Thursday in support of the Trump administration's proposed EPA budget cuts, members of Congress, EPA employees and environmental groups are voicing their concerns.
The proposed budget was the subject of a teleconference Tuesday that included U.S. Rep. Dan Kildee, D-Mich., U.S. Rep. Marcy Kaptur, D-Ohio, Jack Darin, president of Sierra's Club Illinois chapter and Mike Mikulka, president of Local 704 at the EPA's Chicago office.
The White House's latest budget proposal, released last month, would reduce the agency's current funding by more than 31 percent, to $5.7 billion.
Although the plan would slash funding for several regional programs, including the Superfund program, there is a keen focus on the elimination of funding for Great Lakes Restoration, a multi-agency initiative with the objective to restore and maintain the Great Lakes basin ecosystem.
"It's so completely short-sighted and dangerous to completely eliminate these protections, which President Trump is proposing," Kildee said. "It's just completely irresponsible to think cutting protection of the Great Lakes will lead to anything other than a disaster."
There are currently 27 sites that the EPA labeled an "area of concern," a location that has experienced environmental degradation along the Great Lakes, including the Grand Calumet River, which runs 13 miles through Gary, Hammond and East Chicago. GLRI provided nearly $300 million to help complete efforts to clean and restore the Grand Calumet River since 2004, according to the group.
Since its inception in 2010, GLRI has invested in more than 3,000 projects to rehabilitate the Great Lakes by combating invasive species and protecting fish and wildlife, cleaning up pollution and contaminated sediment and controlling pollution run-off, according to the group.
Kildee added both sides of the aisle have worked together to protect the Great Lakes basin.
"It has never been a partisan issue. Since 2010, Democrats and Republicans have come together to protect the Great Lakes through the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative."
Earlier this year, U.S. Sen. Joe Donnelly, D-Ind., along with a bipartisan group of senators sent a letter to Pruitt expressing their concerns about the proposed EPA budget and the drastic cuts to the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative program.
Darin echoed the frustration of Trump's proposal that would divest the Great Lakes basin of resources needed to monitor its ecosystem and contaminated waters.
"Budgets are much more than numbers on a page," he said.
"They really do reflect values and priorities. And when Donald Trump and Scott Pruitt propose a budget that zeroes out the Great Lakes and threatens the very existence of the EPA in the Midwest it is crystal clear that they do not value our lakes, they do not value the professionals who work every day to keep us safe and they don't value the communities around the Great Lakes," Darin said.
Mikulka said the proposed budget cuts would cause thousands of people working for the EPA to lose their jobs, therefore, inhibiting the agency to monitor the environment.
"That concept is a fantasy. Human health and the environment will suffer greatly if that budget becomes a reality."
Amid continued speculation about the EPA's Region 5 office in Chicago closing, EPA officials contend that the regional office will remain open.
"Anyone that takes time to read President Trump's budget will realize that no money is allocated to close down regional EPA offices," EPA spokesman Jahan Wilcox said.
Bowden Quinn, president for the Hoosier chapter of the Sierra Club, said the proposed cuts would be devastating for Northwest Indiana.
"Indiana's Department of Environmental Management is already is already cut to the bone," he said. "Getting more resources up to the Great Lakes region is going to be tough for them. This kind of slashing to the bone of EPA's Great Lakes program is going to cripple Northwest Indiana.
"The cleanup in Grand Calumet River has made a lot of progress and to take money away is going to waste away the resources that have gone into that up to now."
http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/post-tribune/news/ct-ptb-congress-reacts-to-epa-cuts-st-0614-20170614-story.html
-
The Energy 202: Paris and Kyoto Have a Lot More in Common Than You Might Think
Jun 14, 2017 | The Washington Post
By Dino Grandoni
To the consternation of much of the rest of the world, a Republican president has pulled out of a long-deliberated international climate agreement. Democrats howled in protest. Other world leaders reaffirmed their commitment to the accord, but its long-term fate is uncertain.
That is the state of affairs in 2017, but it was also the case in 2001. That year, President George W. Bush withdrew from the Kyoto Protocol, a treaty that committed the United States and other developed nations to keeping greenhouse-gas emissions under set targets.
Sixteen years later, the next Republican to occupy the White House pulled out of another climate agreement, the Paris accord, which was thought to be more immune to change from a GOP-occupied White House given the flexibility it provided to change emissions targets.
One of the most useful ways to assess what happens next after President Trump’s decision to withdraw from Paris -- both to the United States’ standing abroad and to the fate of the agreement itself -- is to review the fallout following the end of U.S. participation in the Kyoto Protocol.
Let’s assess the past and the present situation by looking at two key similarities -- and one important difference:
Similarity: Both Trump and Bush were perceived by other nations as arrogant. But it was, curiously, for precisely opposite reasons.
In 2001, President Bush withdrew from Kyoto by writing a hastily drafted letter to Congress two months after entering office. Bush signed the letter, orchestrated by Vice President Cheney, without consulting his secretary of state, national security adviser or EPA administrator, according to the New York Times. The Times explains what happened next:When Condoleezza Rice, the national security adviser, found out, she called Colin L. Powell, the secretary of state, at his office in Foggy Bottom. Alarmed, he told her, “Slow this thing down until I get there,” and rushed downstairs to his car to race over to the White House.
By the time he made it the few blocks to the West Wing, it was too late. Mr. Cheney had left to hand-deliver the letter to Capitol Hill. “It’s gone,” Ms. Rice told Mr. Powell.
Mr. Powell snapped at the president. “You’re going to see the consequences of it,” he said.
Trump, unlike Bush, did seek the advice of his Cabinet (and family members, notably daughter Ivanka) over the course of several months before coming to his decision. But the sense that Trump underwent a thoughtful review of the Paris implications before coming to a decision was undermined by his Rose Garden announcement, which was littered with inaccuracies and unnecessary taunts of other nations, such as Trump's line that "I was elected to represent the citizens of Pittsburgh, not Paris."
Though some federal climate scientists certainly felt stifled during his administration, President Bush did not make a habit of publicly denigrating climate science in the same way as Trump and some of officials have. Writing to Congress to withdraw from Kyoto, Bush wrote, "My Administration takes the issue of global climate change very seriously."
Similarity: U.S. withdrawal strengthened the resolve of other nations -- for awhile. The U.S. withdrawal from Kyoto spurred the other nations of the world to compromise -- the European Union made key concessions to Japan, Russia and Australia -- and save Kyoto, which unlike Paris had yet to be ratified. In the summer of 2001, 178 nations reached a dealwithout the United States.
U.S. withdrawal "galvanized the response to finalize Kyoto," said Alden Meyer, director of strategy and policy for the Union of Concerned Scientists.
A similar resolve has been on display for months from the international community in the wake of Trump's election. After the 2016 presidential campaign, no nation publicly wavered in its support of Paris. After Trump’s announcement, big players like China, India and Europe reaffirmed their commitment to the accord.
Difference: The Paris accord is more resilient than the Kyoto Protocol.
One of the key sticking points in the Kyoto treaty was that developing nations, like China, did not have to cap emissions -- at least initially. Only developed nations needed to reduce their emissions, an obligation Bush (and, for that matter, the Senate in a resolution passed 95-0 in 1997) perceived as unfair. The expectation was that during the second round of talks more and more nations would step up and commit to legally binding emissions reductions.
But without U.S. participation, they did not step up.
"It was very difficult to get China or other developing countries to come in and join the Kyoto Protocol without having the United States in that agreement," Jennifer Morgan, executive director of Greenpeace International, said. "That weakened the agreement in the end, because it could never really evolve into a truly global agreement without the U.S. being in it."
In fact, the reverse happened: By the end of 2011, Japan, Russia and Canada all said they would not agree to the second commitment period.
Here's the key design difference between Kyoto and Paris: Developing nations have already signed on to the Paris accords. President Obama was able to convince poorer nations to agree to Paris from the start because the agreement let nations set voluntary (rather than mandatory, treaty-bound) targets that gave developing countries breathing room to grow their economies before they capped emissions.
"That's key," Morgan said of the Paris accord. "It's just much more resilient, I think, because you have everybody pretty much on board."
But the true test of that resiliency isn't found in the recent rhetoric of nations following Trump's decision. It will be when nations have to set new targets in 2020.
“I think that will be the real test for Paris," Meyer said.
BREAKING NEWS THIS MORNING: A gunman opened fire this morning on Republican lawmakers practicing for the Congressional Baseball Game in Alexandria, Va., "possibly injuring several including at least one lawmaker, Steve Scalise, the majority whip, according to police and a congressman. Alexandria police would only confirm that a shooting had occurred and that one person was in custody," reports Peter Hermann, Paul Kane and Patricia Sullivan. For more real-time updates, check the Post website.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/the-energy-202/2017/06/14/the-energy-202-paris-and-kyoto-have-a-lot-more-in-common-than-you-might-think/59400252e9b69b2fb981dd02/?utm_term=.be790162d0c4
-
Interior Halts Restrictions on Methane Emissions
Jun 14, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Ellen M. Gillmer
The Trump administration has indefinitely postponed upcoming deadlines for oil and gas companies to slash greenhouse gas emissions on public lands.
In a Federal Register notice to be published tomorrow, the Bureau of Land Management announced that companies will not have to comply with new rules for venting, flaring and leaking of methane from their operations on public and tribal lands, pending judicial review.
The news comes less than a day after U.S. EPA proposed a two-year freeze of its own methane restrictions for new oil and gas operations across the country (Energywire, June 14).
BLM's rule, known as the Methane and Waste Prevention Rule, was finalized by the Obama administration last year and immediately faced legal challenges from industry groups and Western states. The rule narrowly escaped being scrapped through the Congressional Review Act in May (Energywire, May 11).
Now, BLM is rethinking the rule and pausing January 2018 compliance deadlines for measuring flared gas, upgrading equipment, capturing vapors from storage tanks, and implementing leak detection and repair programs.
Other provisions of the rule are already in effect, including general restrictions on venting and flaring, well maintenance, and royalty calculations. Those remain unaffected by the delay.
Industry groups including the American Petroleum Institute and Western Energy Alliance earlier this year sent letters to Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke requesting the stay. They say the rule's provisions are overly burdensome and will force some companies to halt operations (Energywire, May 19).
BLM is delaying the compliance dates under an Administrative Procedure Act provision that allows agencies to pause challenged rules pending judicial review.
"Given this legal uncertainty, operators should not be required to expend substantial time and resources to comply with regulatory requirements that may prove short-lived as a result of pending litigation or the administrative review that is already under way," the Federal Register notice says. "Postponing these compliance dates will help preserve the regulatory status quo while the litigation is pending and the Department reviews and reconsiders the Rule."
Environmental groups that support the Obama-era rule have argued it's too late for the Trump administration to invoke that Administrative Procedure Act provision because, while the various compliance deadlines are phased in over time, the rule officially took effect earlier this year. They have promised to sue over any attempt to sideline the restrictions.
Earthjustice attorney Robin Cooley, who has been defending the methane rule court, slammed the administration's move.
"Once again the Trump administration is bowing to the wishes of the oil and gas industry with no concern for public health and the environment," she said in an email. "Methane regulations are common sense, cost effective standards that reduce pollution while saving money. It is imperative that these rules go into effect, and we will be in court fighting every step of the way."
Industry, meanwhile, celebrated the news.
"Western Energy Alliance is very pleased that the Interior Department has listened to the concerns of companies having to comply with a rule that is likely to be overturned in court or changed significantly through the rulemaking process," alliance President Kathleen Sgamma said in an email, adding that industry will continue working to improve methane capture rates.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2017/06/14/stories/1060056009
-
States See Effects of EPA's Ozone Delay
Jun 14, 2017 | Inside EPA
States are starting to see the effects of EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt's recent decision to delay implementing Obama-era ozone standards -- even as summer heat raises concerns about harmful levels.
EPA announced last week that it is delaying by one year -- from Oct. 1, 2017 to October 2018 -- the deadline for designating areas' attainment with the 2015 National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS). Pruitt said the extra year will give the agency more time to collect “the most recent air quality data” to make the designations and to conduct its previously announced review of the Obama EPA's decision to tighten the ozone limit.
EPA's announcement came just days before a heat wave spread across much of the East Coast and Midwest, prompting warnings about high ozone levels. “The air was so bad on Monday,” Bloomberg reported “that air quality alerts were posted from Virginia to Maine, as well as parts of Indiana, Michigan and across upstate New York.”
And as Inside EPA's Stuart Parker reported from the Ozone Transport Commission's (OTC) spring meeting in Saratoga Springs, NY, last week, state members of the commission said that early data show 2017 ozone levels are worsening and that EPA's one-year delay for implementing the 2015 ozone limit risks stopping the states' “momentum” on tackling ozone air pollution.
In New Jersey, for example, environmentalists are raising concerns that the delay in implementing the Obama-era standard will delay local efforts to curb emissions. “This rule would have helped New Jersey more than most states since we are at the end of the air stream and get a third of our pollution from out of state,’’ Jeff Tittel, director of the New Jersey Sierra Club, told NJ Spotlight. “We are seeing more and earlier bad ozone days making it harder for people to breathe.’’
EPA's efforts to address ozone and help states comply also appear likely to be on hold. OTC, for example is again urging EPA to advance a rulemaking strengthening standards for nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions, an ozone precursor, for heavy-duty vehicles, though the priority for such an action is doubtful given the agency's review of the 2015 standard.
The priority for addressing ozone also appears to be diminishing in some states in the wake of EPA's decision. In Texas, for example, News4 San Antonio reports that Gov. Greg Abbott (R) vetoed nearly $1.5 million in funding slated to help the city come into attainment with the now delayed standard.
Abbott said funding “should be prioritized to directly address problems in our non-attainment areas of the state so that we are better positioned to combat the business-stifling regulations imposed on these areas by the Environmental Protection Agency.”
But Peter Bella, the former Natural Resources Director for the Alamo Area Council of Governments, told the station that the cuts will make it difficult to attain the standards. “Our air pollution is not now meeting the federal air quality standards,” he said. “We’re growing like gangbusters -- we’re having a great time growing -- but we need to be able at the same time to control the pollution that accompanies that growth.”
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/states-see-effects-epas-ozone-delay
-
EPA Inspector General Probes EPA Computer Air Model
Jun 14, 2017 | Inside EPA
EPA's Office of Inspector General (IG) is investigating the agency's methods for evaluating the effectiveness of its computer modeling for air emissions, with a specific focus on the American Meteorological Society/EPA Regulatory Model (AERMOD), used by the agency to estimate emissions but often criticized by states and industry.
In a June 5 letter, James Hatfield, director of air evaluations at the IG's Office of Program Evaluation, informed Sarah Dunham, the acting head of EPA's air office, that the IG “plans to begin preliminary research to assess the effectiveness of EPA's process for reviewing and approving air quality dispersion models it recommends for use by state, local and tribal air pollution control agencies.”
“We plan to review applicable laws, regulations, policies, procedures and guidance related to the uses and evaluations of air quality dispersion models,” the IG says, and will “primarily focus on the review and approval process for” AERMOD “during our preliminary research.”
The IG asks EPA to provide: All model evaluations of AERMOD (original or revised versions); all peer reviews of AERMOD (original or revised versions); and all consequence analyses of AERMOD (original or revised versions).
EPA has used AERMOD as one of its primary modeling tools for a wide range of purposes, and the model underlies numerous EPA air rules. However, states and industry groups have in past criticized aspects of AERMOD as not being sufficiently accurate. The model is, for example, often employed to estimate air emissions from point sources, such as sulfur dioxide emissions emitted by smokestacks.
The IG in its letter does not give a reason for commencing the investigation.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/epa-inspector-general-probes-epa-computer-air-model
Industry and Association News
LCSA News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested