Preview Newsletter
PM ACC 6/23/2017
-
(ACC Mentioned) The Energy 202: This Energy Department Official Has a History of Disturbing Tweets
Jun 23, 2017 | Washington Post
By Dino Grandoni
..."Career agency employees had raised objections to the changes steered by EPA Deputy Assistant Administrator Nancy Beck, who until April was the senior director of regulatory science policy at the American Chemistry Council, the chemical industry’s leading lobbying group... -
(ACC Mentioned) Wentzel Charges up NEI's PR
Jun 23, 2017 | O'Dwyer's PR News
By Kevin McCauley
Jon Wentzel, who was a top executive at Burson-Marsteller and Ogilvy, joined the Nuclear Energy Institute this month as VP-communications. -
(ACC Mentioned) WWAY, Starnews, WHQR to Host Public Forum on GenX Wednesday
Jun 23, 2017 | WWAY NewsChannel 3
As concerns continue about the safety of the region’s drinking water, three newsrooms are joining forces to better bring the public into the conversation. -
(ACC Mentioned) Nanotech Sector Urges Trump EPA to Delay, Revise TSCA Reporting Rule
Jun 23, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Dave Reynolds
Nanomaterial users and producers are urging the Trump EPA to further delay and overhaul an Obama administration nanotech reporting rule, arguing that the agency's recent draft guidance on the rule fails to adequately clarify compliance obligations... -
Trump’s Toxic Turn on Chemical Safety
Jun 23, 2017 | Environmental Working Group
By Scott Faber
President Trump has already methodically weakened efforts to protect Americans from toxic chemicals, but things are about to get much worse. -
Are the Chemicals We Encounter Every Day Making Us Sick?
Jun 23, 2017 | Medical Xpress
By Molly Miller
When her kids were young, Tracey Woodruff, PhD, MPH, knew more than most people about environmental toxics. After all, she was a senior scientist at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) -
(ACC Mentioned) Chemical Risk Reviews Could Be Issued More Quickly — IG
Jun 23, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Cecelia Smith-Schoenwalder
U.S. EPA's Office of Inspector General today released a report claiming that the agency's chemicals office is not reviewing chemical risk assessments as quickly as it could. -
EPA Watchdog Calls for Better Management of Chemical Safety Research Tools
Jun 22, 2017 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Alex Guillen
EPA needs to better coordinate its efforts to create computer programs that help researchers study the health risks of chemicals, according to a new report from the agency's inspector general. -
International Action Urged on Endocrine Disrupting Antibacterials
Jun 23, 2017 | Chemistry World
By Rebecca Trager
More than 200 scientists and health professionals are urging the international community to ‘limit the production and use’ of the antibacterial agents triclosan and triclocarban, citing ‘extensive peer-reviewed research’ that indicates they are environmentally persistent endocrine disruptors. -
Latest EPA Drafts Of ETBE, TBA Assessments Maintain Risk Estimates
Jun 23, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Maria Hegstad
The Trump EPA has released updated draft Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) assessments for two petro-fuels chemicals that include only minor differences from earlier drafts released last year by the Obama administration, a finding that is likely to disappoint... -
Dow, Koehler Create Thermal Paper That Doesn't Need Bisphenols
Jun 23, 2017 | Chemical Watch
Dow Chemical and German paper group Koehler have been jointly awarded a US EPA green chemistry challenge award for developing a thermal printing paper that does not need chemical developers, such as bisphenol A or bisphenol S. -
Echa Authorisation Enforcement Project Finds Cases of Non-Compliance
Jun 23, 2017 | Chemical Watch
About 90% of European companies are in compliance with their REACH authorisation obligations, Echa's enforcement Forum has found. -
Chemical Industry: ‘Greater Consensus Needed’ as Brexit Talks Begin
Jun 23, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
The UK’s chemical industry has called for broad agreement on Brexit priorities as formal talks between EU and UK negotiators got underway in Brussels this week. -
NOAA Requests Comments on Oil Drilling in Marine Sanctuaries
Jun 23, 2017 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Ben Lefebvre
The Trump administration is asking the public to weigh in on its review of whether it is worth changing national marine sanctuary borders to allow for oil and gas drilling, according to a notice it plans to file in the Federal Register on Monday. -
Freshman Dem Launches Oil and Gas Caucus
Jun 23, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Arianna Skibell
Freshman Rep. Vicente González (D-Texas) has launched a Congressional Oil and Gas Caucus with the aim of educating fellow lawmakers about related issues. -
New Best Friends: GOP Governors and Renewables
Jun 23, 2017 | E&E Climatewire
By Benjamin Storrow
While President Trump sings coal's praises, efforts to green America's economy are receiving a boost from an unexpected quarter: Republican-held governors' mansions. -
Western Earthquakes Likely Connected to Wastewater Injection
Jun 23, 2017 | Fuel Fix
By Ryan Maye Handy
An increase in earthquakes in the Rocky Mountain and Oklahoma region is likely tied to an uptick in wastewater injection, a process used to dispose of water in oil and gas operations, according to the U.S. Department of Energy. -
Big Oil Turns to Big Data to Save Big Money on Drilling
Jun 23, 2017 | Reuters (In Real Clear Energy)
By Swetha Gopinath and Liz Hampton
In today's U.S. shale fields, tiny sensors attached to production gear harvest data on everything from pumping pressure to the heat and rotational speed of drill bits boring into the rocky earth. -
Groups File Lawsuit over EPA Safety Regs Delay
Jun 23, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Cecelia Smith-Schoenwalder
Several groups yesterday filed a lawsuit seeking to overturn U.S. EPA plans to delay chemical safety regulations. -
Regulators Take Stock of Power Sector Perils
Jun 23, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Blake Sobczak and Peter Behr
The alarming discovery of a hacking tool built to disrupt electricity nearly caught the U.S. utility community by surprise, a leading grid security official said at a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission conference yesterday. -
A Flurry of Recent Statements Show Widespread Climate Doubt in the Trump Administration
Jun 23, 2017 | Washington Post
By Chris Mooney
After President Trump withdrew from the Paris climate agreement, journalists repeatedly asked the White House what he thought about climate change — and couldn’t get straight answers.
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) The Energy 202: This Energy Department Official Has a History of Disturbing Tweets
Jun 23, 2017 | Washington Post
By Dino Grandoni
"How else can a Kenyan creampuff get ahead?”
"Just so we're clear, I coined the MegOBgyn Kelly thing, OK?"
"Who is this little arrogant self-hating Jew to tell anyone for whom to vote?”
These are some of the questions asked by William C. Bradford on Twitter before he was appointed by the Trump administration to run the Energy Department’s Office of Indian Energy.
In those now-deleted tweets, which The Washington Post reported on late Thursday, Bradford remarked on the real and imagined ethnic, religious and gender identities of former president Barack Obama, TV news host Megyn Kelly and Facebook co-founder Mark Zuckerberg, respectively.
Bradford was recently appointed director of DOE’s office in charge of assisting Native American and Alaska Native tribes and villages with energy development. Before joining the department, he was attorney general of the Chiricahua Apache Nation. He has also been a faculty member at the U.S. Military Academy, the National Defense University, the Coast Guard Academy and the United Arab Emirates National Defense College. According to his online biography on the department’s website, he holds a doctorate, a law degree and a master’s in business administration.
While Bradford has been at the center of controversies in the past, these missives sent from his now-deleted Twitter account have not been previously reported. In an email on Thursday, Bradford acknowledged the Twitter account and apologized for his comments.
“As a minority and member of the Jewish faith, I sincerely apologize for my disrespectful and offensive comments,” he wrote to The Post. “These comments are inexcusable and I do not stand by them. Now, as a public servant, I hold myself to a higher standard, and I will work every day to better the lives of all Americans.” The Energy Department did not comment on Bradford.
This happened once before at Trump's Energy Department: A former Trump campaigner appointed to the department left his post in March after it was revealed he had a history of sending anti-Muslim tweets in reference to Obama and others.
And Bradford himself has courted previous controversy: In 2015, he resigned from his post at West Point after writing an academic paper arguing the United States should threaten to destroy Muslim holy sites in war “even if it means great destruction, innumerable enemy casualties, and civilian collateral damage.” Bradford also called for legal scholars “sympathetic to Islamist aims” to be imprisoned or “attacked.” He dubbed such academics “critical law of armed conflict academy,” or CLOACA, which is also a term for the orifice out of which some animals defecate.
Bradford defended that work in 2015. “I stand by my article," he wrote in an email to The Post at the time.
-- The Trump administration has removed Yellowstone National Park’s grizzly bears from the endangered species list, calling it “one of America’s great conservation successes.”
"As a kid who grew up in Montana, I can tell you that this is a long time coming and very good news for many communities and advocates in the Yellowstone region,” Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke said in making the announcement on Thursday.
Protections for grizzlies have been in place for more than 40 years, when just 136 bears lived in Yellowstone, the Associated Press reported. A population increase to about 700 bears allowed the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to lift the endangered designation.
The change also means the states with authority over the bears — Montana, Idaho and Wyoming — will be able to plan bear hunts outside of Yellowstone as long as the population remains above 600 bears.
But officials in all three states said they're in no rush to allow hunting on the bears just yet, the Associated Press reported.
Some environmental groups called the decision to delist premature, saying the bear population is still at risk due to climate change and fragmented habitat.
"Whitebark pine seeds are a critically important food source for the bears that keeps the animals at higher elevations and out of conflict with people," Sylvia Fallon, senior scientist with the Natural Resources Defense Council, said in a statement emailed to The Post. "But biologists have predicted these trees could be functionally extinct in just a few years—we shouldn’t resign grizzlies to a similar fate."
-- Following Trump's decision to pull out of the Paris deal, many (both in the pro- and anti-Paris camps) suspected the president was not serious when he said he was willing to renegotiate reentry into the agreement. And indeed, now Politico is reporting that "senior White House aides, who are prioritizing health care legislation and increasingly preoccupied by the expanding Russia probe, have had very few internal conversations about the administration’s Paris strategy since Trump’s announcement."
-- Politico also reports on a tiff at the Environmental Protection Agency between career staff and top brass after the EPA issued new rules outlining how it will regulate toxic chemicals under a new chemical-safety law passed by Congress last year. Annie Snider and Alex Guillén report: "Career agency employees had raised objections to the changes steered by EPA Deputy Assistant Administrator Nancy Beck, who until April was the senior director of regulatory science policy at the American Chemistry Council, the chemical industry’s leading lobbying group. Those include limits on how broadly the agency would review thousands of potentially hazardous substances..."
-- On his third and final day of being grilled by members of both parties in Congress over deep budget cuts the Trump administration has proposed for the Energy Department, Rick Perry relented. On Thursday, the energy secretary told a Senate energy panel that the proposal "was written before I got here" and that it is his "job is to defend it."
Given the bipartisan support much of the Energy Department has had historically, one lawmaker, Sen. Angus King (I-Maine), called Perry's task of defending the budget "a suicide mission."
-- On Thursday, 19 Democratic senators sent a letter to President Trump urging him to direct the Energy Department to begin studying the capability of Russia to hack and disrupt the U.S. electric grid. The letter comes off the heels of a report that Russia-allied hackers did just that in Ukraine. "We are deeply concerned that your administration has not backed up a verbal commitment prioritizing cybersecurity of energy networks and fighting cyber aggression with any meaningful action," the lawmakers, led by Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.), wrote.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/the-energy-202/2017/06/23/the-energy-202-this-energy-department-official-has-a-history-of-disturbing-tweets/594bf99ae9b69b2fb981de1c/
-
(ACC Mentioned) Wentzel Charges up NEI's PR
Jun 23, 2017 | O'Dwyer's PR News
By Kevin McCauley
Jon Wentzel, who was a top executive at Burson-Marsteller and Ogilvy, joined the Nuclear Energy Institute this month as VP-communications.
The Washington-based executive is in charge of media relations, digital and editorial to "promote timely and effective coverage of the nuclear energy industry," according to the NEI.
At B-M, Wentzel served as executive VP/chief client officer and handled the WPP unit's campaign for Walgreens Boots Alliance. He also chaired the consumer and brand marketing practice.
For Ogilvy, he handled corporate communications and PR practices for its western region, providing issues management and counsel to the American Chemistry Council and Covered California, and served as PR rep to OgilvyEarth, the environmental and sustainability practice.
Wentzel's goal is to help NEI promote nuclear energy as "a pillar of America’s national security, a jobs creator and a guarantor of the nation’s clean air."
http://www.odwyerpr.com/story/public/8984/2017-06-23/wentzel-charges-up-neis-pr.html
-
(ACC Mentioned) WWAY, Starnews, WHQR to Host Public Forum on GenX Wednesday
Jun 23, 2017 | WWAY NewsChannel 3
As concerns continue about the safety of the region’s drinking water, three newsrooms are joining forces to better bring the public into the conversation.
WWAY News, StarNews Media and HQR News 91.3 are sponsoring a GenX Forum Wednesday from 7 to 9 p.m. at UNCW’s Kenan Auditorium.
The forum will be streamed live here on WWAYTV3.com and broadcast live on the radio on WHQR 91.3 FM. Coverage will appear at StarNewsOnline.com and in the print edition of the StarNews.
Click here for continuing coverage of the GenX situation
“When a story impacts so many people, you have to pull out all the stops to help inform them. This is the sort of thing that the partnership between WWAY and the StarNews is all about,” WWAY News Director Kevin Wuzzardo said. “The StarNews deserves all the credit for breaking this story, but it’s been amazing how our teams have worked together when we can to keep moving this story forward and keep getting answers. It’s not about getting the scoop. It’s about making sure the public gets the information it needs, and through our partnership and with WHQR joining us on this forum, we are able to leverage the power of TV, radio, print and Internet to serve the community like no one else can.”
Speakers will address several topics during the forum, and panelists will answer questions submitted by the public.
Admission to the forum is free with tickets that will be distributed at the door. Doors will open at 6 p.m.
“It’s very important that we pull the community into this story and be an outlet for their voices. This forum is one way we’re doing that,” said Pam Sander, executive editor of the StarNews and NC Coastal Group Editor for GateHouse Media. “This is the most important work the StarNews is doing and will do for some time to come, and needs to be shouted from the rooftops. Partnering with WWAY and WHQR ensures this gets to readers, watchers and listeners. We’re thankful they have joined us.”
To submit water-related questions in advance of the forum, Tweet with the #genxilm hashtag, post your question on the StarNews or WWAY NEWS Facebook pages, or email water@starnewsonline.com, newsroom@wwaytv3.com or coastline@whqr.org.
“As a news organization dedicated to community engagement and civil discourse, WHQR shares the sentiments expressed recently by StarNews editors which might be summed up this way: We’re not ending our coverage until the public has all the answers it deserves,” WHQR News Director Rachel Lewis Hillburn said.
Forum panelists
New Hanover County Commissioners’ Chairman Woody White will be the main speaker on the topic of what’s being done to address the issue of GenX in the water supply. CFPUA board Chairman Mike Brown and Executive Director Jim Flechtner also will speak on the topic.
Speaking about the human impacts of GenX will be Philip Tarte, New Hanover County health director; Larry Cahoon, a marine biologist at UNCW who specializes in aquatic ecology; and Stan Harts, director of Environmental Health and Safety at UNCW.
Sander and environmental lawyer Megan M. Hunter will speak about legal and moral issues related to GenX.
Wilmington Mayor Bill Saffo and Natalie English, president and CEO of the Wilmington Chamber of Commerce, will address the economic impact of the water crisis.
Officials with the NC departments of Environmental Quality and Health and Human Services said the agencies were interested in attending the forum, but had not yet decided who would be there.
Representatives of Chemours were invited to participate in the forum, but had not committed to attend as of Friday morning. An invitation has also been extended to the American Chemistry Council, a trade association of which Chemours is a member, but the organization has not responded.
Moderators for the forum will be Si Cantwell, community editor for the StarNews; Amanda Fitzpatrick, evening anchor for WWAY; and Vince Winkel, reporter for WHQR.
https://www.wwaytv3.com/2017/06/23/wway-starnews-whqr-to-host-public-forum-on-genx-wednesday/
-
(ACC Mentioned) Nanotech Sector Urges Trump EPA to Delay, Revise TSCA Reporting Rule
Jun 23, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Dave Reynolds
Nanomaterial users and producers are urging the Trump EPA to further delay and overhaul an Obama administration nanotech reporting rule, arguing that the agency's recent draft guidance on the rule fails to adequately clarify compliance obligations and saying EPA's delays of other Obama-era rules help to justify their request on the nano rule.
The industry request is detailed in comments filed ahead of an EPA deadline of June 15 for input on the agency's draft guidance seeking to clarify requirements of the Obama EPA's Jan. 12 Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) section 8(a) reporting rule for nanomaterials. The Obama administration intended the rule to inform future oversight of the novel substances, but industry has criticized several aspects of the policy.
In comments posted to EPA's docket for the rule June 21, the Nanotechnology Coalition argues that EPA's draft guidance “does little” to clarify definitions needed to identify substances subject to the rule and asks the agency to delay the rule's effective date to allow time for significant revisions. EPA has already delayed the rule's effective date from May 12 to Aug. 14.
“We urge EPA to delay the effective date of the final reporting rule until EPA revises, re-proposes, and re-issues the
final rule along the lines of many comments EPA received on May 19, 2017, and re-issues the reporting Guidance,” says the coalition, which represents producers and users of nanomaterials.
The Nanotechnology Coalition notes that EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt already has either delayed or announced plans to significantly revise other Obama-era rules, including final rules bolstering protections for farmworkers from pesticide exposure and strengthening the agency's Risk Management Plan industrial facility accident prevention rule.
The Chemical Users Coalition (CUC) in recently-posted comments argues that the lack of clarity on reportable substances in both the guidance and rule should prompt EPA to focus more on compliance assistance rather than enforcement once the rule does take effect.
“[I]t is more appropriate for EPA to focus its limited resources on making entities who are unfamiliar with TSCA aware of the final regulation and providing assistance to manufacturers and processors seeking to comply, as opposed to emphasizing rigorous enforcement efforts -- especially where the requirements of the rule might be misunderstood or easily misinterpreted,” CUC says.
Nanotechnology industry groups have long faulted EPA's Jan. 12 final rule that established reporting and recordkeeping requirements for certain substances manufactured or processed at the nanoscale, as defined in the final rule. The Obama EPA issued the rule, after years of wrangling with the nano industry, including repeated calls for the agency to withdraw its April 6, 2015, draft rule and issue a revised version after further consultation with industry.
Draft Guidance
EPA on May 16 issued the “Draft Guidance on EPA’s Section 8(a) Information Gathering Rule on Nanomaterials in Commerce” seeking to clarify the scope of reportable materials by defining terms used in the rule, such as “unique and novel properties” or “reasonably ascertainable” information.
The guidance defines reportable materials as a combination of particle size and unique and novel properties, adding that “unique and novel properties” includes an element of intent, so nanomaterials are reportable if they are manufactured on the nanoscale in order to exhibit such properties.
Last month, industry officials, who argued that the Obama administration rushed out the reporting rule without addressing their criticisms of a proposed version, said the guidance also fails to provide sufficient clarity for compliance.
While the deadline for filing a lawsuit challenging the rule itself has passed, industry sources have said that if the final guidance fails to adequately clarify reportable substances, companies could challenge the rule's enforcement.
One industry source has previously suggested that groups would likely call on EPA to scale back or repeal the reporting rule under the Trump administration's deregulatory efforts, though another has said that the agency has a limited window for proposing and completing those actions.
Numerous industry groups, in their recent comments, argue that the guidance fails to adequately clarify long-standing concerns with terminology in the rule needed to identify reportable substances, though one group says it does go a long way toward resolving those questions.
The Nanomanufacturing Association in June 15 comments says the guide fails to clarify when a substance should be considered a solid, is a discrete form, or whether it exhibits unique or novel properties. The group also questions whether manufacturers and processors may cooperate on reporting.
The American Chemistry Council says, “Without significant additional clarifications and refinements of the scope and key concepts such as 'unique and novel properties,' 'processing,' 'soluble substances,' and 'detailed information,' the Panel is concerned that the reporting and recordkeeping rule will be perceived as confusing, subjective, and arbitrary.”
Additional Clarity
The Semiconductor Industry Association seeks additional clarity on how to determine whether a company has formed “an intent to process,” which is a trigger for reporting, and requests examples for assessing intent.
The Emulsion Polymers Council argues that the scope of reportable substances is a major issue, noting that EPA has predicted that reporting may take up to 175 hours, and depending on how the agency defines reportable substances, companies may have to report on hundreds of substances.
While also seeking some additional clarification, the Color Pigments Manufacturers Association (CPMA) says EPA's guidance does provide useful instruction on reportable substances. But the group argues that the definition of reportable substances should emphasize not only that a substance have unique and novel properties, but that a manufacturer or processor intends to use that unique property that is specific to the nanoscale.
“[T]he Draft Guidance provides helpful and informative examples that will limit unnecessary reporting under the Final Rule. Not only will this save the resources of industry and EPA, it will also improve the quality and utility of the
information that is reported,” CPMA says.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/nanotech-sector-urges-trump-epa-delay-revise-tsca-reporting-rule
-
Trump’s Toxic Turn on Chemical Safety
Jun 23, 2017 | Environmental Working Group
By Scott Faber
President Trump has already methodically weakened efforts to protect Americans from toxic chemicals, but things are about to get much worse.
Since assuming office, Trump has reversed a ban of a pesticide linked to brain damage, delayed clean air rules designed to reduce mercury emissions, and proposed to mothball a program designed to protect farmworkers from pesticides. He’s proposed to gut the Environmental Protection Agency’s budget, including cutting EPA funding for pesticide reviews by 20 percent, proposed a slashing of programs to protect kids from lead, and proposed deep cuts to Food and Drug Administration programs designed to review food chemicals and keep our food safe.
Yesterday, Trump went even further by proposing new rules for industrial chemical reviews that will allow the EPA to rely on junk science. In particular, the new rules will allow the agency to ignore some of the ways in which our families are exposed to toxic chemicals, including “legacy” chemicals released into the environment decades ago, chemicals included in some household products like cosmetics, and chemical exposures Trump’s EPA has deemed too small to matter.
Consider the EPA’s proposal to review 1,4-dioxane, a chemical linked to cancer. While Trump’s EPA will consider the presence of 1-4-dioxane in tap water, the agency yesterday proposed to ignore the presence of 1,4-dioxane in some personal care products. In other words, Trump’s EPA will count the chemical when it comes from your shower, but will not count the chemical when it comes from your shampoo.
Some chemicals could be deemed “low priority,” implying they are safe, after a cursory review by EPA scientists. The rules also allow chemical manufacturers to seek EPA reviews of their own chemical uses – without adequate EPA consideration of other uses of the same chemical. These reviews could be completed even if companies had failed to provide enough data, and companies would not be required to turn over all of their own safety studies to the EPA.
The rules implement a new law passed last Congress to update the Toxic Substances Control Act, or TSCA. Many of the chemicals in our air, water and household products are not regulated – even though they have been linked to cancer, and neurological and reproductive problems. Under the old version of TSCA, the EPA regulated few chemicals and could not even ban asbestos. The EPA has not regulated a new drinking water chemical in two decades. The FDA has virtually no legal authority to regulate chemicals in cosmetics and other personal care products – including chemicals linked to cancer like 1,4-dioxane – and has not done enough to protect consumers from mercury, lead, arsenic and other toxics found in our food.
There’s no doubt that our daily exposure to a witches’ brew of unregulated chemicals is bad for our families. As the President's Cancer Panel concluded in 2010, the “true burden of environmentally induced cancer has been grossly underestimated” by agencies like the EPA and FDA. So, it should be no surprise that the rates of some cancers have been rising, especially childhood cancers like leukemia and brain cancer.
The Trump administration’s solution? Add more toxic chemicals – not fewer – to the mix.
What can consumers do? EWG provides guides to cosmetics, cleaners, produce and packaged foods that can help you steer clear of dangerous chemicals. Consumers can also look for products that have been verified by EWG to meet our most stringent health standards.
http://www.ewg.org/planet-trump/2017/06/trump-s-toxic-turn-chemical-safety
-
Are the Chemicals We Encounter Every Day Making Us Sick?
Jun 23, 2017 | Medical Xpress
By Molly Miller
When her kids were young, Tracey Woodruff, PhD, MPH, knew more than most people about environmental toxics. After all, she was a senior scientist at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). But even she never dreamed, as she rocked her children to sleep at night, that the plastic baby bottles she used to feed them contained toxic chemicals that could leach into the warm milk.
Back then, in the late 1990s, it wasn't widely known that the chemicals used in plastic sippy cups and baby bottles can potentially disrupt child development by interfering with the hormone system. That, in turn, could alter the functionality of their reproductive systems or increase their risk of disease later in their lives.
"When I had babies, I did many of the things we now tell people not to do," says Woodruff, who for the past decade has been the director of UC San Francisco's Program on Reproductive Health and the Environment (PRHE). Also a professor in the University's Philip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies, she earned her doctorate in 1991 from a joint UCSF-Berkeley program in bioengineering and then completed a postgraduate fellowship at UCSF.
Woodruff's children have since grown into physically healthy teenagers, but many children are not as lucky. Unregulated chemicals are increasing in use and are prevalent in products Americans use every day. Woodruff is concerned by the concurrent rise in many health conditions, like certain cancers or childhood diseases, and the fact that the environment is likely to play a role in those conditions. What motivates her is the belief that we need to know more about these toxics so we can reduce our exposure to the worst of them and protect ourselves and our children from their harmful effects. (Woodruff points out that the word "toxics" as a noun means any poisonous substances, from either chemical or biological sources, whereas "toxins" are poisons only from biological sources, either plant or animal.)
The PRHE is dedicated to identifying, measuring and preventing exposure to environmental contaminants that affect human reproduction and development. Its work weaves together science, medicine, policy and advocacy.
For example, research over the past 10 years by UCSF scientists and others has showed that bisphenol A (BPA) – an industrial chemical used since the 1950s to harden plastics in baby bottles, toys and other products – is found in the blood of those exposed to items made with BPA and that it can harm the endocrine systems of fetuses and infants. As a result, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) outlawed BPA in baby products in 2012, and some manufacturers developed BPA-free products. But now scientists believe the chemicals that replaced BPA may be just as harmful.
Furthermore, BPA is only one in a long, long list of chemicals we encounter every day in our homes, schools, workplaces and communities. And scientists have barely scratched the surface of understanding them. Of the thousands and thousands of chemicals registered with the EPA for use by industry, the agency has regulated only a few.
"In the last 50 years, we have seen a dramatic increase in chemical production in the United States," Woodruff explains. Concurrently, there's been an increase in the incidence of conditions like attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), autism, childhood cancers, diabetes and obesity. "It's not just genetic drift," Woodruff maintains.
And we're all at risk from increasing chemical exposure. The water we run from our taps, the lotion we smear on our skin, the shampoo we rub in our hair, even the dust in our houses is full of synthetic chemicals.
Preventing Exposure in Babies
PRHE experts do more than just measure such trends. They also collaborate with clinical scientists and obstetricians at Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital (ZSFG), so their findings directly benefit pregnant patients. "We partner with the clinical scientists," explains Woodruff, "because they look at treatments for disease, and environment might be a missing factor in the cause and prevention of disease."
Though environmental toxics affect us all, there's a reason PRHE focuses on pregnant women and children, Woodruff adds. Exposure to even tiny amounts of toxic substances during critical developmental stages can have outsize effects. So exposure to toxics is especially detrimental to fetuses, infants and young children, as well as preteens and teenagers.
"If you prevent the problem at the beginning, you get a lifetime of benefits," says Woodruff.
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) began measuring human exposure to chemicals in 1976. These so-called "biomonitoring" studies found a range of toxics in subjects' blood and urine – substances like DDT, BPA, air pollutants, pesticides, dioxins and phthalates. Phthalates, for example, are a class of chemicals known to be endocrine disruptors but widely used as softeners in plastics and as lubricants in personal-care products. Biomonitoring has determined that women of reproductive age evidence higher levels of phthalates than the population at large. One reason, says Woodruff, is that young women use more products like perfume, deodorant, shampoo and conditioner.
Woodruff herself recently led a study in which UCSF researchers collected blood samples from pregnant women at ZSFG. After the women delivered their babies, the researchers collected umbilical cord blood samples – and discovered that almost 80 percent of the chemicals detected in the maternal blood samples had passed through the placenta to the cord blood. It was the most extensive look yet at how the chemicals that pregnant women are exposed to also appear in their babies' cord blood (and followed an earlier study by Woodruff that marked the first time anyone had counted the number of chemicals in the blood of pregnant women). Published in the Nov. 1, 2016, print edition of Environmental Science and Technology, the study also found that many chemicals were absorbed at greater levels by the fetuses than by the pregnant women.
Now, Woodruff is hard at work on a new grant from the federal Environmental Influences on Child Health Outcomes (ECHO) Program. It aims to correlate children's exposure to toxics with their developmental outcomes from birth to age four.
The good news is that the work done by Woodruff and her team shows a clear impact. Following bans (some permanent and some temporary) on certain phthalates, for example, UCSF researchers measured declines in the urinary concentrations of the permanently banned types in a representative sample of the U.S. population.
Crusader for a Healthy Environment
Woodruff's degree is in engineering, and she notes that in the 1980s, when she was in school, a lot of engineers went into the defense industry. "People talk about joining the military to serve their country," Woodruff says. "I also wanted to do something positive for society, and I felt joining the EPA was the best way to serve my country."
She spent 13 years at the federal agency, as a scientist and policy advisor, studying the effects of air pollution on children's health. The topic interested her, she says, "because children are vulnerable and can't speak for themselves." Her analysis of data collected under the Clean Air Act, for example, found that air pollution is linked to infant mortality. She also determined that pregnant African American women had higher exposure to air pollution and more adverse pregnancy outcomes than the population at large.
Nearly 25 years later, her work at UCSF is motivated by the same sense of advocacy and zeal. She joined the PRHE in 2007, shortly after its founding by Linda Giudice, MD, PhD. "What we do," she says, "is bring the best scientific tools from the varied fields at UCSF to bear on uncovering and better understanding the links between the environment and health and translate that science into prevention by improving public policy."
While Woodruff has many influential scientific publications to her name, she's also a sought-after guest for radio interviews and talk shows. She even appeared in a popular 2013 documentary, The Human Experiment, narrated by Sean Penn. In response to questions from the public, she tries to strike a practical note. "You don't want to freak people out," she says. "At the same time, people assume if they can buy it, it's safe. That is just not the case."
In her own home in Oakland, Woodruff has made slow changes over time. "I got rid of carpet. ... The padding can contain toxic chemicals. I waited to buy a couch ... too long according to my family," she laughs. (Couches without flame-retardants didn't become available in California until after the state changed its flammability standard in 2014, making it possible to sell couches that are flammability-safe but are made without flame-retardant chemicals.) "I still have a couch that probably has flame-retardants, but I am just ignoring it. We eat mostly organic to reduce pesticide exposure. Less is more in personal-care products," she adds.
Does she make her own shampoo?
"Oh, my God, no," she answers. "Who has the time? This should not be a burden to people. Systems should be in place so that we can be free of the burden. This is why we need the EPA, and this is where policy comes in."
Policies for the People
"It's important for people to realize there are things you can do to lower your exposure to toxic chemicals, but some things you can't do."
For example, Woodruff explains, Americans would have had a hard time limiting their exposure to lead before leaded gasoline became illegal in 1996 (though the phaseout started in the mid-1970s). Until then, no amount of personal awareness could protect someone from lead – it was in the air that everyone breathed.
She offers another example specific to the PRHE's efforts. "When California outlawed flame retardants," she says, "we saw levels decrease by about two-thirds in the blood of pregnant patients at ZSFG. Through these studies, we can evaluate the effectiveness of public policy. It's clear that when the government acts to reduce exposures to toxic chemicals ... we see a positive change. We do not always consider EPA a public health agency, but it is."
Woodruff and her colleagues also have been working over the last several years to help strengthen the federal Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) of 1976. It was well recognized that the law was flawed and allowed thousands of chemicals to be used in the marketplace without testing for safety, she explains. When bipartisan calls to strengthen the law led Congress to amend it in 2016, PRHE experts partnered with obstetricians and gynecologists to provide scientific evidence about the need for improved standards, deadlines and transparency. As rules for the amended TSCA are rolled out over the next two years, "we'll be right in there to promote the use of science for the public's health," says Woodruff.
She's also bringing environmental toxics to the attention of her UCSF colleagues in other disciplines. "One of the reasons we love being at UCSF is we can learn from people who are doing completely different things," she says. For example, she is working with researchers who study the placenta, since her 2016 study showed that environmental toxics permeate the placenta. And with developmental biologist Diana Laird, PhD, an associate professor in the Center for Reproductive Sciences, Woodruff is co-leading the Environmental Health Initiative (EHI). The EHI's goal is to involve researchers from throughout UCSF – from the biological, population and translation sciences – in solving and preventing the environmental burden of disease, starting with ensuring healthy pregnancies.
"The EHI will link faculty across the campus, to add an environmental component to their work," Woodruff says. "We have already hosted several networking events and symposia with the Research Development Office toward our goal of 'norming' the environment within the research community. We want people to be saying, 'We need to address the environmental consequences to fully solve health issues.'"
"This is about prevention," she concludes. "People talk about nutrition and social competencies of health. There's another thing, which is the physical environment. The missing ingredient is toxics in the environment."
Protecting Your Family From Toxics
Here are some recommendations from the PRHE.
· Use nontoxic personal care products. Many such products contain ingredients that can harm reproductive health, but safer options are available.
· Choose safer home improvement products. Many paints, glues and flooring materials release toxic chemicals and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) long after you complete a project. Ask for VOC-free and water-based products.
· Mop and dust often. Toxic substances like lead, pesticides and flame retardants are present in household dust. Use a wet mop or wet cloth to regularly clean floors and flat surfaces.
· Clean with nontoxic products. It is easy and cheap to make effective, nontoxic cleaners with common ingredients like vinegar and baking soda.
· Remove your shoes inside. Outdoor shoes can carry toxic chemicals into your home.
· Don't dry-clean your clothes. Many dry cleaners use toxic chemicals. Hand-wash delicate clothes or ask your dry cleaner to use water instead of chemicals.
· Avoid pesticides and herbicides. Toxic chemicals used to kill insects, rodents, weeds, bacteria, mold and other noxious animals and plants can also harm your health.
· Select flame-retardant-free foam products. Crib mattresses, nap mats and other upholstered products can contain flame-retardants, which can harm health and affect a child's brain. Instead, select foam products labeled as "flame-retardant-free" or tagged as compliant with TB-117-2013.
· Avoid toxics in your food and water. Whenever possible, eat organic food to reduce your exposure to pesticides. If you can't buy organic produce, choose the fruits and vegetables with the least pesticide residue and avoid the most contaminated ones.
· Limit foods high in animal fat. Many toxic substances build up in animal fat.
· Use less plastic. Choose glass, stainless steel or ceramic containers for food. Don't use plastic containers for hot foods or drinks and use glass instead of plastic in the microwave, because heat makes plastic release chemicals.
· Avoid lead exposure. Any home built before 1978 may have lead paint. There may also be lead in household dust and garden soil.
· Keep mercury out of your diet, home and garbage. Eat fish with lower levels of mercury. Replace your mercury thermometer with a digital one. Don't throw items containing mercury (such as old thermometers or compact fluorescent bulbs) in the trash.
· Avoid canned foods and beverages. Eat fresh or frozen fruits and vegetables. This limits your exposure to BPA, a toxic substance used in the lining of most cans.
https://medicalxpress.com/news/2017-06-chemicals-encounter-day-sick.html
-
(ACC Mentioned) Chemical Risk Reviews Could Be Issued More Quickly — IG
Jun 23, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Cecelia Smith-Schoenwalder
U.S. EPA's Office of Inspector General today released a report claiming that the agency's chemicals office is not reviewing chemical risk assessments as quickly as it could.
According to the report, EPA's Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention is "at risk of not effectively incorporating products in a way that could more rapidly improve how the EPA assesses chemical risks to human health and the environment."
OIG said that the office is missing certain management controls and has not conducted an officewide needs assessment to identify product development priorities for the agency's Chemical Safety for Sustainability plan. Additionally, an assessment is needed to determine training and resource needs and to detect challenges.
EPA yesterday released new chemical rules and documents pertaining to the first 10 chemicals getting risk evaluations under the recently updated chemical safety law.
Environmental groups quickly criticized the rules as putting industry's wishes ahead of public health and questioned how this administration will continue to implement the law.
"By forcing EPA to employ junk science, [President] Trump's lackeys will ensure that cancer-causing chemicals like 1,4-dioxane and asbestos continue to sicken and kill our friends and families," said Scott Faber, senior vice president of government affairs at the Environmental Working Group.
"See you in court, Donald," he continued.
The new rules establish the process and criteria for identifying high-priority chemicals for risk evaluations, establish the process for determining if the chemicals present an unreasonable risk to health or the environment, and require industry reporting of chemicals manufactured or processed in the United States over the past 10 years (E&E News PM, June 22).
Environmental groups were particularly upset about an aspect of the rules that they say allows EPA to look at just a subset of chemical uses when evaluating for chemical safety.
Faber said the rules don't come as a surprise to them, since EPA has hired Nancy Beck, formerly of the American Chemistry Council, to help the agency's chemicals office implement the law (E&E News PM, April 19).
While ACC said it is still looking over the rules, it said it expects that "EPA will not simply meet the minimal requirements of the law, but instead establish the framework for a modern chemical management system capable of meeting 21st century demands."
However, Liz Hitchcock, government affairs director at Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families, said the rules depart dramatically from EPA's original proposal and instead follow the wishes of the chemical lobby.
Richard Denison, a lead senior scientist with the Environmental Defense Fund, expressed concern about how the law will be applied under this administration.
"Given that this is taking place in the most anti-environmental administration we've faced in decades, the changes heighten our concern that the law will not be implemented in the coming years in a way that protects the public's health," he said.
ACC quickly praised the rules, which were issued on the one-year anniversary of President Obama's signing the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/stories/1060056514/search?keyword=%22american+chemistry+council%22
-
EPA Watchdog Calls for Better Management of Chemical Safety Research Tools
Jun 22, 2017 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Alex Guillen
EPA needs to better coordinate its efforts to create computer programs that help researchers study the health risks of chemicals, according to a new report from the agency's inspector general.
EPA's Office of Research and Development helps create "research products" for the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, which tests both commercial chemicals under the Toxic Substances Control Act and pesticides under another federal law.
These products "support risk analyses, search for chemical testing data across multiple databases, and compare previous research results to current risk assessments," according to the IG. The report specifically praised a recently developed modeling program for endocrine disruptors.
However, investigators concluded OCSPP needs better “management controls” — a process to ensure it works consistently with the R&D office. The chemicals office also should identify its own priorities for developing new programs.
"Without management controls that ensure consistent interoffice collaboration and assess CSS product needs, OCSPP is at risk of not effectively incorporating products in a way that could rapidly improve how the EPA assesses chemical risks to human health and the environment," the report concludes.
The report says EPA agreed with its recommendations and has taken appropriate action.
EPA on Thursday released a suite of regulations that lay out how the agency will carry out future chemical risk evaluations under the reformed TSCA law. Though the IG’s report is not directly connected to that, the research products in question will be used by EPA researchers to evaluation chemical risks.
https://www.politicopro.com/energy/whiteboard
-
International Action Urged on Endocrine Disrupting Antibacterials
Jun 23, 2017 | Chemistry World
By Rebecca Trager
More than 200 scientists and health professionals are urging the international community to ‘limit the production and use’ of the antibacterial agents triclosan and triclocarban, citing ‘extensive peer-reviewed research’ that indicates they are environmentally persistent endocrine disruptors. In a statement released on 20 June, the scientists and doctors call for more research into the environmental impact of these chemicals.
This ‘Florence Statement’ also recommends that scientists, governments and chemical manufacturers use safer alternatives when antimicrobials are necessary. Its authors further advise that all products containing triclosan, triclocarban and other antimicrobials should be labelled as such, even in cases where no health claims are made.
In September 2016, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) banned 19 antimicrobial ingredients in over-the-counter consumer antiseptic soaps including triclosan and triclocarban. That decision was based on a lack of evidence demonstrating their safety for long-term daily use, and the agency gave companies a year to rid their antibacterial products of the ingredients. In contrast, the government of Canada announced just a couple of months later that it would continue to allow the use of the triclosan in consumer products like soap and hand sanitiser, saying it is not a human health concern.
Meanwhile, the EU has banned triclosan in food contact products since 2010. In June 2015, the EU announced that triclosan will be phased-out for hygienic uses and replaced by safer alternatives. This European phase-out of the chemical from personal care products began this year.
https://www.chemistryworld.com/news/international-action-urged-on-endocrine-disrupting-antibacterials/3007623.article
-
Latest EPA Drafts Of ETBE, TBA Assessments Maintain Risk Estimates
Jun 23, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Maria Hegstad
The Trump EPA has released updated draft Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) assessments for two petro-fuels chemicals that include only minor differences from earlier drafts released last year by the Obama administration, a finding that is likely to disappoint industries that have lobbied EPA to drop the assessments.
EPA released second draft assessments of the chemicals ethyl tert-butyl ether (ETBE) and tert-butanol, also known as tert-butyl alcohol (TBA) June 16, accompanying a Federal Register notice announcing the agency's plans to peer review the two documents this summer.
The fuels and chemical industries in comments last year on the earlier drafts argued that the assessments were too conservative, misinterpreted data and that neither chemical should be a priority for an IRIS assessment, given their limited usage in the United States and therefore, limited exposure to the public.
But IRIS officials after discussions with colleagues in other EPA offices, concluded that there was a need for the assessments and they should go forward.
EPA's IRIS process generally includes two public draft assessments, the first released for public comment. A second draft is prepared for peer review after IRIS staff has reviewed public comments on the first draft.
The second draft IRIS assessment of ETBE reaches very similar conclusions to the first draft, released in September 2016. EPA again concludes that "there is suggestive evidence of carcinogenic potential for ETBE" -- a finding questioned by industry representatives. EPA also calculates oral and inhalation cancer potency estimates, with the cancer inhalation risk estimate, or inhalation unit risk (IUR) remaining the same as the first draft at 8x10^-5 per milligram per cubic meter of air (mg/m^3)^-1.
EPA's oral cancer potency estimate is very similar to that provided in the 2016 draft -- with an oral slope factor (OSF) of 1x10^-3 per milligram per kilogram bodyweight per day (mg-kg/day)^-1. The 2016 draft contained an OSF of 9x10^-4 (mg/kg-day)^-1.
Similarly, EPA estimates the same reference concentration (RfC), or the greatest amount EPA estimates can be inhaled daily over a lifetime without experiencing a related adverse non-cancer effect, of 9 mg/m^3 as it did last year. Rounding appears to be the only change in the reference dose (RfD), analogous to the RfC but for ingestion. EPA's RfD for ETBE is now estimated at 0.5 mg/kg-day, compared with the 2016 draft's first-time RfD for ETBE of 0.48 mg/kg-day.
As in the 2016 draft, this latest draft echoes EPA's findings in a 2009 ETBE draft assessment, which cited research from a controversial Italian laboratory. The agency withdrew the 2009 draft after concerns regarding the Italian research were raised and investigated.
The biggest difference in calculations between the 2009 draft and the two issued in the past year is the existence of cancer risk estimates and the RfD. EPA's 2009 draft reached the same conclusion regarding ETBE's carcinogenic potential, but declined to calculate a cancer risk estimate for ETBE due to limitations of the study on which it based its cancer assessment. EPA in the new draft assessment goes further by calculating those risk estimates.
Similarly, the 2009 draft did not include an RfD because its technical panel concluded that there were too many uncertainties to do so.
TBA Assessment
The latest draft TBA assessment shows modest changes from the draft EPA released for public comment in May 2016. EPA calculates the same OSF, of 5x10^-4 (mg/kg-day)^-1, as in the 2016 draft. As before, EPA concludes that it has insufficient information to calculate an IUR for TBA. While there are changes to the non-cancer risk estimates, they are within an order of magnitude.
EPA announced in the June 16 Federal Register notice that the agency's Chemical Assessment Advisory Committee (CAAC) will hold a conference call and a peer review meeting over the summer to begin peer review of the latest draft documents. The CAAC, augmented by experts on the individual chemicals, will hold a conference call July 11 and a public meeting in Arlington, VA, Aug. 15-17.
IRIS assessments are widely considered influential but they are often controversial with regulated entities who charge they assess risk too conservatively.
Earlier this year, the Trump administration proposed to eliminate the IRIS program in a leaked March 21 memo from David Bloom, the agency's acting chief financial officer, which detailed how officials planned to implement the administration's proposal to cut EPA's fiscal year 2018 funding by more than $2 billion -- or 31 percent -- compared to FY16 levels.
But when President Donald Trump's FY18 proposed budget was released in May, it sought instead to preserve a smaller version of IRIS, signaling the program will be devoted in part to assessing substances under the revised Toxic Substances Control Act and other mandatory regulatory programs.
The peer reviews of the two risk assessments are likely to be controversial as petrochemical industry representatives questioned EPA's rationale for conducting IRIS assessments of both chemicals.
They argued at public meetings that the fuel oxygenator ETBE and its metabolite, TBA, should not undergo IRIS scrutiny because ETBE was not used in the United States and TBA is a chemical intermediate to which there is not broad exposure.
TBA, however, is also a metabolite of ETBE as well as another fuel oxygenator, methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE), which was widely used in the United States in the 1990s to meet Clean Air Act standards. Groundwater contamination from leaking fuel storage tanks prompted dozens of states to ban MTBE's use in gasoline and liability concerns caused refiners to stop using it in the 2000s. ETBE has been found at cleanup sites and in some groundwater sources, though not nearly as frequently as MTBE.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/latest-epa-drafts-etbe-tba-assessments-maintain-risk-estimates
-
Dow, Koehler Create Thermal Paper That Doesn't Need Bisphenols
Jun 23, 2017 | Chemical Watch
Dow Chemical and German paper group Koehler have been jointly awarded a US EPA green chemistry challenge award for developing a thermal printing paper that does not need chemical developers, such as bisphenol A or bisphenol S.
Current thermal papers, used for till receipts and labels around the globe, all use the developers. In the EU, BPA is banned in thermal paper from 2020 and manufacturers are working towards phasing out the chemical, said Dow.
When used in paper, BPA is present as a free monomer, which is more likely to be released than BPA polymerised into a resin or plastic, it added.
"No clearly safer thermal paper developers are available, with most alternatives having moderate or high hazard designations for human health or aquatic toxicity endpoints," said Dow in its EPA award nomination document.
The new technology creates images using a top layer of polymeric particles. When heated, these collapse to allow an underlying coloured layer to show through in selected areas.
Dow developed the technology in 2012 while Koehler optimised and field tested it. This year sees large-scale commercial roll-out.
The paper works in existing thermal printers and can be used directly in food contact materials, Dow said.
In April, the company received an Edison award in the US for its Canvera metal can coating. This offers a water-borne, spray-applied replacement for epoxy coating systems, "minimising" epoxy and bisphenol A and eliminating material that is of concern for many consumers, it says. For this, it applies a polyolefin dispersion to the interior metal surface of cans using existing equipment.
Last December, the European Commission confirmed the ban on BPA in thermal paper. After 2 January 2020, it can not be placed on the market in the paper at a concentration equal to or greater than 0.02% by weight.
Meanwhile, some BPA alternatives may also cause developmental effects, according to a recent Dutch study.
https://chemicalwatch.com/57151/dow-koehler-create-thermal-paper-that-doesnt-need-bisphenols
-
Echa Authorisation Enforcement Project Finds Cases of Non-Compliance
Jun 23, 2017 | Chemical Watch
About 90% of European companies are in compliance with their REACH authorisation obligations, Echa's enforcement Forum has found.
In the Forum's second pilot project, national enforcement authorities (NEAs) checked the marketing and/or use of substances subject to authorisation. It marks the first time NEAs also reviewed, where relevant, compliance with conditions laid down in the decisions.
Seventeen NEAs looked at compliance in the use and placing on the market of 13 substances of very high concern (SVHCs) with sunset dates in 2015. Where an authorisation had already been granted, inspectors also checked if the conditions set out in the application were being met.
The authorities conducted 802 inspections between January and October 2016. Most took place in Italy (162), followed by Denmark (120) and Sweden (106).
The majority of companies did not use (93%) or place on the market (92%) any of the substances that had a 2015 sunset date, according to the Forum's report.
Legal action
Sixty-seven of inspected companies had placed substances on the market after the date. Six of these were in breach of REACH, the Forum says, which puts the non-compliance rate at 8.9% of cases.
In 16 cases, companies placed substances on the market according to the authorisation granted. In a further 16, it was based on a pending decision at the time of inspection. The NEAs considered these to be compliant.
Fifty-six companies used substances with a sunset date that had passed in 2015. The NEAs found six of these to be in breach of REACH, giving a non-compliance rate of 10.7% of cases.
The authorities took legal action against 13 of the companies, but only two faced a criminal complaint, with most receiving verbal or written advice by the relevant NEA.
During its first pilot project in 2015, 18 NEAs checked REACH compliance on the marketing and use of the first two substances with the earliest sunset date – musk xylene and 4,4’-diamoniodiphenylmethane (MDA). They found three cases of non-compliance in 421 inspections.
The Forum recommends another pilot project for substances whose sunset dates have passed, to "gain more experience with enforcing authorisation decisions and the underlying conditions".
It also recommends implementing appropriate operational controls and risk management measures as set out in the REACH authorisation decision, for such substances.
https://chemicalwatch.com/57145/echa-authorisation-enforcement-project-finds-cases-of-non-compliance
-
Chemical Industry: ‘Greater Consensus Needed’ as Brexit Talks Begin
Jun 23, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
The UK’s chemical industry has called for broad agreement on Brexit priorities as formal talks between EU and UK negotiators got underway in Brussels this week.
At its council meeting on 15 June, the Chemical Industries Association (CIA) called for a "greater consensus" to deliver a solution and reconfirmed its commitment to:
· tariff-free access to the single market and the prevention of non-tariff barriers to trade;
· regulatory continuity and consistency; and
· access to appropriately skilled people.
CIA and the Chemical Business Association had previously said that the UK prime minister’s failure to secure a majority for her Conservative party at the general election on 8 June could mean a ‘soft’ Brexit is more likely.
A ‘soft’ Brexit, they say, might mean the UK retains access to the EU single market, the Customs Union and free movement of skilled labour. This contrasts with the ‘hard’ Brexit the prime minister set out prior to the general election, in which she said the UK would leave the market and not pursue full membership of the Customs Union.
CIA said that the unstable political situation presents "an opportunity to reposition" the UK’s approach, "encouraging greater predictability" for business and employment during the transition period.
"More specifically, we believe that staying in the single market for that period would help support trade, investment, jobs and overall economic growth in the critical time taking us to exit from the EU and our future new trading relationship," CIA said.
At Cefic’s annual REACH forum earlier this week, CIA’s REACH executive Silvia Segna said the status of existing REACH registration is the "main issue" for the industry.
Negotiators began formal talks on 19 June and a day later the government set out seven Brexit bills. These include the so-called Great Repeal Bill to convert the body of EU law into UK law, and new bills on trade and customs to implement an independent policy to help exports outside the Union.
NGO risk tracker
Meanwhile, Greener UK, a coalition of 13 major environmental organisations, has launched a ‘Brexit risk tracker’ and has identified chemicals policy as an area "most at risk".
It says that Thérèse Coffey, the minister responsible for REACH chemicals policy, "suggested weakening" EU laws in her evidence to the Environmental Audit Committee inquiry into the future of environmental law and policy following the EU Referendum.
Greener UK also says it is "not possible" for the UK to copy REACH and the country is very unlikely to have the capacity to create a domestic equivalent because it lacks "any sensible method" of doing so.
https://chemicalwatch.com/57177/chemical-industry-greater-consensus-needed-as-brexit-talks-begin
-
NOAA Requests Comments on Oil Drilling in Marine Sanctuaries
Jun 23, 2017 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Ben Lefebvre
The Trump administration is asking the public to weigh in on its review of whether it is worth changing national marine sanctuary borders to allow for oil and gas drilling, according to a notice it plans to file in the Federal Register on Monday.
The review stems from the executive order President Donald Trump signed in April calling for more fossil fuel development in federal waters.
The order calls on the Commerce Department to weigh the costs of maintaining marine sanctuaries created or expanded in the past 10 years — 11 sanctuaries in all — against the possible profits of oil and gas production in the same areas.
Commerce has until Oct. 25 to issue its findings.
WHAT'S NEXT: Comments will be due 30 days after the request hits the Federal Register.
https://www.politicopro.com/energy/whiteboard
-
Freshman Dem Launches Oil and Gas Caucus
Jun 23, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Arianna Skibell
Freshman Rep. Vicente González (D-Texas) has launched a Congressional Oil and Gas Caucus with the aim of educating fellow lawmakers about related issues.
González wants the group to focus on the production and distribution of oil, gas and other petroleum hydrocarbons, including crude oil, natural gas and gas liquids.
When the former lawyer, who represents South Texas' 15th District, first arrived on the Hill, he described himself as an oil and gas man (E&E Daily, March 16).
Following through on his early remarks, González said he intends to advocate for the economic benefits of "fully harnessing the country's natural resources."
He said in a statement, "As a Texan, I have a unique understanding of how the industry works and its importance for the communities in my district, across the country, and around the world.
"I hope that the Oil & Gas Caucus can serve as a space for members from all over the country to learn more about the oil and gas industry and come away not only with a better understanding of the scientific and technical aspects, but also gain a better understanding of how technological advancements and growth benefit all of us."
González intends to serve as chairman of the caucus and said he hopes it will quickly grow in membership.
"In recent years, our nation's energy sector has experienced dramatic growth and increased innovation. We have seen the United States become the world's leading producer of oil and natural gas," González said.
González's district is home to the Eagle Ford Shale, a sedimentary rock formation that contains large amounts of oil and gas. And construction of the first oil refinery in almost half a century is planned in the region this year.
"The 15th District of Texas is home to several refineries, pipelines, and part of the Eagle Ford Shale," said González. "I have witnessed the effects of a thriving oil and gas industry firsthand."
The House Administration Committee reviewed Gonzalez's request and approved the formation of the caucus earlier this month.
This story also appears in E&E Daily.
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2017/06/23/stories/1060056491
-
New Best Friends: GOP Governors and Renewables
Jun 23, 2017 | E&E Climatewire
By Benjamin Storrow
While President Trump sings coal's praises, efforts to green America's economy are receiving a boost from an unexpected quarter: Republican-held governors' mansions.
Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval is fresh off a legislative session in which he signed nine bills aimed at supporting the clean energy sector. In Florida, Gov. Rick Scott recently signed a tax exemption that solar installers say is essential to jump-starting the residential and commercial market in the Sunshine State. And in Iowa, where wind now accounts for 36 percent of the state's electricity generation, newly installed Gov. Kim Reynolds recently finished an energy plan that calls for growing the wind, biofuels and solar industries.
"For years, our fields have fed the world. Now, they energize it. They produce products that fuel cars, and they host wind turbines that power our communities and businesses," Reynolds said in her inaugural address last month. "And yet those fields are filled with untapped potential. Our energy plan will help us continue to lead the way in wind energy and renewable fuels. Working together, we can have the most innovative energy policy in the country."
The growing embrace of renewables by Republican governors stands in stark contrast to the president. Trump's budget request for fiscal 2018 includes a 70 percent reduction to the Department of Energy's Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (E&E Daily, June 22). Energy Secretary Rick Perry, who has expressed concern about coal's decline and renewables' rise, has embarked on a grid reliability study. And in speeches across the country, Trump has railed against renewables while promising to revive the coal sector.
Wednesday was the most recent example (Climatewire, June 22).
"We've ended the war on clean, beautiful coal, and we're putting our miners back to work," the president said during a campaign-style speech in Cedar Rapids, Iowa.
"I don't want to just hope the wind blows to light up your homes and your factories," he said.
But in states like Iowa and Nevada, which lack a local fossil fuel industry, Republican leaders are becoming increasingly comfortable with renewables. Wind now employs more than 8,000 people in Iowa. Two utilities in the Hawkeye State announced plans last year to invest $4.6 billion in new wind farms.
Reynolds follows in the footsteps of longtime Gov. Terry Branstad (R), an outspoken wind advocate during six nonconsecutive terms in Des Moines. Branstad stepped down this year to serve as the U.S. ambassador to China.
As lieutenant governor, Reynolds led efforts last year to complete an Iowa Energy Plan. It calls for more ambitious renewable energy targets, best practices to help municipalities site turbines and grid modernization pilot projects, among other measures.
The state's wind industry has helped attract Facebook, Microsoft and Google data centers to Iowa, said Brenna Smith, a spokeswoman for the governor.
"In general, renewable energy has provided for local energy production, job and business growth, increases in property tax revenue, and clean energy production in our own backyard," Smith said.
Asked about Trump's comments, she responded, "We will continue working with federal officials to ensure the renewable fuels industry remains strong in Iowa."
The story is similar in Nevada, where Tesla Inc. has invested $1.4 billion in a Gigafactory outside Reno. Sandoval, at a recent bill signing, estimated that the Silver State has seen $6 billion in utility-grade solar development since 2011.
Sandoval signed bills this year to restore net metering for residential solar owners, bolster energy storage and include the cost of carbon in utilities' long-term plans.
"We're going to solidify Nevada's position as a national leader in clean and renewable energy," Sandoval said during a recent bill-signing ceremony at a Tesla warehouse in Las Vegas.
Economic benefits ... and the environment
The maturation of the wind and solar industries is opening the door for Republicans to back renewables, industry and state officials said. Utility-scale solar and wind costs have fallen by 85 percent and 66 percent, respectively, since 2009, according to Lazard, an investment bank.
Higher degrees of renewable penetration in states like Kansas, Oklahoma and South Dakota, where wind now accounts for more than a quarter of all power generation, have helped ease concerns about reliability.
"Increasingly, those concerns about affordability and reliability are being addressed. There are stronger arguments," said Maryland Secretary of Environment Ben Grumbles, who serves under Gov. Larry Hogan (R). "Providing energy is about environmental stewardship and clean energy, but also making sure it's affordable, reliable and sustainable."
Unlike their Democratic counterparts, who are apt to cite climate benefits of clean energy initiatives, Republicans are content to focus on economic benefits.
Reynolds didn't mention climate change in her inaugural address. Sandoval didn't raise the subject at the bill signing. Instead, the Nevada governor talked up the economic benefits of renewables, saying the bills signed this year would boost jobs and save consumers money (Climatewire, June 16).
That suits climate action advocates just fine. There is less need to spar with Republicans over the existence of climate change when GOP leaders are willing to endorse technologies that will reduce carbon emissions, they said.
That dynamic was on display in Illinois last year, when Gov. Bruce Rauner (R) signed a massive energy bill. The Environmental Defense Fund expects the law to slash the state's carbon emissions 50 percent by 2030, by encouraging a combination of renewable development and energy efficiency.
Rauner was a latecomer to the legislative discussions surrounding the bill, and then he was primarily motivated by keeping two Exelon Corp. nuclear plants open. Environmentalists nevertheless achieved much of what they hoped for.
"It is the single biggest climate and energy bill in Illinois history, and one of the biggest things happening on the national stage right now," said Andrew Barbeau, a senior clean energy consultant for EDF.
Howard Learner, executive director of the Environmental Law and Policy Center in Chicago, added, "If we all agree clean energy development is good for economic development and the environment, we don't all have to agree on climate."
More broadly, the positions taken by GOP governors are as diverse as the states they lead. In the Northeast, Massachusetts Gov. Charlie Baker (R) has backed the largest procurement of offshore wind in the country and committed to maintaining the ambitious carbon-cutting targets established by Deval Patrick, his Democratic predecessor.
In Maryland, Hogan has signed a bill to cut the state's carbon emissions 40 percent by 2030, and his administration recently approved renewable energy credits for 368 megawatts of offshore wind.
Along the windswept prairies of the Midwest, renewable development has sometimes continued in the face of Republican opposition. Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin (R) signed a bill this year to eliminate a wind energy tax credit, saying the industry had grown to the point where the assistance was no longer necessary (Climatewire, April 18). In 2015, Kansas made its renewable energy standards voluntary. Both states rank in the top five of U.S. wind production.
'Much less partisan'
Often, Republican positions are more muddled. In North Carolina, where the GOP holds supermajorities in both chambers of the Legislature, lawmakers are considering a solar bill that would open the door to residential and commercial installers. But it would shift decisionmaking about the state's utility-scale installations from solar developers to utilities.
The Tar Heel State trails only California in installed solar capacity, and employment in the industry now stands at around 7,000 jobs. Construction of utility-scale solar projects has pumped tax revenue and jobs into rural parts of North Carolina, said state Rep. John Szoka, a Republican who authored the measure.
"This is millions of dollars in some of the poorest counties in our state to keep their infrastructure up, and build new schools and other things," Szoka said.
Still, many GOP lawmakers worry about the cost of the solar boom, he said. Much of the development is attributable to a long-standing federal law that requires utilities to accept power from small-scale renewable developments. Szoka's bill would change how North Carolina implements the law's standards, requiring solar developers to submit competitive bids to the state's utilities.
"I feel Republicans are supportive of the solar industry if — and it's a big if — if the general ratepayers don't have to pay the cost," Szoka said.
The bill has cleared the House and must pass the Senate. North Carolina Gov. Roy Cooper, a Democrat, has endorsed the measure.
The bill's ultimate impact may depend on how it's implemented by state regulators, who will be tasked with studying net metering, said Stephen Kalland, executive director of the North Carolina Clean Energy Technology Center.
"The good in this bill outweighs the bad, but not as much as I'd like," he said.
Even in states where agreement between Republicans and greens exists, significant divisions persist.
Environmentalists widely criticized Sandoval's decision to veto a bill to boost Nevada's renewable portfolio standard to 40 percent by 2030 (Climatewire, June 20). Baker has frustrated greens in Massachusetts, who say the governor is doing the bare minimum to meet the commonwealth's climate objectives (Climatewire, Dec. 21, 2016).
And in Maryland, Hogan has come under pressure to join the U.S. Climate Alliance, a coalition of 12 states seeking to meet the objectives of the Paris climate accord.
Wind and solar advocates nevertheless detect progress. In Florida last week, Scott signed a bill that provides a series of tax breaks on residential and commercial solar installations. Sunrun Inc., a San Francisco-based solar installer, promptly announced it would begin business in the state.
The Florida law provides a 100 percent property tax exemption for residential solar installations, an 80 percent property tax exemption for nonresidential systems, and an 80 percent ad valorem tax exemption for residential and commercial arrays (Climatewire, May 9).
The move is a sign of Republicans' growing comfort with renewables, said Tyson Grinstead, Sunrun's Southeast policy director.
Many Republicans still ask questions about cost and reliability, said Grinstead, who served as South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham's (R) political director during his 2014 re-election campaign. But as development increases and costs fall, Republican governors increasingly want to see their states benefit from the jobs and cost savings created by the industry, he said.
"It's becoming much less partisan than it used to be," Grinstead said.
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2017/06/23/stories/1060056498
-
Western Earthquakes Likely Connected to Wastewater Injection
Jun 23, 2017 | Fuel Fix
By Ryan Maye Handy
An increase in earthquakes in the Rocky Mountain and Oklahoma region is likely tied to an uptick in wastewater injection, a process used to dispose of water in oil and gas operations, according to the U.S. Department of Energy.
The Energy Department cited research from the U.S. Geological Survey, which has found that earthquakes in oil and gas-producing regions of the U.S. have increased dramatically since 2009. The earthquakes, usually in the three or four magnitude range, have coincided with a shale booms in Oklahoma, Colorado and California.
There have been reports of small earthquakes in Texas, but oil and gas regulators in Texas have said they don't believe the rise of earthquakes in the state can be connected to oil and gas operations. But a ground-breaking report released this week suggested otherwise -- namely that the shale boom has caused earthquakes, degraded natural resources and overwhelmed small communities.
Oklahoma seems to be particularly susceptible to earthquakes caused by wastewater injection, the Energy Department noted. The state naturally has greater amounts of water mixed with its oil and gas, which means drillers have more chemical-laced water that needs to be disposed. Oklahoma's geology also has existing faults that are stressed by wastewater injection.
Other oil and gas states like North Dakota and Montana, which share the Bakken region, rarely experience earthquakes, the Department of Energy said.
A drop in oil prices, and therefore production, helped curtail a further increase in earthquakes, according to the USGS report. Some states, like Oklahoma, have also started limiting wastewater injection.
http://www.chron.com/business/energy/article/Western-earthquakes-likely-connected-to-11239374.php
-
Big Oil Turns to Big Data to Save Big Money on Drilling
Jun 23, 2017 | Reuters (In Real Clear Energy)
By Swetha Gopinath and Liz Hampton
In today's U.S. shale fields, tiny sensors attached to production gear harvest data on everything from pumping pressure to the heat and rotational speed of drill bits boring into the rocky earth.
The sensors are leading Big Oil's mining of so-called big data, with some firms envisioning billions of dollars in savings over time by avoiding outages, managing supplies and identifying safety hazards.
The industry has long used sophisticated technologies to find oil and gas. But only recently have oil firms pooled data from across the company for wider operating efficiencies - one of many cost-cutting efforts spurred by the two-year downturn in crude oil CLc1 prices.
ConocoPhillips (COP.N) says that sensors scattered across its well fields helped it halve the time it once took to drill new wells in Eagle Ford shale basin of South Texas.
By comparing data from hundreds of sensors, its program automatically adjusts the weight placed on a drill bit and its speed, accelerating the extraction of oil, said Matt Fox, ConocoPhillips' executive vice president for strategy, exploration and technology.
It is just one application, but if applied to the more than 3,000 wells ConocoPhillips hopes to drill in the Texas basin, those small sensors could lead to "billions and billions of dollars" in savings, Fox said in an interview.
"We started using data analytics in our Eagle Ford business," he said. "And everywhere we look there are applications for this."
The cost and complexity of such systems vary widely. Oil giants such as ConocoPhillips buy a mix of off-the-shelf and custom programs, along with data repositories. The Houston-based producer's employees use Tibco Software Inc's Spotfire data visualization package to analyze information from well sites.
Tibco declined to discuss its pricing.
Services firms including Schlumberger NV (SLB.N) and General Electric Co (GE.N) oil and gas unit sell sensor-equipped gear, data repositories and software to improve producers' decision-making.
Back when oil traded at more than $100 a barrel - before the price crash in 2014 - data analysis was an "afterthought" for most oil firms, said Binu Mathew, who oversees digital products at GE Oil & Gas.
Now - with prices at about $43 a barrel after recovering from a low of about $26 in early 2016 - "the efficiency aspect is far, far more important," Mathew said.
FINDING HIDDEN VALUE
A survey by Ernst & Young last year examined 75 large oil and gas companies and found that 68 percent of them had invested more than $100 million each in data analytics during the past two years. Nearly three quarters of those firms planned to allocate between 6 and 10 percent of their capital budgets to digital technology, the survey found.
Effectively mining large data sets could lead to supplanting workers with artificial intelligence and machine learning systems, according to firms selling and buying data-driven technology.
Simple sensors already increase safety and savings by eliminating the need to send workers to rigs or production facilities to gather data. Automating drilling decisions can produce more consistent results by cutting out human errors, said Duane Cuku, vice president of sales for rig technology at Precision Drilling Corp (PD.TO).
"The driller is now able to focus his attention on the well - and the performance and safety of his crews - as opposed to the manual manipulation of controls," Cuku said.
Occidental Petroleum Corp (OXY.N) also uses an analytical tool to find the best design for hydraulic fracturing wells. A new version of the software analyzes data on well completions and geology to recommend whether injecting steam or water would produce more oil.
Abhishek Gaurav, a petroleum engineer for closely-held Texas Standard Oil, said he uses big-data analytics to help his company choose which properties to explore.
Using Spotfire, the same program utilized by Conoco, Standard applies a combination of data science and petroleum engineering to rank asking prices for land based on a variety of completion, production and geological variables - such as the amount of sand that likely would be required to complete a well in a given formation.
The technique, Gaurav said, has reduced the time needed for evaluating land parcels from weeks to hours - and resulted in better decisions.
"We found value in properties when many other teams did not," he said.
RECRUITING IN CALIFORNIA Some of the information craved by oil firms isn't so easy to gather or analyze.
Surveys and maps that companies use to acquire acreage for drilling, for instance, are often not digitized. Older company data on wells may be unstructured or spread among suppliers using different storage formats, making integration and analysis a challenge.
General Electric and its oil-and-gas unit are moving aggressively into the business of digitizing industrial equipment for other firms, and have invested in large data processing centers for energy clients.
GE sees huge potential for market growth: A company study estimated that only 3 percent to 5 percent of oil and gas equipment is connected digitally, and less than one percent of the data collected gets used for decision-making, the study found.
Getting the industry more fully connected will take time.
"There is a huge amount of data prep, data sanitization and data extraction needed for big data to be totally disruptive," said Kate Richard, chief executive at private equity investor Warwick Energy.
She projects a major payoff from the technology is still five or ten years away.
Oklahoma City-based Warwick - which manages interests in thousands of wells across Oklahoma and Texas - is preparing for that payoff by hiring people from tech hubs in California, Richard said.
"They all have computer programming and data science backgrounds," she said.
https://www.reuters.com/article/usa-oil-bigdata-idUSKBN19E0DJ
-
Groups File Lawsuit over EPA Safety Regs Delay
Jun 23, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Cecelia Smith-Schoenwalder
Several groups yesterday filed a lawsuit seeking to overturn U.S. EPA plans to delay chemical safety regulations.
"EPA's sudden delay irresponsibly endangers workers, first responders and communities living near chemical facilities," said Gordon Sommers, an attorney with Earthjustice. "It also represents a shocking disregard for the rule of law and the process the government is required to follow before it takes away any health and safety protections under the Clean Air Act."
Earthjustice is representing community groups from California, Louisiana, Pennsylvania, Texas, Utah and West Virginia. Also involved in the lawsuit are the United Steelworkers, the Union of Concerned Scientists and other national groups.
EPA announced a nearly two-year delay on rule changes to the Risk Management Plan this month (E&E News PM, June 12).
But the groups said about 177 million Americans live in the worst-case scenario zones for a chemical disaster.
EPA's own data, they said, show that there will likely be 300 more chemical accidents involving dangerous chemicals during the nearly two-year delay.
The Obama-era rule changes were proposed after a 2013 chemical fire at a Texas fertilizer facility killed 15 people (Greenwire, April 24, 2013).
Last week, two Republican Oklahoma lawmakers, Sen. Jim Inhofe and Rep. Markwayne Mullin, praised the delay, saying the rule change is duplicative of regulations already put in place (Greenwire, June 14).
The motion in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit asks for emergency relief to stop the delay.
When EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt signed the final rule implementing the delay, he cited a need for more time to review public comments and to consider other issues that could require public input.
The new effective rule date is set for Feb. 19, 2019.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2017/06/23/stories/1060056518
-
Regulators Take Stock of Power Sector Perils
Jun 23, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Blake Sobczak and Peter Behr
The alarming discovery of a hacking tool built to disrupt electricity nearly caught the U.S. utility community by surprise, a leading grid security official said at a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission conference yesterday.
Luckily, a U.S. group "put up the Bat-Signal" about the so-called CrashOverride malware, tipping off grid operators before reports on the threat went public, according to Marcus Sachs, chief security officer at North American Electric Reliability Corp.
"Many of us working through the weekend were able to get information out" about the threat, Sachs said. Without the timely warning, "we would have had a media splash that Monday morning that none of us would have been ready for."
The CrashOverride malware was likely used to trigger a minor power outage in Ukraine late last year, experts say, and its potential to be repurposed for attacks in the U.S. turned heads among researchers and grid overseers.
The Slovakia-based cybersecurity firm ESET had been preparing to announce their discovery of the malware Monday. The Maryland-based cybersecurity firm Dragos Inc. got an early heads-up about the research, and experts there quickly notified U.S. officials starting June 9 and dug into the threat on their own. (Sachs did not name names in his testimony, but other sources corroborated the account.)
NERC, which is responsible for policing cybersecurity standards in the bulk U.S. power system, has said there are no signs CrashOverride has wormed its way into U.S. utilities or jeopardized grid reliability. Yet speakers and energy officials at the FERC technical conference yesterday said the mere existence of the grid-focused malware shows the need to pay attention to cybersecurity.
"It's a shame that the state of affairs these days requires that, but it absolutely requires our vigilance — that we're aware, and that we're equipping ourselves with the tools we need," said Democratic FERC Commissioner Colette Honorable.
Sachs emphasized the importance of effective information-sharing channels, such as the one that let the grid community prepare for the CrashOverride news. But he also pointed to the need for grid operators to be ready to detect any abnormal activity on their control networks and quickly narrow down the cause, whether human error or something more sinister.
Mike Assante, a former NERC official and head of industrial control system security at the SANS Institute cyber training group, testified that industry is working with the Idaho National Laboratory on a new strategy to manage cyber risks in control system environments, dubbed "Consequence-driven Cyber-informed Engineering" or CCE.
The program's goal is to "engineer out the worst cyber risks from our critical energy infrastructure," he explained, in large part by "trying to understand what kinds of consequences a cyberattack can enable."
FERC hosted the conference yesterday to gather technical input on grid reliability issues, from cybersecurity to gas storage. The independent federal agency can task NERC to draft and enforce rules for the bulk power sector in areas like physical security and cybersecurity, though multiple panelists spoke to the need to go beyond those efforts via information-sharing partnerships and large-scale security exercises.
"The checklist of NERC standards is a solid foundation," said David Ball, director of transmission protection and control engineering at utility American Electric Power Co. Inc. "But if we were to engage in those activities and nothing more, our bulk electric system could be seriously at risk."
Not just cyber
During the daylong hearing, experts testified about a swarm of threats and hazards to the nation's electricity networks.
The debate continued over the extent of the threat to power grids from an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack, delivered by an atmospheric nuclear weapon explosion. FERC acting Chairwoman Cheryl LaFleur noted that to this point the commission has not seen enough technical detail on the threat to justify issuing rules to cover it. "We didn't believe we had a clear enough path," she said.
LaFleur said she hoped researchers are getting close to creating a basis for rules. "I would really like to do something about this while I'm here," she said, "and that's not going to be forever."
Randy Horton, a senior program manager at the Electric Power Research Institute, cited EPRI's research finding that no more than three to 14 high-voltage grid transformers in the U.S. would be at risk from low frequency currents from an EMP attack, not the several hundred transformers that earlier studies had said could be destroyed, causing a catastrophic power loss.
Horton added that result does not mean that the power sector is safe from EMP weapons, because more research is needed on a companion threat from high-speed pulses. Additional results are due at the end of this year, he said.
Thomas Popik, chairman of the Foundation for Resilient Societies — an outspoken critic of FERC and industry responses to the EMP threat — challenged the EPRI transformer conclusion, saying it was based on tests of only two of the many kinds of transformers in use.
Popik, in his prepared testimony, presented an ominous scenario of a chain reaction of consequences from a wide-spread power outage that extended beyond several days, steadily exhausting onsite backup fuel supplies for emergency generators at control rooms and nuclear plants.
Michael Rivera from the Los Alamos National Laboratory reported on new, unclassified research on the different impacts of EMP attacks based on the size and type of the weapon warhead. But he noted that a more sophisticated analysis wasn't possible without getting into classified weapon-related detail.
"When the final stage of the EPRI report is done, we'll have to look at it and see if it lends itself to a standard," LaFleur said after the hearing. "It certainly will lend itself to action, I hope, whether we pilot something first, whether we direct a standard. The research is being done not to push the problem off, but to understand, so we can act on it."
On another front, a power outage in California last year involving smoke from a forest fire and utility solar power units, was spotlighted as an early warning of a new kind of grid threat.
Smoke from the Blue Cut wildfire in San Luis Obispo County last August tripped two 500 kilovolt power lines, with smoke particles creating a path for power to "arc" between the lines. Line faults created frequency disruptions that knocked out more than 1,000 megawatts of utility-scale solar units — but not other kinds of generation — because of settings on the solar unit's grid connections that need to be changed, said Gerry Cauley, chief executive of the North American Electric Reliability Corp.
Patricia Hoffman, the Energy Department's acting assistant secretary for electricity reliability, brought up the shutdown of the massive Aliso Canyon natural gas storage facility in California because of methane leaks discovered in 2015. It presented a new threat to supplies of gas-fired power generation that most grid planners had not zeroed in on.
Following the incident, national laboratory researchers determined that there were a dozen other gas storage facilities that could potentially disrupt 2,000 megawatts or more of gas generation each, if they too faced an emergency shutdown like the Aliso Canyon incident. NERC is currently reviewing how to deal with this vulnerability, she said.
Hoffman briefly noted a study ordered by Energy Secretary Rick Perry on the impact to grid reliability from retirements of coal-fired and nuclear "baseload" power generator, and whether electricity markets are adequately compensating these facilities the reliability "plus factor" of on-site fuel. The study, which has sparked debate between fossil fuel and renewable power advocates, now is expected in a week or two, and Hoffman did not indicate what it will say.
"This study is not a conclusion, but rather a beginning," she said.
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2017/06/23/stories/1060056495
-
A Flurry of Recent Statements Show Widespread Climate Doubt in the Trump Administration
Jun 23, 2017 | Washington Post
By Chris Mooney
After President Trump withdrew from the Paris climate agreement, journalists repeatedly asked the White House what he thought about climate change — and couldn’t get straight answers.
Since then, though, additional statements from Trump and members of his administration have provided additional evidence suggesting that these leaders don’t accept the mainstream science of climate change.
Let’s begin with Rick Perry, the energy secretary, who challenged the idea that human-induced carbon dioxide is the main “control knob” for the climate — as scientists say that it is, especially when it comes to the current warming trend — in an interview on CNBC.
Perry went even further Wednesday at a Senate appropriations hearing, saying climate change was “not settled science” and that “maybe it’s time for us to have a red team approach to this, set them in the room and let’s listen to what they come up with.”
The statement puts Perry in line with the Environmental Protection Agency chief Scott Pruitt, who has also floated the “red team” notion of having scientists who are skeptical of climate change challenge those researchers who accept the scientific consensus, and sort out who is “right.”
Pruitt, who had a strong influence on the president’s Paris decision, has strongly questioned the role of humans as the principal driver of climate change. His agency has taken down an informational website that stated the scientific consensus that climate change is predominantly caused by humans.
The “red teams” would operate outside of standard scientific peer review, or the drafting of expert scientific assessments — and scientists studying climate change have strongly objected to the “red team” idea, precisely for this reason.
Ryan Zinke, the interior secretary, also does not affirm the predominant human causation of climate change. And before the Senate on Tuesday, he did not answer Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) when asked (three times) how much scientists say the planet could warm this century.
Zinke instead said, “I don’t think government scientists can predict with certainty. There isn’t a model that exists today that can predict today’s weather given all the data.”
Actually, models can predict today’s weather pretty well, and the climate is about long-term patterns and trends in weather, not individual swings in particular places. Models can give informative, if imperfect, future projections of that, too (based, of course, on a necessary set of assumptions about the future, in this case, a “business as usual” trajectory in which we don’t take major action to curtail the use of fossil fuels).
The answer is that under a business as usual trajectory, the planet could warm by a very dangerous global average of 2.6 to 4.8 degrees Celsius, or 4.7 to 8.6 degrees Fahrenheit, in the years between 2081 and 2100.
And then, finally, there is Trump himself.
Despite past tweets suggesting that climate change is a hoax, the president hasn’t been talking about the science of climate change publicly. He didn’t even bring it up in his Rose Garden speech exiting from the Paris climate agreement.
Still, we know that Trump recently called the mayor of Tangier Island, a threatened community in the Chesapeake Bay, and discussed climate change. More specifically, Trump reportedly told that community’s mayor (by the mayor’s account) not to worry about sea-level rise.
“He said we shouldn’t worry about rising sea levels,” James Eskridge, the island’s mayor, told The Washington Post. “He said that ‘your island has been there for hundreds of years, and I believe your island will be there for hundreds more.’ ”
There are few things more certain than that on a warming planet, the oceans will rise, just as on a cooling one, they’ll fall. So it has been throughout glacial and interglacial periods throughout the planet’s history.
Right now we’re in a warming period and the seas are rising — something that is clear even if you for some reason doubt that humans are the cause.
In general, representatives of the Trump administration have tried to avoid outright denial of climate change, and to bridge from questions about science to saying that they’re taking the steps they’re taking because they’re concerned about the economy.
But there’s little evidence that they think the problem is fully caused by humans — and with that mind-set, it’s also difficult to believe the administration is weighing the full consequences of pursuing economic growth driven by fossil fuels.
So in sum: There is plenty of evidence to suggest the Trump administration doesn’t accept the mainstream science of climate change. We don’t really need to make this complicated.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2017/06/23/there-really-isnt-much-mystery-about-what-trump-and-his-government-think-about-climate-change/?utm_term=.f4ed79f293c0
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