Preview Newsletter
PM ACC test 5/7/17
-
(ACC Mentioned) Governments Detail Commitments on Plastic Marine Litter at UN Event
Jul 5, 2017 | Plastics News
By Steve Toloken
If you want a glimpse of what governments around the world are thinking on plastics and marine litter, take a look at the commitments they made at the United Nations Ocean Conference in June. -
(ACC Mentioned) Speakers Urge Plastics Companies to Join in a Circle
Jul 5, 2017 | Plastics News
By Jim Johnson
Creating a circular economy for the plastics industry is going to take collaboration among companies that typically compete in the marketplace. -
In the Legislative Process, Sometimes Small Is Beautiful
Jul 5, 2017 | The Hill
By Gary Andres
There is an obsession in the media these days about the inability of Congress to do big things. Inaction on tax reform, stalled Obamacare repeal, infrastructure spending, and the lack of progress on a budget, are all flashing warning lights about gridlock on the legislative highway. -
UC Study: Chemical Found in Tristate Residents Likely Due to Industrial Discharge
Jul 5, 2017 | Cincinnati Enquirer
By Sarah Brookbank
University of Cincinnati researchers found in a recent study that Tristate residents have a higher level of a chemical in their bodies, likely due to industrial discharge into the Ohio River. -
Cosmetics Safety Bill Gains Support from Industry and Advocates
Jul 5, 2017 | Environmental Working Group
By Scott Faber
Cosmetics companies and health and consumer advocates are coming together to support the Personal Care Products Safety Act, which would strengthen federal regulations that have remained largely unchanged for more than 75 years. -
NRDC Urges White House to Retain Clean Power Plan
Jul 5, 2017 | Inside EPA
Representatives of the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) in a recent meeting with White House officials launched a push to persuade the Trump administration to keep EPA's Clean Power Plan (CPP) regulation to cut greenhouse gases from the power sector. -
Trump Is Right to Push for Energy Dominance
Jul 5, 2017 | The Hill
By Craig Stevens
Once completely dependent upon imports for our critical energy needs, the United States is finally gaining the upper hand. -
(ACC Mentioned) Shutdown Threat Risks Stalling Work, Pushing Out Staff
Jul 4, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sam Pearson
Companies dealing with Chemical Safety Board investigations this year face the prospect of a distracted, inefficient agency after the Trump administration proposed to shutter it in the upcoming budget cycle. -
Groups See Climate Science Review as Chance to Undercut Regulation
Jul 5, 2017 | Reuters (in The New York Times)
The Trump administration will soon begin a review that will question the veracity of the climate change science used by President Barack Obama's administration as the basis for environmental regulations. -
Appeals Court Drops Stay on EPA Methane Emission Rules; Longer Halt in Works
Jul 5, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Richard Nemec
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on Monday removed a stay of the Obama administration's methane emission reduction rules that had been issued by Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt. -
Climate, Poverty Woes Fuel BLM Rule Debate in N.M. Gas Patch
Jul 5, 2017 | E&E News
By Pamela Green
That persistent fragrance on his Devil's Spring Ranch lit a fire under Schreiber to get involved in the Obama administration's efforts to craft a rule to limit emissions of the potent greenhouse gas from energy production on federal lands. -
Corporations Support a Carbon Tax? A Paradox That Will Lower Emissions
Jul 5, 2017 | The Hill
By Josiah Neeley
Why would some of the world’s largest oil companies support a carbon tax? The very question sounds odd, almost like a riddle, akin to “Why does the pope support Martin Luther?” or “Why does the Communist Party support capitalism?”
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) Governments Detail Commitments on Plastic Marine Litter at UN Event
Jul 5, 2017 | Plastics News
By Steve Toloken
If you want a glimpse of what governments around the world are thinking on plastics and marine litter, take a look at the commitments they made at the United Nations Ocean Conference in June.
The commitments are voluntary, but 179 governments, NGOs and some companies focused on what they're doing to reduce plastic pollution in the oceans.
Those 179 were part of more than 1,300 total commitments delivered at the forum on a wide range of ocean challenges. The United Nations billed the conference as its first major forum on the health of the oceans. The commitments can be found on the UN Ocean Conference website under "voluntary commitments" tab and then by doing a keyword search for plastics.
The European Union, for example, said it was looking for its new "EU Plastics Strategy," which it expects to finalize this year, to play a big role in stimulating efforts to reduce plastics getting to the ocean.
Indonesia, which is identified as one of the biggest sources of plastic in the oceans because of its thousands of islands and lack of waste collection, said it targeted a reduction of plastic debris 70 percent by 2025, from 2017 levels.
Indonesia's government also said it was planning to spend up to $1 billion over four years to build up waste management collection infrastructure on land and said it was launching a "National Action Plan on Marine Plastic Debris."
Other governments were making similar commitments. Flanders, in Northern Belgium, outlined ways it would try to meet a goal of cutting marine litter it generates 75 percent by 2025.
It said it wanted a "focus on plastics and circular economy" and was investigating improving its sewage treatment plants to capture more microplastics.
The plastics industry was also there. The American Chemistry Council was part of a group, the Trash Free Seas Alliance, which made a commitment to spend at least $10 million by 2020 on research to address problems from plastics in the oceans.
There's a lot going on. Two weeks after the U.N. event, Plastics News Editor Don Loepp moderated a two-day conference in Rhode Island, organized by ACC and featuring addresses from politicians, including U.S. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.).
Marine litter and plastics have generated a lot of headlines in recent years, like last year's reports that there'd be more plastic than fish in the sea by 2050. Less well-known problems, like plastic getting into the food we eat through fish markets in Indonesia and California, was also on the agenda.
Reading the conference commitments offers an interesting look at how governments are translating all of that concern into action.
http://www.plasticsnews.com/article/20170705/BLOG03/170709983/governments-detail-commitments-on-plastic-marine-litter-at-un-event
-
(ACC Mentioned) Speakers Urge Plastics Companies to Join in a Circle
Jul 5, 2017 | Plastics News
By Jim Johnson
Creating a circular economy for the plastics industry is going to take collaboration among companies that typically compete in the marketplace.
Companies, through trade groups, often join forces to tackle issues of widespread interest, such as regulation and industry standards.
And that's the type of cooperation that will be needed to push the concept of a circular economy in plastics, said Susan Graff, vice president of global corporate sustainability of Resource Recycling Systems, a consulting firm.
"I would submit that this is a pre-competitive issue," Graff told the audience at the recent Re|focus Sustainability & Recycling Summit in Orlando.
Companies, she said, need "to put together a solution before we end up with government regulation telling us what the solution is."
The concept of a circular economy in plastics has been gaining traction thanks, in part, to a report issued by the Ellen MacArthur Foundation addressing the issue.
"Applying circular economy principles to global plastic packaging flows could transform the plastics economy and drastically reduce negative externalities such as leakage into oceans," the foundation has stated.
A circular economy strives to reuse finite resources instead of the more-typical linear approach that ends up with used items in the landfill.
The circular economy, Graff said, focuses on breaking the "take, make, waste" cycle and "closing the loop."
Ocean plastics is one issue the plastics industry faces today as concern, and publicity is growing. And this matter is a prime example of how the industry can come together on a pre-competitive basis to find solutions.
"Cooperation is really the key. This is not something you can really do from inside your fence line or your property boundaries," Graff said.
"I think they have to realize they have risks. And I think ocean plastics is an in-your-face kind of risk," she said. "It's huge. It's visible. People are concerned about it, and so, I think it's a wake-up call to the industry."
"The plastics industry now has an opportunity to get ahead of this issue," Graff said.
People, she said, "are varied" on the view that work toward a circular economy can be accomplished on a pre-competitive basis.
"I do believe, though, a rising tide lifts all boats. And, especially, when you are dealing with infrastructure issues in the market where you operate, there's more than one company who is going to benefit as they try to make sure they have recycling in that area that helps them achieve their zero waste goals, helps them divert value from the landfill that could be captured, and end-markets and applications," Graff said.
She pointed to the Carton Council, a trade group through which different manufacturers worked together to expand recycling opportunities, as an example of pre-competitive cooperation.
The plastics industry also has worked together to help promote recycling efforts. Those, for example, include the Flexible Film Recycling Group organized through the American Chemistry Council.
Keith Christman, managing director of plastics markets at ACC, said trade groups like his own provide a forum for companies to tackle issues on a pre-competitive basis.
http://www.plasticsnews.com/article/20170705/NEWS/170709979/speakers-urge-plastics-companies-to-join-in-a-circle
-
In the Legislative Process, Sometimes Small Is Beautiful
Jul 5, 2017 | The Hill
By Gary Andres
There is an obsession in the media these days about the inability of Congress to do big things. Inaction on tax reform, stalled Obamacare repeal, infrastructure spending, and the lack of progress on a budget, are all flashing warning lights about gridlock on the legislative highway.
But is all the handwringing justified? Not really. There are some good reasons why the big-ticket items are mired in the legislative slow lane. Moreover, under the radar screen – often eclipsed by stories about inaction and kicking the can – some important little things are happening. But they are overlooked due to the drama and controversy swirling around the big partisan brawls.
Let’s first look at why the bigger ticket items get bogged down. Keep in mind, Congress never acts quickly on major legislation or easily resolves large economic or cultural problems. It’s the opposite of an efficiency machine.
In a big country like ours, with diverse views, the legislature is tasked with finding common ground on issues with diverse viewpoints. Who is entitled to government-funded healthcare? How much should people pay in taxes? What’s the right level of federal investment in infrastructure? And how do you pay for it? Opinions vary widely on these questions.
Progressive Democrats support different solutions than conservative Republicans. And there is a wide swath of others, with less thought through opinions, somewhere between the left and right buoys on the river of American politics.
This reality about public opinion, mixed with some of the structural features of American government – like separation of powers and rules that empower minority views – has two results.
First, Congress will never win a popularity contest because it debates divisive issues publicly. So much of what the public sees – and what the media covers – is focused on cantankerous debate, partisan controversy, and deep policy differences. Finding consensus is neither easy nor common and usually doesn’t thrill those asked to compromise. And that means the “big” changes the media often laments Congress strikes out on are about as rare as a baseball no hitter.
Second, while bipartisan consensus and accomplishments are elusive, the terrain is not completely barren. Over the past six years, just in the committee where I used to work (House Energy and Commerce), Congress did find common ground to reduce the deficit and control spending (The Budget Control Act), pass major mental health legislation, fund opioid spending, provide major reforms to speed the drug development and approval process and infuse the National Institutes of Health with billions in new federal investments (all included in the 21stCentury Cures Act), reform the Medicare payment system to physicians (the so-called “Doc-Fix”), improve the system of regulating chemicals in commerce (Toxic Substances Control Act), modernize energy infrastructure and unleash more spectrum to improve the performance of the mobile phones on which so many of us now depend. Not a bad track record.
Even this year, lots of legislative accomplishments have eluded the media’s radar. For example, there wasn’t a lot of attention focused on the passage of Kate’s Law in the House a couple weeks ago, a bill that many argue will make communities safer by allowing stiffer penalties for those who commit crimes after being deported and then return to the United States. Nor was there a lot of press coverage recently when President Trump signed legislation to give the Department of Veterans Affairs authority to make it easier to remove employees who don’t follow the rules and also create new protections for whistle blowers.
Some argue these accomplishments are legislative small potatoes. And perhaps some are.
But sometimes “small is beautiful” in the legislative process. These seemingly minor bills not only elude partisan speed bumps, but can also fix real world problems. Included in the 158 bills the House has already passed this year, for example, are measures to speed the construction of hydroelectric plants, improve access to maternity care, promote a 21stcentury energy workforce, hasten the development of nuclear energy technology, make the government use more energy efficiency technologies, and help sports trainers move critical medicines across state lines.
I remember a member telling me last year that the most important thing Congress did in the last session was pass a small bill to help victims of Lyme’s disease. It didn’t get any national attention, but it made a big difference in his community.
None of these bills made the front pages of major newspapers or the network news. But they address concrete issues, help people and garner broad bipartisan support.
Despite all the teeth gnashing about Congress being broken, it is actually working at one level as intended. In areas where consensus can be found, lawmakers are fixing targeted problems – it’s just no one is paying attention, except maybe those impacted. And that’s not all bad.
Gary Andres was the Majority Staff Director for the House Energy and Commerce Committee from 2011-2017. He also worked in the Office of Legislative Affairs for Presidents George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush. He is currently the Senior Executive Vice President for Public Affairs at the Biotechnology Innovation Association. The view expressed are his own.
http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/politics/340656-in-the-legislative-process-sometimes-small-is-beautiful
-
UC Study: Chemical Found in Tristate Residents Likely Due to Industrial Discharge
Jul 5, 2017 | Cincinnati Enquirer
By Sarah Brookbank
University of Cincinnati researchers found in a recent study that Tristate residents have a higher level of a chemical in their bodies, likely due to industrial discharge into the Ohio River.
The chemical, perfluorooctanoic acid or PFOA, has been linked to a number of health issues but is historically understudied, experts say. Now, researchers across the nation are looking into the chemical, which was widely used as a water-resistant coating in products such as stain-resistant carpet and ski wax.
The UC study examined historical data from blood samples from more than 900residents that lived in the mid-Ohio River Valley between 1991 and 2012 and compared those levels to the general population median. Residents of Huntington, West Virginia, Cincinnati, Louisville and Evansville, Indiana were among those studied.
The study is significant because it's the first to look at levels of historic levels of PFOA in adults, Susan Pinney said. Pinney is a professor in the Department of Environmental Health at the UC College of Medicine and a member of both the Cincinnati Cancer Consortium and the UC Cancer Institute.
PFOA and similar chemicals were released into the environment between 1951 to 2015. For residents of the Ohio River Valley, the UC study found that a DuPont manufacturing plant and its two landfills located upriver in West Virginia are likely the sources of the contamination.
Another study Pinney was involved in measured puberty development in girls in Cincinnati, San Francisco and New York City. The study found high PFOA levels in girls from Northern Kentucky, which led to Pinney studying levels in adults living in the area.
"Most of us who have lived around here for a long time probably still have higher (PFOA) levels, they're still coming down," Pinney said.
Pinney has lived in the Cincinnati region for more than 40 years and she's not worried about drinking the water here. She said water companies know how to treat the water and are able to remove as much PFOA as possible.
Co-author Robert Herrick, a UC doctoral student, traced the blood samples to a certain water treatment plant so the different types of filters could be compared for effectiveness. While treating the water is effective, Pinney said, it doesn't completely eliminate PFOA.Nationwide study finds chemicals in tap water
PFOA belongs to a group of chemicals known as PFCs or PFASs, chemicals used in metal plating, computer semiconductors, water-resistant coatings and fire-fighting foam. PFOAs no longer are made in the U.S., but are still in use in other nations – and may be in goods imported from those countries, according to the federal Environmental Protection Agency.
At the DuPont Washington Works plant, the source of contamination in the Ohio River, the chemical was used to make Teflon coating, Pinney said.
Another new study, released in June by the Environmental Working Group (EWG) and Northeastern University, found PFCs in the tap water of more than 15 million people across 27 states. EWG specializes in research and advocacy in the areas of toxic chemicals, public lands and corporate accountability.
The study found more than four dozen contamination sites, including the DuPont Washington Works plant.
“We were struck that PFASs are a ubiquitous global contaminant and have a multi-decade history of contamination episodes around the world,” said Phil Brown, director of the Social Science Environmental Health Research Institute at Northeastern University.
In a statement about the study, Brown said the project revealed the inadequacy of chemical regulation in the U.S. and highlighted the need for chemical policy that protects the health of citizens.
“As we uncover the pervasive pollution of drinking water, the chemical companies have already shifted production to a similar set of chemicals that are likely no better," EWG senior scientist David Andrews said.
The EPA has a health advisory for consumption of PFOA-laden drinking water, but the EPA's health advisories are non-enforceable and non-regulatory. According to the EPA, a lifetime of exposure to PFOA and PFOS from drinking water should be limited to 70 parts per trillion (ppt).
The EWG study sampled tap water in Lousiville and found that between 2013 and 2016 two out of eight water samples detected an average of 5 ppt with some samples having a maximum of 20 ppt. In Gallia County, West Virginia, the study found that one out of two PFOA samples detected an average of 10 ppt with a maximum of 20 ppt.DuPont's history
In February, DuPont and its spin-off Chemours agreed to pay $671 million to settle more than 3,500 lawsuits involving the leaks of PFOA from its plant in Parkersburg, West Virginia into community water supplies, USA TODAY reported.
In July of last year, an Ohio man diagnosed with cancer was awarded more than $5 million in damages from DuPont. The federal jury said DuPont acted with malice by dumping chemicals into the Ohio River.
According to USA TODAY, an industry risk assessor hired by DuPont found that the company dumped more than 1.7 million pounds of PFOA into the environment between 1951 and 2003. That study discovered 632,468 pounds made its way into the Ohio River.Impact on humans needs more study
"I think the clearest health effects are that it does something to the immune system, such that vaccines are not as effective," Pinney said. "Also, asthma seems to be more prevalent in people who have had PFOA exposure."
Several studies have also shown that puberty maturation in women is delayed by PFOA.
"Is this a bad thing? We don't know," Pinney said.
Other studies have shown that high levels of PFOA in mothers can lead to smaller birth weights and smaller body mass index (BMI) in infants, but this reverses in adults. Adults with higher levels of PFOAs often have higher BMIs, Pinney said.
"In laboratory animals given large amounts, PFOA can affect growth and development, reproduction and injure the liver. More research is needed to assess the human health effects of exposure to PFOA," the national Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said on its website.
Pinney said there's still much to learn about this chemical and the way it impacts populations with high concentrations.
"For me, the takeaway is 'How did this happen?' ' Pinney said. "It wasn't until the late 1990s that people started asking questions about this chemical."
While scientists don't exactly know how the chemical impacts the immune system, Pinney said there are hints.
"Because the elimination time could be several years, it is hard to determine what impact these environmental exposures may have on our health and children’s health,” Pinney said. "This data from the 1990s demonstrates that the contaminants have been in our water a long time, at unchecked levels, before anyone was paying attention to it.”
http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2017/07/05/uc-study-chemical-found-ohio-river-valley-residents-likely-due-industrial-dumping/374074001/
-
Cosmetics Safety Bill Gains Support from Industry and Advocates
Jul 5, 2017 | Environmental Working Group
By Scott Faber
Cosmetics companies and health and consumer advocates are coming together to support the Personal Care Products Safety Act, which would strengthen federal regulations that have remained largely unchanged for more than 75 years.
Cosmetics are a $60 billion-a-year business, and no other products are so widely used by American consumers with such few safeguards. The bipartisan bill, introduced by Sens. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., and Susan Collins, R-Maine, would require companies to ensure products are safe before placing them on the market and give the Food and Drug Administration the tools it needs to protect the public.
Through years of discussion and negotiation, the bill has gained the support of major cosmetics companies such as Johnson & Johnson and Procter & Gamble, as well as influential health and consumer organizations such as the American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, the Endocrine Society and the March of Dimes. (See the complete list of supporters below.)
The legislation would give the FDA the same tools for ensuring the safety of personal care products as it now uses to regulate food and drugs. Each year, the agency would do a safety review of five ingredients and contaminants. Companies also would be required to register their manufacturing facilities and disclose the ingredients they use to the FDA.
The bill would require cosmetics companies to report adverse health incidents and give the FDA authority to recall dangerous products. It also would require specific labeling and warnings for products with ingredients that could pose problems for some consumers. The regulatory program would be funded by user fees from companies, totaling about $20 million a year.
Since June 2015, nearly 100,000 EWG supporters have signed petitions or emailed Congress in support of safer cosmetics. Consumers deserve to know the products they use every day are safe.
If you haven’t done so already, please take a minute now to contact your senators and urge them to add their names to this critical piece of legislation. It's fast, easy and will help us all have safer products.
Health and Consumer Organizations (as of June 20)
American Cancer Society
Cancer Action Network
Caregiver Action Network
Endocrine Society
Environmental Working Group
March of Dimes
National Alliance for Hispanic Health
National Psoriasis Foundation
Society for Women’s Health Research
Supporting Cosmetics Companies*:Au Naturale
Babo Botanicals
California Baby
Coalition of Handcrafted Entrepreneurs
Earth Mama
Angel Baby
Éclair Naturals
The Estée Lauder Companies (Brands include Estée Lauder, Clinique, Origins, Tommy Hilfiger, MAC, La Mer, Bobbi Brown, Donna Karan, Aveda, Michael Kors)
EO Products
Goddess Garden Organics
Handcrafted Soap & Cosmetic Guild
Handmade Cosmetic Alliance
Herban Lifestyle
The Honest Company
Johnson & Johnson (Brands include Neutrogena, Aveeno, Clean & Clear, Lubriderm, Johnson’s baby products)
Juice Beauty
L’Oreal (Brands include L’Oréal Paris, Lancome, Giorgio Armani, Yves Saint Laurent, Kiehl’s, Essie, Garnier, Maybelline-New York, Vichy, La Roche-Posay, The Body Shop, Redken)
Procter & Gamble (Brands include Pantene, Head & Shoulders, Herbal Essences, Secret, Ivory, Olay, Aussie, Old Spice)Revlon (Brands include Revlon, American Crew, Elizabeth Arden, Almay, Mitchum)
Unilever (Brands include Dove, Tresemme, Lever, St. Ives, Noxzema, Nexxus, Pond’s, Suave, Sunsilk, Vaseline, Degree, Axe)
http://www.ewg.org/enviroblog/2016/02/cosmetics-safety-bill-gains-support-industry-and-advocates
-
NRDC Urges White House to Retain Clean Power Plan
Jul 5, 2017 | Inside EPA
Representatives of the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) in a recent meeting with White House officials launched a push to persuade the Trump administration to keep EPA's Clean Power Plan (CPP) regulation to cut greenhouse gases from the power sector.
The environmental group has a high hurdle to overcome, however, since the rule is stayed by the Supreme Court and EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt was one of the leading opponents of the rule before he came to the agency.
Additionally, Pruitt questions mainstream climate science and the need for any mandatory GHG controls.
The recent NRDC meeting was part of the White House review process of a proposed rule that would repeal the CPP. Other recent advocacy on the issue includes a meeting with labor groups that oppose the Obama regulation but are urging EPA to make controversial changes to the Clean Air Act new source review program part of any rule to replace the CPP.
Amid the Trump EPA's review of the Obama-era rule, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit is weighing whether to remand the rule or pause litigation over it. It has yet to issue a decision on that issue.
During the June 22 meeting, NRDC submitted several handouts to White House regulatory reviewers, including a June issue brief that touts power sector GHG reduction progress , including a 20 percent cut since 2005 “made possible through federal and state support for” renewables and energy efficiency, falling costs for renewables and low natural gas prices.
That progress “will continue to grow and may even double by 2021,” the paper says, “putting the power sector in an excellent position to meet” the CPP.
While the downward trend “is good news, . . . the long-term, business-as-usual trajectory is less certain without the right policies in place. Fortunately, the CPP is on deck and ready to build on this solid head start, ensuring that urgently needed carbon reductions will continue into the next decade.”
NRDC also submitted an Environmental Entrepreneurs' jobs report showing that the CPP could create up to 560,000 jobs and add $52 billion to the gross domestic product in 2030; an economic impact analysis detailing the types of jobs that would come with the rule; and a June 2016 MJ Bradley report summarizing modeling results of the regulation that account for extensions of wind and solar tax credits.
Representing EPA at the meeting were four staffers -- Elyse Steiner, Scott Jordan, Kevin Culligan, and Alex MacPherson. They were joined by four White House Office of Information & Regulatory Affairs officials and three NRDC representatives.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/nrdc-urges-white-house-retain-clean-power-plan
-
Trump Is Right to Push for Energy Dominance
Jul 5, 2017 | The Hill
By Craig Stevens
Once completely dependent upon imports for our critical energy needs, the United States is finally gaining the upper hand. Our domestic production is so strong that it has shifted the entire energy debate. For generations, American political leaders challenged us to dream of energy independence. Now the Trump administration is using the term “energy dominance.”
The administration spent the last week highlighting policies that can help us transition from dependence to dominance. Speaking Wednesday, the president said that developing our abundant domestic resources could “usher in a golden age of American energy dominance.”
The transition has already begun. The United States has been a net energy importer since 1953, but in the last decade hydraulic fracturing has opened up huge new energy reserves. The U.S. Energy Information Agency (EIA) projects that the country will become a net energy exporter by 2026. That is only nine years away.
But the EIA warns that this better future will not happen by itself. “Without substantial improvements in technology and more favorable resource availability, U.S. energy production declines in the 2030s,” the agency concludes.
The United States can avoid that decline by investing in the technology and infrastructure needed to continue developing the resources within our own borders. The private sector will take care of this if the government does not stand in the way.
Businesses created the hydraulic fracturing that opened up U.S. shale reserves and put the country on the path to energy independence. Now they are working to lay a new network of pipelines so those energy resources can be delivered to homes, businesses, manufacturers, electricity generators and export facilities. Washington has an important role to play here.
Currently, more than 2.6 million miles of pipelines deliver 65 percent of the nation’s energy, according to government data. But that network does not connect the newly developed reserves to the places where this energy is most in demand.
The country needs new pipelines to complete those connections. The federal government permits these pipelines. If the government is serious about making the United States energy dominant in this new century, then it has to see that those pipelines are built.
The financial gains from this buildout are tremendous. Appalachia, known nationwide for its low standard of living and economic challenges, could become “the largest supplier of new natural gas in the U.S.” It is home to 700 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.
Pipeline construction jobs follow oil and gas production jobs in areas of the country where work is desperately needed. The end result is more affordable energy that can help households save money and businesses expand.
Nationwide, expanding the pipeline network will lead to economic growth as businesses have increased access to a reliable source of less costly domestic energy.
There are national security benefits too. When we become a net exporter of energy, we will have even more influence in global affairs. Being able to supply oil and natural gas to Europe and Asia will boost our economy and give us a tool for countering the influence of other major exporters — like Russia and various Middle Eastern states.
The United States can become energy dominant. But to get there we have to build more infrastructure. The country needs more pipelines — and needs them now.
Russia is not waiting for us. It is spreading its influence by selling as much oil and natural gas as it can. China and India are not waiting for us to reboot U.S. manufacturing by producing our own supply of affordable energy.
There is no time to lose. People from economically struggling parts of the country get this. Does everyone else?
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/energy-environment/340459-trump-is-right-to-push-for-energy-dominance
-
(ACC Mentioned) Shutdown Threat Risks Stalling Work, Pushing Out Staff
Jul 4, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sam Pearson
Companies dealing with Chemical Safety Board investigations this year face the prospect of a distracted, inefficient agency after the Trump administration proposed to shutter it in the upcoming budget cycle.
ExxonMobil Corp., Sunoco Logistics, DuPont Co. and others could see their efforts to cooperate with the CSB’s investigations go to waste if the board, an independent agency that probes industrial chemical accidents, is shut down without finishing ongoing projects.
The Trump administration’s budget proposal would shutter the board and leave logistical questions unanswered. Companies could also be left in the lurch if the board starts probing their plants only to stop later due to a disruption in funding.
Some have suggested, however, that the board’s investigative responsibilities can reasonably be transferred to another agency.
Congress could “think seriously about moving this mission to another entity with better defined administrative and investigatory protocols to ensure that the facts and not political agendas drive outcomes,” said Stephen Brown, vice president of government affairs at Tesoro Corp., which has been the subject of two CSB investigations in the past eight years.
“That mission is equally important to industry, our employees and the general public as safety is paramount,” Brown told Bloomberg BNA. “That said, there is no reason to believe that this mission can only be carried out by the CSB,” rather than another agency.
Mechanics of Shutdown Unclear
The budget provided $9.42 million for the CSB in fiscal 2018 to wind down operations, but the board and White House have not explained how the number came about. How a shutdown could happen is unclear, but the specifics could leave the nine companies under investigation as well as any other firms that may come under scrutiny without information on the causes of fatal incidents at their facilities.
Pending investigations include probes of an ExxonMobil Corp. refinery, a former DuPont Co. chemical plant in LaPorte, Texas, and facilities in Missouri, Kansas and Mississippi. The board also sent investigators to a Wisconsin corn processing plant June 1 and to a chemical tank explosion in Barbour County, W.Va., May 25.
The White House Office and Management and Budget and CSB have not specified if the plan would bar the board from taking on new work while allowing it to finish existing investigations, or leave those probes incomplete.
Mark Farley, a partner at the law firm Katten Muchin Rosenman LLP who has represented companies being investigated by the CSB, told Bloomberg BNA his clients have heard the agency is making contingencies for a possible disruption in appropriations.
Investigators “have been told to be in a position to conclude their investigations by the end of the fiscal year,” Farley said, including at a minimum having their findings ready to be published either as a report or a shorter “lessons learned” document. The CSB also faces operational risks if key investigators leave the agency over the fiscal uncertainty, he said, and losing staff would only make it harder for the board to function.
“I know investigators who are thinking that way,” Farley said.
Hillary Cohen, a spokeswoman for CSB, said in an email to Bloomberg BNA the agency “has every intention of completing all of its open accident investigations if [fiscal year] 2018 funding is provided and the agency is able to carry forward its mission.”
Continuing Investigations
The CSB has continued to launch investigations since the March release of the White House’s “skinny budget"—which was the first mention the administration wanted to close the agency.
Jeff Ruch, the director of Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility, said in an email to Bloomberg BNA the logistics of closure were unclear. The prospect of deep funding cuts “raises questions as to whether CSB should open any new investigations no matter how big or significant the chemical accident,” Ruch said.
Shutting down a federal agency is fairly rare. Congress closed two small agencies in the 1990s—the Administrative Conference of the United States and the Office of Technology Assessment. Their cases provide some glimpse of how a shutdown of the CSB could play out.
ACUS, which describes itself as an agency dedicated to improving the administrative process and providing nonpartisan expert advice for improving federal agency procedures, closed in October 1995 after Congress withheld funds for the fiscal year. It reopened in March 2010 after receiving funds for fiscal 2009. When ACUS was shutdown, work was left unfinished, according to Alan Morrison, one of about 100 attorneys at the agency at the time.
Pending work “didn’t go any place,” Morrison said, “it just stopped.”
Morrison, a co-founder of the Public Citizen Litigation Project, who is now an associate dean at George Washington University, said his former agency was doomed because “it didn’t have any strong supporters in Congress, it didn’t have any clout on its own and nobody cared enough to fight about it.”
ExxonMobil spokesman Aaron Stryk referred questions to the American Petroleum Institute and the American Chemistry Council. ACC spokesman Scott Jensen told Bloomberg BNA he hasn’t heard complaints about the CSB from member companies. API did not respond to a request for comment.
“We will continue to follow all applicable rules and regulations that impact our business,” Vicki Granado, a spokeswoman for Energy Transfer Partners, which operates a Nederland, Texas, terminal facility formerly owned by Sunoco Logistics Partners, which completed a merger with Energy Transfer Partners in April.
The seven other companies—Didion Milling Co., Midland Resources Recovery, Loy Lange Box Co., Packaging Corporation of America, MGPI Processing Inc., Enterprise Product Partners LP and DuPont Co.—did not respond to requests for comment.
https://www.bna.com/shutdown-threat-risks-n73014461147/
-
Groups See Climate Science Review as Chance to Undercut Regulation
Jul 5, 2017 | Reuters (in The New York Times)
The Trump administration will soon begin a review that will question the veracity of the climate change science used by President Barack Obama's administration as the basis for environmental regulations.
The move by the Environmental Protection Agency to launch public debates between scientists on climate research, known as red-team, blue-team exercises, would be the first major effort by the Republican administration to challenge the long-standing scientific consensus on human-caused climate change.
Advocates who have petitioned the EPA to reverse the scientific finding underlying U.S. regulations governing greenhouse gas emissions see the proposal to scrutinize mainstream climate science as a first step in that direction.
"It's a way to survey the landscape before reopening the endangerment finding," said Myron Ebell, head of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, one of the groups that filed a petition with the agency to undo the 2009 scientific determination that formed the basis for the Democratic Obama administration's regulation of greenhouse gases.Continue reading the main story
AdvertisementContinue reading the main story
In 2007, the Supreme Court ruled that the EPA had authority under the federal Clean Air Act to regulate greenhouse gases from cars if the agency determined they endangered human health.
EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt has spoken several times about the merits of opening the climate change debate up to the public. The website Climatewire on Friday cited a senior administration official, who said Pruitt plans to launch the back-and-forth scientific critiques formally.
Francis Menton, a lawyer who filed an endangerment finding petition in January on behalf of the Concerned Household Electricity Consumers Council, said Pruitt told an event at the Manhattan Institute think tank in New York on Friday that he would launch the debates in the next few months.
Menton said he asked Pruitt whether he had made a decision on reopening the endangerment finding. Pruitt said the agency is weighing its options.
The review "can create a body of scientific work that can be trustworthy and dependable to make regulatory choices and decisions," said Rob Henneke, of the Texas Public Policy Foundation, a third group that filed an endangerment finding petition.
Unlike the other two, it has challenged the legality of the endangerment finding, not the science.
Environmental groups are confident that Pruitt will not be successful if he tries to undo the endangerment finding because they expect the courts will side with the scientific consensus that human beings cause climate change.
Pruitt and the EPA would need to build up a new case that shows carbon dioxide is innocuous and counter the volumes of scientific research that support the finding.
"If he has any grasp of scientific and legal reality, he would realize that it's a fool's errand to reverse the endangerment determination," said David Doniger, climate director for the Natural Resources Defense Counsel.
"This could be a way for him to keep the right-wing fringe groups occupied and also accomplish the goal of further confusing the public debate," he said.
Ebell, who was also the transition leader of the Trump EPA, had previously been critical of Pruitt's hesitation to take on the endangerment finding because of the time and staffing it would require.
The Trump administration has not yet appointed second-tier assistant administrators to run different policy divisions of the agency.
"I think (the red-team, blue-team process) is a logical first step, but I don’t think it commits the administrator to anything yet," Ebell said.
https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2017/07/05/us/politics/05reuters-usa-epa-climatechange-science.html?_r=0
-
Appeals Court Drops Stay on EPA Methane Emission Rules; Longer Halt in Works
Jul 5, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Richard Nemec
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on Monday removed a stay of the Obama administration's methane emission reduction rules that had been issued by Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Scott Pruitt.
Led by the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) and more than a dozen states, cities and the District of Columbia, a court challenge was lodged last month to turn back Pruitt's move, part of the Trump administration's comprehensive rollback of alleged onerous regulations by the previous administration that they contend have hurt the U.S. economy.
In late May, the EPA ordered a 90-day stay over parts of proposed rules governing new sources of methane emissions from the oil and natural gas industry while the agency works through a reconsideration process. Two weeks later, Pruitt indicated that EPA was considering extending the stay by two years, while separately Trump's Bureau of Land Management (BLM) postponed implementing an Obama-era rule governing flaring/venting of associated natural gas on public and tribal lands.
Monday's action by the appeals court only applies to the 90-day stay from EPA. In a 2-1 opinion, the court found that Pruitt's action exceeded his authority. The majority opinion by judges David Tatel and Robert Wilkins emphasized that "nothing in this opinion in any way limits EPA's authority to reconsider the final rule and to proceed with its June 16 NPRM [Notice of Proposed Rulemaking]," adding that EPA has no legal requirement to reconsider the Obama methane rule.
In a dissenting opinion, Judge Janice Rogers Brown, an appointee of former President George W. Bush, wrote that the court did not have jurisdiction over the matter because it didn't involve a "final action" by the EPA, which she said was instead merely "hitting the pause button."
Given the swift legal challenges to the initial EPA stay of the methane emission reduction requirements, the EPA in June published an NPRM suggesting a two-year pause was being considered "to look more broadly" at the entire EPA methane rule during what Pruitt has characterized as a "reconsideration phase."
Setting aside the prospects of an EPA-imposed two year hiatus for the rule, EDF President Fred Krupp hailed the ruling as "a big win for common sense, public health, climate security and the rule of law."
Colorado last Friday joined more than a dozen other states and the District of Columbia in seeking implementation of the EPA methane reduction rules. Gov. John Hickenlooper said his state asked the appellate court to join plaintiffs and other intervenors, saying Colorado wants to help assure "comprehensive federal regulation of methane emissions" as authorized by EPA under President Obama.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/110983-appeals-court-drops-stay-on-epa-methane-emission-rules-longer-halt-in-works
-
Climate, Poverty Woes Fuel BLM Rule Debate in N.M. Gas Patch
Jul 5, 2017 | E&E News
By Pamela Green
Desert sand crunches beneath Don Schreiber's boots as he approaches a gas well on his sprawling ranch in the heart of the San Juan Basin.
The equipment is painted yellow and green to blend in with the scrub. But there's no hiding the odor of rotting eggs that wafts across the arid terrain.
"Smell that?" Schreiber asks.
Methane itself has no scent, but the gas is often emitted alongside chemical compounds like benzene and xylene that can be detected in the air by their pungent aromas. That persistent fragrance on his Devil's Spring Ranch lit a fire under Schreiber to get involved in the Obama administration's efforts to craft a rule to limit emissions of the potent greenhouse gas from energy production on federal lands.
After nearly three years of public input, the Interior Department published a final version of the regulation in November. Two months later, President Trump took office and announced a strategy to do away with many of the rules his predecessor had introduced during his last six months in office — simply by securing the support of a simple majority in both chambers of the Republican-controlled Congress.
Sporting his signature ten-gallon hat, Schreiber was a regular Capitol Hill fixture during lawmakers' battle to kill the rule under the Congressional Review Act (CRA) earlier this year. When Senate Republicans failed to garner enough votes to open debate on a resolution disapproving the regulation, Schreiber came home to congratulatory placards handwritten by his wife, Jane.
"Thank you, from all who breathe," says one sign that still hangs on a cabinet in the couple's kitchen.
It's now the afternoon of June 14. Schreiber has spent most of his morning on the phone after learning that the Bureau of Land Management has indefinitely suspended provisions of the rule he fought so long to get on the books (Greenwire, June 14).
With Interior now set to completely scrap and rewrite the BLM methane rule, Schreiber is preparing to resurrect his campaign to stop methane emissions that he says are harming his ranch and other public landscapes. But the path forward is unclear, he says.
"We get the three-year methane fight settled, and then the Trump administration knocks that out," Schreiber says. "We go back and fight — like death fight — for six months, beat the CRA, and today they suspend the rule. So I have no idea what the response is."
That northwest New Mexico is home to some of the methane rule's most prominent supporters — and opponents — is somewhat puzzling. The area is underlain by a formation rich in gas, not oil, which means one of the regulation's signature requirements — restrictions on the flaring of gas byproducts from liquids-producing wells — is largely inapplicable to operations in the San Juan Basin.
But it's what's above the Four Corners region that has captured the passion of the rule's proponents. A methane "hot spot," which scientists last year attributed — at least in part — to natural gas infrastructure in the basin, looms above the intersection of the Utah, Colorado, Arizona and New Mexico borders.
The drill sites on Schreiber's ranch represent just a small fraction of the 18,000 wells that fall under the jurisdiction of BLM's Farmington Field Office (FFO). The district contains more than 8,000 pump jacks and more than 9,000 wellhead compressors with potentially leaky seals, according to field office data. Virtually all the wells contain separators that could have faulty dump valves and pneumatic controllers that vent when the devices are activated.
A large chunk of that vast energy network has lain dormant in recent years. Pummeled by low natural gas prices, production in the basin has been falling steadily since 2008.
The region puts out 601 billion cubic feet of gas per year, down 40 percent from 1 trillion cubic feet annually in 2006. At one point, northwest New Mexico's rig count dropped to zero.
"A lot of people around here had to move to find employment," said Victoria Barr, district manager for the FFO. "There were a lot of houses on the market. Housing prices became depressed. Several businesses closed in town."
That is now changing.
"Now we have six rigs operating, so things are starting to pick up again," Barr said.
Economic impact
In rural Farmington, the potential costs of implementing the original BLM methane rule caught the attention of those looking to dig the state out of its financial hole.
With one-third of the state's budget tied to an industry suffering from a supply glut and low commodity prices, New Mexico Gov. Susana Martinez (R) last month called a special legislative session to shore up funds. Unemployment has spiked to 6.6 percent, the second highest rate in the nation, behind Alaska, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Farmington's unemployment has at times surged to over 10 percent, BLS data show. During the gas boom, the city's joblessness rate dropped as low as 3 percent. The town's strong ties to energy are apparent — oil field services giants Halliburton Co., Weatherford International PLC and Baker Hughes Inc. all maintain Farmington storefronts.
At the end of the month, ConocoPhillips Co., the basin's largest operator and one of the region's top employers, will complete a $3 billion sale of its assets in the region to Hilcorp Energy Co. It's not clear how many jobs will be shed in the process, but speculation runs rampant through the region.
"Because New Mexico is so dependent on oil and gas, the industry's health is of paramount interest to us," said Carla Sonntag, president and founder of the New Mexico Business Coalition, which she runs from her Albuquerque home in the company of her husband, Larry; her dog, Molly; and a growing support staff.
During the CRA battle, Sonntag was a leading voice on the costs companies would bear if they were required to comply with the Obama administration's methane rule. She often quoted an estimate of up to $50,000 per wellhead to meet the rule's requirements.
That would shut in many of New Mexico's marginal wells, Sonntag said. Provisions designed to exempt wells for which implementation would not be economically feasible did little to quell her concerns (Energywire, March 13).
"When a government forces solutions on a business, they're rarely the right solutions," she said. "When government sets standards and allows business or operators to find a way to meet them, that's when the ingenuity kicks in."
The economics of the methane rule are a complicated calculus. Disputes on the regulation's value stem from disagreements over what is known as the "social cost of methane," or the harm of failing to regulate a powerful contributor to climate change.
President Obama's BLM cited a 2010 Government Accountability Office estimate that taxpayers lose up to $23 million annually from natural gas waste. Industry says that loss is more like $3.68 million, after taking into account currently low prices.
BLM calculated an implementation cost of $279 million per year, which it said could be an overestimate. Industry tabulated a $1.26 billion price tag for the rule.
But BLM under the previous administration touted an annual net benefit of at least $46 million, after taking into account at least $209 million per year in benefits from curbing methane leakage into the atmosphere.
Including climate benefits in its tally took BLM beyond the scope of its powers, industry asserted.
Sonntag has questioned New Mexico's gas producers' true impact on the methane hot spot. She points to evidence that the Fruitland coalbed outcrop has been offgassing for the last century.
"Known gas seeps include the Carbon Junction area where the Animas River crosses the Fruitland Formation," a 1999 BLM report says. "At this location, methane and hydrogen sulfide seeps were commonly recognized as early as the 1930s."
Since the 1920s, local residents have reported a "rotten egg" smell, which earned a section of the San Juan Basin's western rim the nickname "stink hill," according to the report.
Sonntag, who was born and bred in New Mexico, said she would back a methane rule written under the new administration's oversight. She is optimistic that Trump's energy-focused Interior will take into consideration the financial realities in her home state.
"New Mexico is just at the bottom of the barrel for everything," she said. "The poverty level here is very difficult for the families, and if we don't do something to preserve the integrity of the industry to produce in our state, I'm not sure how we're going to fund what it needs to fund."
Regulatory environment
From the perspective of FFO staff, companies in the San Juan Basin appeared ready to comply with the methane rule as it previously stood.
During a hearing to prepare for implementation of the rule, companies asked for due dates and clarification of the rule's requirements, said Donna Hummel, communications chief for BLM's New Mexico state office.
"It just seemed people appreciated that opportunity to hear each other and their questions, but also to have somebody saying, 'This is how we see this working,'" she said.
Before the Trump administration announced changes to the rule, the FFO was taking a flexible approach to implementation — so long as companies were fulfilling the spirit of the regulation, said Dave Mankiewicz, assistant manager of minerals for the field office.
"Companies know this rule is coming down, so they contact us to ask what they can do and what their time frame is," he said. "They ask what kind of equipment BLM will approve for leak detection and repair."
For example, Mankiewicz said, the office approved methane detection equipment ConocoPhillips purchased for about one-fifth the cost of $100,000 infrared viewing equipment industry has said the rule would require.
"A rule is a rule, and obviously companies will comply with whatever components are in full force and effect," Hummel said. "But there's also a lot of progress being made in spite of pauses."
The most notable progress has come from ConocoPhillips, which has been identified as the largest methane emitter in the nation. In 2014, the company slashed its leakage by 23 percent from 2013, U.S. EPA data showed (Energywire, Jan. 7, 2016). It achieved that reduction by identifying more than 2,000 "high-bleed" pneumatic devices on its New Mexico wells and replacing nearly all of them.
"It's pretty widely accepted that they made some big strides there," said Schreiber, whose ranch is populated by ConocoPhillips wells. "And they changed operations in the field."
A webpage devoted to ConocoPhillips' methane work attributes the company's status as the top emitter to its position as one of the country's largest producers of natural gas, which is mainly composed of methane.
But a Center for American Progress report — linked to on ConocoPhillips' website — notes that although the company had the highest methane emissions from onshore oil and gas production in 2014, it was only the sixth-largest gas producer that year.
"That said, the company's 2014 performance is a significant improvement from 2013," CAP wrote. "Between 2013 and 2014, ConocoPhillips reduced its methane emissions from the onshore oil and gas production sector by 40 percent."
What becomes of that progress after ConocoPhillips sells its San Juan Basin wells to Hilcorp remains to be seen.
"My impression of Hilcorp is they are environmentally sensitive, but we don't know yet," Mankiewicz said.
Hilcorp said it is reviewing best practices for operations in the basin once its takeover is complete.
The company expects to "continue to operate the assets in a manner that is respectful of our neighbors and the environment," a Hilcorp spokesman wrote in an email.
Open Space Pilot Project
Despite ConocoPhillips' progress on methane, Schreiber isn't ready to sing the company's praises.
"Conoco's still the biggest polluter," he says. "I think of it in terms of going outside and seeing a garden hose pouring water into the street. If you turn off the hose, you made a huge step in reducing your water waste, but your whole house is still leaking in different places — under the floor, the bathtub — or when you turn on the water, you get the wrong kind. ConocoPhillips has not gotten their overalls on and climbed under the house with a wrench and fixed the other stuff.
"They did the easy thing. They turned that garden hose off."
The Schreibers' fight on methane is rooted in a partnership they struck nearly a decade ago with ConocoPhillips and BLM to reduce the surface impacts of drilling on their ranch.
Through the Open Space Pilot Project (OSPP), Don and Jane got ConocoPhillips to "twin" some of its wells, or place more than one well on a pad. In doing so, the company reduces the number of roads that cut through the Schreibers' property and avoids unnecessary fragmentation to the habitat of wildlife that roams the land.
At one well site on the ranch, Don Schreiber points to a spiral of tire tracks — remnants of the truck traffic that appears intermittently to check up on production.
"These tracks pond water so that the water is then stuck or impounded on this location and unavailable for the natural landscape to use," he says. "You keep doing this, and then you're keeping water for 60 years, in some cases, from the natural landscape where it would have allowed the grass to grow.
"Improving the rangeland is really our job. Politics then sort of inserts itself."
But with staff turnover at ConocoPhillips and BLM, it's unclear where the OSPP stands. Schreiber says he currently has no contact with the company or with regulators.
The company said in correspondence with E&E News that it has not participated in the OSPP in several years.
When ConocoPhillips transfers the wells on Devil's Spring Ranch to Hilcorp, Schreiber may need to broker a new deal to protect his land. It's uncertain whether BLM should play some role in that negotiation.
"Since I've been here, we really haven't worked on it," said Barr, who arrived at the FFO a little over two years ago.
A 2003 resource management plan for the Farmington area contains some of the same standards for development as the OSPP, such as twinning wells, she said. A division of the FFO also takes care of some of the pilot project's requirements, said natural resource specialist Jeff Tafoya.
"All the reclamation efforts, the water harvesting, the proper road construction — that's basically what our surface shop does every day for every project," he said.
For Schreiber, dwindling partnership and communication with BLM have only heightened his concerns that industry is gaining freer rein in the San Juan Basin.
"I will conjecture that BLM is loath to formally recognize OSPP out of fear that other landowners would seek those standards, bringing industry disfavor," he says.
Surveying his land, Schreiber tallies his defeats.
"While we get credited for a lot of success, most of what we got is failure on our part to get things changed," he says. "That tank needs to be raised. Those well locations need to be properly graded so as not to trap water. Roads need to be built to get people in safely.
"All those things we tried to get accomplished and failed. I think we have a lot more failures to our credit than we do successes."
Staying silent on methane won't be among those failures, Schreiber pledges.
He returns to Washington next week.
https://www.eenews.net/stories/1060056895
-
Corporations Support a Carbon Tax? A Paradox That Will Lower Emissions
Jul 5, 2017 | The Hill
By Josiah Neeley
Why would some of the world’s largest oil companies support a carbon tax? The very question sounds odd, almost like a riddle, akin to “Why does the pope support Martin Luther?” or “Why does the Communist Party support capitalism?”
Yet as often happens, the seemingly paradoxical has become reality. Recently, oil giants ExxonMobil, BP, Royal Dutch Shell and Total S.A. announced their support for a carbon tax plan put forward by the Climate Leadership Council. The CLC is one of a growing number of right-of-center groups that advocates for some form of carbon tax.
To make sense of all this, we have to remember that politics is about trade-offs. As Thomas Sowell wisely noted, the important question to ask when evaluating whether a policy proposal is good is “compared to what?” Nobody likes paying taxes, but compared to the likely alternatives, a properly structured carbon tax can have features that even an oil company could love.
To begin with, a carbon tax is better than regulation. For the past decade, regulatory restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency have loomed ominously over the oil and gas industry. And while the Trump administration has put some of those proposed restrictions on hold and is likely to roll back others, many companies still view some form of restriction on greenhouse-gas emissions ultimately to be inevitable. In fact, some energy companies already include an internal carbon price in planning and investment decisions.
If you want to lower greenhouse-gas emissions, a carbon tax is a more efficient and effective way to do it than top-down regulation. Carbon pricing allows companies and individuals to choose for themselves how best to reduce emissions, rather than having bureaucrats guess how best to do it and then order them to comply.
Carbon taxes are also better than litigation. A number of environmentalist groups and liberal attorneys general have threatened lawsuits against oil companies based on the harm caused by greenhouse emissions. Whatever the merits of these suits, their mere existence could be a major headache for the companies involved. If preemption of EPA regulation and litigation are included as part of a carbon tax deal, oil majors might find that an attractive trade.
Finally, a carbon tax is a better way to pay for broader tax reform than the chief alternative, a border-adjustment tax (BAT), which would effectively would impose a tariff on imports by making it impossible for companies to deduct their costs. This would make trade more costly, a big negative for companies that deal in a worldwide market like energy. A BAT also functions sort of like a value-added tax (VAT), which traditionally has aroused the hostility of conservatives.
Current proposals for corporate tax reform have included a BAT as a way to offset the lost revenue from lowered tax rates. Business groups and many conservatives understandably like the idea of lower tax rates, but find the BAT idea less appealing. In fact, a broad coalition has been campaigning vigorously against the idea, and some have even suggested that a carbon tax would be preferable to a BAT as part of a tax reform deal.
Once these factors are considered, the fact that oil companies support a carbon tax is much less counterintuitive. The good news is that the reasons an oil company might prefer a carbon tax to the available alternatives are all also reasons why it would be good for America as a whole. A properly structured carbon tax could reduce emissions at the lowest cost, provide regulatory certainty, and enable tax reform that would grow the economy while protecting the environment.
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/energy-environment/340655-corporations-support-a-carbon-tax-a-paradox-that-will
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