Preview Newsletter
ACC AM 7/26
-
EPA Proposes Rule to Permit Early Labeling of Composite Wood Products, Fix "Born-On Date" Problem
Jul 25, 2017 | The National Law Review
By Michael J. Sullivan and Christa E. Burger
Earlier this month the EPA proposed a direct final rule that would amend its Formaldehyde Emission Standards for Composite Wood Products to permit manufacturers to voluntarily label products subject to the standards as Toxic Substances Control Act (“TSCA”) Title VI compliant “as soon as compliance can be achieved.” -
Sperm Counts of Western Men Plummeting, Analysis Finds
Jul 25, 2017 | CNN
By Susan Scutti
Sperm counts of men in North America, Europe, Australia and New Zealand are plunging, according to a new analysis published Tuesday. -
Sperm Concentration Has Declined 50 Percent in 40 Years in Three Continents
Jul 25, 2017 | The Washington Post
By Ariana Eunjung Cha
The quality of sperm from men in North America, Europe and Australia has declined dramatically over the past 40 years, with a 52.4 percent drop in sperm concentration, according to a study published Tuesday. -
Your Sperm Is in Trouble
Jul 25, 2017 | The Washington Post
By Robert Gebelhoff
For years, researchers have warned that the male sperm count has been in a substantial decline. And for years, skeptics have waved those researchers away as alarmists. -
Democrats Seek Another Bipartisan Push on Toxics to Ban Pesticide
Jul 26, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tiffany Stecker
Democratic lawmakers are hoping to re-establish last year's bipartisan push in Congress for chemical oversight reform to ban a common agricultural insecticide, as action to restrict the bug killer stalls in the Trump administration's EPA. -
Traces of Controversial Herbicide Are Found in Ben & Jerry’s Ice Cream
Jul 25, 2017 | The New York Times
By Stephanie Strom
A growing number of foods commonly found in kitchens across America have tested positive for glyphosate, the herbicide that is the main ingredient in the popular consumer pesticide Roundup, which is widely used in agriculture. -
Chemical Solvent's Risks Drive Small Firms to Innovate
Jul 26, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sylvia Carignan
New concerns about the potential health effects of a common chemical solvent are spurring monitoring innovations—and in the process letting small environmental consulting firms compete with industry giants. -
Sorry, the Dust in Your Home Might Be Making You Pack on the Pounds
Jul 25, 2017 | Metro US
By Meagan Morris
Dusting your house likely ranks at number 900 on your list of favorite hobbies, but a new study by researchers at the American Chemical Society might change that rank — and fast, because it suggests that weight gain is directly linked to dust. -
(ACC Mentioned) Appalachian States Look Past Coal, Ask Trump to Aid Natural Gas
Jul 26, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ari Natter
Having lost tens of thousands of coal mining jobs to the rise in natural gas, several states have decided if you can't beat them, join them. -
America's Biggest Oil Port Looks to Be Hub for Shale Exports
Jul 26, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Hailey Waller and Sheela Tobben
The biggest U.S. oil-import hub wants to grab a piece of surging North American crude exports. -
Energy Restrictions Pass House as Part of New Sanctions Bill
Jul 26, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Brian Dabbs
U.S. companies may face new restrictions on participating in global energy projects with Russian investment as part of the passage of a broad sanctions package in the House July 25. -
(ACC Mentioned) State Challenges Delay of Industry Safety Rule
Jul 26, 2017 | Cascadia Weekly
By Tim Johnson
The state Attorney General asks a federal court to review the Trump Administration’s two-year delay of the Chemical Disaster Rule, which updates safety requirements for large industrial facilities that handle hazardous chemicals. The action was filed this week in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. -
(ACC Mentioned) 11 States Sue EPA Over Delay of Chemical Safety Rules
Jul 26, 2017 | EcoWatch
By Andrea Germanos
Eleven states filed suit against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and its chief, Scott Pruitt, in federal court on Monday over the agency's decision to postpone implementation of a rule aimed at lessening the risk of a chemical plant disaster such as the deadly one that rocked West, Texas in 2013. -
Congress Gives DHS Cyber Shakeup Second Try
Jul 26, 2017 | E&E Daily
By Blake Sobczak
House lawmakers are making another attempt to fix the Department of Homeland Security's perceived cybersecurity branding problems. -
Congress Must Stop the Assault on Taxpayer-Friendly Freight Railroads
Jul 25, 2017 | The Hill - Pundits Blog
By David Williams
If Congress and the Trump administration are going to make good on a sweeping legislative package to rehabilitate public U.S. infrastructure, namely the roads we use, taxpayers should hope lawmakers maximize private investment and do not exacerbate matters by over-regulating private infrastructure. -
Senator Backed by Rail Companies Introduces New Bill That Would De-Regulate Rail Industry
Jul 25, 2017 | Desmog
By Justin Mikulka
A new bill by one of the rail industry’s favorite senators looks to change how the industry is regulated to allow “market forces to improve rail safety.” -
California Regulators Next Up With Cap and Trade Bill Signed
Jul 26, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Carolyn Whetzel
California regulators now need to set new carbon dioxide emissions limits for the coming years after Gov. Jerry Brown (D) signed into law legislation renewing the state's greenhouse gas emissions cap-and-trade program another 10 years. -
How California Plans to Go Far Beyond Any Other State on Climate
Jul 26, 2017 | The New York Times
By Brad Plumer
Over the past decade, California has passed a sweeping set of climate laws to test a contentious theory: that it’s possible to cut greenhouse gas emissions far beyond what any other state has done and still enjoy robust economic growth.
Industry and Association News - There are no clips to report at this time.
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
-
EPA Proposes Rule to Permit Early Labeling of Composite Wood Products, Fix "Born-On Date" Problem
Jul 25, 2017 | The National Law Review
By Michael J. Sullivan and Christa E. Burger
Earlier this month the EPA proposed a direct final rule that would amend its Formaldehyde Emission Standards for Composite Wood Products to permit manufacturers to voluntarily label products subject to the standards as Toxic Substances Control Act (“TSCA”) Title VI compliant “as soon as compliance can be achieved.”
This long-awaiting amendment fixes the “born-on date” problem in the original rule, which prohibited products from being labeled prior to the rule’s effective date of December 12, 2017. (As mentioned in a prior alert, EPA has undertaken a formal rulemaking process to extend the rule’s effective date to March 22, 2018.) Because TSCA defines the date of manufacturer as the date of import for imported products, the “born-on date” problem was particularly concerning for importers and oversees manufacturers whose products could be found out of compliance if they arrived in port unlabeled on the effective date, even though they were made and shipped prior to the effective date.
If no negative comments are received, then the labeling relief in the direct final rule will take effect without further action tomorrow, July 26, 2017. In case any negative comments are received, EPA has also published an identical proposed rule under the formal rulemaking process, which will take longer to implement. So far, one comment has been received in support of the proposed rule and no comments have been received on the direct final rule.
https://www.natlawreview.com/article/epa-proposes-rule-to-permit-early-labeling-composite-wood-products-fix-born-date
-
Sperm Counts of Western Men Plummeting, Analysis Finds
Jul 25, 2017 | CNN
By Susan Scutti
Sperm counts of men in North America, Europe, Australia and New Zealand are plunging, according to a new analysis published Tuesday.
Among these men there has been a 52% decline in sperm concentration and a 59% decline in total sperm count over a nearly 40-year period ending in 2011, the analysis, published in the journal Human Reproduction Update, said.
Scientists determine sperm count by looking at a sample of ejaculate under a microscope. For sperm concentration, they measure how many millions of sperm there are in each milliliter of fluid. Sperm count, then, is sperm concentration multiplied by the total volume of an ejaculate.
Researchers led by Dr. Hagai Levine of Hebrew University of Jerusalem examined thousands of studies and then conducted a meta-analysis of 185 studies. These included 42,935 male participants who provided semen samples between 1973 and 2011. The chosen studies were well distributed over the nearly 40 years of the study period and among 50 different countries. The analysis included information on fertility status, age, ejaculation abstinence time, semen collection method, sperm count method and geographic location at the level of continent.
Based on their analysis, the international team of researchers from Brazil, Denmark, Israel, Spain and the United States reported a decline in sperm concentration of 1.4% per year with an overall drop of 52.4% during the entire study period for men living in industrialized, Western countries. Meanwhile, total sperm count among the same group plunged 1.6% per year and 59.3% overall. By comparison, the researchers found no significant declines in the sperm counts and sperm concentrations of men living in South America, Asia and Africa.
"The extent of the decline is a heartache," said Levine. "It's hard to believe -- it's hard to believe for me."
The high proportion of men in Western countries with sperm concentrations below 40 million/ml is "particularly concerning," wrote Levine and his co-researchers, because evidence indicates that a sperm concentration below this threshold is associated with a "decreased monthly probability of conception."
Past studies on sperm quality
Levine noted that his study follows in the footsteps "a seminal paper published in 1992" known as the Carlsen study. In that meta-analysis of 61 studies worldwide, researchers led by Elisabeth Carlsen, a Danish reproductive biologist, found a trend toward decreasing sperm count and volume of seminal fluid over a 50-year period ending in 1991.
Many people did not accept the results of the study, said Levine, "it was quite controversial whether or not there is a decline." However, Levine noted, "there were serious limitations to the [Carlsen] study." For example, a common criticism of the Carlsen group is that it included one overly large study -- it contributed 30% of the total participants, thus heavily influenced the results. By comparison, the largest of the studies examined by Levine's group included only 5% of all participants.
Since 1992, other researchers conducted analyses to understand whether sperm counts have declined, yet the results were mixed.
"Now we have a pretty solid answer," said Levine, who said his own study performed a meta-regression, "a more conservative, sophisticated analysis," one that accounts for factors that might influence the results.
Though Levine emphasized that his analysis did not study the cause of declines, he speculated the reason may be "we are exposed to many chemicals we've never been exposed to before."
Previous studies, including his own, show that exposure in utero to endocrine disrupting chemicals can harm male reproductive system development and fertility potential. Commonly used chemicals, including pesticides, lead and fire retardants, can increase or decrease production of certain hormones within our bodies and so are said to disrupt our endocrine, or hormone-making, system.
Sonya Lunder, a senior analyst at the nonprofit advocacy group Environmental Working Group, noted that sperm is manufactured daily by men's bodies. Recent exposures to environmental chemicals would have an effect on sperm, which serves as a good indicator of contamination, while also serving as a good biomarker of men's health.
Lunder cites the work of Russ Hauser, a professor of reproductive physiology at Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, who suggests that exposure to endocrine-disrupting chemicalsmay be associated with poorer sperm quality among men and worse reproductive outcomes among women.
Still, Lunder noted, "there's not one route to reduction in sperm quality and sperm count for men. By all accounts, people assume there are multiple factors at work."
More explanations: obesity, climate change
Michael Dourson, a professor in the Risk Science Center at the University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, said in an email that "the overall work appears to be solid with numerous safeguards for assuring systematic review and data analysis." Dourson, who was not involved in the research, added, "the observed trends appear to be real, and not based on chance findings."
Yet, Dourson noted that he wondered about the "functional significance of the findings." The authors wrote that "poor sperm count is associated with overall morbidity and mortality," yet Dourson noted that "longevity is increasing" in Western countries so "these two observations do not appear to match."
"I suspect that obesity may have something to do with these trends, but measures of obesity, such as BMI (body mass-index) were not analyzed," said Dourson, who was recently nominated to head the US Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention. "Overall, however, a request for funding for further exploration seems well founded."
Dr. Harry Fisch, a clinical professor of urology at Weill Cornell Medicine, said the results of this study are likely to be "real." Fisch, who has also researched this topic -- though he was not involved in the current analysis -- noted that one issue with all studies is the fact that sperm counting methodologies have not been standardized across the globe or even within most countries.
Another very important consideration is how geography influences sperm count. "Even within the US, different states have different counts," said Fisch, though all states fall within the range of normal. Fisch observed that the new analysis did not delve into differences among countries.
The only environmental factor that's "not controversial" and "known to influence sperm counts is temperature change," said Fisch, who noted that sperm counts are known to vary by season and by climate. "I think global warming, not phthalates, is responsible" for the declining rates seen here, he said. Phthalates, found in everything from flooring to personal care products, are one type of endocrine disrupting chemical.
Kathryn St. John, senior director of strategic communications for the American Chemistry Council, noted this meta-analysis, though a systematic review, is a study of other studies.
"The original studies did not account for fundamental and important information about lifestyles and health status of participants, so such factors cannot be accounted for in the overall results," said St. John, who noted that sperm count is just one measure of male health. "As to the overall state of men's health, it should be noted that life expectancy for men in the US has increased by 25 years over the past 100," St. John said.
But each scientist and representative agreed: Questions around sperm quality warrant continued research.
"The impact of the modern environment on health of populations and individuals is clearly huge, but remains largely unknown," said Levine. "Sperm count has previously been plausibly associated with environmental and lifestyle influences, including prenatal chemical exposure, adult pesticide exposure, smoking, stress and obesity. Every man can reduce exposure to chemicals, avoid smoking, keep balanced diet and weight and reduce stress."
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/07/25/health/sperm-counts-declining-study/index.html
-
Sperm Concentration Has Declined 50 Percent in 40 Years in Three Continents
Jul 25, 2017 | The Washington Post
By Ariana Eunjung Cha
The quality of sperm from men in North America, Europe and Australia has declined dramatically over the past 40 years, with a 52.4 percent drop in sperm concentration, according to a study published Tuesday.
The research — the largest and most comprehensive look at the topic, involving data from 185 studies and 42,000 men around the world between 1973 and 2011 — appears to confirm fears that male reproductive health may be declining.
The state of male fertility has been one of the most hotly debated subjects in medical science in recent years. While a number of previous studies found that sperm counts and quality have been falling, some dismissed or criticized the studies over factors such as the age of the men included, the size of the study, bias in counting systems or other aspects of the methodologies.
Some of the other concerns are outlined in an analysis published by the American Society of Andrology, which focuses on the male reproductive system. The skepticism also has to do with the difficulty of comparing records from a fertility center in the 1970s with one from today and with the fact a single man's sperm count may fluctuate during his life span due to his weight, use of alcohol and many other factors.
However, Shanna H. Swan, one of the authors of the new study published in the Human Reproduction Update, said that the new meta-analysis is so broad and comprehensive, involving all the relevant research published in English, that she hoped it would put some of the uncertainty to rest. Then the scientific community could move forward into putting its resources into figuring out the why of what is going on, she said.
“It shows the decline is strong and that the decline is continuing,” Swan said in an interview.
The analysis found drops only for men in Europe, North America and Australia and not for those in South America, Asia and Africa. Swan explained that this could mean that there's something specific to certain cultures or regions that affects sperm, but that it's also possible that there just isn't enough data yet to draw firm conclusions about the rest of the world. There have been far fewer sperm studies conducted in non-Western countries. (Some of the most recent ones have also noted a decline in aspects of sperm quality. A study published earlier this year about China's Hunan province found that 56 percent of sperm donations met the criteria for health in 2001 vs. only 18 percent in 2015.)
The most important data points in the new study involved sperm concentrations for what are known as “unselected” men who haven't yet proven they are fertile. These are men in the studies who are on the younger side and are not yet fathers or do not have partners who are pregnant. Researchers estimated that these men had an average sperm concentration of 99 million per milliliter in 1973 but that that had dropped to an average 47 million per milliliter in 2011.
That is a disturbing number given that, according to World Health Organization criteria, men with a sperm concentration of less than 40 million are considered to have an impaired chance of conceiving and those with a sperm concentration of less than 15 million per milliliter are unlikely to be able to have children.
These numbers mean “surprisingly higher proportions of men are falling into the infertile and sub fertile categories,” Swan said.
There are numerous theories about what may be happening to sperm. Many scientists say the most sensitive period may be during the first trimester, when the developing fetus's reproductive system may be impacted by a mother smoking, stress she experienced or food she ate. Exposure to chemicals that can change hormone levels, known as endocrine disrupters, are among the issues being studied.
Over the life span, men are also exposed to a number of other things that could potentially influence sperm concentration: pesticides, lead, X-rays, stress and countless other factors.
The changes in the womb can cause permanent damage, Swan explained, while the adult exposures are mostly reversible.
The issue of sperm isn’t just about having babies.
It has larger implications for men's health. Poor sperm health has been linked to cardiovascular issues, obesity, cancer and more generally to higher rates of hospitalization and death. While men’s life expectancy is increasing overall thanks to advances in medical care, nutrition and sanitation, it isn’t unthinkable that that could one day reverse.
“Having a low sperm count is a signal,” Swan said, “that there’s something wrong in men’s health overall.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2017/07/25/sperm-concentration-has-declined-50-percent-in-40-years/?utm_term=.b50c3a53d7b5
-
Jul 25, 2017 | The Washington Post
By Robert Gebelhoff
For years, researchers have warned that the male sperm count has been in a substantial decline. And for years, skeptics have waved those researchers away as alarmists.
But a new study published Tuesday in the journal Human Reproduction Update shows that it’s finally time to take the problem seriously. The study — the largest meta-analysis ever done on the issue to date — examined data from 185 studies between 1973 and 2011, covering nearly 43,000 men. The results are stunning: During that period, the concentration of sperm per milliliter of semen among men from North America, Europe, Australia and New Zealand was cut in half. Total sperm count fell by almost 60 percent.
This should be alarming for several reasons: First, the study suggests that there is no indication the trend is leveling off, so the portion of men with subfertility or infertility will likely increase, meaning more couples will have trouble conceiving. But more pressing, lower sperm counts predict shorter life expectancy and are associated with cancer and disorders of sexual development.
Skeptics have long considered the trend of falling sperm counts a myth, often arguing that previous research is based on skewed data samples because men are more likely to get their sperm examined if they already fear they are infertile. This new study addresses that critique, as it looks primarily at young men who had never conceived and had no knowledge of their fertility status.
Shanna H. Swan, a professor at Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai and co-author of the study, started off as one of those skeptics when she first started studying the issue in the late 1990s. Back then, she was tasked with replicating a shocking 1992 study published in the British Medical Journal — the first to claim that sperm count has been in peril over the past few decades.
“I went into that really unconvinced,” Swan said. “I looked at every factor raised: I looked at the sperm count method; I looked at all kinds of men; I looked at smoking rates. By putting them into the model, I tried to make [the trend] go away … After 25 years of trying to do that, I haven’t been able to.”
What Swan’s new paper doesn’t tell us is why this trend is happening. Public health advocates fear that chemicals such as those in pesticides, flame retardants, cosmetics and plastics are to blame. These substances, known as “endocrine disruptors” because they can interfere with the body’s hormone systems, are ubiquitous — especially in developed countries.
[It’s time we finally offer over-the-counter birth control pills]
China has given observers an excellent natural experiment, given its rapid development over the past two decades. During that time, sperm quality among Chinese men quickly deteriorated, according to a study that looked at more than 30,000 sperm donors in the Hunan Province. In 2001, more than half of those men gave sperm that were healthy enough for donation. By 2015, that rate declined to 18 percent. The study’s authors speculated that environmental pollution could be to blame.
But the causal relationship between these chemicals and fertility has never been conclusively established. We know that exposure to these chemicals can cause temporary harm when exposed in large doses to adult men. The bigger, unanswered question is whether exposing fetuses to these chemicals during a mother’s pregnancy can cause lasting damage to male reproductive systems later in life. This is difficult to prove, especially since there’s no way to conduct randomized studies on pregnant mothers.
We do already have a massive literature demonstrating how these chemicals can severely disrupt reproductive organs, especially among animals. Herbicides have disrupted sexual development among male frogs and turned them into females. And the insecticide DDT, now banned in many nations, has caused alligators to be born with smaller genitalia and eggshell thinning among ospreys.
Establishing such causality in humans, however, will require more research — as well as time and scientific resources. Given the implications of those questions, policymakers and research institutions should support that science.
Declining sperm count is a public health issue that will affect everyone, especially future generations. With this new evidence, it cannot be ignored any longer.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/in-theory/wp/2017/07/25/your-sperm-is-in-trouble/?utm_term=.31ae98b4211d
-
Democrats Seek Another Bipartisan Push on Toxics to Ban Pesticide
Jul 26, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tiffany Stecker
Democratic lawmakers are hoping to re-establish last year's bipartisan push in Congress for chemical oversight reform to ban a common agricultural insecticide, as action to restrict the bug killer stalls in the Trump administration's EPA.
Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.) announced July 25 he will introduce a bill (S.1624) to end all uses of chlorpyrifos on food crops, and Rep. Nydia Velazquez (D-N.Y.) said she will present similar legislation in the House. Chlorpyrifos is widely used on fruits, vegetables, and other crops and was first manufactured by Dow Agrosciences.
Environmentalists have petitioned the Environmental Protection Agency to ban the pesticide for decades, saying it can cause cognitive delays in children.
The bill will be nearly impossible to pass in a Republican-controlled Congress and White House, but Udall said he plans to enlist support from Republicans with whom he worked on last year's reforms of the Toxic Substances Control Act.
“The scientific evidence is so strong here that I think it's going to be compelling in terms of people joining,” Udall said at a news conference to roll out the bill.
Velazquez said the message of protecting children would resonate among Republican districts.
“Rural America, they too breathe the same air, they too drink the same water,” she said at the news conference.
Pruitt Denies Petition
The move is in response to EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt's March 29 decision to deny a petition to prohibit the chemical on crops, reversing the Obama administration's proposal to revoke the legal tolerances of allowable chlorpyrifos on food. The EPA plans to make a decision on how to regulate chlorpyrifos in 2022, when the agency is required to review the chemical's risks to health and the environment.
Republican Sens. James Inhofe (Okla.) and John Barrasso (Wyo.), who worked on TSCA reform with Udall last year, were not immediately available to comment.
On the House side, Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill.) said he sees issues such as oversight over cosmetics chemicals, spent nuclear fuel, brownfields and safe drinking water as more likely candidates for bipartisanship than a ban on a widely use pest control substance.
The EPA's decision on chlorpyrifos, Shimkus told Bloomberg BNA, was a reflection of the agency's analysis of the available science.
“If you really want a bill to become a law, you have to negotiate in good faith,” he said.
Dow said in a statement that chlorpyrifos has been rigorously assessed for safety by regulators.
“Authorized uses of chlorpyrifos products, when used as directed, offer wide margins of protection for human health and safety,” spokesman David Sousa said.
Organophosphates Off the Market
Chlorpyrifos was first registered for use as a pesticide in 1967. It works by suppressing an essential enzyme for nerve function, leading to an overstimulation of the nervous system. This kills insects but can also lead to convulsions, headaches, nausea, or sometimes death in humans that are directly exposed. At certain levels of exposure over time, studies show that chlorpyrifos is linked to low IQ and cognitive disorders in children.
The bill also seeks to clamp down on the broader class of organophosphate pesticides, which include chlorpyrifos and work via a similar biochemical cascade. The legislation directs the EPA to enter into an agreement with the National Research Council to conduct a risk assessment on the cumulative and aggregate health effects of organophosphates on children and fetuses by October 2019.
“There's no reason why the organophosphate family of pesticides should stay on the market,” Philip Landrigan, a pediatrician from Mt. Sinai Hospital who chaired a National Academy of Sciences panel on pesticide effects on children.
Pruitt told Udall and other senators at an appropriations hearing June 27 that the Obama EPA's scientific justification for the proposal for a ban was “questionable.” He told the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Interior, Environment, and Related Agencies that he decided to decline the petition after speaking with officials at the U.S. Department of Agriculture who expressed concerns over the scientific rigor behind the epidemiological studies that show a link between chlorpyrifos and brain development.
The EPA based part of its justification for restrictions on a long-term epidemiological study from Columbia University that measured the level of the chemical in the umbilical cords of pregnant women and maternal blood.
Columbia's Mailman School of Public Health refused to make the study's data public, drawing criticism from Dow and the industry that the EPA was making an important decision based on undisclosed data.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=117504200&vname=dennotallissues&fn=117504200&jd=117504200
-
Traces of Controversial Herbicide Are Found in Ben & Jerry’s Ice Cream
Jul 25, 2017 | The New York Times
By Stephanie Strom
A growing number of foods commonly found in kitchens across America have tested positive for glyphosate, the herbicide that is the main ingredient in the popular consumer pesticide Roundup, which is widely used in agriculture. But few brands on that list are as startling as the latest: Ben & Jerry’s, the Vermont ice cream company known for its family-friendly image and environmental advocacy.
The Organic Consumers Association announced Tuesday that it found traces of glyphosate in 10 of 11 samples of the company’s ice creams — although at levels far below the ceiling set by the Environmental Protection Agency.
Rob Michalak, global director of social mission at Ben & Jerry’s, said the company was working to ensure that all the ingredients in its supply chain come from sources that do not include genetically modified organisms, known as G.M.O.s. None of its plant-based ingredients, for instance, come from a genetically engineered crop like corn or soy, where glyphosate is used in production. The company is also trying to figure out a cost-effective way for the dairy farms that supply its milk to use non-G.M.O. feed.
“We’re working to transition away from G.M.O., as far away as we can get,” Mr. Michalak said. “But then these tests come along, and we need to better understand where the glyphosate they’re finding is coming from. Maybe it’s from something that’s not even in our supply chain, and so we’re missing it.”
Consumer groups around the country, including the Organic Consumers Association, have begun raising awareness of glyphosate in food, because some studies have linked it to a variety of diseases. The International Agency for Research on Cancer, a unit of the World Health Organization, declared this year that it “probably” could cause some cancers. The agency reviewed scientific studies involving people, laboratory animals and cells to assess whether glyphosate might cause cancer.Continue reading the main storyRELATED COVERAGEKey Element of Monsanto Weed Killer Not a Carcinogen, European Agency SaysMARCH 15, 2017Monsanto Weed Killer Roundup Faces New Doubts on Safety in Unsealed DocumentsMARCH 14, 2017Quaker Oats’ 100% Natural Claim Questioned in Lawsuit MAY 1, 2016RECENT COMMENTSMiami's Dr. Bob 5 minutes ago
Factory food, factory food, everywherebut is any safe to eat?Crossing Overhead 53 minutes ago
MmmmmDelicious roundup flavored ice cream......I love new flavors.The Worm Is Turning 1 hour ago
The bottom line here is the bottom line. It is all about big ag business profits from selling these 'tools' to the farmers. It is very...SEE ALL COMMENTS WRITE A COMMENT
Monsanto and other companies that make products containing glyphosate hotly dispute those studies and say there is no reason for concern. Government and other regulators tend to agree that very low levels are not harmful to humans.
Ronnie Cummins, a founder and the international director of the Organic Consumers Association, said the amount found in Ben & Jerry’s ice cream would not violate any regulations. “Not everyone agrees with the acceptable levels governments have set,” Mr. Cummins said. “And, anyway, would you want to be eating this stuff at all?”
It’s far from clear. Divergent findings over glyphosate’s impact on health have divided governments, scientists, regulators and even the World Health Organization, with its International Agency for Research on Cancer linking it to cancer and another unit of the organization insisting on its safety.
Here is what we know:
• The levels of glyphosate found in Ben & Jerry’s ice creams are, indeed, small, according to government regulators and the scientist who did the testing.
Among the flavors tested, Ben & Jerry’s Chocolate Fudge Brownie showed the highest levels of glyphosate, with 1.74 parts per billion, and glyphosate’s byproduct aminomethylphosphonic acid registering 0.91 parts per billion.
Such amounts might seem negligible. John Fagan, the chief executive of the Health Research Institute Laboratories, which did the testing for the Organic Consumers Association, calculated that a 75-pound child would have to consume 145,000 eight-ounce servings a day of Ben & Jerry’s Chocolate Fudge Brownie ice cream to hit the limit set by the Environmental Protection Agency, the government body charged with setting a ceiling on the amount of glyphosate allowed in food.
An adult would have to eat 290,000 servings to hit the agency’s cutoff, Dr. Fagan said.
Even European regulatory limits for glyphosate consumption, which are almost six times lower than limits in the United States, find that a child would have to eat 25,000 servings a day and an adult 50,000 for the herbicide to pose a threat.
“Based on these government thresholds, the levels found in Ben & Jerry’s Chocolate Fudge Brownie ice cream would seem totally irrelevant,” he said.
• But recent research suggests that the glyphosate levels still might be significant. In research published this year in Scientific Reports, a journal from the publishers of Nature, rats that consumed very low doses of glyphosate each day showed early signs of fatty liver disease within three months, which worsened over time.
In that study, conducted by a group of scientists at King’s College London and led by Michael Antoniou, a molecular biologist, the rats consumed in a day an amount of glyphosate equivalent to a child’s portion of Ben & Jerry’s Chocolate Fudge Brownie ice cream, Dr. Fagan said.
Monsanto, the largest seller of products containing glyphosate, labeled the research “bad science” and the rehashing of a study done five years earlier. Some scientists criticized the more recent study for failing to disclose the age of the rats, which could affect outcomes, and for using a breed prone to tumors.
“There were a number of criticisms of that study that were absolutely not true,” said David Schubert, a professor at the Salk Institute for Biological Studies who works on neurodegenerative diseases. “But the industry does what it can to make the science very confusing to a layperson.”PhotoThe main ingredient in the pesticide Roundup, which is widely used in agriculture, is the herbicide glyphosate.CreditReed Saxon/Associated Press.
Dr. Schubert pointed to a study in the journal Cell Chemical Biology that came out shortly after the one led by Dr. Antoniou, which found that when a body processes glyphosate, one of the herbicide’s byproducts interfered with the body’s ability to break down fatty acids. The accumulation of fatty acids is a signature of fatty liver disease.
“It basically confirms what Antoniou showed in his research,” Dr. Schubert said.
• One of the consumer groups pointing at Ben & Jerry’s may have a larger motive.Newsletter Sign UpContinue reading the main storyCooking
The Organic Consumers Association has been working with an organization called Regeneration Vermont to persuade Ben & Jerry’s to go organic. Federal regulations governing organic agriculture prohibit the use of glyphosate.
To make its point, the association also had the Health Research Institute test four organic brands of vanilla ice cream — Alden’s, Three Twins, Julie’s and the Whole Foods Market brand 365. The lab found 0.25 to 0.5 parts per billion of glyphosate’s byproduct, aminomethylphosphonic acid, in the 365 sample, but no detectable traces of glyphosate or its byproduct in the other samples.
“If they went organic, they wouldn’t have this problem,” said Will Allen, a founder of Regeneration Vermont and an organic farmer who has met with Ben & Jerry’s executives.
Other groups testing for glyphosate have found it in Quaker Oats, Cheerios, Ritz Crackers and Stacy’s Simply Naked Pita Chips, among a range of other products. The companies behind those products have all noted that the glyphosate amounts fell well below regulatory limits.
Many of those products have few or no ingredients derived from genetically engineered crops like corn, soy and sugar beets, which are meant to withstand glyphosate. Some of those products have nonetheless tested for glyphosate registered at much higher levels than those found in Ben & Jerry’s ice creams.
Both Mr. Cummins, of the Organic Consumers Association, and Mr. Michalak, of Ben & Jerry’s, said the glyphosate found in Ben & Jerry’s probably comes from add-ins like peanut butter and cookie dough. Such products contain ingredients like wheat, oats and peanuts that are often sprayed with the herbicide to dry them out.
• Regardless, this may be only the beginning for consumer brands, which will face increasing scrutiny over glyphosate.PhotoRonnie Cummins, a founder of the Organic Consumers Association, said the amount of glyphosate found in Ben & Jerry’s ice cream would not violate any regulations: “Not everyone agrees with the acceptable levels governments have set. And, anyway, would you want to be eating this stuff at all?”CreditDerek Montgomery for The New York Times
For the past few years, consumer and environmental groups have started testing for glyphosate in food, because, while the government routinely tests foods for a variety of pesticides, it does not regularly test for glyphosate.
In 2011, the Agriculture Department conducted a special test of 300 soybean samples for glyphosate and found the herbicide in 271 of them, according to Carey Gillam, the author of “Whitewash: The Story of a Weed Killer, Cancer, and the Corruption of Science,” a book about glyphosate that will go on sale in October.
“Regulators have turned a blind eye toward trying to figure out what levels of glyphosate are in our food supply,” Ms. Gillam said.
The Agriculture Department did not respond to a request for comment.
The Food and Drug Administration is responsible for enforcing maximum pesticide residue levels for any foods in interstate commerce, and it issues an annual report on pesticide residue found in food — with the exception of glyphosate.
Megan McSeveney, a spokeswoman for the agency, said the methods used in its annual tests cannot detect glyphosate because of its chemical makeup and how it degrades. Available methods of testing, she added, are costly and labor intensive. In 2014, after the Government Accountability Office sharply criticized the agency for failing to test for glyphosate — and also for not disclosing that fact to the public — the Food and Drug Administration said it would cost about $5 million to start such testing.
The agency, Ms. McSeveney said, planned to test four food commodities — corn, soy, eggs and milk — although she could not say when such testing would begin.
Some food and commodity companies have decided they can’t wait on the government. The Scoular Company, which sells grains and other commodities, has begun requiring farmers who sell the company soybeans and corn to notify it before using any defoliants, including glyphosate.
“We are concerned about the general increase in chemical residues in foods,” said Greg Lickteig, a director at Scoular, “and some of our customers are concerned, too. That’s just the way it is. We now have the ability to know what’s in our food more than we ever have before.”
Follow NYT Food on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and Pinterest. Get regular updates from NYT Cooking, with recipe suggestions, cooking tips and shopping advice.Correction: July 25, 2017
Because of an editing error, an earlier version of this article misstated the name of the lab that tested the ice cream for the Organic Consumers Association. It is Health Research Institute Laboratories, not Health Resource Institute Laboratories.Correction: July 25, 2017
An earlier version of this article misstated the name of a journal that published a study led by Dr. Michael Antoniou. The study was published in Scientific Reports, a journal from the publishers of Nature, not in Nature.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/25/dining/ben-and-jerrys-ice-cream-herbicide-glyphosate.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fwell&action=click&contentCollection=well®ion=stream&module=stream_unit&version=latest&contentPlacement=4&pgtype=sectionfront&_r=0
-
Chemical Solvent's Risks Drive Small Firms to Innovate
Jul 26, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sylvia Carignan
New concerns about the potential health effects of a common chemical solvent are spurring monitoring innovations—and in the process letting small environmental consulting firms compete with industry giants.
States are testing thousands of sites to determine whether the solvent trichloroethylene, or TCE, is affecting people as the chemical migrates from contaminated soil or water into buildings’ indoor air. The chemical solvent has long been considered carcinogenic, but is now associated with concerns that short-term exposure could affect pregnant women and the development of their babies.
To track and evaluate those risks, environmental consultants—particularly smaller firms—are turning to continuous air quality monitoring systems that are capable of spotting short term spikes in exposure to the chemical.
“There are a lot of smaller groups that want a piece of that pie,” Mark Kram from the small California-based firm Groundswell Technologies told Bloomberg BNA.
The new monitoring push creates an opportunity for small businesses like Groundswell Technologies and Entanglement Technologies to go toe-to-toe with large firms like Geosyntec Consultants, AECOM, Tetra Tech, and CH2M for assessment contracts.
The Environmental Protection Agency recently added vapor intrusion to the list of ways a site could land on the Superfund National Priorities List. The agency issued guidance on vapor intrusion assessment methods in 2015, but some feel the guidance leaves out essential information on the consequences of short-term chemical exposure.
At some sites, Kram said, concentrations of TCE in indoor air have been high enough to present a danger to public health. “We've had situations where the buildings are evacuated,” he said.
‘Thousands’ of Sites Possibly Contaminated
Vapor intrusion concerns often crop up at Superfund or brownfields sites. Environmental firms like Groundswell Technologies, Geosyntec or CH2M are called in to assess the potential for indoor air or soil contamination.
John Lowe, a principal technologist for CH2M, said the threat of exposure to TCE though vapor intrusion could be extensive. The chemical has been used for decades as a machine degreaser and aircraft parts cleaner.
“The scale of the potential problem—we are talking about thousands, maybe tens of thousands, of sites across the United States,” he told Bloomberg BNA.
Vapor intrusion can occur when volatile chemicals migrate up from a groundwater plume. The chemicals contaminate soil and indoor air above the plume.
Short-Term Exposures a Concern
Continuous monitoring has created a niche for smaller businesses and those seeking subcontractors on federal contracts.
Entanglement Technologies, headed by Chief Executive Officer Tony Miller, is developing a continuous monitoring device that would focus on small amounts of TCE at sites with the potential for vapor intrusion. Miller told Bloomberg BNA the need for this kind of device arose because existing technologies couldn't detect as wide a range of TCE concentrations, and canisters and sorbent readings take hours or days to return from the laboratory—too long to detect brief spikes of TCE.
Dominant companies in the industry said continuous monitoring is merely one tool in the vapor intrusion assessment toolbox, not the only solution.
“In order to really assess what's happening, you really have to have multiple lines of assessment open to you,” Hester Groenevelt, an environmental chemist at Geosyntec, told Bloomberg BNA.
Filling the Regulatory Gaps
In a statement, an EPA spokesperson told Bloomberg BNA that it recommends “time-integrated continuous sampling technologies, such as canisters and sorbent samplers, and the collection of multiple samples over time to account for variability.”
At the same time, Kram said, the EPA has been open to using continuous monitoring at Superfund sites with potential TCE contamination.
“EPA is now hiring us for various projects because they recognize that there's this potential risk,” Kram said. On May 22, EPA added the vapor intrusion pathway as one of the criteria for adding waste sites to its Superfund program list (RIN:2050-AG67).
Blayne Hartman, a geochemist, works as an independent contractor under his own small firm, Hartman Environmental Geoscience. He said his firm also has worked with the EPA to continuously measure TCE at a New Hampshire Superfund site, taking thousands of readings to monitor vapor intrusion.
Lowe said adaptations may come with time as states start to set their own guidance. State standards currently vary, and the EPA has not set an agency-wide short term exposure limit for TCE.
“[Continuous monitoring] is an emerging method, and the regulations haven't really caught up to it,” Lowe said.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=117504201&vname=dennotallissues&fn=117504201&jd=117504201
-
Sorry, the Dust in Your Home Might Be Making You Pack on the Pounds
Jul 25, 2017 | Metro US
By Meagan Morris
Dusting your house likely ranks at number 900 on your list of favorite hobbies, but a new study by researchers at the American Chemical Society might change that rank — and fast, because it suggests that weight gain is directly linked to dust.
For the study, researchers collected indoor dust samples from 11 North Carolina homes and then exposed the samples to 3T3-L1 fat cells in mice. The results? Seven of the 11 dust samples triggered the cells development into bigger fat cells, while nine of the 11 samples caused the fat cells to divide, creating more fat cells and, potentially, more fat gain.
Even worse news: As few as 3 micrograms of dust caused measurable effects, an amount that’s well below the amount found in most homes.How dust affects metabolic health
The researchers said the results show that household dust can spread endocrine disruptors that can affect metabolic health in people, especially children. The disruptors are often found in household cleaners and pesticides and the particles eventually make their way into dust. However, a substance typically found in plastic had the strongest effect on fat cells. (Endocrine disruptors that affect how your body stores fat are commonly referred to as “obesogens.”)
More research is needed, according to the study authors, because the amount of dust that affected cells is much lower than what the government says — in other words, it takes less dust to affect young cells than previously thought.How to minimize endocrine disruptors in your home
And it’s impossible to avoid these disruptors.
"At this point," said lead researcher Dr. Heather Stapleton, "it’s difficult to provide advice on how to avoid exposure…cleaning more with wet techniques (e.g. mopping) can help remove and reduce dust particles [...] dry dusting can sometimes release more dust particles to the air which can then be inhaled."
There are things you can do to minimize these hormone disruptors, though. Washing your hands frequently, avoiding canned goods and plastic containers can help, according to the Natural Resources Defense Council.
Dusting and vacuuming help, too. So, break out the dust rag and get to work — you’ll burn a few calories cleaning and keep gut-busting dust particles at bay. Win-win.
http://www.metro.us/body-and-mind/weight-loss/endocrine-disruptors-dust-weight-gain
-
(ACC Mentioned) Appalachian States Look Past Coal, Ask Trump to Aid Natural Gas
Jul 26, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ari Natter
Having lost tens of thousands of coal mining jobs to the rise in natural gas, several states have decided if you can't beat them, join them.
A bipartisan group of lawmakers hopes to persuade President Donald Trump to spare a loan program he wants to kill and use it to help a $10 billion gas-storage project in the hard-hit Appalachian region of the eastern U.S. where coal had once dominated. Proponents say it would help spur new chemical, refining and other manufacturing industries—and give out-of-work miners a new career path.
“We need a more diverse portfolio,” said Brian Anderson, director of West Virginia University's Energy Institute, and a member of the project's coordinating committee. “If you have one industry that dominates your economy and that industry sees a decline then it really runs huge ripples through your entire economy.” Coal and natural gas compete in the electricity markets and the proliferation of fracking in recent years led to cheaper gas that has displaced coal. Coal had once accounted for more than half of all U.S. electricity generation, but last year natural gas topped coal to become the largest source of power generation. The impact has been felt especially hard in the Appalachian region—which was once largely dependent on coal mining and steel production.
The Appalachian Storage Hub, estimated to cost as much as $10 billion, could encompass underground caverns in Pennsylvania, Ohio or West Virginia, although the final site has yet to be selected. It would have the capacity to hold as much as 100 million barrels of ethane, methane and other products produced in conjunction with natural gas. It would also include a 3,000-mile pipeline network to link up the storage sites with petrochemical plants.
A report by the American Chemistry Council found the project could create more than 100,000 jobs and nearly $36 billion in capital investment. The project would be similar, though smaller, to the Mont Belvieu natural gas liquids hub just outside Houston that has bolstered that area's chemical industry.
Supporters of the project say a lack of pipelines and storage infrastructure has depressed the price of gas produced from the Marcellus shale under Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia. Natural gas prices there are only two-thirds that of the main market rate set in Louisiana.
Southwestern Energy Co., a gas exploration company with operations in the Marcellus, is a top proponent of the storage hub.
Bipartisan Group
A group of lawmakers led by Democrat Joe Manchin and Republican Shelley Moore Capito sent Trump a letter last week asking that he set up a blue ribbon commission to back the construction effort.
The two West Virginia senators also introduced legislation that would allow the Appalachian storage hub to qualify for Energy Department loan guarantees. Trump has proposed killing that program, and a spending bill the House of Representatives is debating this week would do just that.
Even without federal help, there are initial signs that investment is coming to the region. A $6 billion ethane cracker plant, which would make ethylene for plastics and other products, is being considered by PTT Global Chemical America for a site along the Ohio River where a former coal-fired power plant owned by FirstEnergy Corp. once stood. Royal Dutch Shell Plc also has a new chemical complex planned for western Pennsylvania.
Shell's project follows the first wave of North American plants being built along the Gulf of Mexico coast by companies such as Dow Chemical Co. and Chevron Phillips Chemical Co. The factories all use shale gas to gain a cost advantage over producers in Europe and Asia that rely on oil and coal feedstocks.
“We certainly had our struggles in this region,” said Steven Hedrick, the president of the Mid-Atlantic Technology, Research & Innovation Center in South Charleston, West Virginia. “This would be an opportunity for displaced miners to allow them to use the skills they've learned during a lifetime of engagement with coal.“
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=117504202&vname=dennotallissues&wsn=498266000&searchid=30253159&doctypeid=1&type=date&mode=doc&split=0&scm=DELNWB&pg=0
-
America's Biggest Oil Port Looks to Be Hub for Shale Exports
Jul 26, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Hailey Waller and Sheela Tobben
The biggest U.S. oil-import hub wants to grab a piece of surging North American crude exports.
Louisiana Offshore Oil Port, the only terminal along the U.S. Gulf Coast able to handle a fully laden supertanker, is gauging interest from shippers in sending crude overseas on the world's biggest ships by early next year. The port would continue to take in foreign oil, LOOP LLC said in an emailed statement July 24.
Ports are competing to fill the needs of domestic oil producers looking for outlets for their growing supply. At the same time, the boom from U.S. shale fields and Canadian oil-sands mines has reduced refiners’ need for imported oil. LOOP's ability to handle tankers capable of carrying 2 million barrels in their holds would reduce shipping costs for companies looking to send crude to refiners in Asia.
“LOOP is the most obvious place for U.S. crude exports since as a deepwater port it makes it more manageable to load up a large ship such as a VLCC,” Sandy Fielden, director of commodities and energy research at Morningstar Inc., said by phone from Austin, Texas. “It makes huge sense from a logistical perspective as it will allow for more efficient cargo shipments.”
Currently, shippers have to load oil onto smaller tankers in ports such as Houston or Corpus Christi, Texas, that then transfer their cargoes onto Very Large Crude Carriers sitting offshore. That adds cost and time to the shipments. While Corpus Christi received its first VLCC at the end of May, the port's channel isn't deep enough for a ship that size to load a full cargo.
Nigerian and Saudi Arabian oil will continue being unloaded from massive supertankers at LOOP's marine terminal 17 miles offshore and pumped into storage caverns one-third of a mile under its Clovelly Hub in Louisiana, as it has for over 30 years. But LOOP is turning some of its operations around as exports surge after restrictions were lifted at the end of 2015.
“Today, customers are seeking the optionality to safely and efficiently load or offload, which is a natural request for a port,” LOOP President Tom Shaw said in the statement. “This service offers our customers the scalability to fully load a VLCC.“
LOOP will be competing with Corpus Christi, which in 2017 became the top oil-export hub for the U.S. Canadian producers are looking for more options for selling their crude to higher-priced markets around the world, lessening their dependence on U.S. refiners.
In recent years, shipping oil overseas has become more economical, thanks to low-cost drilling methods unlocking vast deposits in West Texas and other areas. U.S. production reached 9.6 million barrels a day in April 2015, according to the Energy Information Administration.
Rising Output
Daily U.S. output is hovering at more than 9 million barrels, much of which is lighter than what local refineries are configured to process. The excess is heading overseas, boosting American exports above those from OPEC members Qatar, Libya, Ecuador and Gabon. VLCC shipments to Asia are expected to jump 52-fold this year, shipping analysts at McQuilling Partners Inc. said in a note. That makes a port able to load the huge ships attractive to traders.
The additional capacity at LOOP could add another 300,000 barrels a day of U.S. exports, according to Fielden.
“Professional exporters will be drawn to this as they will want to export more regularly.“
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=117504208&vname=dennotallissues&fn=117504208&jd=117504208
-
Energy Restrictions Pass House as Part of New Sanctions Bill
Jul 26, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Brian Dabbs
U.S. companies may face new restrictions on participating in global energy projects with Russian investment as part of the passage of a broad sanctions package in the House July 25.
U.S. companies would be prohibited from participating in energy projects that have a 33 percent or more Russian stake. The new sanctions regime also would prohibit U.S. involvement in any deep water, Arctic offshore, or shale project that involves Russian investment and produces oil. That language is the result of a deal struck between leaders in both chambers in recent days. The House passed the bill on a 410-3 vote as part of sanctions also targeting North Korea and Iran.
The Senate will now have to sign off on the revised version in order to send it to the president's desk for signature. The White House is sending mixed signals over its support for the bill.
The Senate version of the legislation—which passed that chamber in June—would have prohibited U.S. involvement in any project, such as resource development or pipeline operations, with the shared involvement of any sanctioned Russian company. U.S. oil and gas companies warned those stringent controls would stifle U.S. industry and prevent resource shipments to European countries.
U.S. sanctions already target a wide range of the energy sector, but existing policy applies only to projects within the Russian Federation.
Some senators are expressing concern over the changes, saying they represent a weakening of the bill. Current U.S. sanctions against Russia are linked to that country's military aggression in Ukraine and cyberattacks during the U.S. presidential election.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=117504219&vname=dennotallissues&fn=117504219&jd=117504219
-
(ACC Mentioned) State Challenges Delay of Industry Safety Rule
Jul 26, 2017 | Cascadia Weekly
By Tim Johnson
The state Attorney General asks a federal court to review the Trump Administration’s two-year delay of the Chemical Disaster Rule, which updates safety requirements for large industrial facilities that handle hazardous chemicals. The action was filed this week in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.
The state joined 10 other attorneys general to claim the administration’s delay violates the Clean Air Act. The Chemical Disaster Rule was prompted by a number of high-profile accidents around the nation, including the 2010 Tesoro refinery explosion in Anacortes that claimed the lives of seven workers.
The rule is designed to prevent disasters like the Tesoro refinery explosion, which investigators found was worsened in part because of deficiencies in the company’s safety culture that led to a “complacent” attitude toward flammable leaks and occasional fires.
“Washingtonians have firsthand experience with the types of disasters this rule was designed to help prevent,” Ferguson said. “I won’t allow the Trump Administration to violate the law by blocking these important environmental and worker safety standards.”
In response to protests from the chemical industry, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency director Scott Pruitt delayed the rule in January, slapped on another 90-day delay in March, and in June put off the rule by 20 months while Pruitt considers repealing it. The lawsuit alleges these delays are unlawful.
After taking office, the Trump Administration issued a directive to “temporarily postpone” regulations issued by the previous administration that had not yet taken effect. These regulations had been through an intensive public review and vetting process. Ferguson is involved in several challenges to those delays.
“Protecting our workers, first-responders, and communities from chemical accidents should be something on which we all agree. Yet the Trump EPA continues to put special interests before the health and safety of the people they serve,” noted New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman, who is leading the lawsuit.
Noting that the EPA itself says there have been more than 1,500 accidents at chemical plants over the past decade resulting in 58 deaths, Schneiderman said, “It’s simply outrageous to block these commonsense protections—and attorneys general will keep fighting back when our communities are put at risk.”
The EPA said in June it was again delaying implementation of the Risk Management Program (RMP) Amendments, setting an effective date of Feb. 19, 2019. The states say the EPA rule delay is arbitrary and capricious, and exceeds the agency’s authority.
The Chemical Disaster Rule aims to reduce the threat of chemical releases with new standards and required safety audits, in addition to bolstering emergency preparedness. The rule applies to more than 12,000 facilities nationwide, including refineries, chemical manufacturers and others that use, store or have the potential to release highly hazardous chemicals.
Once a rule is finalized, the Clean Air Act allows for a 90-day delay to reconsider it in response to litigation. Beyond 90 days, the act clearly states that “reconsideration shall not postpone the effectiveness of the rule.”
According to the lawsuit, the Obama-era rule was delayed in effect by the incoming Trump Administration for 60 days—along with 29 other environmental regulations—shortly after the president took office. The Trump Administration postponed the 30 environmental regulations without providing an opportunity for public comment.
After the initial delay on Jan. 26, the Trump Administration postponed the Chemical Disaster Rule another 90 days in March, according to the lawsuit filed by the state attorney general. In June, the EPA again stalled its implementation, this time for an additional 20 months while the agency reconsiders the rule.
The rule, a press statement from Schneiderman’s office states, would necessitate additional safeguards in accident-prevention programs to protect communities and prevent future accidents—requiring “root cause” analyses and third-party audits following accidents, as well as analyses of safer technology and alternatives; emergency response procedures, mandating annual coordination with local first responders, annual notification drills, and periodic field exercises; and increased public access to facility chemical hazard information, in addition to public meetings within 90 days of an incident.
Despite Administrator Pruitt’s delay of the rule, the Trump EPA published a June 2017 fact sheet explaining how these improvements “will help protect local first responders, community members, and employees from death or injury due to the chemical facility accidents.”
The delay of the rules, notes Genna Reed at the Union of Concerned Scientists, “came after several petitions from the American Chemistry Council and a handful of other chemical manufacturing corporations, oil and gas companies, and trade organizations asked the agency to reconsider the rule. Even after receiving thousands of public comments, including those from individuals from low-income communities and communities of color that face the greatest risks from RMP facilities urging the EPA to enforce the rule as planned, the EPA sided with industry and went forward with its decision to delay.”
“President Trump’s illegal safety rollback puts our first responders and local communities in danger from chemical accidents,” said New Mexico Attorney General Hector Balderas, vowing continued legal action against Trump when he “puts our children, families, and whole communities at risk.”
Counsel for Environmental Protection chief Bill Sherman is leading the case for Washington. In 2016, Ferguson created the Counsel for Environmental Protection to protect our environment and the safety and health of all Washingtonians.
The Attorney General’s Office has prevailed in three cases against the Trump Administration. Every court to have issued a decision has ruled in favor the Washington Attorney General’s Office in cases it brought against the Trump Administration. These cases include:• In January, a federal judge granted the Attorney General’s request to block implementation of President Donald Trump’s first travel ban executive order. A three-judge panel with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit unanimously agreed with that decision. The Trump Administration decided not to appeal and agreed to pay the state of Washington’s legal costs.
• After the Attorney General’s Office and a multi-state coalition asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit to review the administration’s delay in implementing new energy efficiency rules for ceiling fans, the U.S. Department of Energy conceded and announced that the rules would go into effect.
• On July 3, after the Attorney General’s Office intervened in a lawsuit against the EPA challenging delays in implementing a rule regulating emissions from new oil and gas facilities, a federal panel ruled against the EPA.
http://www.cascadiaweekly.com/cw/currents/state_challenges_delay_of_industry_safety_rule
-
(ACC Mentioned) 11 States Sue EPA Over Delay of Chemical Safety Rules
Jul 26, 2017 | EcoWatch
By Andrea Germanos
Eleven states filed suit against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and its chief, Scott Pruitt, in federal court on Monday over the agency's decision to postpone implementation of a rule aimed at lessening the risk of a chemical plant disaster such as the deadly one that rocked West, Texas in 2013.
"Protecting our workers, first-responders, and communities from chemical accidents should be something on which we all agree. Yet the Trump EPA continues to put special interests before the health and safety of the people they serve," said New York Attorney General Schneiderman, who's leading the lawsuit.
Noting that EPA itself said there have been more than 1,500 accidents at chemical plants over the past decade resulting in 58 deaths, Schneiderman said, "It's simply outrageous to block these common sense protections—and attorneys general will keep fighting back when our communities are put at risk."
The EPA said in June it was again delaying implementation of the Risk Management Program Amendments, setting an effective date of Feb. 19, 2019. The states said that the EPA rule delay is arbitrary and capricious, and exceeds the agency's authority under the Clean Air Act.
The Obama-era rule, a press statement from Schneiderman's office states,
would necessitate additional safeguards in accident prevention programs to protect communities and prevent future accidents—requiring "root cause" analyses and third-party audits following accidents, as well as analyses of safer technology and alternatives; emergency response procedures, mandating annual coordination with local first responders, annual notification drills, and periodic field exercises; and increased public access to facility chemical hazard information, in addition to public meetings within 90 days of an incident. In fact, despite Administrator Pruitt's delay of the rule, the Trump EPA published a June 2017 fact sheet explaining how these improvements "will help protect local first responders, community members, and employees from death or injury due to the chemical facility accidents.
The delay of the rules, noted Genna Reed at the Union of Concerned Scientists, "came after several petitions from the American Chemistry Council and a handful of other chemical manufacturing corporations, oil and gas companies, and trade organizations asked the agency to reconsider the rule. Even after receiving thousands of public comments, including those from individuals from low-income communities and communities of color that face the greatest risks from RMP [Risk Management Program] facilities urging the EPA to enforce the rule as planned, the EPA sided with industry and went forward with its decision to delay."
"President Trump's illegal safety rollback puts our first responders and local communities in danger from chemical accidents," said New Mexico Attorney General Balderas, vowing continued legal action against Trump when he "puts our children, families, and whole communities at risk."
Attorneys General Schneiderman and Balderas are joined in the suit by the AGs from Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington.
https://www.ecowatch.com/sue-epa-chemical-safety-2465198873.html
-
Congress Gives DHS Cyber Shakeup Second Try
Jul 26, 2017 | E&E Daily
By Blake Sobczak
House lawmakers are making another attempt to fix the Department of Homeland Security's perceived cybersecurity branding problems.
The agency's National Protection and Programs Directorate (NPPD) spends hundreds of millions of dollars on cyberdefenses annually, from locking down federal networks to helping critical infrastructure operators like power utilities. But Rep. Michael McCaul (R-Texas), chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, has long contended that NPPD's name and structure don't do justice to its mission.
On Monday, he reintroduced legislation to authorize the "Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency Act," previously cast as a way to "streamline" NPPD's cybersecurity activities. A previous version of the bill passed McCaul's committee but failed to come up for a full vote last year. In that draft, the new agency would have been charged with carrying out a national assessment of threats to key U.S. infrastructure like gas pipelines and the bulk power grid. The legislation also would have drawn the office out from under headquarters, granting it stand-alone operational authority that the NPPD currently lacks.
McCaul has made it clear that restructuring DHS is one of his "biggest priorities" in this year's Congress (Energywire, April 28). A spokeswoman for the Homeland Security Committee did not respond to requests for comment on the new bill, H.R. 3359. Its listed co-sponsors include Homeland Security ranking member Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), Reps. Cedric Richmond (D-La.) and John Ratcliffe (R-Texas), and seven other Republican lawmakers. Spokespeople for DHS and Thompson did not respond to requests for comment.
The Homeland Security Committee is set to mark up H.R. 3359 today after 11:30 a.m.
McCaul said in April he believes the White House supports the effort, though the White House has not responded to a request for comment on the administration's official position.
This story also appears in Energywire.
https://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2017/07/26/stories/1060057901
-
Congress Must Stop the Assault on Taxpayer-Friendly Freight Railroads
Jul 25, 2017 | The Hill - Pundits Blog
By David Williams
If Congress and the Trump administration are going to make good on a sweeping legislative package to rehabilitate public U.S. infrastructure, namely the roads we use, taxpayers should hope lawmakers maximize private investment and do not exacerbate matters by over-regulating private infrastructure.
This is especially true for the under-the-radar freight railroad industry, which like the internet sector, pays its own way entirely and is working quite well in serving the U.S. economy. Unlike trucks that use roadways consistently funded by taxpayers through transfers from the general fund to the Highway Trust Fund — more than $140 billion in recent years — freight railroads operate on private infrastructure that they build and repair themselves. This includes spending $26 billion annually in recent years and nearly $650 billion since 1980.
It is therefore especially paramount that the Surface Transportation Board(STB), which regulates railroad economics and is meeting this week to discuss regulatory reform under the current admiration, scrap a proposed “access” rule that would mark a significant change in direction from the industry-saving partial deregulation in 1980. After all, driving cargo from private railroads to taxpayer-funded roads runs counter the restoration of our roads, bridges and the like.
Currently, railroads provide access to competitors for a fee or if cargo can only reach its final destination using multiple railroads. Forced access, which the STB is considering, would require one railroad to give a competitor access to its private infrastructure and equipment. The complexity of this process — which could require more than 60 steps for a single switch and take days to complete — causes railroads to lose crucial time as they move goods across the country. Networked industries require efficiency.
But a small cadre of rail customers are throwing their support behind forced access, and want to see more of it. They misleadingly claim it would reduce prices to ship goods by increasing competition. Shippers are already allowed to request this type of traffic switching, however, if they can prove anticompetitive behavior by railroads. This policy has been around for decades, but anticompetitive behavior has not.
These rail customers miss the fact that forced access would kill the network efficiency that has made freight rail a trusted shipping option — with shipping rates reduced 45 percent since deregulation. In fact, in comments filed with the Surface Transportation Board opposing forced access, the world’s largest shipper, UPS, said the rule would decrease the efficiency of the rail network to the extent that it could be forced to move containers back onto highways.
Similarly, the Taxpayers Protection Alliance argued alongside the Competitive Enterprise Institute and other free market organizations last year that the measure is nothing more than a backdoor price control, on the table only because rent-seeking rail shippers continue to lobby for government intervention. The Phoenix Center, an economic think tank, said forced access is “regulatory activism, not competition policy.”
This should raise an alarm bell for all Americans, considering the fact that our country’s road and highway system is already struggling and in need of money. Moving more freight on our roads would lead to further deterioration of this system — as well as more funding gaps — and taxpayers could be left to foot the bill.
In today’s deregulatory political climate, we should be considering options to improve and lessen onerous regulations, such as Sen. Deb Fischer’s (R-Neb.) recently introduced Railroad Advancement of Innovation and Leadership with Safety (RAILS) Act, rather than imposing new ones. As rail industry commentator Frank Wilner has said, “Innovative and customized approaches to safety improvements especially benefit small railroads burdened by meticulous regulatory prescriptions intended primarily for railroads employing tens of thousands.”
With healthcare, trade, tax reform and the lofty infrastructure goals of leaders in Washington looming, expending political capital on narrow regulations like forced access is foolhardy. And it is a perfect example of an unnecessary regulation that has little benefit for Americans. Taxpayers deserve better.
http://thehill.com/blogs/pundits-blog/transportation/343692-congress-must-stop-the-assault-on-taxpayer-friendly-freight
-
Senator Backed by Rail Companies Introduces New Bill That Would De-Regulate Rail Industry
Jul 25, 2017 | Desmog
By Justin Mikulka
A new bill by one of the rail industry’s favorite senators looks to change how the industry is regulated to allow “market forces to improve rail safety.” In June, Sen. Deb Fischer (R-Neb.), who happens to chair the Senate Surface Transportation Subcommittee, introduced the Railroad Advancement of Innovation and Leadership with Safety (RAILS) Act.
In essence, the bill seeks to shift the rail industry toward a self-regulatory — and more difficult to enforce — approach to safety known as “performance-based regulation,” an effort first reported by DeSmog after a Congressional hearing in May.
In that hearing, Rep. Bill Shuster (R-PA) advocated for performance-based regulations for safety, saying that government should “allow the railroad industry to keep more of their profits.” That's what you should expect when moving to a system relying on market forces to improve safety.
Speaking of market forces, it should come as no surprise that the top donor to Senator Fischer’s election campaigns is rail company Union Pacific. Or that four of her top eleven donors are rail companies, which include Berkshire Hathaway (owner of rail company BNSF), Norfolk Southern, and CSX.
That helps explain why she is pushing to allow the industry to self-regulate via performance-based regulations. Even in a pro-industry opinion piece in the publication RailwayAge, written by a former employee of rail lobbying group, the Association of American Railroads, it wasn’t possible to sell the bill without noting that it allows industry to regulate itself:
“…performance-based safety standards mean rather than the [Federal Railroad Administration] prescribing particular actions, such as mileage-based brake tests and specific operations and maintenance procedures, the agency would specify a safety outcome — such as a maximum accident-type rate or component failure rate — and allow each railroad to devise its own cost-effective means of achieving that target.”
What could go wrong if you allow each railroad to devise its own cost-effective means of achieving safety? Let’s take a look at Exhibit A: Lac-Mégantic.Lac-Mégantic: When 'Market Forces' Regulate Safety
Shortly after the deadly oil-by-rail disaster in Lac-Mégantic, Canada, a columnist at The Guardian stated, “the explosion in Lac-Mégantic is not merely a tragedy. It is a corporate crime scene.” There is a mountain of evidence to prove how corporate cost-cutting caused the July 2013 accident in the small Quebec town.
The fire on the locomotive that started the whole deadly chain of events was the result of cutting costs for engine repair. A report from the Transportation Safety Board of Canada stated that “This temporary repair had been performed using a polymeric material, which did not have the strength and durability required for this use.” That was the first mistake due to cost-cutting shortcuts.
The company operating that oil train had also been allowed to run the trains with a single person crew. Another cost-saving measure that railroad labor unions oppose and one that the rail industry in America is lobbying hard to make standard.
And then there was the corporate policy of not using all of the braking systems in order to save time, which we wrote about on DeSmog last year:
What has been overlooked is the corporate policy of not engaging the “automatic brake” when leaving a train on the tracks. Harding [train engineer] set the independent brake and handbrakes but did not set the automatic brake because that was corporate policy.
The brakes he did apply were sufficient to hold the train. But then the locomotive caught fire that night and the fire department cut power to the locomotive, which led to the loss of pressure in the independent brake and the train “running away” down the hill towards Lac-Mégantic.
It would have taken Harding 10 seconds to engage the automatic brake. If this had been done, the train most likely would have remained in place until it was scheduled to continue the next morning. But company policy was to not engage the automatic brake even when parking a loaded train of explosive Bakken oil on a hill above a town. Why not?
Because while it only takes 10 seconds to engage the braking system, it takes between 15 minutes to an hour to disengage the system when the train is restarted the next day. And in the rail industry, time is money.
This is what happens when market forces drive safety precautions. And that is why it is accurate to describe Lac-Mégantic as a corporate crime scene.'Sound Science' and ECP Braking
The new bill from Sen. Fischer include the section “Sound Science,” which requires that regulations be based on things like “appropriately validated models and formulas.” It does not mention how one goes about “appropriately” validating models and formulas.
This approach of claiming that safety regulations aren’t based on sound science or that the “science is still out” has already proven to be a very effective approach for delaying further safety measures for the rail and oil industries. It has been the main argument allowing the oil industry to continue to transportvia train a dangerous and volatile oil that could easily be stabilized and made safer to ship.
In the RailwayAge opinion piece supporting Fischer's industry-friendly bill, it notes that the industry is particularly interested in rolling back the requirement to have electronically controlled pneumatic (ECP) brakes on oil trains, saying this regulation was “troubling to railroads and the scientific community.”
When DeSmog asked RailwayAge to provide evidence that the scientific community found the regulations requiring ECP braking “troubling,” the author of the piece — former Association of American Railroads (AAR) employee Frank Wilner — directed DeSmog to the Transportation Technology Center, Inc. According to its website this organization is “a wholly owned subsidiary of the Association of American Railroads.”
So, scientists on the payroll of the rail industry’s main lobbying group find a proven safety technology “troubling.” What should be more troubling to anyone concerned about rail safety is a bill introduced by a senator taking large amounts of money from the rail industry, a bill which is then promoted by not only the industry's lobbying group but also a former lobbying group employee, claiming in an industry trade magazine that industry-paid scientists are the final word on safety.
As repeatedly noted on DeSmog, there is ample evidence that ECP brakes are safer.
But perhaps the strongest argument for ECP brakes is that they are required on trains hauling nuclear waste. Why would this be required if these brakes offer no safety benefits? In 2004, the AAR gave a presentation on why trains should be allowed to move spent nuclear fuel (SNF) and clearly noted that ECP brakes were important for safety. Yet 13 years later, this group is purporting that it is an unproven technology.
And that's not all. There's evidence that ECP brakes would have prevented the Lac-Mégantic disaster.Performance-Based Regulation or Profit-Based Regulation?
“Railroad rules have been written in blood.” This line comes from the annual report of the Commissioner of Railroads for the state of Michigan — in 1901. It implied that safety rules were only implemented when enough blood had been spilled.
One hundred and fifteen years later, in an opinion piece on rail safety for CNN, rail expert Fred Failey essentially said the same thing, opening his piece with the statement, “The rules by which trains operate on American railroads were written in blood.”
Now, with over 100 years of history showing the rail industry's refusal to implement safety measures until enough people have died, the industry is again pushing to regulate itself in order to avoid proven safety technologies for the sake of “keep[ing] more of their profits.” Congress and the anti-regulatory officials now in the Trump administration are working hard to allow this to happen.
The only performance that will improve when implementing performance-based regulations is the performance of railroad stock prices and the fundraising efforts of politicians like Sen. Deb Fischer.
https://www.desmogblog.com/2017/07/25/senator-backed-rail-companies-introduces-new-bill-would-de-regulate-rail-industry
-
California Regulators Next Up With Cap and Trade Bill Signed
Jul 26, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Carolyn Whetzel
California regulators now need to set new carbon dioxide emissions limits for the coming years after Gov. Jerry Brown (D) signed into law legislation renewing the state's greenhouse gas emissions cap-and-trade program another 10 years.
“We are a nation-state in a globalizing world and we're having an impact and you're here witnessing one of the key milestones in turning around this carbonized world into a decarbonized, sustainable future,” Brown said at a July 25 bill signing ceremony in San Francisco.
The California Air Resources Board is set to consider a series of existing cap-and-trade amendments at its July 27-28 meeting. Those amendments involve proposed changes through 2020.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=117504221&vname=dennotallissues&fn=117504221&jd=117504221
-
How California Plans to Go Far Beyond Any Other State on Climate
Jul 26, 2017 | The New York Times
By Brad Plumer
Over the past decade, California has passed a sweeping set of climate laws to test a contentious theory: that it’s possible to cut greenhouse gas emissions far beyond what any other state has done and still enjoy robust economic growth.
Now that theory faces its biggest test yet. Last August, the State Legislature set a goal of slashing emissions more than 40 percent below today’s levels by 2030, a far deeper cut than President Barack Obama proposed for the entire United States and deeper than most other countries have contemplated.
So how will California pull this off?
On Tuesday, Gov. Jerry Brown signed a new law expanding the state’s cap-and-trade program, which is expected to play a big role. But cutting greenhouse gases this deeply will involve more than cap and trade. The state plans to rethink every corner of its economy, from urban planning to dairy farms.
No one knows yet if it can succeed. “You can think of California as a giant laboratory” for climate action, said Severin Borenstein of the Haas School of Business at the University of California, Berkeley.
If California prevails, it could provide a model for other policy makers, even as President Trump scales back the federal government’s efforts on climate change. The state may also develop new technologies that the rest of the world can use to cut emissions.Continue reading the main storyRELATED COVERAGECalifornia Extends Climate Bill, Handing Gov. Jerry Brown a Victory JULY 17, 2017California Upholds Auto Emissions Standards, Setting Up Face-Off With Trump MARCH 24, 2017
And if California falters, or if the experiment proves too costly? “Other states and countries will be watching that, too,” Mr. Borenstein said.Entering Uncharted Territory
Until now, most states have followed a standard playbook for curbing emissions. Market forces have replaced older coal plants with cheaper and cleaner natural gas, while state mandates have added modest shares of wind and solar power to the grid. As a result, domestic carbon dioxide emissions have fallen 14 percent since 2005 at relatively little cost.
But California has now plucked most of that low-hanging fruit. The state’s emissions are nearly back to 1990 levels, it barely uses any coal and it has installed as many solar panels as the rest of the country combined. Per capita, California has the third-lowest emissions in the nation, after New York and the District of Columbia, which means further cuts will come less easily than they would for a state like Texas.
“Each additional increment of carbon reduction is tougher than the previous one,” said Dan Reicher, director of the Center for Energy Policy and Finance at Stanford. He added, “California will have to reach deeper into the bag of technologies” to cut emissions from more stubborn polluters like oil refineries and cement plants.
In January, California’s Air Resources Board, which has broad latitude to carry out the state’s climate laws, detailed one possible strategy for cutting emissions 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030.A California Plan to Cut Emissions
The state needs to cut greenhouse-gas emissions by 681 million metric tons by 2030. In January, regulators showed how different policies might contribute toward that goal.Methane reductionsCap and tradeRenewable energyVehicles and freightEnergy efficiencyOther32% of cuts28131089"Other" includes potential regulations on refineries as well as cuts forced by the low-carbon fuel standard.Source: California Air Resources Board 2017 Scoping Plan
First, by law, California must get 50 percent of its electricity from renewable sources by 2030, up from 25 percent today. That’s a herculean task in itself: The state is already straining to cope with sharp swings in solar powerduring afternoons and will soon have to juggle ever-larger shares of intermittent renewable electricity, by deploying batteries, reworking its grid or taking other novel approaches.
Second, the board envisioned the number of electric cars and other zero-emissions vehicles on California’s roads rising to 4.2 million by 2030 from 250,000 today. Freight trucks would have to become more efficient or electrified, while cities would need to adopt far-reaching strategies to promote mass transit, biking and walking.
But a major push on renewable power and transportation would get California just one-fourth of the way toward its goal. Other cuts would come from doubling efficiency savings from buildings and industry, no mean feat in a state that already has some of the strictest building codes in the country. The state would also need to lower the carbon content of its gasoline supply under the Low Carbon Fuel Standard, possibly by increasing biofuel use.
One-third of the reductions in the proposal would come from curbing emissions of methane — a potent greenhouse gas — from landfills, wastewater facilities and manure piles at dairy farms. No state has ever regulated agriculture so aggressively, and dairy farmers are pushing back, warning that capturing methane from millions of cows could prove untenable.
In its proposal, the board emphasized that some of these strategies may not pan out — for instance, the Trump administration could block California’s move to force automakers to build more zero-emissions vehicles. Other regulations might reduce emissions less than anticipated, especially if California’s economy grows faster than expected.
So, as a complement to these efforts, Mr. Brown insisted on expanding another major program: cap and trade.The Role of Cap and Trade
In 2012, under a previous climate law signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, the Air Resources Board imposed a statewide ceiling on greenhouse gas emissions. It then distributed a fixed number of tradable pollution permits to power plants, refineries, factories and other large emitters.
Under this cap-and-trade program, businesses need to either cut their emissions or buy permits. The idea is that by setting a price on carbon, cap and trade spurs businesses to figure out for themselves the most economical way to reduce pollution. The total number of permits is intended to dwindle each year, pushing the state’s emissions downward.
Economists call the approach a cheaper path than inflexible regulations.
So far, California’s initial cap has had a relatively minor effect on emissions, as other policies, like the renewable electricity mandate, have done most of the heavy lifting and businesses have had relatively little trouble staying under pollution limits.
But as the cap keeps tightening, it’s expected to have a sharper bite. The law Mr. Brown signed extends the program through 2030, and limits the ability of businesses to purchase cheap offsets to comply (by, for example, paying for tree-planting programs).
If it works, the Air Resources Board expects cap and trade to deliver at least one-quarter of the emissions cuts needed by 2030. And, by auctioning off permits, the state will raise billions of dollars for more climate programs. California has already earmarked $800 million from past auctions to help finance high-speed rail between Los Angeles and San Francisco, though under the new law lawmakers will have more say over spending and may redirect funds elsewhere.
In order to secure approval, the bill’s backers made a number of compromises to critics worried that a strict cap might harm the state’s competitiveness. Industries at risk of relocating will receive a mix of tax cuts and free permits to cushion the blow. (Some environmental groups opposed the bill for making too many concessions to polluters.)
Notably, the Air Resources Board must also now set a ceiling on permit prices — if they spike, regulators will flood the market with permits to prevent a political backlash. While no one is exactly sure how much California’s climate policies will ultimately cost, this ceiling will set a limit on that price tag: If climate policy poses too severe a threat to economic growth, the state will prioritize growth.What the World Might Learn
Mr. Brown has promoted California’s policies as a way of convincing the world that the United States won’t abandon the fight against climate change, even after Mr. Trump announced a withdrawal from the Paris climate agreement. “I want to do everything we can to keep America on track, keep the world on track,” Mr. Brown said in May.
California is responsible for only 1 percent of global emissions. But it could contribute even more to the world’s efforts by advancing new tools to tackle climate change, like floating deepwater wind farms.
If the state stumbles, that could provide valuable lessons, too. By 2030, California plans to close its last nuclear power plant, Diablo Canyon, which provides 9 percent of the state’s electricity. The idea is to replace that lost power with renewables and efficiency. If that proves unworkable, it could offer a warning to other states facing nuclear shutdowns.
California’s push to make cap and trade effective could also have global ramifications, especially since Europe has failed to gain traction with its emissions-trading program and China is testing its own version.
“If the cap-and-trade market melted down, that could be a real deterrent elsewhere,” said Mr. Borenstein, the University of California professor. “The rest of the world is going to be watching closely.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/26/climate/california-climate-policy-cap-trade.html
Industry and Association News - There are no clips to report at this time.
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested