Preview Newsletter
ACC PM 18/10/17
-
(ACC Blog) 2017 Polyurethanes Technical Conference Draws Highest Attendance of More Than 1,000 Professionals to New Orleans
Oct 18, 2017 | American Chemistry Matters
“Sixty years – what a milestone,” remarked 2017 conference committee chair Melissa Rose during the opening session of the 2017 Polyurethanes Technical Conference. -
Controversial EPA Nominee Already Working for Agency
Oct 18, 2017 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
A controversial nominee for a top Environmental Protection Agency post is already working at the EPA, E&E News reported Wednesday. -
EPA Chemical Nominee Starts at EPA as Pruitt Adviser
Oct 18, 2017 | Politico Pro Whiteboard
By Alex Guillen and Eric Wolff
Michael Dourson, the controversial nominee to run EPA’s Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, has already started at the agency as a special adviser to Administrator Scott Pruitt, according to an agency spokeswoman. -
Mr. Trump Outdoes Himself in Picking a Conflicted Regulator
Oct 17, 2017 | The New York Times
By The Editorial Board
President Trump has made a habit of filling important jobs with people dedicated to undermining the laws they’re supposed to administer while pampering the industries they’re supposed to regulate. -
(ACC Mentioned) Commission Votes Along Party Lines to Ban Phthalates in Toys
Oct 18, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Corbin Hiar
The Democratic-controlled Consumer Product Safety Commission voted along party lines today to prevent some harmful chemicals from being used in plastic for toys and child care products. -
Three EU Member States Start New Substance RMOAs
Oct 18, 2017 | Chemical Watch
The Netherlands, Sweden and France have begun risk management option analyses (RMOAs) of new substances under Echa’s public activities coordination tool (PACT), which also assesses hazards. -
Independent EU Agency Tests Needed to Assess 'Controversial' Chemicals
Oct 18, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Clelia Oziel
Three EU member states have suggested that European Commission agencies carry out independent tests on hazardous substances to end "controversies" about evaluation methods and their robustness. -
California Cleaning Disclosure Bill Unites NGOs and Industry
Oct 18, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Tammy Lovell
After six months of negotiations, a new law requiring ingredient disclosure for cleaning products sold in California, has met with approval from both industry and NGOs. -
NatGas Production Keeping Storage Development at Bay -- Even as Demand Grows
Oct 18, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Leticia Gonzales
Even as the United States faces years of structural natural gas demand growth ahead, particularly in the form of liquefied natural gas and Mexican exports, the continued exploitation of shale resources will limit the need for more gas storage development, analysts say. -
Senate Bill Would Fast-Track 'Small-Scale' Natural Gas Exports
Oct 18, 2017 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
A pair of Republican senators is proposing to fast-track the approval process for companies wishing to export relatively small-scale volumes of liquefied natural gas (LNG). -
Chatterjee Wants to Streamline Project Approval Process
Oct 18, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Rod Kuckro
The chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission wants to see his agency "significantly reduce its review times for major natural gas pipeline certificates and other projects." -
Southern Co. Cashes in on Gas Distributors
Oct 18, 2017 | E&E Energywire
Georgia-headquartered Southern Co. has reached a deal to sell two natural gas distributors, in a measure of the unusually high value of gas pipelines. -
Haynesville Shale Field Re-Emerges as Drilling Hub
Oct 18, 2017 | E&E Energywire
The Haynesville shale field in Louisiana is experiencing a renaissance of activity, as cost-saving technologies and rising demand for gas lure drillers back to fracking's historic home. -
Cyberdefenses Put to Test at Computer Speed
Oct 18, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Peter Behr
At the Energy Department's remote "proving grounds" in southeast Idaho's desert, researchers are testing automated cybersecurity defenses to protect grid systems if a destructive attack comes too fast or in too many places for humans to handle. -
Spokane Coal- and Oil-Train Fines Face Weak Odds in Court
Oct 18, 2017 | E&E Energywire
cSupporters of the initiative say a 2000 appeals court case gives them legal standing for what they see as a way to protect downtown against explosions like the June 2016 derailment in Mosier, Ore. Where federal regulators don't act, they say, the city can. -
New Talks on Paris Climate Pact Are Set, and That’s Awkward for U.S.
Oct 18, 2017 | The New York Times
By Lisa Friedman
When Trump administration officials travel to Germany next month for United Nations climate change discussions, they will face a fundamental contradiction: how to negotiate the terms of a deal they say they’re walking away from. -
Pruitt: Staff Dropping the Ball on 'Real, Tangible' Problems
Oct 18, 2017 | E&E Climatewire
By Jean Chemnick
U.S. EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt wants a public fight over climate science, and he thinks his agency's staff isn't acting urgently enough on "real" environmental problems like toxic waste cleanup. -
Pruitt's Promised Directive Rattles Science Advisers
Oct 18, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Hannah Northey and Sean Reilly
U.S. EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt's suggestion that he'd get rid of advisory committee members who also receive EPA grants has roiled the research community.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
-
Oct 18, 2017 | American Chemistry Matters
“Sixty years – what a milestone,” remarked 2017 conference committee chair Melissa Rose during the opening session of the 2017 Polyurethanes Technical Conference.
“Think about it: leading figures in our field have been convening every year for six decades, and each time bring new ideas and insights from the brightest experts in the industry.”
To mark this industry milestone of innovation and progress, more than 1,000 industry experts gathered in New Orleans this year to learn, share ideas and help make the industry even stronger. Over the course of three and a half days, the 2017 Polyurethanes Technical Conference featured 14 technical sessions, 18 posters and 73 exhibitors, as well as the Professional Development Program.
In a keynote discussion on the first day of the event, renowned Harvard University professor Dr. Mahzarin Banaji delivered a thought-provoking address about how industry professionals can recognize unconscious bias and achieve a more inclusive work environment. Ultimately, her talk provided strategies and ideas on how diversity can continue to drive innovation and grow the industry. Following her keynote address, Dr. Banaji held a luncheon workshop where more than 40 industry professionals came together to ask questions, collaborate and consider ways to cultivate inclusion and diversity at their respective organizations.
The competition for the coveted Innovation Award presented at the conference this year is a testament to the industry’s commitment to technical progress. The three finalists – including BASF’s Irgastab® PUR 70, Chemours’ Opteon™ 1100 and Covestro’s PUReWall – were presented at Monday’s opening session. Chemours’ winning entry was revealed at the conference’s Closing Session on Wednesday.
At this year’s 14 technical sessions, there was something for everyone, with sessions ranging from environmental health and safety, to the latest topics in chemical management, to new applications of polyurethanes technology in the construction industry. The evolving regulatory landscape was also addressed at this year’s conference, with a robust regulatory roundtable discussion and an update from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
During the closing session, CPI unveiled its 2016 End-Use Market Survey, providing a detailed historical analysis of the major end-use markets for polyurethane in North America. Finally, as part of its mission to help foster the next generation of innovators, CPI recognized and gave a donation to STEM NOLA, a local nonprofit organization with the mission to expose, inspire and engage students in the surrounding communities about the opportunities in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM).
https://blog.americanchemistry.com/2017/10/2017-polyurethanes-technical-conference-draws-highest-attendance-of-more-than-1000-professionals-to-new-orleans/
-
Controversial EPA Nominee Already Working for Agency
Oct 18, 2017 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Devin Henry
A controversial nominee for a top Environmental Protection Agency post is already working at the EPA, E&E News reported Wednesday.
Michael Dourson, President Trump's nominee to head the agency’s Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, is currently serving as an “adviser to the administrator,” Scott Pruitt, the EPA confirmed to E&E News.
An agency spokesman refused to confirm the report when contacted by The Hill.
Democrats and environmentalists have pushed back against Dourson's nomination, given his work within the chemicals industry, which, if confirmed, he would soon regulate.
During a confirmation hearing earlier this month, Democrats highlightedDourson’s work at the Toxicology Excellence for Risk Assessment group. The organization has taken industry-friendly positions on the risks posed by chemicals, Democrats alleged.
“Never in the history of the EPA has a nominee to lead the chemical safety office had such deep ties to industry,” Sen. Tom Carper (Del.), the top Democrat on the Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee, said at the time.
Dourson, however, said that he would “dedicate my mind, body and spirit to the work of this office” and enforce the chemical safety laws currently on the books.
The EPW Committee was due to vote on Dourson and five other Trump nominees on Wednesday. But Republicans postponed the vote on Tuesday night.
—Updated at 11:29 a.m.
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/356001-controversial-epa-nominee-already-working-for-agency
-
EPA Chemical Nominee Starts at EPA as Pruitt Adviser
Oct 18, 2017 | Politico Pro Whiteboard
By Alex Guillen and Eric Wolff
Michael Dourson, the controversial nominee to run EPA’s Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, has already started at the agency as a special adviser to Administrator Scott Pruitt, according to an agency spokeswoman.
“Yes, he most certainly has,” EPA spokeswoman Liz Bowman said in an email when asked if Dourson had begun serving as an adviser to Pruitt on chemicals.
Dourson has yet to be confirmed by the Senate. A committee vote planned for today was scrapped after Sen. Joni Ernst threatened to withhold her support for Dourson and other EPA nominees over an unrelated biofuel dispute with Pruitt.
Dourson was most recently a professor at the University of Cincinnati Department of Environmental Health's Risk Science Center. Dourson was still listed as a professor as of Oct. 5, a day after his confirmation hearing, according to a cache of his department bio page, though he is no longer listed as a faculty member.
Dourson’s move to EPA was first reported Wednesday by E&E.
Another pending EPA nominee, Susan Bodine, who was selected to run the enforcement office, has also started at EPA ahead of her confirmation, which has yet to receive a floor vote. She has been working as an adviser to Pruitt on enforcement matters.
“This is not unique to our administration, but something that is a common practice,” Bowman said.
https://www.politicopro.com/energy/whiteboard
-
Mr. Trump Outdoes Himself in Picking a Conflicted Regulator
Oct 17, 2017 | The New York Times
By The Editorial Board
President Trump has made a habit of filling important jobs with people dedicated to undermining the laws they’re supposed to administer while pampering the industries they’re supposed to regulate. His nominee for the Environmental Protection Agency’s top clean air post, William Wehrum, is a retread from the George W. Bush administration with a deep doctrinal dislike of clean air regulations. His choice to runthe White House Council on Environmental Quality is borderline comical: Kathleen Hartnett White, a former Texas official who believes that the main greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide, is harmless. Yet no nomination has been as brazen, as dangerous to public health and as deserving of Senate rejection as that of Michael Dourson to run the E.P.A. office in charge of reviewing chemicals used in agriculture, industry and household products.
Mr. Dourson is a scientist for hire. A toxicologist and a professor at the University of Cincinnati, he has a long history of consulting for chemical companies and conducting studies paid for with industry money. He frequently decided that the compounds he was evaluating were safe at exposure levels that are far more dangerous to public health than levels recommended by the E.P.A., the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and other agencies. His nomination is enthusiastically endorsed by the chemical industry. It horrifies environmental groups, public health advocates, firefighters and scientists and has inspired many letters in opposition to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, which may vote as early as Wednesday.
Among the chemicals that received a favorable nod from Mr. Dourson is 1,4-dioxane, which is used by paint and coating manufacturers and is also found in shampoos and other personal care products. His analysis recommended a safe level that was 1,000 times higher than the E.P.A.’s recommended level; the agency considers the chemical “a likely carcinogen.”
Another is PFOA, a chemical used by DuPont to make nonstick surfaces. The compound has been linked to cancers, thyroid diseases and other health problems. Working for West Virginia on the recommendation of DuPont, Mr. Dourson in 2002 helped establish a safety threshold of 150 parts per billion for PFOA in drinking water. That is substantially higher than the standard of 1 part per billion that DuPont’s own scientists had recommended more than a decade earlier, and higher still than the health advisory level of 0.07 parts per billion set by the E.P.A. last year.
More broadly troubling is that Mr. Dourson, if approved, will set back an arduous, yearslong effort to improve the regulation of chemicals. Last year, after many false starts, Congress passed a bipartisan bill that updated the Toxic Substances Control Act, a 1976 law that had made it very hard for regulators to ban or regulate chemicals by requiring the E.P.A. to meet a very high burden of proof before taking action. The law also made it easy for companies to keep data about their products hidden from the public by claiming the information was a “trade secret.” The new law simplified the task by streamlining it, directing the E.P.A. to review at least 20 substances at a time, giving priority to the riskiest chemicals. The money to do this work will come from up to $25 million in annual fees paid by chemical manufacturers and processors.
Experts fear that if confirmed Mr. Dourson will put a much greater emphasis on pleasing the chemical industry than on protecting public health. He could, for instance, order his staff to cherry-pick studies and data that in turn would lead to lax standards or even allow the continued use of chemicals that ought to be banned outright. In March, the E.P.A. administrator, Scott Pruitt, rejected a staff recommendation to ban the pesticide chlorpyrifos, which scientists believe has harmed farm workers and children. Any decisions Mr. Dourson would make would most likely remain in place for years or even decades. E.P.A. reviews take several years to complete, and the agency has a long list of chemicals it needs to study.
It would take just a few Republicans to block the nomination. There’s hope that Shelley Moore Capito of West Virginia, who showed during a recent hearing an awareness of Mr. Dourson’s controversial work on chemical safety in her home state, will vote against him in the Environment and Public Works Committee, where Republicans have an 11-to-10 majority. Even if he wins there, Ms. Capito and her colleagues ought to think hard about the impact their votes could have on the health of Americans for years to come.
Correction: October 17, 2017
An earlier version of this editorial incorrectly described a 1976 law. That law allowed the chemical industry to claim that product data was a “trade secret” in order to keep the information hidden from the public, not from the E.P.A.
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/17/opinion/mr-trump-outdoes-himself-in-picking-a-conflicted-regulator.html?_r=0
-
(ACC Mentioned) Commission Votes Along Party Lines to Ban Phthalates in Toys
Oct 18, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Corbin Hiar
The Democratic-controlled Consumer Product Safety Commission voted along party lines today to prevent some harmful chemicals from being used in plastic for toys and child care products.
The 3-2 vote signed off on a rule to ban five types of phthalates from the kids' products. The CPSC regulation will now go to the Federal Register by Oct. 25 and take effect upon publication.
Instead of explaining his opposition to the rule, Republican Commissioner Joseph Mohorovic used his pre-vote statement to announce that he is resigning, effective Friday, to take a job at the law firm Dentons.
His absence will give Democrats an even stronger hold on the independent consumer watchdog agency.
Phthalates, also known as plasticizers, are a group of chemicals used to make plastics more flexible and harder to break. Studies have linked exposure to reproductive system damage.
Today's decision came nearly a decade after Congress ordered CPSC to ban the chemicals from children's toys (E&E Daily, Aug. 1, 2008). Environmental groups celebrated the vote as a win for public health.
"These chemicals in children's toys and child care articles are a known health risk," Avinash Kar, a senior attorney at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said in a statement.
"In banning them, CPSC is following the advice of its scientific experts and doing precisely what Congress directed the agency to do in a 2008 law it passed overwhelmingly," Kar said.
But Eileen Conneely, the American Chemistry Council's director of chemical products and technology, dismissed the ban as "arbitrary and capricious."
"From the beginning of this rulemaking process, ACC has questioned the science supporting the agency's decisions, as well as the process by which those decisions are developed," the chemical industry group official said.
The CPSC vote was the second major victory for environmentalists and their public health allies in as many months. The commission, which has retained a Democratic majority despite Republicans' sweeping wins in the 2016 elections, also recently moved to ban a whole class of toxic flame retardants (Greenwire, Sept. 21).
Last month, President Trump nominated a white-collar attorney who has made a career of representing companies fighting CPSC for a seven-year term as commissioner (Greenwire, Sept. 22).
With Mohorovic's resignation, Trump now needs to put another Republican commissioner forward for Senate confirmation to flip the voting majority on the CPSC.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2017/10/18/stories/1060063981
-
Three EU Member States Start New Substance RMOAs
Oct 18, 2017 | Chemical Watch
The Netherlands, Sweden and France have begun risk management option analyses (RMOAs) of new substances under Echa’s public activities coordination tool (PACT), which also assesses hazards.
The Netherlands is assessing indium tin oxide (ITO) because of concerns it has properties that could affect human health and the environment. It is used as a coating in consumer products like mobile phones, solar panels, LCDs and flat panel displays.
Sweden is assessing lead due to its potential carcinogenic, mutagenic and reprotoxic (CMR) properties. The Swedish Chemicals Agency, Kemi, says there are currently 31 lead compounds included in the REACH candidate list, but metallic lead is not present. The assessment in the RMOA leads to the conclusion that there is a need to prepare an Annex XV dossier, with the intention of inclusion of lead metal on the candidate list, and eventually in Annex XIV, it says.
And France is investigating phenanthrene for its suspected persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic (PBT) properties. A polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH), phenanthrene is used used to make dyes, plastics, pesticides and explosives.Commission activity
The European Commission is developing RMOAs for three substances it suspects have CMR qualities. These are:
· 1-methyl-2-pyrrolidone (NMP), used in inks and toners;
· N,N-dimethylacetamide (DMAC), used in the manufacture of laboratory chemicals, textiles, leather and fur; and
· N,N-dimethylformamide; dimethyl formamide (DMF). The substance is used in laboratory chemicals, machinery and vehicles.Other potential PBTs
Meanwhile, several EU and European Economic Area (EEA) countries are preparing hazard assessments of substances they suspect of having PBT properties. The countries and the chemicals are:
· Belgium: 2,4,6-tri-tert-butylphenol;
· Denmark: diundecyl phthalate, branched and linear;
· Italy: quaternary ammonium compounds, tri-C8-10-alkylmethyl, chlorides;
· Norway: N,N'-ethylenebis(3,4,5,6-tetrabromophthalimide);
· Spain: a mixture of branched and linear C7-C9 alkyl 3-[3-(2H-benzotriazol-2-yl)-5-(1,1-dimethylethyl)-4-hydroxyphenyl]propionates; and a mixture of: N,N'-ethane-1,2-diylbis(decanamide); 12-hydroxy-n-[2-[1-oxydecyl)amino]ethyl]octadecanamide; N,N'-ethane-1,2-diylbis(12-hydroxyoctadecanamide); and
· Sweden: a mixture of: α-3-(3-(2H-benzotriazol-2-yl)-5-tert-butyl-4-hydroxyphenyl)propionyl-ω-hydroxypoly(oxyethylene); α-3-(3-(2H-benzotriazol-2-yl)-5-tert-butyl-4-hydroxyphenyl)propionyl-ω-3-(3-(2H-benzotriazol-2-yl)-5-tert-butyl-4-hydroxyphenyl)propionyl.
The last update to the PACT tool came in August.
https://chemicalwatch.com/60178/three-eu-member-states-start-new-substance-rmoas
-
Independent EU Agency Tests Needed to Assess 'Controversial' Chemicals
Oct 18, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Clelia Oziel
Three EU member states have suggested that European Commission agencies carry out independent tests on hazardous substances to end "controversies" about evaluation methods and their robustness.
European chemicals legislation gives full responsibility to industry for the products they put on the market. It is on the basis of the studies it provides that health agencies, at European or national level, assess the risks.
This system is "regularly criticised", ministers say, because certain data and studies from industry are not accessible to the public.
Echa and the European Food Safety Authority are unable to finance scientific studies that are complementary, "when, in specific cases, contradictory results or controversies cast doubt on the quality of the expertise provided".
Now, ministers from France, Italy and Luxembourg say a new mechanism of independent tests "in a very limited number of cases" will lead to greater confidence in chemicals assessment and authorisation mechanisms. "It seems essential to strengthen the trust between citizens and decision makers at European level", they said in a paper presented to the EU Council’s Environment Council on Tuesday.
The results of such independent studies could be made public and could be compared with results provided by petitioners, to check for consistency.
This will strengthen the robustness of the system "without compromising the principle of industrial responsibility", the proposal says.
French environment minister, Nicolas Hulot, told the assembly this week that the current approach "shows some shortcomings in the most complex cases". The EU needs to improve its policies, he said, "while maintaining the original principles".
The proposal follows on from the conclusions the Council adopted last year for a "sound management" of chemicals.Burden of proof
The financing of the additional tests should not come from the Commission or the agencies themselves, but from "other public and private sources", Mr Hulot added.
Carole Dieschbourg, Luxembourg's environment minister, said that the proposal is not intended to "undermine" Echa, but the studies have to be "truly independent". That is why the methodology, credibility and financing of these studies are very important, she added.
The three member states have called for the Commission to initiate a debate in the coming months, with member states and relevant stakeholders.
Karmenu Vella, European commissioner for the environment, said it would look into the proposal, while bearing in mind that the burden of proof "will always remain" on industry.
"I can assure you that improved chemical assessments, as called in your paper, will be looked into, including in the context of the fitness check evaluation of all chemicals legislation except REACH," he said.
https://chemicalwatch.com/60195/independent-eu-agency-tests-needed-to-assess-controversial-chemicals
-
California Cleaning Disclosure Bill Unites NGOs and Industry
Oct 18, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Tammy Lovell
After six months of negotiations, a new law requiring ingredient disclosure for cleaning products sold in California, has met with approval from both industry and NGOs.
Governor Jerry Brown gave final approval to the state's Cleaning Products Right to Know Act (SB258) on 15 October. The law, authored by Senator Ricardo Lara (D-Bell Gardens), is the first in the US to require "chemicals of concern" including fragrance ingredients, to be listed on a product's label.
The American Sustainable Business Council CEO and co-founder, David Levine, said: "It's encouraging that the California governor and legislature are acknowledging, through this action, the hard work that companies – big and small – along with NGO partners contributed to reach a fair compromise on this legislation. This bill creates a model for the nation for transparency in cleaning product labelling.
"'Monumental day'
The move was supported by several cleaning products companies that were members of the joint-industry working group that negotiated the bill.
A statement from SC Johnson, which makes the household brands Glade, Pledge, Scrubbing Bubbles and Shout, called the act "groundbreaking legislation".
The company's chairman and CEO, Fisk Johnson, said: "We have been sharing the ingredients in our products with consumers for nearly ten years. Now that the entire industry will be sharing this information, we'll continue to champion the need for greater ingredient transparency and remain committed to going further."
Reckitt Benckiser (RB), which makes the brands Cillit Bang, Dettol, Harpic and Vanish, issued a statement saying the act, and a similar disclosure measure proposed for New York, "sets new standards in ingredient transparency in the US for cleaning products".
Seventh Generation CEO Joey Bergstein, said the act being signed into law marked "a monumental day for the cleaning products industry".
"We’ve long believed in the consumers' right to know what's in the products they're buying. Nearly ten years ago, Seventh Generation began displaying all of our ingredients on packages, and we've been able to prove that this is not only good for consumers but good for business," he said.
Earth Friendly Products president and CEO, Kelly Vlahakis-Hanks, praised the act for "empowering consumers with the information they need to make informed choices about the products they bring into their homes".
Trade association the American Cleaning Institute (ACI) said in a statement that the final version "does thoughtfully reflect input from the manufacturing community and is improved from the original".
However, it added there were still concerns about the bill's "reliance on lists of scientifically suspect hazard-based lists of chemicals that have not been vetted here in the US and the lack of a designated state agency to properly regulate the law's mandates.
"'Huge victory'
The act is the result of months of negotiations with stakeholders, after industry raised concerns about protecting confidential business information (CBI) in the version approved by the Senate on 30 May. A similar measure also failed in 2016.
In key concessions to industry, the final bill allows manufacturers to omit listing ingredients considered CBI. And to qualify, a substance must be included on the TSCA Confidential Inventory or the manufacturer must have claimed protection for it under the Uniform Trade Secrets Act.
Online ingredient listing is required by 1 January 2020, and on-package disclosure by 1 January 2021.
The act was co-sponsored by public health and environmental health advocates Breast Cancer Prevention Partners (BCPP), Environmental Working Group (EWG), Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and Women’s Voices for the Earth.
In a blog, WVE director of programmes and policy, Jamie McConnell hailed the law as "a huge victory for our right to know".
"Ten years ago, companies scoffed at us when we asked them to disclose ingredients and said it just wasn't possible," she said.
"Fast forward ten years and these same companies were at the table with us and our partners, hammering out a compromise that would eventually pass both houses in the California legislature and receive the governor's signature."
The law will benefit not just the state, but the whole country, she added, because "what’s required in California will move companies toward similar disclosure practices throughout the nation."
https://chemicalwatch.com/60146/california-cleaning-disclosure-bill-unites-ngos-and-industry
-
NatGas Production Keeping Storage Development at Bay -- Even as Demand Grows
Oct 18, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Leticia Gonzales
Even as the United States faces years of structural natural gas demand growth ahead, particularly in the form of liquefied natural gas and Mexican exports, the continued exploitation of shale resources will limit the need for more gas storage development, analysts say.
In 2006, FERC allowed new storage developers to charge market-based rates with the idea of encouraging the development of new storage capacity. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission specifically noted the need for more capacity as demand had increased by 24% over the prior 20 years, while storage capacity had grown by only around 1.5%, according to PointLogic’s Callie Kolbe, manager of energy analysis.
Since 2006, more than 675 Bcf of working capacity has been added to the Lower 48 states. Much of the growth has come from high-deliverability salt cavern storage, which was supported by the need for flexibility as the market expanded. Post-2013, however, storage capacity increases have largely come from existing field reclassifications and expansions, Kolbe said.
Meanwhile, unconventional development of shale and tight gas resources over the last decade dramatically changed the landscape, effectively leading to rampant onshore production, steep declines in offshore production and lower gas prices. These and other market changes in turn appear to have reduced the importance of storage as a supply source.
“If you look at the Marcellus, production is happening right where the storage fields are,” said RBN Energy’s Rick Smead, managing director of advisory services. “Each year, we’ve added more production deliverability than total deliverability of storage. So taking into account the existing storage fields, you’re basically doubling capacity.”
Pipelines Upending Load Swings
With decades’ worth of technically recoverable resources in the Appalachian Basin alone, and growing demand in what was once the epicenter of U.S. supply, the manner in which gas is transported has also changed. Multi-directional pipes have made storage less critical because there is so much flexibility, Smead said.
“Storage used to carry you on a forward haul. You can now meet a lot of load swings with pipeline flexibility,” he said.
Genscape Inc.’s Eric Fell, senior natural gas analyst, said while storage was also designed to handle supply shocks, a lot of those concerns are not as pronounced in a post-shale revolution world.
“Although both supply and demand have grown a lot, the seasonality of demand hasn’t changed very much,” he said. “Supply shocks are less of a concern today versus 10 years ago when a much larger percentage of our supply stack was offshore (hurricane risk) and LNG imports.”
And during times of high demand and thus higher gas prices, the market now has the ability to absorb large shocks with price-driven switching between gas and coal in the power stack. Before 2009, fuel switching between gas and oil was the norm and was much smaller in scale than gas versus coal is today, Fell said.
“Given large declines in offshore production and the market’s ability to absorb price and supply shocks via large-scale coal versus gas switching, the need for storage capacity has arguably declined compared to 10 years ago, even though the overall size of the market is much larger today.”
In fact, Fell said FERC’s ruling in 2006 led to a storage overbuild that remains largely underutilized. A noteworthy example is Tres Palacios Gas Storage LLC (TPGS), which in 2013 asked FERC for authorization to abandon up to 22.9 Bcf of working capacity at its three-cavern storage facility in the Texas counties of Matagorda, Colorado and Wharton. TPGS said the market didn't want the capacity and an abandonment would cut its cavern lease payments to Riverway Storage Holdings LLC and Underground Services Markham. FERC denied the request in March 2015.
In 2016, FERC also vacated a certificate for the proposed Tallulah Gas Storage Project, a salt cavern facility planned for Madison Parish, LA. The project was certificated in 2011 to be placed in service by March 2015. A three-year in-service extension was sought in November 2014, and a one-year extension was granted in February 2015 to March 18, 2016. No further extension was sought.
Today, based on data provided by the Energy Information Administration (EIA), “we’re not cycling a very high percentage of working gas,” said underground gas storage consultant Douglas Elenbaas of Michigan-based EI Energy. “We’re not doing deep withdrawals.”
Record-Breaking Storage Levels
Indeed, storage inventories at the end of the traditional withdrawal season set record highs in 2012 and again in 2016, according to the EIA. Heading into the 2015-2016 winter season, inventories were already at a record high of 4,009 Bcf on Nov. 20, 2015. In the previous five winters, the total withdrawal from the end of October through the end of March averaged 2,176 Bcf. During the 2015-2016 winter, weekly withdrawals were often smaller than the five-year average level, and the total withdrawal was only 1,475 Bcf, the EIA said.
A more granular look at storage data by ICF International LLC for the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) in 2016 revealed that the maximum inventory level reached has surpassed 80% for all regions except the Mountain region, which has seen a maximum inventory level of just 52%.
Peak storage deliverability occurred during the winter of 2013-2014 for all regions. The regions with the highest peak storage deliverability utilization are the Mountain and Pacific regions at about 80% during mid-December 2013. The East, Midwest and South Central regions had peak-day withdrawals at a more modest level of 46%, 68% and 46%, respectively, during the first half of January 2014. Despite cold weather, maximum storage withdrawals in January 2014 were well below maximum deliverability capabilities because of relatively low inventory levels and pipeline constraints, ICF said.
Unconventional Gas Creating Flatter Prices
Meanwhile, another byproduct of the shale revolution has been a relative flattening of gas prices over the last few years. Price signals to incentivize gas storage development (summer-winter spreads and price spread volatility) have been crushed to the point where people have mostly stopped trying to develop new facilities, Genscape’s Fell said.
ICF analysts echo those sentiments, saying “low price levels and low price volatility have, at least temporarily but dramatically, diminished the value of storage facilities as a tool to mitigate price risks. As a result, almost all pending new storage projects and capacity expansions have been delayed or canceled.”
The issue of lower price volatility has impacted the demand for U.S. storage for a number of years now. In February 2014, Boardwalk Pipeline Partners slashed their quarterly distribution by 81% to $0.10 per unit, in no small part because of what CEO Stanley Horton described as “substantial market headwinds” facing their storage business.
“Since forward price curves are backwardated, market conditions currently do not provide opportunities to park gas,” Horton explained at the time. Boardwalk’s cash flows from operations have improved since early 2014, but its quarterly distribution still remains at $0.10 per unit.
$4 Gas? Not Until 2030 At The Earliest
A look at the New York Mercantile Exchange (Nymex) futures curve on Wednesday (Oct. 17) shows winter prices for November 2017-March 2018 averaging $3.16 and the summer 2018 (April-October) strip averaging less than 25 cents lower at $2.99. The winter 2018-2019, meanwhile, sat just 20 cents above the summer 2018 strip. In fact, $4 gas isn’t seen in the entire futures strip through 2029.
The futures curve was vastly different back in 2006. A look at historical Nymex data shows November 2005-March 2006 futures averaging $10.39, compared to the summer 2006 strip, which averaged at a $4.07 discount at $6.32. The winter 2006-2007 strip averaged $7.15.
“High price levels, large price differentials between summer and winter or extreme price volatility provide opportunities for storage capacity owners to profit from the price movements using the flexibility of storage capacity, creating market incentives for sustained storage developments,” ICF analysts said in their 2016 report. “However, expected seasonal spreads observed in the Nymex natural gas futures market have been in constant decline in recent years, as a result of robust growth of shale production outpacing growth in gas demand.”
In addition to discouraging storage development, the lack of gas market volatility has also created a starkly different environment compared to a decade ago in which storage operators contract their services. Long gone are the days of 10-year deals and high rates of return. Now, customers want short-cycle, low-rate contracts that offer flexibility.
“People that are purchasing storage are not going to opt for 10-year contracts; they want one- to five-year contracts, which makes it difficult for the operator,” El Energy’s Elenbaas said. “Returns aren’t as certain as they’ve been in the past. Gas pricing is not consistent with the past.”
Better Days Ahead
Some storage operators, however, are optimistic that there are brighter days ahead for gas storage. During a second quarter earnings call in July, Boardwalk’s Horton said the company was “bullish” that storage was going to pick up. Whether it’s electric utility plants or industrial load or LNG load, the occasional variability in that load will lend itself to the need for storage, he said.
Boardwalk owns gas storage facilities comprised of 14 underground storage fields in four states with an aggregate working gas capacity of approximately 205 Bcf.
“We have a lot of storage and quite frankly, we don’t really need right now to expand our storage to handle some additional re-contracting,” Horton said during the call.
Boardwalk holds a lot of “financial storage, a lot of power” that can easily be converted over into operational storage with longer-term contracts, Horton added. “So I think our storage position right now is good. We’ve got the ability to put new caverns at our petrol facility. I think we’ve got the ability to leach five additional caverns there. We’ve got the ability to add caverns in our Boardwalk Louisiana Midstream areas, and those could be natural gas caverns if the demand materializes there.”
For now, though, where storage is for the next couple years, Boardwalk has plenty of capacity to to handle demand, Horton said. “But I do think that the operational storage is going to be more valuable, and we’re going to see more demand for that,” he added.
Improving Gulf Coast Utilization
With exports to Mexico averaging around 5 Bcf/d and expected to grow through at least the next few years, and U.S. LNG exports accelerating at lightning speed since launching in mid-2016, one could argue the need for more storage in the South Central region.
In the latest International Energy Outlook 2017, the EIA said world gas trade, by pipeline and by LNG shipments, is poised to increase. In the United States, LNG exports are projected to account for more than 60% of total domestic gas exports by 2040.
Mexican pipeline imports from the United States, which have more than quadrupled since 2009, are also expected to continue increasing over the next several years. By 2018, the United States is expected to become a net gas exporter on an average annual basis, as pipeline exports to Mexico and LNG export volumes grow, the EIA said.
Meanwhile, power generation growth in the region is also set to drive demand. “The one place that could put a strain on storage is power generation, especially with renewables,” RBN’s Smead said. “That could cause volatility. If gas tends to be more baseload, then that would reduce the use existing storage for renewables.”
Still, under a base-case scenario outlined by the Department of Energy’s Office of Energy Policy and Systems Analysis, ICF analysts said that given planned pipeline expansions, gas infrastructure, including storage, is sufficient to meet the needed increase in supplies. The base case called for gas demand for power generation growing at more than 4% per year in the South Atlantic region, which would increase the daily demand to 7.5 Bcf/d from 6.5 Bcf/d by 2035.
ICF analysts, however, said the South Central region could benefit from improved utilization of upstream storage facilities in the Gulf Coast to help meet the need for intra-day flexibility and the intermittent and instantaneous demand from the power sector. Expected LNG exports in the region could also lead to improved utilization of the storage facilities in the Gulf Coast as LNG suppliers need to support potential supply disruptions, they said.
Energy Ventures Analysis analyst Henan Xu agreed that better utilization of existing storage in the Gulf Coast would prove beneficial in the new era of LNG exports. “The South Central region has a lot of storage that can flip directions and is pretty flexible,” Xu said.
While the market could see some fluctuations during maintenance events, those typically last a few days to two weeks, Xu said.
LNG Facilities Creating Storage
Meanwhile, the LNG facilities have storage on site, Elenbaas said. “That is, in a way, a new type of storage coming into the market. As opposed to trying to develop new storage, you can build these tanks,” he said. “The ships alone can hold a lot of gas, so that’s storage as well.”
Smead said he wholeheartedly agreed there is no need for additional storage development in the United States, but said it was critical for storage operators to maintain the integrity of the existing facilities.
“Existing storage needs to stay healthy,” Smead said. “That means recognizing the integrity and maintaining level of capacity.”
Southern California Gas’ Aliso Canyon underground storage facility, the state’s largest, is a prime example of how poor oversight may lead to major disruptions in the gas market. A gas well at the facility sprung a leak back in October 2015 that continued for four months. The California Division of Oil, Gas and Geothermal Resources at the time suspended injections at the facility, but it cleared the way for it to resume operations at a fraction of its design capacity in July.
Non-Salt Storage Eyed As Growth Engines
As noted, most of the new storage capacity coming online in recent years resulted from reclassifications and expansions. Interestingly, EIA data show that in 2016, all eight storage expansions were in the South Central region. The largest expansion was near Houston at the Kinder Morgan Inc. (KMI) Tejas West Clear Lake facility, which expanded by more than 16 Bcf.
Salt fields are mostly in the South Central region, PointLogic’s Kolbe said.
Capacity-wise, the salt fields over the past few years have peaked with a maximum demonstrated capacity at about 91% of total design working capacity. The rest of the South Central region is made up of the non-salt fields.
Non-salt fields started in 2017 with a 23 Bcf, or 2%, boost to design working capacity, according to the EIA. Most of the increase came from two fields: the Tejas West Clear Lake field and Oneok Inc.'s Haskell/Booch field in Oklahoma, which converted 4 Bcf of base gas into working gas.
“I would say that over the next few years, the non-salt fields in the South Central region will be the ones to watch,” Kolbe said. “They will have to balance winter peak demand with increasing demand coming from LNG exports.”
Genscape’s Fell agreed that growth in LNG exports will likely create more seasonality and volatility of demand, and may indeed lead to the need for more storage down the road, but said the market is currently overbuilt and would “first need to chew through the excess storage capacity that we already have.”
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/112130-natgas-production-keeping-storage-development-at-bay----even-as-demand-grows
-
Senate Bill Would Fast-Track 'Small-Scale' Natural Gas Exports
Oct 18, 2017 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
A pair of Republican senators is proposing to fast-track the approval process for companies wishing to export relatively small-scale volumes of liquefied natural gas (LNG).
Under the bill from Sens. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) and Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), applications to export up to 51.1 billion cubic feet of natural gas per day to nearly any country would get Energy Department approval “without modification or delay.”
Currently, all natural gas exports from the contiguous United States must be extensively reviewed and certified by the Energy Department as being in the “public interest” before they can proceed.
“This bill promotes the growth of American natural gas, creating well-paying jobs with good benefits for hardworking families in Louisiana,” Cassidy said in a statement.
“The faster approval of small-scale natural gas shipments will create American jobs, improve Caribbean energy security and lower greenhouse gas emissions,” he continued.
“Expedited approval of small-scale natural gas exports would strengthen an emerging sector of Florida’s economy,” said Rubio.
The bill comes as the Trump administration is working on multiple fronts to promote production and use of fossil fuels and other domestic energy sources under an “energy dominance” banner.
The legislation mirrors a regulation the Energy Department proposed in September that would similarly expedite approvals for small-scale exports.
Gas demand is growing rapidly in the Caribbean and Latin America, and Republicans and the Trump administration see an opportunity for the United States to take advantage of it.
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/356033-senate-bill-would-fast-track-small-scale-natural-gas-exports
-
Chatterjee Wants to Streamline Project Approval Process
Oct 18, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Rod Kuckro
The chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission wants to see his agency "significantly reduce its review times for major natural gas pipeline certificates and other projects."
But Neil Chatterjee pledged that "any efficiency-aimed action we take will not cut corners," especially when it comes to safety and environmental protection.
They are "essential parts of what we do. That's not going to change as we look for greater efficiencies in our review processes," he said yesterday during what he called his "maiden speech" to industry players at a meeting of the Energy Bar Association in Washington.
A chief complaint from industry stakeholders is that "it takes too long to review applications for natural gas and hydropower projects," Chatterjee said.
"The FERC review process continues to get longer and longer due in large part to increased participation in the process by stakeholders" as well as "numerous legal challenges," he said.
Delays are "bad for those on both sides of the issue," he said, as they discourage investment and harm communities, end users and consumers.
He said reviewing a hydropower project "can take around 30 months on average," while relicensing a hydro project "can take more than four years."
Reviews of new natural gas pipelines can take "up to 18 months," he said, noting that the reviews of the Atlantic Coast and Mountain Valley pipeline projects approved last week took 22 months.
Chatterjee and Commissioner Robert Powelson late Friday gave a green light to the two projects that would transport shale gas across Appalachia.
Commissioner Cheryl LaFleur, the lone Democrat on the panel, parted with her colleagues. In a dissenting statement, the former chairwoman wrote that she doesn't believe the proposals are in the public interest (Energywire, Oct. 16).
Chatterjee said LaFleur's dissent in the case "suggested that FERC should depart from its long-standing policy of relying on agreements with shippers [and a pipeline] to demonstrate economic need in favor of weighing a broad range of economic social and aesthetic values."
"I strongly disagree," Chatterjee said. Contracts signed by shippers are "clear, unequivocal statements of economic need by the market itself," he said.DOE directive a conversation 'we need to have'
Chatterjee downplayed the significance of Energy Secretary Rick Perry's request earlier this month that FERC consider cash subsidies for coal and nuclear power plants that are unable to compete and face being shut down (Energywire, Oct. 2).
The DOE notice of proposed rulemaking "fits comfortably within" the ongoing work at FERC to regulate the nation's power markets, he said.
"I believe there's real value in Secretary Perry initiating a conversation regarding whether FERC-jurisdictional organized markets adequately compensate certain generators for their contribution to the reliability and resilience of the nation's grid," Chatterjee said.
"The DOE NOPR contemplates and builds on FERC's existing regulatory initiatives on price formation. It's a conversation that I believe we need to have.
"We must ensure that we don't find ourselves coming to regret not having asked hard questions like these among all the changes in the energy industry," he said.
Any concerns about the direction from Perry to FERC, which is an independent agency, are unwarranted, he said.
"Let me be clear. I remain committed to upholding the commission's independence on this and the many other issues that may come before us," Chatterjee said.
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2017/10/18/stories/1060063893
-
Southern Co. Cashes in on Gas Distributors
Oct 18, 2017 | E&E Energywire
Georgia-headquartered Southern Co. has reached a deal to sell two natural gas distributors, in a measure of the unusually high value of gas pipelines.
In a statement Monday, Southern said it would sell Elizabethtown Gas and Elkton Gas — which service customers in New Jersey and Maryland's Eastern Shore, respectively — to South Jersey Industries for $1.7 billion.
The deal is the latest in a recent round of agreements that see utilities expanding their stake of pipelines as demand for electricity remains flat. It comes not long after Southern itself poured nearly $10 billion into purchases of energy distributor AGL Resources and a stake in the Southern Natural Gas Co. pipeline system.
It will also make South Jersey the second-biggest gas distributor in New Jersey, according to the company.
"It's an expensive acquisition," said Chris Ellinghaus, a senior equity utility analyst for Williams Capital Group LP. "Not a big surprise for local natural gas distribution companies right now" (Jim Polson, Bloomberg Markets, Oct. 17). — DI
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2017/10/18/stories/1060063889
-
Haynesville Shale Field Re-Emerges as Drilling Hub
Oct 18, 2017 | E&E Energywire
The Haynesville shale field in Louisiana is experiencing a renaissance of activity, as cost-saving technologies and rising demand for gas lure drillers back to fracking's historic home.
"The Haynesville is where it began," said Frank Patterson, Chesapeake Energy Corp.'s vice president of exploration and production.
Along the Gulf Coast and elsewhere, liquefied natural gas export facilities and petrochemical plants have mushroomed, while private equity firms have poured billions into gas companies with acreage in the Haynesville. Production in the field has risen over 20 percent this year, with the number of active rigs tripling.
The field began to fade in prominence about five years ago, with drillers parting for Texas to avoid the high costs of Haynesville wells. Innovations emerging in the wake of the 2014 oil price crash helped cut costs of extraction in the Louisiana field, where reserves sometimes lie as far as 15,000 feet underground (Lynn Cook, Wall Street Journal, Oct. 17). — DI
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2017/10/18/stories/1060063887
-
Cyberdefenses Put to Test at Computer Speed
Oct 18, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Peter Behr
At the Energy Department's remote "proving grounds" in southeast Idaho's desert, researchers are testing automated cybersecurity defenses to protect grid systems if a destructive attack comes too fast or in too many places for humans to handle.
A unique replica of a California grid substation has been created here at the Idaho National Laboratory (INL) to allow real-world trials of advanced software intended to find dangerous hidden malware and trigger immediate countermeasures at computer speeds.
The process, called Machine-to-Machine Automated Threat Response (MMATR), aims to improve early warning systems for utilities with advanced threat analysis using technologies not yet commercially available.
The testing of the MMATR defenses here at the INL facilities is part of a high-profile, heavy-lift project called California Energy Systems for the 21st Century (CES-21), directed by the California Public Utilities Commission.
CES-21 enlists the state's largest public utilities — Pacific Gas and Electric Co., Southern California Edison Co. and San Diego Gas & Electric Co. — and the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, along with INL. The goal is to test a wide range of attack scenarios against MMATR defenses tailored to the three utilities' systems. If it succeeds, the strategy could be widely deployed in the entire U.S. utility sector.
"With attacks becoming more sophisticated and frequent, defending utilities have a very short window to identify an intrusion, notify critical systems, and respond to incoming threats before the issue becomes critical," said Joy Weed, manager of cybersecurity outreach and operations at Southern California Edison, in an email comment.
Behind the project is a grim assumption: that highly sophisticated attackers may tunnel into utility control systems and hide cyber weapons that will await a command to strike. The danger would increase geometrically if versions of the same weapon have infected many power systems and could be activated by a single command.
"The adversaries are very agile and very creative, and our responses are not," said Rita Foster, INL's cybersecurity strategic adviser. "The responses do not match the threat. They are very staid, controlled, static. So there's a total mismatch there," said Foster, interviewed in an INL lab space surrounded by sensors and controls from real power grids that are part of the test regime.
"That's why they can be successful, why they can hide, and why they can do things that we don't think they can do," she said.
The project developers may have to convince the Energy Department, utilities and state regulators that increased sharing of sophisticated cyber weapons will strengthen defenses but not open unanticipated channels for attack. "If the confidentiality, integrity and availability of an M2M system cannot be ensured, there will be serious problems," said Brian Harrell, vice president of security of AlertEnterprise. "It is very important to construct an effective security framework against various attacks to protect the M2M communication systems."
Backers of the strategy say utilities have no choice but to accelerate defenses.
"Attacks on energy infrastructure can move so swiftly and be so comprehensive — the ones we're imagining — that humans can't react in time," said Andrew Bochman, INL's senior cyber and energy strategist, testifying before Congress this year. "But we can set up our systems so that they can look for and identify certain attack patterns and immediately trigger the remediation action.
"It sounds pretty far out, and it is, but we've been making good progress by all accounts," he said.
To succeed, MMATR technology will have to shrink the time between discovery and recovery and prevent attackers from using the same weapons in multiple attacks, Weed said.
"This is active defense," Bochman said. It goes far beyond cyber hygiene, such as the need for utility employees to steer clear of phishing email messages that could allow entry by a hacker. "Active defense assumes they're in there, or they're going to be," he said.
The strategy was patterned after the Aegis missile defense system on U.S. Navy warships, Bochman said. "If one missile is coming in, or two or three, you can take them out," he said. "But if it's 150 missiles, humans don't have the ability to track and take out those missiles."
"Aegis was developed to automate that process," Bochman explained, on a recent hourlong car ride from INL's headquarters in Idaho Falls to the 890-square-mile INL desert test facility.
Budget reprieve
The Idaho laboratory programs were largely protected in the 2018 Energy and Water Development Appropriations bill, as House members in July rejected cuts in nuclear and cybersecurity programs called for by President Trump's budget proposal in May. INL's safeguards and security programs were allotted $133 million, an increase of $3.7 million over fiscal 2017.
The facility, approaching the size of Rhode Island, accommodated test firing of battleship guns in World War II and vital early nuclear reactor research (Energywire, Oct. 17).
Today, the INL site contains a working 61-mile high-voltage transmission loop, the Critical Infrastructure Test Range, with seven substations and a control room, for trials of a wide range of cyberattacks and grid resilience challenges.
Along one road, INL media representative Misty Benjamin pointed out a concrete slab that was the site of the 2007 "Aurora" test, when engineers succeeded in hacking into the controls of an electric generator and forced out-of-sync connections with the INL power grid. The generator blew up, like an auto transmission that is shoved into reverse at highway speed.
Elsewhere on the site is test bed for wireless communications technologies that play an increasing role in grid operations. The facility was built in a depression in the desert — the caldera from a volcanic eruption eons ago — which helps shield microwave transmission from outside interference.
A central part of the CES-21 strategy, Foster said, focuses on identified potential attack points in substations and control rooms. "Let's see what is the most vulnerable area that may already have exploits written for it," she said. "If something were to happen, what would be the consequences to that utility? Do they care? Would it be a hard fix, an easy fix; long or short lead time? And then prioritize the issue.
"You're getting a threat indicator that is machine readable, and you can create a remediation action to another machine," Foster continued. "So it could indicate, for example, that a back channel has been opened and you'd create a remediation action to either kill that session, or to kill the port the back channel was going on," or change the software in a system to eliminate the threat.
MMATR seeks to detect out-of-the-ordinary behavior in control systems, compare that against known threats, and create and test defenses against the threat. Understanding how and where attackers could do the most harm to grid systems would also guide development of defenses, advancing a utility's chances of finding if an enemy has broken in. Machine learning — feedback loops that allow software threat assessments to grow more precise with experience — is part of the strategy.
"The attacker may be hiding in an embedded [grid] system and nobody is watching," Foster said. "That is the problem we're trying to deal with. Right now, utilities can't even answer that question because it's a little, teeny, embedded thing that they incorporated when they created the system, and they never saw it."
A project milestone last year was creating a threat indicator language for the utilities in a version of the STIX programming language that would enable utilities, vendors and cyber analysts to label attack malware in common terms that can be shared at computer speed. The new version is particular to grid control systems.
More testing on the entire project is needed to prove the concepts on actual equipment, Foster said, "so then we'll have a little more confidence that yes, this could work." Final activities could be wrapped up by the end of 2019, she said.
INL's cybersecurity agenda points in many directions. To take one case, its "Sophia" defensive tool offers "fingerprinting" software to utility control room operators and other managers of industrial control systems, enabling them to map connections and network traffic in and out of the systems.
An industrial control system's communications patterns, which normally are largely fixed and static, are mapped to define normal conditions. Then Sophia keeps running passively in the background to track communications across a utility network, looking for trouble.
Foster said her lab's work on CES-21 is only a part of that large, diverse project (it also includes research on integrating renewable energy into California's grid).
'Consequence-driven' defense
INL's role of testing MMATR against actual components fits its identity as the prime DOE lab for applied engineering, said Wayne Austad, director of INL's Cybercore Integration Center.
"If you just let the market drive it, [cybersecurity] innovations will be centered around a natural progression of what we use in IT [information technology]," rather than the operational technologies that run equipment in the grid's physical domain, he said.
Austad said INL is pushing a defense strategy it calls "consequence-driven cyber-informed engineering." It seeks to calculate the most serious threats to critical infrastructure from particular advanced cyber adversaries and find out what would happen if the attacks succeeded. Specific defenses must be developed and shared, designed to prevent catastrophic damage.
"This process starts with identifying the highest impact, most severe consequences, and then discovers the best process design and protection approaches for engineering out the cyber risk," he said. In some cases, hardware barriers — not software "firewalls" — will be needed.
Getting inside attackers' heads is crucial, he said. "You have to understand the 'kill chain' that the adversary would follow to target and take out the most critical systems," and head them off, Austad said.
"We should not be responding to an alert that some nation-state attacker has gathered this design information [about a target], and go, 'Whoa, this important,'" he said. "We should already know that."
A top-level adversary can get in somewhere, Austad said. "You just have to live with that," he said. The challenge, as he sees it: "Keep them away from places where they can really hurt you."
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2017/10/18/stories/1060063877
-
Spokane Coal- and Oil-Train Fines Face Weak Odds in Court
Oct 18, 2017 | E&E Energywire
cSupporters of the initiative say a 2000 appeals court case gives them legal standing for what they see as a way to protect downtown against explosions like the June 2016 derailment in Mosier, Ore. Where federal regulators don't act, they say, the city can.
But legal and safety analysts at City Hall and elsewhere say such a law would almost certainly lose a legal challenge from the railroads, commodity owners or other parties.
Mayor David Condon, a Republican, has called the November initiative "misguided," pointing to federal legislation from Washington senators that would call for national action on cargo volatility and firefighting training.
"We're an initiative state. We have a very low threshold for citizens initiatives. I think we're very prideful of that," said Condon. "On the flip side, I think the citizens need to be aware of the legal ramifications of this, and the confusion it causes."
Donors that include the owner of several coal mines and railroads in Western states have raised a total of $151,000 for the campaign against the initiative. Supporters have mustered just over $6,000 (Kip Hill, Spokane Spokesman-Review, Oct. 16). — DI
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2017/10/18/stories/1060063891
-
New Talks on Paris Climate Pact Are Set, and That’s Awkward for U.S.
Oct 18, 2017 | The New York Times
By Lisa Friedman
When Trump administration officials travel to Germany next month for United Nations climate change discussions, they will face a fundamental contradiction: how to negotiate the terms of a deal they say they’re walking away from.
Like a spouse who demands a divorce but then continues to live at home, the relationship between the United States and other parties to the Paris Agreement is, at best, awkward.
The Trump administration has declared it will abandon the global climate change pact and make no effort to meet its voluntary target to curb planet-warming emissions. On Tuesday, President Trump repeated his claim that former President Obama’s diplomats agreed to bad deals.
“I will always put the needs of our country first,” Mr. Trump said. “That is why we are withdrawing from one-sided international deals,” he added, citing the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the Paris agreement.
Yet the United States cannot formally leave the accord until 2020, and in the interim administration officials have said they will continue to protect American interests, which essentially translates into helping to write the Paris Agreement’s rule book. Secretary of State Rex W. Tillerson and Mr. Trump’s national security adviser, H.R. McMaster, have both dangled the possibility that some as-yet undefined improved terms might one day persuade the president to reconsider.
This ambiguous position will be on stage at the meeting of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, at which representatives of the nearly 200 signatories to the Paris agreement will gather beginning Nov. 6 in Bonn.
“The U.S. is still at the table,” said James L. Connaughton, who served as an environmental adviser to George W. Bush. “It’s very important for the United States to have a presence. The U.S. is looked to and heavily engaged regardless of differences of opinion.”
The two-week session promises to be a volatile mix of anger toward the United States for declaring its intention to withdraw from the accord, mixed with lingering hope it might stay. Developing countries, particularly some of the most vulnerable to climate change, will most likely use the spotlight of the forum to denounce the Trump administration’s growing ranks of climate deniers and recent moves to repeal regulations limiting greenhouse gases.
“Resentment toward an insult-hurling, free-riding U.S. president is sure to boil over,” said Paul Bledsoe, a former Clinton White House climate change adviser. “Trump is going to be vilified in no uncertain terms.”
The Trump administration, for its part, will also display something of a split personality. Thomas A. Shannon, undersecretary for political affairs at the State Department and a respected career diplomat, will lead a small American delegation. Scott Pruitt, the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, expressed interest in leading the American negotiating team and may still attend the conference in some capacity, according to several people familiar with the administration’s deliberations. The E.P.A. did not respond to questions about the administrator’s plans.
Climate change activists said they expected to see Trump administration officials championing fossil fuels at the climate conference, an unwelcome position among the thousands of delegates and observers who say the world must move away from polluting sources of energy. But, they said, the presence of Mr. Pruitt, who says he does not believe carbon dioxide is a primary contributor to global warming, would be particularly provocative.
“The message would be, ‘We don’t care.’ The world would see an E.P.A. administrator who doesn’t even believe climate change is real,” said Carol Browner, who led the agency under Bill Clinton.
Behind the scenes, however, diplomats said they believed the Trump negotiating team would be constructive — and in fact probably take some of the same positions as the Obama administration. They are expected to argue, for example, that countries of all levels of wealth should be held to the same legal standards, particularly when it comes to reporting progress in meeting emissions goals.
That will be a tricky needle to thread, said Andrew Light, who served as a senior adviser on climate change at the State Department in the Obama administration. He said other countries would invariably question America’s right to make demands.
“Every substantive point they put down will be met with the question of ‘how do we take seriously a hard-and-fast position over your contribution to institutions you claim you are going to walk away from?’” he said.
Underscoring the mixed messaging from the Trump administration will be the defiant presence of American governors and mayors. A coalition of philanthropies led by Michael Bloomberg, the former mayor of New York, and Tom Steyer, the billionaire environmental activist, was expected to announce Wednesday that they will cover the approximately $200,000 costs of a pavilion to showcase efforts of American states, cities and businesses in meeting the goals of the Paris agreement.
The pavilion, a space adjacent to the government negotiating center, is an expense normally borne by the federal government to highlight steps the country is taking on things like developing clean energy. E & E Newsreported that the Trump administration had declined to fund the pavilion this year.
“We’re stepping into the breach,” said Gov. Jay Inslee of Washington, a Democrat. “The president has run up the white flag of surrender to climate change, and we intend to wave our flag.”
Mr. Bloomberg said he felt strongly that there be a way to show other countries that the United States is represented by leaders who are committed to tackling climate change despite the fact that Mr. Trump has labeled it a hoax.
“He runs the U.S. government, he has a right to do that,” Mr. Bloomberg said of Mr. Trump. But, he asserted, “The American people and American industry are pretty much all behind doing what the Paris agreement is designed to do, and that is to cut the amount of greenhouse gases going into the atmosphere so we will slow down and maybe even stop climate change, which has the potential to destroy the world.”
The lingering question over the Bonn talks will be whether the United States will indeed leave the international accord. That will probably remain unanswered for some time.
Mr. Bloomberg said the debate over Mr. Trump’s intentions should not be a distraction from the urgent business of addressing climate change.
“Don’t sit there and waste your time talking about should’ve and would’ve and could’ve,” he said. “I hope the administration will change their mind and will realize this is a very serious thing, but we can’t sit around. We have to act for our children and grandchildren.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/18/climate/trump-paris-accord.html
-
Pruitt: Staff Dropping the Ball on 'Real, Tangible' Problems
Oct 18, 2017 | E&E Climatewire
By Jean Chemnick
U.S. EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt wants a public fight over climate science, and he thinks his agency's staff isn't acting urgently enough on "real" environmental problems like toxic waste cleanup.
Those were some of his key points yesterday as he spoke to an appreciative audience at the conservative Heritage Foundation. Pruitt used his remarks, which served as a warmup act for President Trump's address to the influential conservative group later in the night, to skewer scientists, environmentalists and the Obama administration. He also reminded the audience at a Washington hotel of his progress in reversing Obama-era air, water and climate change policies.
On climate change, Pruitt touted his proposal for a "red team, blue team" dialogue on climate science, which would pit researchers critical of the science of human-caused warming against mainstream scientists. He said he was open to the eventual outcome of the monthslong exercise.
"If it poses an existential threat, I want to know," he said.
He expressed skepticism that scientists could pinpoint an "ideal" average surface temperature for the Earth. Scientists do grapple with the temperature threshold at which catastrophic warming would become inevitable, but most say that warming levels north of 2 degrees Celsius above preindustrial levels would usher in a host of global challenges.
He also criticized EPA staffers' "lack of urgency" on "real" environmental objectives, including Superfund cleanups.
"As I was engaged in meetings at the office, there just appeared to be a lack of urgency, a lack of focus, a lack of energy to do what's right to serve the American people in a fundamental way to provide real, tangible environmental outcomes in water, air and Superfund. So we're getting back to basics."
Pruitt also used the Heritage podium to preview a new directive to be released next week that would limit the role scientific experts who receive EPA grants can play in advising the agency on policy.
The number of scientists who sit on EPA's expert advisory boards and receive backing from the agency "causes question on the independence and the veracity and the transparency of the recommendations that are coming our way," he said. "Next week we're going to fix that."
Pruitt also celebrated Monday's agencywide directive aimed at dismantling what conservatives term "sue and settle," whereby the agency reaches a settlement agreement with litigants outside of court on rulemaking issues. The term was generally used to decry Obama-era settlements with environmental litigants pressing for tougher or sooner environmental rules, but Andrew Rosenberg, director of the Center for Science and Democracy at the Union of Concerned Scientists, noted that the same arrangements are reached with industry.
But he said Pruitt's directive, which is not binding on him, would likely be applied to lawsuits from environmentalists and not industry.
"So far he has consistently sided with industry on absolutely everything," Rosenberg said.
The same is likely to hold true for next week's directive, he said. Academic researchers who rely on government grants to support their work would have to choose between pro bono participation on EPA advisory boards and access to government funds. Meanwhile, scientists employed in industry could act as advisers without making a similar sacrifice.
"It essentially turns the idea of conflict of interest on its head," he said. "It's basically a through-the-looking-glass kind of approach."
Pruitt spoke in glowing terms about Trump's legacy on environmental issues, especially his "tremendously courageous" decision to leave the Paris climate agreement. Pruitt, who was perhaps the administration's most outspoken proponent of leaving the 2015 accord, slammed the agreement as a collection of "words and labels" rather than a driver of action.
The EPA administrator also blasted German Chancellor Angela Merkel for her country's move away from nuclear energy in response to the 2011 Fukushima Daiichi disaster in Japan — a shift that increased Germany's emissions in the near term. Pruitt is rumored to be considering attending next month's U.N. climate summit in Bonn, Germany, and his comments about Merkel could offer a preview of the message he would take to the talks.
At the Heritage event, he accused the previous administration of offering a false choice between the environment and economic development.
He said that "true environmentalism, from my perspective, is using the natural resources that God has blessed us with to feed the world, to power the world, but with a sensitivity to future generations."
Pruitt noted that the Clean Air Act has delivered air quality gains since the 1980s, even as the economy grew. It's a fact his predecessor, former EPA chief Gina McCarthy, often cited to argue that EPA rules would not slow economic growth.
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2017/10/18/stories/1060063901
-
Pruitt's Promised Directive Rattles Science Advisers
Oct 18, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Hannah Northey and Sean Reilly
U.S. EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt's suggestion that he'd get rid of advisory committee members who also receive EPA grants has roiled the research community.
Speaking at a Heritage Foundation event yesterday, Pruitt questioned the objectivity of scientists who serve on EPA advisory boards and also receive agency grants. He promised to issue a directive next week to "fix that."
A Pruitt spokeswoman didn't reply to emailed requests for details on the forthcoming policy, such as whether it would require advisers who have received past or present EPA funding to step down.
But the impact could be far-reaching.
EPA has two dozen federal advisory committees that provide advice on air quality, pesticides, chemicals, environmental justice, drinking water safety, hazardous waste and more. Also in play are panels under the auspices of individual committees to address specific topics like air quality standards for a particular pollutant.
While some members of Congress — including Pruitt's fellow Oklahoman, Rep. Frank Lucas (R) — have said the current system creates at least the appearance of a conflict of interest, critics of Pruitt's approach warned that it could undercut efforts to keep the agency's work grounded in top-notch research.
Deborah Swackhamer, a retired science professor who chairs the agency's Board of Scientific Counselors (BOSC), said conflict-of-interest rules for advisers are already clear and prevent researchers from directly influencing or being influenced by EPA grants. If a conflict is discovered, she said, researchers must recuse themselves in a process that's also overseen by EPA's ethics officials.
"To simply disqualify a whole bunch of excellent scientists is throwing the baby out with the bathwater," she said. "It guarantees a less qualified set of advisers and is a clear attempt by the administrator to remold these boards to his own liking, so that they will support his deregulation agenda rather than provide objective advice."
Excluding researchers who have received EPA funding is likely to "significantly and adversely affect the quality of the scientific advice" provided to the agency, said Ana Diez Roux, a Drexel University epidemiologist and immediate past chairwoman of EPA's Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee.
"The top scientists, the ones most qualified to provide objective and transparent scientific advice to EPA, are of course the scientists who will likely be most successful at obtaining highly competitive federal grants," Diez Roux said in an email. "It would be a disservice to the American public to exclude those most qualified from serving on these panels."
The committee — often known by its acronym, CASAC — is a seven-member body charged with providing outside expertise during EPA's assessments of the agency's air quality standards for a half-dozen major pollutants.
Depending on its scope and how quickly it takes effect, Pruitt's directive could carry major repercussions for a high-stakes review of the particulate matter standard. That review, launched last year by a 27-member CASAC review panel, is being closely followed by industry and environmental groups in light of mounting research that fine particulates pose health risks at levels below the current limits.
Last year, the Energy and Environment Legal Institute, an anti-regulatory group, sued to disband the panel on the grounds that Diez Roux and most of the other members had received EPA grants at some point and were thus allegedly biased toward the agency's position in favor of tighter regulation. The group had wanted a federal judge to name a new panel with members "independent" of EPA influence.
The institute dropped the lawsuit after EPA attorneys argued that the group lacked legal standing to bring the litigation; the agency also pointed to a 1999 decision by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that concluded that receipt of grant money didn't mean that advisory committee members were "susceptible to improper influence."
In an interview yesterday, Steve Milloy, a senior fellow at the institute, said he didn't know the specifics of what Pruitt had in mind but applauded the overall intent.
"I'm very pleased," Milloy said. "It's something I've been working on for a long time."Industry push
Pruitt's plans could also fall within the scope of a broader campaign by business organizations to open the door for more industry participation on advisory committees.
Under H.R. 1431, a House-passed bill sponsored by Lucas, no member of one panel, the Science Advisory Board, could have current EPA grants or contracts; members would be barred from applying for agency funding for three years after their term ends. The measure would also allow industry representatives with a stake in the board's work to serve as long as any conflicts of interests are disclosed.
Similar legislation has won House approval in past years, only to die in the Senate. In urging Democratic support for the latest version, Lucas in March suggested that Pruitt, who previously served as Oklahoma's Republican attorney general, could otherwise tackle the issue on his own.
"He is a very energetic, very bright attorney," Lucas said at a House Science, Space and Technology Committee markup. "If, perhaps, in the last session, you were concerned about what this would do to EPA, I would suggest ... you should be with me to potentially address your concerns from this point on."
A Lucas spokesman did not respond today to requests for comment on Pruitt's plans.
Michael Halpern, deputy director of the Center for Science and Democracy at the Union of Concerned Scientists, said in a blog post yesterday that Pruitt is attempting to push through the goals of House legislation that have failed to make their way through Congress.
Halpern also noted that Pruitt is not opposed to advisers who receive industry funding.
"So let's recap: according to some, scientists who receive money from oil and chemical companies are perfectly qualified to provide the EPA with independent science advice, while those who receive federal grants are not," he wrote. "It's a fundamental misrepresentation of how conflicts of interest work."
Joanne Carney, director of government relations at the American Association for the Advancement of Science, said she knew of no federal agency that currently bars grant recipients from serving on advisory committees.
While noting that it's difficult to comment without knowing details of Pruitt's plans, Carney said that the association "would question policies that would exclude qualified experts from review panels based on criteria that are extraneous."
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2017/10/18/stories/1060063991
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested