Preview Newsletter
PM ACC 3/11/17
-
Pruitt to Address Trade Group at Luxury Resort
Nov 3, 2017 | The Hill - E2 Blog
By Avery Anapol
EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt will address a chemical trade group next week at a luxury resort in South Carolina. -
(ACC Mentioned) EPA Chief Scott Pruitt to Talk With Chemical Industry at Kiawah Island Next Week
Nov 3, 2017 | The Post and Courier
By Bo Petersen
EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt will speak to the American Chemistry Council board at a Kiawah Island retreat on Thursday. -
(ACC Mentioned) Scott Pruitt Set to Receive Warm Welcome From Chemical Industry Allies at South Carolina Resort
Nov 3, 2017 | Think Progress
By Mark Hand
Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt is scheduled to give a speech next week at the American Chemistry Council’s (ACC) annual board meeting, an event where he is expected to receive a warm reception from chemical company executives. -
(ACC Mentioned) Scott Pruitt Announces New Appointees to Advisory Boards After Banning EPA Grant Recipients
Nov 3, 2017 | The Washington Examiner
By Josh Siegel
Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt on Friday announced new appointments to three key advisory boards and made it clear he favors state regulators and energy industry representatives over environmentalists. -
(ACC Mentioned) US Targets Higher Recycling Rates
Nov 3, 2017 | Innovators Magazine
Americans are being urged to do more to boost recycling rates as part of a nationwide campaign. -
EPA Names Industry, State Officials to Advisory Boards
Nov 3, 2017 | The Hill - E2 Blog
By Timothy Cama
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) overhauled its external advisory boards Friday with new members representing various regulated industries and states, among other entities. -
Trump Visits Asia With Gas Execs as World Meets on Climate
Nov 3, 2017 | E&E Climatewire
By Zack Colman
President Trump is heading to Asia with natural gas exporters on the eve of an international climate conference, signaling sharp contrasts between the United States and other nations as efforts get underway to reduce carbon emissions worldwide. -
Interior Review Omits Oil and Gas Rule
Nov 3, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Pamela King
The Interior Department could skip one rule in its effort to erase all agency actions that unduly strain U.S. energy production. -
PHMSA Leaders Say Rollbacks Can Improve Safety
Nov 3, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Mike Soraghan
Top federal pipeline regulators said yesterday that Trump-era regulatory rollbacks can improve safety. -
How a DuPont Carve-Out Made a Comeback
Nov 3, 2017 | The Washington Post
By Tatyana Shumsky
It was supposed to be the worst spinoff in the history of spins. WhenDuPont Co. DWDP -1.21% cleaved off its performance chemicals business as Chemours Co. CC -9.39% in June 2015, doubts ran high about the company’s future. -
Antero Claims Crown as Largest U.S. NGL Producer
Nov 3, 2017 | Natural Gas Inteligence
By Jamison Cocklin
Antero Resources Corp. became the nation’s largest natural gas liquids (NGL) producer in the third quarter, according to company calculations, after years of amassing a wetter position and focusing on the richer portions of the Marcellus and Utica shales. -
Former OSHA Officials Fault EPA's RMP Delay
Nov 3, 2017 | Inside EPA
Former Obama Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) officials are backing environmental and labor groups' lawsuit challenging the Trump administration's delay EPA's facility accident prevention rule, arguing in an that the delay will impair the agency's ability to prevent and mitigate chemical disasters and violates federal law. -
Trump to Loom Large Over Climate Talks
Nov 3, 2017 | E&E Climatewire
By Jean Chemnick
President Trump's decision to leave the Paris Agreement was made by the White House, but it will fall to career diplomats to defend it to the world at U.N. talks that begin in Bonn, Germany, on Monday. -
EPA's Science Is Under Attack: What You Need to Know
Nov 3, 2017 | Environmental Defense Fund
By Diane Regas
For decades, scientists have known that the more we reduce soot and other particulate matter in the air we breathe, the healthier we’ll be. So how can the man in charge of environmental protection for our nation suddenly claim that this established truth no longer holds true? -
New Adviser Suggested Clean Air's 'Not Good for the Children'
Nov 3, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Sean Reilly
A newly appointed member to a top U.S. EPA advisory panel suggested in 2012 that children need exposure to contaminated air to help their lungs ward off pollutants, according to a profile by a leading scientific organization.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
-
Pruitt to Address Trade Group at Luxury Resort
Nov 3, 2017 | The Hill - E2 Blog
By Avery Anapol
EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt will address a chemical trade group next week at a luxury resort in South Carolina.
Pruitt and eight members of EPA staff will travel to Kiawah Island’s Sanctuary Hotel to speak to the board of the American Chemistry Council, the Washington Post reported.
An EPA spokesman told the Post that the trip is part of Pruitt’s “back-to-basics” tour to meet with stakeholders.
The spokesman confirmed that the government would be paying for the trip, including a $135 government rate per room, per night for the hotel. The Post reported that registration costs for the meeting start at $649.
Spending among cabinet members in the Trump administration has been under close scrutiny – health secretary Tom Price resigned after reports emerged of his excessive spending of taxpayer dollars on private flights for government business.
Pruitt’s spending, in particular, has drawn ire. The EPA spent nearly $25,000 to build a soundproof phone booth for Pruitt, despite already having one in the EPA building. Pruitt also has a 24/7 security detail, breaking with predecessors who had security details when working and in transit.
A security detail of three will accompany Pruitt on the trip to South Carolina, according to the Post.
http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/358586-pruitt-to-address-trade-group-at-luxury-resort
-
(ACC Mentioned) EPA Chief Scott Pruitt to Talk With Chemical Industry at Kiawah Island Next Week
Nov 3, 2017 | The Post and Courier
By Bo Petersen
EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt will speak to the American Chemistry Council board at a Kiawah Island retreat on Thursday.
A staff including security, policy, public engagement and press aides will accompany him to the plush Sanctuary Hotel on the resort island near Charleston.
The council is a lobbying group representing chemical manufacturers — a $768 billion group of businesses, according to its website.
“This is part of Administrator Pruitt’s back-to-basics tour as he continues to meet with as many stakeholders as possible," EPA spokesman Jahan Wilcox said. "Administering the Toxic Substances Control Act, amended by the 2016 Lautenberg Chemical Safety Act, is one of Environmental Protection Agency's core functions.”
All expenses will be paid by the EPA, Wilcox said.
Government officials typically meet with the business communities they regulate to share perspectives, council spokeswoman Anne Kolton said. Previous EPA administrators Gina McCarthy and Lisa Jackson spoke at council board meetings during the Obama administration, she said.
Pruitt met in July with South Carolina farmers, developers and utility company representatives at a private home in Orangeburg to discuss EPA's plan to rescind the Clean Water Rule and eventually replace it. Environmental groups were not invited to that meeting. The Kiawah meeting is not open to outside groups.
The Trump administration has called for dramatic cuts to the budget of the EPA, the central federal environmental law enforcement agency.
Pruitt, who as Oklahoma's attorney general repeatedly sued the EPA, has focused his administration on cutting back regulations and easing enforcement. In an April radio interview, he said, "Science should not be something that’s just thrown about to try and dictate policy in Washington D.C."
Conservationists weren't pleased to hear of the Kiawah engagement.
"Scott Pruitt has been selling out the health and safety of our families to the chemical industry since he came into office, including by allowing a dangerous pesticide to stay on the market and thwarting safeguards requiring that companies disclose toxic substances at their facilities," said Chris Hall, the Sierra Club's South Carolina chapter chair.
"His dependency on and subservience to corporate polluters is on full display with this trip, and that should worry everyone who wants to keep our kids safe from environmental toxins," Hall said.
http://www.postandcourier.com/news/epa-chief-scott-pruitt-to-talk-with-chemical-industry-at/article_c121fa72-c0a6-11e7-b52c-0b0c960c4902.html
-
Nov 3, 2017 | Think Progress
By Mark Hand
Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt is scheduled to give a speech next week at the American Chemistry Council’s (ACC) annual board meeting, an event where he is expected to receive a warm reception from chemical company executives.
Pruitt plans to bring eight EPA staffers to the November 9 event, including his chief of staff and a senior adviser on state and regional affairs, the Washington Post reported Thursday. The ACC, the primary trade and lobbying group for the chemical industry, is holding the board meeting at The Sanctuary at Kiawah Island, a luxury hotel and resort near Charleston, South Carolina.
The trip to South Carolina “is part of Administrator Pruitt’s ‘back-to-basics’ tour as he continues to meet with as many stakeholders as possible,” EPA spokesman Jahan Wilcox said in a statement sent to the Post. Since taking over as EPA administrator in February, Pruitt has met almost exclusively with representatives from chemical companies and other industries that the agency is mandated to regulate.
“He’ll get a warm reception. After all, until Scott Pruitt came along, chemical companies held the worst reputation for environmental integrity in America,” Environmental Working Group (EWG) President Ken Cook said in a statement about Pruitt’s attendance at the ACC board meeting. (The EWG is a nonprofit group that advocates for protecting human health and the environment.)
Aside from meeting with chemical companies, Pruitt has hired chemical industry representatives to fill top positions at the agency, including former ACC official Nancy Beck, who has a long history of defending toxic chemicals. Pruitt also installed Michael Dourson, President Donald Trump’s nominee to run the EPA’s Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, as a senior adviser, E&E News reported — even before the Senate voted to confirm Dourson in that role.
Trump nominated Dourson, a University of Cincinnati environmental health professor, to head the division of the EPA responsible for chemical safety and for enforcing the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), the nation’s primary chemicals management law. Dourson also runs an organization called Toxicology Excellence for Risk Assessment, which has produced reports minimizing concerns about the safety of chemicals produced by companies like DuPont, Dow, and Boeing.
“No one in the environmental community will forgive Pruitt for what he’s doing. And we will never forget the companies that used his disgraceful tenure to turn back the clock on chemical safety and environmental regulation,” Cook said.
Richard Denison, lead senior scientist with the Environmental Defense Fund, said his group is concerned with how deep into the EPA the chemical industry has “infiltrated.”
“Nancy Beck, fresh from ACC, and Michael Dourson, a frequent consultant to ACC, are in highly influential positions,” Denison told ThinkProgress.
The ACC successfully petitioned the EPA to implement a two-year delay for the effective date of an Obama-era rule that would have tightened safety requirements for companies that store large quantities of dangerous chemicals, such as those stored at the Arkema Inc. chemical plant near Houston that was damaged by Hurricane Harvey and exploded, injuring several first responders. The EPA rule — the Risk Management Plan amendments — would have required chemical plants to make public the types and quantities of chemicals stored onsite. The rule was developed after a fertilizer plant in Texas exploded in 2013, killing 15 people.
Mathy Stanislaus, a former EPA assistant administrator who helped draft the rule for the Obama administration, told the Associated Press that the rule, if it had not been delayed, could have greatly reduced the risk to police officers and paramedics who responded to the explosion at the Arkema plant.
In 2016, Congress overhauled TSCA for the first time in decades, requiring the EPA to conduct comprehensive risk evaluations of chemicals without regard to cost, and with special attention to the risks posed to vulnerable populations. In its implementation of the law, however, the Trump administration issued dramatically weakened rules governing how the agency assesses the safety of a chemical.
Public health and environmental advocates charge that EPA is no longer testing new chemicals as required by the law and that his appointees are rewriting the rules for how the law will be implemented going forward.
Earlier in his tenure, Pruitt met with Cal Dooley, president and CEO of ACC, and several other officials from the group at EPA headquarters on May 10, the Washington Post reported. The topic listed on the calendar for the meeting was, “Importance of EPA to the antimicrobial and chemical industry and the need for greater transparency and opportunities for stakeholder engagement.”
On May 15, Pruitt also met with Mark Vergnano, president and CEO of leading chemical company Chemours. On the same day, the EPA administrator met with officials from the National Association of Chemical Distributors to discuss TSCA and other related issues. And on May 20, he toured Brainerd Chemical in Oklahoma, a major provider and distributor of chemicals for research facilities, industrial plants, and agricultural operations, according to the Post.
“The industry’s heavy influence is already visible in virtually every decision being made,” Denison said, “from Pruitt overruling EPA scientists on chlorpyrifos, to Beck’s wholesale rewrite of the rules that will determine how the new chemical safety law is implemented for years to come, to the industry’s ability to get the EPA to reverse course on its reviews of new chemicals, to apparent decisions by EPA to delay or abandon its first attempts in 28 years to ban high-risk uses of dangerous chemicals under TSCA.”
On Tuesday, in an unprecedented move, Pruitt announced that no scientists who had received EPA funding would be eligible to serve on the agency’s Science Advisory Board (SAB), which provides scientific and technical expertise regarding environmental regulations. The EPA administrator on Friday released a list of people he plans to appoint to the SAB. The list contains names of officials from energy and chemical companies, including Sue Marty, toxicology science director at Dow Chemical Company, and Kimberly White, senior director of the ACC’s Chemical Products and Technology Department.
In her role at the ACC, White has challenged studies that show a link between formaldehyde exposure and leukemia. Earlier this year, White submitted testimonyto the House Science Committee criticizing the processes used by the EPA to evaluate and assess how chemicals interact with the human body and the environment.
https://thinkprogress.org/scott-pruitt-to-speak-to-chemical-executives-5a6acb1c33f4/
-
Nov 3, 2017 | The Washington Examiner
By Josh Siegel
Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt on Friday announced new appointments to three key advisory boards and made it clear he favors state regulators and energy industry representatives over environmentalists.
The appointments to the Science Advisory Board, Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee, and Board of Scientific Counselors were announced after Pruitt this week unveiled a new directive to block scientists who receive EPA funding from serving on the advisory boards.
Pruitt, in announcing the directive barring EPA grant recipients, said more than 430 people applied to the Board of Scientific Counselors and over 130 applied for the Scientific Advisory Board. Forty-two people have applied for seven positions with the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee.
Critics say that means the EPA will fill the boards with corporate interests who support Pruitt’s deregulatory agenda.
But Pruitt said the current crop of applicants represents a broader geographic area than in previous boards. He said his goal is to provide more “fulsome” representation on the boards.
“To ensure that EPA is receiving the best independent scientific advice, I am appointing highly qualified experts and scientists to these important committees,” Pruitt said Friday.
Michael Honeycutt, who heads the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality’s toxicology division, will lead the Scientific Advisory Board. Honeycutt has questioned the health risks associated with smog.
Tony Cox, an independent consultant in quantitative risk analysis, will lead the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee. And Paul Gilman, chief sustainability officer at Covanta Energy and a former EPA official under President George W. Bush, will head the Board of Scientific Advisers.
Pruitt appointed two others to the seven-member Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee: James Boylan of the Georgia Department of Natural Resources and Larry Wolk from the Colorado Department of Public Health & Environment.
He chose 18 new members for the Scientific Advisory Board, with representatives from the utility industry, chemical industry, refining industry and state governments. These include Larry Monroe of Southern Company, Kimberly White of the American Chemistry Council, Merlin Lindstrom of Phillips 66, and Bob Blanz of the Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality.
Monroe, as chief environmental officer at Southern Company, argued the Obama administration’s Clean Power Plan was “unworkable and would increase electricity prices to customers while hurting reliability.”
Arkansas was one of 26 states that sued the Obama administration over the Clean Power Plan, which aimed to regulate emissions from coal-fired power plants.
Another appointee, Anne Smith, the managing director of NERA Economic Consulting, has worked for groups that opposed the Obama administration’s regulatory agenda.
Pruitt’s appointments to the Board of Scientific Counselorscontain more balance between industry and science. There are multiple representatives from the federal national labs, including Charlette Geffen and Katrina Waters of the Pacific Northwest National Laboratory.
Among the other choices are Jennifer McPartland, a senior scientist of the Environmental Defense Fund; Kari Cutting of the North Dakota Petroleum Council; Tim Wallington of Ford and Bart Croes of the California Air Resources Board.
California is in talks with the Trump administration over its strict vehicle emissions standards. President Trump earlier this year launched a review of the Obama administration’s greenhouse gas rules for the auto industry.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/scott-pruitt-announces-new-appointees-to-advisory-boards-after-banning-epa-grant-recipients/article/2639547
-
(ACC Mentioned) US Targets Higher Recycling Rates
Nov 3, 2017 | Innovators Magazine
Americans are being urged to do more to boost recycling rates as part of a nationwide campaign.
Keep America Beautiful leads the America Recycles Day – being held this year on 15 November. It aims to raise awareness on the importance of seeing waste as a resource and encourage people to be proactive in recycling goods and be conscious to #BeRecycled 365 days a year.
“America Recycles Day is a call-to-action to motivate individuals to actively pursue a #BeRecycled lifestyle 365 days a year. America Recycles Day helps to shine a light on our ongoing efforts to educate and inspire people to reduce, reuse and recycle, and when they buy, to buy products made from sustainable and recycled materials,” said Brenda Pulley, senior vice president, recycling, Keep America Beautiful.
Events are being planned across the States, and people can pledge to do more. The American Chemistry Council, H&M and Indorama Ventures are some of the big names sponsoring the activities.
“Indorama Ventures is committed to supporting America Recycles Day because it offers an opportunity for the next generation of environmental stewards to learn about the importance of recycling and taking care of the environment,” added Russ Wilson, plant manager at Indorama Venture’s IVXP Plant in Decatur, Alabama.
https://www.innovatorsmag.com/us-targets-higher-recycling-rates/
-
EPA Names Industry, State Officials to Advisory Boards
Nov 3, 2017 | The Hill - E2 Blog
By Timothy Cama
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) overhauled its external advisory boards Friday with new members representing various regulated industries and states, among other entities.
Among the dozens of new members to the Science Advisory Board, Clean Air Safety Advisory Committee and Board of Scientific Counselors are representatives of Phillips 66 Co., Southern Co. and the North Dakota Petroleum Council.
Some of the new advisers have controversial scientific views, including one who believes air quality is too clean for children, while the new members include multiple climate change skeptics.
“To ensure that EPA is receiving the best independent scientific advice, I am appointing highly-qualified experts and scientists to these important committees,” EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, who has the authority to appoint and dismiss the advisory board members, said in a statement accompanying the lists.
The advisers have no decisionmaking authority, but they’re often called upon to interpret and judge scientific research as well as give opinions on regulatory matters and other decisions the agency makes.
The overhauled boards reflect a new policy Pruitt established earlier this week that no scientists receiving EPA grants could be on any of the EPA advisory committees, which he said would reduce conflicts of interest. Instead, Pruitt has pushed to encourage state and local government representatives and people with diverse viewpoints.
Several scientists, Democrats and environmentalists sharply criticized the move, saying it was meant to exclude the most qualified experts in the fields.
Pruitt carved out an exemption to the grantee rule for representatives of state, local, tribal and territorial governments.
Pruitt’s policy released this week also put a new emphasis on regional diversity and “fresh perspectives,” which regulated industries and Republicans have been seeking for years.
The rosters released Friday include Merlin Lindstrom, vice president for research at Phillips 66 on the science board; Larry Monroe, head of research and environment at Southern Co., also on the science board; and Kari Cutting, vice president at the North Dakota Petroleum Council, on the Board of Scientific Counselors’ executive committee.
Tony Cox, the new head of the clean air committee, runs a consulting firm serving oil and chemical clients. He has published research questioning whether recent reductions in pollutants like fine particulate matter and ozone yields health benefits, which runs contrary to the EPA’s position.
Robert Phalen of the University of California, Irvine is a new science board chairman. He has argued that current air quality in the United States is too clean for “optimum health.”
The advisory panels kept most of the members, including many from academia and environmental groups.
They include Viney Aneja of North Carolina State University, on the Board of Science Advisors’ executive committee and Jack Harkema of Michigan State University on the clean air committee.
Pruitt even added at least one representative of an environmental group: Jennifer McPartland, a senior scientists with the Environmental Defense Fund, is on the Board of Scientific Advisors’ chemical safety subcommittee.
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/358640-epa-names-industry-state-officials-to-advisory-boards
-
Trump Visits Asia With Gas Execs as World Meets on Climate
Nov 3, 2017 | E&E Climatewire
By Zack Colman
President Trump is heading to Asia with natural gas exporters on the eve of an international climate conference, signaling sharp contrasts between the United States and other nations as efforts get underway to reduce carbon emissions worldwide.
Several energy companies are expected to join Trump for part of his trip, beginning tomorrow, to boost trade with Asian nations. Natural gas exports from the United States are expected to play a significant role in leveling imbalances with energy-hungry Asian allies. Meanwhile, diplomats will gather Sunday in Bonn, Germany, to begin designing the architecture of the Paris climate accord, the global pact from which Trump has promised to withdraw the United States.
The dichotomy of the two trips highlights a tension within the White House.
The dominant Trump theme is that remaining in the Paris Agreement would kill jobs and dampen energy-dependent economic sectors. But others in the administration argue that acting on climate could be an advantage to its trade and energy agenda. George David Banks, who oversees the White House's international energy portfolio, has privately pushed climate engagement as a way to promote exports, according to an international source.
State Department officials, though, haven't been advised on how to "re-engage" on Paris, an idea that the White House has floated without any specificity. Diplomats and environmental groups have said their conversations with the U.S. government have been frustrating, because U.S. officials lack actionable information.
Nothing has changed with the White House's position on the Paris Agreement, said White House spokeswoman Kelly Love, even as it sends a skeleton negotiating crew to the Conference of the Parties to the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change in Bonn. The White House also doesn't plan to discuss climate change while the president is in China, even as U.S. and Chinese negotiators sit down in Bonn to write the new rules about reporting greenhouse gas emissions as part of the Paris accord.
"The Chinese have not brought it up in trip planning discussions," National Security Council spokesman Michael Anton said in an email. "We do not plan to make it a topic either."
Rather, the Asia visit presents a chance to capitalize on the administration's "energy dominance" platform by promoting liquefied natural gas exports. News reports indicate that the Commerce Department has invited LNG exporters, like Cheniere Energy Inc., to the China leg of the trip, along with big-name chemicals firms like DowDuPont Inc. Others that trade in the renewable energy and efficiency space, such as Honeywell International Inc. and General Electric Co., were also reportedly invited.
China will be a big focus; Cheniere already has an office there and is looking to expand its shipments. LNG exports are also playing a role in negotiations over an existing free-trade agreement with South Korea. The Trump administration contends that South Korea hasn't properly enforced that deal.
"The Koreans [are] highlighting that the imbalance is going to get less because of this energy import opportunity," said Christopher Guith of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Global Energy Institute.
While the administration's focus is on boosting exports and eliminating trade imbalances, experts said expanding LNG trade could have short-term climate benefits by encouraging a swifter move away from coal.
"What President Trump really is competing for, if indeed he is going to be hawking U.S. LNG on this trip, is going to be for the market, not for credit with respect to the international climate negotiations," said Andrew Light, a former State Department climate adviser who is now a distinguished senior fellow at the World Resources Institute.
The concern among many climate advocates is that the boost in LNG trade won't be short-lived.
That's because the U.S. export infrastructure is in its infancy. The lifetime of those assets would last beyond when countries need to rapidly draw down greenhouse gas emissions to avoid a 2-degree-Celsius global temperature rise above preindustrial levels by 2100, said Alden Meyer, a veteran observer of the UNFCCC negotiations with the Union of Concerned Scientists.
"It can be a short-term piece of the puzzle when you're talking about converting some coal-fired plants to natural gas," Meyer said. "But building a whole new natural gas liquefaction and exporting infrastructure makes no sense if you're concerned about climate."
Still, companies joining Trump's Asia voyage have a chance to make a climate statement from China, which has filled a leadership vacuum on the global climate stage since Trump broadcast his plan to pull the United States from the Paris accord, noted Sherri Goodman, who was undersecretary of Defense for environmental security under President Clinton.
Goodman noted that companies like General Electric, which has signed onto the "We Are Still In" pledge to adhere to the Paris accord goals, and Honeywell would stand to benefit from climate-friendly policies.
She added that China and the United States cemented strong relationships on clean energy under the Obama administration. She expects that to continue, given China's moves to implement a cap-and-trade emissions market, ban coal in Beijing, and potentially limit the use of internal-combustion engines.
"I can't tell you what their press people are planning to highlight, but you can look at companies like GE and Honeywell that are in the delegation are also in the clean tech business," Goodman said. "They certainly have the potential to get a twofer."
GE and Honeywell declined to comment on whether they would address climate change during the trip.
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2017/11/03/stories/1060065509
-
Interior Review Omits Oil and Gas Rule
Nov 3, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Pamela King
The Interior Department could skip one rule in its effort to erase all agency actions that unduly strain U.S. energy production.
Last week, Interior unveiled its review of all department actions with the potential to burden domestic energy activity. The report touched on the department's ongoing examination of rules introduced by the Bureau of Land Management, Fish and Wildlife Service, and National Park Service under the previous administration to guide oversight of oil and gas operations on sites the agencies manage.
But beyond a mention of Secretary Ryan Zinke's secretarial order listing four Interior rules pinpointed in President Trump's March 28 "energy independence" directive, the NPS rule doesn't even appear in the document.
"The NPS rule was under review," said Interior spokeswoman Heather Swift. "No action has been taken or identified for it, which is why it is not in the report."
She did not confirm whether the current rule would be allowed to stand.
In keeping with the White House strategy to promote "energy independence and economic growth," Interior had previously indicated it would review four oil and gas rules (Energywire, April 4).
Two of those rules — introduced by President Obama's Bureau of Land Management to control hydraulic fracturing and methane emissions on public lands — have since been proposed for rescission and suspension under the rulemaking process.
The Trump administration also targeted two less controversial Obama-era measures: One expanded NPS's oversight of older drill sites and wells located on park peripheries, and another introduced new standards for FWS governance of oil and gas activity in wildlife refuges (Greenwire, April 25).
As of the release of Interior's regulatory review, FWS and NPS had not introduced proposals to change their oil and gas rules. Last week's report offered no further details on how — or even whether — the regulations would be unraveled.
Short of a proactive statement from Interior that the NPS rule will remain intact, it still appears to be fair game for revision, said Nicholas Lund, senior manager for the National Parks Conservation Association's landscape conservation program.
"I would like a clear indication, but we don't have that," said Lund, who supported the rule.
Interior's report is a response to Trump's energy independence order, but it's unclear whether the department's document offers a comprehensive picture of how it will fulfill the president's vision.
"There's no indication that this report is a path forward for them or is everything they're planning to do or will do," Lund said.
Four energy industry groups said they opposed the NPS rule because it was duplicative.
"Our comment letters point out our concerns with the proposed regulations and we would hope that those are addressed by Interior," said American Exploration & Production Council (AXPC) President Bruce Thompson. "A fair and reasonable regulatory regime is not a problem for AXPC members, and we are always willing and anxious to sit down with our regulators in any agency to work on a result that is good for all parties."
He added that AXPC favors a complete repeal of the NPS rule.
"One way to achieve this would be the rescission immediately followed by engagement with all stakeholders with a view to generate thoughtful and fair regulations," Thompson said.FWS rule
Swift said yesterday that she had no additional information to offer on the FWS regulation. Interior's review includes slightly more information on the rule's future — but not much.
"The FWS is reviewing its final rule, 'Management of Non-Federal Oil and Gas Rights' ... to determine whether revision would be appropriate to reduce burden on energy," the report says.
Supporters of the rule said they objected to its characterization in the Interior review.
"The Department of the Interior's 'burdens' report only briefly references this rule, noting that the administration is still reviewing it for potential burdens on energy development," said Mark Salvo, vice president of landscape conservation at Defenders of Wildlife.
"We contend there are none."
Instead of burdening the government, the rule introduces efficiency to the federal process for managing private mineral interests in the refuge system, Salvo said.
"Voiding this rule would create legal and operational uncertainty for both refuge managers and developers, threaten wildlife and watersheds, and undermine safe, sustainable economic development," he said.
FWS's rule drew criticism from the American Petroleum Institute and the Independent Petroleum Association of America. Both oil and gas trade groups also opposed the NPS rule.
"The legal and practical bases for the proposed regulations are, at best, questionable," the associations wrote. "As described above, the most prudent approach would be for the Service to continue to manage oil and gas activities under its 2012 guidelines for a sufficient period of time, and with adequate staffing, resources, and training, to accurately determine the areas in which those guidelines are effective and the areas in which they are not."
API and IPAA suggested changes to the proposed FWS rule in anticipation of the Obama administration moving forward with the regulation. Those alterations included adjustment of the rule's geographic scope, timing, and appeals process and financial assurances.
"The natural gas and oil industry supports smart, common sense regulations that protect our workers and the environment," API spokeswoman Brooke Sammon wrote in an email yesterday.
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2017/11/03/stories/1060065527
-
PHMSA Leaders Say Rollbacks Can Improve Safety
Nov 3, 2017 | E&E Energywire
By Mike Soraghan
Top federal pipeline regulators said yesterday that Trump-era regulatory rollbacks can improve safety.
"I think we have an opportunity here to make things better, to make regulations more effective," said Alan Mayberry, associate administrator for pipeline safety at the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration.
Mayberry was speaking at the annual conference of the Pipeline Safety Trust, where the regulatory agenda of the Trump administration is a major theme. The title of this year's conference is "Moving Forward, Holding Steady, or Slipping Back?"
The No. 2 Trump appointee at PHMSA said weeding out bad regulations can improve enforcement of good ones.
"We're constantly seeking ways to improve them by eliminating unnecessary or overly burdensome requirements that distract from beneficial requirements," Deputy Administrator Drue Pearce told attendees.
That squares with President Trump's high-profile order to eliminate two rules for every new one enacted.
The conference brings together regulators, industry officials, environmental groups, landowners and the public to discuss pipeline safety. The trust is a Bellingham, Wash.-based advocacy group formed after a fatal pipeline explosion in the area in 1999.
The trust's executive director, Carl Weimer, said he is skeptical of PHMSA's rosy outlook on the regulatory rollbacks. That includes President Trump's two-for-one regulation order.
"Maybe there are rules that are just wasting these companies' time," he said. "But that's hard for me to believe."
Mayberry said that federal pipeline regulation from its inception has had a prescriptive approach — telling pipeline companies what they needed to do to be safe.
"Is there another approach? We need to ask the question," Mayberry said. "It's no good if you're having to put resources where they're not needed."
The alternative to prescriptive approaches has generally been a "risk-based" approach — requiring companies to operate safely but allowing them to figure out how that should be done. PHMSA officials have also been promoting an approach called "safety management systems," an effort to get companies to move past minimum regulations and instill a culture of safety (Energywire, Sept. 28).
Pearce, though, also said she's worried about lack of regulation at the state level, specifically exemption from state "one-call" rules. Pearce said many state legislatures have granted exemptions to farmers and local governments from the rules, which require people to call a utility hotline, often referred to as "811," before digging.
All railroads and the Virginia Department of Transportation are also exempt, she added.
"That's too many exemptions, to my mind," she said, urging people to talk to state legislators about the issue.
Pearce, a former Alaska state legislator, served as federal coordinator for Alaskan natural gas transportation projects and was also a member of PHMSA's Technical Pipeline Safety Standards Committee. With her background in pipelines, she expects to take the lead in the department on pipeline issues while the new administrator, Howard "Skip" Elliott, a former rail executive, leads on rail issues.
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2017/11/03/stories/1060065567
-
How a DuPont Carve-Out Made a Comeback
Nov 3, 2017 | The Washington Post
By Tatyana Shumsky
It was supposed to be the worst spinoff in the history of spins. WhenDuPont Co. DWDP -1.21% cleaved off its performance chemicals business as Chemours Co. CC -9.39% in June 2015, doubts ran high about the company’s future.
Activist investor Nelson Peltz, whose Trian Fund Management received Chemours shares as a DuPont shareholder, sold off the stake within six months. A year after its launch, famed short-seller Andrew Left announced he was betting against the stock with a report titled “Chemours is a bankruptcy waiting to happen.”
Chemours is a market darling today. Shares of the Teflon maker have more than tripled, and the company is on track for its second year of profits, after reporting a loss in 2015. Its turnaround involved an aggressive plan, a bit of luck in the form of a rebound in titanium dioxide prices and a legal settlement.
“Thank God I got out fast,” said Mr. Left, founder of Citron Research, in an interview with CFO Journal. “It surprised a lot more [people] than just me.”
Chemours on Thursday reported adjusted third-quarter earnings of $214 million, or $1.12 a share, up 91% from $112 million, or 61 cents a share, a year ago. The figures beat analysts’ earnings forecasts of $1.04 a share on sales of $1.6 billion.
By contrast, Chemours posted a loss of 10 cents a share for the second quarter of 2015, sparking concern among investors about the company’s future after it separated from DuPont.
Chemours’s transformation plan, announced at the time of the spin, included slashing the dividend, paying down debt and targeting cost cuts of $350 million by 2017. The company also launched a review of its operations with an eye to sell off nonstrategic business units and grow its refrigerants and cyanides businesses.
The executive team pursued three objectives: “Be bold, exercise speed in execution and communicate, communicate, communicate,” said Finance Chief Mark Newman. “We set out with a bold plan to really double earnings from where they were in 2015 to 2017.”
Chemours launched with $3.7 billion in net debt at a time when its operating profit barely breached $250 million. And more than 98% of that money came from a single division: the titanium dioxide business that makes paint and ceramics pigments.
Chemours also inherited part of DuPont’s legal liabilities related to perfluorooctanoic acid, or PFOA. DuPont faced lawsuits over links to potential health problems after the chemical, used to make Teflon, leached into drinking water near some production facilities.
Analysts and investors struggled to predict the likely cost of the lawsuits. “Environmental liabilities can be viewed as open-ended and it was really hard to estimate from the outside back then,” said John Roberts, chemicals industry analyst at UBS AG.
Chemours sold off three companies during its first year, raising around $700 million in capital. The company slashed net debt by $1.2 billion and delivered on $300 million of the $350 million in promised cost cuts. Other steps followed, including a 7% staff cut and plant closures.
The stronger business footing translated into higher stock prices. Chemours shares have more than tripled, to $51.12 a share by late morning Friday from its 2015 spinout price of $16 a share, after briefly trading for less than $4 in 2016.
Pressure from outside voices forced Mr. Newman—formerly CFO atSunCoke Energy Inc. —to redouble efforts on communicating the company’s turnaround plan.
“There will always be people who try to detract from the story. Our job is to stay on message and focus on ‘here is the plan, and here is how we’re doing against the plan,’” Mr. Newman said.
Better business performance helped fuel a run-up in Chemours’s share price. Mr. Left, the short-seller, closed out his position in the summer of 2016.
“I realized that I had no firm grasp on the [titanium dioxide] pricing and that the lawsuits are not going to put them out of business,” he said.
Chemours also successfully nurtured a second business line that has diversified its earnings pool in less than three years through its Opteon refrigerant, part of the fluoroproducts units. Today, Opteon is used by all major European auto makers, and has a significant market share among U.S. auto makers.
“Now their fluoroproducts is almost equal into the earnings contribution from the [titanium dioxide] products,” Mr. Roberts said. “They have two strong legs now for the company to stand on.”
Still, analysts say that Chemours also benefited from several factors outside of management’s control. For one, titanium dioxide prices have marched higher as Beijing’s increased focus on the environment shut down parts of Chinese titanium dioxide production.
The PFOA liability that threatened Chemours’s balance sheet turned out to be less expensive than expected. DuPont in February agreed to a $671 million settlement with lawyers representing thousands of people in Ohio and West Virginia. Chemours will pay half the settlement amount, with DuPont paying the remaining half. The settlement lifted Chemours shares 14% in one day.
“The things that they had control over, they did a very good job of improving,” said Joe Princiotta, a credit analyst with Moody’s Investors Service. “It was pretty aggressive and pretty comprehensive.”
A spokesman from DuPont declined to comment.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-a-dupont-carve-out-made-a-comeback-1509722998
-
Antero Claims Crown as Largest U.S. NGL Producer
Nov 3, 2017 | Natural Gas Inteligence
By Jamison Cocklin
Antero Resources Corp. became the nation’s largest natural gas liquids (NGL) producer in the third quarter, according to company calculations, after years of amassing a wetter position and focusing on the richer portions of the Marcellus and Utica shales.
The company has long dumped capital into liquids-rich wells, even as other operators have increasingly found better economics in the Appalachian Basin’s dry gas windows. Antero produced 105,609 b/d of NGLs in the third quarter, up 37% from the year-ago period and enough to vault the company to the No. 1 position. Antero based its calculation on public company disclosures, but that could not immediately be verified on Thursday.
“We built our business around the liquids-rich areas of Appalachia,” CFO Glen Warren told financial analysts during an earnings call. “The rising liquids price environment plays a major part in cash flow growth and value creation at Antero, and we plan to continue building on that progress.”
Indeed, NGLs improved with a strengthening of the benchmark Mont Belvieu prices during the quarter, primarily lifted by an increase in export volumes. Before hedges, Antero’s average realized NGL price was $28.92/bbl, or 60% of the average West Texas Intermediate (WTI) oil price on the New York Mercantile Exchange (NYMEX). Pre-hedge liquids prices were up 65% from the year-ago period. Antero forecasts that its NGL price realizations will increase to 70-75% of the average WTI price this quarter.
“We’ve positioned the company strategically for this, being very much focused on liquids-rich [assets],” Warren said. “We’ve done a lot of work on that over time -- just understanding where are the remaining locations and what companies hold them. We’re highly confident in our position.”
Liquids revenue of $251 million accounted for a record 38% of the company’s total pre-hedged product revenues. Antero reaffirmed on Thursday that it would continue targeting liquids-rich acreage in the basin, where management said the company controls 44% of all future liquids-rich drilling areas in the Marcellus and Utica. Antero has continuously bolted on properties over the years, amassing a sizable contiguous acreage position that has allowed it to capture wetter targets through longer laterals.
“Antero has done an extensive technical analysis on acreage configurations, well results and the geology underlying our competitors in the core of the Marcellus and Utica. Based on an extensive analysis, Antero holds over 30% of the long lateral inventory beyond 10,000 feet, outpacing close peers by a wide margin,” CEO Paul Rady said. “In fact, 24% of our undrilled inventory is made up of laterals longer than 10,000 feet.”
Longer laterals, increased estimated ultimate recoveries and lower well costs also find Antero cutting out 200 wells and $1.5 billion from its plans through 2020. In a three-year forecast that has yet to be approved by the company’s board, the company said it would still target annual production growth of 20% between 2017 and 2020. The capital efficiencies management expects to achieve in that time should also help the company transition from one that has historically overspent on its drilling program to one funded entirely within upstream cash flow.
Drilling and completion costs are expected to stay flat year/year in 2018 at $1.3 billion, before increasing to $1.5 billion in 2019 and 2020. The company plans to run six or seven rigs next year and then eight or nine in 2019 and 2020.
The third quarter wasn’t without challenges. Two contractual disputes over the company’s natural gas sales cost it millions. WGL Midstream Inc. allegedly failed to take delivery of a portion of Antero’s volumes at a point in Braxton, WV, in violation of the contract terms. That forced Antero to sell 380,000 MMBtu/d at lower pricing points, resulting in a $40 million loss during the third quarter. The companies have fought in court over the contract before. Antero has charged WGL for its losses, which have not yet been paid.
Another dispute, with South Jersey Gas Co. (SJGC), which started in 2014, cost Antero $7 million during the quarter. According to Antero, SJGC has been short paying it based on different unidentified price indices and not the one it uses from S&P Global Platts. Antero filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court in Colorado and won a favorable verdict. But Antero alleges that SJGC continues to short pay during an appeal. The dispute has cost Antero $47 million since 2015.
Management said, however, that it does not expect any balance sheet impact next year, as more takeaway capacity comes online and Appalachian basis is forecast to narrow. Its contract with SJGC expires in April 2019, while different tranches of the WGL contract are scheduled to phase out over the next 20 years.
Antero’s realized natural gas price before hedges for the third quarter was $2.71/Mcf, a 29-cent differential to the average NYMEX price, including a 26-cent impact stemming from the contractual disputes.
Antero produced more than 2.3 Bcfe/d in the third quarter, up from about 1.9 Bcfe/d in 3Q2016 and 2.2 Bcfe/d in 2Q2017.
Higher volumes helped lift third quarter revenue to $1.1 billion from $647.9 million in the year-ago period. Antero reported a net loss of $135 million (minus 43 cents/share), compared to net income of $238 million (78 cents) in 3Q2016.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/112325-antero-claims-crown-as-largest-us-ngl-producer
-
Former OSHA Officials Fault EPA's RMP Delay
Nov 3, 2017 | Inside EPA
Former Obama Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) officials are backing environmental and labor groups' lawsuit challenging the Trump administration's delay EPA's facility accident prevention rule, arguing in an that the delay will impair the agency's ability to prevent and mitigate chemical disasters and violates federal law.
In a Nov. 1 amicus brief in the case Air Alliance Houston, et al v. EPA, et al, David Michaels and Jordan Barab, the former chief and deputy chief of the Obama OSHA, as well as former Chemical Safety Board member Beth Rosenberg, argue that the Trump administration's delay of EPA's Risk Management Plan (RMP) rule violates a Clean Air Act limit on delaying effective dates and the Administrative Procedure Act.
“The Delay Rule was not based on analysis of whether the new effective date would fulfill the protective purposes of the Chemical Disaster Rule or was necessary to make industry compliance with its provisions practicable,” the former officials say. “[R]ather, it was explicitly designed to spare industry the burden of complying or even having to prepare to comply with the rule while EPA reconsidered it.”
Meanwhile a public interest group, in a separate amici filing in the case, faults the Trump EPA's economic analysis supporting the delay, arguing that the agency failed to consider foregone benefits of the Obama-era facility safety rule.
Environmental, labor and 11 Democratic state attorneys general are challenging EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt's June 14 rule delaying implementation of the Obama RMP rule by 20 months from June 19, 2017 to Feb. 19, 2019. Pruitt claimed broad Clean Air Act authority to set effective dates after seeking public input, and has signaled that the administration plans to significantly revise the Obama-era rule updating the agency's RMP with new requirements.
The Obama EPA's Jan. 12 final RMP update rule brought new requirements for independent audits, hazard analysis, as well as provisions for streamlining release of facility data to first responders and the public. EPA issued the rule in response to an executive order on improving facility safety issued after an April 2013 fertilizer facility explosion in West, TX, killed 15 people, including first responders.
In recent opening briefs filed with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, petitioners argue that Clean Air Act sections 307(d) and 112(r) precludes EPA from delaying a rule longer than three months, and requires the agency to set effective dates that assure compliance as “expeditiously as practicable.”
Petitioners also argue that the Trump EPA's delay of the final rule is arbitrary and capricious for reasons, including that it reverses the agency's prior conclusion that new protections are necessary without explanation.
The former Obama chiefs back the environmentalist, labor and Democratic state officials' arguments in their amicifiling, saying that the delay rule “violates a substantive statutory limitation on EPA’s authority to delay effective dates of Clean Air Act regulations.”
They also argue that the RMP rule's provisions “share the critically important aims of protecting
members of fence-line communities and other people who live in the paths of often deadly accidental releases, enhancing safety of first responders who are on the front lines when chemical disasters occur, and benefiting chemical plant workers who are the first victims when explosions, fires and other accidents result in releases of hazardous chemicals.”
In a separate Nov. 1 amicus curiae brief brief, the Institute for Policy Integrity at the New York University School of Law argue that EPA failed to provide a reasoned explanation for delaying the rule and reversing without explanation the agency's prior conclusion that new protections are necessary.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/former-osha-officials-fault-epas-rmp-delay
-
Trump to Loom Large Over Climate Talks
Nov 3, 2017 | E&E Climatewire
By Jean Chemnick
President Trump's decision to leave the Paris Agreement was made by the White House, but it will fall to career diplomats to defend it to the world at U.N. talks that begin in Bonn, Germany, on Monday.
State Department Office of Global Change Director Trigg Talley and his team will leave this weekend for the climate conference. It's being led by the government of Fiji but held in the German city on the Rhine for logistical reasons.
Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Tom Shannon, another career diplomat, will wrap up negotiations for the United States the following week. Their task is to make good on the State Department's promise to play an active role in crafting the rules of the road for Paris implementation, despite a negotiating position weakened by Trump's June decision to pull out of the deal.
A secondary objective for the smaller-than-usual U.S. team may be to avoid attracting the attention of foes of the Paris deal back home — including the president — who could use the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change gathering to lambaste the deal 200 countries struck in Paris two years ago, which remains globally popular.
"From the State Department's perspective, presumably a successful [Conference of the Parties] is one the president doesn't tweet about," said Andrew Deutz, director of government relations for the Nature Conservancy.
It's also possible that U.S. EPA head Scott Pruitt, an opponent of the Paris deal, will make a cameo appearance at the conference to rebut messages that the United States might be looking to re-enter the agreement. The meeting was on Pruitt's calendar over the summer, but the likelihood of his making the trip appears to be diminishing.
Apart from the politics surrounding the U.S. withdrawal, this year's conference isn't expected to be a headline-grabber.
"In terms of potential outcomes for this COP, boring is beautiful," Deutz noted.
The gathering should be a businesslike affair, attracting few foreign dignitaries and far less media attention than was lavished on the conference two years ago in Paris. Few decisions are expected from it, but negotiations must progress on a host of issues, from transparency to emissions accounting to a new market mechanism, in order to ready the agreement's "rulebook" for a deadline of next year.
The conference is also the first to be presided over by a small island state, and while the Fijian presidency has emphasized it won't use its gavel to wring concessions from the world for highly climate-vulnerable countries like itself, modest progress on adaptation finance and loss and damage is seen to be crucial in Bonn.U.S. presence in Bonn
The United States managed to confuse the world last September when National Economic Council Deputy Director Everett Eissenstat made remarks to a closed-door climate gathering that some foreign officials interpreted to mean the Trump administration was searching for a way back to the Paris deal. Trump administration officials held a meeting in New York to squelch hopes that there might be plans to reverse the president's June decision.
The U.S. position might be just as murky at this month's conference, where negotiations will be headed by Shannon, a respected career diplomat who has called climate mitigation "one of the world's great challenges." Talley, a deputy special envoy for climate change during the Obama administration and multiyear veteran of this process, will manage next week's more granular talks with a team that includes career staffers Kim Carnahan and Andrew Rakestraw.
"Frankly, the fact that it's basically the same team representing the U.S. bodes well for how the U.S. positioning will be received there," said Elliot Diringer, executive vice president of the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions. "There's a lot of trust and credibility that has been built up over the years."
Many of the same players attended the so-called pre-COP in Fiji last month and were deemed by participants to be "constructive."
"We don't anticipate any great fireworks, quite frankly," Andrew Steer, president of the World Resources Institute, said on a call with reporters. "These are people who will try to do a thorough and probably relatively low-key job there."
Shannon and Talley are expected to advocate for rules on transparency, accounting and other issues that would not complicate the United States' ability to come back to the deal if Trump or a subsequent administration chose to do that. One of the top considerations will be ensuring that major developing countries don't reinsert divisions in the rulebook between how historically rich and poor countries are treated on issues like transparency. The U.S. hand may be weakened, but experts note that developed countries with more political capital, like the European Union and Canada, will have the same priorities in the talks.
While Shannon, Talley and other career officials tussle over commas in the negotiating rooms, U.S. divisions on climate policy will be on full display at the U.S. Climate Action Center, hosted by the We Are Still In coalition of states, cities and private-sector Paris proponents. The center, sponsored by former New York Mayor and billionaire Michael Bloomberg, replaces the U.S. pavilion the federal government usually sponsors but that the Trump administration scrapped.
It will play host to a steady stream of pro-Paris dignitaries, including Democratic Govs. Jerry Brown of California, Jay Inslee of Washington and Andrew Cuomo of New York; Democratic Sens. Ben Cardin of Maryland, Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, Brian Schatz of Hawaii, Ed Markey of Massachusetts and Jeff Merkley of Oregon; and others from local governments and the private sector.
Schatz told E&E News this week that the purpose of the trip, led by Senate Foreign Relations ranking member Cardin, would be "to reinforce that even though the president has the wrong ideas about climate action, that the United States is still in."
"The administration will be outlived and overcome by the momentum that we have for climate action," he added.
The quintet of senators, who will visit Bonn next weekend, were among the 10 Democratic lawmakers to briefly attend the Paris summit in 2015. Cardin spokesman Sean Bartlett said they will stress that even some Senate Republicans would have liked to see the United States remain in Paris and that there is congressional support for the accord.
But career diplomats and Democrats will not be the only U.S. voices in Bonn.
White House National Security Council international energy and environment adviser George David Banks will attend at least part of the meeting to host an event on the importance of carbon capture and storage and of nuclear energy in combating climate change. He has been a proponent of the United States' staying in the Paris accord, albeit with a weaker emissions commitment.
And while prospects for a Pruitt check-in look slim, the administration hasn't ruled out a visit from the former Oklahoma attorney general and most vocal Trump administration foe of the Paris deal.
Myron Ebell, a senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute and early champion of a Paris withdrawal, said he hopes Pruitt will put in an appearance.
"He could disabuse many world leaders of their illusion that President Trump isn't serious about getting the U.S. out of the Paris climate treaty, and he could explain that as EPA's deregulatory policies take effect, our resource and manufacturing sectors are going to start growing rapidly, which means that the decline in our greenhouse gas emissions will not continue," he said.The rulebook
In the negotiating rooms of the former parliament of West Germany, where the conference will be held, the focus will be on the nitty-gritty details. The implementation guidelines commonly known as the Paris "rulebook" are due to be adopted by parties at next year's conference in Poland. While a final draft might not be completed until the new year, Bonn must deliver progress.
One of the main issues is how countries will be held accountable for the promises they made in Paris, which are known as nationally determined contributions (NDCs). The accord specifies that all countries are covered by an "enhanced transparency framework," though it promises some built-in flexibility for poorer countries that might lack the capacity to immediately follow a rigorous compliance regime.
Major developing countries like China and India have a history of arguing that the most stringent requirements under global climate agreements should be reserved for rich nations, but the U.S. position has long been to push to remove bifurcation between wealthy and historically poor countries. A highly differentiated outcome would still be problematic for the United States and other rich nations.
Rakestraw, a State Department climate negotiator, is still co-facilitator with a Chinese counterpart of the working group on transparency despite the planned withdrawal.
Also on the docket are guidelines for how countries will increase the stringency of their commitments over time. Paris pledges fell far short of what scientists say the world must do to avoid the worst impacts of climate change, so the deal set up a five-year cycle for countries to re-up their commitments for greenhouse gas mitigation and adaptation.
"At the core of the Paris Agreement is the five-year cycles of progressive ambition," Paula Caballero, global director of the World Resources Institute's climate program, said on a call with reporters. "This is what the world actually signed onto in order to close the emissions gap and maintain an inhabitable planet."
But countries are still hammering out how they will communicate new NDCs starting by 2020 for the five-year period ending in 2030, and what elements those commitments will include.
Negotiators must also decide how the "global stocktake" will be conducted, again every five years starting in 2023. It's intended to show the world's progress toward the Paris goal of keeping warming to well below 2 degrees Celsius and to inform the next batch of NDCs that countries put forward.
A first look at post-Paris progress will come next year at the facilitative dialogue, which is effectively the first global stocktake. The Fijian and outgoing Moroccan presidencies have spent this year planning for that event, which the United States is expected to participate in as a Paris Agreement party until 2020.Adaptation, damage clearinghouse
Bonn may not yield many finance breakthroughs, though the U.S. delegation will have to face international frustrations over Trump's decision not to provide $2 billion to the Green Climate Fund promised by President Obama. The move has apparently reduced the adaptation and mitigation fund for poor countries from $10 billion to $8 million.
Negotiators must also grapple with how and whether the Adaptation Fund, which pre-dates Paris, will be retooled to serve the Paris Agreement. The fund is less controlled by rich countries because they don't donate to it directly, and is therefore very popular with poorer nations. One solution might be to direct funds from a new market mechanism for emissions to the fund.
The summit will also see the establishment of a clearinghouse for loss and damage to help vulnerable countries better manage their risks.
No important decisions are due on how poor countries might be compensated for the cost to them of man-made climate change in the form of more powerful storms, sea-level rise, droughts and other impacts. Still, with Fiji the president of the talks and with the Caribbean still reeling from this year's hurricane season, it would be strange if the issue were not at least touched on in the final text — if only to reaffirm its importance.
"We are now in this age of climate disruption where we're seeing entire islands destroyed and a new class of citizens being created: climate refugees," Selwin Hart, ambassador of Barbados to the United States, said at a recent event in Washington, D.C., hosted by Oxfam America.
Hart said the islands could use recovery from tragedies like Hurricanes Maria and Irma to transform their development trajectories with stronger infrastructure and more clean energy. But that would require foreign investment.
"We need a New Deal for islands and vulnerable communities," he said.'Utterly isolated'
Climate advocates, meanwhile, said they hope Trump-related drama won't overshadow the work that needs to be done in Bonn.
Paul Bledsoe, a lecturer at American University's Center for Environmental Policy, predicted that other developed and developing countries will cooperate even more in the face of the United States' defection from the Paris deal, as occurred during this year's Group of Seven and Group of 20 summits.
"As a practical political matter, the combination of incredible anxiety from vulnerable developing countries about climate change impacts and renewed belief that major economies can cut their emissions together are going to leave the United States and the Trump administration utterly isolated," he said.
Rachel Kyte, CEO of the United Nations' Sustainable Energy for All initiative, said the other 196 members of the UNFCCC are showing a willingness to work even if the United States is not, and their story should be front and center.
She compared the U.N. body to a school classroom.
"Maybe some of them haven't pulled their socks up straight, a couple of them have their ties askew, but they're doing their best," she said. "And then there's one kid in the classroom who's just larking about, not paying attention and getting the majority of the teacher's time.
"Let's give it up for all those other kids who are sitting at their desks with their notebooks open, doing really hard work," she said.
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2017/11/03/stories/1060065573
-
EPA's Science Is Under Attack: What You Need to Know
Nov 3, 2017 | Environmental Defense Fund
By Diane Regas
For decades, scientists have known that the more we reduce soot and other particulate matter in the air we breathe, the healthier we’ll be. So how can the man in charge of environmental protection for our nation suddenly claim that this established truth no longer holds true?
Because for the first time in modern history, the United States has a government that rejects settled science and claims that evidence doesn’t matter because it no longer fits the administration’s agenda.
We have leaders who, in the face of catastrophic storms, insist there is no such thing as climate change – and who tell us that facts are nothing more than opinions.
The Trump administration is even rigging the very process of providing unbiased scientific advice to the government by changing the rules for who can serve on science advisory boards, and by nominating people with a history of downplaying the health impacts of pollution to such boards.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is ground zero for the administration’s anti-science campaign. At stake is not just our health and future, but also America’s standing and influence in the world.Pruitt’s polluters-first agenda
Science is about learning and it never stands still. But science also consists of building blocks that help us increase our knowledge over time, and to find ever-better solutions to the challenges we face.
Today, a vast majority of scientists agree that particle pollution is bad for public health and that climate change is real – even as they continue to learn more about both.
And yet, since Scott Pruitt took over the EPA in February, he has blocked, removed or sought to delay more than 30 rules that protect clean air, water and public health – including the landmark Clean Power Plan. He also pushed for the United States’ withdrawal from the Paris climate accord.
Such steps, which fly in the face of today’s science, will have a direct result on public health and especially affect children who are more vulnerable to lead poisoning, asthma and dangerous chemicals in products and foods.
It begs the question “why?” What makes Pruitt not want to hear from independent scientists?
We can only surmise it’s because the answers he would get won’t fit his agenda. This agenda, as you know, is to prop up yesterday’s energy interests, industries that have bankrolled his entire career.EPA’s key scientific advisory board a prime target
Under Pruitt’s new rules for EPA’s Science Advisory Board, scientists who get EPA research grants – a huge pool of neutral experts – would be banned from serving. This way, if the EPA picks the absolute best toxicologist to do needed research, the advisory panel would have to settle for the second best to determine if our air and water are clean.
It would tip the balance of advice strongly toward those who are funded by industry, people who are not banned by Pruitt’s purported conflict-of-interest rule. Pruitt’s logic is that you can take money from Exxon-Mobil or even a foreign government and he’ll welcome your advice – but get a grant from the agency itself and he considers you tainted.
As chair of the board, Pruitt chose Texan Michael Honeycutt. This man has a record of diminishing the effect of toxic chemicals ranging from ozone to benzene, and claimed that “some studies even suggest that [particulate matter] makes you live longer.”
It’s not surprising to hear people at the EPA talk about repressive tactics that make it increasingly difficult for scientists to do their jobs.Why I still have hope
Powerful interests with ideological, political or economic agendas are politicizing science and we’re all losers in this new reality. Except, the battle over science at the EPA and other U.S. government agencies is far from over.
Polls consistently show that Americans are waking up to the erosion of environmental protections they’ve long taken for granted. The latest poll, from Chapman University, shows the fears for the environmental now make up four of 10 things Americans worry most about for the first time in the survey’s history.
Importantly, American scientists continue to stand side by side with their international colleagues and their work continues – regardless of who rules at the EPA or in the White House.
I have hope that over time, they will prevail.
https://www.edf.org/blog/2017/11/03/epas-science-under-attack-what-you-need-know
-
New Adviser Suggested Clean Air's 'Not Good for the Children'
Nov 3, 2017 | E&E Greenwire
By Sean Reilly
A newly appointed member to a top U.S. EPA advisory panel suggested in 2012 that children need exposure to contaminated air to help their lungs ward off pollutants, according to a profile by a leading scientific organization.
"Modern air is a little too clean for optimum health," Robert Phalen, a professor of medicine at the University of California, Irvine, told the American Association for the Advancement of Science in a "member spotlight" posted to the organization's website.
The profile says Phalen believes clean air is "not good for the children, whose lungs need a few irritants to learn how to ward them off."
In a news release today, EPA confirmed Phalen, founder of an air pollution laboratory at the university, has been picked for the agency's Science Advisory Board, which provides outside expertise on a variety of topics. His comments to AAAS were first reported by Newsweek. He could not be reached for comment this morning.
Earlier this week, Phalen's name had shown up on a preliminary list of new SAB appointees that was leaked in advance of the official announcement. Reached Monday by E&E News, Phalen said he hadn't yet gotten notification from EPA but had been nominated for a seat by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2017/11/03/stories/1060065617
Industry and Association News
LCSA News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested