Preview Newsletter
ACC AM 11/9/2017
-
(ACC Mentioned) Bottle Recycling Rate Slides For Second Straight Year
Nov 8, 2017 | Plastics Recycling Update
By Colin Staub
Plastic bottle recycling was a difficult business to be in last year, with negative trends seen in collection, processing and pricing, according to an annual report on the industry sector. -
CPSC Nominee Reveals She Worked in Modeling, Not Much Else
Nov 9, 2017 | E&E Daily
By Corbin Hiar
Dana Baiocco, the corporate lawyer President Trump picked to join the Consumer Product Safety Commission, is keeping under wraps her public health priorities and the companies she and her husband have represented. -
Vote on Trump's EPA Air Office Pick Set for Today
Nov 9, 2017 | E&E Daily
By Sean Reilly and Kevin Bogardus
Attorney Bill Wehrum's nomination to head U.S. EPA's air office will be voted on by the full Senate this morning. -
Greens, Dems See Policy Opportunities After Big Wins
Nov 9, 2017 | E&E Daily
By Nick Sobczyk
Environmentalists and Democrats did their victory laps yesterday. -
(ACC Mentioned) Chlorine's Deadly Hazards Fuel Stock Rally as Supply Tightens
Nov 9, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Jack Kaskey
Armies used chlorine as a weapon in World War I. Thousands of lives are put at risk every time a railroad tank car rolls through a city carrying the chemical. It's among the biggest fears of safety regulators. -
(ACC Mentioned) Air Force To Reimburse Airway Heights For Clean Water After Decades Of Chemical Contamination
Nov 8, 2017 | The Spokesman-Review
By Chad Sokol
The U.S. Air Force has agreed to reimburse the city of Airway Heights for water it’s purchasing from the city of Spokane, months after the revelation that firefighting operations at Fairchild Air Force Base have contaminated the former city’s drinking water system. -
US Senator Introduces Bill Authorising FDA to Regulate Cosmetics
Nov 9, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Julie A Miller
Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) has introduced a bill that would allow the US Food and Drug Administration to regulate cosmetics ingredients. The bill is a less ambitious alternative to one favoured by NGOs. -
Lead Paint Nuisance Ruling Could Have Big Impact
Nov 9, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Peter Hayes
Sherwin-Williams Co., NL Industries Inc. and ConAgra Grocery Products Co. are expected to learn before Thanksgiving whether a California trial court validly ordered the manufacturers to pay $1.15 billion to remove or abate lead paint hazards from hundreds of thousands of California homes. -
While We Aren’t Paying Attention, the Trump Administration is Making Products Less Safe
Nov 7, 2017 | Union of Concerned Scientists
By Gretchen Goldman
Have you ever checked to see if a product has been recalled because of a safety concern? As a parent of a young child, I am deeply familiar with this task. Babies are expensive and buying used products cuts costs, but it’s crucial to check if products have been recalled because baby products can often be recalled for safety concerns. When you have a little one, you want to protect them as best you can. But now, the Trump administration is putting my family and yours at risk.The Consumer Product Safety Commission: Keeping our families safe -
Market Disruption Fears Grow As Glyphosate Ban Looms
Nov 9, 2017 | Euractiv
By Sarantis Michalopoulos
The Standing Committee on Plant Animal Food and Feed met today (9 November) to discuss renewing the approval of the active substance glyphosate, which is produced by Monsanto and others, but no qualified majority among member states was reached again. -
(ACC Mentioned) How Coal Giant Peabody's Ideas Ended Up in Trump's Coal Study
Nov 9, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ari Natter
Days after Energy Secretary Rick Perry requested a study on how to help coal-fired power plants, a lobbyist for the largest U.S. coal producer contacted the department to offer his advice. Many of those ideas became part of the department's efforts to help companies who provide the fuel source. -
DOE Overhaul, Other E&C Priorities May Have To Wait
Nov 9, 2017 | E&E Daily
By George Cahlink
A legislative push for a major overhaul of the Energy Department and other bills addressing nuclear waste and environmental cleanup may not make it to the House floor this year, senior Energy and Commerce Committee lawmakers say. -
2nd Circuit Stays FERC Gas Pipeline Approval After State's CWA Concerns
Nov 8, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Dawn Reeves
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit has stayed a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) approval to construct an interstate gas pipeline, after New York argued that FERC is seeking to usurp its Clean Water Act (CWA) authority by approving the project before the state certified whether it complies with the water law. -
Shell Begins Building New Petrochemical Complex in Pennsylvania
Nov 8, 2017 | Platts
By Kristen Hays
Shell Chemical has begun construction on a new $6 billion petrochemical complex in western Pennsylvania, the company said Wednesday, that will be the first fueled by the cheap US natural gas boom to come online in the US Northeast rather than the chemical-heavy Texas and Louisiana coasts. -
House Panel Passes Bill To Boost Drilling On Federal Land, Offshore
Nov 8, 2017 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
The House Natural Resources Committee passed a bill Wednesday aimed at boosting oil and natural gas drilling on federal land, as well as offshore. -
Murkowski Unveils Legislation to Allow Drilling in Refuge
Nov 9, 2017 | E&E Daily
By Kellie Lunney
Senate legislation unveiled last night to allow oil and gas drilling in part of the 19-million-acre Arctic National Wildlife Refuge would allocate a 50 percent revenue-sharing split between the state of Alaska and the federal government. -
Northwest Ohio Voters Reject Anti-NatGas Pipeline Referendum
Nov 9, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jamison Cocklin
Voters in Bowling Green, OH, on Tuesday definitively rejected a referendum that would have prohibited natural gas pipelines from being built on city-owned property. -
Atlantic Sunrise Construction Temporarily Halted in Pennsylvania
Nov 9, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jamison Cocklin
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia has ordered a temporary stay of construction on the Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Co. LLC (Transco) Atlantic Sunrise project in the latest setback for the Northeast infrastructure build-out. -
'We're Engaged': Alaska Gets China Backing For Natural Gas Project
Nov 9, 2017 | Reuters
By Josephine Mason
China’s biggest state oil company Sinopec, one of the country’s top banks and its sovereign wealth fund agreed on Thursday to develop a $43 billion natural gas project in Alaska, as the cash-poor U.S. state seeks to revive its dwindling energy industry. -
Pollution Claims Against Rug Makers Batted to State Court
Nov 9, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Steven M. Sellers
Water pollution claims against many of the nation's carpet manufacturers belong in Alabama state court, a federal court in Alabama ruled Nov. 7. -
Federal Climate Report Creates Additional Hurdle For GHG Risk Finding Foes
Nov 9, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Doug Obey
The latest federal assessment of climate change finding it “extremely likely” humans are the dominant force behind observed warming adds another political and legal hurdle for any attempt to challenge EPA's landmark 2009 greenhouse gas endangerment finding, according to several legal experts. -
EPA's Critics Fault Ozone Designations In Effort To Preserve Pending Suit
Nov 8, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Stuart Parker
Several states and environmentalists are criticizing EPA's recent delayed issuance of designations for areas attaining the 2015 ozone air standard as unlawful because it falls shorts of Clean Air Act mandates to also issue nonattainment findings, as they seek to preserve a lawsuit challenging a rescinded agency delay of the designations. -
Trump Nominee Drops Paganism Claim, Says Climate Change Is Real
Nov 9, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ari Natter
An environmental nominee of President Donald Trump who had dismissed the threat of climate change and labeled carbon dioxide plant food, abandoned those positions Nov. 8 under questioning from Senate Democrats. -
As Trump Steps Back from UN Climate Talks, Coke and HP Move In
Nov 9, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Jennifer A. Dlouhy
On the fringes of the ongoing global climate summit in Bonn, U.S. leaders will once again demonstrate their commitment to the issue, with a packed agenda of film screenings, panel discussions and cocktail parties where they will highlight the country's carbon dioxide cuts. -
EPA Extends Comment Period For Rollback
Nov 9, 2017 | E&E News PM
By Maxine Joselow
U.S. EPA has extended the deadline for commenting on its proposed rollback of the Clean Power Plan by 32 days, according to a Federal Register notice posted today. -
Democrats' Election Victories Could Boost State GHG Trading Efforts
Nov 9, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Curt Barry
Democrats' election victories in several key state races Nov. 7 could boost prospects for enlarging regional greenhouse gas trading programs on both the East and West coasts, bolstering climate policy advocates who are struggling to curtail Trump administration efforts to roll back EPA and other federal climate programs.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) Bottle Recycling Rate Slides For Second Straight Year
Nov 8, 2017 | Plastics Recycling Update
By Colin Staub
Plastic bottle recycling was a difficult business to be in last year, with negative trends seen in collection, processing and pricing, according to an annual report on the industry sector.
“2016 was not a particularly good year,” said Dave Cornell, technical consultant for the Association of Plastic Recyclers (APR). The industry association and the American Chemistry Council (ACC) jointly released the latest national post-consumer plastic bottle recycling report this week.
The U.S. bottle recycling rate fell 1.4 percentage points to 29.7 percent in 2016. The groups point to declining collection volumes, rising contamination and shifting export markets as factors contributing to the decline.
Collection drops
While the total amount of resin used to make new bottles grew, collection of used bottles shrank. Those diverging numbers led to an overall collection of about 2.9 billion pounds out of nearly 9.8 billion pounds of resin sold onto the market for bottle production. The 29.7 percent recycling rate was down from 31.1 percent in 2015. That figure was down slightly from 2014, which concluded 20-plus years of growth.
Collection figures decreased for both PET and HDPE bottles, which together make up 97.1 percent of the domestic plastic container market. PET collection dropped by 44 million pounds, and HDPE collection dropped by 31.7 million pounds. Cornell described both those figures as “significant” numbers that could not be attributed to statistical error.
PP collection, however, rose by 4.8 million pounds from 2015 to 2016. In 2015, PP container collection tonnages equated to 17.9 percent of total PP container resin put on the market. That figure rose to more than 20 percent last year.
Despite the negative trend, a press release from ACC and APR points to a compound annual growth rate of 2.1 percent over the past five years, meaning the decline has not been enough to offset the recycling growth in recent years.
Multitude of challenges
Bale prices across the board were depressed in 2016, Cornell said, which he attributed to the crude oil price dropping 16 percent from the previous year.
“What we saw was recycled materials had to sell at competitive prices,” he said. “The prices dropped, [and] as the prices dropped there was pressure exerted on all aspects of the recycling stream, from the collection through the processing through the use.”
“Saddle that with contamination issues which we’ve seen for many years, and it’s a very tough business to be in in 2016,” Cornell added.
Contamination presented “an ongoing challenge to reclaimers” of both HDPE and PET bottle bales, the report stated. HDPE bale yields averaged 79.1 percent in 2016, compared with 80 percent a year earlier and 81.8 percent two years prior. PET yields varied widely based on the source of the bottles, from the mid-60s to the mid-70s percentages.
The use of lighter-weight bottles also negatively impacting recycling collection, according to the report.
“Lightweighting helps companies to meet economic and sustainability goals and is a relentless force in bottle making,” the report states. But, it adds, “recycling is denominated by weight and reduced weight per container adversely affects recycling economics.”
Where the material goes
Exports back in 2008 were in the 40 to 50 percent range, meaning almost half of material collected was being shipped out of the country. But in the past nine years exports have declined markedly.
In 2016, exports across the board decreased by 37.6 million pounds from a year earlier, meaning about 20.1 percent of collected bottles were sent out of the country. By resin, HDPE exports grew slightly, whereas PET and PP exports declined.
For both HDPE and PET, end-market trends varied by product. Bottles and pipe – the largest markets for recycled HDPE container plastics – shrank as a portion of the end-market sector. Film, sheet, crates and buckets also shrank, but the lawn and garden, automotive and decking sectors grew as downstream outlets for recycled HDPE containers.
For PET, bottle, fiber, and strapping increased as end markets, whereas sheet and film fell.
https://resource-recycling.com/plastics/2017/11/08/bottle-recycling-rate-slides-second-straight-year/
-
CPSC Nominee Reveals She Worked in Modeling, Not Much Else
Nov 9, 2017 | E&E Daily
By Corbin Hiar
Dana Baiocco, the corporate lawyer President Trump picked to join the Consumer Product Safety Commission, is keeping under wraps her public health priorities and the companies she and her husband have represented.
In answers to questions for the record from Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) following Baiocco's recent confirmation hearing, she avoided weighing in on the commission's top public health matters and declined to list or commit to recuse herself from CPSC issues involving former clients at Jones Day or her husband's clients at White and Williams LLP.
The responses, obtained by E&E News from a congressional source, went to lawmakers ahead of yesterday's Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee vote on Baiocco (Greenwire, Nov. 8).
Blumenthal, ranking member on the Consumer Protection, Product Safety, Insurance and Data Security Subcommittee, repeatedly sought to get Baiocco to go "above and beyond your ethics agreement" in his questions.
But Baiocco refused to fully list companies she and her husband have worked for, citing "the confidential nature of legal advice sought by or provided to any client."
In a financial disclosure report required by the Office of Government Ethics, she previously disclosed 14 clients that paid her $5,000 or more in the last calendar year. Those include RJ Reynolds Tobacco Co., Volkswagen AG and Lyft Inc.
Baiocco, who is up for a seven-year term on the five-member commission, also rejected Blumenthal's request that she recuse herself from all matters involving her and her husband's clients.
"I have signed an ethics agreement that will govern the potential conflicts that have already been identified and I will recuse myself in those instances, in accordance with federal ethics laws," she said. "The agreement also addresses my spouse."
At last week's hearing, Blumenthal suggested she should refrain from weighing in on issues she and her husband have previously worked on to avoid "any potential taint or conflict of interest" (E&E Daily, Nov. 2).
Blumenthal's questions also touched on the ongoing CPSC battle over the regulation of flame retardants.
While Baiocco made clear to him that "I have never worked on issues relating to flame retardants," she offered few insights on whether she supports a petition for a ban of organohalogen flame retardants in many household products. The CPSC approved it narrowly (Greenwire, Sept. 21).
"I am not currently in a position to comment on the petition or any plans regarding the initiation of any rulemaking procedure because I am not part of the commission, and I am neither aware of nor privy to the steps or analyses taken internally by the CPSC," she said.
The Jones Day partner offered similarly evasive responses to questions about her stance on crumb rubber and phthalates, among other hot-button CPSC matters.
Baiocco also filed in a gap in her resume between when she graduated from Ohio University's E.W. Scripps School of Journalism and started attending law school five years later.
"From late 1988 through 1993 when I began the four-year evening program at Duquesne University School of Law in 1993, I worked in sales and promotions for American Modeling, Inc., in Monroeville, Pennsylvania, and also taught modeling, make-up, and photography courses at its affiliated modeling school," she said. "I worked on a part-time basis for a short while after starting law school in the same capacity."
https://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2017/11/09/stories/1060066083
-
Vote on Trump's EPA Air Office Pick Set for Today
Nov 9, 2017 | E&E Daily
By Sean Reilly and Kevin Bogardus
Attorney Bill Wehrum's nomination to head U.S. EPA's air office will be voted on by the full Senate this morning.
His nomination late yesterday cleared a procedural hurdle as lawmakers invoked cloture on a party-line vote of 49-46, setting the stage for the final confirmation vote. Five senators — Ted Cruz (R-Texas), Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), Rand Paul (R-Ky.), Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), and Jon Tester (D-Mont. ) — did not vote.
The discussion prior to the vote was perfunctory as lawmakers rehashed points made during a contentious hearing last month.
"Bill Wehrum is the right man for the job," said Senate Environment and Public Works Chairman John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), highlighting endorsements by former officials from both the Obama and George W. Bush administrations. "He will pursue policies that will protect America's air and allow our economy to grow."
Democrats, however, pointed to Wehrum's record during a prior stint in EPA's air office under Bush, followed by a lucrative career representing industries that he would regulate at EPA.
"We've seen this movie before," Sen. Tom Carper of Delaware, the top Democrat on the EPW Committee, said after the vote. "There is no need for a sequel."
Similar concerns helped scuttle Wehrum's first try for the job more than a decade ago, after Democrats bottled up his nomination under Bush (E&E Daily, Sept. 8). Trump tapped him again for the post — formally known as assistant administrator for the Office of Air and Radiation — in early September.
At last month's hearing, Wehrum drew particular scorn from Sen. Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.) for saying that it is "an open question" whether humans are a major driver of climate change and then seeming to profess unfamiliarity with ocean acidification and other effects associated with rising global temperatures. Ignoring such phenomena "makes you really, quite frankly, unacceptable to serve in this capacity," Merkley said.
But the only real peril to Wehrum's candidacy came from Midwestern lawmakers worried about the Trump administration's stance on biofuels.
Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) held up a committee vote on the nomination until EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt provided written commitments in support of the renewable fuel standard.
With Ernst's backing, the committee finally approved the nomination Oct. 25 on a 11-10 vote that also fell on party lines.
Publicly boosting Wehrum yesterday was Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), who portrayed him as a corrective to the excesses of the Obama years.
The EPA air office is "in desperate need of new leadership from an individual who understands how to implement policies in a balanced way rather than with extreme regulatory overreach," McConnell said on the Senate floor.
Almost 10 months after Trump was sworn in, Pruitt remains the only Senate-confirmed appointee in place at EPA. Republicans are eager to pick up the pace.
Debate on Wheeler, Hartnett White
The EPW Committee also held a hearing yesterday on the nominations of Andrew Wheeler to become EPA deputy administrator and Kathleen Hartnett White to head the White House Council on Environmental Quality.
Afterward, Barrasso told reporters that once his panel receives written responses from the two nominees, he will schedule a business meeting to vote and advance them to the floor. He lamented that many nominees approved by the committee have yet to be confirmed due to delays by Democrats.
Barrasso said that he expects both Hartnett White and Wheeler to advance through the committee. He also said Wheeler is "eminently qualified and the right person for this job."
Barrasso has also been pushing for a rule change to shorten debate time on Trump's nominees under what he called the "Schumer standard," referring to a past agreement between Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) that limited debate on President Obama's choices (Greenwire, Nov. 8).
At a press conference following the hearing, Senate Democrats didn't commit to requesting full debate time on Hartnett White and Wheeler.
"I don't know if we will need 30 hours. We have a lot that we want to say. We want to say it tonight. We want say it tomorrow before the vote occurs," said Carper, referring to the vote on Wehrum.
Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) said Democrats will want to use the floor time they do receive to make the case against Hartnett White and Wheeler.
"The important goal for us to achieve is to make sure we use the floor time we have to make a very clear description for the American people of exactly the conflicts of interest that are behind these people, the extremism that they embody and the danger that they present to public health down the road from all the signals and warnings they're going to deliberately tune out because they don't want to hear them," said Whitehouse.
Hartnett White came under fire from Democrats.
Carper said she had walked back her previous statements on climate change, biofuel mandates and EPA employees.
"Just to be a completely different person and to say things that are entirely unrelated, unconnected to what she said for years just was breathtaking," Carper said.
The EPW ranking member said he finds Hartnett White's nomination for CEQ chair as "troubling" as the pick of Michael Dourson, who has strong industry ties, to lead EPA's chemicals office.
"But just like I said with Michael Dourson, I will do everything I can make sure that he's not confirmed to serve in EPA," Carper said.
Carper said he has spoken with several Republican senators who have "some really serious concerns" about Dourson.
Dourson's nomination was cleared by the EPW Committee last month on a party-line vote of 11-10 but has not been considered by the full Senate yet.
https://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2017/11/09/stories/1060066091
-
Greens, Dems See Policy Opportunities After Big Wins
Nov 9, 2017 | E&E Daily
By Nick Sobczyk
Environmentalists and Democrats did their victory laps yesterday.
Their preferred candidates prevailed in statewide elections in Virginia and New Jersey, as well as key races in Washington state, a feat that they say demonstrates the depth of voter concern about clean energy and the changing climate.
"It's a very exciting day," Gene Karpinski, president of the League of Conservation Voters, told reporters yesterday. "We've been saying for a while that climate change is on the ballot this year, and the election results yesterday made it clear."
Time will tell whether Tuesday's votes prove a harbinger of things to come in 2018. Right now, though, environmentalists see a fresh opportunity to shape policy in states — particularly Virginia and Washington — where fossil fuel interests have a significant voice in the political sphere.
In Virginia, incoming Gov. Ralph Northam embraced environmental issues and climate science on the campaign trail. Justin Fairfax, who will replace Northam as lieutenant governor, is also a favorite of environmentalists.
Their victories mean the state will move forward with Gov. Terry McAuliffe's (D) executive order to cap carbon emissions from power plants, a plan that Republican candidate Ed Gillespie had called a "job-killing" regulation. That will likely involve joining the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, a cap-and-trade program encompassing nine Northeastern states.
Environmentalists say joining RGGI would be significant. Coal is a big industry in Virginia, and annual emissions in the commonwealth are nearly as high as those in New York, the biggest emitter in RGGI.
Virginia has been moving closer to joining during the past year, but a Gillespie victory would have shifted the pendulum in the opposite direction (Climatewire, Sept. 26).
Democrats also picked up at least a dozen seats in the Virginia House of Delegates, with a handful of other slots close enough to warrant a recount. The chamber is still in flux, and it will likely end up close to a 50-50 split between the two parties. Tuesday's results mark the first time since 2000 that Democrats have a shot at control.
Greens are hoping they'll have enough votes now to push legislation through on the state level to clean up coal ash ponds and initiate other environmental measures.
"We know we're going to continue our progress on clean energy, and we know we'll have a governor who will stand up against offshore drilling and the other environmental attacks coming out of Washington," Mike Town, executive director of the Virginia League of Conservation Voters, said during a call with reporters.
Environmentalists may be particularly keen on the latter point — offshore drilling — given President Trump's push for expanded oil and gas operations off Virginia's coast.
But even with Northam in office, the energy industry isn't backing down from the issue. Northam is a noted moderate, and like many Virginia Democrats before him, he could take a middle-of-the-road approach on offshore drilling, said Frank Maisano, a partner in Bracewell LLP's Policy Resolution Group who represents energy clients, including utilities, natural gas firms, refiners and renewable producers.
"It's not going to be as helpful as having Ed Gillespie in there, but there's always a nuanced approach to offshore drilling because most of the state still supports it, including Democrats," Maisano said.
Maisano noted that even Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.), a former Richmond mayor who worked his way up through Virginia ranks serving as lieutenant governor and then governor, did not oppose drilling offshore until he joined the presidential ticket with Hillary Clinton in 2016.
"I think Northam has a more moderate understanding on some of these energy issues," Maisano added.
That may be a sound assessment given Northam's history. Though he stressed climate and the environment on the campaign trail, Northam declined to explicitly oppose a pair of major pipeline projects that would run through Virginia, which are pending final approval from state regulators (Greenwire, Sept. 14).New Jersey
Environmentalists and clean energy groups alike will have similar opportunities in New Jersey with Democrat Phil Murphy, who easily bested Republican Kim Guadagno in the governor's race.
Murphy's environmental proposals rank as some of the most ambitious in the country, with a plan to entirely power the Garden State with clean energy by 2050.
"We viewed this election as a real opportunity to repudiate Trump's destructive and unpopular environmental agenda," said Ed Potosnak, executive director of the New Jersey League of Conservation Voters.
He added, "The first candidate to commit to our 100 percent clean energy pledge was Phil Murphy."
As in Virginia, Murphy's election will likely mean New Jersey will join RGGI. The Garden State was originally part of the cap-and-trade program, but Gov. Chris Christie (R) withdrew in 2011.
Perhaps more importantly, Murphy's proposal calls for a sweeping offshore wind project to bring online 3,500 megawatts of wind power by 2030.
That, Maisano said, may be the most significant energy policy outcome in any of Tuesday's elections.
New Jersey has long had opportunities to advance offshore wind projects, but Christie shied away, effectively punting the idea until after the 2017 election, Maisano said.
"Offshore wind has struggled to get footing in many places, even though we've been pushing it, we've had a government pushing it," Maisano said. "I think freeing up the logjam in a state like New Jersey where there has been a significant amount of work already done will be the most significant takeaway and most significant opportunity that yesterday's election presents for energy industries."Washington
Fossil fuels did pick up a win in Washington state, where voters knocked down a proposal to stop coal trains from traveling through the city of Spokane.
The ballot measure, known as Proposition 2, sparked a heated debate in the city over whether to fine owners of rail cars carrying uncovered coal or oil that hasn't been treated to reduce flammability (E&E News PM, Aug. 17).
Spokane is a major juncture between coal mines and Bakken oil rigs in the West and export terminals along the Pacific coast.
"With the city's own legal advisers saying for more than a year Proposition 2 was unenforceable and potentially illegal, a no vote was the only responsible way to avoid costly lawsuits that would waste city resources from more important things," said Michael Cathcart, spokesman for the Committee to Protect Spokane's Economy, a group that lobbied against the measure.
Greens in Washington had other reasons to celebrate yesterday. As of last night, Manka Dhingra looked to be in solid control of the race for a Seattle-area seat in the state Senate, which would give Democrats unified control of the state Legislature.
The win clears a path for Gov. Jay Inslee's ambitious climate change agenda, a fact the Democrat touted in an interview with The Seattle Times yesterday.
Environmentalists were undoubtedly happy with the prospect of furthering Inslee's climate policies. Washington Conservation Voters' Action Fund poured $500,000 into supporting Dhingra, the most the group has ever invested in a state Senate race.
"We're thrilled that [Inslee] now has a pro-environmental House and Senate that is ready to work with him to address some of our state's biggest environmental issues," said Shannon Murphy, president of Washington Conservation Voters. "It puts our state back on offense on key issues, like oil transportation safety, toxic cleanup and prevention, and reducing climate pollution."
But Murphy also emphasized a lesser-known race for a key seat on the Port of Vancouver Board of Commissioners. Don Orange beat out Kris Greene, an industry-backed candidate, a vote that's seen as the death knell for an oil terminal proposal that has been in the works for years.
"It was largely seen as a referendum against the largest oil-by-rail terminal in North America, so now we have a port commission majority that has a clear mandate against this terminal and for clean energy jobs for all," Murphy said.Capitol Hill
In the nation's capital, meanwhile, Democrats sought to link Tuesday's results in Virginia to the topic du jour in Congress: tax reform.
Northam dominated in suburban districts that benefit from state and local tax deductions, which would be scrapped in current Republican tax reform proposals.
"The election results should be a stop sign for Republican efforts to pass this bill," Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) told reporters.
That may be wishful thinking, but it was clear yesterday that Democrats think a partisan tax bill could be an electoral boon for the left.
"As Clint Eastwood says, 'Make our day.' Pass this bill that is so bad for the suburbs," Schumer said.
https://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2017/11/09/stories/1060066099
-
(ACC Mentioned) Chlorine's Deadly Hazards Fuel Stock Rally as Supply Tightens
Nov 9, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Jack Kaskey
Armies used chlorine as a weapon in World War I. Thousands of lives are put at risk every time a railroad tank car rolls through a city carrying the chemical. It's among the biggest fears of safety regulators.
In an odd twist, chlorine's hazards have now set the table for U.S. producers to thrive. Environmentalists have succeeded in raising awareness, strengthening regulations, and closing plants around the world. Safety and pollution concerns are shrinking global production capacity, tightening supplies. and driving up prices—and profits—as demand grows.
Major producers Olin Corp. and Westlake Chemical Corp. have seen shares surge this year about double the 22 percent rise in the S&P 500 Chemicals Index. Even the devastating effects of Hurricane Harvey along the Gulf Coast didn't deal much of a setback to producers—both companies reported record earnings in the third quarter, helped by rising prices for chlorine and related products.
“It's looking very good, not just for next year but for 2019 as well,’’ said Matthew Blair, an analyst at Tudor, Pickering, Holt & Co.
Like other dangerous chemicals, chlorine is useful stuff, underpinning 55 percent of all other chemical production, according to Euro Clor, the European industry association. It's used to disinfect water supplies and to make microchips, pharmaceuticals, and PVC plastic found in products as diverse as pipes and blood bags.
The process that makes chlorine—running electricity through saltwater—also produces caustic soda, a chemical even more in demand than chlorine. Commonly called lye, it helps manufacture ubiquitous products like paper, glass, soap, and adhesives. The co-produced chemicals are jointly known in the market as chlor-alkali.
Plant Closings
A wave of plants in Europe will be shut by year-end to comply with new rules banning the use of mercury in chlor-alkali production, cutting world capacity by 1 percent. China is shutting down plants as part of a multi-industry cleanup effort. Consolidation has stalled U.S. expansion, with 76 percent of production now held by the three largest producers: Olin, Westlake, and Occidental Petroleum Corp.
Chlor-alkali demand is expected to grow 12 times faster than supply through 2021, according to Blair. U.S. chemical makers increased caustic soda prices 29 percent since early last year, while chlorine gained 22 percent. U.S. exports to the rest of the world are surging, rising 26 percent in August from year-earlier levels, Blair said.
Hurricane Harvey drove home the tightness of the market in August when it knocked out about 12 percent of U.S. chlor-alkali capacity, according to Blair, giving already rising prices another boost as buyers scrambled for supplies. Though chlorine-maker Olin lost production from the storm, rising prices still drove sales and earnings to a record in the third quarter, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.
Westlake also reported record earnings Nov. 7. The outlook is only getting better as more plants shut down in Europe, Chief Executive Officer Albert Chao said during a Nov. 7 conference call to discuss its third-quarter results.
Upside Outlook
“Westlake is well-positioned to benefit from these market developments,” he said.
On an Oct. 31 call with analysts after its earnings release, Olin executives saw nothing but upside for the caustic soda market. Olin expects prices and demand to continue rising the remainder of the year, as exports steadily make up a growing portion of its sales.
“We're not really seeing weakness in anything,” said James Varilek, an Olin executive vice president. “The markets are generally strong around the world.”
Such a strong market would typically give rise to new plant construction, but that's not happening yet. First, producers need to figure out the most efficient way to respond to chlorine safety concerns from communities and shippers—issues that have pushed up costs.
Dangerous Commodity
Railroads carry most of the chlorine that needs to be shipped long distances, and they're increasingly reluctant to take on the risks. Chlorine is probably the most volatile and dangerous commodity that railroads carry, said James Beardsley, global rail practice leader for Marsh, the brokerage insurance unit for Marsh & McLennan Cos. That earns freight haulers the highest premium in the chemicals industry, according to an American Chemistry Council report.
Since 1978, two dozen people have been killed by lung-destroying chlorine gas in five U.S. railroad accidents, and more than 2,000 have been injured in scores of mishaps, according to a Surface Transportation Board database. Those numbers include nine killed and 554 injured in 2005 after a train collision in South Carolina released a yellow-green fog of poisonous chlorine.
Insurance to protect against such incidents is costly and hard to come by. In a major accident, coverage caps could leave railroads on the hook for billions, Beardsley said. The result: “They'll move it, but it's going to cost you more and more,” said Chuck Carr, a consultant at IHS Markit.
Making PVC
The best solution is to use the chlorine where it's made, forestalling the need to ship the deadly chemical. Producers often co-locate chlor-alkali plants with facilities that use the chlorine to make PVC plastic, which is far easier and cheaper to ship than chlorine. Building such plants makes it harder to justify adding capacity for chlor-alkali production.
That's the path proposed by Shintech Inc., which has applied to build chlor-alkali, PVC and other units in Plaquemine, Louisiana. If that project moves forward, it wouldn't be complete for three or four years. Until then, producers are trying to ramp up production at existing plants, which already are running at the highest operating rates in a decade, Blair said.
Olin's interest in building a new facility “is very close to zero,” said CEO John Fischer.
Both Olin and Westlake have given bullish outlooks for their chlor-alkali businesses, bolstered by the lack of plans for new plants. Olin's shares have risen 40 percent this year, and Westlake is up 64 percent.
With no significant new capacity coming online anywhere in the world, “We don't see anything changing in the fundamentals,” Olin's Varilek said.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=123449720&vname=dennotallissues&fn=123449720&jd=123449720
-
Nov 8, 2017 | The Spokesman-Review
By Chad Sokol
The U.S. Air Force has agreed to reimburse the city of Airway Heights for water it’s purchasing from the city of Spokane, months after the revelation that firefighting operations at Fairchild Air Force Base have contaminated the former city’s drinking water system.
The Air Force will pay Airway Heights for up to 440 million gallons of clean tap water with a potential cost of more than $687,000 during the next year, according to Air Force officials based in San Antonio. The agreement took effect Nov. 1.
Airway Heights Mayor Kevin Ritchey said Wednesday the Air Force had stopped paying for bottled water for residents who rely on the municipal water system. The military is now picking up some of the costs associated with pumping water from Spokane, which draws from a different aquifer.
“It’s an increased cost from what we would normally pay to get it out of the ground ourselves,” Ritchey said.
Military installations across the country – and their civilian neighbors – are trying to quantify the environmental and physical health effects of perfluorinated compounds known as PFOA and PFOS, which were key ingredients in a foam used to douse ship and aircraft fires. Cleanup and mitigation efforts are costing taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars. Lawsuits and tort claims have been filed.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency last year advised limiting concentrations of the chemicals to 70 parts per trillion in drinking water, but it has not created a framework for regulating the chemicals, and local and state health authorities are not required to test for them. Some environmental experts, meanwhile, say the chemicals are unsafe at any concentration.
PFOA and PFOS have been linked to kidney cancer, birth defects, immune system disorders and other serious health problems. And numerous studies, including some commissioned by the military and the chemicals’ manufacturers, hinted at those health effects decades ago. The compounds were once main ingredients in Teflon and Scotchguard but have been voluntarily phased out of production.
Last month, the New York Times reported that a top Trump administration appointee in the EPA’s toxic chemical unit, Nancy Beck, “insisted upon the rewriting of a rule to make it harder to track the health consequences of (PFOA) and therefore regulate it,” drawing concern and criticism from colleagues.
Beck previously worked for the Washington State Department of Health and for the American Chemistry Council, the chemical industry’s main trade association.
In Airway Heights, chemical runoff from Fairchild has contaminated dozens of wells, including several that supplied the city’s tap water. Air Force officials have been testing wells in phases for about a year in an attempt to trace how the chemicals migrated through the water table. They were used on the base for decades, and it remains to be seen how far they spread.
The base’s public affairs office said 202 wells were tested between May and the end of September, with 57 showing chemical concentrations above the EPA threshold, 55 showing concentrations below that threshold and 90 showing no trace of the compounds. A new round of testing began in early October.
Airway Heights has long purchased water from Spokane to bolster its supply during the summer months, using a pipe that moves up to 1,500 gallons per minute. The cities added a second, smaller connection after the chemical contamination prompted a shutdown of Airway Heights’ system this spring, bringing the total pumping capacity to about 2,000 gallons per minute.
Marlene Feist, a spokeswoman for Spokane’s public works department, said the city sold Airway Heights an average of about 92 million gallons per year from 2012 to 2016. She said the extra demand this year is not cause for concern.
“We’re used to them pumping during the summertime,” she said, “so for them to pump during the winter months is basically no big deal.”
She noted that Airway Heights’ total annual water usage, about 450 million gallons, is still less than 2 percent of the 23 billion gallons that Spokane pumps from its system each year.
Cleanup and mitigation of perfluorinated chemicals near more than 400 U.S. military installations may cost up to $2 billion, according to some estimates. U.S. Sens. Maria Cantwell and Patty Murray (D-Wash.), and other lawmakers, are pushing to include an extra $62 million for that effort in this year’s National Defense Authorization Act.
http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2017/nov/08/air-force-to-reimburse-airway-heights-for-clean-wa/
-
US Senator Introduces Bill Authorising FDA to Regulate Cosmetics
Nov 9, 2017 | Chemical Watch
By Julie A Miller
Senator Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) has introduced a bill that would allow the US Food and Drug Administration to regulate cosmetics ingredients. The bill is a less ambitious alternative to one favoured by NGOs.
S2003, the proposed FDA Cosmetic Safety and Modernization Act, introduced on 25 October, would give the agency the authority to review chemical ingredients in cosmetics and regulate them.
However, the bill would not mandate reviews, and it would require the FDA to declare a substance safe "if there is reasonable certainty that the cosmetic is not injurious to users" under typical circumstances.
In addition, the legislation would prohibit states from taking action to regulate any cosmetic chemical that the FDA had identified for review.
However, NGO the Environmental Working Group says this would "allow the Trump administration to pre-empt all state action by simply creating a list of chemicals".Alternative
The leading alternative bill, the Personal Care Products Safety Act (S1113), reintroduced in May by senators Dianne Feinstein (D-California) and Susan Collins (R-Maine), would require the FDA to review five cosmetic ingredients a year and would specify the first five.
Both bills would require cosmetic companies to register with the FDA, though the Hatch bill has larger small-business exemptions.
Both require reporting of adverse effects from the use of cosmetics, but the Feinstein-Collins bill authorises the FDA to order recalls.
While NGOs are solidly behind the Feinstein-Collins proposal, industry is divided.
In September, 15 makers of cosmetics and skincare products announced a coalition to push for stronger US cosmetic safety laws and came out in favour of S1113.
The Personal Care Products Council praised senator Hatch’s contribution to the debate, but did not take a side. Instead, the council reiterated principles it set out in January for cosmetic regulation reform, including:a uniform national regulation that authorises the FDA to review ingredients and preempts state laws;requiring manufacturers "to substantiate the safety of cosmetic products and ingredients"; andmandatory reporting of "serious and unexpected adverse health events.
Meanwhile Icmad, which represents independent cosmetic manufacturers and distributers and the Professional Beauty Association reiterated their support for the proposed Safe Cosmetics Modernization Act (HR575), a competing bill introduced by Representative Pete Sessions (R-Texas). This would require registration of cosmetic manufacturers, reporting on cosmetic ingredients and reporting of adverse events, but includes no provisions for FDA regulation.
https://chemicalwatch.com/60969/us-senator-introduces-bill-authorising-fda-to-regulate-cosmetics
-
Lead Paint Nuisance Ruling Could Have Big Impact
Nov 9, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Peter Hayes
Sherwin-Williams Co., NL Industries Inc. and ConAgra Grocery Products Co. are expected to learn before Thanksgiving whether a California trial court validly ordered the manufacturers to pay $1.15 billion to remove or abate lead paint hazards from hundreds of thousands of California homes.
How an intermediate California Court of Appeal rules in the long-running public nuisance suit brought by several California cities and counties could have big ramifications. The ruling could extend well beyond California, broadly affecting public nuisance litigation in a wide range of areas, from climate change to opioids, attorneys following the litigation tell Bloomberg Law.
The judgment, if affirmed, would be the first major lead paint public nuisance victory, but would also “register beyond that context,” Professor Craig Johnston at Lewis & Clark Law School in Portland, Ore., said.
Ripple Effects
If the plaintiffs win, “it will have significant ripple effects beyond lead paint, and will convince judges that the law is moving” in favor of allowing public nuisance claims generally, Johnston said.
“And the law needs to move—climate change and opioids call out for some response and evolving doctrines in the area of tort law,” he said.
Those problems affect the public broadly yet aren't readily addressable via standard product liability claims that require more of a direct link to a manufacturer's products, advocates of public nuisance claims say.
Professor Sean Hecht at the UCLA School of Law in Los Angeles agrees the lead paint case could have a significant impact in other areas where public authorities have alleged nuisance, including in climate change suits also pending in California.
There, a number of California municipalities have sued petroleum companies, alleging greenhouse gases tied to their products have caused sea levels to rise and resulting damages to their cities and residents.
“The outcome of the lead paint litigation will impact the viability of these cases,” Hecht said. “If the court here takes a negative view of public nuisance, it could have a chilling effect on the public nuisance litigation.”
Hecht is co-executive director of UCLA Law's Emmett Institute on Climate Change and the Environment. He previously served as a deputy attorney general for California, working on environmental and public health matters.
‘Not Revolutionary’
Santa Clara County and the nine other California cities and counties that sued the manufacturers say upholding the 2014 trial court order to pay $1.15 billion to fund lead abatement is vital to protecting children in the state (People v. Atlantic Richfield Co., Cal. Ct. App., H040880, oral argument 8/24/17).
But counsel for Santa Clara County also says the predictions of a public nuisance explosion are misplaced.
“It's not revolutionary,” Danny Chou, assistant county counsel for the County of Santa Clara told Bloomberg Law.
Chou pointed to a critical 2006 California appeals court decision in the case that the plaintiffs could proceed with their public nuisance claims, but only if they proved the companies affirmatively promoted their products while knowing they would be creating a public health hazard.
“We haven't seen a spike in public nuisance claims since the 2006 decision,” he said. “The case applies regular principles of California public nuisance law.”
“It's a big deal,” Chou said, only “because of how hazardous lead paint is for young children.”
Remoteness
But defense attorneys keeping tabs on the litigation disagree, both with the litigation's merits and its potential repercussions.
The decision is an outlier, allowing a manufacturer to be held liable “for a nuisance caused by the user” long after a consumer product is sold and legally used for its intended purpose, attorney Peter Hsiao with Morrison & Foerster LLP in Los Angeles told Bloomberg Law.
The trial court also “blurred the requirement to show causation by creating a common fund to remedy the problem,” which requires the manufacturers to pay to clean up some homes “where their product was never used,” Hsiao said.
Hsiao's practice includes environmental and chemical toxic tort law. He formerly worked as an Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Central District of California.
If the decision is reversed, “California law would return to conforming with the vast majority of decisions in other states requiring a specific showing of proximate causation before a manufacturer is held responsible in tort,” he said.
If the paint companies lose on appeal, however, “there would be the risk of a flood of public nuisance litigation over a variety of products,” Hsiao said.
Defense attorney Richard Faulk, with Davis Wright Tremaine LLP in Washington, concurred.
The judgment, if upheld, “would almost certainly stimulate a trend of similar cases—not only in California, not only regarding lead paint and pigments, but also regarding a variety of other products, conditions and circumstances created by manufacturers of finished and component products, as well as fuels, additives, and environmental conditions associated with industrial activities,” Faulk said.
“Opioids are the big thing,” said Faulk, who has written extensively on nuisance litigation. “The pharmaceutical industry liability if this tort is allowed is immense.”
The problem with public nuisance cases in general, Faulk said, is a lack of clear standards by which a manufacturer can predict whether it will face liability.
“After 10, 20, 30 years, how far can you push a duty to people who were not your customers?,” Faulk asked. “It is an exercise in remoteness; that's where the lack of a duty comes from.”
One of a Kind
If the California court upholds the judgment, it would be the first state appeals court to find manufacturers liable under nuisance law for creating a lead paint hazard.
In 2008, the Rhode Island Supreme Court overturned a nuisance jury verdict in that state against Sherwin-Williams, NL Industries, and former lead paint maker Millennium Holdings LLC.
Antonio Dias, lead counsel for Sherwin-Williams in the California litigation, told Bloomberg Law that “all other states that have considered the issue” have similarly rejected lead paint nuisance claims, including Ohio, Mississippi, New Jersey, Illinois, New York, and Wisconsin.
The case is ripe for reversal, Dias said, because the trial court failed to hold the plaintiffs to the standard set by the 2006 appeals court ruling.
“The appeals court established that the proof required would be much higher than in a product liability case, but the trial court didn't follow that,” Dias, a partner with Jones Day in Washington, said.
“The plaintiffs are trying to hold companies liable for something unknown and unknowable at the time,” he said.
Faulk said that regardless of how the California appeal court rules, the state's top court will ultimately be asked to decide the validity of the judgment.
Professor Nancy White, chair of the Department of Finance and Law at Central Michigan University in Mount Pleasant, Mich., said that because of the enormity of the stakes involved, even California Supreme Court review might not end the matter.
“Whichever way the courts come down on the situation the legislature could come in later and fix it,” White told Bloomberg Law.“The ultimate issue is who bears the costs of injuries caused by products: the manufacturers or the injured?” White said.
“If the defendants win then it will be business as usual: The cost of these unforeseen injuries will be borne by the injured. To some extent the cost will also be on the state to the extent tax dollars are spent on health care and remediation,” she said.
But if the plaintiffs win, “the California view on public nuisance could slowly seep into the case law of other liberal states,” White said.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=123449729&vname=dennotallissues&fn=123449729&jd=123449729
-
While We Aren’t Paying Attention, the Trump Administration is Making Products Less Safe
Nov 7, 2017 | Union of Concerned Scientists
By Gretchen Goldman
Have you ever checked to see if a product has been recalled because of a safety concern? As a parent of a young child, I am deeply familiar with this task. Babies are expensive and buying used products cuts costs, but it’s crucial to check if products have been recalled because baby products can often be recalled for safety concerns. When you have a little one, you want to protect them as best you can. But now, the Trump administration is putting my family and yours at risk.The Consumer Product Safety Commission: Keeping our families safe
To our nation’s benefit, there’s the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). The little-known federal agency plays a crucial role in making sure that the products we bring into our homes and trust with our families’ lives are safe. I depend on this every day when I put my child down for a nap, put him in a car seat, or give him a toy. Because of the CPSC, I trust that the crib won’t injure him, the car seat is built properly, and that his toys don’t have parts he can choke on.
You might only hear about these kinds of recalls when they’re high-profile like those scooters that everyone got for Christmas one year that had a tendency to catch fire or the exploding Android phone debacle. But the reason you don’t hear more about these issues is because the CPSC is doing its job. Scientists at the CPSC monitor product injuries and deaths, issue recalls and work with companies to help prevent unsafe products from ever reaching the market.Dana Baiocco: A dangerous pick for CPSC commissioner
Now, the Trump Administration is threatening the CPSC’s ability to keep us safe. President Trump’s nominee for CPSC commissioner Dana Baiocco—who will be voted out of committee tomorrow on the hill—has spent her career defending companies whose products have harmed people (Check out this reporting from Sharon Lerner at the Intercept). When people fought for justice because their loved ones had mesothelioma from asbestos exposure because of the negligent company, Baiocco was making sure widows wouldn’t get their money. When Yamaha knowingly kept on the market unsafe ATVs that caused injuries and deaths of several people, including children, Baiocco worked to make sure the families didn’t get compensation. When Volkswagen was caught cheating on their emissions testing, Baiocco was there to defend them. And when the tobacco conglomerate R.J. Reynolds needed help defending harms caused by smoking, Baiocco was there too, defending the tobacco giant from cancer victims.
Clearly, Baiocco is the wrong choice for the CPSC. Nothing about this past gives me confidence that she’ll use science to make decisions in the public interest if she is appointed a CPSC commissioner.Would Baiocco keep us safe from harmful flame retardants?
This year the CPSC is slated to work on organohalogen flame retardants. As my colleague Genna Reed reported last month, the CPSC made the science-based decision to phase out the harmful class of flame retardants from products, despite chemical industry opposition. This was a huge victory for science and for public health. I celebrated this move. No longer would I have to spend hours reading labels, pouring over scientific studies and buying costly foreign baby products to avoid exposing my child to these unsafe flame retardants.
Now the CPSC will be implementing that rule. Baiocco’s nomination will have a huge impact on how that implementation happens. Commissioners have a lot of power when it comes to implementation, timing, and overall agency priorities. Will harmful flame retardants be phased out under a proper timeline and sufficiently eliminated from products? If Baiocco becomes commissioner, this flame-retardant rule could be delayed or weakened in its implementation, and that won’t be a victory for anyone other than the companies that produce them.The dangers of a politicized CPSC: The case of the lead lunch boxes
We don’t have to look too far to see the devastating consequences of a CPSC where science is compromised. In 2005, under the George W. Bush administration, the agency tested children’s lunchboxes and found unsafe levels of lead. In the case of one test on a Spiderman lunchbox, the agency found 16 times the federal standard for lead. Rather than immediately announce this finding and recall a potentially unsafe product, the CPSC changed their lead testing technique and employed an averaging scheme that scientists said underestimated the level of lead in the lunch boxes. With the backing of the vinyl industry, the CPSC continued to defend this testing method while allowing the product to stay on the market, potentially exposing children to lead poisoning.The Senate Commerce Committee should vote no on Dana Baiocco for CPSC commissioner
As a mom, I worry a lot about the safety of my son. There is nothing more important to me than making sure he can grow up in a safe environment. I know I can’t keep him safe from every danger in the world, but I can make sure he’s surrounded by safe cribs, strollers, car seats, and toys. In order to do that though, I depend on a CPSC that uses science and works in the public interest.
And so I ask the members of the Senate Commerce Committee, do you trust that Baiocco will keep your family safe? Do you have confidence that she will make sure that my child and yours are protected from unsafe baby products? If a recall would be inconvenient to a company’s bottom line, would she still prioritize public safety over corporate profits? How will Americans know if products are safe to use in our homes? This isn’t just a policy preference. This could cost American lives, and Baiocco is not on our side. As a parent and a scientist, I urge you to vote no tomorrow for the safety of all Americans.
http://blog.ucsusa.org/gretchen-goldman/while-we-arent-paying-attention-the-trump-administration-is-making-products-less-safe
-
Market Disruption Fears Grow As Glyphosate Ban Looms
Nov 9, 2017 | Euractiv
By Sarantis Michalopoulos
The Standing Committee on Plant Animal Food and Feed met today (9 November) to discuss renewing the approval of the active substance glyphosate, which is produced by Monsanto and others, but no qualified majority among member states was reached again.
According to the European Commission, half of the member states (14) supported the Commission’s proposal. Among the countries in favour of a five-year re-approval were the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Ireland, Spain, Finland, the UK, Sweden, Slovenia, Slovakia, the Netherlands, Hungary, Latvia and Lithuania.
Belgium, France, Greece, Croatia, Italy, Cyprus, Luxembourg, Malta and Austria voted against the proposal, while Bulgaria, Germany, Poland, Portugal and Romania abstained.
“Taking into account its legal obligations and the fact that the current authorisation expires on 15 December the European Commission will now submit the proposal to the Appeal Committee by the end of November,” the Commission said.
Trade disruption
A possible glyphosate ban entails the risk of trade disruption to food imports from third countries, in case the EU fails to follow scientific evidence in its decision-making, EU farmers warn.
Based on the positive assessments of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) and the European Chemicals Authority (ECHA), the Commission proposed a five-year re-approval of glyphosate (See background).
But critics point to the International Agency for Research on Cancer’s (IARC) classification of glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic”, with France among the countries that oppose the re-authorisation of the weedkiller.
A European Citizens’ Initiative has also gathered more than 1.3 million signatures calling for a European ban over fears that the weed killer causes cancer.
Imports from third countries
In a recent interview with EURACTIV.com, the head of Britain’s National Farmers’ Union Meurig Raymond wondered what would happen if glyphosate is used in the UK and banned in Europe. “Will we be allowed to export our wheat in the EU?”
This is a question for the rest of the world as well.
A World Trade Organisation Spokesperson (WTO) declined to comment on the case but referred to a recent committee meeting on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS) on 2-3 November, which raised the issue of the EU delay to re-authorise glyphosate.
Under an agenda item on monitoring the use of international standards, Argentina and the United States expressed their concerns about the EU delay, which were echoed by Australia, Brazil, Canada, Colombia, New Zealand, Peru and Uruguay.
“The US said members’ actions to restrict the use of glyphosate appear to lack scientific justification. It reminded members that the scientific body assessing risks that international standards rely on – the Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues (JMPR) – concluded that glyphosate does not pose a risk to consumers or public health when used appropriately.”
EURACTIV asked the European Commission whether a glyphosate ban could disrupt food imports from third countries, considering that the rest of the world is using glyphosate.
A Commission spokesperson replied that the executive does not comment on hypothetical scenarios; however, the EU official stressed, “Even today products containing glyphosate above the established maximum residue levels are restricted in the EU.”
EU farmers’ union Copa-Cogeca is pushing for a 15-year re-authorisation and urges the member states to focus on scientific evidence.
Asked about the impact of a possible glyphosate ban on food imports, Secretary-General Pekka Pesonen replied: “Copa-Cogeca expects that imports to the EU must fulfill the same requirements that EU farmers are facing in their production.”
However, he warned about a risk of trade disruption in case the EU fails to follow scientific evidence in its decision-making.
“We are concerned that the competitiveness of the EU farming sector will be endangered,” Pesonen stressed.
Luc Vernet, an agriculture expert from Farm Europe think-tank, has “serious doubts” on this.
“The situation today is that some products are not allowed in the EU but they are totally accepted for imports,” he told EURACTIV.
“The Commission has a system for organic certification, but it put in place a system of equivalence and not conformity for the logo. In wine or bananas, we have products to fight specific diseases, which are allowed in these markets with the stamp of organic farming, and not allowed in the EU,” he said.
According to the Lisbon Treaty, the Commission can still move on with its proposal if no qualified majority in favour or against is achieved among member states in the appeal committee.
But it has warned that it won’t take the political risk of doing so. Glyphosate producer Monsanto has already sent legal notifications to the executive in the event of a glyphosate ban.
“Not the member states but the Commission will be sent to the EU Court,” a source said, adding that this is the reason why the member states hide behind the executive.
“We don’t know what retaliation measures other countries will take […] the Commission has to move forward unilaterally with its proposal if no qualified majority is reached,” the same source added.
Restoring EU confidence
Vernet said that the glyphosate deadlock has been instrumentalised for different reasons and with different objectives.
“Some at EU level wanted to stop a situation where the Commission in all these topics is alone in making decisions. And these people thought that via glyphosate, because it had scientific proof that it was safe, they would unlock the situation and force member states to go forward and to vote in favour of this.”
He pointed out that there was a big question mark about the reliability of the EU authorities.
“Our politicians at EU level lack intermediation between science and political decisions,” he noted.
“When you are an MEP you have to participate in the public debate and you cannot have the full entire picture of scientific data. You have EFSA doing so. But when you take the public debate, which is driven by social media and so on, it is very difficult if you’re not a scientist to have a clear idea and a personal opinion on that. In addition to organisations like EFSA, we need to build at EU level capacity to interpret science and deliver clear messages on the reliability of science.”
He stressed there was a need to rebuild confidence to have this capacity with trustworthy experts, fully independent, in a position to say, “At the moment, we can rely on this science”.
“We have the capacity at EU level to organise a body of experts between EFSA and the EU Parliament. We could easily do that. But what we cannot and we should not have a situation where it is a fight between industry and NGOs. The rule of law has to be guaranteed by the institutions. And no industry or NGO can say ‘this active substance is the right one’ or not,” he concluded.
https://www.euractiv.com/section/agriculture-food/news/market-disruption-fears-grow-as-glyphosate-ban-looms/
-
(ACC Mentioned) How Coal Giant Peabody's Ideas Ended Up in Trump's Coal Study
Nov 9, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ari Natter
Days after Energy Secretary Rick Perry requested a study on how to help coal-fired power plants, a lobbyist for the largest U.S. coal producer contacted the department to offer his advice. Many of those ideas became part of the department's efforts to help companies who provide the fuel source.
Emails obtained by the Sierra Club show that Travis Fisher, a senior adviser at the department who coordinated the report, sought and received input from Raymond Shepherd, a top Peabody Energy Corp. lobbyist in Washington.
“It occurred to me that the DOE study would be a good way to highlight the inequities in the market and the uneven playing field on which coal plays,” Shepherd wrote in an April 19 email to Fisher, adding he was including “some broad questions that could be addressed by the study.“
Shepherd said the department should highlight a key reason why coal is important: “On-site fuel storage increases reliability,” he said in one email.
“Power generation can be interrupted by outages, weather events, and competing market pressures.“
The resulting study, released by the Energy Department in August, touted the value of power from coal-fired power plants, emphasizing just that point: on-site storage of fuel offers an important way to safeguard the electric grid's resiliency. A month later the department proposed a rulemaking to bail out coal plants, touting just those fuel-storage attributes.
That regulation, if adopted, would be a boon for coal companies like Peabody. Neither natural gas nor renewable energy—coal's chief competitors in electricity markets—have fuel on site.Shepherd's emphasis that the electricity marketplace wasn't working correctly was also highlighted repeatedly by Perry and other supporters of the new regulation.
FOIA Finds
The emails were obtained through an open-records request. An Energy Department spokeswoman didn't immediately respond to a request for comment. Peabody didn't have an immediate comment.
Not all of Peabody's ideas were adopted. Shepherd recommended that the administration move to “suspend or limit” the wind production tax credit and provide tax incentives to existing coal plants for the construction of environmental controls.
The emails also show that Peabody sought help from the Energy Department and other federal agencies to extend the life of the massive coal-fired Navajo Generation Station in Arizona. A Peabody mine supplies that plant with coal.
“We would love to get your insight on how DOE could work with the EPA and Interior to assist in keeping the plant open,” Shepherd wrote in an Apr. 12 email.
The emails show that the Energy Department's study was not an objective look at the reliability of the grid as the department has maintained, said Casey Roberts, a senior attorney with the Sierra Club, an environmental group.
The Sierra Club has joined with groups as diverse at the American Petroleum Institute and American Chemistry Council to oppose Perry's proposed regulation.
“These documents show the influence certain private interests had and the extraordinary access they had while the Department of Energy was conducting this study,” Roberts said in an interview. “The communications between Peabody and Department of Energy staff show a shared understanding that the objective of the DOE study was to preserve coal generation.“
The Sierra Club has received funding from Bloomberg Philanthropies, the charitable organization founded by Michael Bloomberg, the majority owner of Bloomberg L.P., parent of Bloomberg BNA.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=123449709&vname=dennotallissues&fn=123449709&jd=123449709
-
DOE Overhaul, Other E&C Priorities May Have To Wait
Nov 9, 2017 | E&E Daily
By George Cahlink
A legislative push for a major overhaul of the Energy Department and other bills addressing nuclear waste and environmental cleanup may not make it to the House floor this year, senior Energy and Commerce Committee lawmakers say.
The lawmakers said a crowded House floor agenda, ongoing and only recently resolved legislative differences, and other committee priorities have slowed what had been seen as an ambitious plan.
They stressed, though, that there's no reason to believe those priorities won't move in 2018, the latter half of the 115th Congress.
Senior E&C member Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill.) said he is optimistic that the committee will soon achieve one of its other goals: having U.S. EPA chief Scott Pruitt testify. So far, Pruitt has avoided appearing before the agency's top oversight panel.
"I personally have said, 'You know you are going to have to come, sooner rather than later,'" said Shimkus, who noted that Pruitt had little reaction when he made the remarks to him in a meeting about two weeks ago.
With a chuckle, Shimkus told reporters, "He will, he'll come."Energy overhaul slows
Energy and Commerce Chairman Greg Walden (R-Ore.) said this week that his committee has "just begun the process" of working on legislation reauthorizing the Energy Department.
He declined to offer a specific timeline for moving the measure, but when asked about its prospects for this year, he conceded, "We've got a lot of other work to do."
Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.), chairman of the Subcommittee on Energy, added, "All the air in the balloon right now is in tax reform."
Walden restated his belief that the committee needs to review all the agencies under its purview, which in some cases have never been reauthorized since being created.
DOE is an "agency that was built at a time of energy scarcity in the '70s, and the physical structure of the agency has never been re-evaluated," he said.
Walden said the committee's former chairman, Rep. Joe Barton (R-Texas), is leading the effort. He said earlier this year that the review would likely re-examine the role of the department's 17 national laboratories but wouldn't look to take over large chunks of EPA's regulatory role as some conservatives have hoped (E&E Daily, Sept. 5).
Barton told E&E News this week, "We don't have a bill yet; we had hoped to have a bill, really, in the next couple of weeks. That timetable is going to slip." He said the measure now could be unveiled by late winter.
Barton said no disputes are holding up the bill, saying it simply has been a logistical challenge to find time for both Republican and Democratic leaders of the committee to meet.
"I am really, really, really trying to do this bipartisan — it will end up a better product," said Barton, who also noted that there have been some staff-level conversations with DOE.
Barton suggested that the reauthorization could be made up of smaller bills the committee has been eyeing, including the "Energy Star Reform Act," which the panel held a hearing on this week.
Under that bill, the voluntary energy efficiency program, jointly run by EPA and the Energy Department, would be solely run by DOE. Energy Star highlights buildings and products deemed more efficient than average.
Rep. Frank Pallone of New Jersey, the panel's top Democrat, said he has not heard from Republicans yet about working on a reauthorization and is skeptical about talk of a bipartisan bill.
"My concern would be that they dismantle the department and it loses its regulatory or enforcement power. I am just suspicious is the best way to put it," he said.Brownfields, Yucca slipping
Shimkus, who heads the Subcommittee on Environment, said he's increasingly skeptical that any of his legislative priorities — a nuclear waste storage overhaul; a brownfields reauthorization, H.R. 3017; and a safe drinking water bill — will hit the floor this year, despite the measures' gaining bipartisan support in committee.
"We should be on the floor, and [brownfields] should be passed on the suspension calendar," said Shimkus, referring to the fast-track option for moving bills.
Shimkus said a disagreement with the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee — which shares oversight of the brownfields program — held up the reauthorization earlier this fall but has been resolved.
He said the difference involved a provision, which has been dropped, that would have created tougher "due care standards" for local communities holding remediated properties.
Shimkus also said the House could easily pass a bill, H.R. 3053, that would lay the groundwork for restarting both interim nuclear waste storage sites and the Yucca Mountain program to store spent reactor fuel.
He said it's being delayed by appropriators who oppose the measure's push for mandatory funding for waste storage rather than having it appropriated annually.
"We are not going to play this yearly game," said Shimkus, a reference to successful efforts by appropriators to block Yucca by denying funding for years.
Shimkus said the House should have already moved the "Drinking Water System Improvement Act," H.R. 3387, which would reauthorize the Drinking Water State Revolving Fund at $8 billion over the next five years. It passed the committee by voice vote over the summer.
Shimkus said other priorities beyond energy and environmental policy fights are also holding up committee bills.
Most recently, he noted, E&C leaders have been focused on forcing changes to provisions in the annual defense authorization bill related to how the Food and Drug Administration oversees military personnel.
https://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2017/11/09/stories/1060066093
-
2nd Circuit Stays FERC Gas Pipeline Approval After State's CWA Concerns
Nov 8, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Dawn Reeves
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit has stayed a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) approval to construct an interstate gas pipeline, after New York argued that FERC is seeking to usurp its Clean Water Act (CWA) authority by approving the project before the state certified whether it complies with the water law.
The outcome of the battle between New York and FERC could set a broad precedent on whether one state has authority to deny interstate energy projects based on state-specific environmental concerns, which could pose a major hurdle to President Donald Trump's vow to boost infrastructure projects such as pipelines.
The court in a Nov. 3 order stops construction from commencing while the litigation proceeds over whether FERC improperly usurped the state's authority under section 401 of the Clean Water Act to determine if projects are consistent with state clean water goals. The section requires that states affected by interstate water projects that would discharge into their waters certify that the projects meet various CWA requirements.
The New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) denied the section 401 certification for the Millennium Pipeline Company's Valley Lateral gas pipeline in August.
But FERC in September claimed the state waived its certification authority and granted a notice to proceed (NTP) for construction of the pipeline on Oct. 27. FERC did so over NYSDEC objections that it not act until it address the state's administrative request to reconsider its wavier decision.
NYSDEC then sought the stay in a Nov. 2 emergency motion with the 2nd Circuit in NYSDEC v. FERC and Millennium Pipeline Company that warned: “Without the stay requested in this Emergency Motion, Millennium could construct the project before this Court acts upon the Emergency Petition, inflicting irreparable environmental harm and undermining the State of New York’s sovereign duty to prevent or mitigate the discharge of pollutants into state waterways."
FERC granted the NTP after it issued a precedent-setting decision holding that NYSDEC waited too long in denying the CWA section 401 approval. FERC Sept. 15 found that the state waived its right because it failed to act within the one-year timeframe mandated by the CWA, rejecting NYSDEC concerns that the company's application was not complete.
The FERC waiver decision was prompted by a different case over the same project in the D.C. Circuit, and that court held that FERC had to rule on the waiver dispute administratively before that court could consider the issue -- in a case brought by Millennium seeking to speed a decision -- on the merits.
401 Certifications
The 2nd Circuit has already suggested in a different case, Constitution Pipeline Co. v. NYSDEC, that the state did not waive its CWA authority when it denied its 401 certification for that project.
The court said Aug. 18 that states have power to block federally approved interstate projects on environmental grounds, dismissing an alternative argument advanced by Constitution that the 401 denial was voided because of the amount of time it took and finding that the Natural Gas Act requires such challenges to be heard in the D.C. Circuit, so it lacked jurisdiction, avoiding a merits ruling.
The 2nd Circuit in its order sets a noon Nov. 20 deadline for responses to the state's petition and a noon Nov. 28 deadline for any replies.
FERC did not weigh in on the issue but Millennium filed a Nov. 1 opposition arguing that the court should deny the stay because, “The Commission thus correctly concluded that the Department waived certification when it did not act on the application” within a year of receiving it.
NYSDEC also has an administrative request pending with FERC to reconsider its waiver order, and explains to the court in a separate Nov. 2 memo the need for the injunction including that FERC was granting the NTP before addressing this administrative request. “If the Department were required to act within one year of receiving an incomplete application for a section 401 certification, it could be forced to act on an application before the public notice and comment process has concluded or, in some cases, before that process has even commenced.”
FERC declined to comment on the case while a Millennium pipeline spokeswoman says, “We feel the facts of this case are on our side and we still plan to commence construction when the stay if lifted.”
A source with a gas-fired power plant that is relying on the pipeline for fuel says that despite the stay, FERC “did the right thing” in determining New York waived its section 401 authority. “If FERC had not done this, a bunch of States would have repeated this stupid, juvenile delinquent behavior.”
As far as the litigation, the source says, “It's the American way,” and that the stay is “not a huge surprise” because it is only in place “until FERC does something with the rehearing request.”
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/2nd-circuit-stays-ferc-gas-pipeline-approval-after-states-cwa-concerns
-
Shell Begins Building New Petrochemical Complex in Pennsylvania
Nov 8, 2017 | Platts
By Kristen Hays
Shell Chemical has begun construction on a new $6 billion petrochemical complex in western Pennsylvania, the company said Wednesday, that will be the first fueled by the cheap US natural gas boom to come online in the US Northeast rather than the chemical-heavy Texas and Louisiana coasts.
The company has been preparing the site in Monaca, nearly 28 miles northwest of Pittsburgh, which will house a 1.6 million mt/year steam cracker and three polyethylene plants with a cumulative capacity of 1.6 million mt/year to start up in 2020 or 2021.
The complex also will include a cooling tower, rail- and truck-loading facilities, a water treatment plant, a laboratory, a gas-fired power plant and an office building, the company said.
Shell's pipeline division also has been securing easements since late 2016 for a 97-mile, 107,000 b/d pipeline to feed ethane to the cracker from southeast Ohio and southwest Pennsylvania.Shell decided to move forward on the Pennsylvania cracker in June 2016. While other companies also have considered building similar infrastructure in the region, none have announced similar final investment decisions.
PTTGC America, the US arm of Thailand's PTT Global Chemical, has yet to make that decision on a 1 million mt/year cracker project in Belmont County, Ohio, about 71 miles southwest of Pittsburgh. Last month, PTTGC America CEO Toasaporn Boonyapipat signed a memorandum of understanding with John Minor, president of JobsOhio, a statewide job-promotion group, to establish an infrastructure development plan around the project site after the company issues its final investment decision.
PTTGC America had planned to make that FID by mid-2017, but in February pushed it to later in the year to allow further discussions regarding engineering and construction plans submitted by Fluor and Bechtel.
Brazil's Braskem also has a dormant proposal for a 1 million mt/yer cracker project in West Virginia, which has been on indefinite hold since crude oil prices fell from triple-digit highs in 2014.https://www.platts.com/latest-news/petrochemicals/houston/shell-begins-building-new-petrochemical-complex-21492314
-
House Panel Passes Bill To Boost Drilling On Federal Land, Offshore
Nov 8, 2017 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
The House Natural Resources Committee passed a bill Wednesday aimed at boosting oil and natural gas drilling on federal land, as well as offshore.
The bill, the Strengthening the Economy with Critical Untapped Resources to Expand American Energy Act — or SECURE American Energy Act — passed 19-14, with nearly all Republicans in support and all Democrats opposing.
The legislation would provide for Alaska and Atlantic Coast states to take shares of revenue from future offshore oil drilling in those areas, end the president’s authority to withdraw offshore areas for drilling and require all planned offshore drilling rights sales to occur.
On federal land, it would allow states to take over permitting and oversight authority for drilling on federal lands within their borders, which Republicans said would remove unnecessary federal red tape.
“The SECURE American Energy Act provides a multifaceted approach to improving access and management of our nation’s valuable energy sources,” Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.), chairman of the panel’s land and minerals subcommittee, said in a hearing Tuesday.
Democrats said the bill would remove necessary protections, like those for marine mammals and birds, while ignoring and exacerbating climate change.
“This bill does nothing to solve the real energy problems we’re facing today,” Rep. Alan Lowenthal (Calif.), the minerals subpanel’s top Democrat, said at the hearing.
The committee rejected numerous Democratic amendments, including ones that would to require a 1,500-foot setback from homes and businesses for gas wells, extending a moratorium on offshore drilling near Florida and requiring that states overseeing federal-land drilling consult with American-Indian tribes for their decisions.
Rep. Garret Graves (La.) was the only Republican to vote against the bill. He said he supports its policies, but would refuse to vote unless it allowed Louisiana to get a higher share of revenue from offshore drilling fees than it does currently.
“I regretfully am going to be voting against this legislation, despite the fact that I think it brings good energy policy to the table, in terms of addressing jobs,” Graves said.
“I think it is disgusting that we’re not addressing this,” he added.
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/359473-house-panel-passes-bill-to-boost-drilling-on-federal-land-offshore
-
Murkowski Unveils Legislation to Allow Drilling in Refuge
Nov 9, 2017 | E&E Daily
By Kellie Lunney
Senate legislation unveiled last night to allow oil and gas drilling in part of the 19-million-acre Arctic National Wildlife Refuge would allocate a 50 percent revenue-sharing split between the state of Alaska and the federal government.
Calling it a "tremendous opportunity" for both Alaska and the country, Energy and Natural Resources Chairwoman Lisa Murkowski released her much-anticipated language in advance of a markup scheduled for Wednesday.
The Alaska Republican's proposal would require the Interior Department to conduct two lease sales within ANWR's coastal plain within the 10-year budget window.
It also calls for the secretary to "issue any necessary rights-of-way or easements across the coastal plain for the exploration, development, production, or transportation associated with the oil and gas program," according to a summary.
The fiscal 2018 budget resolution, which Congress passed last month, tasked Murkowski's panel with finding $1 billion in new revenues during the next decade as part of a larger GOP effort to accelerate tax cuts through the reconciliation process.
Those instructions gave Murkowski the opportunity to write legislation paving the way for drilling in the refuge's 1.5-million-acre coastal plain, a longtime priority of the Alaska delegation and other Republicans.
Attaching ANWR language to the larger tax package through reconciliation allows it to move by a simple majority vote without the threat of a filibuster. That means it won't need any Democratic support in the Senate.
It's the best shot the Alaska delegation has had in decades to realize its goal of allowing energy development in the refuge's coastal plain, also known as the 1002 area.
"For over 40 years, Alaskans have led the fight to safely and responsibly unlock the 1002's vast energy resources," Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska) said in a statement. Young, a 23-term lawmaker, has shepherded such legislation successfully through the House more than a dozen times.
"Today is an important step in that process, one that ultimately works to create new jobs and opportunities for our people, generate new revenue and wealth, and strengthen the economic outlook of Alaska and the nation," he added.
In addition to the 50-50 revenue-sharing split between Alaska and Uncle Sam, Murkowski's legislation would impose a 16.67 percent royalty rate for leases.
"The legislation I released tonight will put Alaska and the entire nation on a path toward greater prosperity by creating jobs, keeping energy affordable for families and businesses, generating new wealth, and strengthening our security — while reducing the federal deficit not just by $1 billion over ten years, but tens or even hundreds of billions of dollars over the decades to come," Murkowski said in a statement.
But opponents of drilling in ANWR have argued that the math behind the Republican tax plan and the estimated revenue from drilling in ANWR's 1002 area is fuzzy at best.
The left-leaning Center for American Progress analyzed data based on recent lease sales in the state, which found the federal government could expect closer to $37.5 million in earnings. That is well short of $1 billion.
Michael LaRosa, communications director for the Environment and Natural Resources Committee's top Democrat, Maria Cantwell of Washington, took to Twitter shortly after Murkowski made her announcement criticizing the plan.
"This revenue source will pay for 0.067% (less than one-tenth of one percent) of the cost of tax cuts for the wealthy," he wrote.
Cantwell is a fierce opponent of oil and gas drilling in ANWR and successfully led the last major effort to defeat a Senate measure to allow energy development in the region. That was in 2005.
The Alaska Wilderness League, which has long opposed drilling in the refuge, criticized Murkowski's legislation and blasted Republicans' use of the reconciliation process to try to advance energy development in ANWR.
"It's deplorable that a backdoor budget maneuver is being used to ram Arctic drilling through without a full, fair and open debate," Adam Kolton, the group's executive director, said in a statement. "This bill would allow roads, pipelines, gravel mines and well pads to be erected across the entire birthing grounds of the Coastal Plain, where caribou calve and where polar bear mothers den."
The Wilderness Society also lambasted the bill and its insertion into the budget process.
"Most Americans oppose drilling in the refuge, and the backers of this bill are keenly aware that if it were subject to a full debate and vote, the scheme would lose on the merits," said Nicole Whittington-Evans, the group's Alaska regional director. "With millions of acres already open for oil leasing in the Arctic, industrializing and destroying this refuge makes absolutely no sense."
If Congress ends up approving drilling in ANWR, the process would unfold over several years. Murkowski's legislation stipulates that the Interior Department must conduct the first lease sale within four years of enactment and the second lease sale within seven years of the legislation becoming law.
"Each lease sale must contain at least 400,000 acres and be comprised of those areas that have the highest potential for the discovery of hydrocarbons," the legislative summary said.
Drilling supporters say it not only would boost the economy, but also would strengthen national security because it would make the United States less reliant on foreign oil.
"I have no doubt that this legislation, which would lead to producing more energy responsibly by opening up the small section of the 1002 area in ANWR, will help make the United States the world's energy super power again, will dramatically increase our country's national security and lead to American jobs and productive diplomacy around the globe," Alaska Republican Sen. Dan Sullivan said in a statement.
https://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2017/11/09/stories/1060066097
-
Northwest Ohio Voters Reject Anti-NatGas Pipeline Referendum
Nov 9, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jamison Cocklin
Voters in Bowling Green, OH, on Tuesday definitively rejected a referendum that would have prohibited natural gas pipelines from being built on city-owned property.
The grassroots initiative, prompted in part by Nexus Gas Transmission LLC’s plans to build a few miles outside of Bowling Green on property owned by the city in Middleton Township, was defeated by a margin of 61-39%.
The Ohio Supreme Court had given hope to referendum proponents last month when it upheld a decision by the local county board of elections to leave the proposal on the ballot. “The Community Rights to a Healthy Environment and Livable Climate,” as it was titled, would have banned pipelines carrying gas or other fossil fuels from running within the city limits or on land owned by Bowling Green. It would have excluded infrastructure that serves local consumers in Wood County. Bowling Green Mayor Dick Edwards was a vocal opponent.
The 255-mile Nexus project would move 1.5 Bcf/d from Ohio to Michigan and into Canada. The project, cleared by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to begin construction last month, is expected to be in-service by 3Q2018. The bulk of Nexus construction is to take place in Ohio, where the project crosses 11 counties.
The Bowling Green initiative was not the only opposition the pipeline has faced in the state. More than a dozen communities have passed symbolic resolutions opposing the pipeline or had requested reroutes during the planning phase.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/112385-northwest-ohio-voters-reject-anti-natgas-pipeline-referendum
-
Atlantic Sunrise Construction Temporarily Halted in Pennsylvania
Nov 9, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jamison Cocklin
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia has ordered a temporary stay of construction on the Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Co. LLC (Transco) Atlantic Sunrise project in the latest setback for the Northeast infrastructure build-out.
The appeals court issued the administrative stay to further consider an emergency motion filed Oct. 30 against the project by a coalition of environmental groups. FERC issued a certificate in February.
Transco parent Williams Partners LP stressed that the stay is temporary and “not related to the project’s execution or its compliance with applicable federal or state regulations or permit conditions.” The court stayed the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s certificate order, which forced construction activities to be halted in Pennsylvania and threatened other related operations elsewhere.
After Williams filed a motion for clarification, the DC Circuit partially granted it, limiting the stay only to construction in Pennsylvania and not other operations outside of the state. Portions of the project that were authorized for partial service over the summer to move 400,000 Dth/d, for example, are not included.
The groups, represented by the Appalachian Mountain Advocates and the Sierra Club, said late Monday after the order was issued that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and Williams each are trying to rush construction of the project.
“The arrogance of the industry is on full display as they rush this project and silence protestors while there are still pending cases in court,” said Mark Clutterbuck of Lancaster Against Pipelines, which is challenging Atlantic Sunrise. “Transco wouldn’t be rushing if they weren’t worried, and I hope this is the beginning of a turning tide that will check the fossil fuel industry, an industry that has been rolling over the rights of communities for years.”
Greenfield construction of the project started in September, and it is scheduled to enter service in mid-2018. Cabot Oil & Gas Corp. (1 Bcf/d), Chief Oil & Gas LLC (420 MMcf/d) and Seneca Resources Corp. (190 MMcf/d) have contracted for the highest volumes.
“Atlantic Sunrise has undergone a nearly four-year, extensive review process and is operating and being constructed in compliance with all state and federal permits,” Williams COO Michael Dunn said Tuesday. “These current actions by opponents of American energy are, this morning, idling thousands of workers in Pennsylvania and could delay the benefits of low-cost energy delivery to millions of American families.”
Shares of Cabot were down as much as 5.6% on Tuesday, but they gained 2 cents to close on Wednesday at $27.82.
FERC granted Transco a variance last week to prevent further delays, allowing around-the-clock construction at two compressor stations in Pennsylvania, where most of the construction is taking place.
The groups contesting the project have requested that construction not move forward until FERC conducts a “comprehensive environmental review” of the short- and long-term impacts, as well as the public need. After FERC issued the certificate order, the groups filed for a rehearing, but without a quorum the Commission tolled the request until it could make a final decision. Citing FERC’s inability to act, the groups filed a petition for review of the project’s certificate in March, which is pending.
Williams started the pre-filing process at FERC in early 2014 for the nearly $3 billion project and applied for a certificate in March. The company received key permits from Pennsylvania in August. Unions and business interest groups on Tuesday urged the appeals court to lift the stay.
The 1.7 Bcf/d project would move natural gas from the Marcellus Shale’s constrained northern tier to Mid-Atlantic and Southeast markets.
Complicating matters, the DC Circuit ruled in August that FERC’s environmental impact statement for a trio of pipelines, including Sabal Trail, failed to adequately consider the impact of greenhouse gas emissions. Environmentalists have challenged other projectswith that decision, and it was also cited by New York state in its decision to deny Millennium Pipeline Co. LLC’s Valley Lateral project a water quality certificate.
Valley Lateral was cleared by FERC to begin construction after the Commission waived New York’s authority on that project. It is unclear whether the DC Circuit’s August decision may factor into its review of Atlantic Sunrise.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/112384-atlantic-sunrise-construction-temporarily-halted-in-pennsylvania
-
'We're Engaged': Alaska Gets China Backing For Natural Gas Project
Nov 9, 2017 | Reuters
By Josephine Mason
BEIJING (Reuters) - China’s biggest state oil company Sinopec, one of the country’s top banks and its sovereign wealth fund agreed on Thursday to develop a $43 billion natural gas project in Alaska, as the cash-poor U.S. state seeks to revive its dwindling energy industry.
The deal had been in the works since April and was sealed during U.S. President Donald Trump’s state visit to China. It is the second-largest pact among a slew of agreements signed during the trip between the world’s top two economies that are worth as much as $250 billion.
Sinopec (601988.SS), China Investment Corp [CIC.UL] and the Bank of China (601988.SS) will work over the next year with the state government to hammer out the details of their involvement in the Alaska LNG project, according to a statement from project sponsor Alaska Gasline Development Corp (AGDC).
Alaska LNG is designed to carry natural gas from fields in the North Slope through an 800-mile (1,287 km) pipeline to south central Alaska for in-state use and to a liquefaction plant to produce up to 20 million tons of LNG per year for export.
Sinopec will buy some of the LNG and may supply engineering work for the project’s construction, Bank of China will provide funding and CIC may take an equity stake, Alaskan Governor Bill Walker said on a call with reporters. AGDC will remain a majority shareholder, he said.
Alaska created AGDC in 2010 to build the project to tap the North Slope gas reserves, where production is expected to average about 3.5 billion cubic feet per day, according to Alaska LNG’s website.
Alaska aims to shore up its oil and gas sector, which has struggled to compete with lower-cost shale projects in states such as Texas. Securing a Chinese customer, lender and investor would help Alaska overcome a multi-billion dollar budget deficit and create jobs.
“It’s been a long courtship with these folks,” said AGDC President Keith Meyer on the call. “We’re now engaged.”
The LNG will meet China’s growing appetite for cleaner-burning fuels as the government tries to wean the country off coal to reduce air pollution. The Trump administration has touted natural gas exports from the United States as a way to reduce its trade deficits and boost domestic employment.
A final investment decision (FID) for Alaska LNG is expected in the first quarter of 2019, with construction starting in the same year and the first cargo expected around 2024 to 2025.
Most of the gas from Alaska LNG is expected to go to China, with Sinopec also helping with the marketing, although AGDC is also speaking to Japan, South Korea and Vietnam about potential off take, Meyer said.
Another energy-rich state, West Virginia, signed a memorandum of understanding with China Energy Investment Corp, the world’s largest power company by asset value.
At the signing ceremony, Chinese President Xi Jinping said one of the world’s top energy markets will expand its imports of LNG and crude oil from the United States.ECONOMIC BOOM
Alaska has the advantage of being closer to China than LNG projects on the U.S. Gulf Coast, but its main issue is its high cost, said Kerry-Anne Shanks, head of Asia gas and LNG research at Wood Mackenzie.
“Sinopec may be able to secure cheaper LNG supply elsewhere,” she said in a note.
Alaska Governor Walker said the project will generate $8 billion to $10 billion in revenue each year, including $1 billion from gas sales.
“This is an agreement that will provide Alaska with an economic boom comparable to the development of the Trans-Alaska Pipeline System in the 1970s,” Walker said in a statement.
The U.S. State Department said in a separate statement the project will create up to 12,000 jobs during construction and reduce the trade deficit between the U.S. and Asia.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-trump-asia-china-gas/were-engaged-alaska-gets-china-backing-for-natural-gas-project-idUSKBN1D90C1
-
Pollution Claims Against Rug Makers Batted to State Court
Nov 9, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Steven M. Sellers
Water pollution claims against many of the nation's carpet manufacturers belong in Alabama state court, a federal court in Alabama ruled Nov. 7.
The ruling rejected claims by Shaw Industries Inc. that the plaintiff in a chemical contamination case included an Alabama-based company as a defendant solely to defeat federal diversity jurisdiction (The Water Works & Sewer Bd. of the Town of Centre v. 3M Co., 2017 BL 399634, N.D. Ala., No. 17-cv-1026, 11/7/17).
Diversity jurisdiction requires proof that a threshold amount of money is at stake, and that no plaintiff shares citizenship with any defendant. But federal court rules also bar the improper addition of local defendants—known as fraudulent joinder—to keep cases in more plaintiff-friendly state courts.
The plaintiff, Water Works and Sewer Board of Centre, Ala., claims that Shaw, 3M Co., Alladin Manufacturing Corp., and other carpet makers tainted the Coosa River with perfluorinated chemicals.
Shaw argued for federal diversity jurisdiction because Centre had no conceivable cause of action against Birmingham, Ala.-based Industrial Chemicals Inc.
The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama wasn't convinced.
Here, defense affidavits showed that Industrial Chemicals made no sales of perfluorinated chemicals to Shaw or other carpet makers in Georgia after 2005, but didn't resolve whether sales could have occurred before that year, the court said in remanding the case to Alabama state courts.
The Alabama company could have polluted the waters by other means, so it “may be found liable for contaminating Centre's water source with perfluorinated chemicals,” the court said.
U.S. District Judge Karon Owen Bowdre wrote the opinion.
Beasley Allen Crow Methvin Portis & Miles represented Centre.
Bainbridge Mims Rogers & Smith, as well as Bryan Cave, represented Shaw.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=123449730&vname=dennotallissues&fn=123449730&jd=123449730
-
Federal Climate Report Creates Additional Hurdle For GHG Risk Finding Foes
Nov 9, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Doug Obey
The latest federal assessment of climate change finding it “extremely likely” humans are the dominant force behind observed warming adds another political and legal hurdle for any attempt to challenge EPA's landmark 2009 greenhouse gas endangerment finding, according to several legal experts.
“At the very least, this report makes abandonment of the endangerment finding by EPA even more infeasible than it already was,” Foley Hoag attorney Seth Jaffe writes in a Nov. 6 blog post, citing the new report, released Nov. 2 as the first volume of the National Climate Assessment (NCA).
“When the government itself says that it is extremely likely that release of GHGs is the dominant cause of warming, it would seem to be the definition of arbitrary and capricious were the government somehow still to conclude that the endangerment finding should be withdrawn,” Jaffe writes.
Similarly, Michael Gerrard, director of Columbia University's Sabin Center for Climate Change Law, told Bloombergthat it would be “a legal suicide mission to try to rescind the endangerment finding in the face of a comprehensive report issued by multiple federal agencies in late 2017. I don’t see how a lawyer could keep a straight face saying there are solid grounds to rescind, which is what the courts would require.”
At the same time, however, the report shows little sign of affecting the Trump administration's plans to target specific GHG rules, with many observers predicting that the White House and EPA will try to treat the report as a one-day event and continue to roll back Obama-era measures while hedging on the wisdom of imposing new GHG controls.
The appraisals comes in the wake of the newly release first installment of the NCA, concluding “it is extremely likely that human activities, especially emissions of greenhouse gases, are the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century.”
Further, the report states that, “For the warming over the last century, there is no convincing alternative explanation supported by the extent of the observational evidence.”
An interagency group released the new assessment pursuant to a statutory mandate for periodic updates on the implications of climate change for the United States. It is also developing a second volume of the NCA, to be released next year, that will detail a range of topic- and region-specific climate damages.
The release comes despite earlier fears among many scientists, environmental groups and others that the Trump administration would try to suppress the study or significantly alter its findings.
Many experts and administration critics are pointing out that the report starkly conflicts with prior statements by President Donald Trump -- as well as EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt and other administration officials -- downplaying the link between human activity and climate change.
'Another Brick'
Former EPA official Robert Sussman tells Inside EPA it seems the Trump administration calculated it would be better not to block the report's release than to spark a huge backlash by attempting to delay it or heavily edit its conclusions.
“I think the Trump administration actually allowed the report to go forward on the theory it would disappear and they could continue reiterating their position” on climate change, he says.
Whether such a hedge on climate change will be tenable over the long term remains unclear, but the administration thus far has given every indication it wants to discuss climate change as little as possible, removing references to the subject from websites at multiple agencies and proposing to defund an array of climate programs.
Some conservative groups, including the Texas Public Policy Foundation, have also sought to challenge the lack of a GHG risk finding specific to the electric sector, with the original endangerment finding focused explicitly on mobile sources.
But Sussman calls the report “another brick in the wall” affirming the science behind man-made global warming, creating further political and even legal complications for any effort to formally challenge the GHG finding.
Sussman also argues that a direct administration assault on the endangerment finding was already more unlikely than a scenario in which EPA follows through with Pruitt's proposed public “red team, blue team” debate on the science.
But if such a challenge to the risk finding were to occur, Sussman says Pruitt “would have to explain why the administration issued this [recent] report, why he did not object to it, why he did not dispute the specific scientific findings in the report.”
Sussman stops short of claiming the assessment's conclusions backing anthropogenic climate change conclusively bars any challenge to the GHG finding, under legal principles of estoppel that prohibit persons from taking contradictory positions in front of a court. But Sussman says the report “would certainly call into question” in court whether the administration is operating on good faith.
Sussman and others add that that they do not expect the report to change the minds of those determined to maintain skepticism. “There is so much evidence out there that if they were inclined to take it seriously they would have changed their minds long ago,” Sussman said.
Similarly, Foley Hoag's Jaffe is reluctant to rule out administration attacks on the endangerment finding, writing that “nothing would really surprise me at this point,” given what he calls the administration's abandonment of years of GOP support for weighing both the costs and benefits of federal rules.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/federal-climate-report-creates-additional-hurdle-ghg-risk-finding-foes
-
EPA's Critics Fault Ozone Designations In Effort To Preserve Pending Suit
Nov 8, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Stuart Parker
Several states and environmentalists are criticizing EPA's recent delayed issuance of designations for areas attaining the 2015 ozone air standard as unlawful because it falls shorts of Clean Air Act mandates to also issue nonattainment findings, as they seek to preserve a lawsuit challenging a rescinded agency delay of the designations.
But EPA in a Nov. 8 legal filing with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit argues that the suit over the withdrawn delay is moot because the agency on Nov. 6 issued initial attainment designations, with a plan to issue nonattainment findings at a later date. Nonattainment findings trigger a Clean Air Act clock for states to craft plans detailing the ozone-reduction measures they will impose in order to meet the standard.
EPA missed an Oct. 1 air law deadline to issue the designations for the 2015 ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS), set at 70 parts per billion. The agency in June announced it was delaying all designations by one year, but in the face of litigation brought by states and environmentalists instead withdrew that delay, leaving in place the original deadline -- which it missed, instead issuing designations Nov. 6.
But those initial designations only announced that 2,646 of the more than 3,100 counties in the United States are attaining the 2015 ozone limit, a standard that the Trump administration is reconsidering. Environmentalists and several states now argue that the designations fall short of air law mandates, and that their case should proceed.
The states and environmental groups' response answers in part questions over their legal strategy, although other possibilities remain. For example, many of the same litigants have already served EPA with notices of intent to sue the agency for failure to discharge its nondiscretionary duty to issue designations, and if EPA fails to issue designations for the hundreds of remaining areas, the states and groups can sue the agency in federal district court.
Also, sources say, the deficiencies in the Nov. 6 action issuing ozone designations leave EPA vulnerable to a fresh D.C. Circuit action. For the time being, however, states and environmentalists are focused on preserving their existing case, which asks the court to vacate the since-withdrawn delay decision that EPA insists is moot.
“October 1 has come and gone. EPA has not promulgated all the required designations, nor has it given any indication of a plan or schedule for doing so,” environmental petitioners say in a Nov. 8 motion. “EPA's designation of 2,646 counties either “attainment” or “unclassifiable” on Nov. 6 “promulgated no nonattainment designations and instead left hundreds of counties -- with an aggregate population far exceeding 100 million people -- without any designations at all,” the filing says. “Because the same concrete result of the Designations Delay -- no nonattainment designations -- remains in effect despite the Withdrawal Notice, Public Health and Environmental Groups respectfully submit that this case is not moot, and this Court should accordingly rule on the undisputed merits that the Designations Delay is illegal and arbitrary,” they add.
If the court does not proceed to the merits of the lawsuit over the rescinded delay, it should hold the case in abeyance until EPA promulgates designations for all areas under the 2015 NAAQS, they argue.
'Indefinitely Denied'
States in their own Nov. 8 filing say that the missing non-attainment designations “are the designations that trigger steps to achieve meaningful reductions in ozone levels.” Not issuing nonattainment designations means “the public is indefinitely denied the benefits of the 2015 ozone NAAQS,” they say.
Further, if the court dismisses the case -- which is currently in abeyance -- there is a risk EPA could simply issue a new one-year extension for the missing nonattainment designations, and then argue this action precludes district court challenges, states argue. “Nothing EPA has said or done since issuing the Deadline Extension indicates that the illegal justifications for that delay are not still motivating its failure to issue meaningful designations,” states write.
EPA in its pre-publication Federal Register notice announcing the initial attainment designations said only that it will issue the remaining designations in a future action.
The agency in a Nov. 8 letter notifies the court of its designation of “most” areas in the country. “In the preamble to the rule, EPA states that EPA intends to address the remaining areas in a separate future action, and that 'the EPA is not extending the time provided'” by the air law for the designations.
In the second filing the same day, EPA adds that “the Court should now proceed to decide the currently pending motions, i.e., EPA’s motion to dismiss the petitions as moot, ALA’s motion for summary vacatur or stay pending judicial review, and ALA’s request that the Court vacate the EPA action granting the extensions if it dismisses the case as moot.”
The air act allows EPA two years after issuance of a new NAAQS to issue designations, necessary for states to craft state implementation plans (SIPs) to come into compliance. The agency can extend this period by one year, but must provide a convincing rationale for doing so -- and has failed to do so here, sources say.
One public health advocate says that EPA has had states' recommendations for which areas should be designated nonattainment for months. “The data have been posted now since July,” the source says. The states' original recommendations were based on three years of data from 2013-2015, but states are now using more-recent data from 2014-2016 to determine compliance. However, further delay to allow use of 2017 data would be largely self-defeating for states, because ozone levels were actually higher in 2017 due in part to hotter weather, the source says.
“What's missing is the crucial part,” the advocate says of the nonattainment designations. While some areas know they will be in nonattainment, such as southern California, “there are places that don't realize, or haven't been planning for it,” and those places will be unable to craft SIPs on time, the source says.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/epas-critics-fault-ozone-designations-effort-preserve-pending-suit
-
Trump Nominee Drops Paganism Claim, Says Climate Change Is Real
Nov 9, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ari Natter
An environmental nominee of President Donald Trump who had dismissed the threat of climate change and labeled carbon dioxide plant food, abandoned those positions Nov. 8 under questioning from Senate Democrats.
Kathleen Hartnett White, Trump's pick for the White House's top environmental position, also said her earlier comments comparing the belief in global warming to paganism had been taken out of context.
“Climate change is, of course, real,” White said in her nomination hearing at the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee. “It's likely that CO2 emissions from human activity have some impact on climate.”
In speeches and articles in 2015 and 2016, White, a senior fellow at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, made the comments about climate change and paganism and warned that solutions in Pope Francis's 2015 climate encyclical would lead to poverty, socialism and concentration camps.
She had also called renewable energy a parasitic “false hope” and said ozone isn't harmful to human health “unless you put your mouth over the tailpipe of a car for eight hours,” according to Delaware Senator Tom Carper.
Democrats on the panel said those and other comments made White unfit for the role of head of the White House Council on Environmental Quality. If confirmed, White would be in charge of overseeing and coordinating environmental and energy policies across the government.
“Ms. White has shown a disdain for science, a disregard for the laws and regulations already on the books, and a staggering disrespect for people who have views with whom she disagrees,” said Carper, the committee's top Democrat. “Her tone, her words and her actions are simply unacceptable.“
Republicans on the committee praised White's tenure as the chairman of the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, and said that showed she was right for the White House job.
“While you were at Texas CEQ the Texas air quality dramatically improved,” Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) said.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=123449706&vname=dennotallissues&fn=123449706&jd=123449706
-
As Trump Steps Back from UN Climate Talks, Coke and HP Move In
Nov 9, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Jennifer A. Dlouhy
On the fringes of the ongoing global climate summit in Bonn, U.S. leaders will once again demonstrate their commitment to the issue, with a packed agenda of film screenings, panel discussions and cocktail parties where they will highlight the country's carbon dioxide cuts.
Unlike past years, however, the leaders are from corporate America—not the White House.
President Donald Trump sent a bare-bones negotiating team to the two-week long climate gathering that began Nov. 6 in Germany, after pledging to withdraw from the Paris climate accord earlier this year. Instead of holding an array of events highlighting naturally clean energy, it scheduled a lone panel discussion on how fossil fuels fit into a low-carbon future.
But the official U.S. presence is buttressed by an army of company executives, governors, mayors and activists who will deliver a different message. Coca-Cola Co., Mars Inc. and HP Inc. are planning to tout U.S. progress in cutting emissions. A Citigroup Inc. vice president is set to elaborate on how finance can help the world reach the Paris goals. A Berkshire Hathaway Inc. executive is scheduled to discuss how markets can drive carbon reductions.
“We're all playing a role in moving this forward,” said Nate Hurst, HP's chief sustainability officer. “Our customers, some of which are right here alongside us on these panels, and the investment community are expecting this.”
The next two weeks may reveal whether the unofficial delegation will be enough to convince leaders in Beijing, New Delhi and Brussels to continue to fight climate change—or if the skepticism in Washington spurs them to back off as well.
“When the U.S. government is engaged in a serious way and puts some of its political capital behind this, it makes a difference,” said Lisa Jacobson, president of the Business Council for Sustainable Energy, which represents dozens of renewable power, natural gas and other companies. “Without that, there is a possibility of backsliding and postponing the needed action.“
Many of the events are being held at a “U.S. Climate Action Center”—a city-block-sized pavilion next to the formal negotiation site. Bloomberg Philanthropies, the Hewlett Foundation and NextGen America, founded by hedge fund billionaire Tom Steyer, are the top funders of the pavilion. Michael Bloomberg is the founder and majority owner of Bloomberg Philanthropies and Bloomberg LP, the parent of Bloomberg News.
The U.S. government has said it will continue participating in climate negotiations until the country's expected withdrawal from the Paris agreement in 2020. But there's no sign of the enthusiasm that previous administrations brought to the issue, much less the kind of personal involvement that former President Barack Obama brought in the run-up to the 2015 Paris agreement.
The Trump administration is taking a different approach.
At the sprawling summit site, the U.S. government is sponsoring a panel discussion on “the clean and efficient use of fossil fuels and nuclear power,” as it works to persuade other countries they can meet their climate objectives without abandoning coal and natural gas. Expected participants include representatives from Tellurian Inc., a liquefied natural gas company, and coal-producer Peabody Energy Corp.
Only official government representatives have a formal role in the summit's planned negotiations over how to validate countries’ carbon-cutting claims and take stock of progress in a few years.
Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs Tom Shannon is leading the U.S. delegation, which includes members of the State Department's climate office. State Department spokesman Yoon Nam declined to provide more specifics about the size and members of the U.S. delegation, but it's likely to be far smaller than the contingent of 93 U.S. government participants who were registered for last year's summit in Marrakech, Morocco.
While the U.S. government presence will be decidedly low-key, the unofficial representatives of the U.S. hope to make a splash. Representatives of the “We Are Still In” coalition representing nine states, 1,780 businesses and investors, 252 cities and counties and 339 colleges will use more than a dozen events at the U.S. pavilion to showcase their action.
Business leaders from Coca-Cola, Citigroup, HP and Microsoft are set to join those from Ingersoll-Rand Plc, Target Corp., Johnson Controls Inc. and other companies to emphasize their climate commitments. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is hosting an event on the role businesses play facilitating dialogue on climate. The Business Council for Sustainable Energy plans to describe how clean-energy technology can be deployed globally to help satisfy carbon-cutting goals.
Some issues that may be debated in Bonn are of critical importance to the business community, including strong intellectual property rights protections for technology that can “have the biggest impact on emissions going forward,” said Stephen Eule, vice president for climate and technology at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce's Global Energy Institute.
“Ultimately, it will be the private sector that develops, finances, builds, and operates the new energy and other technologies of the future,” Eule wrote in a blog post.
For companies, it's good public relations to make climate commitments and be present in Bonn. It's also a matter of managing risks that they recognize as real, even as the science of climate change is still debated in Washington.
“Real things are happening in the real world, and that's where our supply chains operate, that's where our factories operate and that's where our customers live,” said Kevin Rabinovitch, global sustainability director with Mars Inc. “It's critically important to us to tackle some of these issues, to manage risks to our supply chain and to capture some of the opportunities that exist in this space.“
Local political leaders are also trying to emphasize their role.
Rolling Back
“The world needs to know that Donald Trump cannot stop us,” said Washington state Governor Jay Inslee. The rest of the world needs to realize “they've got good partners here and their efforts will not be in vain,” he said.
Trump is rolling back Obama-era environmental regulations seen as helping to satisfy the U.S. Paris agreement pledge to pare greenhouse gas emissions to between 26 and 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025. But he doesn't have the authority to stop state-level policies, such as Washington state's cap on carbon pollution or its initiatives supporting clean energy research and development, Inslee said.
Federal policy and regulations are important to ensure action by all states—even those with political leaders who are skeptical of climate science and eager to support coal.
Even as it rescinds regulations, Trump's team has a positive story to tell. U.S. emissions are declining, driven by state mandates for renewable electricity, cities and companies committing to 100 percent green power, and utilities switching from coal to cheaper, cleaner-burning natural gas. The U.S. is already halfway to the 26 percent goal Obama set out.
“The bad news is obvious, which is this administration is a bunch of climate deniers, and we will look pathetic,” said Carol Browner, who was Obama's top climate adviser. “The good news is a lot of the countries that are providing leadership on this issue know that all of these things are going on, and they see that there is another America.“
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=123449710&vname=dennotallissues&fn=123449710&jd=123449710
-
EPA Extends Comment Period For Rollback
Nov 9, 2017 | E&E News PM
By Maxine Joselow
U.S. EPA has extended the deadline for commenting on its proposed rollback of the Clean Power Plan by 32 days, according to a Federal Register notice posted today.
The public now has until Jan. 16, 2018, to submit comments on the proposed repeal of President Obama's signature climate rule, which aimed to slash U.S. carbon emissions 32 percent by 2030.
EPA previously announced plans to hold a public hearing on the rollback later this month in Charleston, W.Va. (Greenwire, Nov. 2).
EPA spokeswoman Liz Bowman said the comment period was extended so that people would have a month to weigh in after the hearing.
"We understand that there's a lot of interest in this issue, and we look forward to hearing from all stakeholders on their thoughts on the Clean Power Plan or its replacement," Bowman said. "We encourage people to participate in the hearing and submit comments online."
Bowman added that the 32 days include two federal holidays — Christmas and New Year's Day.
A fierce legal battle is set to ensue after EPA finishes collecting comments. While the agency could replace the Clean Power Plan with a rule focused only on improving power plant efficiency, environmental groups are already preparing arguments against that potential outcome (Climatewire, Oct. 25).
https://www.eenews.net/eenewspm/2017/11/08/stories/1060066037
-
Democrats' Election Victories Could Boost State GHG Trading Efforts
Nov 9, 2017 | Inside EPA
By Curt Barry
Democrats' election victories in several key state races Nov. 7 could boost prospects for enlarging regional greenhouse gas trading programs on both the East and West coasts, bolstering climate policy advocates who are struggling to curtail Trump administration efforts to roll back EPA and other federal climate programs.
In Washington state, Democrats gained full control of the state's legislature, opening the door to advancing new proposals for coordinated programs to reduce GHGs with California and Oregon, sources say, including the potential for a linked West Coast cap-and-trade program that includes Canadian provinces.
The election Nov. 7 of Manka Dhingra, a career prosecutor, to represent several suburbs east of Seattle in the state Senate gives Democrats a one-seat majority in that chamber. Democrats previously controlled the Washington governor's office and state House.
Both the executive and legislative branches of California and Oregon are already controlled by Democrats.
Washington Gov. Jay Inslee (D) told the New York Times earlier this month that he “harbors dreams of enacting a muscular carbon pricing plan along with California, Oregon and officials in Canada.”
On the East Coast, Democratic victories in Nov. 7 governor's races in Virginia and New Jersey will pave the way to expand the Northeast power sector cap-and-trade program known as the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI).
Observers have long expected the Garden State to re-join the program as the 10th member state after term-limited Gov. Chris Christie (R) leaves office in January. The election of Phil Murphy (D) as the state's next governor almost certainly assures that.
Separately, Ralph Northam's (D) election to the governor's mansion in Virginia after the Nov. 7 election likely will allow that state to “link” its proposed power sector carbon trading program with RGGI.
However, observers are underscoring the potential of a West Coast trading program, in part because it would cover a range of sectors beyond electricity and would include many population centers with strong economies.
Inslee told the Times that state officials “intend to make a full-scale effort in the next session of the Legislature if we win. It will be a bell in the night, showing hope for the country, rejecting the Trump agenda of denying climate science.”
A coastal alliance, Inslee said, especially when cities such as Seattle and Portland and throughout California are booming economically, “would help make the case to a national audience that addressing climate change through energy policy is good for business and job creation,” the article says.
California already operates an economy-wide cap-and-trade program and holds quarterly GHG allowance auctions jointly with Quebec. Ontario is scheduled to join the joint program in January.
Oregon Legislation
Oregon lawmakers are expected early next year to consider legislation establishing a GHG “cap-and-invest” program that could link to the California-Quebec-Ontario program, which supporters say would represent a significant advancement toward achieving the originally envisioned Western Climate Initiative.
The Oregon legislation, Senate Bill 1070, was introduced in July but was not taken up this year by the state legislature. However, some observers expect lawmakers to consider it during Oregon's short 2018 legislative session, which lasts for 35 days in February and March.
Modeled after California's cap-and-trade program, SB 1070 proposes to establish a system in which certain polluting facilities must obtain GHG allowances that match their annual emissions. Some of the credits would be auctioned by the state, potentially generating hundreds of millions of dollars annually.
Facilities that emit 25,000 metric tons or more of CO2-equivalent would be subject to the new program.
State regulators would be required to set a cap on the total combined GHG emissions allowed from covered entities during calendar year 2021, and a schedule for the cap to decrease by a predetermined amount each year until 2050.
“I am hopeful we’ll see SB 1070 passed in Oregon, and Washington will then follow suit with either a linked cap-and-trade program or a correspondingly stringent, economy-wide carbon tax,” says an energy industry attorney who supports cap-and-trade. “They’d be wise to do the former, as it would work more seamlessly with the growing clout of the California-Quebec-Ontario (and possibly Oregon) linked program. . . . Do I think it will happen? Politics are inherently unpredictable.”
A Western energy trading source says that “due to the short legislation session in 2018, I doubt we’ll see [SB 1070] movement until 2019.” The source notes that the Oregon legislation “is explicitly intended to create a program that could be linked to California, Quebec and Ontario.”
As for Washington, this source says there is a “very good chance” that lawmakers in that state will pass “something on climate” now that Democrats have claimed a new majority in the Senate. “Prevailing winds seem to favor a carbon tax, since that’s the preferred option of most of the environmental community, which unfortunately could not be linked to the California program.”
But the energy industry attorney points out that Washington state voters rejected a carbon tax in the November 2016 election. “Last year’s carbon tax ballot measure gave a strong indication about how hard it might be even for a Democratic majority to coalesce around a carbon tax,” the source says.
Nevertheless, the source remains optimistic about a future linked, international West Coast GHG trading program.
“This is what I dream about: an integrated, carbon-pricing policy among the three coastal states, linked with jurisdictions throughout Canada, all of which could hold up their relative success in attracting technology, finance and young educated workers as a counterpoint to the rhetoric out of Washington that serious efforts to address climate change will hurt the economy.”
Clean Air Rule
In part due to a failure in prior years to advance cap-and-trade legislation through the state's GOP-led Senate, Washington state regulators in 2016 adopted a GHG reduction and trading program called the “Clean Air Rule” that covers about two-thirds of the state's total GHG emissions. The rule governs transportation fuels, natural gas distributors and stationary sources such as power plants, refineries, landfills, forest and paper facilities, and waste-to-energy plants.
Facilities with annual emissions of more than 100,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent started to comply this year, and energy-intensive, trade-exposed industries face compliance starting in 2020, according to the rule. Facilities are allowed to purchase GHG allowances from California's trading market to help comply with the rule, though it progressively limits the amount that can be used over time.
But the energy industry attorney says the Clean Air Rule “isn’t really a 'cap-and-trade' program; it’s what we call a 'baseline-crediting' program” and is “premised upon use of allowances from other states to achieve its reduction targets.”
Moreover, “there was lots of commentary surrounding adoption of the Clean Air Rule suggesting that Washington [should] adopt a true cap-and-trade program, rather than the structure that they did,” the source says.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/democrats-election-victories-could-boost-state-ghg-trading-efforts
Industry and Association News
LCSA News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested