Preview Newsletter
ACC AM 12/26
-
(ACC Mentioned) $180bn Investment in Plastic Factories Feeds Global Packaging Binge
Dec 26, 2017 | The Guardian
By Matthew Taylor
The global plastic binge which is already causing widespread damage to oceans, habitats and food chains, is set to increase dramatically over the next 10 years after multibillion dollar investments in a new generation of plastics plants in the US. -
World's Largest Plastics Plant Rings Alarm Bells on Texas Coast
Dec 26, 2017 | The Guardian
By Oliver Milman
Donald Trump’s state visit to Saudi Arabia in May will perhaps be best remembered by his participation in an all-male sword dance where he awkwardly waved a ceremonial blade in step with his cabinet and their Saudi counterparts. -
Energy, Environment Nominees Hit Snag in Senate's Year-End Wrapup
Dec 26, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tiffany Stecker
A contentious pick to head the White House's environmental office will have to be renominated by President Donald Trump after being left out of an agreement to hold over nominees into 2018. -
Chemicals Company Loses Bid for Lower Duties at Federal Circuit
Dec 26, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Brian Flood
Chemtall Inc. lost its bid for lower duties on its imports of certain chemicals, after its appeal was rejected by the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals Dec. 21. -
Michigan Commits $23M to Test, Clean Up Fluorochemicals
Dec 26, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Alex Ebert
Michigan is investing $23.2 million into testing and cleanup of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) throughout the state. -
Alberta Seeks Future Beyond Oil Exports with Petrochemical Plan
Dec 26, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By James Munson
Inter Pipeline Ltd.'s C$3.5 billion ($2.75 billion) investment in a propane-to-plastics facility in northern Alberta was taken as a welcome sign that the province is slowly moving away from a reliance on oil and gas extraction, but not everyone agrees that it will boost fortunes in Canada's petroleum hub. -
EPA Leaving Companies Open to Risk Over Contamination: Report
Dec 26, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sylvia Carignan
The EPA's weak oversight of companies’ insurance against environmental disasters leaves companies open to billions of dollars in financial risk, the agency's internal watchdog reported. -
Train Speed Kills, So Does Congress Delay
Dec 25, 2017 | The Editorial Board
By USA Today
Three people were killed and dozens injured last week in a horrific Amtrak derailment near Seattle — an accident that might have been prevented by a safety system that Congress mandated nine years ago. -
Rep. Bill Shuster: Train Control Was Not Ready
Dec 25, 2017 | USA Today
By Rep. Bill Shuster
As we await findings of the investigation into the tragic Amtrak accident in Washington state, Americans can be assured that train travel remains extremely safe. -
Editorial: End Delay to Train Safety
Dec 25, 2017 | Albany Times Union
By The Editorial Board
Another tragic train derailment underscores the need for new safety technology. -
Bottle Rules Proposed by U.K. Lawmakers to Curb Plastic in Ocean
Dec 26, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Jessica Shankleman
The U.K. should pay people who return their drink bottles and make tap water more freely available to curb the mountains of plastic waste that find their way into the oceans, members of Parliament said in a report.
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
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) $180bn Investment in Plastic Factories Feeds Global Packaging Binge
Dec 26, 2017 | The Guardian
By Matthew Taylor
The global plastic binge which is already causing widespread damage to oceans, habitats and food chains, is set to increase dramatically over the next 10 years after multibillion dollar investments in a new generation of plastics plants in the US.
Fossil fuel companies are among those who have plooughed more than $180bn since 2010 into new “cracking” facilities that will produce the raw material for everyday plastics from packaging to bottles, trays and cartons.
The new facilities – being built by corporations like Exxon Mobile Chemical and Shell Chemical – will help fuel a 40% rise in plastic production in the next decade, according to experts, exacerbating the plastic pollution crisis that scientist warn already risks “near permanent pollution of the earth.”
“We could be locking in decades of expanded plastics production at precisely the time the world is realising we should use far less of it,” said Carroll Muffett, president of the US Center for International Environmental Law, which has analysed the plastic industry.
“Around 99% of the feedstock for plastics is fossil fuels, so we are looking at the same companies, like Exxon and Shell, that have helped create the climate crisis. There is a deep and pervasive relationship between oil and gas companies and plastics.”
Greenpeace UK’s senior oceans campaigner Louise Edge said any increase in the amount of plastic ending up in the oceans would have a disastrous impact.
“We are already producing more disposable plastic than we can deal with, more in the last decade than in the entire twentieth century, and millions of tonnes of it are ending up in our oceans.”
The huge investment in plastic production has been driven by the shale gas boom in the US. This has resulted in one of the raw materials used to produce plastic resin – natural gas liquids – dropping dramatically in price.
The American Chemistry Council says that since 2010 this has led to $186bn dollars being invested in 318 new projects. Almost half of them are already under construction or have been completed. The rest are at the planning stage.
“I can summarise [the boom in plastics facilities] in two words,” Kevin Swift, chief economist at the ACC, told the Guardian. “Shale gas.”
He added: “There has been a revolution in the US with the shale gas technologies, with the fracking, the horizontal drilling. The cost of our raw material base has gone down by roughly two thirds.”
The findings come amid growing concern about the scale of plastics pollution around the world. Earlier this year scientists warned that it risked near permanent contamination of the planet and at a UN environment conference in Kenya this month the scale of plastic in the sea was described as an “ocean armageddon”.
In June a Guardian investigation revealed that a million plastic bottles are bought around the world every minute with most ending up in landfill or the sea. Earlier this month, UK environment secretary Michael Gove said reducing plastic pollution was a key focus, adding that he had been “haunted” by images of the damage being done from David Attenborough’s Blue Planet II TV series.
However, campaigners warn that despite the rising tide of concern, powerful corporations are pressing ahead with a new generation of plastic production facilities that will swamp efforts to move the global economy away from single use, throw away plastic products.
Steven Feit, from the Centre for Environmental International Law which has researched the impact of the US shale boom on plastics, said: “The link between the shale gas boom in the United States and the ongoing – and accelerating – global plastics crisis cannot be ignored.
“In the US, fossil fuel and petrochemical companies are investing hundreds of billions of dollars to expand plastic production capacity... All this buildout, if allowed to proceed, will flood the global market with even more disposable, unmanageable plastic for decades to come.”Make supermarkets and drinks firms pay for plastic recycling, say MPs
Read more
Athough the majority of the new investment is in the US, the impact will ripple outwards in the form of vast new supplies of raw materials for plastics being transported to Europe and China.
Petrochemical giant Ineos has been shipping natural gas liquids from the US to cracking plants in Europe and the UK on huge “dragon ships” for the past year.
Last month the company announced it will ship the first NGLs from the US to China in 2019 where it will be turned into plastic resin at a new cracking facility in Taixing China.
Roland Geyer, from the University of California at Santa Barbara, was the lead author of a study earlier this yearrevealing that humans have produced 8.3bn tonnes of plastic since the 1950s, with the majority ending up in landfill or polluting the world’s oceans and continents. The report warned that plastic, which does not degrade for hundreds of years, risked “near-permanent contamination” of the earth.
He said he was deeply troubled by the expansion in plastic production.
“I am now all but convinced that the plastic waste/pollution problem will remain unmanageable without serious source reduction efforts,” he told the Guardian. “Building out production capacity is obviously the opposite of source reduction.”
But experts believe the new facilities will lock in an increase in plastic production for years to come.
Matthew Thoelke, executive director at IHS Markit analysts in Germany and an expert in the global chemical industry, said the expansion in the US would be a critical part of a 40% increase in global plastics production over the next decade.
“This will help meet growing demand for plastic in the existing big markets of the US, Europe and China as well as a predicted steep increase in demand in India and south east Asia,” he said.
But the American Chemistry Council said the plastics boom had brought huge economic benefits to the US creating hundreds of thousands of jobs and allowing the manufacture of a wide range of important products from medical supplies to auto parts, piping to technology.
Steve Russell, vice president of plastics for the American Chemistry Council also defended the environmental impact of plastic, citing a study from 2016 that found using plastic reduces environmental damage.
“Advanced plastics enable us to do more with less in in almost every facet of life and commerce. From reducing packaging, to driving lighter cars, to living in more fuel-efficient homes, plastics help us reduce energy use, carbon emissions and waste.”
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/dec/26/180bn-investment-in-plastic-factories-feeds-global-packaging-binge
-
World's Largest Plastics Plant Rings Alarm Bells on Texas Coast
Dec 26, 2017 | The Guardian
By Oliver Milman
Donald Trump’s state visit to Saudi Arabia in May will perhaps be best remembered by his participation in an all-male sword dance where he awkwardly waved a ceremonial blade in step with his cabinet and their Saudi counterparts.
But a little-noted deal signed prior to the ceremony is set to worsen a vast problem the world has yet to fully confront – plastic pollution.
In front of a seated Trump and King Salman, Saudi officials posed for photos shaking hands with secretary of state Rex Tillerson and Darren Woods, Tillerson’s successor as chief executive of the oil and gas giant ExxonMobil.
Woods was there to seal a $10bn agreement with the state-owned Saudi Basic Industries Corporation (Sabic) to build the world’s largest plastics facility on the Texas coast, the spearhead of a US boom that will create an enormous new glut of bottles, food packaging, polyester clothing and other products that are already, once discarded, choking the world’s oceans and food chains.
Lavished with more than $1bn in tax breaks by local authorities in Texas to locate the plant on farmland just north of Corpus Christi, Exxon and its Saudi partner have promised the ethane steam “cracker” facility will create thousands of new jobs. Trump called the deal a “true American success story” in a White House statement that included paragraphs copied directly from an Exxon corporate press release.
The Exxon-Sabic project, which will annually produce 1.8m tonnes of ethylene, a key building block of plastics, is just one of 11 chemical, refining, lubricant and gas projects Exxon is building along the US Gulf coast. The region is being divvied up in a multi-billion dollar push by fossil fuel companies that will fuel an anticipated 40% rise in global plastic production over the next decade.
The new plants are likely to have consequences for the climate and the air breathed in by people living on the US Gulf coast. An analysis of 184 planned chemical plants, many of them strung along the coast of Texas and Louisiana, showed they would collectively emit around 216m tons of greenhouse gases a year once complete.
“Many of these projects are approved so quickly that you are left with highly polluting operations,” said Eric Schaeffer, a former senior official at the US Environmental Protection Agency, who prepared the analysis for the Guardian.
“The Gulf coast is a place already covered in pipelines and storage tanks, but it’s now transforming. The scale is overwhelming. Residents will have to decide how much more of this they are prepared to take.”
Exxon’s plastics plant crept up quickly on the residents of San Patricio County, which lies on the north shore of Corpus Christi Bay, around 200 miles south-west of Houston. Last year, the county and then the local school district announced proposals to offer huge tax breaks to a mysterious entity called Project Yosemite.
A hastily-assembled group of concerned citizens discovered this was, in fact, the Exxon-Sabic venture, and used public meetings to protest the location of the proposed plant, which is within two miles of a middle school. Both the county and school district voted to offer the tax breaks to successfully lure Exxon to the area.
“We caused a ruckus,” said Errol Summerlin, a retired legal aid lawyer who became a visible sign of protest at public meetings by wearing a red #No Exxon T-shirt. “Exxon bullied their way in here and are tearing the community apart. All our local officials said they wanted it on a different site but Exxon wouldn’t budge.”
Opponents of the sprawling plant warn that it will produce trillions of small polyethylene pellets that will inevitably find their way into the bay and surrounding landscape, where they would be gobbled by fish or endangered species such as the whooping crane and piping plover.
The facility will also release millions of gallons of piping hot effluent into the bay, a prospect that has spooked fishers, and suck up 20m gallons of water a day in part of the US that has been parched by drought.
The consortium, known as Gulf Coast Growth Ventures, is now awaiting permits from state authorities, which could be granted within a few months, allowing construction to begin by 2019.
“Some people have moved away from here because they see it as inevitable,” said Summerlin, who has lived in the area since 1984.
“We are not naive, we understand who we are up against. If you put Exxon’s money together with the Saudi royal family’s, then lord have mercy, that’s an enormous ring of wealth. But some of us think ‘to heck with this, if you want it you will at least have to fight for it.’ Are we to be completely surrounded by industry here?”
Gulf Coast Ventures, which declined to comment, has previously stated environmental protection is a “key priority” and will impose emissions controls and use bleach in its cooling towers to improve the quality of its wastewater.
But environmentalists have long tangled with the operators of plastic plants along the Gulf coast and are sceptical Exxon will prove a better neighbour. At Point Comfort, further north up the coast from Corpus Christi, Formosa Plastics has been accused of contributing to the ruin of the local shrimping industry by riddling the water with dumped plastic pellets and powders.
“I feel like how Geronimo felt when he saw all the settlers coming in,” said Diane Wilson, a former commercial shrimper who has waged a long battle against Formosa and is now suing the company over its alleged pollution.Advertisement
“The industry just expands and expands and expands. It’s like seeing your home destroyed. My family was in the shrimping industry for 100 years and I never thought it would all just go within a decade.”
The resurgence in industry along the Gulf coast has buoyed those voters who warmed to Trump’s caustic laments over the loss of US manufacturing muscle to Mexico, China and other countries. Trump has promised “jobs, jobs, jobs” from the new expansion, quantified by industry groups as being in the hundreds of thousands over the coming decade.
But the administration’s enthusiasm for fossil fuels is also exacerbating roiling fights across the US over the spread of oil and gas pipelines. The vast Dakota Access project, which sparked fierce clashes between native American tribes and police in North Dakota, has caused fresh consternation with a plan to build a 162-mile pipeline at its tail, which would bring oil to Louisiana.
A protest camp, similar to the one near the Standing Rock reservation in North Dakota, has taken root in the path of the Bayou Bridge pipeline, which recently got its stamp of approval from the federal government. The pipeline would cross the Atchafalaya Basin, the largest wetland in the US. Five plastics plants, one of them backed by Dow Chemical, are also planned for the surrounding area, just north of New Orleans.
“This is already one of the most polluted areas of the US and yet as a society we seem to be willing to ruin people’s lives for plastic,” said Cherri Foytlin, who heads a community group that warns a pipeline leak would befoul the wetland and cripple the local crawfish industry.
Foytlin, who is of Navajo and Cherokee decent, moved to the Gulf coast because her then-husband was an oil worker. The BP oil spill of 2010 brought an epiphany for Foytlin while she was helping tend to dying pelicans, an activism that has been further provoked by the Trump administration’s peeling away of environmental regulations and the uprising at Standing Rock.
“We are not Standing Rock, but I expect we will have to put our bodies on the line at some point in a nonviolent way” she said. “I have yet to see one of these companies come in and not poison the community. I’ll believe it when I see it.
“It’s silly to think we should destroy the planet for a few moments of convenience. My grandma didn’t have plastic cups, we used old mixing jars. I don’t need that junk. We should recycle or make things out of wood or glass. I mean, how much more plastic do we need anyway?”
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/dec/26/worlds-largest-plastics-plant-rings-alarm-bells-on-texas-coast
-
Energy, Environment Nominees Hit Snag in Senate's Year-End Wrapup
Dec 26, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tiffany Stecker
A contentious pick to head the White House's environmental office will have to be renominated by President Donald Trump after being left out of an agreement to hold over nominees into 2018.
The nomination of Kathleen Hartnett White to serve as White House Council on Environmental Quality director wasn't included on a list of Trump's nominees that the Senate unanimously agreed to keep active into next year.
White, the former commissioner of the Texas Council on Environmental Quality, drew fire from the minority at her Senate Environment and Public Works Committee hearing for her history of questioning the link established by a consensus view of science between fossil-fuel emissions and climate change.
Democrats also accused White of plagiarizing answers to the committee's written questions, copying word-for-word responses from other nominees.
Senate Environment and Public Works ranking member Tom Carper (D-Del.) said he was pleased that White's nomination has hit a roadblock.
“Ms. White's concerning record, unacceptable statements and shockingly poor performance before the EPW Committee last month have elicited serious concerns on both sides of the aisle and all across the country,” Carper said in a statement. “I am hopeful that President Trump will seize on the opportunity to start the new year and the new session of Congress off on the right foot by nominating a new and better qualified candidate to lead this consequential office.”
The office of Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), the committee chairman, didn't immediately respond to a request for comment regarding White's nomination.
EPA, Energy
Other energy and environment nominees left off the list include Environmental Protection Agency deputy administrator pick Andrew Wheeler and Department of Energy general counsel choice David Jonas.
At the Interior Department, assistant secretary pick Susan Combs, solicitor nominee Ryan Nelson, and the choice for Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement director, Steven Gardner, also will need to be renominated next year.
Scott Mugno, the pick to lead the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, will also see his nomination return to the White House.
Under Senate rules, any nominees not acted on when the Senate adjourns, which is expected Jan. 2, get returned to the White House, but the Senate can waive that rule if all senators agree.
The chamber will frequently use “unanimous consent” to permit nominations to remain active, known as “in status quo,” between the first and second sessions of the two-year Congress.
This type of return of nominees to the White House is a procedural move, and the president may renominate the individuals.
Nominee Backgrounds
Wheeler, a former Republican staffer for the EPW Committee, has lobbied on behalf of energy companies like Murray Energy Corp., Energy Fuels Resources Inc., and Xcel Energy with the firm Faegre Baker Daniels LLP. His close ties with industry would present conflicts of interests at the EPA, Democrats have said.
Jonas, a partner at the law firm Fluet Huber & Hoang PLLC, wrote a controversial op-ed in 1993 criticizing the inclusion of gay people and women serving in the military.
Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee ranking member Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) raised concerns about Jonas’ views during his July 20 confirmation hearing. Jonas said at the hearing that he no longer holds those views.
Combs, another nominee from Texas, served both as agricultural commissioner and state comptroller under Republican Govs. George W. Bush and Rick Perry. She led efforts in Texas to avoid listing the dunes sagebrush lizard under the Endangered Species Act, a move that sparked lawsuits against the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
Mugno most recently worked as vice president of safety for FedEx Ground.
Other Nominees Confirmed
The following nominees were confirmed Dec. 21 before the Senate left Washington for the holiday recess:
• Timothy R. Petty to be assistant secretary of the Interior for water and science;
• Linda Capuano to be administrator for the U.S. Energy Information Administration; and
• John Vonglis to be chief financial officer for the Department of Energy.http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=125614731&vname=dennotallissues&fn=125614731&jd=125614731
-
Chemicals Company Loses Bid for Lower Duties at Federal Circuit
Dec 26, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Brian Flood
Chemtall Inc. lost its bid for lower duties on its imports of certain chemicals, after its appeal was rejected by the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals Dec. 21.
The appeals panel took a narrower view of what constitutes an “amide” than the company had argued for. As a result, Chemtall faces duties of 6.5 percent on its imports.
The case centered on Chemtall's imports of acrylamido tertiary butyl sulfonic acid (AMPS). The company argued that this chemical was an “amide,” which is subject to import duties of only 3.7 percent. But Customs and Border Protection argued that this chemical was actually a derivative of an amide, and subject to the higher duty rate.
AMPS has a number of uses, including as a water treatment chemical.
Representatives of Chemtall and its parent company, SNF Holding Co., were not immediately available for comment. However, SNF's website bills the company as “the world's leading manufacturer of water-soluble polymers, serving the municipal and industrial water and wastewater treatment markets.”
In a ruling heavy on scientific jargon, the appeals panel sided with Customs’ classification. Ultimately, the panel concluded that “amides, when precisely defined, are limited to having only hydrogen, alkyl, or aryl groups bonded to the nitrogen atom.” AMPS didn't qualify because it had sulfonic acid attached to its nitrogen atom, the panel said.
The panel found that scientific sources did not support Chemtall's “broad definition” of amides.
(Chemtall, Inc. v. United States, 2017 BL 457146, Fed. Cir., No. 2016-2380, 12/21/17)
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=125614750&vname=dennotallissues&fn=125614750&jd=125614750
-
Michigan Commits $23M to Test, Clean Up Fluorochemicals
Dec 26, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Alex Ebert
Michigan is investing $23.2 million into testing and cleanup of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) throughout the state.
Gov. Rick Snyder (R) signed the funding into law Dec. 20 and issued a statement saying the state was committing to be “on the forefront of addressing this issue and how it affects groundwater and public health.”
PFAS are or have been used to make stain-resistant upholstery, waterproof apparel and footwear, and grease-resistant food packaging such as pizza boxes, popcorn bags, and hamburger wrappers.
Some people exposed to high concentrations have suffered high cholesterol, colon and thyroid problems, testicular and kidney cancers, and elevated blood pressure during pregnancy, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Cleanup, Testing, Hiring
The funds are being split between Michigan's Department of Environmental Quality and Department of Health and Human Services. The DEQ money will go to cleanup activities at 14 confirmed locations of PFAS, purchasing of new laboratory equipment for testing, and hiring seven full-time employees who will support cleanup efforts or assist with sampling.
HHS receives more than $8 million of the funding. Those resources will go toward new lab equipment, funding local health initiatives, and hiring eight employees to analyze well water samples.
At the 14 locations, there are 28 Michigan sites with known PFAS concentrations, according to the DEQ. That includes a water treatment plant in Ann Arbor, a landfill in Flint, and an Air Force base in Oscoda Township.
The state identified an 8-square-mile area of plumes near the base. The bill includes language seeking reimbursement from the federal government for costs incurred at military sites.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=125614736&vname=dennotallissues&fn=125614736&jd=125614736
-
Alberta Seeks Future Beyond Oil Exports with Petrochemical Plan
Dec 26, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By James Munson
Inter Pipeline Ltd.'s C$3.5 billion ($2.75 billion) investment in a propane-to-plastics facility in northern Alberta was taken as a welcome sign that the province is slowly moving away from a reliance on oil and gas extraction, but not everyone agrees that it will boost fortunes in Canada's petroleum hub.
The Calgary-based petrochemical company's decision to build the plant on the outskirts of the provincial capital of Edmonton is proof that plans to diversify Alberta's economy are working, Albertan Cabinet ministers said after the decision was announced.
“Seeing this project proceed is just another step in our government's plan to increase competitiveness, diversify the type of energy products we produce in Alberta, and create lasting benefits for the modern Alberta economy,” Economic Development Minister Deron Bilous said in a Dec. 18 news release.
Diversify
The announcement Dec. 13 that renewable energy firms will build four new wind farms in the province was similarly used by Premier Rachel Notley to show the province isn't just relying on raising oil sands production over the next decade as an economic base.
But the popularity of diversification away from petroleum extraction masks deeper complexities about its wisdom, said University of Alberta energy economist and past government adviser Andrew Leach.
“Our activity in (oil and gas extraction) is high, but we're not at a Middle Eastern oil-type of domination,” said Leach, who chaired Alberta's climate change advisory panel and has advised federal political leaders on Canadian energy policy.
While growing other sectors might create some shelter from the boom and busts of the oil market, “there's not some magic bullet where you can say ‘I'm completely immune from all types of economic ups and downs,’” he said.
In fact, oil and gas—including petroleum processing and refining—is declining as a share of growth in the province. In 1986, petroleum and mining accounted for 23.2 percent of provincial GDP, according to government figures. In 2016, that share was down to 17 percent.
Boom and Bust
Notley, Alberta's premier, came to power in 2015 amid a severe oil-price-induced crash.
The global oil price drop, precipitated by OPEC's decision to curb production, put scores of Albertans out of work and dented the province's decades-long ride as an economic powerhouse. The provincial GDP contracted by 3.7 percent in 2016, and the unemployment rate rose from a pre-crash low of 4.4 percent to 9 percent in November 2016.
Reducing the reliance of public finances on crude oil markets was part of Notley's platform. Expanding the “value-added” parts of the petroleum industry by building more refineries and petrochemical plants, as well as expanding the forestry, agriculture, high-tech, and finance sectors, figured prominently in her first major speech to the province's business elite in November 2015.
Inter Pipeline's recent investment is one of the first big signs the diversification push might be having an effect. The company will use Alberta's abundant propane reserves to make 525,000 metric tons of polypropylene annually, the company said.
“Diversification in Alberta's downstream oil and gas sector is a win-win-win proposition,” said Gil McGowan, president of the Alberta Federation of Labour and co-chair of Alberta's Energy Diversification Advisory Committee, created after Notley came to power.
“It's a win for workers because it creates jobs, it's a win for business because it creates spin-offs and new profit opportunities, and it's a win for government because it generates new revenue that could be used to support things like education and healthcare,” McGowan said.
Imbalance
There's long been an “imbalance” between raw production and downstream industries, McGowan said. Around 85 percent of the energy sector, as measured by the value of production, is devoted to getting the resource out of the ground, while 15 percent goes into making petroleum products, he said.
The case for diversification is even stronger now because low crude oil prices haven't bounced all the way back up, meaning there's cheaper feed-stock for refiners and petrochemicals, he said.
Alberta recently mandated a cap on oil sands emissions growth and has created a scheme under which large industrial emitters, including oil sands operators, will compete to reduce the intensity of their emissions.
Long Game
McGowan's views, like Notley's policies, aren't new in Alberta. Premiers since the 1980s have tried to weaken the link between public finances and oil markets.
But even McGowan said he “doesn't want to overstate” the negative impact of the oil crash. “Alberta continues to lead the country in both business investment and economic growth,” he said.
And as Leach, the University of Alberta energy economist, points out, the province is not as dependent on oil as its reputation as the country's oil and gas hub sometimes makes it look.
The fact that Alberta's pre-crash oil boom was also a construction boom is often overlooked, too, Leach said.
That raises the question of whether government is really addicted to oil and gas extraction or a steady flow of massive industrial projects being built, much like Inter Pipeline's propane-to-plastics plant, he said.
Bust or Boom
In normal times, Alberta's trouble is always finding enough workers for its projects, Leach said. As more downstream projects like Inter Pipeline's come online, the labor crunch will be even more severe.
Other parts of the world don't have the labor constraint as badly as Alberta does, which means the most economical thing to do in a place to Alberta is to extract, he said.
Policy-makers need to be clearer about what they're trying do with terms like “diversification,” otherwise economic indicators down the road will prove they've shrunken the economy, he said.
“You have this magic unicorn of diversification that gets thrown around without a lot of really data behind it or clarity on what it is or what we're trying to accomplish,” Leach said. “Everyone will say, ‘Yes, it lets us avoid the busts,’ but few people are willing to say it also potentially excludes you from some of the boom.”
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=125614735&vname=dennotallissues&fn=125614735&jd=125614735
-
EPA Leaving Companies Open to Risk Over Contamination: Report
Dec 26, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sylvia Carignan
The EPA's weak oversight of companies’ insurance against environmental disasters leaves companies open to billions of dollars in financial risk, the agency's internal watchdog reported.
The Environmental Protection Agency accepts companies’ self insurance against environmental contamination, but the agency does not require full disclosure of possible risks and doesn't have a data system capable of validating insurance for companies facing multiple liabilities, the Office of the Inspector General said in a Dec. 22 report.
When a company is unable to pay for cleanup, the costs may fall to the EPA, and the property could become a Superfund site. The EPA's efforts to validate companies’ insurance would help prevent the creation of new Superfund sites, but the inspector general said the agency's capability to do so is “impaired” by its shortcomings.
Companies are required to provide the EPA with proof that they have the financial resources to meet regulatory requirements for cleanup.
‘Larger Problems’
“Without sufficient financial assurance, contamination at sites can remain unaddressed for long periods, leading to larger problems such as more complicated cleanups and higher costs,” the inspector general wrote.
The Office of the Inspector General recommended that EPA study the cost of closing the holes it found in the agency's financial assurance practices.
“Until EPA agrees to take positive steps to require adequate financial assurance for high-risk industries, the problem will get worse,” Lisa Evans, senior counsel for Earthjustice, said.
In its response to the report, the EPA Office of Land and Emergency Management and Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance disagreed with the finding that “billions” of dollars are at risk and questioned whether a study was necessary.
The EPA declined to provide further comment to Bloomberg Environment.
Under EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, the agency decided Dec. 1 not to issue a rule addressing financial assurance specifically for hardrock mining operations. The rule would have cost the industry more than $170 million annually, according to the agency, and companies said the rule duplicates existing requirements at the state level.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=125614733&vname=dennotallissues&fn=125614733&jd=125614733
-
Train Speed Kills, So Does Congress Delay
Dec 25, 2017 | The Editorial Board
By USA Today
Three people were killed and dozens injured last week in a horrific Amtrak derailment near Seattle — an accident that might have been prevented by a safety system that Congress mandated nine years ago. Making this all the more tragic, the automatic-braking system was installed on the tracks and on the train, but it was not yet operating.
Seconds before the crash, the locomotive was tilting as it headed at 80 mph into a curve posted at 30 mph, and the engineer appeared to be applying the brakes, investigators said Friday. But like the Titanic, Amtrak's Cascades 501 would never complete its inaugural passenger-carrying run along a new bypass route.
While the official cause of the accident has not been determined, it’s not much of a stretch to think that the train’s speed — nearly three times the limit — contributed to what happened. Or that automatic braking, designed to handle just this sort of circumstance, might have prevented cars from flying off the tracks.
How many more lives will be lost before the safety system — known as "positive train control" — will be operating on all passenger, commuter and freight railroads?
Safety watchdogs have been pushing for some type of automatic braking system since 1969, the year of the moon landing.
Meanwhile, such crashes have killed 298 and injured more than 6,700, according to an Associated Press analysis.
Finally, in 2008, lawmakers took notice after a California accident in which the engineer of a Metrolink commuter train ran through a stop signal and hit a freight train, killing 25. Congress ordered the braking system installed on all passenger trains and those that carried hazardous chemicals by the end of 2015.
Two other deadly crashes underscored the need. In December 2013 in the Bronx, a commuter train derailed killing four, after the engineer headed into a 30-mph curve at 82 mph. And in May 2015, just north of Philadelphia, an Amtrak train barreled into a turn at more than 100 mph — twice the speed limit — and ran off the rails, killing seven and injuring more than 200.
If positive train control had been installed, “this accident would not have occurred,” National Transportation Safety Board member Robert Sumwalt said of the Philadelphia crash.
What did Congress do? Five months later, after lobbying by the railroad industry, Republicans and Democrats extended the deadline to install the system until the end of 2018.
Now, three more people are dead. And no single entity is willing to take responsibility. While Amtrak operated the train, the Washington state transportation department owned the locomotive, and a third entity, Sound Transit, owns the tracks. The perfect scenario for finger-pointing.
Certainly, there are challenges to putting positive train control in place: high costs, standardizing technologies and getting the radio spectrum that makes the system work.
Complicated? Yes. But installation has already taken longer than it took to put a man on the moon, eight years after President Kennedy announced his ambitious goal in 1961. As of Sept. 30, the safety system is operating on just 24% of the milespassenger trains travel.
The rationale for Congress’ extension in 2015 was that the only alternative was to shut down the nation's rails. What about huge fines for the laggards? That might have lit a fire under the industry. And saved the three lives lost last week.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2017/12/25/train-speed-kills-so-does-congress-delay-editorials-debates/979850001/
-
Rep. Bill Shuster: Train Control Was Not Ready
Dec 25, 2017 | USA Today
By Rep. Bill Shuster
As we await findings of the investigation into the tragic Amtrak accident in Washington state, Americans can be assured that train travel remains extremely safe. Yet we can be even safer. Important technology, called positive train control (PTC), will help by allowing trains to communicate with one another and the infrastructure to potentially avoid collisions and over-speed derailments.
So why, in 2015, did Congress act overwhelmingly and President Obama sign a law to extend the PTC implementation deadline?
It’s simple. The technology was not ready, and the impact of a rail system shutdown was too devastating. When PTC was mandated, there was no off-the-shelf solution. PTC was a complex, undeveloped communication technology, composed of more than 20 mostly first-generation components. It all needed to be installed on more than 68,000 miles of track by 40 private and public railroads that all communicate but operate independently.
OUR VIEW:Train speed kills, so does Congress delay
By fall 2015, it was clear the initial December 2015 deadline could not be met by passenger, commuter and freight railways. Aside from technological complexity, the Government Accountability Office and the Federal Railroad Administration found many challenges necessitating an extension. System testing was not complete, safety plans hadn’t been approved by government, and the communication spectrum wasn’t available.
Maintaining the original deadline, without regard to reality, would have halted trains nationwide, crippling the economy while disturbing millions of daily commuters and disrupting food, energy and clean water supplies. One report concluded that just a one-month rail shutdown would have reduced the nation’s gross domestic product growth by 2.6%, placing 700,000 jobs at risk.
Instead, congressional Republicans and Democrats agreed to extend the deadline to December 2018. Meanwhile, billions continue to be invested to properly implement this technology under government oversight.
Rep. Bill Shuster, R-Pa., is chairman of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2017/12/25/why-congress-extended-deadline-positive-train-control-editorials-debates/108917742/
-
Editorial: End Delay to Train Safety
Dec 25, 2017 | Albany Times Union
By The Editorial Board
THE ISSUE:
Another tragic train derailment underscores the need for new safety technology.
HE STAKES:
Congress must not give in to industry demands to further delay implementation.
---
A typical new automobile sold today — a Chevy, Honda, or just about any brand — includes options that can alert a driver who is veering out of a lane, help the car maintain safe distances from other highway vehicles, and even slow or stop the car when necessary. Why don't our nation's trains have similar technology?
Last week's tragic derailment of an Amtrak passenger train between Seattle and Portland, Ore., that killed three people and injured dozens, is just the latest in a string of train accidents that underscore the urgency for using better technology. As investigators search for all the causes of the derailment near Tacoma, they have already determined the train was going 80 mph into a curve with a 30-mph limit. As in many recent rail disasters, human error is suspected.
The technology that would have slowed the train, known as positive train control, or PTC, had already been installed on the train, which was on its inaugural run along a 14.5 mile stretch of newly constructed track. But the safety equipment, which uses GPS sensors and an automatic breaking system, was not scheduled to be put into use until sometime next year.
Under legislation passed by Congress in 2008, all trains would have had PTC installed, tested and up and running by the end of 2015. A deadly head-on crash in 2005 between a passenger train and a freight train in California that killed 25 and injured 135 spurred the administration of President George W. Bush and Congress to impose the new regulations. They gave the railroad industry seven years to complete the task.
Persistently complaining that PTC was complicated and expensive technology, the rail freight and passenger carriers argued they needed more time. Their lobbying efforts succeeded and Congress granted a deadline extension until 2018, then included an option for more delays reaching into 2020 — which would be 12 years after the horrible California crash that prompted the federal mandate.
As the industry continues to drag out the implementation of PTC, it becomes more evident that trains relying only on human operators carry too many risks. Human error was a factor in both a 2015 crash in Philadelphia that killed eight people and the Metro North crash at Spuyten Duyvil in the Bronx in 2013, which killed four and injured 65. The horrific 2013 crash of a 74-car freight train carrying Bakken crude oil in Lac-Mégantic, Canada, which killed 47 people, was due largely to human error.
The not-yet-implemented technology that can help protect against operator inattention, distraction, sleep or other human failings already exists. No question, installing the various sensors and other equipment and testing these systems is time consuming and expensive. But when you look at the human toll — not to mention the immense costs and disruption after derailments like last week's — this should be very clear: The rail industry should not be given any more extensions on implementing PTC.
https://www.timesunion.com/opinion/article/Editorial-End-delay-to-train-safety-12454653.php
-
Bottle Rules Proposed by U.K. Lawmakers to Curb Plastic in Ocean
Dec 26, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Jessica Shankleman
The U.K. should pay people who return their drink bottles and make tap water more freely available to curb the mountains of plastic waste that find their way into the oceans, members of Parliament said in a report.
A nationwide return-and-reward program for plastic bottles could increase the U.K.’s bottle recycling rate to 90 percent, according to the House of Commons's Environmental Audit Committee. A little more than half the 13 billion plastic bottles used in Britain each year are recycled, with the rest sent to landfill, burned or left to litter streets.
A bottle deposit program plan has already been suggested by Environment Secretary Michael Gove, who has made tackling plastic pollution a priority since taking up the role earlier this year. It would help reduce plastic in seas, which harms marine life.
A deposit return program would encourage people to return their bottles and the proceeds should be used to build plastic reprocessing facilities, the panel said.
“Urgent action is needed to protect our environment from the devastating effects of marine plastic pollution which, if it continues to rise at current rates, will outweigh fish by 2050,” said Mary Creagh, chair of the committee.
The lawmakers also recommend:
• Government require a minimum use of 50 percent recycled polyethylene terephthalate in new plastic bottles by 2023
• Make plastic bottle makers financially responsible for the plastic packaging they produce by increasing fees on packaging that is difficult to recycle and reducing it for easily recyclable plastic
“A lot of single-use plastic items provide more cost than benefit, but currently the manufacturers only see the benefits. Once the manufacturers are given responsibility for the costs as well, the system should quickly become a lot more efficient,” said Will McCallum, Head of Oceans at Greenpeace U.K.The EAC also said mandating greater availability of drinking water in shops, cafes and public spaces would reduce the 7.7 billion plastic water bottles used in Britain each year by 65 percent.
“The U.K. has safe, clean tap water and failing to provide it leads to unnecessary use of plastic water bottles which clog up our rivers and seas,” said Creagh.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=125614754&vname=dennotallissues&fn=125614754&jd=125614754
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
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested