Preview Newsletter
AM ACC 12/29/2017
-
(ACC Mentioned) OUTLOOK '18 US Chemical Industry Experiencing Renaissance
Dec 29, 2017 | ICIS
By David Haydon
Despite disruptions from several major hurricanes three-quarters into the year, the US chemical industry grew in 2017, with similar growth expected for 2018 thanks to continued investments, as well as gains in a wide spectrum of industries. -
9th Circuit Sets Speedy Deadline for EPA to Update Lead Dust Standards
Dec 28, 2017 | Inside EPA
A divided appellate panel has ordered EPA to propose updates to its 2001 lead dust hazard standard within 90 days, and take final action no later than a year after that, backing environmental and health groups who charged that the agency has ignored Congress’ -
Senate Committee to Take Up Fluorochemical Health Study
Dec 29, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
A Defense spending bill that includes $10 million to examine the health effects of two fluorochemicals will be taken up by the Senate Appropriations Committee in January. -
Trump Administration to Rescind Fracking Regulation
Dec 29, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Renee Schoof
A 2015 regulation governing hydraulic fracturing on federal and tribal lands is entering the final stage of repeal, the Trump administration said in a final rulescheduled to be published in the Federal Register Dec. 29. -
Energy Department's Global Work Shifts to Carbon Capture, Nuclear
Dec 29, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rebecca Kern
The Energy Department's Office of International Climate and Technology mission is changing under the Trump administration to focus on promoting U.S. fossil fuels and nuclear power abroad. -
Vitol, Hilcorp Affiliate Planning South Texas Terminal for Permian Oil Exports
Dec 28, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Carolyn Davis
Global crude oil trader Vitol Inc. and a Hilcorp. Energy Co. affiliate are finalizing plans to develop a state-of-the-art export terminal on the South Texas coast that would move more Permian Basin volumes overseas. -
Trump Administration to Overhaul Safety-Monitoring Rules for Offshore Drilling
Dec 28, 2017 | Washington Post
By Juliet Eilperin and Dino Grandoni
The Trump administration is overhauling how federal officials monitor safety procedures on offshore drilling operations, revising a pair of rules enacted in the wake of the 2010 Deepwater Horizon spill on the grounds that they are overly burdensome on industry. -
Off the Rails: Speed-Control System for Trains is Way Overdue
Dec 29, 2017 | Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
By Editorial Board
The Amtrak train derailment that killed three people south of Seattle earlier this month was an easily avoidable tragedy, according to many transportation safety advocates. -
End Delays in Implementing Positive Train Control
Dec 28, 2017 | New Haven Register
By Sen. Richard Blumenthal
Our worst railroad nightmare has happened again - tragic fatalities in a derailment resulting from entirely preventable excessive speed. It was preventable by Positive Train Control, a life-saving technology that can slow a speeding train and stop a collision. -
Harvard Study Suggests PM2.5, Ozone Risks Below Air Standard
Dec 29, 2017 | Inside EPA
A new study by researchers at the Harvard School of Public Health shows increased mortality risk from exposures to fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and ozone at levels below EPA's current regulatory limits, suggesting that current limits need to be tougher... -
Billion-Dollar U.S. Weather Disasters Point to Climate Change
Dec 29, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Brian K. Sullivan and Jim Efstathiou Jr.
In the year that President Donald Trump said he would pull the U.S. out of the Paris Agreement and downplayed global warming as a security threat, the U.S. received a harsh reminder of the perils of the rise in the planet's temperature: a destructive rash of hurricanes, fires, and floods.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) OUTLOOK '18 US Chemical Industry Experiencing Renaissance
Dec 29, 2017 | ICIS
By David Haydon
Despite disruptions from several major hurricanes three-quarters into the year, the US chemical industry grew in 2017, with similar growth expected for 2018 thanks to continued investments, as well as gains in a wide spectrum of industries.
Continued gains in manufacturing and exports during 2018 and beyond will drive demand for basic chemicals, in particular for areas where the US has what the American Chemistry Council (ACC) describes as a renewed competitive advantage.
In its year-end 2017-2018 outlook, the ACC noted that American chemistry is experiencing a “renaissance” as new investments come online while others continue to be announced. At the same time, US chemical companies continue to research improving efficiencies and product development.
The continued recovery in the oil and gas sector, as well as improvement in related investments, is a leading factor behind the stronger economic growth figures, the ACC said.
US chemistry output is expected to increase by 3.7% in 2018, driven mainly by export growth due to new capacity coming online, the ACC said.
Although the Society of Chemical Manufacturers and Affiliates (SOCMA) does not conduct formal studies on the economics of the chemical industry, SOCMA Vice President of Legal and Government Relations Robert Helminiak said that anecdotally a lot of its members have had a “stellar” year, with continued expectations of a strong market.
“It’s tough for us to project what the industry is going to do. And especially for chemicals,” he said, “But I would expect we will continue to see an upward trend. There’s always a need for innovation, and that’s specifically what our guys do.”
The end-use markets, such as vehicles and housing, are also driving growth for the industry.
The automotive industry contributes more than a third of the raw material costs of an average vehicle. The ACC estimates that each vehicle represents $3,500 worth of chemical products.
Although auto sales have been slipping (in particular for internal combustion engines) the demand for electric and self-driving cars is expected to rise next year. California-based industry analyst Edmunds forecasts that the market share for electric vehicles (EVs) overall will go beyond 4% in 2018.
Though adoption of EVs decreases fuel consumption and demand, the vehicles require several lightweight plastics, including acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene (ABS), polypropylene (PP), polystyrene(PS), polycarbonate (PC), and several others.
Despite the growth, analysts with the Energy Information Administration (EIA) expect that uncertainties with consumer acceptance, vehicle cost, policies and other market conditions could affect EV adoption rates into 2018 and beyond.
The specialty chemicals segment was a particular example for the industry overall. The ACC forecasted that in 2017, production would increase by 3% in 2017, and grow an additional 2.3% in 2018.
Improvement in oilfield and mining chemicals, adhesives, and electronic chemicals were specific drivers for gains in specialty chemicals, though the ACC said the manufacturing and construction sectors are expected to push demand in 2018.
Paul Hirsh, SOCMA’s senior vice president of industry development and strategic partnerships, had similar sentiments towards specialty chemicals and its end-markets.
“We really do see the trend continuing in key sectors like electronics, adhesives and sealants going into 2018 as well,” Hirsh said. “We’re very upbeat in terms of the outlook for 2018 within specialty chemicals overall.”
Hirsh highlighted that providing alternate services with products will be just as relevant in 2018 as the products themselves.
“We are value added within the chemical supply chain. What we see is that playing a part, as our members provide their customers with the service aspect of the project,” he said. “It’s not just providing physical, tangible products, it’s also about providing services as well.”
How much of the chemical industry’s success can be attributed to the political climate, specifically the first year of US President Donald Trump’s administration, is hard to pinpoint. SOCMA noted the chemical industry also did well during 2016.
Helminiak did say that the Trump Administration has at least taken a few deregulatory initiatives that have helped business.
“We’ve seen them push back a couple of departmental labour rules that would have been problematic for the industry,” Helminiak said.
Throughout 2017, the Trump administration made a spectrum of decisions that potentially aided the industry, ranging from signing executive orders reviving the Keystone XL and Dakota Access pipeline projects, to suspending protections against methane leaks under the Clean Air Act.
Regardless of the political climate, the US has a competitive advantage thanks to shale gas and abundant supplies of natural gas liquids, which the industry uses as feedstocks. The ACC expects US production to continue to meet growing global demand in 2018, the latter of which is expected to strengthen in turn.
https://www.icis.com/resources/news/2017/12/28/10177287/outlook-18-us-chemical-industry-experiencing-renaissance/
-
9th Circuit Sets Speedy Deadline for EPA to Update Lead Dust Standards
Dec 28, 2017 | Inside EPA
A divided appellate panel has ordered EPA to propose updates to its 2001 lead dust hazard standard within 90 days, and take final action no later than a year after that, backing environmental and health groups who charged that the agency has ignored Congress’ intent to revise the standards based on new information.
The ruling underscores the challenges the Trump administration faces as it seeks to delay Obama administration rules or reject petitions for new rulemakings, though as in other cases, the decision still leaves the door open for EPA to decide not to set strict new standards.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit ruled Dec. 28 in A Community Voice, et al. v EPA, that EPA is required to update its lead standards under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) and that it unreasonably delayed doing so after accepting a 2009 rulemaking petition from the same groups who would later file the suit.
The two-judge majority rejected the agency’s argument that current law only required it to issue the original lead dust standard, leaving any further updates entirely to regulators’ discretion; instead, Senior Judge Mary M. Schroeder writes, both TSCA and Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act create a duty for the agency to update that rule as new information arises.
Noting that TSCA set up a framework for revised standards and a task force to recommend when updates are needed, Schroeder writes, “This statutory framework clearly indicates that Congress did not want EPA to set initial standards and then walk away, but to engage in an ongoing process, accounting for new information, and to modify initial standards when necessary to further Congress’s intent: to prevent childhood lead poisoning and eliminate lead-based paint hazards,” reads Schroeder’s opinion, joined by District Judge Lawrence L. Piersol, who is sitting by designation on the circuit court.
And she agrees with the environment and health groups’ arguments that recent scientific developments show the update to be necessary. Among other factors, she cites the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) 2012 tightening of its “level of concern” for lead dust -- a figure that EPA used to justify its earlier rule -- from 10 micrograms per deciliter (ug/dL) to a “reference value” of 5 ug/dL.
“EPA does not appear to dispute the factual record developed by Petitioners showing that, according to modern scientific understanding, neither the dust-lead hazard standard nor the lead-based paint standard are sufficient to protect children,” Schroeder writes in her order. And she later writes, “there is a clear threat to human welfare” from the agency’s inaction because lead poisoning is “the number one environmental health threat in the U.S. for children ages 6 and younger.”
However, Circuit Judge N. Randy Smith argues in dissent that none of the laws at issue explicitly orders EPA to revise the standards based on anything other than its own discretion -- potentially providing a guide for the Trump administration if it seeks to continue litigation or eventually decide not to set a final standard.
“Congress did not even mandate that the EPA accept or act on those task force recommendations . . . without a congressional mandate in the TSCA, we have no authority to mandate that the EPA act to meet Congress’s goals (even if we believe it is in the best interest of society for the EPA to act),” Smith writes.
Rulemaking Petition
In addition to finding a duty for EPA to update its rules based on TSCA, the majority’s order also holds the agency in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act’s requirements for petition responses, saying it unreasonably delayed issuing new standards after accepting a rulemaking petition in 2009 despite EPA’s claim that beginning development of a new rule was enough to satisfy its commitment to the petitioners.
“Having chosen to grant the petition for rulemaking, EPA came under a duty to conclude a rulemaking proceeding within a reasonable time. The agency does not comply with that duty merely by ‘begin[ning] an appropriate proceeding,’” Schroeder writes.
She compares the case to litigation over the pesticide chlorpyrifos, where another 9th Circuit panel held in 2015 that EPA had unreasonably delayed a decision on whether to ban the pesticide by failing to issue a proposal for eight years after accepting environmentalists’ 2007 petition on the subject.
“We held that after eight years and without a “concrete timeline” for resolving the petition,’ but only a ‘roadmap for further delay,’ EPA had ‘stretched the “rule of reason” beyond its limits.’ This case is similar in the length of delay, absence of a reasonable timetable, and harm to health,” Schroeder writes.
However, Smith again uses his dissent to argue that EPA is under no legal obligation to act, because it never committed to issuing a new rule when it accepted the groups’ petition. Rather, he said, it only promised to open “an appropriate proceeding.”
“To the contrary, the EPA engaged in research with regard to this issue, which ended just prior to this petition being filed. Hence, the EPA did not fail or delay in proceeding as it stated it would,” Smith writes.
But Schroeder uses her opinion to counter that claim, saying it gives EPA a roadmap to avoid any suit if it grants a petition but never takes a concrete action.
“Under the EPA’s view, were it not to respond to the petition at all, this court could grant mandamus and compel a time table for rulemaking, yet if EPA ‘grants’ the petition it can then delay indefinitely, without any recourse to the Petitioners. This would allow the EPA to grant petitions for rulemaking and take no action in order to avoid judicial review. The dissent’s position that EPA is under no duty to act leaves the agency unaccountable and our children unsafe,” she writes.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/9th-circuit-sets-speedy-deadline-epa-update-lead-dust-standards
-
Senate Committee to Take Up Fluorochemical Health Study
Dec 29, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
A Defense spending bill that includes $10 million to examine the health effects of two fluorochemicals will be taken up by the Senate Appropriations Committee in January.
The House passed a similar provision in July that was tucked into a consolidated spending package (H.R. 3219) for the Department of Defense and other agencies for fiscal year 2018.
Calls for a fluorochemicals study also was included in the National Defense Authorization Act (Pub. L. No. 115-91) that President Trump signed into law Dec. 12—but that law doesn't include money to actually fund the study.
The new measure would include $10 million for research.
Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), who championed the broader study proposed in the authorization act, has been working to include it in the final Senate spending bill, according to a Senate aide.
Contaminants
The House spending bill and Senate's summary mention limited research on two fluorochemicals—perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA)—that are contaminating drinking water sources on and near military sites.
These two chemicals are the most well-known members of a much larger family increasingly called per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS). Companies use compounds in the fluorochemical family to make heat-resistant, oil-resistant, and nonstick products.
Some fluorochemical research—especially studies of PFOA—has shown wide-ranging problems, including the potential to affect fetal development, impair the immune system, increase cholesterol, and cause cancer, Benjamin Chan, state epidemiologist for New Hampshire's Department of Health and Human Services, told Bloomberg Environment. Other studies haven't shown a PFOA link to these problems.
Legal Questions
Whatever the scope of the study, it's unlikely that the resulting information would stop litigation against companies and agencies, Douglas Arnold, a partner in Alston & Bird LLP's Atlanta office told Bloomberg Environment.
These include 3M, the Chemours Co., DowDuPont Inc., the U.S. Navy, and Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics, which have been accused of being responsible for fluorochemical contamination.
Even when the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention studied a site contaminated with other types of chemicals and concluded they aren't harming people's health, lawsuits are still filed, Arnold said.Avoiding Bias
To avoid concerns about influencing any study's results, taxpayers—not the companies that made the chemicals—should fund the needed research, Jennifer Field, an Oregon State University professor who specializes in fluorochemicals, told Bloomberg Environment.
The Defense Department supports the study, but wants Congress to give the money directly to the agency or agencies that would carry the study out, Christopher Sherwood, a department spokesman told Bloomberg Environment.
“To prevent the perception of bias, other than providing existing data, the DOD should not be involved in the study,” he said.
Such a move could complicate its passage. Democrats already have criticized the defense spending bill because they say it would increase defense spending by $54 billion in fiscal 2018 while Congress is slashing funds for public safety, meal subsidies, and other nondefense programs.
Polluter Pays?
If Congress fails to fund a national study of fluorochemicals, an attorney dubbed by The New York Times as “DuPont's Worst Nightmare” has threatened to sue the Environmental Protection Agency and the CDC's Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry to force them to use a provision in the Superfund law that would let the government recoup the costs of the health study from responsible parties.
Robert Bilott, a partner in Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP's Cincinnati office, points to part of the law requiring the ATSDR to provide medical care and testing to people who have been exposed to toxic chemicals and face a public health emergency.
The EPA and the ATSDR haven't commented, citing their policies of not discussing potential litigation.
Other attorneys are skeptical that Superfund could be used as Bilott suggested.
While the law allows health assessment costs to be recovered, that applies to specific sites where the ATSDR has evidence of “significant increased risk of adverse health effects,” Kaitlyn R. Maxwell, an associate in Greenberg Traurig LLP's Philadelphia office, said.
The law would not apply to a national study designed to determine whether people's health had been harmed by the chemicals, she told Bloomberg Environment.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=125820295&vname=dennotallissues&fn=125820295&jd=125820295
-
Trump Administration to Rescind Fracking Regulation
Dec 29, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Renee Schoof
A 2015 regulation governing hydraulic fracturing on federal and tribal lands is entering the final stage of repeal, the Trump administration said in a final rulescheduled to be published in the Federal Register Dec. 29.
The rule was issued during the Obama administration. At the time, the Bureau of Land Management said it was setting minimum standards for well-integrity testing, approval processes, chemical use reporting, and storage of waste fluids. However, the rule was soon embroiled in legal wrangling and never went into effect.
The BLM said in the rule that it was rescinding the regulation “because we believe it imposes administrative burdens and compliance costs that are not justified.”
The decision to rescind the Obama-era regulation, which takes effect when it is published in the Federal Register, is estimated to save industry between $14 million and $34 million per year in avoided compliance costs, according to the BLM.
President Donald Trump directed Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke to review the fracking rule and four others in a March 28, 2017, executive order and rescind it if it was not consistent with the administration's deregulatory and pro-fossil fuels priorities. The BLM did not immediately respond to a Bloomberg Environment query about whether it would replace the rule with any new regulations.
Environmentalists are opposed to the rollback.
“The Trump administration is endangering public health and wildlife by allowing the fracking industry to run roughshod over public lands,” Brett Hartl, government affairs director at the Center for Biological Diversity, said.
“Fracking is a toxic business, and that's why states and countries have banned it. Trump's reckless decision to repeal these common-sense protections will have serious consequences.”
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=125820290&vname=dennotallissues&fn=125820290&jd=125820290
-
Energy Department's Global Work Shifts to Carbon Capture, Nuclear
Dec 29, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rebecca Kern
The Energy Department's Office of International Climate and Technology mission is changing under the Trump administration to focus on promoting U.S. fossil fuels and nuclear power abroad.
Groups tracking the issue say the change could cause the U.S. to cede its leadership in global clean energy work.
The Office of International Climate and Technology—created by the Obama administration in 2010—is responsible for promoting the U.S. presence in international clean energy efforts. The Trump administration targeted it for elimination in its 2018 budget proposal. With the budget not yet passed in Congress, it remains open.
But the small office—located within the Office of International Affairs—has shrunk from approximately 11 to six employees through attrition and departures of Obama-era political appointees. Now the administration wants to refocus the office's work on new priorities: promoting carbon capture and nuclear energy technologies.
Climate Change Not ‘Role of This Office’
Wells Griffith, a political appointee and former Trump campaign staffer and Republican National Committee employee who has been in charge of the Office of International Affairs since August, said his team is “trying to return corporate management that's been lacking.”
“A lot of the focus [during the Obama administration] was travel to promote climate change, but that's not really the role of this office,” he told Bloomberg Environment. “It's to coordinate the international engagement on international energy issues related to U.S. energy security, scientific collaboration in early stage research and development on all sources of energy and technologies.”
The Obama administration was “pushing renewables or certain types of energy, and not equally supporting all sources of energy. ... It wasn't a level playing field for all sources.”
Jonathan Pershing, who had been a senior climate adviser to former Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz and special envoy for climate change, said the international office “is the public face to the global community of things that the U.S. is trying to do both at home and wants to engage others in.”
Cutting back the work on clean energy sends the message that the U.S. doesn't want to have the same engagement it had during the Obama administration, Pershing told Bloomberg Environment.
‘Help With Fossil Fuels’
Ethan Zindler, head of Americas for Bloomberg New Energy Finance, told Bloomberg Environment, “The administration is enthusiastic about energy technologies. It just re-prioritizes the list of which ones it views as important, and the emphasis is very much on what they call ‘clean coal’ and other similar technologies that help with fossil fuels.”
However, Zindler noted that that there has been “far less progress” on carbon capture technologies, which can be considered “clean coal” than on “truly zero carbon” technologies like wind and solar.
Carbon capture, utilization and storage involves capturing carbon dioxide emissions and reusing it or storing it underground so that it is not released to the atmosphere, where it accumulates and causes the planet to warm.
Clean Energy Ministerial, Mission Innovation
The Office of International Climate and Technology's work included U.S. contributions to the Clean Energy Ministerial. The U.S. started and funded the Clean Energy Ministerial in 2010 under Energy Secretary Steven Chu. The organization of 24 countries and the European Union promotes efforts to advance clean energy technologies and transition to a global clean energy economy.
The U.S. held the secretariat function for the Clean Energy Ministerial until 2016. The new secretariat is based at the International Energy Agency's headquarters in Paris.
Similarly, the U.S. in 2015 founded and held the secretariat for Mission Innovation, a group of 22 countries and the European Union committed to accelerating clean energy innovation. The mission was housed in the DOE international office, but the secretariat now is based in the U.K.
Griffith still sits on the steering committee for Mission Innovation, and DOE staff continue to participate in ministerial meetings.
‘Still Support Clean Energy’
While the transitions of the secretariats for the Clean Energy Ministerial and Mission Innovation took place prior to the Trump administration, observers have raised concerns about what Energy Secretary Rick Perry's messaging will mean for the future of clean energy investment.
“We obviously still support clean energy,” Griffith said, pointing to U.S. support for renewables at the latest Clean Energy Ministerial meeting in Beijing in June, right after the U.S. announced plans to pull out of the Paris climate agreement.
Perry also introduced two initiatives for the Clean Energy Ministerial: carbon capture utilization and sequestration, and nuclear energy. The organization will consider this when it next meets in May in Copenhagen. Griffith said there was a lot of interest in these topics.
Jonathan Elkind, the former head of the the Office of International Affairs under Moniz, said the initiative on carbon capture for coal “is clearly related to the administration's objectives for having a future for coal.”
‘Nations Are Going to Keep Using Coal’
But, he added, “in reality, nations are going to keep using coal...and you can't get to affordable technology if you don't invest today in the research and development, so it is a good thing the U.S. is still engaged.”
While the U.S. is still involved in the Clean Energy Ministerial, Jake Schmidt, the director of Natural Resources Defense Council's International Program, said that without the U.S. being the secretariat, he's concerned there may not be as much buy-in from other countries.
“There's a big difference when you don't have the U.S. helping to drive that train,” he told Bloomberg Environment.
Likewise, Graham Pugh, who was head of the Office of International Climate and Technology during the Obama administration from 2010 to 2014, said there will be loss for other countries with the U.S. moving to leave the Paris Agreement.
“Where stuff actually happens is domestic policymaking in all of these countries, and you've got to provide the technical support for that stuff to happen in order to really meet those goals,” Pugh told Bloomberg Environment. “And that's where we really added value, and it's disappointing to see that go away.”
Refocusing of Office
Given that the majority of the responsibilities of hosting the Clean Energy Ministerial and Mission Innovation secretariats have transitioned out of DOE as part of a regular rotation, the remaining staff have a lighter workload and some have been given assignments from the regional offices within the International Affairs program. These focus on bilateral agreements and partnerships with other countries.
“Because the regional offices are super busy, and because there was a sprinkling of work on Clean Energy Ministerial, Mission Innovation and other science-focused things that we've always done through the regional offices, it would be better to beef up these regional offices and make the organization more streamlined,” Andrea Lockwood, a career employee who is acting deputy assistant secretary for the Office of International Climate and Technology, told Bloomberg Environment.
Who Will Lead on Clean Energy?
Major U.S. cities and companies have stepped up commitments to invest in clean energy technologies to combat climate change. But Pershing says that in reality, these investments will be a drop in the bucket compared to what is lost if the U.S. withdraws from the Paris Agreement, as Trump is moving to do. The earliest it can technically leave the deal is one day after the Nov. 3, 2020, presidential election.
“If you think of the size of the U.S. budget, it's measured in the billions of dollars. If you look at the size of state budgets for R&D, they're measured in the millions or sometimes tens of millions,” said Pershing, who is now the program director of environment at the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation.
“That's the thing that we lose—our competitive edge in these kinds of technologies is one that only is maintained with a lot of regular attention,” Pershing told Bloomberg Environment. “You don't get to stay out in front when everyone else is working like crazy on an agenda if you abandon the agenda.”
This story is part of a Bloomberg Environment series on issues to look for in 2018. We're publishing these Outlook articles on a wide range of topics throughout December.
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=125820293&vname=dennotallissues&fn=125820293&jd=125820293
-
Vitol, Hilcorp Affiliate Planning South Texas Terminal for Permian Oil Exports
Dec 28, 2017 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Carolyn Davis
Global crude oil trader Vitol Inc. and a Hilcorp. Energy Co. affiliate are finalizing plans to develop a state-of-the-art export terminal on the South Texas coast that would move more Permian Basin volumes overseas.
Vitol and Hilcorp’s Harvest Pipeline Co. plan to lease a 22-acre tract from the Port of Corpus Christi, which approved the lease earlier in December.
“Port Corpus Christi continues to help develop maritime facilities and provide services to customers that are committed to sustainable growth, and building the future of our community,” said Executive Director John LaRue. “We are looking forward to growing a longstanding relationship with Vitol and Harvest Pipeline Co. with mutual benefits for the future of our region.”
The crude oil terminal development would add to Harvest’s existing South Texas pipeline system, providing connectivity to its Midway Junction and waterborne access to Permian crude oil going to international markets.
Crude oil shippers would have access to the terminal via a 16-inch diameter lateral pipeline. “The agreement between Harvest Pipeline Co. and Vitol is an extraordinary opportunity to help satisfy the growing need for export capacity along the Texas Gulf Coast,” said Harvest President Sean Kolassa.
Vitol’s Mark Couling, who heads crude oil for the marketing giant, said crude oil demand, “particularly in emerging markets, continues to grow, and U.S. shale has an important role to play in satisfying this demand. Our new pipeline and terminal will facilitate the efficient delivery of U.S. crude to global markets, thereby increasing marketing opportunities and optimizing value for U.S. producers.”
Vitol trades more than 7 million b/d of crude oil and products. At any time, it said it has as many as 250 ships transporting cargoes.
The new project aligns with the Port of Corpus Christi’s strategic plan goals, which include providing surface infrastructure and services in support of maritime and industrial development.
Port Corpus Christi is the fourth largest port in the United States in total tonnage. The 36-mile, 47-foot deep channel is becoming a more important gateway to international and domestic maritime commerce.
The Corpus Christi region, while not causing much heartburn for the Houston Ship Channel, is becoming a magnet for oil, liquefied natural gas (LNG) and petrochemical projects.
Among other things, Plains All American Pipeline LP and Anadarko Petroleum Corp. earlier in December said they are planning open seasons to move Permian crude to the Corpus Christi/Ingleside area.
In addition, Cheniere Energy Inc. is proceeding with the Corpus Christi LNG export project. And ExxonMobil Corp., and Saudi Arabian partner Saudi Basic Industries Corp., agreed to develop a world-class ethane steam cracker near Corpus Christi that would be able to produce 1.8 million metric tons/year of ethylene. Once completed, the cracker is expected to be the largest in the world.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/112888-vitol-hilcorp-affiliate-planning-south-texas-terminal-for-permian-oil-exports
-
Trump Administration to Overhaul Safety-Monitoring Rules for Offshore Drilling
Dec 28, 2017 | Washington Post
By Juliet Eilperin and Dino Grandoni
The Trump administration is overhauling how federal officials monitor safety procedures on offshore drilling operations, revising a pair of rules enacted in the wake of the 2010 Deepwater Horizon spill on the grounds that they are overly burdensome on industry.
On Friday, the Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (BSEE) will publish new regulations for the production-safety-systems rule, which addresses devices used during offshore oil production.
The agency has also drafted changes to another set of regulations, called the well-control rule, which aims to prevent the kind of blowout that killed 11 workers.
The Deepwater Horizon disaster, the largest oil spill in U.S. history, released more than 200 million gallons of oil into the Gulf of Mexico. It killed thousands of dolphins, sea turtles and other marine animals, exposed hundreds of cleanup workers and other gulf residents to toxic chemicals and prompted a six-month shutdown of all deepwater drilling in the gulf.
Even before President Trump’s election, many oil and gas officials said that the Obama administration had overreached on rules designed to forestall a future catastrophe. Those rules inhibited offshore production, they argued, and Trump administration officials reiterated that Thursday.
“It’s time for a paradigm shift” in regulations on the outer continental shelf, which accounts for 1 in every 6 barrels of domestic oil, BSEE Director Scott Angelle said in a statement. “There was an assumption made previously that only more rules would increase safety, but ultimately it is not an either/or proposition. We can actually increase domestic energy production and increase safety and environmental protection.”
Industry leaders applauded the move.
“Safety experts in the offshore oil and gas industry now have the opportunity to comment on this important regulation,” Randall Luthi, president of the National Ocean Industries Association, said in a statement. “This ‘second bite at the apple’ provides an opportunity for further dialogue, discussion and debate to assure the Nation’s offshore energy resources are developed safely and expeditiously.”
But Michael Bromwich, who served as the BSEE’s first director, said Thursday that because both rules did not take full effect until last year, “the argument that the regulatory burden needs to be lifted . . . is not credible.”
While the BSEE released a copy of the production-safety rule Thursday, it has not made the well-control proposal public. A copy of the latter rule, which was first reported by the Wall Street Journal, was obtained separately by The Washington Post.
In March, Trump issued an executive order instructing agencies to reduce undue burdens on domestic energy production. Angelle, who was installed by the president in May as head of the BSEE, cited that order as one of the reasons the agency decided to change the production safety rule.
Neither proposal amounts to a wholesale reversal of existing regulations, according to experts, but instead each minimizes some of industry’s obligations and changes compliance terms in several instances to language favored by drillers.
The proposed rule unveiled Thursday, for example, eliminates a requirement that safety and pollution prevention equipment be inspected by independent auditors certified by the BSEE. A bipartisan presidential commission established after the disaster had recommended such inspections.
Instead, under new regulations, oil companies will use industry-set “recommended practices” for ensuring that safety equipment works — as was done before the Deepwater Horizon incident.
Recommended practices by industry groups such as the American Petroleum Institute “are simply that — they make recommendations but don’t require anything,” said Nancy Leveson, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who served as a senior adviser to the presidential commission.
“The documents are filled with ‘should’ instead of ‘must,’ ” she noted in an email.
The publication of the proposed changes kicks off a 30-day comment period.
The BSEE’s proposed revisions also include several other changes that the industry has long sought. For example, while it does not change the level of downhole pressure the agency requires operators to maintain in a given well to avoid an accident, it removes the word “safe” in describing that balance. In the case of pressure tests, which failed in the Deepwater Horizon disaster, those no longer have to “show” that a well is in balance. Instead, they should “indicate” that. Some changes are more substantive. The existing well-control rule requires that companies complete any investigation and failure analysis within 120 days of an equipment failure. The proposed rule, by contrast, calls for this process to start within 120 days and provides no specific end date.
The agency declined to comment on the proposed revisions to the well-control rule, saying it is still under review at the Office of Management and Budget, BSEE spokesman Greg Julian said in an email.
In May, a coalition of seven industry groups submitted a 53-page letter, obtained by The Post, suggesting technical changes to the well-control rule. Four months later, the BSEE gathered industry and environmental groups in Houston, the heart of the U.S. oil and gas sector, to solicit ways of making that rule less burdensome. Among the provisions targeted was the one about 120-day investigations.
The industry wanted requirements for real-time data from offshore operations to be pulled back. Lois Epstein, Arctic program director at the Wilderness Society, described the administration’s ultimate changes as modest.
Bromwich questioned the administration’s emphasis on promoting offshore energy exploration in fashioning regulations; the previous administration had changed the Interior Department’s structure specifically to separate drilling oversight from the agency collecting revenue from such activities and eliminate any perceived conflicts of interest.
“The rhetoric seems to be moving away from being a tough-minded but fair regulator,” he said, “and instead being a cheerleader for industry.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/trump-administration-to-overhaul-safety-monitoring-rules-for-offshore-drilling/2017/12/28/37cb40bc-ec20-11e7-9f92-10a2203f6c8d_story.html?utm_term=.13ae46f3ce8a
-
Off the Rails: Speed-Control System for Trains is Way Overdue
Dec 29, 2017 | Pittsburgh Post-Gazette
By Editorial Board
The Amtrak train derailment that killed three people south of Seattle earlier this month was an easily avoidable tragedy, according to many transportation safety advocates.
The passenger train was making its inaugural trip on a new line between Seattle and Oregon when it derailed while crossing an overpass atop I-5, one of the busiest interstates in the nation. Thirteen of the train’s cars derailed, with several falling to the highway and one even dangling from the overpass bridge. Along with the three fatalities, about 100 people were injured.
In the aftermath, analysts focused not only on questions of whether the train’s conductor might have been distracted, but also how fast the train was going. Just before the crash, the train was going 80 mph while heading into a 30-mph turn.
Such a crash likely could have been prevented by technology called positive train control, which is a computer-based system designed to prevent trains from speeding.
The system is well known to regulators. The National Transportation Safety Board has recommended for decades that Amtrak implement it. And Congress ordered the train service to install positive train control almost 10 years ago after an accident near Los Angeles in which 25 people died.
But the railroad industry lobbied against the mandate, saying positive train control is both costly and difficult to install. Railroads must acquire wireless spectrum along which information from each train must be carried to the speed-controlling system. Congress gave Amtrak and other rail operators a reprieve, pushing back the deadline to install positive train control from 2015 to 2018 with the option of further extensions on a case-by-case basis.
Meanwhile, yet another fatal accident seemed to demonstrate the necessity for the speed-limiting technology. The accident in Washington closely resembles the one that occurred in Philadelphia just two years ago, in which an Amtrak train hurtled through a sweeping curve at 106 mph before flying off the tracks. Eight people died.
How many deadly derailments will it take? It is time for Congress to end the delays and demand full implementation of positive train control.
http://www.post-gazette.com/opinion/editorials/2017/12/29/Off-the-rails-Speed-control-system-for-trains-is-way-overdue/stories/201712290042
-
End Delays in Implementing Positive Train Control
Dec 28, 2017 | New Haven Register
By Sen. Richard Blumenthal
Our worst railroad nightmare has happened again - tragic fatalities in a derailment resulting from entirely preventable excessive speed. It was preventable by Positive Train Control, a life-saving technology that can slow a speeding train and stop a collision. Three people might be alive in Washington State if Congress had not delayed the deadline for implementing PTC from 2015 to 2018.
In 1970, after a head-on collision in Darien, the National Transportation Safety Board first called for installation of technology that could remove human error and automatically control train speeds and operations at critical junctures. PTC existed then as it does now, we just lack the political will to implement it.
The NTSB has been consistently urging adoption of PTC technology since then. For decades, railroads dithered and delayed, investing more time and energy in excuses than solutions. Meanwhile, more than 300 people died, thousands were injured, and millions in property damages were incurred during preventable rail collisions.
Then in 2008 in Chatsworth, Calif., a freight and passenger train collided head-on, killing 25 people and injuring 135 more. Congress took action, mandating implementation of PTC by the end of 2015.
In the next three years, railroads did next to nothing and then demanded Congress extend the deadline. Against my strong objections, Congress caved and gave railroads until the end of 2018 to complete PTC implementation. With one year left to meet the extended deadline, many railroads have little progress to show.
Shamefully, Metro-North has made little progress in implementing PTC, despite derailments that have killed and injured passengers. That includes the Spuyten Duyvil derailment in 2013 that killed four and injured more than 60 others. Today, PTC is operational nowhere on Metro-North’s 384 miles of track—a stunning failure.
Amtrak has made some progress— 67 percent of its routes have PTC in operation. That was little consolation for the eight passengers killed in the Philadelphia Amtrak derailment in 2015—when PTC should have been operational, but wasn’t.
The U.S. Department of Transportation must be aggressive and assertive in imposing strong fines and penalties for any railroad that fails to meet the 2018 deadline. Congress must hold their feet to the fire and refuse additional extensions. We cannot afford further delay of this lifesaving technology.
It will cost Amtrak an estimated $150 million to install PTC on its tracks nationwide. The Philadelphia derailment and resulting service disruptions alone cost the Northeast regional economy billions. Amtrak paid out more in claims—reportedly $265 million—than the cost to implement PTC. The cost in lives is immeasurable. This basic math is played out across all railroads nationwide.
Following the law and implementing Positive Train Control by the 2018 deadline is the least we can do, but there’s more. Many railroads still lack other basic, proven safety technology, including redundant signal protection, inward-and-outward facing cameras and alerters to keep passengers and worker safe. Our rail grade crossings rely on 19th century technology. Nationwide, our tracks and bridges are decaying and we lack modern technology to inspect them.
Patch and pray is our nation’s rail funding plan today. We pour meager resources into our system and hope our decrepit and dated infrastructure and technology will hold out for one more day. Service disruptions along Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor alone cost our national economy over $500 million each year. The U.S. DOT estimates we have a $90 billion backlog in projects needed to repair our nation’s public transportation infrastructure. Experts have concluded the passenger rail line between DC and Boston needs an investment of nearly $40 billion just to keep pace with growing needs. My Democratic colleagues and I proposed a plan to reverse the backlog—a plan that would put 1.9 million people to work, reduce injuries, save lives and bring our transportation infrastructure into the 21st century. We need bipartisan work but the president has no proposal after a year in office.
The costs in lives and dollars from crashes on our railroads can be saved, but only by investment now.
Sen. Richard Blumenthal is Connecticut’s senior U.S. senator. He is a Democrat.
https://www.nhregister.com/opinion/article/Sen-Richard-Blumenthal-End-delays-in-12460004.php
-
Harvard Study Suggests PM2.5, Ozone Risks Below Air Standard
Dec 29, 2017 | Inside EPA
A new study by researchers at the Harvard School of Public Health shows increased mortality risk from exposures to fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and ozone at levels below EPA's current regulatory limits, suggesting that current limits need to be tougher, the study authors say.
In their article published Dec. 26 in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), “Association of Short-term Exposure to Air Pollution With Mortality in Older Adults,” researchers Qian Di, Lingzhen Dai and Yun Wang find that exposures to air pollution below the level of the current national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for PM2.5 and ozone still produces a statistically significant increased incidence of mortality.
The PM2.5 NAAQS is currently set at 12 micrograms per cubic meter (12 ug/m3), and the ozone NAAQS is set at 70 parts per billion (ppb).
But in the study of more than 22 million deaths in the Medicare population from 2000-2012, each 10 ug/m3 daily increase in PM2.5 and 10 ppb daily increase in warm-season ozone exposures “were associated with a statistically significant increase of 1.41 and 0.66 deaths per 1 million persons at risk per day, respectively,” the researchers conclude.
The ramifications are that “Day-to-day changes in fine particulate matter and ozone exposures were significantly associated with higher risk of all-cause mortality at levels below current air quality standards, suggesting that those standards may need to be reevaluated,” the study concludes.
Further, “There was no evidence of a threshold in the exposure-response relationship,” the researchers conclude.
The Clean Air Act requires EPA to set NAAQS at a level requisite to protect public health with an “adequate margin of safety,” but the findings again suggest there is no safe threshold for ozone or PM2.5 exposure. This would suggest that EPA should set the NAAQS at stricter levels when it conducts five-year reviews of the standards, but the Trump EPA is under intense pressure from some states and industry groups to maintain the standards, and even consider weakening them.
For example, EPA has indicated it intends to review and possibly reconsider the ozone standard, set in 2015 by the Obama EPA and opposed by many state and industry critics as being too stringent.
The agency is also in the early stages of a review of the PM2.5 standard, set in 2012, but this will not conclude for several years and has no firm schedule at present.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/harvard-study-suggests-pm25-ozone-risks-below-air-standard
-
Billion-Dollar U.S. Weather Disasters Point to Climate Change
Dec 29, 2017 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Brian K. Sullivan and Jim Efstathiou Jr.
In the year that President Donald Trump said he would pull the U.S. out of the Paris Agreement and downplayed global warming as a security threat, the U.S. received a harsh reminder of the perils of the rise in the planet's temperature: a destructive rash of hurricanes, fires, and floods.
The country recorded 15 weather events costing $1 billion or more each through early October, one short of the record 16 in 2011, according to the federal government's National Centers for Environmental Information in Asheville, N.C.
And the tally doesn't include the recent wildfires in southern California.
In many cases, weather broke records. In others, it was just downright odd, like the February warm spell that sent temperatures to a record 72 degrees Fahrenheit in Burlington, Vt., and spawned a tornado in Massachusetts.
“When all is said and done, this year is going to be one of the worst years on record for U.S. damages,” said Antonio Busalacchi, president of the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colo.
Among the most devastating events were hurricanes Harvey, Irma and Maria and wildfires in northern California. The killer storms caused economic losses of more than $210 billion in the U.S. and across the Caribbean, and about $100 billion in insured damages, according to Mark Bove, a senior research scientist with Munich Reinsurance America in Princeton, New Jersey.
The list goes on—ruinous hail in Colorado and Minnesota, tornado outbreaks across the Midwest and South, flooding that damaged a massive dam in California and triggered evacuations downstream.
Many of the events can be explained by historical weather patterns. The most calamitous, though, showed signs of a warming climate, including Hurricane Harvey, which dropped as much as 60 inches rain as it meandered around the Texas coast after coming ashore as the first of three Category 4 storms to strike the U.S. this year.
Warming worsened Harvey's impacts by boosting moisture in the atmosphere and weakening high-altitude winds that would normally push such a system along, according to Kerry Emanuel, a professor of atmospheric science at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge. Harvey marked the third-straight year of major flooding in Houston.
In Texas and elsewhere, “there are certainly indications that these extreme rainfall events are occurring more frequently,” said Greg Carbin, branch chief at the U.S. Weather Prediction Center in College Park, Md.
Those who are skeptical that climate change is a phenomenon, or that human activity is to blame, contend that dramatic weather this year was happenstance or part of larger, regular meteorological swings. Trump, who has in the past dismissed the concept of man-made climate change as a hoax, announced in June that the U.S. would leave the Paris climate accord, saying it favors other nations at the expense of American workers.
The overwhelming consensus among scientists is that Earth's climate is warming and that greenhouse gases are the prime reason. The American Meteorological Society linked changing climate and severe weather this month in a report that included contributions from researchers at the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
“When you see an extreme event that is breaking all records, it is more likely to have the fingerprints of human-induced climate change,” said Brenda Ekwurzel, senior climate scientist at the Union of Concerned Scientists.
Earlier this year, rain and snow that brought life to California hills parched by six years of drought foretold dangerous times. The moisture produced a bumper crop of grass and brush that then dried out, leaving ample fuel for wind-driven flames that burned large swaths of Napa and Sonoma counties in October and Santa Barbara and Ventura counties this month.
“Prolonged drought and warming temperatures in California are not just extending the state's wildfire season, they are increasing the evaporation rate of water,” Bove said. “This means that extreme wildfire conditions will return to California after a rain event more quickly today than in the past.”
At least 40 people died in the fires, some of which were among the top 20 most destructive in state history, according to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. The Thomas fire, now almost contained, set a record as the largest ever in the state.
While other countries suffered intense and unprecedented weather in 2017, the range and number of incidents across America put it in its own league, said Bob Henson, a meteorologist at the Weather Underground in Boulder, Colo. “The U.S. took a disproportionate hit.”
http://news.bna.com/deln/DELNWB/split_display.adp?fedfid=125820302&vname=dennotallissues&fn=125820302&jd=125820302
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested