Preview Newsletter
AM ACC 1/16/2018
-
(ACC Mentioned) ERJ Business News Tracker
Jan 16, 2018 | European Rubber Journal
Global chemicals production rose 0.6% in July, according to the American Chemistry Council‘s Global Chemical Production Regional Index. That rate is a quicker pace than in June and May, as measured on a three-month moving average basis, according to a release. -
Trump EPA Spends First Year Rolling Back Environmental Regulations
Jan 16, 2018 | ABC News
By Stephanie Ebbs
In its first year under President Donald Trump, the Environmental Protection Agencymoved quickly to fulfill several promises Trump made during his presidential campaign, most notably to roll back climate regulations put into place under the Obama administration. -
Votes Set on NOAA, NASA, CPSC Picks
Jan 16, 2018 | E&E Daily
By Arianna Skibell and Rob Hotakainen
The Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee will vote on several Trump administration renominations this week, including Rep. Jim Bridenstine (R-Okla.) to lead NASA. -
Committee to Vet 2 DOE Picks
Jan 16, 2018 | E&E Daily
By Sam Mintz
Two nominees for senior positions at the Department of Energy will face Senate lawmakers at a confirmation hearing this week. -
Echa Adds Seven Svhcs to Candidate List
Jan 16, 2018 | Chemical Watch
Echa has added seven substances of very high concern (SVHCs) to the REACH candidate list, which now contains 181 substances. -
Cvs Pharmacy Promises to End Touchups of Its Beauty Images
Jan 16, 2018 | AP (In The Washington Post)
By Anne D'Innocenzio
Pharmacy giant CVS said it will stop significant touchups of images used in its advertising for beauty products. -
Week Ahead: Gop Looks to Overhaul Natural Gas, Utilities Laws
Jan 16, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
A House panel will meet in the coming week to debate three Republican-backed bills meant to overhaul how federal regulators oversee liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports and electric utilities. -
Lawmakers to Review Domestic, International Forecasts
Jan 16, 2018 | E&E Daily
By Sam Mintz
The head of the International Energy Agency will testify before a Senate committee today about his organization's work on mapping out the future of energy, both domestically and globally. -
U.S. Oil Industry Set to Break Record, Upend Global Trade
Jan 16, 2018 | Reuters (In The New York Times)
By Liz Hampton
Surging shale production is poised to push U.S. oil output to more than 10 million barrels per day - toppling a record set in 1970 and crossing a threshold few could have imagined even a decade ago. -
America Could Stop Almost Half of Train Crashes. Here’s Why It Doesn’t.
Jan 16, 2018 | Daily Beast
By Winston Ross
Penn Central Commuter Train N-48 was en route to New Canaan, Connecticut, with a three-man crew and 60 to 80 passengers aboard, when disaster struck. -
Another Day of Reckoning for Big Oil’s Role in Climate Change
Jan 16, 2018 | New York Times
By Editorial Board
Mayor Bill de Blasio’s recent declaration of war on Big Oil for its contribution to climate change inspired, as is often the case with this mayor, some skepticism that he was once again seizing a big issue to propel himself into the national spotlight. -
Oregon Considers Cap-And-Trade System for Carbon Emissions
Jan 15, 2018 | Seattle Times
By Cassandra Profita
Oregon lawmakers are considering a major change in how the state will go about reducing its contributions to climate change.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) ERJ Business News Tracker
Jan 16, 2018 | European Rubber Journal
...Global chemicals production rose 0.6% in July, according to the American Chemistry Council‘s Global Chemical Production Regional Index. That rate is a quicker pace than in June and May, as measured on a three-month moving average basis, according to a release....
http://www.european-rubber-journal.com/2018/01/15/erj-business-story-tracker/
-
Trump EPA Spends First Year Rolling Back Environmental Regulations
Jan 16, 2018 | ABC News
By Stephanie Ebbs
In its first year under President Donald Trump, the Environmental Protection Agencymoved quickly to fulfill several promises Trump made during his presidential campaign, most notably to roll back climate regulations put into place under the Obama administration.
As part of an effort to carry out executive orders repealing regulations and re-examining landmark environmental policies, the EPA also began a process to repeal the Clean Power Plan, which would impose restrictions on greenhouse gas emissions from power plants, and to start a review of the Waters of the United States Rule, intended to limit pollution in bodies of water.
Along with rolling back policies intended to combat global warming, Administrator Scott Pruitt removed references to climate change from the EPA's strategic plan and supported the president's decision to withdraw the United States from the Paris climate agreement.
Along with rolling back policies intended to combat global warming, Administrator Scott Pruitt removed references to climate change from the EPA's strategic plan and supported the president's decision to withdraw the United States from the Paris climate agreement.
In addition to its policy priorities, the agency spent much of Trump's first year responding to Hurricanes Harvey, Irma and Maria in conjunction with several other government agencies. EPA worked to secure contaminated Superfund sites in areas affected by the storms and tested floodwater and drinking water systems for dangerous bacteria or chemicals. Early in 2018 the agency still had more than 700 staff members involved in hurricane recovery in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands.
Trump and Pruitt further sought to significantly shrink the EPA over the past year, proposing drastic budget cuts and offering buyouts that reduced staffing. From December 2016 to January 2018, the size of the agency has shrunk by 1,500 people, according to the Office of Personnel Management, and its current total of 14,162 employees is fewer than worked for it under President Ronald Reagan's administration.
The agency additionally altered its policy on the scientific boards that advise the agency, blocking any researchers from participating if they received grant money from the EPA.
This story is part of a weeklong series examining the first year of the Trump administration.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/trump-epa-spends-year-rolling-back-environmental-regulations/story?id=52162794
-
Votes Set on NOAA, NASA, CPSC Picks
Jan 16, 2018 | E&E Daily
By Arianna Skibell and Rob Hotakainen
The Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee will vote on several Trump administration renominations this week, including Rep. Jim Bridenstine (R-Okla.) to lead NASA.
Bridenstine has received pushback from both Democrats and Republicans, for denying climate change and lacking critical scientific experience, respectively. He first passed committee in November by a narrow vote of 14-13.
In a 2013 floor speech, Bridenstine, a naval aviator and the former head of the Tulsa Air and Space Museum and Planetarium, said there "is not credible scientific evidence that greenhouse gas atmospheric concentrations, including carbon dioxide, affect global climate."
But in a hearing late last year, he seemed to have changed his stance and acknowledged carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas and a contributing factor to rising temperatures.
Bridenstine also agreed that humans contribute to global warming but wouldn't say humans are the main cause.
"Right now we're just scratching the surface of understanding the science," the congressman said. "NASA is the only agency in the world that can do this kind of science."
Bridenstine also promised to not interfere with scientists' work even if the Trump administration disagrees with their findings.
NASA is one of the top climate science agencies in the world, recording global temperature spikes and tracking increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide. It tracks key data that show how human activity is changing the planet at unprecedented rates.
The panel will vote on another controversial nomination: AccuWeather Inc. CEO Barry Myers, the president's pick to lead NOAA and its 12,000 employees.
Last month, the committee approved Myers on a razor-thin 14-13 vote, with Democrats united in opposition.
Many of them criticized Myers also for having no science background and worried that his ties with AccuWeather, his family-owned business, could pose a conflict of interest.
Republicans voted unanimously for Myers, saying he had satisfied all of the government's ethics requirements.
Myers, 74, was nominated for the job in October. President Trump broke a record by waiting longer than any other president to nominate a NOAA leader.
The Commerce panel will also vote again on Trump's Consumer Product Safety Commission picks.
Acting Chairwoman Ann Marie Buerkle, a former New York Republican congresswoman, was renominated for a second seven-year term and to lead the independent agency for the duration of the Trump administration.
Buerkle ran into opposition because of a vote against a mandatory emissions standard for potentially deadly portable power generators.
Dana Baiocco, a partner at the law firm Jones Day who often represents companies fighting CPSC enforcement, was also put forward again for a spot on the five-member commission.
Both women's bids cleared the committee last year on party-line 14-13 votes and are likely to once more move to the Senate floor by the same narrow margins.
The committee will also vote on the following:
· Leon Westmoreland to serve on the Amtrak board.
· Diana Furchtgott-Roth to be assistant secretary of Transportation.
Schedule: The markup is Thursday, Jan. 18, at 11 a.m. in 216 Hart.
Reporter Corbin Hiar contributed.
https://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2018/01/16/stories/1060071023
-
Jan 16, 2018 | E&E Daily
By Sam Mintz
Two nominees for senior positions at the Department of Energy will face Senate lawmakers at a confirmation hearing this week.
The president has tapped Melissa Burnison and Anne White to serve as DOE's assistant secretary for congressional and intergovernmental affairs and assistant secretary of energy, respectively.
White would oversee the agency's Office of Environmental Management, which is responsible for cleaning up sites involved in decades of nuclear weapons development and energy research.
The two appear to be moving relatively quickly through the nomination process. Burnison was picked in November, and White was named on Jan. 3.
The same cannot be said of other DOE nominees. General counsel pick David Jonas recently withdrew his name from consideration, having been tapped last May (Greenwire, Jan. 8).
Burnison is a lobbyist at the Nuclear Energy Institute, where she "plans, directs and executes legislative strategies for nuclear energy programs and policies on behalf of the nuclear energy industry," according to the White House. She has also held a past position at DOE and on Capitol Hill.
White founded Bastet Technical Services LLC, which does consulting work for DOE. According to an online biography, she has led decommissioning work at the Diablo Canyon nuclear plant in California for the last eight months and has consulted for Los Alamos National Laboratory.
Schedule: The hearing is Thursday, Jan. 18, at 10 a.m. in 366 Dirksen.
Witnesses: Melissa Burnison and Anne White.
https://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2018/01/16/stories/1060071013
-
Echa Adds Seven Svhcs to Candidate List
Jan 16, 2018 | Chemical Watch
Echa has added seven substances of very high concern (SVHCs) to the REACH candidate list, which now contains 181 substances.
Chrysene and benz[a]anthracene have been added due to their carcinogenic, persistent, bioaccumulative and toxic (PBT) and very persistent and very bioaccumulative (vPvB) properties. They are not normally manufactured as single chemicals but occur as a constituent or impurity in other substances, the agency says.
Cadmium nitrate, cadmium hydroxide and cadmium carbonate are listed due to their carcinogenic, mutagenic and specific target organ toxicity after repeated exposure (Stot Re) properties. They are used in the following products:
· cadmium nitrate: manufacture of glass, porcelain and ceramic products and in laboratory chemicals;
· cadmium hydroxide: manufacture of electrical, electronic and optical equipment and in laboratory chemicals; and
· cadmium carbonate: a pH regulator and used in water treatment products, laboratory chemicals, cosmetics and personal care products.
Another entry is reaction products of 1,3,4-thiadiazolidine-2,5-dithione, formaldehyde and 4-heptylphenol, branched and linear (RP-HP) [with ≥0.1% w/w 4-heptylphenol, branched and linear]. It has endocrine disrupting properties for the environment and is used as an additive in lubricants and greases.
And dechlorane plus is on the list because of its vPvB qualities. It is used as a non-plasticising flame retardant, in adhesives and sealants, and in binding agents.BPA update
The agency has also updated the entry for bisphenol A (BPA). This is to reflect an additional reason for inclusion, due to its endocrine disrupting properties causing adverse effects to the environment.
This update was prompted by Echa's Member State Committee (MSC) agreeing with Germany's proposal at is meeting in December.
The chemical is used in the manufacture of polycarbonate, as a hardener for epoxy resins, as an anti-oxidant for processing PVC and in thermal paper production.
Earlier this month, MEPs voted to reject a motion calling for a total ban on BPA in food contact materials. This has paved the way for a European Commission draft Regulation that lowers migration limits to be adopted.
And in July, Echa added perfluorohexane-1-sulphonic acid and its salts (PFHxS) to the candidate list because of its vPvB properties.
The candidate list comprises substances that may have serious effects on human health or the environment. Such substances are candidates for possible inclusion in the authorisation list (Annex XIV). Companies using chemicals on Annex XIV will need to apply for permission to continue to use them if there are no alternatives.
https://chemicalwatch.com/63126/echa-adds-seven-svhcs-to-candidate-list
-
Cvs Pharmacy Promises to End Touchups of Its Beauty Images
Jan 16, 2018 | AP (In The Washington Post)
By Anne D'Innocenzio
Pharmacy giant CVS said it will stop significant touchups of images used in its advertising for beauty products.
The company said it has a responsibility to think about sending messages of unrealistic body images to girls and young women.
CVS Health Corp. said Monday it will not “materially” alter photos used in stores, on websites and on social media by changing a model’s shape, size, skin or eye color or wrinkles.
CVS, which was founded in Lowell, Massachusetts, in 1963 but now is based in Woonsocket, Rhode Island, said it will use a watermark to highlight images that have not been materially altered beginning this year. The change affects marketing materials produced by CVS, which said that if suppliers use altered photos in their material they will be labeled.
CVS said it hopes the beauty sections of all its stores will comply with the new policy by the end of 2020.
Most of the chain’s retail customers are women. Helena Foulkes, president of the pharmacy division, said there is a connection between unrealistic body images and bad health effects, especially in girls and young women.
Foulkes said CVS was trying to ensure that the messages it sends help customers attain better health. She said many of the companies that make beauty brands carried by CVS were already thinking about the issue.
CVS has previously made changes in its stores to support broader health issues. It stopped selling tobacco products in 2014, and last year it announced it would remove certain chemicals from about 600 beauty and personal-care products by the end of 2019.
CVS runs more than 9,700 retail locations.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/cvs-pharmacy-promises-to-end-touchups-of-its-beauty-images/2018/01/15/b8f4b0b4-fa40-11e7-9b5d-bbf0da31214d_story.html?utm_term=.4328fc7c0483
-
Week Ahead: Gop Looks to Overhaul Natural Gas, Utilities Laws
Jan 16, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
A House panel will meet in the coming week to debate three Republican-backed bills meant to overhaul how federal regulators oversee liquefied natural gas (LNG) exports and electric utilities.
The hearing in the House Energy and Commerce Energy subcommittee is part of the GOP's ongoing drive to "modernize" the nation's energy laws, bringing them out of an energy scarcity framework.
Two of the bills being debated Friday, both from Rep. Bill Johnson (R-Ohio), aim to ease the permitting process for companies wishing to export LNG.
Currently, companies must get approval for their export facilities from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), and then Department of Energy (DOE) approval to export the gas to countries that do not have free trade agreements with the United States.
The Unlocking Our Domestic LNG Potential Act would remove the DOE from the process, so that once FERC approves a facility, exports could begin.
The Ensuring Small Scale LNG Certainty and Access Act, meanwhile, would make approvals to export up to 140 million cubic feet of gas per day mandatory and automatic.
Rep. Tim Walberg's (R-Mich.) PURPA Modernization Act would overhaul the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978, the main law governing electric utility regulation by states.
Walberg's bill would ease the standards that require utilities to purchase small amounts of electricity and allow that requirement to be eliminated if a state agency approves, among other changes long sought by utilities.
Elsewhere in the House, the Natural Resources Committee's energy and mineral resources panel is planning a series of hearings on how the Trump administration oversees energy production.
First, in a Thursday hearing, the panel will look into the administration's efforts to ease energy production on public land.
The next day, lawmakers will host a hearing on permitting problems for offshore oil and natural gas seismic surveys, which companies use to estimate resource potential.
Fatih Birol, executive director of the International Energy Agency, will be in Washington, D.C., in the coming week for the U.S. launch on Tuesday of the agency's annual World Energy Outlook, an extensive report on the status of energy across the world in 2017.
That will take place at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, where John Hess, CEO of Hess Corp., which introduce him.
Earlier Tuesday morning, Birol will testify at a Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee about the global and domestic energy outlook.
Also on Tuesday, the Bipartisan Policy Center will host an event to discuss Energy Secretary Rick Perry's proposal to prop up coal and nuclear plants, which FERC recently rejected.
The event will feature Republican FERC Commissioner Neil Chatterjee and Democratic Commissioner Cheryl LaFleur.
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/368787-week-ahead-gop-looks-to-overhaul-natural-gas-utilities-laws
-
Lawmakers to Review Domestic, International Forecasts
Jan 16, 2018 | E&E Daily
By Sam Mintz
The head of the International Energy Agency will testify before a Senate committee today about his organization's work on mapping out the future of energy, both domestically and globally.
The IEA, an autonomous, intergovernmental organization, published its annual World Energy Outlook in November. The report said, among many other projections, the U.S. is set to lead the world in crude oil and gas production, and will be the leading exporter of oil and gas by the end of the next decade (Greenwire, Nov. 14, 2017).
"It is far too early to write the obituary of oil, as growth for trucks, aviation, petrochemicals, shipping and aviation keep pushing demand higher," said Executive Director Fatih Birol in November.
The report also signaled a "bright future" for renewables, which are the cheapest source of new generation in many countries, and featured updates about China's energy development, electric vehicles and more.
After his Hill cameo this morning, Birol will appear at the U.S. launch of the report at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.
IEA's goal is to "ensure reliable, affordable and clean energy for its 29 member countries and beyond," according to a mission statement.
Schedule: The hearing is Tuesday, Jan. 16, at 10 a.m. in 366 Dirksen.
Witnesses: Fatih Birol, executive director, International Energy Agency.
https://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2018/01/16/stories/1060071007
-
U.S. Oil Industry Set to Break Record, Upend Global Trade
Jan 16, 2018 | Reuters (In The New York Times)
By Liz Hampton
Surging shale production is poised to push U.S. oil output to more than 10 million barrels per day - toppling a record set in 1970 and crossing a threshold few could have imagined even a decade ago.
And this new record, expected within days, likely won't last long. The U.S. government forecasts that the nation's production will climb to 11 million barrels a day by late 2019, a level that would rival Russia, the world's top producer.
The economic and political impacts of soaring U.S. output are breathtaking, cutting the nation's oil imports by a fifth over a decade, providing high-paying jobs in rural communities and lowering consumer prices for domestic gasoline by 37 percent from a 2008 peak.
Fears of dire energy shortages that gripped the country in the 1970s have been replaced by a presidential policy of global "energy dominance."
"It has had incredibly positive impacts for the U.S. economy, for the workforce and even our reduced carbon footprint" as shale natural gas has displaced coal at power plants, said John England, head of consultancy Deloitte's U.S. energy and resources practice.Continue reading the main story
U.S. energy exports now compete with Middle East oil for buyers in Asia. Daily trading volumes of U.S. oil futures contracts have more doubled in the past decade, averaging more than 1.2 billion barrels per day in 2017, according to exchange operator CME Group.
The U.S. oil price benchmark, West Texas Intermediate crude, is now watched closely worldwide by foreign customers of U.S. gasoline, diesel and crude.
The question of whether the shale sector can continue at this pace remains an open debate. The rapid growth has stirred concerns that the industry is already peaking and that production forecasts are too optimistic.
The costs of labor and contracted services have recently risen sharply in the most active oilfields; drillable land prices have soared; and some shale financiers are calling on producers to focus on improving short-term returns rather than expanding drilling.
But U.S. producers have already far outpaced expectations and overcome serious challenges, including the recent effort by the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) to sink shale firms by flooding global markets with oil.
The cartel of oil-producing nations backed down in November 2016 and enacted production cuts amid pressure from their own members over low prices - which had plunged to below $27 earlier that year from more than $100 a barrel in 2014.
Shale producers won the price war through aggressive cost-cutting and rapid advances in drilling technology. Oil now trades above $64 a barrel, enough for many U.S. producers to finance both expanded drilling and dividends for shareholders.
BOOMING OIL EXPORTS
Efficiencies spurred by the battle with OPEC - including faster drilling, better well designs and more fracking - helped U.S. firms produce enough oil to successfully lobby for the repeal of a ban on oil exports. In late 2015, Congress overturned the prohibition it had imposed following OPEC's 1973 embargo.
The United States now exports up to 1.7 million barrels per day of crude, and this year will have the capacity to export 3.8 billion cubic feet per day of natural gas. Terminals conceived for importing liquefied natural gas have now been overhauled to allow exports.
That export demand, along with surging production in remote locations such as West Texas and North Dakota, has led to a boom in U.S. pipeline construction. Firms including Kinder Morgan and Enterprise Products Partners added 26,000 miles of liquids pipelines in the five years between 2012 and 2016, according to the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. Several more multi-billion-dollar pipeline projects are on the drawing board.
U.S. drillers say they can supply plenty more.
"We continue to see and drive improvements" in drilling speed and efficiency, said Mathias Schlecht, a technology vice president at Baker Hughes, General Electric Co's oilfield services business.
New wells can be drilled in as little as a week, he said. A few years ago, it could take up to a month.
TECHNOLOGY OPENS UP NEW FIELDS
The next phase of shale output growth depends on techniques to squeeze more oil from each well. Companies are now putting sensors on drill bits to more precisely access oil deposits, using artificial intelligence and remote operators to get the most out of equipment and trained engineers.
As expanded investments push more producers to add wells in less productive regions, technology will help make those plays more profitable, said Kate Richard, chief executive of Warwick Energy Group, which owns interests in more than 5,000 U.S. wells.
In an interview, she estimated about a third of the money from private equity investments in shale will be used to wring more oil from overlooked regions.
Higher prices - up about $10 a barrel in the last two months - also may encourage the industry to work through a backlog of some 7,300 drilled-but-uncompleted shale wells that have built up because of crew and equipment shortages.
The higher prices have suppliers that provide hydraulic fracturing services, such as Keane Group and Liberty Oilfield Services, buying expensive new equipment in anticipation of more work.
U.S. fracking service revenues are expected to grow by 20 percent this year, approaching a record of $29 billion set in 2014, according to oilfield research firm Spears & Associates.
OIL MAJORS JOIN SHALE FRAY
The shale revolution initially upended the traditional industry hierarchy, making billionaires out of wildcatters such as Harold Hamm, who founded Continental Resources, and the late Aubrey McClendon of Chesapeake Energy.
Top U.S. oil firms such as Exxon Mobil and Chevron a decade ago turned much of their focus to foreign fields, leaving smaller firms to develop U.S. shale. Now they're back, buying shale companies, land and shifting more investments back home from overseas.
Exxon last year agreed to pay up to $6.6 billion for land in the Permian basin, the epicenter of U.S. shale. Chevron this year plans to spend $4.3 billion on shale development.
The majors' shift is driving up costs for labor and drillable land in the region, another boost to wages and wealth in rural areas.
In the shale industry hub of Midland, Texas, unemployment has fallen to a mere 2.6 percent, said Willie Taylor, executive director of the Permian Basin Workforce Development Board, a group that helps firms find staff.
https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2018/01/16/business/16reuters-usa-oil-record-shale-analysis.html?_r=0
Companies are now offering signing bonuses to attract workers to West Texas. One oil company flies workers to Midland from Houston weekly to fill a local labor void, he said.
"It was an employer's market," he said. "Now it's more of a job seeker's market."
Additional reporting by Ernest Scheyder; Editing by Gary McWilliams and Brian Thevenot
https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2018/01/16/business/16reuters-usa-oil-record-shale-analysis.html?_r=0
-
America Could Stop Almost Half of Train Crashes. Here’s Why It Doesn’t.
Jan 16, 2018 | Daily Beast
By Winston Ross
Penn Central Commuter Train N-48 was en route to New Canaan, Connecticut, with a three-man crew and 60 to 80 passengers aboard, when disaster struck. The train’s engineer, Frank J. Bojarski, inexplicably ignored an order that should have prompted him to stop the train at the crossing and yield to another train, N-49, headed in the opposite direction.
“He just kept coming at me,” N-49’s engineer, Edward May, would later tell Hearst Newspapers.
Bojarski and a passenger were killed, along with N-49’s conductor and flagman. Forty others were injured. It took five hours to cut May out of the wreckage.
A year later, the National Transportation Safety Board released its findings about the crash. The engineer had ignored an order to pull onto a side track and let May pass, NTSB wrote. (A copy of that order was found on Bojarski’s body.) Among NTSB’s recommendations aimed at preventing another tragedy were to “study the feasibility” of a form of “automatic train control.”
That was on Oct. 23, 1970.
Nearly a half-century later, what’s now known as Positive Train Control has yet to be activated on most passenger rail lines across America. If an engineer doesn’t slow down at an upcoming crossing, curve, or obstacle, PTC kicks in and stops the train. Some 40 percent of all rail accidents are caused by improperly lined switches or human error; by an engineer distracted or literally asleep at the switch.
PTC is on most rail lines across Europe, Japan, and even in large swaths of relatively poor countries like Mozambique and India. But in America, only patches of the rail network have track control. All those countries subsidize safety for passenger rail, which doesn’t make as much money as its lucrative brother, freight rail. The United States’ subsidies for passenger rail are minuscule by comparison.
The latest avoidable tragedy came a few days before Christmas, in DuPont, Washington, when an engineer somehow missed admonitions that he slow Amtrak 501 train from 80 mph to 30 mph as it reached a curve ahead of a bridge across Interstate 5. The 14-car train flew off the tracks, throwing passengers from busted-out windows, killing three people and injuring dozens of others.
NTSB immediately dispatched a team that will within some months discern the cause of the crash. Was the engineer distracted? Asleep? Did his equipment fail? But it doesn’t take a federal investigation for every expert who has studied the crash to agree on one thing: Positive Track Control would have prevented this derailment, and the unnecessary deaths of Benjamin Gran, Jim Hamre, and Zack Willhoite. Positive Track Control would have prevented 145 train crashes between 1969 and 2015; 298 deaths, and nearly 7,000 injuries, according to NTSB. And yet, the implementation of PTC limps along in the U.S., with lawmakers and government officials and rail companies all blaming one another for the delays.
NTSB’s 1970 recommendation was largely ignored, thanks in part to a defiant response from the Federal Railroad Administration, which called the frequency of accidents due to incapacitated engineers’ “so very small” that the installation of an expensive system wouldn’t be worth the investment. Automatic Train Control had been installed on sections of the Northeast Corridor rail line since the 1930s, but it enforced the speeds at signals not at curves. In Europe and Japan, governments began deploying similar technologies beginning in the 1950s.
Years after NTSB called for it, in 1987, Burlington Northern deployed a system of 17 locomotives on 250 miles of tracks in northern Minnesota. The system worked fine, Steven Ditmeyer, the railroad’s former head of research and development, told The Daily Beast, and NTSB added track control to its “most wanted” list of transportation safety improvements in 1990.
The trade group ordered the study destroyed, Ditmeyer says. Burlington Northern’s train control-enamored chairman retired in 1991, and his successor shut down the project, Ditmeyer said. “PTC went into hiatus for the better part of the decade,” he added.
In 1993, the Association of American Railroads put together a study laying out the business case for PTC: Railroads would save fuel and labor costs, traffic control would work better, and the system could monitor the health of locomotives.
The rail industry has since spent tens of millions of dollars lobbying Congress to keep the government from mandating the installation of PTC, all the while complaining publicly that the government doesn’t provide it enough capital for infrastructure improvements.
It wasn’t until 2007, after an increase in preventable rail crashes and after Democrats took over Congress, that lawmakers finally found the political stomach to mandate the installation of PTC, but only on the highest-risk rail lines: passenger and commuter railroads, and those lines that carried more than 5 million gross tons of hazardous materials. The initial deadline was 2018. A 2008 crash in California inspired lawmakers to push that up to 2015. But the railroads successfully lobbied for a three-year extension, back to 2018, with an option for two more years to get the job done, if railroads met certain stipulations.
Ironically, PTC was installed on the rail line of last month’s Amtrak crash in Washington State. It just hadn’t been activated yet.
“This was preventable, the technology was available, and it was installed,” Ditmeyer said. “That makes me angry.”
While Amtrak owned the train, a local agency called Sound Transit owned the tracks, which it purchased from freight operator Burlington Northern Santa Fe. Amtrak’s locomotive was equipped with PTC, and so was the track, but the system hadn’t been switched on. That’s because the line needed testing, Sound Transit spokesman Geoff Patrick told The Daily Beast.
Sound Transit is much farther along installing PTC than most of its national counterparts. The majority of the commuter line’s routes run on BNSF tracks, and 56 percent of the companies trips all have PTC installed and operating. “We’re ahead of two-thirds of commuter rail systems in the country,” Patrick says.
American railroads are a complicated web of ownership scattered amongst freight companies, and local and regional commuter lines. Of 200,000 miles of railroad in the U.S., some 97 percent carries freight, not passengers, Dr. Allan Zarembski, direct of the Railroad Engineering and Safety Program at the University of Delaware, told The Daily Beast.
The freight industry can afford to make infrastructure improvements to its lines because it makes more money on its cargo, Zarembski says. But even the freight industry has made “foolish” decisions that have delayed the rollout of PTC, according to Ditmeyer. The business case for PTC was clear: It wouldn’t just improve safety, it would help railroads run trains more efficiently, closer together, allowing the companies to increase track capacity and use their assets smartly.
But the railroads’ method for installing PTC was to remove existing systems, install brand new ones, and then add track control on top of that, a move that “doubled the cost of PTC and virtually eliminating the possibility of reducing running time,” Ditmeyer says. “They knocked out the business benefits and doubled the cost,” he said, from $5 billion to $10 billion.
Despite that, most of the freight system has finally had PTC installed on its tracks, but passenger rail waits on government handouts for infrastructure upgrades.
Congress has consistently hacked away at federal budget allocations that could have paid for more PTC. In 2016 alone, House Republicans cut Amtrak’s capital grants by $290 million.
The federal government spends more each year on freeway construction than Amtrak has received for capital upgrades in its entire 47-year history.
“There’s no passenger, commuter, or transit system in the world that makes money,” U.S. Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-OR) told The Daily Beast. “They’re always in fiscal distress. They’ve got to choose between keeping the trains running, maintenance, contracting, or new equipment.”
Despite Congress’ mostly unfunded mandate, some tried to meet the original 2015 deadline for PTC, says Zarembski. That’s when they ran into another reason PTC isn’t installed on more rail lines across America: the Federal Communications Commission.
For PTC to work requires an allocation of radio “spectrum,” which is sort of like bandwidth, by the FCC. Freight railroads started buying up all the spectrum they could get their hands on years ago, but the feds have to approve those purchases, and telecommunications companies have fought any allocation outside of those allotted to cellphone and internet bandwidth.
The Association of American Railroads has complained to Congress that there’s a backlog of submissions to the FCC for a review of wayside antennas that have delayed freight rail lines’ ability to implement PTC by 15 months, according to a report from the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure.
“The phone companies want to gobble up all the spectrum in the world, so you can have 10 gigabyte Twitters,” DeFazio, the committee’s ranking member, says. “They’re trying to block us from having spectrum for smart cars, and railroad communications, too.”
NTSB could be weeks or months away from completing its investigation into the Washington State derailment, but the government’s 50-year failure is already clear. This disaster will certainly ramp up pressure on the government and rail companies to make trains an even safer mode of transit than they already are.
https://www.thedailybeast.com/america-could-stop-almost-half-of-train-crashes-heres-why-it-doesnt
-
Another Day of Reckoning for Big Oil’s Role in Climate Change
Jan 16, 2018 | New York Times
By Editorial Board
Mayor Bill de Blasio’s recent declaration of war on Big Oil for its contribution to climate change inspired, as is often the case with this mayor, some skepticism that he was once again seizing a big issue to propel himself into the national spotlight. Some also suggested that if he truly cared about the carbon emissions that cause global warming, he would mothball at least part of the fleet of SUVs that ferry him around the city.
All partly true, perhaps, but Mr. de Blasio’s decision to confront some of the world’s biggest polluters is possibly transformative and certainly timely. It comes just when the Trump administration is moving in the opposite direction, opening up America’s coastal waters to drilling and removing regulatory obstacles to oil exploration, and generally giving fossil fuel companies pretty much what they want. It follows a year of extreme weather events, including three major hurricanes, that collectively caused $306 billion in damage — the most expensive year on record for natural disasters in this country. And it comes as climate scientists are growing increasingly confident about linking these events, or at least their severity, to global warming.
The mayor’s attack is two-pronged. First, he intends to divest the city’s $189 billion pension fund of an estimated $5 billion invested in fossil fuel companies. This puts the city on the same page as a number of other cities, New York State and many colleges, where the divestment movement first took root.
Second, of potentially more consequence, he announced that the city was suing five big oil companies — ExxonMobil, Chevron, BP, Royal Dutch Shell and Conoco Phillips — to hold them accountable for emissions that have helped drive up global temperatures and to force the companies to fork over billions of dollars in damages to help cope with the effects of climate change, steps like fortifying coastal protections against flooding and upgrading sewer systems.
The suit says the five companies have contributed more than 11 percent of all the greenhouse gases since the industrial age began. Locally, it claims that rising sea levels and the storm surges caused by atmospheric changes attributable to these gases contributed heavily to the $19 billion in damages inflicted on the city by Hurricane Sandy. The suit is hardly a slam dunk: Among the obstacles will be establishing relationships between emissions and weather events, and surmounting the industry’s claim that the consumers of fossil fuels are no less culpable. Summarizing the companies’ generally contemptuous point of view, a Chevron spokesman called the suit “factually and legally meritless” and said it would benefit only special interests.
Whatever the obstacles, the suit and the discovery process will be useful for many reasons, not least in spotlighting evidence that companies like Exxon had long known from their own scientists about the damage their products would cause the environment while at the same time underwriting advocacy groups whose main purpose was to confuse the public by denying the very existence of climate change. This is the essence of an investigation of Exxon begun two years ago by New York’s attorney general, Eric Schneiderman, and joined by other states, to try to determine whether Exxon had defrauded shareholders by failing to disclose the risks of continuing to produce a commodity — fossil fuels — whose value would inevitably decline once the world decided (as it did in the 2015 Paris agreement on climate change) that it needed less of it.
The two cases are quite different. The Schneiderman investigation is about financial fraud, the de Blasio suit about potentially huge civil damages. But both are about reparations, and both could speed the day of corporate reckoning.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/15/opinion/big-oil-climate-change-nyc.html
-
Oregon Considers Cap-And-Trade System for Carbon Emissions
Jan 15, 2018 | Seattle Times
By Cassandra Profita
Oregon lawmakers are considering a major change in how the state will go about reducing its contributions to climate change.
Right now, there’s nothing to stop a lot of Oregon businesses from pumping carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
The Clean Energy Jobs Bill introduced last week would launch a cap-and-trade system that would limit some of those emissions and charge businesses for the right to pollute.
The system would be similar to existing programs in California and some Canadian provinces.
Basically, Oregon’s cap-and-trade system would work this way: The state would set a cap on total greenhouse emissions, and about 100 companies in the state’s largest industries would be required to buy pollution permits to cover their emissions.
The bill requires permits for a business emitting more than 25,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent. That includes a variety of large manufacturers, paper mills, fuel distributors and utilities.
Over time, the cap will come down and fewer pollution permits will be available. So companies will have to reduce their emissions, spend more on permits or buy credits to offset their emissions.
Cap and trade is different from just setting laws that limit emissions.
This system would create a new marketplace for pollution credits that companies can buy and sell. It would be designed to link up with existing markets in California and Canadian provinces, so a company in Oregon could buy pollution credits from a business in California.
It also creates a market for offset projects, so a forest landowner in Oregon could sell the carbon sequestration credits from not cutting down trees. Buying an offset credit may be a cheaper option for companies that need to reduce their emissions or buy a pollution permit.
Creators of the bill call it a “cap and invest” program because the state could make an estimated $700 million a year from selling pollution permits. That money would then be invested in projects that expand public transit, solar power, electric vehicles and home-energy efficiency upgrades that will help reduce the state’s overall greenhouse-gas emissions.
How much would this kind of system cut the state’s greenhouse-gas emissions?
The bill mandates reductions down to 80 percent of 1990 emission levels by 2050. Supporters say that’s the only way the state is ever going to meet its targets for reducing carbon emissions. Right now, the state is way behind on the climate goals it set in 2007.
“That’s what brings urgency to this,” said state Sen. Michael Dembrow, who helped create the bill as the chair of the Senate Environment and Natural Resources Committee. “It’s very clear we’re not going to get there if we don’t have the discipline of a program that sets a cap each year and gradually brings us down.”
Environmental groups point to California’s cap-and-trade program and its recent renewal as proof that this kind of system can reduce emissions and generate revenue without hurting the economy.
A lot of industries are opposed to a cap-and-trade system in Oregon because they say it will inevitably raise prices for all kinds of energy, which affects businesses as well as the cost of living for everyday people.
Oregon Business & Industry, the Oregon Farm Bureau and Northwest Food Processors Association, which together represent thousands of businesses across the state, have all spoken out against the Clean Energy Jobs Bill.
“This legislation is harmful to farmers and ranchers in Oregon because it increases our cost of production and makes us less competitive,” said Jenny Dresler of the Oregon Farm Bureau. “Raising the price of gas, electricity and natural gas on everybody will simply make it harder for Oregon family farms to survive to the next generation.”
The bill is designed to address some of these concerns by setting revenue aside to help low-income families, displaced workers and rural areas adapt to the new policy and the effects of climate change.
The bill’s chances for passage this year are not clear.
There’s a chance the bill will pass this session but it will depend on what else lawmakers have to tackle. If Measure 101, the so-called health-care “provider tax,” doesn’t pass, lawmakers will likely be too busy with health-care issues to address cap and trade.
After months of work-group sessions, though, lawmakers now have a detailed proposal to work with. The program isn’t scheduled to launch until 2021, so the Legislature could also pick it back up next year.
Oregon Gov. Kate Brown issued a statement outlining her requirements for signing any bill that creates a cap-and-trade system for the state. They include protecting people from utility-rate hikes as the state transitions away from coal-fired power and investing revenues to help rural and underserved communities make the shift to cleaner energy sources.
“It must both grow our economy and reduce pollution,” she said. “Specifically, the policy needs to ensure that as we reduce emissions, Oregon small businesses and manufacturers are not put at a competitive disadvantage in global markets.”
https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/oregon-considers-cap-and-trade-system-for-carbon-emissions/
Industry and Association News
LCSA News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested