Preview Newsletter
AM ACC 5/11/2018
-
(ACC Mentioned) Industry Urges OMB to Back EPA Rule Boosting Policy Cost Considerations
May 10, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Doug Obey
Industry groups are pressing the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to support a draft preliminary EPA rule that would establish greater “consistency” when considering the costs of its regulatory policies, urging OMB to devote resources to the effort... -
(ACC Mentioned) Let's Talk About the Environment
May 10, 2018 | Plastics Technology
By Proper Barney
The Plastics Industry Association (PLASTICS) is taking NPE2018 to introduce This Is Plastics, an online resource designed to arm plastics-industry employees with information and talking points to answer consumer questions and correct mistaken beliefs they may have about the material. -
(ACC Mentioned) Daily on Energy: FERC Chief Questions Rick Perry’s Coal, Nuclear Plan
May 10, 2018 | Washington Examiner
By John Siciliano & Josh Siegel
...Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt was in comfortable terrain Wednesday, meeting with industry representatives as part of the agency’s revived “Smart Sectors” program to discuss the status of his deregulatory agenda. -
(ACC Mentioned) Purging Compound Market Report Highlights The Competitive Scenario With Impact Of Drivers And Challenges 2025
May 11, 2018 | Investor Opinion
By mohit@coherentmarketinsights.com
Purging compound is used for cleaning plastic machinery such as injection molding machines, extruders, and blow molding machines. -
Fuel Giant Sasol Is Transforming into a Chemicals Powerhouse
May 10, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Paul Burkhardt
Sasol Ltd. built its business making fuel from coal, shielding apartheid-era South Africa from sanctions. This year, the start-up of a huge new ethylene plant in Louisiana will complete the group’s conversion into a global chemicals player. -
New Ventures Try Again to Recycle Polystyrene
May 10, 2018 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Michael McCoy
Big plastics producers are joining with two start-up companies to pursue what is currently an unrealized goal: large-scale recycling of polystyrene. -
(ACC Mentioned) EPA Signals It Will Ban Toxic Chemical Found in Paint Strippers
May 10, 2018 | Washington Post
By Dino Grandoni and Brady Dennis
The Environmental Protection Agency signaled on Thursday it will follow through on an Obama-era proposal to ban paint strippers containing a toxic chemical – leaving lawmakers, environmental groups and the families of victims cautiously optimistic. -
(ACC Mentioned) After Families' Push, EPA Plans to Finalize Obama-Era Paint-Stripper Ban
May 10, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Dave Reynolds
Amid lobbying by families of consumers and workers killed from exposure to the paint-stripper chemical methylene chloride, EPA has reversed course, saying it now intends to soon finalize an Obama-era rule expected to ban certain uses of the substance... -
EPA Will Soon Take Stance on Toxic Paint-Stripping Solvent (1)
May 10, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
The EPA will soon decide whether restrictions on methylene chloride’s use for paint and coating removal are needed after at least 17 bathtub remodelers died from their use of the solvent. -
Shale Gas Exporters to Gain as Iran Move Encourages Drilling
May 11, 2018 | Bloomberg
By Ryan Collins and Naureen S Malik
Another darling of the Trump administration is poised to gain from the Iran deal breakup as oil surges: Natural gas exports. -
Pentagon Warns Against Offshore Drilling in Eastern Gulf of Mexico
May 10, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
Offshore oil and natural gas drilling in the eastern part of the Gulf of Mexico would likely be incompatible with military training and testing, the Pentagon is warning lawmakers. -
Senator Eyes Oil Tax to Punish Canada Over Alaska Drilling Clash
May 10, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ari Natter
Alaska’s congressional delegation worked feverishly last year to achieve the decades-long dream of drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge but they met resistance from Canada. -
Firefighters Fail to Sway EPA as Locals Manage Chemical Risks
May 10, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sam Pearson
The call to police came in on a winter night in 2017 in McIntosh, an Alabama town with fewer than 300 people: Chlorine gas was leaking at one of the town’s chemical plants. -
(ACC Mentioned) U.S. Leads Efforts to Keep Discussion of Conflicts of Interest off the Table at UN Climate Talks
May 9, 2018 | Think Progress
By Natasha Geiling
For nine days, representatives from governments across the globe have been meeting in Bonn, Germany, to hammer out details of the Paris climate agreement. -
Pruitt's Focus on Costs in Shortened NAAQS Process Raises Legal Doubts
May 10, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Stuart Parker
EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt in a new memo is dramatically shortening the process through which the agency reviews its six national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS), but his order for consideration of economic impacts as part of the review process... -
Illinois Readies Early Suit over EPA'S 2015 Ozone NAAQS Designations
May 10, 2018 | Inside EPA
Illinois is preparing to sue EPA over its decision to designate a Wisconsin county as meeting the 2015 ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS), in what will likely be one of several lawsuits challenging the agency's April 30 list of areas meeting or violating the air quality limits. -
Trump Admin Kills NASA Project Monitoring Greenhouse Gas Emissions
May 10, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Jacqueline Thomsen
President Trump’s administration quietly killed a NASA project that monitored whether countries were reducing their greenhouse gas emissions, stoking fears about efforts to decrease global emissions, Science magazine reported. -
Bipartisan Bill Would Authorize Doe Fossil Office
May 11, 2018 | E&E Daily
By Christa Marshall
House lawmakers introduced legislation yesterday to boost carbon capture technologies and reauthorize the Department of Energy's fossil office for the first time in more than a decade. -
Democrat Calls Pruitt Move on Clean Air Act Reviews 'Illegal'
May 10, 2018 | E&E News PM
By Sean Reilly
Initial congressional reaction to a newly announced overhaul of EPA policies for setting air pollution standards broke sharply along party lines, as several congressional Republicans today hailed it as a needed fix to a flawed process... -
House Environment Panel to Weigh Bill Easing NSR Permit Program
May 11, 2018 | Inside EPA
The House Energy & Commerce Committee's environment panel will hold a hearing May 16 on a discussion draft bill to ease the Clean Air Act new source review (NSR) air permit program for industry, aiming for a legislative solution that would go beyond recent EPA guidance... -
Apple Backs Alcoa, Rio Tinto to Develop Carbon-Free Metal Making
May 10, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Mark Gurman and Joe Deaux
Apple Inc. is backing a joint venture between metal producers Alcoa Corp. and Rio Tinto Group to develop a new aluminum-making process that eliminates greenhouse gases.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) Industry Urges OMB to Back EPA Rule Boosting Policy Cost Considerations
May 10, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Doug Obey
Industry groups are pressing the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to support a draft preliminary EPA rule that would establish greater “consistency” when considering the costs of its regulatory policies, urging OMB to devote resources to the effort and broadly playing down legal obstacles to consideration of costs in future rules.
Groups including the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM), American Petroleum Institute (API), American Forest and Paper Association (AF&PA) and the American Chemistry Council (ACC) have been meeting with OMB officials in recent weeks to discuss a draft advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR) that the agency says is intended to remedy past “nontransparent” internal EPA policies on the issue.
Industry sources who attended the meetings say they are urging OMB to advance the effort and ensure EPA is aggressive in considering rules' costs when environmental statutes allow.
“Our pitch is that . . . there is enough of an issue here that it makes sense as to evaluate whether this process [for considering costs] is working as well as it should for rulemakings, says one source familiar with the meetings.
The source characterizes discussion of the issue as at an early stage, and says groups are broadly urging OMB to allow EPA to move forward. The source adds it is not clear whether the process, should it proceed, would generate one rule or multiple rules.
“OMB is trying to figure out . . . how many resources do they want to spend doing this. We are saying there is enough here that you ought to spend some resources.”
Another source familiar with the meetings agrees that EPA's precise plan is somewhat vague, but it appears “they are going to be asking questions more than they are going to be providing a lot of answers on what they are doing,” the source says -- an approach typical of an ANPR.
Sources say this approach is already prompting groups to raise a “laundry list” of issues, ranging from general pitches to broaden use of cost-benefit analysis to more specific complaints on specific methodologies for calculating costs in rules.
The first source cites as just one example complaints about EPA's tendency not to take into account operating costs at specific facilities installing Clean Air Act controls that could render the controls uneconomic. And the source notes more broadly that different laws set up different test for consideration of costs, and sometimes different thresholds for weighing costs in the same statute.
Such approaches, if adopted, will almost certainly anger environmentalists, who have long criticized overly aggressive cost considerations, which they say usually come at the expense of adequately considering the benefits of regulation.
OMB's website shows three meetings at OMB in recent weeks, an April 23 meeting that included NAM, the National Association of Chemical Distributors, ACC and the Independent Petroleum Association of America.
An April 25 meeting convened at the request of the AF&PA includes the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, ACC the Business Roundtable, and other industry representatives.
And OMB on May 3 also met with American Petroleum Institute and companies including ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips, Chevron and Marathon Petroleum.
EPA Latitude
Background materials for the April 25 meeting appear to broadly make a case for the agency resolving any ambiguities in its statutory authority to consider costs, in favor of the presumption that it can do so, though it is not entirely clear how this might translate into an upcoming agency rule or rules.
The materials include March 14 Capitol Hill testimony by AF&PA's Vice President for Public Policy Paul Noe suggesting that recent high court rulings have given agencies greater latitude to implement “cost benefit balancing” unless prohibited by law.
Another document, an April 2016 article by Noe and John Graham, who led the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs during the Bush administration, makes similar points, arguing that the Supreme Court in recent years has reversed what had been a longstanding presumption against cost benefit balancing in regulations unless clearly permitted in the statute.
A third handout provided to OMB -- a 2010 law review article by Jonathan Masur and Eric Posner -- criticizes “feasibility analysis” approaches inherent in some statutes, which can appear to require stringent rules without consideration of costs, embracing instead “cost-benefit” approaches allowed in other statutes including the Toxic Substances Control Act.
The article urges federal agencies to choose a cost-benefit approach in their rules whenever the statute allows, noting that the courts often give agencies deference on such questions under the Supreme Court's Chevron doctrine.
How such suggestions would figure into a specific EPA rule or rules is not entirely clear, but the background documents appear to support arguments that EPA has more latitude to explicitly consider costs in some rules than the agency has done previously.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/industry-urges-omb-back-epa-rule-boosting-policy-cost-considerations
-
(ACC Mentioned) Let's Talk About the Environment
May 10, 2018 | Plastics Technology
By Proper Barney
The Plastics Industry Association (PLASTICS) is taking NPE2018 to introduce This Is Plastics, an online resource designed to arm plastics-industry employees with information and talking points to answer consumer questions and correct mistaken beliefs they may have about the material.
Many consumers take for granted—or are simply unaware of—the array of benefits plastics offer. All too often, those in the industry are left wondering what to say when conversation with family or friends turns to important but complicated topics—like plastic marine litter and recycling.
This Is Plastics (ThisIsPlastics.com) is a feature-rich resource designed to frame that conversation with facts. Articles, infographics and interactive quizzes highlight five key topics—Plastics 101, Environment, Safety, Innovation, and Economic Impact.
On the Environmental front? While most Americans are aware that recycling has a positive impact on the environment, they may be unaware that PLASTICS has been working with manufacturers to reduce the amount of plastic that gets wasted.
“We help educate about recycling and partner with recycling organizations to do our part to fund initiatives that are consumer-focused,” says Mia Quinn, vice president of communications for PLASTICS.
Some of these partner organizations include the Sustainable Packaging Coalition, the Recycling Partnership, and Keep America Beautiful. “We collaborate with (these) organizations to fight pollution and to make recycling easier and more available.” The industry can read all about these initiatives on the This Is Plastics website.
PLASTICS has also created the Zero Net Waste (ZNW) program to keep as much plastic as possible out of landfills. To receive ZNW honors, a company must reuse or recycle all materials generated during the manufacturing process. It cannot send any by-products to landfills. “Through this program,” Quinn says, “PLASTICS hopes to drive the industry toward waste reduction and maximum recovery of resources, consistent with the sustainable materials management model being embraced by leaders and regulatory agencies around the globe.”
Moreover, PLASTICS has created Operation Clean Sweep (OCS) in conjunction with the American Chemistry Council. Quinn states, “OCS was created with the goal to help every plastic handling operation contain pellet, flake, and powder loss.” These waste materials can travel to the ocean through rivers and estuaries, harming the birds and marine animals that mistake them for food. “That’s why the industry is behind zero pellet, flake, and powder loss.”
The plastics manufacturing process, in general, has a smaller carbon footprint than does other, competing manufacturing processes, such as glass manufacture. Even so, PLASTICS has recognized the need to make the plastic industry as green as possible and is now doing its best to share that information with the industry. Visit ThisIsPlastics.com to check out the online toolkit and arm yourself and your team with pride in the industry you serve.
https://www.ptonline.com/articles/plastics-works-with-industry-to-recycle-reduce-waste
-
(ACC Mentioned) Daily on Energy: FERC Chief Questions Rick Perry’s Coal, Nuclear Plan
May 10, 2018 | Washington Examiner
By John Siciliano & Josh Siegel
FERC CHAIRMAN SAYS PERRY’S COAL, NUCLEAR PLAN NOT AN ‘OBVIOUS FIT’: Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Chairman Kevin McIntyre says Energy Secretary Rick Perry’s proposed use of a Cold War-era law to help out coal and nuclear plants is “perhaps not the most obvious fit” when considering how to handle power plant retirements.
“It’s perhaps not the most obvious fit,” but “I am sure DOE has a handle on that issue,” McIntyre said. Perry is considering using the 1950s Defense Production Act or another related law that were meant to keep power plants running during wartime.
• The Trump plan: The Trump administration’s controversial strategy on addressing nuclear and coal plant retirements has become a huge part of the president’s energy agenda and a major sticking point for many industry groups that are opposing it.
McIntyre was speaking at a electric grid conference put on by the Washington Post Thursday. He was asked by the moderator about Perry’s potential use of various laws to bail out power plants after FERC rejected a plan Perry proposed in the fall.
• Democratic view: Sen. Martin Heinrich, D-N.M., who spoke on a panel before McIntyre, said the idea of “baseload has become a political term” when asked about Perry’s use of various laws to try and save baseload coal and nuclear.
“Baseload” refers to plants that can run 24-hours without interruption.
Heinrich said coal plants “go down,” but solar and wind are reliable if they are managed right. Perry’s proposal is “just not market based,” the senator said. It’s a measure meant to bail out a “few uneconomic” power plants.
• GOP view: Sen. John Hoeven, R,N.D., said one has “to be careful when you say market based.” He said his state is a microcosm for many of the problems affecting the grid, because it has both coal and renewables.
He said some policies undermine baseload resources based on tax burdens and conflicts over who has access to transmission lines.
• Skeptical: Hoeven appeared skeptical of Perry taking steps that would nationalize private power plants. “I don’t favor nationalizing anything,” he said. The panel’s moderator suggested the use of the Defense Production Act would be akin to nationalizing private power plants.
• Come together around transmission: Nevertheless, the lawmakers suggested that transmission line policy is one area where Republicans and Democrats can come together.
• Energy bill hope: Hoeven was hopeful that the Senate will pass a comprehensive energy bill. “I’ll think we’ll get there on the energy bill.”
The bill died last Congress in the final stages of a House-Senate conference during the presidential election. House members thought they could get a better deal under Trump and withdrew from the deliberations.
Welcome to Daily on Energy, compiled by Washington Examiner Energy and Environment Writers John Siciliano (@JohnDSiciliano) and Josh Siegel (@SiegelScribe). Email dailyonenergy@washingtonexaminer.com for tips, suggestions, calendar items and anything else. If a friend sent this to you and you’d like to sign up, click here. If signing up doesn’t work, shoot us an email and we’ll add you to our list.
TRUMP’S ‘HAIL MARY’ TO SAVE COAL AND NUCLEAR DRAWS SKEPTICISM: Perry’s statement Wednesday that the the Trump administration is looking “very closely” at using at using the Defense Production Act to save coal and nuclear plants sparked skepticism from energy experts and industry officials, who questioned how legislation designed to protect national security could apply.
• What the law does: The law allows the president to prioritize the federal government’s ability to obtain critical, scarce industrial materials in a time of war, ensuring the government can buy the goods before others.
The law also can be used to spur an industry to produce more of a scarce critical resource through a loan guarantee or direct subsidy, effectively nationalizing it.
The statute, as amended in 1980, classifies energy as a "strategic and critical material," although it does not give the president the authority to set the price of fuels or electricity.
• Awkward fit: Sen. Joe Manchin, a Democrat from the coal state of West Virginia, has urged Perry to invoke the law to prevent planned closures of financially struggling nuclear and coal plants by Ohio utility FirstEnergy.
Energy experts say using the Defense Production Act for that reason would stretch the law beyond what it's meant for because there is no imminent national security threat from the plants closing in several years.
Experts also note that electricity is not scarce as a result of lost coal and nuclear power.
TOXIC ‘VOG’ FROM KILAUEA THREATENING TO SPREAD IN HAWAII: A change in wind patterns could have dangerous consequences in Hawaii later this week as residents deal with Kilauea’s eruptions.
The volcano on Hawaii's Big Island first erupted a week ago. Since then, lava has flowed from fissures, wrecking dozens of structures and forcing thousands of residents to evacuate.
• Dangerous gas: Also seeping from the fissures is poisonous gas known as "vog." According to the Hawaii Interagency Vog Information Dashboard, vog is "hazy air pollution caused by the volcanic emissions from Kīlauea volcano, which are primarily water vapor (H2O), carbon dioxide (CO2), and sulfur dioxide (SO2) gas."
• Wind patterns: The vog has only beset the southern and western side of the Big Island, but an expected shift later this week in the northeasterly trade winds could mean trouble for the state’s other islands, AccuWeather forecasters warn. The islands that could be affected include Maui, Oahu, Lanai, and Molokai.
• The threat: The sulfur dioxide in the vog can cause respiratory problems, including irritation and difficulty breathing, and concentrated levels of it can be deadly. Meanwhile, the small amount of sulfuric acid in vog can slowly damage painted surfaces and metals.
FERC GETS MANY VIEWS ON GRID RESILIENCE: FERC received many different views on grid resilience, as its comment period ended at midnight, an issue that has become a controversial part of the Trump administration’s policy agenda.
Here’s a rundown of some of the industry groups responding to how the FERC-overseen grid operators are defining resilience:
• Power lines: The transmission industry group WIRES says resilience is less about power plants and more about the wires that connect those plants to the sources of demand – homes and businesses.
“Because grid resilience will only increase in importance as the economy continues to become more dependent on electricity, consumers have a large stake in development of a modern and robust transmission system that delivers power for tasks as varied as texting and emailing to life-saving medical procedures and transportation,” the group said.
• Utilities: The Electric Power Supply Association, representing utilities, made the point that FERC’s process is the right way to assess resilience, while making clear that Perry’s proposed rule that FERC rejected was not.
“Certainly, any hasty short term ‘fixes’ invoked based on speculative concerns cannot and should not be supported or approved by the commission, particularly calls to subsidize specific types of resources at the expense of well-functioning competitive markets and all other market participants,” the group wrote.
Perry proposed giving coal and nuclear plants market-based subsidies.
“Tipping the scales in this manner is not the way to ensure a reliable, resilient, secure system, and may in fact overturn the cup entirely,” EPSA said.
HOUSE PASSES BILL ADVANCING YUCCA MOUNTAIN AS NUCLEAR WASTE SITE: The House passed legislation Thursday that would move forward a long-stalled plan to store the nation’s nuclear waste in Nevada’s Yucca Mountain.
• What the bill does: The bill, sponsored by Rep. John Shimkus, R-Ill., would direct the Energy Department to authorize an interim storage program before the Nuclear Regulatory Commission completes the licensing process for Yucca. The temporary site would be used until Yucca is opened.
It would establish a time limit for the commission to approve the project and would make a necessary land transfer.
• ‘Screw Nevada’: The bill is expected to pass by bipartisan margins, but will face resistance in the Senate by powerful senators from Nevada. The Senate, which holds a one-seat GOP majority, may never vote on the bill.
“I'm here to send a message that we are going to continue fighting this tooth and nail here in Congress, in the Senate, here in the House, and also if need be, we will continue fighting this in the legal courts,” said Rep. Ruben Kihuen, D-Nev., in comments on the House floor Thursday.
Rep. Dina Titus, D-Nev., deemed the legislation“screw Nevada 2.0.”
PERRY VOWS TO ‘FOLLOW THE LAW’ ON YUCCA MOUNTAIN: Perry on Wednesday vowed to “follow the law” if Congress approves legislation spurring the use of Yucca Mountain to store nuclear waste.
He also said the licensing process will continue to move forward, regardless of what Congress does.
“The important aspect of this issue is that I have a requirement of law to take this licensing process forward,” Perry said in testimony before the House Science, Space and Technology Committee. “The debate about Yucca Mountain, whether it should be open or shouldn't, has been ongoing for a long time. My responsibility here is not to tell you whether I am for Yucca or against Yucca. It's too follow the law and the law says DOE will go forward with the licensing side.”
• Long history: Yucca Mountain is the nation’s only approved geologic repository for high-level nuclear waste. But opposition from Nevada lawmakers has stalled the 30-year effort to develop the Yucca site.
PERRY URGES SAUDI ARABIA TO SIGN NUCLEAR ENERGY DEAL WITH US: Perry prodded Saudi Arabia on Wednesday to sign a nuclear energy agreement with the U.S., warning the oil-rich kingdom that it risks missing out on an opportunity to show its commitment to using nuclear power responsibly.
"If they don't, the message will be clear to the rest of the world that the kingdom is not as concerned about being leaders when it comes to nonproliferation in the Middle East," Perry told the Science, Space and Technology Committee.
• Count to three: The Trump administration is considering allowing the Saudis to enrich and reprocess uranium as part of what’s known as a nuclear cooperation agreement, or a “123 agreement.”
In exchange, the U.S. would permit Westinghouse, a bankrupt nuclear reactor business, and other American companies to build nuclear reactors in Saudi Arabia.
ZINKE SAYS NATIONAL PARKS REPAIR PLAN ‘SOUND AND PRUDENT’: Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke on Thursday justified his plan to repair national parks with energy revenue as “sound and prudent policy,” as some Democrats questioned the plan.
“It is a sound and prudent policy,” Zinke said in testimony before a subcommittee of the Senate Appropriations Committee on his fiscal 2019 budget proposal. “My priority with this budget is infrastructure repair.”
Zinke’s plan: Zinke has proposed paying for billions of dollars of repairs and maintenance in national parks with money the government collects from the development of oil, natural gas, wind, and solar energy on public lands.
The plan would create the Public Lands Infrastructure Fund of up to $18 billion over 10 years for maintenance and improvements in national parks, wildlife refuges, and Bureau of Indian Education schools. It would use royalty payments and lease sales on federal onshore and offshore lands.
• Money matters: Bipartisan coalitions in both chambers of Congress have endorsed the proposal with matching legislation. But some Democrats questioned whether Interior can raise the money it aims to.
“None of this will get done unless there’s money in the accounts,” said Sen. Jon Tester, D-Mont.
CALIFORNIA FIRST STATE MANDATING SOLAR PANELS ON HOMES: California on Wednesday became the first state to require solar panels on all new, single-family homes.
The California Energy Commission voted 5-0 to approve changes to the state’s building code to require single-family homes be equipped with solar panels starting in 2020.
The regulations also apply to new multi-family buildings of three stories or fewer. The new rules don't need the approval of the legislature or the governor.
• Cost balance: Supporters say the proposal will save costs in the long-term, even as housing costs increase in the short-term, and is a key piece of California’s plan to goal to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030.
• Storage key: A new rate structure the state is implementing next year charges California customers based on when during the day they use electricity. Those with solar power likely would pay less, especially if paired with batteries, which can store excess solar for use when the sun isn’t shining.
PRUITT INSISTS HE HAS CONFIDENCE FROM WHITE HOUSE: Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt was in comfortable terrain Wednesday, meeting with industry representatives as part of the agency’s revived “Smart Sectors” program to discuss the status of his deregulatory agenda.
Pruitt met at EPA headquarters with more than 80 people from groups including the National Mining Association, National Association of Home Builders, the American Chemistry Council, and the American Petroleum Institute.
• Inside the room: According to Bloomberg, Pruitt told the group they no longer had to choose between protecting the environment and industry, and he outlined plans to accelerate permitting of new factories and refineries.
He did not mention his ethics and spending scandals with the group, but was asked by a Bloomberg reporter if he believes he has the confidence of the White House. “I think they’ve spoken very clearly,” Pruitt said.
• ‘We like him’: Marc Short, the White House’s legislative director, told reporters Wednesday the administrator would remain in his position “for the foreseeable future.”
“We like him,” Short said. “He’s doing a good job.”
SLAP ON WRIST FOR HEWITT AFTER MEETING WITH PRUITT: MSNBC host Hugh Hewitt was given a proverbial slap on the wrist Wednesday after it was found out his law firm requested a meeting Pruitt.
Hewitt "was given a verbal warning as such activity is a violation of our standards," said a network representative.
News about the conservative commentator’s law firm trying to arrange a meeting with Pruitt came earlier in the week with the release of internal emails from the EPA. The emails were the result of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit by environmental group Sierra Club.
• Toxic waste and Hewitt: The email showed the MSNBC host asking Pruitt for a meeting with his law firm, which represented a water district seeking federal assistance to clean up a toxic waste site in California, near where Hewitt lives.
The site was placed on Pruitt's list of areas designated for "immediate and intense" action soon after the meeting with Hewitt attorneys. Politico first reported the news on Tuesday.
MORE LNG, PLEASE: The Energy Department wrapped up the public comment period for a significant expansion of the Jordan Cove natural gas export in Coos Bay, Ore., at midnight.
• LNG is huge: The liquified natural gas export terminal wants to increase the volume it ships from the facility to the equivalent of 395 billion cubic feet per year, from it original intent of less than 300 Bcf per year.
The new rate of export would be the equivalent of shipping one billion cubic feet of natural gas per day.
• A lot of LNG: To give some sense of scale, natural gas power plants consumed just over 22 Bcf per day in 2013, and an average home consumes just 168 cubic feet of natural gas. One Bcf per day could supply close to 6 million homes.
• Any protests? The Energy Department held the comment period to hear “Protests, motions to intervene, notices of intervention, and written comments addressing the amendment.”
Facilities such as Jordan Cove are at the center of President Trump’s “energy dominance” agenda that supports increased domestic production while upping energy exports abroad.
LNG INDUSTRY GROUP GETS BIGGER: The Center for Liquefied Natural Gas announced Thursday that Baltimore-based Constellation is joining the trade group. Constellation, owned by utility giant Exelon, is now a major supplier of electricity, natural gas and energy products and services for homes and businesses.
• LNG goes electric: The trade groups wants to work with the big utility to raise awareness of LNG’s many uses.
“Constellation is a welcome addition to the Center for LNG, representing the importance and flexibility of LNG in the U.S. market and as an export,” said Charlie Riedl, executive director of the group.
• Defender of LNG exports: Constellation has been defending the shipment of LNG abroad as a benefit for consumers. “Detractors, meanwhile, argue that as more American natural gas begins to go abroad, domestic customers may be left with higher prices,” the company said in a blog late last year. “However, the growth of the natural gas market has served to undercut prices on other energy sources for domestic customers, so it is imperative that consumers stay vigilant and keep informed on the latest developments.
ALASKA’S ICE NURSERY IS FAILING: The iceberg nursery near Alaska is failing as warming temperatures have made it harder to churn out sea ice year after year, the federal government warned Wednesday.
The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration issued a new analysis with maps detailing how older Arctic sea ice is being lost north of Alaska and the likelihood that it will never be replaced.
"The Beaufort Gyre north of Alaska has traditionally acted as a nursery for growing sea ice, but warmer conditions have impeded the gyre's ability to preserve older ice since the start of the 21st century," according to the agency.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/daily-on-energy-ferc-chief-questions-rick-perrys-coal-nuclear-plan
-
May 11, 2018 | Investor Opinion
By mohit@coherentmarketinsights.com
Purging compound is used for cleaning plastic machinery such as injection molding machines, extruders, and blow molding machines. The formulation of resin compound contains a base resin and additives. Purging compound is used to remove contaminations and black specks or after a color and resin change in plastic manufacturing machineries. High temperature resins such as polyusulfones and polyether ether ketone; engineered resins such as polyamide and polystyrene; and polyolefins such as polyethylene and polypropylene are few polymers that needs to be purged using purging compound. It improves product quality and reduces downtime of the thermoplastic extruders and molding machines. The correct usage of purging compounds can help in reducing the time that is required for cleaning the machine.
Market Dynamics
The use of purging compounds aid in improving productivity, saves time and material, reduces screw pulls, lowers scrapes, and reduced wear and tear of machines and this is driving growth of the global purging compound market. Furthermore, purging compounds are superior to conventional purging methods such as regrind resin and flushing with the next resin. These purging compounds facilitate carbon removal and color deposits in the product, which is another key factor fueling demand for purging compounds. Moreover, increasing use of plastics in wide application such as packaging, automotive, and construction industries, among others, which in turn is fueling growth of the purging compounds market. According to Coherent Market Insights’ analysis, global plastic packaging market was valued at US$ 300 billion in 2017 and is estimated to expand at a CAGR of 5.3% in terms of revenue during 2018–2025. Increasing usage of home and personal care products, rising demand for PET Bottles due to the increasing consumption of soft drinks are some of the factors fuelling the growth of the market for plastic packaging, which in turn is fuelling the growth of the market for purging compounds. Furthermore, the market for molded plastics is expected to cross the US$ 200 billion market by end of 2025.
However, high production cost of purging compounds is a major factor hindering growth of the global purging compound market.
Market Trends
Mechanical purging compound segment accounted for the dominant share in 2016, in the market, owing to advantages such as effectiveness in removing impurities as compared to that of an unfilled polymer. The mechanical purging compound works by scrubbing the machine clean by means of abrasive material.
On the basis of process, the extrusion segment was the dominant segment in the market in 2017, and is expected to retain its dominance throughout the forecast period. Favorable compounding, efficient melting, high productivity, and cost effectiveness are some of the advantages of this process and are factors expected to drive growth of this segment. Extrusion process is commonly used in manufacturing of products such as tubes, sheets, films, filaments, cords, coat wires, cables, and rods. Furthermore, opening of extrusion process machine is not required for using purging compounds thereby, saving time and increasing efficiency.
Market Outlook
North America was the dominant region in the global purging compound market in 2017, owing to increasing production and demand for plastic resins. According to American Chemistry Council, thermoplastics production in the U.S. in 2015 was 42.8 million metric tons, which increased by 1.5% in 2016 to 43.4 million metric tons. Furthermore, sales and captive use of thermoplastics in 2015 was 43.5 million metric tons, which increased by 1.4% to 44.1 million metric tons in 2016.
Europe is a lucrative market for purging compounds, as demand for good quality plastic products is increasing in the region. According to Plastics Europe, pan-European trade association, 70% of the plastic demand is concentrated in Germany, Italy, France, the U.K., Spain, and Poland. Thus, there is a significant demand for purging compounds in these countries. Furthermore, plastic production in Europe, in 2015, was 58 million tons, which increased to 60 million tons in 2016.
Asia Pacific market is expected to exhibit significant growth over the forecast, due to rising demand for plastics in the region. According to India Brand Equity Foundation (IBEF)—established by the Department of Commerce, Ministry of Commerce and Industry—the domestic plastic consumption is anticipated to reach 20 million metric tons by 2020. Furthermore, growing demand for plastics in various end-use industries such as packaging, construction, and automotive is fuelling growth of purging compounds market. According to Coherent Market Insights’ analysis, Asia Pacific accounted for 41.8% of the plastic packaging market in 2016 and is expected to retain its dominance throughout the forecast period from 2018-2025.
Key Players and Business Strategies
Some of the major players operating in purging compounds market include Asahi Kasei Corporation, Clariant A.G., CALSAK Corporation, Daicel Corporation, DowDuPont Inc., Formosa Plastics Corporation, Kuraray Co., Ltd., Chem-Trend L.P., Polyplast Muller GmbH, and Claude Bamberger Molding Compounds Corporation.
Some of the key strategies adopted by these players include mergers and acquisitions, joint ventures, and partnerships, product innovations and various others in order to retain their market share and increase product offerings. For instance, in June 2015, Sun Plastech Inc. acquired Asaclean, which is a manufacturer of purging compound. Furthermore, Chem Trend L.P. acquired Ultra Purge business segment from Moulds Plus International USA, Inc. in September 2016. Moreover, in December 2016, Velox GmbH launched new series of purging compound called Cleanplus Express Purge Compound, suitable for quicker material and color change as well as machinery shutdown.
https://opinioninvestor.com/purging-compound-market-report-highlights-the-competitive-scenario-with-impact-of-drivers-and-challenges-2025/520115/
-
Fuel Giant Sasol Is Transforming into a Chemicals Powerhouse
May 10, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Paul Burkhardt
Sasol Ltd. built its business making fuel from coal, shielding apartheid-era South Africa from sanctions. This year, the start-up of a huge new ethylene plant in Louisiana will complete the group’s conversion into a global chemicals player.
The $11 billion Lake Charles project will catapult Sasol’s chemicals revenue to more than 70 percent of the company’s total once fully up and running, and the share is likely to get even bigger over time, co-Chief Executive Officers Bongani Nqwababa and Steve Cornell said in an interview this week at Bloomberg’s Johannesburg offices.
While the group is still looking to expand the number of gas stations it operates in its home market and boost natural gas output in Mozambique, the best international growth opportunities are in specialty chemicals, which are used in products from cosmetics to hardware, Cornell said.
Trends from population growth to urbanization will support strong demand for plastics and chemicals into the future, while oil-consumption growth may be limited beyond 2030, he said.
“Our energy business is mainly Southern Africa, but our chemicals business is global,” Cornell said. “Progressively over time we’ll be more and more chemicals oriented. We’ve got a great base here in our fuels business and we’re going to continue to grow that, but globally you’ve got more opportunity on the chemicals side.”
While Sasol’s operational mix is changing, virtually all corners of the business will continue to be linked to crude prices. The company cut costs and took measures to save cash during the three-year oil price slump, including shelving a $14 billion gas-to-liquids plant also planned in Louisiana.
Sasol reported revenue of 172 billion rand ($13.9 billion) in the year through June 2017 and currently has a market value of about $23 billion. Once Lake Charles is fully operational, the company’s geographic revenue will be evenly split between South Africa and the rest of the world, Nqwababa said.
Lake Charles will produce base chemicals—used to make packaging, bottles and footwear as well as solvents, explosives and fertilizers—as well as specialty chemicals, which have more specific applications and are in high demand. The company’s planned specialty output from Lake Charles is already close to being sold out, Cornell said.
More Investment ComingSasol anticipates $1 billion a year in revenue from the project, after all units are producing by 2020, and about $1.3 billion the following year. More investment is set to follow.
“We’re already looking at bolt-on additions to what we’re building now” at Lake Charles, in order to produce more specialty chemicals, Cornell said. Sasol also expects to finish a $100 million investment to make similar products in China.
The energy sector in South Africa still holds investment opportunities for Sasol. The company wants to almost double its 11 percent retail market share to more closely match the 30 percent of fuel production that it accounts for in the country. It’s not the only one, as Total SA also expects to expand its own service stations.
Retail margins “are quite decent” at present and Sasol’s plans could eventually include charging stations for electric vehicles, Nqwababa said.
Clean Fuel RegsOne potential challenge in South Africa is the prospect of new clean-fuel regulations and what they would mean for the country’s refining industry, Nqwababa said.
“We are developing alternative strategies as to how we respond to that,” he said. Sasol is studying the possibility of increasing output at its synthetic fuel operations in Secunda, as well as considering options for the Natref refinery—co-owned with Total—which would struggle under stricter regulations, Nqwababa said. The results of both studies are expected by November.
Once Lake Charles is completed, Sasol will seek to boost its dividend payout and reduce borrowings. The U.S. project has brought the company’s debt-to-equity ratio to 39 percent, which it would like to reduce to about 30 percent, according to Cornell.
“There will more than likely be a pause on any big growth projects for a few years as we try to bring that down.”
—With assistance from Antony Sguazzin and Gordon Bell.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/fuel-giant-sasol-is-transforming-into-a-chemicals-powerhouse
-
New Ventures Try Again to Recycle Polystyrene
May 10, 2018 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Michael McCoy
Big plastics producers are joining with two start-up companies to pursue what is currently an unrealized goal: large-scale recycling of polystyrene.
In one deal, the polymer business of the French oil giant Total will join with Polystyvert, a Montreal-based start-up, to advance a polystyrene recycling method based on dissolution. In another, the plastics maker Ineos Styrolution will work with Agilyx to advance a depolymerization technology.
In both cases, the companies seek to cost-effectively reuse a plastic that is currently recycled at much lower rates than polyethylene terephthalate and polyethylene, two large-volume competitors. Partly as a result, polystyrene foam products are the subject of ban legislation in U.S. cities such as Baltimore, New York City, and San Francisco.
Polystyrene foam is a recycling challenge because it is 95% air and thus expensive to ship to recycling centers. Moreover, post-consumer polystyrene is often contaminated with food. Although firms such as Plastic Recycling Inc. do recycle post-industrial polystyrene, several high-profile, post-consumer recycling efforts have failed in the past.
Polystyvert’s answer, says founder and CEO Solenne Brouard Gaillot, is to take advantage of polystyrene’s solubility in the solvent cymene. The firm reduces transportation costs by dissolving waste polystyrene in cymene-containing concentrators set up at customer locations. It then brings the polystyrene-rich solvent to a central location where it filters out contaminants and recrystallizes the polymer.
Agilyx, meanwhile, uses pyrolysis to turn polystyrene back into styrene monomer. Last month it opened a “chemical recycling” facility in Tigard, Ore., that can convert up to 10 metric tons per day of polystyrene waste into styrene for sale to Ineos and Americas Styrenics, another plastics firm. On April 26, Agilyx announced a follow-on agreement with Ineos to develop a second plant at or near an Ineos facility in North America.
The techniques each have pros and cons, observes Brian Riise, president and technical director of the consulting firm Sustainable Materials Recovery Group. Agilyx’s approach, for example, closes the raw material loop for polystyrene makers but doesn’t address waste collection issues.
Riise says he’s impressed that big polymer makers are backing both approaches. “If they really have an interest in doing this, they may have to prime the pump,” he says. “It’s not going to be profitable overnight.”
https://cen.acs.org/business/start-ups/New-ventures-try-again-recycle/96/i20
-
(ACC Mentioned) EPA Signals It Will Ban Toxic Chemical Found in Paint Strippers
May 10, 2018 | Washington Post
By Dino Grandoni and Brady Dennis
The Environmental Protection Agency signaled on Thursday it will follow through on an Obama-era proposal to ban paint strippers containing a toxic chemical – leaving lawmakers, environmental groups and the families of victims cautiously optimistic.
Since taking office, Pruitt has been laser-focused on undoing environmental and safety rules proposed by President Barack Obama’s administration. But the EPA’s announcement that it “intends to finalize” a proposed ban on methylene chloride would be the exception.
“Today’s announcement demonstrates EPA’s commitment to finalize the methylene chloride rule-making,” EPA spokesman Jahan Wilcox said in a statement.
The chemical, used by professional contractors and do-it-yourselfers to remove paint, has been linked to dozens of deaths – including 12 people between 2000 and 2011 who specialize in refinishing bathtubs, according to a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention report.
But advocates of the ban reserved full-throated cheers until the rule’s language is made public and submitted to the White House’s Office of Management and Budget, which the EPA said will happen “shortly.”
Sarah Vogel, vice president for health at the Environmental Defense Fund, said the nonprofit advocacy group was “encouraged” by the EPA’s decision but urged the agency to move quickly to formally block the access to the chemical.
“We and families across this country will be watching closely to make sure this administration actually delivers on today’s promise from Administrator Pruitt,” Vogel said. “We will delay any celebration until paint strippers containing this deadly chemical are actually off the market.”
The EPA first proposed banning the use of methylene chloride in paint and coating removal products in the waning days of Obama’s second term. A year earlier, Congress had granted the EPA new powers to restrict the use of that and other chemicals in an amendment to the 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act, the nation’s main chemical safety law.
But in December, the Pruitt’s EPA indefinitely postponed bans on certain uses of methylene chloride and two other deadly chemicals often found in consumer products. For a time, it seemed like the ban was headed to the trash bin, along with many other Obama-era rules after President Trump’s election.
That delay in December kicked off an effort to salvage it.
Several Democratic lawmakers asked Pruitt about the chemical and urged him to ban it in a pair of hearings on Capitol Hill last month. Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.Y.) invoked the deaths of Drew Wynne and Joshua Atkins, who both died from methylene chloride exposure. Pallone asked Pruitt if he had anything to say to those families given the lack of EPA action.
Pruitt didn’t directly address that question, but he made clear that the agency hadn’t abandoned its evaluation of the chemical’s safety. “There has been no decision at this time,” he said at the April 26 hearing.
That did little to satisfy Pallone. “Look, you say you’re going to do something, but these chemicals are still on the shelves, and they make a mockery of [chemical reform] legislation that this committee works so hard on,” Pallone said. “And it makes a mockery of EPA. You have the power immediately to get this chemical off the shelves. And you’re not doing it. And you should do it.”
Later that day, another Democrat from New York, Rep. Nita Lowey, accused Pruitt of “strategically starving programs that identify chemicals that could be harmful to children, while rolling back and delaying regulations for deadly chemicals.”
Pruitt replied that the agency was reviewing the comments of the proposal to ban the chemical. “I take this issue very seriously,” he said.
The lobbying effort also continued behind the scenes.
After the hearings, the Environmental Defense Fund contacted Pruitt’s office on behalf of the families of Wynne and Kevin Hartley, another man who died from methylene chloride exposure. The group asked for a meeting with the administrator.
“I wanted to use Kevin’s story to try to save more lives,” Wendy Hartley, Kevin’s mother, told The Washington Post in an interview. “We do not need any more lives lost due to this. And if I could tell Kevin’s story and get someone to listen to it and do something about, then I was willing to tell his story.”
Pruitt has met with few environmental groups throughout his tenure, more often conferring with industry representatives. But he agreed to meet with the mothers.
So this past Tuesday morning, Wendy Hartley, along with Cindy Wynne and her other son Brian Wynne, met Pruitt and several of his aides at his office in EPA headquarters.
The families brought with them photographs and the death certificates of the two men, and explained to Pruitt what happened to them.
Wynne, 31, was running a cold-brew coffee business in Charleston, S.C., when he died last year while stripping paint from the floor of a walk-in refrigerator using a product called Goof Off. Hartley, 21, was a trained contractor who died last year while refinishing a bathtub with White Lightning Low Odor Stripper near Nashville. Both men both were wearing respirators when they died.
Pruitt “was very attentive to us,” Cindy Wynne told The Post in an interview earlier this week before the EPA’s announcement. “He was somewhat surprised when we showed him the cans from Lowe’s,” where her son had purchased the paint stripper.
Her son, Brian, asked Pruitt if he agreed that methylene chloride was a problem. Pruitt responded, “I do.”
But when pressed on whether he would finalize the ban, the administrator did not make a commitment, the family members said.
“We all have the same sense that for a moment there, we felt like there was positive momentum,” Brian Wynne said. “And then that went out of the room pretty quickly when he was steadfast against the word ‘ban.’ ”
In an interview after the announcement Thursday, the brother said he was now “cautiously optimistic” that Pruitt would follow through.
“This is a positive development,” Brian Wynne said. “ It was a surprising one. We certainly didn’t see this coming in our meeting with Administrator Pruitt. But we’re certainly encouraged by this sign that he seems ready to take action.”
The EPA said the “meeting with the families was constructive.”
“It provided the families the opportunity to share with Administrator Pruitt the circumstances in each of their cases and the Administrator the opportunity to hear directly from them,” Wilcox said. “There was an exchange of ideas, and we appreciate EDF reaching out to request the meeting.”
Public health and environmental groups were also pleased but cautioned that more work needs to be done. Vogel urged the EPA to “move quickly to implement a ban, and that includes ensuring necessary administrative procedures are followed to guarantee a permanent ban and that these products are promptly removed from store shelves.”
The EPA said it will not redo a 2014 risk assessments that determined inhaling the paint-stripping fumes is dangerous. “The agency is not reevaluating the paint stripping uses of methylene chloride, but relying on its previous risk assessments and working diligently to ensure the safety of chemicals in the marketplace,” it said.
On Thursday, Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.), the top Democrat on the Environment and Public Works Committee, called the EPA’s announcement “welcome news, especially after the agency previously delayed finalization of this proposed ban indefinitely.”
“I am also encouraged that the agency is relying on previous risk assessments that clearly and scientifically showed just how threatening products containing methylene chloride could be to people’s health and safety,” Carper added in a statement. “However, just like a law doesn’t mean much if it is not enforced, intentions to finalize a ban on a deadly chemical don’t mean much if that chemical stays on the shelves.”
The American Chemistry Council, the main trade association for U.S. chemical companies, greeted the move with muted acceptance.
“EPA has authority to move ahead on specific conditions of use,” spokesman Jon Corley said in a statement. “ACC supports EPA’s completion of the risk management rule-making on methylene chloride and publication of a final rule.”
Methylene chloride can kill either through direct narcosis or through metabolization into carbon monoxide, which binds to hemoglobin in the blood and inhibits oxygen from moving around the body. Exposure to as little as six ounces can kill, according to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.
The heavier-than-air chemical can pool in places with poor ventilation, like bathrooms. “But now we’re seeing more and more cases in other types of confined spaces,” said Lindsay McCormick, a project manager for EDF’s health program.
In 1997, OSHA issued its own restriction on the chemical’s use in workplaces. But those standards did not cover regular consumers, who can buy methylene chloride products at most hardware stores.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2018/05/10/epa-signals-it-will-ban-toxic-chemical-found-in-paint-strippers/?utm_term=.6edcd2d6ed51
-
(ACC Mentioned) After Families' Push, EPA Plans to Finalize Obama-Era Paint-Stripper Ban
May 10, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Dave Reynolds
Amid lobbying by families of consumers and workers killed from exposure to the paint-stripper chemical methylene chloride, EPA has reversed course, saying it now intends to soon finalize an Obama-era rule expected to ban certain uses of the substance, though environmentalists are cautioning that the final rule should preserve the proposed ban.
In a May 10 statement, EPA says it intends to finalize a January 2017 proposed rule banning certain uses of methylene chloride in paint-strippers under rarely-used Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) authority. The agency adds that it plans to soon send the final rule for White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review.
EPA also says that it will not reevaluate risks of paint-stripping uses of methylene chloride and will rely on previous risk assessments, including a 2014 Obama-era review used to support the proposed ban. EPA notes that in January 2017 it “proposed prohibiting the consumer and commercial paint stripping uses for methylene chloride,” and adds that based on its work on the issue it “intends to finalize the methylene chloride rulemaking.”
Sen. Tom Carper (D-DE) and environmentalists are hailing EPA's decision and urging the agency to swiftly ban the uses, though environmental groups are also cautioning that the agency's statement fails to commit to finalizing the ban.
“Today’s announcement that EPA intends to finalize a ban on methylene chloride -- a chemical so dangerous that it has killed dozens of people even when they were wearing protective gear -- is welcome news, especially after the agency previously delayed finalization of this proposed ban indefinitely,” Carper says in a May 10 statement.
“I would urge the agency to work expeditiously to finalize and implement a ban on methylene chloride in order to get dangerous products off the market once and for all.”
The Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) appears more skeptical. “We are encouraged that today EPA has decided to reverse course and move forward to finalize its proposed rule banning methylene chloride in these products,” the group says in a May 10 statement, adding that the EPA statement falls short of committing to finalizing the ban.
The group says that the final rule should ban distribution and use of methylene chloride for paint and coating removal, apply to both consumer and commercial uses to ensure protection of workers, and not allow exemptions based on training, labeling and use of protective equipment.
“It is vitally important that EPA move quickly to implement a ban, and that includes ensuring necessary administrative procedures are followed to guarantee a permanent ban and that these products are promptly removed from store shelves,” the statement says.
EDF's skepticism comes after the Trump administration late last year stalled the rulemaking by categorizing the proposed ban of paint-stripping uses as a “long-term action” on the Unified Agenda of federal rules.
The delay followed the American Chemistry Council's (ACC) critical May 2017 comments arguing that EPA's proposed rule failed to rely on best available scientific and economic data, and that the agency failed to adequately consider risks of potential alternative substances in assessing the benefits of the proposed ban.
ACC suggested EPA consider restrictions short of a ban. “Risk management measures applied in response to a TSCA risk evaluation should be based on consideration of a comprehensive set of factors,” ACC said.
“These measures should not be based on a cursory evaluation of the effectiveness of any one risk management measure alone, but rather an evaluation of a robust set of options, including labeling, personnel training, personal protective equipment, and other useful combinations of risk management.”
The Halogenated Solvents Industry Alliance, Inc. also argued that the methylene chloride uses are already well controlled by existing rules of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration, Consumer Product Safety Commission and EPA, and questioned the need for the proposed rule.
Growing Pressure
The January 2017 proposed ban on certain methylene chloride uses is one of several rules where the Obama EPA proposed relying on TSCA section 6(a) authority, rarely used since a federal court struck down EPA's attempt to ban most uses of asbestos in 1991.
The court ruling prompted critics of TSCA to seek reform of the statute, eventually enacted in June 2016.
The other rules target use of N-methylpyrrolidone (NMP) in paint strippers, as well as use of trichloroethylene (TCE) as a vapor degreaser. Despite EPA's May 10 announcement that it intends to finalize the methylene chloride ban, all three rules are listed as “long-term actions” on EPA's spring update to the Unified Agenda issued May 9.
The apparent reversal comes amid growing pressure from lawmakers and environmental groups, backed by families of consumers and workers killed from exposure while using paint-strippers containing methylene chloride.
In a March 22 letter to EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, South Carolina Republicans Sens. Lindsey Graham and Tim Scott, along with Rep. Mark Sanford, called for EPA to use TSCA section 6 authority to “immediately and fully address” the already identified risks of methylene chloride in paint-strippers to prevent further harm.
And family members of two men killed while using methylene chloride met with Pruitt May 8 and pushed for a ban.
But according to an EDF statement on the meeting, Pruitt declined to commit to advancing the Obama-era rule.
"While we were pleased that Mr. Pruitt met with us, we are deeply disappointed that he has chosen not to take immediate action,” Wendy Hartley said in May 8 statement issued by EDF.
Cindy Wynne adds that Pruitt's “words of consolation and explanation are -- sadly -- not nearly enough. With every delay, thousands more Americans buy and use paint strippers containing methylene chloride -- risking death each time."
Family members this week also met with House and Senate lawmakers from South Carolina, Tennessee, and Pennsylvania -- states where deaths from consumer uses of methylene chloride in paint-strippers have occurred in recent months, according to Liz Hitchcock of the group Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families.
Hitchcock says at least 60 people have died from using paint strippers containing methylene chloride since 1980.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/after-families-push-epa-plans-finalize-obama-era-paint-stripper-ban
-
EPA Will Soon Take Stance on Toxic Paint-Stripping Solvent (1)
May 10, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
The EPA will soon decide whether restrictions on methylene chloride’s use for paint and coating removal are needed after at least 17 bathtub remodelers died from their use of the solvent.
The Environmental Protection Agency’s May 10 announcement marks a change in this administration’s policy, because the agency stalled the Obama-era rulemaking after the Trump administration took office.
The agency didn’t offer a timeline or details on whether the rule, as previously proposed, would ban the solvent’s use in paint and coating strippers that consumers purchase. The EPA proposed the ban on Jan. 19, 2017, the last full day of the Obama administration.
The announcement did say the agency would “shortly” send its final rule to a White House office for clearance.
EPA’s decision followed a May 8 meetings with EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, members of Congress, and parents who lost their sons to methylene chloride exposure.
Methylene chloride is a clear, volatile liquid with a sweet smell that emits fumes that can be deadly in enclosed spaces. The chemical is found in consumer products such as Formby’s Paint & Poly Remover and Jasco Premium Paint & Epoxy Remover available from Lowe’s Companies, Inc., The Home Depot Inc., and other retailers.
Short-term exposure to the chemical can harm the central nervous system and sometimes causes death, according to an EPA assessment. Effects of exposure over longer periods include liver toxicity, liver cancer, and lung cancer.
The proposal also would restrict the solvent’s use in commercial paint and coating removers.
Initial Reactions“The EPA’s announcement on methylene chloride is very unsettling to paint professionals,” Mark Casale, an adviser to the Society of Painting & Decorating Contractors of Massachusetts, told Bloomberg Environment.
“The EPA’s proposed rulemaking is not based on accurate, reality-based data,” Casale said, referencing objections contractors raised in comments on the agency’s proposed rule.
A spokesman for the W.M. Barr & Company, Inc., which makes Jasco Premium Paint & Epoxy Remover and which also opposed the EPA’s proposed rule, could not immediately be reached by phone or email for comment. The remover already bears a label warning consumers not to use it to remove bathtub coatings.
Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.) and environmental health organizations, which have been pushing EPA to proceed with the rulemaking, cautiously welcomed the agency’s announcement.
“While today’s news is a positive sign that EPA is moving in the right direction, I would urge the agency to work expeditiously to finalize and implement a ban on methylene chloride in order to get dangerous products off the market once and for all,” Carper said in a statement.
“If methylene chloride in paint strippers is effectively removed from the marketplace, it will be a good day for American families,” the Environmental Defense Fund said in a statement and blog post.
EPA Options, Corporate EffortsThe Toxic Substances Control Act—which directs the EPA to assess chemicals in commerce and control ones posing an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment—allows the agency to use many regulatory approaches to managing those risks.
In addition to banning some uses of methylene chloride, the agency could require warnings about the chemical’s use, restrict the amount of it in products, or take other actions to limit consumer or commercial groups’ exposure to the solvent.
Some retailers already are asking their suppliers to help them identify alternative paint-stripper ingredients.
For example, Home Depot issued a chemical statement in April that said it is “working with suppliers and the EPA to identify alternatives with comparable efficacy that do not pose risks to human and environmental health,” and that it currently offers alternatives to methylene chloride-based removers.
“We continue to work with home improvement stores to get this very dangerous chemical off their shelves,” Liz Hitchcock, acting director of Safer Chemicals Healthy Families, told Bloomberg Environment.
Safer Chemicals, a nationwide coalition of environmental, health, and labor groups, has mounted a “Mind the Store” campaign urging retailers to use their purchasing power to spur suppliers to safely reformulate products.
(Updates throughout with additional reporting)
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/epa-will-soon-take-stance-on-toxic-paint-stripping-solvent-1
-
Shale Gas Exporters to Gain as Iran Move Encourages Drilling
May 11, 2018 | Bloomberg
By Ryan Collins and Naureen S Malik
Another darling of the Trump administration is poised to gain from the Iran deal breakup as oil surges: Natural gas exports.
With the move to curb Iran’s oil output encouraging more shale drilling, prices for natural gas produced alongside crude in West Texas could crater, falling to zero some days, according to Tudor Pickering Holt & Co. Already, the gas sold at West Texas’ Waha hub is down 48 percent for the year.
That’s bad for producers selling the fuel in the U.S., but good for companies that export it in tankers. As the market for liquefied natural gas grows in Asia, being able to source gas at its cheapest should give U.S. exports a leg up.
“I doubt this was a driving factor by the administration” to impose sanctions because “we just don’t have that much capacity built up for LNG exports,” said Anastacia Dialynas, an analyst at Bloomberg New Energy Finance.
But indirectly, she said, “if it results in a structurally higher oil price, it definitely makes U.S. cargoes more attractive.”
Only Cheniere Energy Inc. and Dominion Energy Inc. are currently exporting U.S. shale gas worldwide, but as many as three more projects could be up and running in the next year. Several other companies including Tellurian Inc. and NextDecade Corp. plan to start LNG projects within the next decade.
From Secretary of Commerce Wilbur Ross to the President himself, the White House has long sang the praises of increasing American LNG exports to help trim the trade deficit with Asian countries. Meanwhile, the Permian boom has filled pipelines to capacity, trapping gas in the region and making prices there the cheapest of any major U.S. shale play.
Once the sanctions formally kick in, they’ll make long-term LNG contracts linked to oil prices in other parts of the world more expensive, potentially increasing demand for agreements tied to cheap and abundant U.S. shale gas.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-05-10/shale-gas-exporters-to-gain-as-iran-move-encourages-drilling
-
Pentagon Warns Against Offshore Drilling in Eastern Gulf of Mexico
May 10, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
Offshore oil and natural gas drilling in the eastern part of the Gulf of Mexico would likely be incompatible with military training and testing, the Pentagon is warning lawmakers.
In a report sent this week to pair of House committees, the Defense Department’s Undersecretary for Research and Engineering Michael Griffin called the eastern Gulf “irreplaceable,” and said that any drilling there would need significant restrictions in order to not disturb military operations.
The Navy and Air Force use the eastern Gulf to test laser weapons, long-range strike weapons, new vessels and mine warfare, among other activities, and drilling rigs could hamper operations.
The eastern Gulf, the report said, “is an irreplaceable national asset used by DOD to develop and maintain the readiness of our combat forces, and is critical to achieving the objectives contained in the National Defense Strategy.”
“Simply stated, if oil and gas development were to extend east of the [Military Mission Line], without sufficient surface limiting stipulations and/or oil and gas activity restrictions mutually agreed by the DOD and [Department of the Interior], military flexibility in the region would be lost and test and training activities would be severely affected,” it stated.
The report is likely to provide significant fodder to Florida leaders, Democrats and others who want to keep the eastern Gulf closed to oil and gas drilling.
Congress has blocked drilling until 2022 in a swath of the Gulf that is slightly larger than everything east of the Military Mission Line, a line of longitude that runs through Florida’s panhandle.
But in an aggressive offshore drilling plan proposed in January, the Trump administration considered allowing companies to lease drilling rights in that area in 2023 and 2024.
Days after the plan came out, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke reversed course and pledged that waters near Florida would not have drilling rigs, a promise he reiterated Thursday to a Senate subcommittee.
“I'm committed to … no new oil and gas platforms off the coast of Florida,” Zinke said, though he has not specified how far into the Gulf the prohibition would extend.
Military activities have long been the driving force behind the ban on eastern Gulf drilling. In addition to the air, water surface and subsurface uses of the Gulf, numerous Navy and Air Force facilities are on or near Florida’s coast.
The National Offshore Industries Association saw a positive side to Thursday’s report for drillers, arguing that it leaves the door open to allowing drilling in some areas and in some ways that were not available previously.
“The report shows there is a lot of ocean out there and while there will be devils in the details, the overall message from the Pentagon should be interpreted as cooperation and coordination,” said Randall Luthi, the group’s president. “In addition, as companies are allowed to explore and evaluate oil and natural gas plays, it is likely that areas of high potential will be more clearly defined and thus allow for additional military operations.”
Drillers have long seen the eastern Gulf as their No. 1 prospect for new drilling areas, since they have a good understanding of the oil and gas potential there, as well as the infrastructure, equipment and staff nearby.
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/387161-pentagon-warns-against-offshore-drilling-in-eastern-gulf-of-mexico
-
Senator Eyes Oil Tax to Punish Canada Over Alaska Drilling Clash
May 10, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ari Natter
Alaska’s congressional delegation worked feverishly last year to achieve the decades-long dream of drilling for oil in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge but they met resistance from Canada.
The Canadian government was concerned about preserving the pristine wilderness that serves as habitat for the country’s Porcupine caribou herd, named for the river that spans its range into Alaska. So its embassy in Washington lobbied U.S. lawmakers to vote against the Republican bid to add a refuge-drilling measure to the tax-cut package.
They lost the gamble. The tax cuts passed and drilling is set to resume after a 40-year hiatus.
Now one lawmaker has a plan to punish the North American neighbor with what amounts to a new tax on hundreds of millions of barrels of Canadian oil imported annually into the U.S.
Loophole ClosureSen. Dan Sullivan (R-Alaska) said he will introduce legislation to end a loophole through which imported oil from Alberta’s oil sands deposits doesn’t come with a 9-cent-per-barrel tax to fund clean up of oil spills. Such a change would have generated about $47 million for the U.S. in 2016, according to the Congressional Research Service.
“It was outrageous,” Sullivan, a former Alaska attorney general and natural resources commissioner, said. “They were going to every office in the Senate.”
“It was not a smart move,” he added. “It’s a loophole and we intend to close it.”
Sullivan said the language ending the exemption for tar sands and other forms of “synthetic petroleum” will be included in a broader bill reinstating a per-barrel fee on domestic and imported oil to fund spill cleanups.
The U.S. tax—which generates hundreds of millions of dollars a year for what’s known as the Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund—expired at the beginning of this year.
Drilling FrictionColin Shonk, a spokesman for the Canadian embassy, said the country remains committed to protecting the habitat for the Porcupine caribou herd. He didn’t address a question about potential changes in U.S. taxes on Canadian oil sands.
“Canada continues to engage the U.S., other partners, and indigenous peoples on the protection of land from resource development and the management of the Porcupine caribou herd,” he said in an email.
But Sullivan and other members of Alaska’s three-person congressional delegation say that position is hypocritical given Canada drilled hundreds of oil and gas wells in neighboring Yukon Territory including ones directly in the path of herd migration routes.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/senatoreyesoiltax-to-punish-canada-over-alaska-drilling-clash
-
Firefighters Fail to Sway EPA as Locals Manage Chemical Risks
May 10, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sam Pearson
The call to police came in on a winter night in 2017 in McIntosh, an Alabama town with fewer than 300 people: Chlorine gas was leaking at one of the town’s chemical plants.
Workers inside the Olin Corp. chlorine plant had been attaching hoses to rail cars, preparing to load them with chlorine, according to an incident report. Around 7 p.m. on Feb. 15, monitors alerted employees to leaking chlorine, which can cause coughing, blurred vision, difficulty breathing, and nausea if inhaled, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Twenty-five minutes later, alarms at the fence line went off, showing trace amounts of the substance. An hour later, plant operators called 911.
Confusion arose as officers arrived at the Olin plant, Mike Ready, the town’s police chief, told Bloomberg Environment. An emergency dispatcher told the officers to close the road, but they weren’t able to get more specific information right away from the company on the nature of the chemical release. The company later determined it released 738 pounds of chlorine that night, the incident report said.
The challenge that McIntosh officers faced isn’t unique. Local agencies countrywide have grappled with how to get the information they need before things go wrong and in the midst of an emergency response.
Pending federal regulations issued during the Obama administration would have expanded information sharing and planning requirements for major facilities, but the Trump administration has paused the initiative. What happens next has implications for the workers who will have to manage these types of incidents in the future.
Significant But RareWhile most chemical plants don’t experience major accidents, the consequences can be significant when they do occur.
The EPA found that between 2007 and 2017, plants regulated by the agency’s facility security program saw 1,517 reportable accidents that killed 59 people and sent more than 17,000 others to seek medical treatment.
One of the McIntosh officers, Lt. Charles Koger, later told a local television station that responding to the chlorine leak left him with a scratchy cough that lasted a week. His boss said the officers were unprepared.
“The plant dropped the ball,” Ready said of what happened in his town, “and it’s lucky somebody didn’t get injured or killed over it. Chlorine’s no joke.”
‘Deaf Ears’The incident in McIntosh is typical of what can happen to first responders nationwide.
First responders also were at risk in a high-profile response at an Arkema Inc. chemical facility in Crosby, Texas, in the aftermath of Hurricane Harvey in August 2017. Workers lost control of a volatile class of substances known as reactive chemicals when refrigeration units failed amid heavy flooding.
Like McIntosh, Harris County Sheriff’s deputies were instructed to close a major road, U.S. Highway 90, near the plant. They waited for days as Arkema’s chemicals overheated and broke down.
The local fire department established a 1.5-mile perimeter, and sheriff’s deputies later took over keeping watch. But the company never told them what precautions to take, just that they should maintain the perimeter, Misty Hataway-Cone, an attorney at Spurlock & Associates PC in Humble, Texas, told Bloomberg Environment.
She is representing 14 emergency response workers in a lawsuit against Arkema in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, which is scheduled for trial in March 2020.
Law enforcement officers believed the substances were harmless and when the chemicals exploded, no one from Arkema told them what was going on, according to Hataway-Cone.
“These officers were never, ever warned of what chemicals were going to be released,” she said. Nor were they informed of exposure information, precautions to take, or what to do if they saw a chemical cloud, which led to first responders falling ill in the street and needing medical attention, she said.
The U.S. Chemical Safety Board, which is investigating the root cause of Arkema’s chemical release, is also examining what implications the events have for emergency preparedness and response efforts. The CSB is a nonregulatory agency and doesn’t issue citations or fines.
The board lists inadequate emergency responses on its drivers of critical chemical safety change program, a list of what the board thinks are the five most important safety improvements. The agency has flagged flawed emergency response efforts in 14 of its completed investigations. A board spokeswoman said the agency can’t discuss the Arkema probe until it is complete.
Firefighters InvolvedWhile police unions haven’t been especially involved with emergency response regulations at the federal level, firefighting organizations have rallied around the issue.
In a letter to Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt in 2017, Harold Schaitberger, general president of the International Association of Firefighters, a Washington-based labor union, warned against delaying Obama administration safety regulations.
“Further delay would potentially endanger not only the public, but the lives of fire fighters responding to incidents at chemical facilities,” Schaitberger wrote.
The regulations came in response to a high-profile fertilizer plant explosion in West, Texas, in 2013 that killed 12 firefighters when they entered the burning plant. But the EPA was concerned about lower-profile mishaps throughout the U.S., too.
Despite Schaitberger’s pleas to keep the chemical safety rule in place, the EPA delayed the regulation to Feb. 19, 2019. An agency spokesman didn’t respond to a request for comment from Bloomberg Environment on the EPA’s views of risks to first responders.
“It seems that what we’ve been saying pretty much falls on deaf ears,” Shannon Meissner, director of governmental affairs for the International Association of Firefighters, told Bloomberg Environment.
The purpose of the regulation seems like a no-brainer, Meissner said.
“You’re not going to perform anywhere near as well on the day of the accident unless you practice,” she said. “That’s true for our members, but also, even more so, for the people at these facilities.”
The International Association of Fire Chiefs, which represents leaders of fire agencies, doesn’t have a position on the EPA’s regulation, Jim Philipps, a spokesman for the Virginia-based group, told Bloomberg Environment.Chemical Facilities Coordinate
During the Obama administration, the EPA tried to set new requirements for large chemical facilities to coordinate with local responders to avoid mishaps and miscommunication.
But with federal action paused, state programs in Washington and California are addressing the issue at oil refineries, but their actions don’t extend to other industrial facilities.
Arkema disputes the allegations in the first responders’ lawsuit, and Olin said they are already doing at least some of the actions called for in the federal regulation, as did local officials in some areas where major industrial accidents have occurred.
Olin said in a statement it has “a robust risk management program integrated into our daily operations.” The company said it regularly coordinates with state and local agencies, including those in McIntosh, on preparedness drills.
Olin also provided respirators to the McIntosh Police Department and donated gas monitors capable of detecting chlorine to the local fire department, as part of a settlement agreement with the Alabama Department of Environmental Management.
Arkema worked with local responders “for years” on training exercises and shared information about the plant, Janet Smith, the company’s director of communications and crisis preparedness, said in an email to Bloomberg Environment.
Responders can prepare by ensuring planning and communication are up to date, even if they work in a small community, Ted Graf, chief of the Atchison Fire Department in Kansas, told Bloomberg Environment. Graf was involved in a response to a toxic cloud of chlorine gas and other compounds that enveloped the city on Oct. 21, 2016.
Graf’s comments were echoed by Richard Curtis, chief of the Anacortes Fire Department in Washington state. Anacortes is home to two oil refineries that saw major explosions in 1998 and 2010, killing a combined 13 workers.
These grim reminders have brought advancements such as a Reverse 911 notification system and a single frequency for radio communications, Curtis told Bloomberg Environment.
National ChangesMore changes could be afoot if Washington regulators finalize regulatory changes for oil refineries that echo a stepped-up safety program California officials put in place last year.
Those changes go beyond what the Obama administration EPA considered. They would require companies to use the safest possible options to evaluate refinery processes on an ongoing basis to eliminate hazards and to involve workers in safety decisions, among other things.
Atchison responders have increased training with the county’s Department of Emergency Management, which was a recommendation the U.S. Chemical Safety Board issued when it investigated the chemical release, Graf said.
The Washington city’s refineries have in-house firefighters on-site, but if a major incident happens again, the six-person municipal force will have to close roads and provide medical assistance, Curtis said. Oil companies Andeavor and Royal Dutch Shell Plc pitch in, through regular meetings with city officials and paid training for its firefighters, Curtis said.
Firefighters in Atchison have been canvassing the region, talking to other departments about their tumultuous day.
“Don’t say it can’t ever happen here,” Graf said. “Because things have happened here.”
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/firefighters-fail-to-sway-epa-as-locals-manage-chemical-risks
-
May 9, 2018 | Think Progress
By Natasha Geiling
For nine days, representatives from governments across the globe have been meeting in Bonn, Germany, to hammer out details of the Paris climate agreement. But participating at the talks alongside diplomatic representatives and environmental groups are some perhaps unexpected parties — like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which has long opposed climate regulations and is a vocal proponent of fossil fuels.
A coalition of developing nations in Africa and Latin America had hoped to draw attention to the influence that the fossil fuel industry maintains over the climate negotiation process with a formal acknowledgement of conflicts of interest at the conclusion of the talks in Bonn this week. But developed nations — led largely by the United States — succeeded in preventing such a formal acknowledgement from being included in the meeting’s final notes.
Conflicts of interest within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCC) — the international treaty that dictates the UN’s annual climate conferences — aren’t a new phenomenon. In 2015, companies like Engie — a utility company that gets more than 70 percent of its energy output from fossil fuels — were financial sponsors of the Paris climate talks. But this year, developing nations — alongside environmental groups — have been working to make eliminating conflicts of interest a central part of the climate negotiations moving forward, much to the chagrin of countries like the United States and Australia.
“Every institution, especially of this scale, has some kind of policy to identify and mitigate internal conflict of interests,” Jesse Brag, media director for Corporate Accountability, which has been campaigning to make conflicts of interest within the United Nations climate negotiations a central issue since 2015, told ThinkProgress. “Right now, there is no acknowledgement [within the UNFCCC] that there could be problems that arise from the financial interests of businesses and NGOs operating here.”
There are a few ways in which fossil fuel companies — or industry groups that represent fossil fuel companies — have already influenced UN climate negotiations. At the Paris climate negotiations in 2015, for instance, fossil fuel companies that sponsored the talks were given access to “communications and networking” areas in rooms where negotiations were taking place.
The text of the Paris climate agreement, which calls for limiting global warming to “well below 2 degrees Celsius” (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) doesn’t mention the term “fossil fuels” once, despite the fact that burning fossil fuels is the primary action driving climate change. And the UNFCCC’s Climate Technology Network, which promotes the adoption of low carbon technology in developing countries, includes a member of the World Coal Association.
Developing nations, alongside NGOs like Corporate Accountability, had hoped to get parties on the record this year acknowledging that conflicts of interest exist within the climate negotiations. They had also hoped that such acknowledgement would be followed by policy suggestions aimed at helping root out conflicts of interest within the process.
That effort was largely waylaid due to intense opposition from the United States, which refused to allow any mention of conflicts of interest or fossil fuel companies into the meeting’s official notes.
But a coalition of governments representing 70 percent of the world’s population — largely from developing countries in Latin America and Africa — did succeed in getting parties to agree to keep talking about the issue at climate negotiations next year.
That might seem like a small victory, but Bragg argues it’s an important signal that the culture of the talks — as well as general recognition of the issue of conflicts of interest within the negotiations — is starting to change.
“Three years ago, no one wanted to talk about the fossil fuel industry’s role in climate denial in these talks,” Bragg said. “Now, it’s a discussion that is happening in every area of these halls. As the process advances, so does the culture around what needs to be done.”
It is unsurprising that the United States — which is still a party to the UNFCCC even as President Trump has promised to withdraw from the Paris climate agreement — would oppose efforts to draw attention to conflicts of interest between environmental treaties and fossil fuel companies. Under the Trump administration, several high-profile environmental regulator posts have been filled by people who previously represented the industries that they now oversee.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Deputy Administrator Andrew Wheeler, for instance, came to the EPA after working as a lobbyist for Murray Energy, the largest privately-owned coal firm in the United States.
Nancy Beck, who is currently the highest-ranking political appointee at overseeing regulation of the chemical industry at the EPA, used to work for the American Chemical Council , the chemical industry’s main lobbying organization.
And over at the Department of the Interior, Deputy Secretary David Bernhardt came to the agency after working for years as a lobbyist in the natural resources department of the firm Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck.
https://thinkprogress.org/conflicts-of-interests-un-climate-talks-2018-d0cf3a9d1995/
-
Pruitt's Focus on Costs in Shortened NAAQS Process Raises Legal Doubts
May 10, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Stuart Parker
EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt in a new memo is dramatically shortening the process through which the agency reviews its six national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS), but his order for consideration of economic impacts as part of the review process raises legal doubts given a Supreme Court bar on weighing costs in NAAQS reviews.
The accelerated process, detailed in a May 9 Pruitt memo to the agency's assistant administrators, puts the ongoing reviews of the ozone and particulate matter (PM) NAAQS on a fast track to completion in 2020. Pruitt argues that the changes will help to put the agency back on track in meeting the Clean Air Act mandate to review its NAAQS every five years, rather than past reviews where it has often exceeded five years.
The memo follows an April 12 directive from President Donald Trump to Pruitt calling for a streamlining and easing of NAAQS requirements, including implementation issues and permitting.
EPA air chief William Wehrum last month signaled some plans to abbreviate the often lengthy NAAQS reviews that routinely miss the five-year review window. For example, at a law conference in Orlando, FL, last month he discussed the possibility of using scientific data that is “close enough” to justify a final decision on a NAAQS review, rather than a “perfect” scientific conclusion.
Pruitt's memo outlines a host of more-detailed steps for overhauling and speeding up the NAAQS process, although several provisions could face legal push-back from environmentalists.
EPA in a press release says the reforms “include incorporating important policy-relevant context, as required in the Clean Air Act, on issues like background pollution and potential adverse health, welfare, economic, energy, and social effects from strategies to attain and maintain the NAAQS.” Background pollution stems from natural or foreign sources and cannot be controlled by local regulators.
One of the likely most controversial parts of Pruitt's memo is his decision to ask the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC), which advises EPA on NAAQS reviews, to consider these economic and background pollution issues in the context of specific NAAQS reviews. That appears to runs counter to past EPA practice, as informed by Supreme Court precedent. The high court in the 2001 case Whitman v. American Trucking Associations held unanimously that EPA cannot consider implementation costs when setting NAAQS.
Pruitt in the memo notes the Supreme Court's ruling in Whitman, but says the “Court did note that CASAC's 'advice concerning certain aspects of “adverse public health . . . effects” from various attainment strategies is unquestionably pertinent' to the NAAQS rulemaking record and relevant to the standard-setting process.”
NAAQS Reviews
Industry and GOP critics argue that the NAAQS review process is too slow and biased toward producing ever-tougher standards without regard to implementation costs and practical difficulties, and are welcoming the memo.
“It’s good to see that the public will finally get an authoritative accounting of the adverse effects caused by some of EPA’s regulatory mandates,” said former Bush EPA air chief Jeffrey Holmstead, now an industry attorney.
Public health advocates, while welcoming the commitment to meeting statutory deadlines, are otherwise deeply concerned by the memo's implications for NAAQS. Pruitt's action appears intended to “rip the heart and lungs” out of the Clean Air Act, said American Lung Association (ALA) National Senior Vice President of Advocacy Paul Billings.
The memo further announces a “streamlined” review process that will collapse three currently separate steps in the review process into one, in order to meet EPA's air law mandate to review NAAQS every five years. EPA has consistently missed its five-year deadlines by years, prompting lawsuits to get the agency back on track.
In addition, the memo requires that EPA use only “transparent” science, an apparent reference to Pruitt's broader science policy that requires that EPA rely on science that is publicly available and “reproducible.” Environmentalists, scientists, former EPA officials and Democrats have denounced the policy as a ruse to exclude high-quality studies that use medical data subject to restrictions to protect the confidentiality of study participants.
Pruitt's memo envisages that EPA will complete the review of the 2015 Obama ozone NAAQS, set at 70 parts per billion (ppb), by the five-year review deadline of Oct. 1, 2020.
It also projects that the agency will complete an already overdue review of the fine particulate matter (PM2.5) and coarse particulate matter (PM10) standard by December 2020. EPA last set a PM standard in 2012, tightening the PM2.5 primary, or health-based, standard from 15 micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m3), down to 12 ug/m3. Secondary NAAQS, meanwhile, are intended to protect the environment.
Sources say that senior EPA career staff are skeptical that the 2020 deadlines can be met, given that the PM review has not made it out of the earliest stages and the ozone review has yet to be launched at all.
The memo also requires that EPA issue implementation rules concurrently with new NAAQS to help states craft plans to meet the NAAQS, a step long sought by many states.
CASAC Advice
Pruitt's memo takes steps to achieve the truncated reviews by suggesting combining three distinct steps in the review process that CASAC must review into one. EPA “shall consider” combining its integrated science assessment (ISA), which compiles new scientific evidence made available since the last review; the risk and exposure assessment (REA), which gauges the risk to the public from exposure to air pollutants; and the policy assessment (PA), an EPA staff document that aims to give the administrator policy options to set a new standard.
Pruitt further says that EPA and CASAC should streamline their selection of studies to appear in the ISA, and he sets a standard series of questions for CASAC to answer in all NAAQS reviews. Lessons learned from speeding the ozone and PM reviews can serve to inform future reviews, Pruitt says. “EPA should seek to identify efficiencies in the simultaneous review of these two important criteria pollutants. These principles shall apply to all aspects of the review of the ozone NAAQS as well as future NAAQS review,” Pruitt writes.
When providing advice to the agency on a particular review, CASAC should answer, “What is the relative contribution to air pollution concentrations of natural as well as anthropogenic activity? In providing advice on any recommended NAAQS levels, please discuss relative proximity to peak background levels.”
Also, the charge questions ask CASAC to “advise the Administrator of any adverse public health, welfare, social, economic, or energy effects which may result from various strategies for attainment and maintenance of such NAAQS.”
Yet EPA also adds that, “These charge questions may elicit information which is not relevant to the standard-setting process, but provides important policy context for the public, co-regulators, and EPA."
The air law requires EPA to set primary NAAQS at a level requisite to protect public health “with an adequate margin of safety,” and Pruitt stresses the discretion of the administrator in making this decision. Pruitt commits EPA to a process that is “timely, complete, based on transparent information, balanced with respect to policy and science."
Public health advocates, however, distrust this formula, pointing to EPA's contested science policy and efforts to reform the membership of CASAC to reflect more industry views and a wider geographic representation. “Mushing together” the ISA, REA and PA may undermine scientific rigor, ALA's Billings warns, calling the step a “great concern.” EPA is trying to stack CASAC with “outliers, deniers and industry shills,” and to exclude “independent scientific researchers,” in order to deliver a “polluter wish list,” Billings warns.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/pruitts-focus-costs-shortened-naaqs-process-raises-legal-doubts
-
Illinois Readies Early Suit over EPA'S 2015 Ozone NAAQS Designations
May 10, 2018 | Inside EPA
Illinois is preparing to sue EPA over its decision to designate a Wisconsin county as meeting the 2015 ozone national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS), in what will likely be one of several lawsuits challenging the agency's April 30 list of areas meeting or violating the air quality limits.
Lisa Madigan, Illinois attorney general (D), in a May 4 press statement threatened to sue EPA in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit once EPA publishes its list of “nonattainment” areas in the Federal Register.
The list found 51 areas in 22 states and the District of Columbia in nonattainment with the 2015 ozone standard, set at 70 parts per billion (ppb). However, it labeled as “attainment” areas of Wisconsin close to Illinois, including Racine county, WI, the site of a planned Foxconn computer parts factory.
Areas labeled nonattainment must impose tough pollution controls on industry that can in some cases impede industrial development, but the Foxconn project will now avoid this fate despite earlier suggestions by EPA that Racine County and other Wisconsin areas are in fact violating the NAAQS.
Madigan accuses EPA of ignoring air quality data showing violations in Wisconsin and bowing to pressure from industry and GOP lawmakers to let the Foxconn project proceed. “EPA is putting a company's profit ahead of our natural resources and the public's health,” Madigan said. Her office in its statement cites “indisputable pollution monitoring data showing Racine County exceeds ozone levels beyond” the 70 ppb limit. “Racine County recorded average ozone levels of 74 ppb from 2015 through 2017,” the statement says.
Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker (R) called for essentially his entire state to be labeled attainment, and although EPA resisted this, the agency has scaled back nonattainment areas in the state that it earlier proposed. EPA has further excluded three Wisconsin counties, including Racine, from proposed nonattainment status entirely.
Wisconsin Attorney General Brad Schimel (R) has called the threatened lawsuit “meritless” and “ironic,” because “Illinois is the largest contributor of ozone pollution to Racine,” according to The Journal Times website.
EPA has further refused some states' and environmentalists' requests that nonattainment areas in around New York City and Philadelphia be expanded or merged to create larger, multi-state nonattainment zones. These disputes, and those in the Midwest, may spawn several further legal challenges.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/illinois-readies-early-suit-over-epas-2015-ozone-naaqs-designations
-
Trump Admin Kills NASA Project Monitoring Greenhouse Gas Emissions
May 10, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Jacqueline Thomsen
President Trump’s administration quietly killed a NASA project that monitored whether countries were reducing their greenhouse gas emissions, stoking fears about efforts to decrease global emissions, Science magazine reported.
NASA spokesman Steve Cole told the magazine that the agency’s Carbon Monitoring System was canceled due to ”budget constraints and higher priorities within the science budget."
Congress has repeatedly blocked the Trump administration’s proposed cuts to NASA’s earth science budget — including the monitoring system. But, Cole said, Trump's new tax law didn’t mention the project, enabling the administration to end it.
He added that existing grants using the system would be allowed to continue, but that no new research will be permitted.
Kelly Sims Gallagher, director of Tufts University's Center for International Environment and Resource Policy, told Science that canceling the project could threaten plans to use the Carbon Monitoring System to track whether countries are falling in line with emission reductions laid out in the Obama-era Paris climate agreement.
The deal, signed in 2015, by nearly 200 countries, aims to lower global carbon emissions. President Trump pulled the U.S. out of the Paris climate deal last year, a move that was condemned by several world leaders.
"If you cannot measure emissions reductions, you cannot be confident that countries are adhering to the agreement," she said.
David Jacob, a Harvard researcher whose work was supported by the project, told the magazine that NASA had been planning to launch several new observatories connected by the system in order to monitor carbon.
"It would be a total shame to wind [it] down," Jacob said.
Science reported that there are currently 65 projects using the system, many of which focus on carbon in forests and changes in tropical forests.
Several Trump administration websites have removed references to climate change, and Environmental Protection Agency Administration Scott Pruitt has moved to kill former President Obama’s landmark climate change rule for power plants.
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/387144-trump-admin-killed-nasa-project-monitoring-cuts-to-greenhouse-gas
-
Bipartisan Bill Would Authorize Doe Fossil Office
May 11, 2018 | E&E Daily
By Christa Marshall
House lawmakers introduced legislation yesterday to boost carbon capture technologies and reauthorize the Department of Energy's fossil office for the first time in more than a decade.
The "Fossil Energy Research and Development Act," H.R. 5745, from Reps. Marc Veasey (D-Texas) and David McKinley (R-W.Va.) and House Science, Space and Technology ranking member Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-Texas), would focus the office's work on utilizing, sequestering and capturing carbon dioxide from emitters and the air.
DOE's fossil office oversees research on oil, gas and coal initiatives, but current authorizing text doesn't fully reflect new carbon-reduction technologies that have been developed in the past 10 years, according to bill supporters.
The legislation would also authorize higher funding for the office, call for new programs on methane leak detection and establish an interagency task force assessing carbon dioxide pipelines. It would encourage DOE to back large-scale pilot projects.
"With research into these technologies, we will reduce uncertainty so business can continue to invest and create jobs in the energy industry," Veasey said in a statement.
The bill would repeal the Clean Coal Power Initiative, a DOE program that expired four years ago after supporting several big carbon capture projects, including NRG Energy Inc.'s Petra Nova venture in Texas. It is the world's largest retrofit of a coal plant with carbon capture.
"While the original CPPI would be repealed, there are numerous provisions in the bill that would cover and might be beneficial to coal, effectively meeting the same policy goals as the CPPI," said Jeff Bobeck, co-director of the Carbon Capture Coalition, which is supporting the measure.
Other supporters include the American Council for Capital Formation, the American Federation of Government Employees, AFL-CIO, the Bipartisan Policy Center Action and Third Way.
https://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2018/05/11/stories/1060081427
-
Democrat Calls Pruitt Move on Clean Air Act Reviews 'Illegal'
May 10, 2018 | E&E News PM
By Sean Reilly
This article was updated at 5:57 p.m. EDT.
Initial congressional reaction to a newly announced overhaul of EPA policies for setting air pollution standards broke sharply along party lines, as several congressional Republicans today hailed it as a needed fix to a flawed process while one Democrat labeled it an "illegal" attempt to bypass a landmark Supreme Court ruling.
"I applaud the Trump administration's efforts to improve implementation of the Clean Air Act," Senate Environment and Public Works Chairman John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) said in a statement soon after EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt announced the changes in an 11-page memo this morning.
Besides giving certainty to states and businesses, Barrasso said, the overhaul will also ensure that the agency "considers all relevant data and information when it makes decisions."
Later in the day, however, EPW ranking member Tom Carper (D-Del.) accused Pruitt of "again making life-altering decisions that benefit his lobbyist and industry friends" at the expense of public health. Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.), a member of the House Science, Space and Technology Committee, said in a news release that the planned changes to the review mechanisms for the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone and five other pollutants would take the United States back to the day "when cities were shrouded in lethal air pollution."
By requiring EPA to take potential economic effects into account during the NAAQS review process, Beyer added, Pruitt is attempting to circumvent the high court's 2001 decision in the case known as Whitman v. American Trucking Associations that the agency cannot consider implementation costs in setting air quality standards.
Under the Clean Air Act, EPA is supposed to review the standards for ozone, particulate matter, sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, lead and carbon monoxide every five years to assess whether they protect public health with an adequate margin of safety. In reality, EPA rarely, if ever, meets that timetable (Greenwire, May 10).
In the memo, Pruitt says EPA will now "look for efficiencies and opportunities" to streamline reviews so they finish on time.
Agency officials are now also supposed to strive to issue implementation regulations at the same time they revise the standards for any of the six pollutants. The lag time has been a particular source of industry complaints in the agency's handling of its ground-level ozone standard.
After tightening the standard to 75 parts per billion in 2008, the agency did not issue the formal implementation regulations until March 2015, only seven months before it again reset the threshold to 70 ppb. As a result, critics said, states and local governments now have to juggle implementation of two separate standards.
"We hope today's announcement leads to better, more effective regulations and improved air quality," Ross Eisenberg, vice president for energy and resources policy at the National Association of Manufacturers, said in a statement.
Also welcoming the policy changes was Rep. Pete Olson (R-Texas), lead sponsor of H.R. 806, a bill that would delay implementation of the 70 ppb standard until 2025.
In a statement released by EPA, Olson thanked Pruitt and said he looked forward to working with him "as we continue to move towards standards that improve air quality while reducing unnecessary red tape."
After passing the House last year, Olson's bill is still awaiting action by the Senate EPW Committee.
https://www.eenews.net/eenewspm/2018/05/10/stories/1060081411
-
House Environment Panel to Weigh Bill Easing NSR Permit Program
May 11, 2018 | Inside EPA
The House Energy & Commerce Committee's environment panel will hold a hearing May 16 on a discussion draft bill to ease the Clean Air Act new source review (NSR) air permit program for industry, aiming for a legislative solution that would go beyond recent EPA guidance aimed at the same deregulatory goals.
The discussion draft floated by Rep. Morgan Griffith (R-WV) builds on the lawmaker's earlier bills, H.R. 3127 and H.R. 3128, which aimed to make NSR implementation easier, and cheaper, for industry by excluding projects that reduce pollution, increase energy efficiency or do not result in increased maximum emissions rates of pollution.
The new bill would complement recent guidance memos from EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt and air chief Bill Wehrum on NSR reform, but with significant differences.
The new draft bill would, for example, determine projected emissions increases of projects using the maximum achievable hourly emission rate as compared to the 10-year period immediately preceding the project's construction. This is a less stringent standard than that still used by EPA, which determines emissions increases based on actual emissions rates and projected future emissions rates.
EPA's new guidance, however, prohibits the agency from “second-guessing” permit applicants' emissions projections, except where the applicant makes obvious and egregious errors. The guidance also establishes that compliance with NSR is determined by actual emissions resulting from a project, not projections of emissions in the pre-construction phase.
EPA now allows facilities to determine whether they meet emissions thresholds that trigger NSR and potentially expensive pollution control mandates by taking into account emissions decreases, as well as increases, within a plant. NSR applies to new and modified sources in areas in “nonattainment” with federal air standards, while the related prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) program applies in areas meeting federal standards.
Griffith's bill takes a more expansive approach than EPA, excluding from the term “modification” any change that “reduces the amount of any air pollutant emitted by the source per unit of output,” or which is “designed to restore, maintain or improve the reliability or safety of the source,” except when that would increase the maximum hourly rate of pollution compared to the prior 10 years, and where the EPA Administrator determines that the change is harmful to human health or the environment.
“Modifications” not exempted by these terms would not be considered as modifications if they do “not result in a significant emissions increase, or a significant net emissions increase, in annual actual emissions at such facility.” The bill does not define the term “significant,” suggesting this could be left to EPA or state permit authority to decide.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/house-environment-panel-weigh-bill-easing-nsr-permit-program
-
Apple Backs Alcoa, Rio Tinto to Develop Carbon-Free Metal Making
May 10, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Mark Gurman and Joe Deaux
Apple Inc. is backing a joint venture between metal producers Alcoa Corp. and Rio Tinto Group to develop a new aluminum-making process that eliminates greenhouse gases.
The Alcoa-Rio joint venture, which will get initial funding of C$188 million ($147 million), will be based in Montreal and have a research facility in Quebec’s Saguenay region, the aluminum companies said in a statement. The announcement was made with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau on hand along with executives from the three companies. While Alcoa and Rio are developing the technology, which they plan to put on sale beginning in 2024, Apple said it “helped facilitate” the collaboration and will provide technical support.
Aluminum is used in everything from automobiles to airplanes to window frames, and is key to Apple’s own devices. For years, the company has used aluminum in iPhones, iPads, Macs, and Apple Watches.
“We are proud to be part of this ambitious new project, and look forward to one day being able to use aluminum produced without direct greenhouse gas emissions in the manufacturing of our products,” Apple Chief Executive Officer Tim Cook said in the statement.
Competitor Collaboration
Apple has pushed for using more environmentally friendly materials in its products. The company is investing C$13 million into the joint venture. Rio and Alcoa will be investing C$55 million, while the Canadian and Quebec governments will each invest C$60 million.
The move combines the efforts of competitors Alcoa, the largest U.S. aluminum producer, and London-based Rio, the world’s No. 2 miner. They appointed Rio executive Vincent Christ to head the venture, to be named Elysis.
For Apple, the public investment is a rare move. While Apple typically invests millions of dollars in the development of new manufacturing processes and key technologies, it often doesn’t discuss them publicly.
Recently, however, the company started a $5 billion fund in the U.S., resulting in investments in companies such as Corning Inc. and Finisar Corp., which make glass for iPhone screens and Face ID sensors, respectively. Five years ago, Apple also invested hundreds of millions of dollars in an Arizona plant for building sapphire crystal iPhone screens, but the deal fell apart due to quality-control problems.
The investment in the new aluminum process is comparatively small monetarily, but could have a big impact on the company’s future environmental efforts. Apple has said it eventually hopes to make its products entirely from recycled materials. It also indicated recently that it reduced its total greenhouse gas emissions by 2 million metric tons between 2016 and 2017.
On its environment report, the company says that 80 percent of greenhouse emissions from an iPhone 8 come during the production phase. This new initiative could reduce that.
—With assistance from Molly Schuetz.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/applebacksalcoa-rio-tinto-to-develop-carbon-free-metal-making
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested