Preview Newsletter
AM ACC 7/11/2018
-
(ACC Mentioned) A Trade War Threatens the U.S. Economy
Jul 11, 2018 | Washington Examiner
By Jack Gerard , Cal Dooley, & Edward R. Hamberger
Taxpayers and businesses alike celebrated in President Trump's first year when he reformed regulations and signed a major tax cut — all designed to spur a new era of prosperity and growth for the U.S. economy. -
(ACC Mentioned) US Fires Next Shot in China Trade War
Jul 11, 2018 | BBC
The US has ramped up its trade war with China, listing $200bn (£150bn) worth of additional products it plans to place tariffs on as soon as September. -
(ACC Mentioned) Ex-Lawmakers See Tough Job Market with Trade Groups
Jul 11, 2018 | The Hill
By Megan R. Wilson
Retiring lawmakers could find it harder than ever to find a job at trade groups next year. -
GOP Senators Willing to Wait for a Permanent Pruitt Replacement
Jul 10, 2018 | PoliticoPro
By Anthony Adragna
Senate Republicans are in no hurry to tackle a bruising confirmation fight to permanently replace Scott Pruitt as head of the Environmental Protection Agency. -
NGOs Fear Little Improvement in Changed EPA Leadership
Jul 11, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
Even as Congressional Democrats and environmental groups celebrate the departure of embattled former EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt (pictured), they continue to worry about his successor and whether the Trump administration will reverse its anti-regulatory agenda at the agency. -
How Trump’s EPA is Keeping Asbestos Legal
Jul 10, 2018 | Environmental Working Group
By Melanie Benesh
A Russian asbestos company is lavishing praise on Donald Trump and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. -
EPA Toxics Office Ignores Risks of Five Hazardous Air Pollutants
Jul 10, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
The EPA has decided not to consider the public’s risks from certain toxic chemicals once they’re released into the air, saying they’re already adequately controlled. -
(ACC Mentioned) What’s in Your Blood? California to Screen for Fluorochemicals
Jul 10, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Emily C. Dooley
California state health officials and researchers are launching a biomonitoring program this year to measure the concentration of fluorochemicals in people’s blood. -
House Democrats Seek Schedules on ATSDR Toxicological Profiles
Jul 10, 2018 | Inside EPA
House Democrats are seeking to protect a federal health program for assessing chemical risks from further political interference after EPA and the Defense Department (DOD) sought White House assistance to temporarily block release of a draft analysis... -
Massachusetts Advances Flame Retardant Ban
Jul 11, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
Massachusetts' senate has approved a bill to ban certain flame retardants from children’s products and home furnishings. -
U.S. Judge Allows Lawsuits Over Monsanto's Roundup to Proceed to Trial
Jul 10, 2018 | Reuters (In The New York Times)
By Tina Bellon
Hundreds of lawsuits against Monsanto Co by cancer survivors or families of those who died can proceed to trial, a federal judge ruled on Tuesday, finding there was sufficient evidence for a jury to hear the cases that blame the company's glyphosate-containing weed-killer for the disease. -
American Airlines to Stop Using Plastic Straws
Jul 10, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Avery Anapol
American Airlines announced Tuesday that it would stop serving drinks with single-use plastic straws and stirrers. -
Race Is on for Greener Straws as Starbucks, MGM Spurn Plastic
Jul 10, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Eliza Haverstock
Craig Graffius started EcoGlass Straws 12 years ago with three decades of glass-making experience and his vision for an alternative to the ubiquitous plastic straw. What he didn’t have was anyone clamoring for his product. -
EPA Sends Proposed Rule Replacement to White House
Jul 10, 2018 | E&E News PM
By Niina Heikkinen
EPA submitted its proposal to replace the Clean Power Plan to the White House yesterday, the same day Andrew Wheeler began work as the new temporary head of the agency. -
A Decade of Fracking Research: What Have We Learned?
Jul 11, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By Pamela King
When oil and gas developers began using hydraulic fracturing to tap previously unaccessed sources of fossil fuels across the United States, the American public had a few questions. -
US LNG Export Growth from Gulf Coast Draws Futures Contract Proposal by CME and Cheniere
Jul 10, 2018 | Platts
By Harry Weber and Scott Ickes
Exchange operator CME Group said Tuesday it was working with Cheniere Energy to develop a new futures contract for cargoes shipped from the US LNG exporter's Louisiana terminal that should reflect the physical cost of feedgas delivered to the facility... -
BLM Defers Colo. Lease Sale
Jul 11, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By Pamela King
Federal land managers have delayed a planned September sale of oil and gas leases on 18,000 acres in Colorado's Huerfano County. -
Power Demand Could Keep Natural Gas Storage at Deficit Despite Record Onshore Output
Jul 10, 2018 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Leticia Gonzales
Even as Lower 48 natural gas production has reached record highs in recent days, strong power demand in the South Central region of the United States stands to challenge storage injections going into the peak summer period, according to Barclays Commodities Research. -
House Democrats Push for GAO Review of Grid Cyber Readiness
Jul 11, 2018 | E&E Daily
By Blake Sobczak
A group of Democratic lawmakers is calling on the Government Accountability Office to investigate grid cybersecurity, including use of Russian anti-virus software in the U.S. power sector. -
Oil Workers Still Risking Death from Toxic Vapors, Green Group Says
Jul 11, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By Mike Soraghan
Sharon Wilson watched the young oil worker through an infrared camera as he opened hatches on top of an oil storage tank. Toxic gases billowed out, and he walked along a catwalk in a steady stream of the vapors. -
(ACC Mentioned) ACC Names Eagle Transport Responsible Care Partner of the Year
Jul 11, 2018 | Modern Bulk Transporter
Annually, the American Chemistry Council (ACC) recognizes chemical industry leaders for their exceptional health, safety, security and environmental (HSSE) performance and commitment to sound chemicals management. -
3 Reasons the Deadly Lac-Mégantic Oil Train Disaster Could Happen Again
Jul 11, 2018 | DeSmog
By Justin Mikulka
In the five years since the oil train disaster in Lac-Mégantic, Quebec, claimed 47 lives, the world has learned much about the risks that hauling oil by rail poses. One of the clearest lessons is how little has been done to address those risks... -
Brett Kavanaugh’s Quotes Reveal His Stance on the Environment
Jul 11, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Fatima Hussein
Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh‘s previous opinions are drawing intense scrutiny for a glimpse into how he would rule on the nation’s high court. -
EPA Readies Draft Plan for State Oversight but Some Fear Regional Limits
Jul 10, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Dave Reynolds
EPA is preparing to float a draft policy that a top agency official says will make regions' oversight of state programs more consistent and efficient, an effort that state officials are welcoming even as they caution that the agency should not undermine existing regional flexibilities... -
Single State Can’t Block Regional Air Cleanup Extension, Court Rules
Jul 11, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Amena H. Saiyid
Delaware lacked the power to prevent the EPA from giving its neighboring states more time to meet federal air quality standards, a federal appeals court ruled July 10. -
More Americans Accepted Global Warming During Hot Spring
Jul 11, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Kelsey Brugger
mid miserably hot temperatures this May, more Americans said they believed in global warming than did a decade ago, a new study has found.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) A Trade War Threatens the U.S. Economy
Jul 11, 2018 | Washington Examiner
By Jack Gerard , Cal Dooley, & Edward R. Hamberger
Taxpayers and businesses alike celebrated in President Trump's first year when he reformed regulations and signed a major tax cut — all designed to spur a new era of prosperity and growth for the U.S. economy.
That was then. The president’s more recent trade decisions could reverse that tremendous progress, adding hundreds of billions of dollars in potential costs for American businesses — costs that could ultimately be borne by consumers.
America’s energy, manufacturing and transportation industries are prime examples of the collateral damage threatened by Trump's steel and aluminum tariffs. These materials are critical to every aspect of our operations: building equipment and infrastructure to produce, refine and transport natural gas and oil; manufacturing parts and machines that produce everything from household plastics and automotive parts to waxes and chemicals that touch the daily lives of every household and business; and filling the freight rail cars that serve as a nationwide steel delivery network.
In many cases, the specialty steel and aluminum components our industries need are simply not produced in the United States.
Our industries generate growth and savings that directly benefit U.S. households and small businesses. Fortified by free trade and fueled by the American energy revolution, these sectors support millions of jobs in the U.S. and across an array of industries.
Tariffs put those benefits at risk.
The examples are endless, but here are just a few:
Since 2010, more than $194 billion of new chemical industry investment has been announced. Steel tariffs threaten around half of that — jeopardizing construction on job-creating projects because companies cannot procure the products they need in sufficient time. Steel tariffs also hurt America’s railroads, with 140,000 miles that make up a steel network across the nation.
Pre-tariffs, the private sector was poised to invest $1.34 trillion in energy infrastructure to keep pace with surging production — supporting more than 1 million jobs each year on average through 2035. Tariffs could stifle hundreds of billions of dollars’ worth of projects — including new pipeline infrastructure needed to get oil and natural gas from the prolific Permian Basin to markets. The steel tariffs alone could increase the cost of a 280-mile pipeline by as much as $76 million.
Then there are the retaliatory tariffs on U.S. exports that China and other countries could impose.
Crude oil, liquid propane, and other non-finished products that are the feedstock of petrochemicals and that fuel locomotives are also impacted by the tariffs. Railroads, which move these goods alongside trucks, would feel the pain, too.
China is threatening to retaliate against U.S.-made chemical exports valued at $5.4 billion. China’s tariffs will hit the U.S. chemical industry not once, but twice by closing China’s market both to chemical exports and exports of finished products using chemicals in their production, including agricultural goods and automobiles. The tariffs on downstream products could lead to less demand for those products and therefore less demand for U.S.-made chemicals.
Against the backdrop of the escalating tariff fallout, stalled efforts to renegotiate the North American Free Trade Agreement point toward even more trouble ahead.
Free trade between the U.S., Canada, and Mexico under NAFTA helps support over 10 million jobs here at home, and the agreement is at the center of a vital supply chain. Our three industries provide just a snapshot of the complex whole, but it’s an instructive snapshot to understand the stakes.
The rail industry supports 1.5 million jobs, one-third of which depend directly on international trade. Bolstered by NAFTA, international trade accounted for $26.4 billion of freight train revenue and 511 million tons of rail traffic in 2014. North America’s energy markets are integrated and interdependent — trading crude oil, natural gas, and refined products between the U.S., Canada and Mexico.
Manufacturing components may cross the border as many as seven or eight times, often via railroads, before a final product is complete. Without agreements like NAFTA, tariffs would be levied multiple times, with the vastly more expensive materials potentially leading to higher price tags for consumers.
While we respect the administration’s vision for U.S. energy and manufacturing dominance, we also know when U.S. trade policy is bad for business and a threat to our economic security.
That’s why our organizations — the American Petroleum Institute, the Association of American Railroads, and the American Chemistry Council — joined a range of industries to support legislation introduced by Sen. Corker to re-examine tariffs. By requiring the president to sit down with fellow elected leaders and consider a full range of trade solutions, the bill is intended to infuse more dialogue into the president’s decision-making and ensure the best possible outcome is achieved.
Right now, the White House has a critical opportunity to avoid years of damaging impacts to American businesses and consumers by undoing these serious tariff missteps. It’s already clear that this well-intentioned policy will actually make the United States less competitive, undermine this administration’s vision of energy dominance and the manufacturing renaissance, and almost certainly destroy many more jobs than it protects.
By acting quickly and decisively, the Trump administration can stop a harmful policy before the full impact hits. The economic consequences are as damaging as they are foreseeable. Now is the time to change course.
Mr. Gerard is president and CEO of the American Petroleum Institute. Mr. Dooley is president and CEO of the American Chemistry Council. Mr. Hamberger is president and CEO of the Association of American Railroads.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/op-eds/a-trade-war-threatens-the-u-s-economy
-
(ACC Mentioned) US Fires Next Shot in China Trade War
Jul 11, 2018 | BBC
The US has ramped up its trade war with China, listing $200bn (£150bn) worth of additional products it plans to place tariffs on as soon as September.
The move comes just days after the two countries imposed tit-for-tat tariffs of $34bn on each other's goods.
President Donald Trump had already threatened to impose additional tariffs against China if it retaliated.
The list names more than 6,000 items including food products, minerals and consumer goods such as handbags.
The public will have until the end of August to comment on the list before the new tariffs - to be imposed at 10% - come into effect.
Asian stock markets fell sharply in early trading amid escalating trade tensions between the two economic giants.
In China, Hong Kong's Hang Seng index dropped 2% while the Shanghai Composite fell 1.8%. Japan's benchmark Nikkei 225 index shed 1.7%.
The White House says the tariffs are a response to unfair trade practices by China.
The US wants China to stop practices that allegedly encourage transfer of intellectual property - design and product ideas - to Chinese companies, such as requirements that foreign firms share ownership with local partners to access the Chinese market.
US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer said there was "no justification" for China's retaliation.
"As in the past, the United States is willing to engage in efforts that could lead to a resolution of our concerns about China's unfair trade practices and to China opening its market to US goods and services," he said.
"In the meantime, we will remain vigilant in defending the ability of our workers and businesses to compete on a fair and reciprocal basis."
'Increasingly worried'
Many companies in the US are opposed to the administration's use of tariffs against China, saying they risk hurting business and the economy without being likely to change behaviour.
On top of the $34bn worth of tariffs that came into effect on Friday, the White House has said it would consult on tariffs on another $16bn of products. President Trump has suggested these could come into effect later this month.
In total, the new import taxes President Trump is threatening to impose are almost equal to the value of China's entire goods exports to the US, worth more than $500bn last year.
"It's a difficult situation for a number of our companies. They're getting increasingly worried about where this is all going," Ed Brzytwa, director of international trade for the American Chemistry Council, which represents chemical companies, told the BBC on Tuesday before the latest measures were announced.
"They can't figure out what the end game is."
https://www.bbc.com/news/business-44788817
-
(ACC Mentioned) Ex-Lawmakers See Tough Job Market with Trade Groups
Jul 11, 2018 | The Hill
By Megan R. Wilson
Retiring lawmakers could find it harder than ever to find a job at trade groups next year.
Headhunters who specialize in finding candidates for high-level K Street jobs told The Hill industry groups are no longer clamoring for the cachet of hiring a former elected official.
Instead, they say hiring trends have changed and high-powered groups are looking for people with management skills, policy knowledge and industry smarts.
“When we do these [trade] association searches now, no one says, ‘My first choice is
a former House member, governor or senator,’ ” said Julian Ha, who leads the government affairs and trade association practices at executive search firm Heidrick & Struggles.“It used to be ... get a name, someone who could throw their weight around and get calls returned.”
Snagging a marquee name two decades ago may have been the ideal choice for some groups, but Ha and others say that political gridlock in Washington and the expanded work of trade associations has ushered in the need for candidates with a larger skill set.
“Now you need a combination of strategies; you need someone with the connections and someone who could create a strategy and then lead a team to execute that against that comprehensive advocacy plan,” Ha said.
Dozens of lawmakers will be hitting the streets looking for a job next year. More than 50 members of Congress are not returning to Capitol Hill in 2019 — including nearly a dozen high-profile committee leaders.
Trade groups have long been a natural next step for many lawmakers. More than 50 percent of all retiring lawmakers end up in the advocacy industry, according to various studies by watchdogs and academics in recent years, primarily at multiclient lobbying and public affairs firms.
But more than 20 former members or governors have been hired as trade group chief executives over the last two decades, with influential organizations like the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association, the Motion Picture Association of America, the Business Roundtable, the Financial
Services Roundtable and telecommunications group CTIA choosing to hire former elected officials to fill the top role.Former Rep. Billy Tauzin (R-La.), who led the House Energy and Commerce Committee, went on to be chief executive of the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America. He now has his own lobbying firm, Tauzin Consultants.
Ex-Rep. Jim Nussle (R-Iowa) is president and CEO of the Credit Union National Association. He also did a stint under former President George W. Bush as Office of Management and Budget director. Former GOP Rep. James Greenwood (Pa.) leads the Biotechnology Innovation Organization.
A few lawmakers who retired in 2018 have gone on to K Street or advocacy roles, including former GOP Reps. Blake Farenthold (Texas) and Charlie Dent (Pa.). Farenthold ended up as a lobbyist for the Calhoun Port Authority in Texas, while Dent went to work for law and lobbying firm DLA Piper.
Former Rep. Pat Tiberi (R-Ohio) is the first of the 2018 retiring class to take a trade association role. He joined the Ohio Business Roundtable last year in the heat of the
tax-reform effort.Headhunters say that chief executives must still be able to explain the inner workings of Washington — shepherding association members through legislative and regulatory processes. But they are also looking for CEOs who can handle other tasks.
“Today, the board expects a CEO to bring operational efficiencies to the trade association, leverage technology and the digital arena, all while understanding the challenges that members are facing every day in their businesses as a result of tariffs, increased regulations, #MeToo, and other current events,” Stephanie Tomasso, head of the trade and professional associations practice for executive search firm Russell Reynolds Associates, told The Hill in an email.
With trade associations growing in size and their CEOs taking on greater responsibilities, boards want more from their leaders.
“What’s really changing is ... associations are bigger and there’s more money involved than has ever been involved. Therefore, they’re looking for people that have more of a business mindset and can do things in that way,” said Ivan Adler, a principal at the McCormick Group, an executive-search firm.
More money than ever is being spent on advocacy, and member dues are also getting higher in some cases, Adler said.
“The costs of failure are so high today at these associations,” he adds, “and they’re looking for, frankly, more.”
In industry groups’ most recent CEO hires, former high-level staffers, longtime lobbyists with government service experience and those who have served in executive roles before have ultimately been selected by industry groups.
Earlier this year, when the American Petroleum Institute needed a new chief executive — one of the most coveted and highest-paying gigs on K Street — it went with a longtime top congressional aide for former Speaker John Boehner (R-Ohio), rather than a high-profile retiring lawmaker.
That aide, Mike Sommers, had led the American Investment Council (AIC) for about two years before that, an organization he joined after Boehner’s retirement in 2015. AIC has replaced him with Drew Maloney, a top official from the Treasury Department with strong K Street credentials.
After former Idaho Gov. Dirk Kempthorne (R) announced he would be stepping down as chief executive of the American Council of Life Insurers this year, the group brought on longtime American Beverage Association CEO Susan Neely to take the reins.
The Grocery Manufacturers Association is replacing its outgoing leader with Geoff Freeman, who leads the American Gaming Association.
“If you hire a former staffer with a great deal of experience, they have climbed the ladder. They know what it’s like to not be the top person, and they’re comfortable with that,” said Tim LaPira, a professor at James Madison University who specializes in the revolving door between government and the private sector.
“Former members come with an ego. They were the principal — always,” he added, acknowledging that some former members fit well in the roles.
All of the headhunters who spoke with The Hill emphasized that many lawmakers still have the qualifications that trade groups’ hiring committees are looking for and still pop up as chief executive candidates.
One factor is the performance of some past elected officials.
Some headhunters worried that some former lawmakers have taken cushy CEO titles expecting seven-figure paychecks but then not always done their best in the posts.
“Unfortunately, some previous former member hires have perhaps not performed as well, and so for every Cal Dooley or Dave McCurdy, who were very effective, there are others who have not,” said Ha.
Former Rep. Dave McCurdy (D-Okla.) helms the American Gas Association. And former Rep. Cal Dooley (D-Calif.) had two successful stints, first at the Grocery Manufacturers Association and then at the American Chemistry Council (ACC). He announced his retirement from ACC earlier this year.
For lawmakers now, Ha said, “the bar is higher.”
http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/396395-ex-lawmakers-see-tough-job-market-with-trade-groups
-
GOP Senators Willing to Wait for a Permanent Pruitt Replacement
Jul 10, 2018 | PoliticoPro
By Anthony Adragna
Senate Republicans are in no hurry to tackle a bruising confirmation fight to permanently replace Scott Pruitt as head of the Environmental Protection Agency.
Nearly a dozen GOP senators said this week that they are comfortable with acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler’s ability to run the agency indefinitely. The Senate's schedule ahead of November's midterm elections is expected to be dominated by annual spending bills and the fight to confirm President Donald Trump's new Supreme Court nominee, leaving Republicans with little appetite to worry about replacing the scandal-scarred Pruitt this year.
“We have a lot of confirmation business and it’d be best not to take up the schedule with yet another confirmation,” Sen. Roger Wicker (R-Miss.) told POLITICO.
Many Republicans said they personally know and respect Wheeler, a longtime Senate aide on the Environment and Public Works Committee and lobbyist. Several, including Sens. Mike Rounds (S.D.), Dan Sullivan (Alaska) and Cory Gardner (Colo.), indicated the longtime Washington operator might be a good candidate to replace Pruitt permanently.
“I’ve known Andy Wheeler for a number of years,” Gardner told POLITICO. “I think he’ll probably be there, in whatever capacity, as long as he wants to be.”
Wheeler cleared the Senate just months ago when three Democrats joined with Republicans in backing his nomination. The chamber lies closely divided at effectively 50-49 with Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) battling cancer, leaving Republicans with the slimmest of margins to confirm an unfamiliar Pruitt replacement.
Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn (R-Texas) predicted the confirmation battle over the next EPA chief would be “bumpy.”
“I think [Wheeler] will be a competent acting administrator, but I don’t know what the president’s plans are in terms of nominating somebody else,” Cornyn said.
An additional wrinkle for the GOP may lie in the bloc of corn-state Republicans still smarting over Pruitt’s handling of the federal ethanol mandate. At least three of them — Sens. Chuck Grassley (Iowa), Joni Ernst (Iowa) and Rounds — said they were pushing for a meeting in the near future to discuss the matter with Wheeler.
A Senate Republican aide said they'd reached out to the agency but didn't see anything happening "for a bit until things get settled over there." In the meantime, Grassley said his colleagues should be patient.
“The Senate shouldn’t rush to confirm a replacement for Pruitt until we more fully understand the damage done to the RFS by Pruitt and what can be done to make it right,” Grassley said in a Tuesday call with reporters. “I think we ought to wait a while. Let things cool down. See the lay of the land before we fill that position.”
Ernst agreed: “I’m not looking for a permanent replacement right now,” she told POLITICO.
In general, acting officials can serve no more than 210 days from the date of a vacancy under the Federal Vacancies Reform Act, according to a Congressional Research Service report posted online by the Federation of American Scientists. Pruitt’s resignation, effective July 6, would make the end of that period Feb. 1, 2019.
However, under a 2017 Supreme Court decision, Wheeler could not continue to serve as acting administrator if Trump nominated him as a permanent replacement for Pruitt. EPA did not respond to request for comment on how long Wheeler could serve as acting administrator.
Not all Republicans want to wait, with some pointing to the canceled August recessperiod as opening additional floor time to consider a new nominee.
“He’s the acting director and we need a permanent person in that spot,” Sen. James Lankford (R-Okla.) said. “We’re here in August. Let’s keep going.”
The top Democrat on EPW, Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.), said he’d already spoken by phone with Wheeler and hoped he would usher in a tone shift at the agency. He was also wary of the type of nominee Trump might select to replace Pruitt.
“I know a lot of people who have great misgivings about Andrew Wheeler even as the acting, much less as the administrator, but I’m afraid this president could do a whole lot worse,” he told reporters. “As a former EPA staffer, he’s intent on making sure people feel respected and not disrespected.”
Eric Wolff contributed to this report.
https://subscriber.politicopro.com/energy/article/2018/07/gop-senators-willing-to-wait-for-a-permanent-pruitt-replacement-676250
-
NGOs Fear Little Improvement in Changed EPA Leadership
Jul 11, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
Even as Congressional Democrats and environmental groups celebrate the departure of embattled former EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt (pictured), they continue to worry about his successor and whether the Trump administration will reverse its anti-regulatory agenda at the agency.
Last week, Mr Pruitt resigned after 17 months at the top of the EPA. His tenure was mired in ethics scandals and criticised heavily by environmental advocates who felt he acted to protect the industries he was appointed to regulate.
Mr Pruitt's deputy, former coal lobbyist Andrew Wheeler, took over as acting agency administrator on Monday.
Hostility
Despite President Trump's claim that Mr Pruitt had done an "outstanding job" at the EPA, news of his departure was met with blistering comments from environmental groups and Congressional Democrats, who called his resignation "long overdue".
Tom Carper (D–Delaware), minority leader on the Senate Environmental Works Committee, said the former administrator was "openly hostile to the agency's fundamental mission [and] made a mockery of the position".
"He has actively worked to discredit objective science, ignore the most serious environmental threats to our communities and consistently put polluters' profits and partisan views over public health," added Mr Carper.
And while environmental groups share enthusiasm for Mr Pruitt's departure, they remain cautious about who will fill the vacancy.
The Natural Resources Defense Council's Ana Unruh Cohen said Mr Wheeler is "equally unqualified to serve as the nation's chief environmental steward".
"Like Pruitt, this veteran coal lobbyist has shown only disdain for the EPA's vital mission to protect Americans' health and our environment," she said.
Mr Wheeler, who was confirmed as deputy administrator in April, began his career in the EPA's Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT). He was later chief of staff for Senator James Inhofe (R-Oklahoma) and subsequently served as a lobbyist to coal giant Murray Energy, as well as to several chemicals companies.
More broadly, the Environmental Working Group's president Ken Cook said the "ideological fervour with which Pruitt pursued the destruction of environmental regulations and the agency itself lives on in the Trump administration".
Ken Kimmell, president at the Union of Concerned Scientists, has called for the EPA to put in place a new administrator who will uphold science and commit to the agency's mission of protecting the environment.
But until that happens, he has called on Congress to "conduct considerably more oversight because political appointees at the EPA are sidelining science and compromising the agency's effectiveness."
And the EWG's Mr Cook joined with other environmental groups to pledge that "resistance to all [Mr Pruitt] stood for will continue undiminished".
However Senator John Barrasso (R–Wyoming), chairman of the EPW committee, said that during Mr Pruitt's tenure, "the agency has rolled back punishing regulations that were hurting American workers and stifling our economy."
"I look forward to the confirmation of the next head of the EPA. In the meantime, I know Deputy Administrator Andrew Wheeler is well prepared to continue the progress already made under President Trump," he added.
https://chemicalwatch.com/68511/ngos-fear-little-improvement-in-changed-epa-leadership
-
How Trump’s EPA is Keeping Asbestos Legal
Jul 10, 2018 | Environmental Working Group
By Melanie Benesh
A Russian asbestos company is lavishing praiseo n Donald Trump and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
“Donald is on our side,” says a post on the Facebook page of the company, Uralasbest, touting the EPA’s recent decision to “no longer deal with negative effects potentially derived from products containing asbestos.”
Uralabest – one of the largest asbestos producers in the world, with ties to Russian President Vladimir Putin – is even wrapping crates of asbestos in plastic emblazoned with Trump’s image.
Given the well-known health hazards of asbestos, the endorsement is startling. Asbestos exposure is the only known cause of mesothelioma, a painful and deadly form of lung cancer. Asbestos exposure is also linked to other kinds of lung disease. A recent studyfound that asbestos could be responsible for nearly 40,000 deaths per year in the U.S.
But Uralasbest is not wrong about the EPA’s actions.
Uralsbest is referring to recent actions taken under the Toxic Substances Control Act, or TSCA, the country’s primary chemical law. Asbestos is one of the first 10 substancesthe EPA is assessing for safety following TSCA’s overhaul in 2016. Although the EPA has not yet made a decision on the safety of asbestos under the new law, recent actions lay the groundwork for the agency to find that asbestos is safe and should remain legal.
The new TSCA requires the EPA to consider all uses of a chemical when evaluating it for safety. Despite this clear directive, the Trump EPA is ignoring key exposures to asbestos in its safety assessment, likely in violation of the law.
Most egregiously, the EPA is excluding most so-called legacy uses from its risk evaluation. That means the EPA is disregarding the safety risks from asbestos lingering in schools, homes and other building materials across the country – even though these uses pose the biggest exposure risk for most Americans.
The EPA has also significantly narrowed the kinds of asbestos included in its definition of asbestos. With limited exposures considered and some of the most dangerous exposures to asbestos removed from the agency’s consideration, it’s unlikely that the safety assessment will identify the true risk, making it less likely the EPA will ban asbestos.
Last month, the EPA also declined to ban uses of asbestos that have already been abandoned by industry. Instead, the agency issued a so-called significant new use rule, or SNUR, that merely requires manufacturers to notify and seek approval from the EPA before resuming these uses.
The EPA’s failure to finally ban asbestos is especially significant given the agency’s history with asbestos.
TSCA first became law in 1976. One of the EPA’s first actions under the law was to conduct a comprehensive 10-year study on the dangers of asbestos. As a result of the study, in 1989 the EPA proposed banning asbestos. But because of weaknesses in the law, in 1991 a court overturned the ban.
After that setback, the EPA took very few actions under TSCA on any chemical, leading many to consider it the least effective environmental law on the books. When Congress reformed TSCA in 2016, asbestos was often held up as the poster child for TSCA reform, with many saying the law was so broken the EPA “couldn’t even ban asbestos.”
Whether the EPA will finally ban asbestos under the reformed TSCA is an important litmus test for the new law. But given the agency’s recent actions, all signs seem to point to “nyet.”
https://www.ewg.org/news-and-analysis/2018/07/how-trump-s-epa-keeping-asbestos-legal#.W0W4XtIzbIU
-
EPA Toxics Office Ignores Risks of Five Hazardous Air Pollutants
Jul 10, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
The EPA has decided not to consider the public’s risks from certain toxic chemicals once they’re released into the air, saying they’re already adequately controlled.
Airborne releases of each of the five pollutants “are adequately assessed and any risks effectively managed” under the Clean Air Act, the Environmental Protection Agency said in risk analysis plans it recently released for the five chemicals.
Therefore, the “EPA does not plan to evaluate emission pathways to ambient air from commercial and industrial stationary sources or associated inhalation exposure of the general population or terrestrial species,” the agency said.
Environmental advocates disagreed with the decision, saying the EPA hasn’t gone far enough to examine the chemicals’ health effects, particularly on children.
“It is pretty obvious that EPA, influenced by the chemical industry, is taking a see-no-evil, speak-no-evil approach to these potential dangers,” Frank O’Donnell, president of Clean Air Watch, told Bloomberg Environment.
The EPA didn’t respond to multiple requests for comment.
Five Air Pollutants
The five hazardous air pollutants—which are all solvents—are: 1,4-dioxane (CAS No. 123-91-1), carbon tetrachloride (CAS No. 56-23-5), methylene chloride (CAS No. 75-09-2), perchloroethylene (CAS No. 127-18-4), and trichloroethylene (CAS No. 79-01-6). They also are volatile organic compounds, meaning they help form ozone.
Four of the air pollutants are likely to cause cancer, according to the EPA. It classifies the fifth chemical, trichloroethylene (TCE), as a known human carcinogen. Most of the five air pollutants, including TCE, can harm liver and kidney function. Trichloroethylene also can reduce fertility and suppress the immune system.
The Clean Air Act requires the EPA to set technology-based standards to control emissions of these and other toxic air pollutants. The agency then periodically reviews those standards to ensure they are sufficiently protective of public health.
The EPA would examine ways people could be exposed to the five chemicals if they worked at a company that made or used the compounds, or purchased products that released them. But the agency wouldn’t count any exposure that took place as those same people walked outside between their jobs or the stores where they purchased the products.
Bloomberg Environment contacted five chemical manufacturers listed in the EPA’s Toxics Release Inventory as having production facilities that emitted the highest volumes nationwide of one of each of the five pollutants.
Four of the five companies—3V Sigma USA, Dover Chemical Corp., the Olin Corp., and Daramic LLC—didn’t respond to a request for comment.
Penny Mahoney, director of sustainability at DAK Americas, declined to comment on whether the agency is taking an appropriate analytic approach to the risks posed by these hazardous chemicals.
Risk to Children
Recent amendments to the nation’s primary chemical law—the Toxic Substances Control Act—said children are among those the agency should examine to ensure it considers the risks potentially exposed or susceptible populations may face from chemicals.
“It’s inconceivable that EPA would exclude air pollution,” yet claim it is examining children’s risk, S. Katharine Hammond, an environmental health professor at the University of California, Berkeley, told Bloomberg Environment.
The EPA could examine the amount of exposures to these five hazardous air pollutants and then decide the exposure is so low that it would not pose a health risk, she said. But the agency can’t fully evaluate people’s risk until it has looked at their total exposure, Hammond said.
The Berkeley/Stanford Children’s Environmental Health Center that Hammond helps run focuses on children’s exposure to air pollutants generally, including some hazardous air pollutants.
The center’s research hasn’t focused on the five toxic air pollutants the agency is evaluating, she said. But its research on other hazardous air pollutants has shown that tiny concentrations—at the parts per billion level—of hazardous air pollutants can harm children’s immune systems and increase the likelihood that they are born prematurely, she said.
Risk Analysis Comes First
The agency’s approach “flies in the face of what Congress told EPA to do” when it amended TSCA in 2016, said Richard Denison, lead senior scientist with the Environmental Defense Fund.
The Environmental Defense Fund is among many environmental, health, and other non-profit groups challenging the EPA risk assessment approach in court.
Communities that live in industrial areas where air pollution and other chemical exposures tend to be higher would have that reality presumed “not to exist,” Denison said. Those exposures are presumed to be zero under the EPA’s approach, he said.
Denison said the law is clear: The EPA must first comprehensively assess a chemical’s risks.
Then, if the agency concludes there is an unreasonable risk, it would decide whether TSCA or other legal statutes would adequately address that risk, he said.
“The agency has totally reversed that approach,” Denison said.
The EPA is accepting comment through July 26 on its “problem formulations,” the documents that describe its proposed approach to assessing the risks of all 10 chemicals.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/epa-toxics-office-ignores-risks-of-five-hazardous-air-pollutants
-
(ACC Mentioned) What’s in Your Blood? California to Screen for Fluorochemicals
Jul 10, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Emily C. Dooley
California state health officials and researchers are launching a biomonitoring program this year to measure the concentration of fluorochemicals in people’s blood.
The California Regional Exposure Study, or CARE, will start with 300 to 500 volunteers in Los Angeles and expand to include eight parts of the state in coming years as resources allow.
Twelve types of fluorochemicals will be screened for in blood serum, said Sam Delson, spokesman for California Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, or OEHHA.
“This information will support efforts to reduce chemical exposure in Californians and improve public health,” a state fact sheet said.
Care in Communication
Fluorochemicals, such as perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS), are known for their use in firefighting foam and in making stain-resistant products.
They don’t break down in water and can accumulate in the body. Exposure can cause developmental issues in children, thyroid problems, immune system issues, and other ill health effects.
Results of individual tests will be communicated to participants and a summary of total samples will be released to the public. The state also will hold community meetings to discuss findings.
Jon Corley, director of issue communications for the American Chemistry Council, expressed caution about how California communicates survey results.
“It is important for California to adhere to the CDC standards for biomonitoring of human exposure to chemicals so information is reported in the proper context and does not create unwarranted fear or concern,” Corley said.
Federal SurveysThe Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s National Center for Health Statistics has included blood testing for fluorochemicals as part of its own national health survey since about 2003, said Kathryn S. Porter, director of the Division of Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys.
That survey involved interviews with 5,000 randomly-selected people nationwide about their health and habits and collected blood and urine samples, but the results down to the state level are not released.
“I could certainly see why California would want to do their own study,” Porter told Bloomberg Environment July 9.
The national survey screens for 16 types of fluorochemicals, including the dozen that California will test for as part of its research.
California has had a biomonitoring program in place since 2006.
In 2016, the state launched a limited survey of Chinese residents in San Francisco to screen for fluorochemicals and metals like arsenic, cadmium, and lead as part of its Asian/Pacific Islander Community Exposures Project.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/whats-in-your-blood-california-to-screen-for-fluorochemicals
-
House Democrats Seek Schedules on ATSDR Toxicological Profiles
Jul 10, 2018 | Inside EPA
House Democrats are seeking to protect a federal health program for assessing chemical risks from further political interference after EPA and the Defense Department (DOD) sought White House assistance to temporarily block release of a draft analysis that sought more conservative values for four per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) chemicals than EPA had used.
Reps. Peter DeFazio (D-OR) and Grace Napolitano (D-CA), top Democrats on the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, wrote a July 9 letter to Andrew Wheeler, acting EPA Administrator, and Patrick Breysse, director of the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), seeking further information about EPA's efforts to delay the release of ATSDR's draft toxicological profile of four PFAS, schedules for releasing the final document and all ongoing toxicological profiles.
“In our view, any effort by the Trump administration to suppress the ATSDR study would be wholly inconsistent with the stated missions of the EPA and its statutory responsibility to protect public health,” DeFazio and Napolitano write.
“Reports of political appointees within the administration attempting to suppress ATSDR’s draft toxicological profile for PFOS cast serious doubts over the administration’s commitment to protecting the American public and environment from harmful toxic chemicals,” they add.
While ATSDR last month released a draft toxicological profile on four PFAS chemicals, it was released in the face of strong public criticisms after Inside EPA first reported that EPA and DOD sought to delay its release for fear its inclusion of more conservative risk estimates than EPA had used for two substances would create a “public relations nightmare.”
In light of the scandal, the Democrats are seeking by July 31 copies of EPA and ATSDR memos, emails and other documents regarding the release of the draft PFAS tox profile; a list of all toxicological profiles “currently under development at ATSDR and a timetable for their expected dates of release”; the planned schedule for releasing the finalized PFAS profile and “your intended action plan to address both the exposure concerns raised by the ATSDR report, including ongoing releases of PFAS from manufacturing facilities and firefighting techniques, as well as the Trump administration’s action plan to address the health of military families and other communities associated with known contamination of groundwater sites associated with DOD facilities.”
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/house-democrats-seek-schedules-atsdr-toxicological-profiles
-
Massachusetts Advances Flame Retardant Ban
Jul 11, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
Massachusetts' senate has approved a bill to ban certain flame retardants from children’s products and home furnishings.
The measure (S2555) is aimed at residential upholstered furniture, bedding, carpeting, window treatments and products intended for children less than 12-years-old.
If passed into law, it would prohibit the sale of such items if they contain, in any component part, more than 1,000 parts per million of any of the following substances or their analogues:
· tris(1,3-dichloro-2-propyl)phosphate (TDCPP);
· tris(2-chloroethyl)phosphate (TCEP);
· antimony trioxide;
· hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD);
· bis(2-ethylhexyl)-3,4,5,6-tetrabromophthalate (TBPH);
· 2-ethylhexyl-2,3,4,5-tetrabromobenzoate (TBB);
· chlorinated paraffins;
· tris(1-chloro-2-propyl)phosphate (TCPP);
· pentaBDE;
· octaBDE; or
· tetrabromobisphenol A (TBBPA).
The ban would not apply to products manufactured before 1 January 2019.
The bill, now under consideration by the House Ways and Means Committee, also contains a provision to allow for bans on additional chemicals.
This calls for the state's department of environmental protection to assess, every three years, whether substances merit banning based on their meeting certain toxicity and usage criteria.
The measure cleared the senate last month on a 37-0 vote.
States move on flame retardants
Massachusetts' action comes as other states look to address the potentially toxic class of substances.
Washington is working to develop policy recommendations on six flame retardants: TPP, TCPP, TBPH, V6, IPTPP and TBB. The move comes as part of a 2016 law that banned five flame retardants – TDCPP, TCEP, decaBDE, HBCD and additive TBBPA – from children's products and residential furniture.
Last year, Rhode Island prohibited the sale of furniture containing organohalogen flame retardants, while Maine banned all chemical flame retardants from such items.
Meanwhile, a bill is working its way through the California legislature to act like Maine on the full class of substances.
More than a quarter of US states, this year, have been considering legislation to ban or restrict flame retardants in certain types of products.
And on a national level, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) voted last year to grant an NGO petition to begin a rulemaking that could see a ban on the use of organohalogen flame retardants in furniture, children's products, mattresses and external cases of electronics.
https://chemicalwatch.com/68536/massachusetts-advances-flame-retardant-ban
-
U.S. Judge Allows Lawsuits Over Monsanto's Roundup to Proceed to Trial
Jul 10, 2018 | Reuters (In The New York Times)
By Tina Bellon
Hundreds of lawsuits against Monsanto Co by cancer survivors or families of those who died can proceed to trial, a federal judge ruled on Tuesday, finding there was sufficient evidence for a jury to hear the cases that blame the company's glyphosate-containing weed-killer for the disease.
The decision by U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria in San Francisco followed years of litigation and weeks of hearings about the controversial science surrounding the safety of the chemical glyphosate, the key ingredient in Monsanto's top-selling weed-killer.
Monsanto is now a unit of Bayer AG, following a $62.5 billion takeover of the U.S. seed major which closed in June.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency last September concluded glyphosate is likely not carcinogenic to humans. But the World Health Organization in 2015 classified glyphosate as "probably carcinogenic to humans."
Chhabria called the plaintiffs' expert opinions "shaky" and entirely excluded the opinions of two scientists. But he said a reasonable jury could conclude, based on the findings of four experts he allowed, that glyphosate can cause cancer in humans.
The plaintiffs will next have to prove Roundup caused cancer in specific people whose cases will be selected for test trials, a phase Chhabria in his Tuesday opinion called a "daunting challenge."
Lawsuits by more than 400 farmers, landscapers and consumers who claim Roundup caused them to develop non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma, a type of blood cell cancer, have been consolidated before Chhabria.
Monsanto denies the allegations and in a statement said it would continue to defend the lawsuits with evidence proving there is "absolutely no connection between glyphosate and cancer." The company said its position was supported by more than 800 scientific studies and reviews.
The company had told Chhabria in March that none of the plaintiffs' experts satisfied scientific or legal requirements for admissibility and urged the judge to dismiss the cases.EDITORS’ PICKSSafety Concerns Grow as Inmates Are Guarded by Teachers and SecretariesThese Transgender Recruits Are Ready. The Military Isn’t.China Got a 99-Year Lease for a Port Near India. Here’s How, and Why.
Aimee Wagstaff, one of the lawyers representing the people suing the company, in a statement said she was pleased her clients will have their day in court. "It's time to hold Monsanto accountable for putting this dangerous product on the market," Wagstaff said.
Monsanto faces 5,000 lawsuits nationwide alleging Roundup caused cancer, mainly in state courts.
While Chhabria's ruling is not binding on them, state court judges have been closely following the federal litigation and expert hearings. The California state judge who handles the most Roundup cases posted to her docket that she was attending the hearings before Chhabria in March.
https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2018/07/10/business/10reuters-monsanto-glyphosate.html
-
American Airlines to Stop Using Plastic Straws
Jul 10, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Avery Anapol
American Airlines announced Tuesday that it would stop serving drinks with single-use plastic straws and stirrers.
The airline said in a release that it will serve a straw-and-wood stir stick and bamboo straw with drinks, and will begin transitioning to “all eco-friendly flatware” in its lounges.
The airline said that it will begin to use eco-friendly alternatives in all of its airport lounges starting this month, and on planes later this year.
The company estimates that the move will eliminate more than 71,000 pounds of plastic annually.
Jill Surdek, American Airlines' vice president of flight service, said that the company is “excited and proud” to switch to green alternatives.
“We’re cognizant of our impact on the environment and we remain committed to doing our part to sustain the planet for future generations of travelers,” Surdek said.
American Airlines is the world’s largest airline, and one of the biggest companies to stop using plastic straws.
Earlier this week, Starbucks announced that it would phase out plastic straws in all of its stores worldwide by 2020.
The movement to end the use of plastic straws has quickly gained traction among major companies, cities and even entire countries as a means to combat pollution and harm to marine life.
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/396416-american-airlines-to-stop-using-plastic-straws
-
Race Is on for Greener Straws as Starbucks, MGM Spurn Plastic
Jul 10, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Eliza Haverstock
Craig Graffius started EcoGlass Straws 12 years ago with three decades of glass-making experience and his vision for an alternative to the ubiquitous plastic straw. What he didn’t have was anyone clamoring for his product.
Today, his tiny four-person shop in Hood River, Ore., is gearing up to turn out 2,000 handcrafted glass straws an hour. That’s up from the current pace of 125 an hour, or 1,000 a day.
EcoGlass’s surging output underscores a wave of change sweeping through the supply chain as the straw emerges as a central symbol of the world’s plastic trash crisis. With consumers searching for greener options, companies from Starbucks Corp. to McDonald’s Corp. to MGM Resorts International are responding.
“Everybody’s got to find a replacement,” said Graffius, who has seen orders more than triple in the past year after a long struggle to convince buyers his wares were more than just a novelty. “We didn’t anticipate this happening. We were going to really hit the market.’’ But instead, “it’s hitting us.”
Plastic straws are just one example of how companies are being forced to adapt to changing public attitudes about the environment. For some, abandoning traditional plastic raises costs, threatens sales, and forces uncomfortable conversations with customers. Others see an opportunity for new business with the rise in demand for alternatives.
Sea Turtle
The furor dates to a viral 2015 video of marine biologists pulling a straw from deep inside the nose of a sea turtle. Then in 2017 the “Strawless in Seattle” campaign motivated cities to take action. The public outcry escalated to the point McDonald’s, Starbucks, and MGM have vowed to phase out their reliance on plastic straws globally.
While straws account for just .03 percent of the 8 million metric tons of plastic that enters the ocean each year, according to a 2015 study, the disturbing images refocused the world’s attention on the problem.
“The anti-single-use-plastic movement is much bigger than those who identify as environmentalists,” said Maisie Ganzler, brand chief for Bon Appetit Management Co., a food-service chain that on May 31 said it would stop using traditional plastic straws. “When people see the photographic evidence of the amount of plastic pollution in our oceans and in the bodies of birds, fish, turtles, and whales, it’s stomach-turning no matter what your politics are,” Ganzler said.
Biodegradable Option
In recent months, countries in Europe have begun announcing bans or limits. As of July 1, Seattle became the first major U.S. city to outlaw plastic straws, following similar measures by smaller towns along the East and West Coasts. Even where laws haven’t changed, the public outcry is pressuring companies to respond or risk alienating customers. That pressure travels up and down the supply chain.
Best Diamond Plastics co-founder and president Mark Tolliver has grown his straw-making business to more than 70 employees from the five he started with in 2008, in large part thanks to his first major customer: McDonald’s. Now his 73,000 square-foot plant in Chicago churns out plastic implements for customers including five big fast-food companies.
Smart Plastic
Tolliver started talking with McDonald’s about more environmentally friendly options a few years ago as concerns about plastic trash gained traction. That sent him searching for a solution that wouldn’t turn his growing business upside down. Competing against a range of entirely different materials, such as glass, paper, or metal, Best Diamond decided to stick with the material it knew best, but engineer it to quickly decompose.
Tolliver teamed up with Smart Plastic Technologies in Knoxville, Tenn., where CEO Tim Murtaugh found success in recent years selling an additive that makes plastic grocery bags biodegradable, and has now adjusted the product to work for straws.
In the last six months, the drive for an alternative became more urgent as he heard from all five of his big fast-food customers. McDonald’s announced last month it would be replacing plastic straws with paper in the U.K. and Ireland by 2019, and would start testing substitutes in the U.S., as well.
Drawing Attention
Murtaugh says he’s seen a 10-fold increase in inquiries for his additive so far this year, including from many larger companies. “We’ve drawn their attention, they’re impressed with our technology, and we are now in what I would call the final phase of conversation about it,’’ he said.
Many plastic substitutes come with their own set of environmental problems, said Murtaugh. Paper straws have more carbon emissions when the entire manufacturing process is considered, and plant-based bioplastics are tricky because they won’t break down if they’re not composted correctly, he said. Reuseable glass straws can be difficult to clean and are significantly more expensive up front.
Nonetheless, those products are also seeing demand surge in the wake of the plastic straw controversy.
The largest U.S. paper straw maker, Aardvark Straws, can’t keep up with the flood of new orders, leaving some customers to wait three months for their orders to be filled.
Eco-Products Inc., which supplies food-service giants such as US Foods Holdings Corp. and Sysco Corp., has seen demand for its compostable straws double in the last six months.
When he was first getting EcoGlass off the ground, Graffius spent years traveling to craft shows and conferences handing out free samples of his glass straws to drum up business. But people still viewed them as a gimmick. “I spent a lot of money and I pretty much got nowhere,” he recalled.
Like ‘Silverware’
Graffius abandoned his marketing efforts and refocused on making his straws. He imports shatter-resistant glass from Germany and then hand-shapes and polishes it into smooth, dishwasher-safe drinking tubes “almost equal to the silverware that’s in your drawer.’’
He sells his straws direct through his company website and in bulk to a distributor, Foods Alive Inc., based in Angola, Ind. Foods Alive repackages and sells the straws to several hundred retail stores, juice bars and consumers. The distributor has seen sales jump by 30 percent from last year, and now markets the EcoGlass product to individuals, too, packaged with a carrying case and cleaning brush, said Matt Alvord, one of the company’s founders.
‘Overwhelmingly Positive’EcoGlass’s phone started ringing more often a couple years ago after the turtle video stirred more awareness about how plastic trash was harming the environment.
A local restaurant, Pelinti Pizza, is among the new customers stocking EcoGlass straws. Owner Gabriel Head says customers have been “overwhelmingly positive,” with many thanking him for providing an option other than plastic.
“People who care, get it,’ he said.
As demand took off over the past year, EcoGlass has been able to cut prices by almost half, with the wholesale price now ranging from $1 to $1.50 per straw, depending on style. Compare that to a box of 100 disposable plastic bendy straws that retails for $5.99 on Amazon.com, or about six cents apiece. Graffius is finishing work on a machine that will drastically speed up the cutting and polishing process. He expects an average 1,890 straws an hour to roll off the assembly line by next month, which will allow him to cut prices even more.
Meanwhile, the glassmaker is hearing from new customers every day, ranging from hospitals to hotels, as the plastic backlash accelerates.
“It’s exciting,’’ Graffius said. His business started with a simple, environmentally friendly product that was ahead of its time, “and now everything’s catching up.”
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/race-is-on-for-greener-straws-as-starbucks-mgm-spurn-plastic
-
EPA Sends Proposed Rule Replacement to White House
Jul 10, 2018 | E&E News PM
By Niina Heikkinen
EPA submitted its proposal to replace the Clean Power Plan to the White House yesterday, the same day Andrew Wheeler began work as the new temporary head of the agency.
The proposal to replace the Obama-era regulation on greenhouse gas emissions from power plants is now under review by the Office of Management and Budget.
Details of the proposal, "State Guidelines for Greenhouse Gas Emissions From Existing Electric Utility Generating Units," are slim, but Wheeler is expected to follow much the same approach as his predecessor.
The rule is likely to be much less stringent than the Clean Power Plan, which would have cut carbon emissions by 32 percent below 2005 levels by 2030.
An advance notice of proposed rulemaking published in December 2017 suggested the new administration was considering crafting a rule that would define emissions reductions at the facility level and would set guidelines for states to establish a system for addressing power plant CO2 releases.
Enesta Jones, an EPA press aide, said in an emailed statement that the agency drafted the proposal after reviewing comments on the December ANPRM. She added that more details of the proposal would be available after OMB review.
The New York Times reported last week the proposal would be heading to OMB imminently and would focus on cutting emissions through fuel sources and efficiency improvements.
Some EPA observers have suggested Wheeler may be more effective at unwinding the Clean Power Plan because he is more practiced in working through Washington, D.C., bureaucracy and is not distracted by more than a dozen federal investigations (Climatewire, July 10).
The proposal comes as litigation over the Clean Power Plan is still stalled in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
The court has granted a number of stays in the case as the Trump administration has worked out whether it intended to eliminate the rule outright with or without a replacement.
Two judges on the court stated they would not approve further stays, suggesting there may have been added pressure on EPA to show progress in replacing the rule (Climatewire, June 27).
The agency is deviating somewhat from its proposed timeline for eliminating the Clean Power Plan, which it had intended to complete by the end of this year. An earlier regulatory calendar had stated the agency would release a proposal in June.
https://www.eenews.net/eenewspm/2018/07/10/stories/1060088693
-
A Decade of Fracking Research: What Have We Learned?
Jul 11, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By Pamela King
When oil and gas developers began using hydraulic fracturing to tap previously unaccessed sources of fossil fuels across the United States, the American public had a few questions.
Will this process pollute drinking water? Will it cause cancer in the communities close to well sites? What are the ramifications for global climate change?
Hydraulic fracturing — or fracking, as it is more commonly known — is just one small part of the broader process of unconventional oil and gas development. The extraction technique, popularized about a decade ago, has helped unlock hydrocarbons trapped in tight shale formations, spawning a vast web of rigs, wells and energy infrastructure across the country.
Every element of that network carries its own risks for water contamination, air pollution, health and climate change. Scientists have, in some cases, been able to distill the likelihood and severity of those risks.
akeaway: Air emissions from the oil and gas supply chain are significant but often underestimated. When emissions occur near the places where humans live, work and recreate, they can have implications for human health.
Fracking researchers are still working to understand what impact the spread of oil and gas development across the country has had on air quality.
Invisible emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), benzene and other pollutants from well sites could contribute to health effects ranging from headaches and nausea to cancer. But scientists are still in the early stages of understanding exactly what pollutants drill sites — and support activities like trucking — are producing.
Location of the well also matters, said Colorado State University professor Jeff Collett.
"We have some information about some of these operations, but I wouldn't say we have a comprehensive view from basin to basin or operator to operator," he said.
In a study this year, the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) found VOC emissions nine times higher than what had been reported to Pennsylvania environmental regulators. The measurements varied from state records because EDF's scientists were able to take measurements on site, instead of relying on self-reported numbers from companies.
"You can't rely on industry reports of what's been emitted," said Elena Craft, senior scientist for EDF.
"If you don't have a measurement, how is one to know if a facility is underreporting their emissions or not?" she said. "There's no groundtruthing that number."
Some operators have been open to partnering with EDF to measure emissions from their equipment because they don't want their infrastructure to release the product they're trying to market, Craft said. Other companies are a tougher sell.
"A couple of bad apples spoils the whole thing," she said.
Actions by the Obama administration to control methane emissions from oil and gas operations could have helped curb other air contaminants, such as VOCs, Craft said. The Bureau of Land Management's 2016 Methane and Waste Prevention Rule, for example, required companies to capture or burn gas from particularly leaky tanks.
The Trump administration this year proposed to completely rescind that provision of the rule due to concerns that the cost of complying with the requirement would outweigh the conservation benefits. The proposed revised rule would completely eliminate a definition of "volatile organic compounds" — and other phrases — from the rule because "they are no longer needed."
"I don't know that we understand the full implications of letting the industry carry on full bore without understanding health outcomes that might result from these operations," Craft said. "We need to better understand that if we do want to protect public health." Human health
But not always.
"Those who have black-and-white views on this issue would be well served to look at the research and try to understand the other side's position," said Daniel Raimi, a University of Michigan lecturer and senior research associate at the think tank Resources for the Future.
In his recent book, "The Fracking Debate: The Risks, Benefits, and Uncertainties of the Shale Revolution," Raimi addresses some of the most divisive questions about the shale boom, including "Will fracking make me sick?" and "Is fracking good for the climate?" (Energywire, Jan. 26).
Many times the answer is: We don't know yet.
"As the evidence does grow, people can understand and wrestle with the complexities, rather than painting everything as all good or all bad," Raimi said.
Industry groups say the book is closed on the question of whether fracking has polluted groundwater, but they remain open to new research on the climate and human health impacts from the various stages of energy development.
"Industry welcomes honest research," said Seth Whitehead, spokesman for the industry research campaign Energy In Depth. "The more reputable information that's out there, the better. It's good for all parties involved."
Antifracking advocates also want more research — but they have called to stop or slow energy production until the scientific literature is more robust.
"The technological gamble of developing shale gas early in this century is one that should never have been taken and has very grave consequences for every person on Earth," Anthony Ingraffea, an emeritus professor at Cornell University and senior fellow of Physicians, Scientists and Engineers for Healthy Energy, said in a recent lecture.
PSE Healthy Energy has built a repository of peer-reviewed studies that evaluate the impacts of shale development. In 2009, there were seven studies on the practice. There are now more than 1,000 studies in PSE Healthy Energy's archive.
The amount of research being conducted has increased as activity in the field has increased. According to reports from people living near shale wells, health impacts have increased, but scientists have yet to show a correlation between oil and gas activity and those health effects.
While some impacts of unconventional oil and gas development remain a mystery, the scientific community is much closer to understanding those effects than it was a decade ago, Ingraffea said.
"We knew jack shit in 2008," he said.
After 10 years of research on the environmental and health impacts of fracking, here's what we know now: Water contamination
Takeaway: While scientists have not found large-scale groundwater contamination from fracking, the process has at times polluted ground and surface water. The composition of oil and gas wastewater is a concern because of efforts to find other uses for the large volumes of flowback that fracking produces.
Drillers send millions of gallons of water, combined with sand and chemicals, into shale formations to extract oil and gas from below.
But the water that travels deep into the ground may be less concerning than what comes back up, researchers are finding.
"Our research results indicate that what we can definitively say is that mishandling of the waste can result in degradation of water quality," said U.S. Geological Survey research hydrologist Isabelle Cozzarelli. "That has occurred."
As part of a multiagency research collaborative, USGS has produced a set of studies on fracking impacts, including a paper declaring a "definitive link" between wastewater injection and compromised water quality (Energywire, May 11, 2016).
The process of fracking itself isn't causing the pollution, said USGS research microbiologist Denise Akob.
"Understanding proper terminology and understanding what's happening at each stage in the life cycle of oil and gas development is important," she said.
Their findings are in line with conclusions from Duke University scientists.
"The flowback water from shale gas development is actually composed of over 90 percent of this flowback or wastewater is composed of naturally occurring brine," said Duke scientist and professor Avner Vengosh. "The water that you put in is not the water that is coming out."
Well flowback can also contain radioactive elements and other toxins, the Duke research has shown. That matters because states like New Mexico and Colorado are pushing for opportunities to find uses for fracking wastewater, other than injecting it into disposal wells. Those uses could include crop irrigation or livestock watering.
EPA announced last month that it plans to study the safety of those uses (Energywire, May 3).
At the close of the Obama administration, EPA asserted that there was scientific evidence of fracking affecting drinking water in some cases, but due to a lack of data, the agency could not calculate the frequency and severity of those impacts. A draft version of the study purported that there were no "widespread, systemic" drinking water impacts from fracking. EPA dropped the controversial phrase from the final version of the study.
Fracking has contaminated groundwater in places like Pavillion, Wyo., where shale formations are shallower and closer to the aquifer, but those cases are rare, the EPA report found.
"We do know that hydraulic fracturing is causing groundwater contamination," said Dominic DiGiulio, a former EPA scientist and a senior research scientist at PSE Healthy Energy. "We don't know the extent."
Those rare cases have sometimes been seized by drilling opponents as a way to push to eliminate fossil fuels as a source of energy, said Syracuse University hydrologist Don Siegel, who found no correlation between drilling and groundwater contamination in his study of samples provided by the gas firm Chesapeake Energy Corp.
"I'm absolutely convinced that that's the case," Siegel said.
Air quality
Takeaway: Studies of health outcomes in shale regions are largely preliminary and do not conclusively show that unconventional oil and gas development has caused specific ailments, illnesses or diseases. Research will continue as operations mature.
Even after a decade of studies, scientists still have a long way to go toward understanding how activity in the shale patch has affected human health.
Most studies to date have focused on health outcomes — such as low birth weights, migraines and cancer — reported by residents in the communities where oil and gas extraction is taking place. Researchers understand that air and water contamination from energy production and support services are the pathways by which human health can be compromised.
But without any specific information about the nature and concentration of pollutants to which the local population is exposed, it's hard to conclude much about human health risks, said Donna Vorhees, director of the energy research program at the Boston-based Health Effects Institute. The institute has embarked on a long-term study of exposures and health in the Appalachian Basin.
"After 10 years, you would think we would know a whole lot," she said. "There are many community groups out there that are disappointed that we have 16, 17, 18 health studies, and you have someone like me saying they're hypothesis-generating studies.
"Science takes time, and it takes funding, and that's limited," she said. "It's not for lack of interest, and it's not for lack of people actually trying."
Exposure studies are the missing link in the literature, said Trevor Penning, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania's Perelman School of Medicine.
"There have been quite a few studies that have indicated an association between health outcomes and hydraulic fracturing, but association is not causation," he said.
If alternative uses for oil and gas wastewater catch on, it will be important to know how exposure to those fluids can affect human health, as well, said Seth Shonkoff, a visiting scholar at the University of California, Berkeley, and executive director of PSE Healthy Energy.
"There have not been any studies that have tried to assess exposure or public health impacts to water contamination from oil and gas development," he said. "However, there have been many studies that have looked at water contamination and taken educated guesses or models to assess what it would mean if people were exposed."
There are a few factors that contribute to the uncertainty as to what risks exist from exposure to wastewater, Shonkoff said.
First, U.S. chemical disclosure policies for oil field wastewater are limited: Operators aren't always required to contribute to registries like FracFocus, and when they do, they can often invoke proprietary protections. Second, the monitoring that's required to secure discharge permits can sometimes fall short. Third, oil and gas fields are dynamic places, and the composition of produced water is widely variable within a given shale formation or even within a single well.
"In some cases, the risks can be clear, and in most cases, we just don't know," Shonkoff said.
Time is another important factor in understanding health outcomes, said Susan Nagel, an associate professor at the University of Missouri School of Medicine. She has studied the impacts of shale production on pregnancy and infant health.
"Some epidemiological studies now are finding that developmental exposure in humans can alter birth outcomes related to birth defects and birth weights," Nagel said. "The question will be moving longitudinally and watching those kids as they grow up." Climate
Takeaway: The oil and gas supply chain contributes to increased concentrations of methane, a potent greenhouse gas, in the atmosphere. Substituting natural gas for coal has had the effect of cutting carbon dioxide emissions in the United States.
As with air, water and health impacts, fracking itself isn't resulting in greater greenhouse gas emissions, research shows.
EDF analysis shows that all elements of the oil and gas supply chain, to include pipelines, compressor stations and other infrastructure, are releasing methane into the atmosphere, said David Lyon, a scientist for the group. Conventional wells, or those that are stimulated without the use of fracking or horizontal drilling, are also contributing, he said.
While there are impacts associated with fracking specifically, "that's actually a pretty small part of the emissions piece," Lyon said.
Last month, EDF reported that oil and gas operations leak 60 percent more methane than previously estimated (Climatewire, June 22). Whitehead of Energy In Depth slammed the findings as "alarmist."
EPA and other regulatory agencies tend to underestimate emissions, primarily due to their measurement methods, Lyon said. Inventories assess activity data and multiply by an emission factor, such as average emissions per well, and arrive at a figure that could fail to account for equipment malfunctions and super-emitters.
In 2015, EDF determined that sites with high emissions account for 40 percent of methane leaks (Energywire, July 22, 2015).
Oil and gas companies have been receptive to fixing leaks from super-emitters, Lyon said.
"That's really the lowest-hanging fruit in reducing emissions," he said.
The increased availability of natural gas has had the effect of lowering carbon dioxide emissions as power generators phase out coal as a fuel source.
But attempts by the Trump administration to revitalize the coal industry could diminish the climate benefits of gas, Raimi of RFF wrote in his book.
"Whether the United States takes that opportunity depends primarily on the actions (or inaction) of the federal government," Raimi wrote.
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2018/07/11/stories/1060087955
-
US LNG Export Growth from Gulf Coast Draws Futures Contract Proposal by CME and Cheniere
Jul 10, 2018 | Platts
By Harry Weber and Scott Ickes
Exchange operator CME Group said Tuesday it was working with Cheniere Energy to develop a new futures contract for cargoes shipped from the US LNG exporter's Louisiana terminal that should reflect the physical cost of feedgas delivered to the facility, as well as the fundamentals of the global LNG market.
The effort is designed to provide global LNG market participants with liquid and transparent forward price discovery that can be transacted upon via the physically deliverable futures contract. The key benefit of physical deliverability is that futures contract prices, by definition, converge with the physical spot market at expiration of the contract.
As more LNG is shipped overseas from the US Gulf Coast, market participants including upstream producers, gas processors, traders and consumers are trying to determine with greater precision the true value of the product on a forward basis and how much they need to hedge to mitigate their risk.
"The LNG market is evolving rapidly and will continue to evolve over the next few years as a significant amount of capacity in the US comes online," Peter Keavey, CME's global head of energy, said in a telephone interview. "What we do know is the US Gulf Coast will be a significant pricing point."
The Henry Hub in Erath, Louisiana, serves as the official delivery location for natural gas futures contracts on the New York Mercantile Exchange. Because of the proximity to its Sabine Pass terminal, Cheniere traditionally has tied its long-term commercial deals to the Henry Hub price. The exporter also ships a meaningful number of cargoes on a spot basis.
But if the Henry Hub price remains relatively stable as expected over the next decade or two and global LNG demand surges due to Asia's desire to use cleaner-burning fuels, the future price in Asia of Gulf Coast-produced LNG could still rise. That would cause a dislocation with the Henry Hub price. In that scenario, producers like Cheniere would want a futures contract that helped them maximize their netback, while other participants along the value chain would be interested in a way to improve their hedging and trading strategies.
In March 2017, IntercontinentalExchange announced that it would begin trading the first-ever US LNG futures contract, which would be cash settled against the Platts LNG Gulf Coast Marker price assessment. ICE said it would uses Platts-derived US GCM LNG forward curves for daily settlement purposes, with an initial term of 48 months. Platts JKM is the benchmark price for spot LNG in Northeast Asia. CME and Cheniere may be hoping that the price of the futures contract they develop is more reflective of the physical LNG market at expiration, therefore generating what they believe is the true value of a Sabine Pass cargo bought, sold or hedged - versus cash settling based on the ability to discover or assess where the market will be.
Keavey declined to say when the new futures contract would launch, what it might be based on, or whether it ultimately could be applied to LNG exports from other Gulf Coast terminals that soon will be coming online.
Spokespersons for S&P Global Platts and ICE declined to comment on the announcement involving CME and Cheniere.MARKET RESPONSE TO NEW FUTURES PRODUCT MUTED
Ultimately, how the market responds to the new product remains to be seen, said Brad Leach, an energy market consultant in Connecticut who was formally responsible for natural gas and electricity research at CME.
"The geography of where Sabine Pass is located ensures a tight fit with the current Henry Hub contract," Leach said.
Further, because all Cheniere long-term sales are linked to the front month CME Henry Hub futures price, Sabine Pass sales can be directly hedged with the Henry Hub futures contract, Leach said.
Madeline Jowdy, New York-based senior director, global gas and LNG, Platts Analytics, said a transparent futures contract is an important step toward establishing a liquid trading hub in the US Gulf. But for now, she said, the CME proposal would be dominated by a single supplier, Cheniere, from a single export project, and the viability would be a function of Cheniere's commitment to the product.
"It's unclear if this particular product could develop into a larger clearinghouse for physical volumes or if something else, not influenced by Cheniere, would be preferred," Jowdy said. "When considering the US Gulf as a potential trading or pricing hub for LNG, it is critical to remember that most of the LNG consumption is occurring in Asia, and that is probably a more important factor."
https://www.spglobal.com/platts/en/market-insights/latest-news/natural-gas/071018-us-lng-export-growth-from-gulf-coast-draws-futures-contract-proposal-by-cme-and-cheniere
-
Jul 11, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By Pamela King
Federal land managers have delayed a planned September sale of oil and gas leases on 18,000 acres in Colorado's Huerfano County.
The Bureau of Land Management had scheduled the sale for the week of Sept. 3. The tracts may still be auctioned off at a later date, said Jayson Barangan, lead public affairs specialist for BLM in Colorado.
"We are currently engaged in tribal consultation with the Navajo," he told E&E News.
Green groups celebrated the news, which was first reported by the Associated Press. Environmentalists had called to stop or postpone the sale due to the proximity of the acreage to the Great Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve.
"The lease sale was a rush job as shown by the agency's failure to consult with the Navajo Nation, which owns land right near the proposed leases," said Becca Fischer, climate expert for WildEarth Guardians.
The Sierra Club said the announcement was a "substantial victory" for the community.
"We must continue to fulfill our obligation to leave great natural places for others to experience," said Kimberly Pope, organizing representative for the group's Our Wild America campaign. "This deferment is a great victory, but the fight isn't over. We will continue our fight until lease sales are permanently halted."
The Western Energy Alliance, which represents oil and gas producers, has criticized greens' quest to shutter oil and gas on public lands.
"The truth is, the federal government owns valuable energy resources that lie several miles outside of these protected areas and under lands Congress designated for productive uses," Western Energy Alliance spokesman Aaron Johnson wrote in a Saturday op-ed in the Pueblo Chieftain.
BLM has recently deferred lease sales in Montana to consider environmental impacts, New Mexico to study cultural artifacts and Idaho to weigh sage grouse concerns (E&E News PM, March 5).
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2018/07/11/stories/1060088743
-
Power Demand Could Keep Natural Gas Storage at Deficit Despite Record Onshore Output
Jul 10, 2018 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Leticia Gonzales
Even as Lower 48 natural gas production has reached record highs in recent days, strong power demand in the South Central region of the United States stands to challenge storage injections going into the peak summer period, according to Barclays Commodities Research.
Daily natural gas flow volumes have climbed just north of 80 Bcf/d on a handful of days since the end of June. Growth has come from shale plays including the Marcellus and Utica despite infrastructure issues in the region, like the explosion on Columbia Gas Transmission’s Leach Xpress that has restricted flows on the pipeline and the still pending in-service requests for the final portions of Energy Transfer Partners LP’s Rover Pipeline. Incremental additions to takeaway capacity in the Permian Basin have allowed for continued production growth in that region as well.
East Daley analysts have also noted that production from the Louisiana side of the Haynesville Shale “has been on a tear” since early 2017 as commodity prices have rebounded from 2016 lows. Natural gas production volumes hitting interstate pipelines have nearly doubled in the past 18 months, they said.
Sample volumes showed the biggest sequential increases in 2Q2018 for Azure Midstream Energy LLC’s Holly system (up 52%), Momentum Midstream LLC’s M5/Indigo Blue Union (27%), Kinder Morgan Inc.’s Kinderhawk system (22%) and Aethon Energy’s Ibex system (22%).
Given the production growth trajectory, Barclays researchers expect Lower 48 production to average 79.9 Bcf/d in 2018, up 7.3 Bcf/d year/year (y/y).
Despite the surge in production, storage inventory deficits of historical levels remain.
The Energy Information Administration reported inventories at 2,152 Bcf as of June 29, versus 2,869 Bcf last year and five-year average inventories of 2,645 Bcf. Week/week, the year-on-year deficit shrank from minus 735 Bcf to minus 717 Bcf, and the year-on-five-year deficit narrowed from minus 501 Bcf to minus 493 Bcf, EIA data show.
By region, Midwest storage stocks trail historic levels mostly significantly, with 2018 inventories about 35% below year-ago levels and about 26% below the five-year average. Stocks in the Mountain region are currently about 26% below year-ago levels and 15% below the five-year average. The South Central region is at a similar deficit, with stocks about 26% below year-ago levels and 16% below the five-year average.
The persistent deficits have come as power demand is off to a strong start this summer, Barclays said. During the recent heat wave that started at the end of June and continued through the Fourth of July holiday, daily gas burns reached nearly 40 Bcf/d. Meanwhile, the most recent weather forecasts show above-average temperatures for the rest of July for most of the country, with some of the hottest weather forecast for Texas.
Even without the help of Mother Nature, power demand has been “robust” on a weather-adjusted basis and is forecast to grow 2.2 Bcf/d this year, Barclays researchers said. With more than 40% of the y/y storage deficit in the South Central region, where demand growth is concentrated, “storage refills there should help put a bid under Henry Hub cash prices through October.”
The investment bank is projecting total U.S. demand to average 78.5 Bcf/d in 2018, an increase of 4.3 Bcf/d over 2017. It expects Henry Hub prices to average $2.85 in 2018, down from the $2.96 average in 2017. Barclays also lowered its price outlook for the second half of 2018 to $2.77, down from $2.85.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/114997-power-demand-could-keep-natural-gas-storage-at-deficit-despite-record-onshore-output
-
House Democrats Push for GAO Review of Grid Cyber Readiness
Jul 11, 2018 | E&E Daily
By Blake Sobczak
A group of Democratic lawmakers is calling on the Government Accountability Office to investigate grid cybersecurity, including use of Russian anti-virus software in the U.S. power sector.
Four members of the House Science, Space and Technology Committee urged GAO chief Gene Dodaro to review how U.S. utilities are handling "widespread, growing and deeply concerning" threats to their computer networks.
Reps. Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-Texas), Don Beyer (D-Va.), Marc Veasey (D-Texas) and Dan Lipinski (D-Ill.) warned of "escalating" consequences from cyberattacks on critical infrastructure.
"This has made the need to thoroughly address the weaknesses and vulnerabilities of our critical infrastructure paramount," they said in their letter to Dodaro yesterday.
The lawmakers highlighted security concerns with anti-virus software vendor Kaspersky Lab, which is headquartered in Moscow. Critical infrastructure providers across the globe have used Kaspersky products in their systems, but the U.S. intelligence community has warned that the software could provide a backdoor for Russian spies.
Last year, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security banned use of Kaspersky products in federal networks, saying that they "can be exploited by malicious cyber actors to compromise" the very networks they claim to protect.
The company's CEO, Eugene Kaspersky, has vehemently denied any compromising links to the Russian government. Kaspersky announced earlier this year it would move its data storage and processing services to a new facility in Switzerland in a bid to allay concerns about possible ties to the Kremlin.
The DHS directive did not cite evidence of wrongdoing on the part of Kaspersky. Nevertheless, the order has had a chilling effect on the company's business in the U.S., though it does not apply to private utilities.
"A lot of people are bailing on [Kaspersky]," said a power industry source, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss security matters. The source pointed to a major power generation control system vendor that switched from Kaspersky to another anti-virus vendor "based almost entirely" on U.S. government warnings. "They have to, because their clients are the ones saying, 'Why are you bringing Kaspersky?'"
The four lawmakers yesterday requested GAO identify which parts of the grid use Kaspersky products and whether utilities "have taken any actions to ascertain if Kaspersky products are being utilized on their networks, and whether they have implemented any plans to remove them."
Johnson, Beyer, Veasey and Lipinski pointed out that "the extent to which Kaspersky products are being used on critical nodes and computer servers across the U.S. critical infrastructure network, including natural gas facilities, dams, electrical plants, water distribution systems, and healthcare networks, or the U.S. election infrastructure is unclear."
That could pose a real threat, they said, "if the U.S. intelligence committee's concerns about the potential security threats posed by Kaspersky products are accurate."
Large power utilities in the U.S. face binding cybersecurity standards set through the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and the nonprofit North American Electric Reliability Corp.
FERC and NERC have stayed out of the debate on the security of Kaspersky products, as has the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, which enforces cybersecurity rules for nuclear power generators.
However, all three agencies have keyed in on risks to the supply chain of products that make their way into the bulk power grid or sensitive nuclear sites, including software.
New NERC requirements set to come into effect next year would force grid operators to verify the authenticity of software installed anywhere on computers crucial to the bulk electric system.
In the meantime, GAO is leading several investigations into the state of cyber readiness in the U.S. energy industry, including a deep dive into cybersecurity practices at U.S. natural gas pipelines and related DHS oversight.
As its name suggests, GAO traditionally serves as a federal government watchdog, but some of its work carries over to the private sector, where investigators typically rely on voluntary interviews to inform their reports.
The House Democrats yesterday also called on GAO to evaluate whether U.S. electric utilities employ "appropriate numbers" of cybersecurity professionals to protect their networks. They tasked GAO with reviewing whether smaller electric utilities follow voluntary cybersecurity standards set through the National Institute of Standards and Technology.
A spokesman for GAO confirmed the agency had received the letter and is reviewing the lawmakers' requests, a process that "typically takes a few weeks."
This story also appears in Energywire.
https://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2018/07/11/stories/1060088729
-
Oil Workers Still Risking Death from Toxic Vapors, Green Group Says
Jul 11, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By Mike Soraghan
Sharon Wilson watched the young oil worker through an infrared camera as he opened hatches on top of an oil storage tank. Toxic gases billowed out, and he walked along a catwalk in a steady stream of the vapors.
What Wilson knew, and the young man apparently did not, was that those vapors could kill him.
Wilson, a Texas-based environmental activist for the group Earthworks, had come to this West Texas oil well site in April to document pollution for the people living nearby.
The oil worker knew she was watching. And he wasn't happy. He turned toward Wilson with an exasperated shrug. But as he drove away, she waved him over. He looked about the same age as her youngest son. Wilson told him men had died doing just what he'd been doing. He wasn't convinced.
"He said, 'My momma knows what I'm doing, and she is fine with it,'" Wilson recalled in an interview. "That was very disturbing to me. I cried."
It's one of several instances in which Wilson and others from Earthworks set out to document air pollution from oil and gas production but also found workers laboring in potentially lethal conditions.
Earthworks reported what Wilson saw to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration several days later. In May, the group followed up with a letter to OSHA and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) detailing seven other situations the group's monitors have observed in Texas, Colorado, Louisiana and North Dakota.
OSHA has not responded except to note that the complaint was forwarded to regional offices in Dallas and Denver. A NIOSH spokeswoman said the agency is preparing to respond.
To Wilson, the eight incidents show that workers are still being exposed to the dangerous gases from storage tanks despite years of government warnings and industry programs. And she says it also undercuts assurances from oil companies that their efforts to reduce methane emissions are effective.
"The industry is not at all serious about containing methane," said Wilson, who lives in the Dallas-Forth Worth area. "They don't care at all about workers."
Documenting pollution
Earthworks started its Community Empowerment Project several years ago to document air pollution from oil and gas affecting communities. The group obtained a sophisticated infrared camera, got people trained to use it and sent them to communities with intense oil and gas activity. Industry groups have accused them of using grainy, black-and-white videos to get people to fear oil and gas production.
Federal worker safety officials have been warning oil workers and their employers about toxic gases at shale oil production sites since about 2014 (Energywire, May 20, 2014).
All crude oil has compounds called volatile hydrocarbons such as benzene, butane and propane. Crude from shale formations sometimes has more of these compounds than conventional oil. It's related to why shale crude is more prone to explode in rail cars.
Before they fill up their tankers, truckers have to measure and sample the tanks. To do this, they pop the "thief hatch" atop the tank, potentially exposing them to the toxic gases. Then they drop in their instruments. "Flow testers" stay on-site and perform similar tasks (Energywire, Oct. 27, 2014).
Safety and health officials say the volatile petrochemicals can whoosh out of the tanks with enough force to knock off a worker's helmet. At high concentrations, the hydrocarbons can push enough oxygen out of the air to asphyxiate a person, even outdoors. The airborne chemicals can also disorient people to the point that they are unable to escape the lethal effect of the vapors.
NIOSH in 2015 identified at least nine oil-field deaths where tank vapors were suspected as the cause (Energywire, April 13, 2015). Another man died later in 2015 in West Virginia (Energywire, Jan. 28, 2016).
Worker safety experts say there may be more deaths and injuries among workers who get disoriented and fall or remain disoriented after they drive off-site.
OSHA and others have issued safety alerts warning companies and their workers about the hazard, including one in early 2016 (E&E News PM, Feb. 12, 2016). NIOSH recommends that crude should be measured without workers opening hatches and peering in.
In mid-2016, the American Petroleum Institute announced a new standard intended to reduce the number of workers taking measurements by hand atop tanks (Energywire, July 11, 2016).
But Wilson and others who recorded oil field emissions found that workers were still often opening hatches and measuring by hand. When Wilson asked the young oil worker if he had a respirator, he pointed to a monitor he was wearing. She said it appeared to be a hydrogen sulfide monitor (she also wears one). Hydrogen sulfide is a known killer in the oil field, but a monitor that detects it won't protect a person from toxic gases.
"I told him," Wilson said, "that's not going to protect you."
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2018/07/11/stories/1060088689
-
(ACC Mentioned) ACC Names Eagle Transport Responsible Care Partner of the Year
Jul 11, 2018 | Modern Bulk Transporter
Annually, the American Chemistry Council (ACC) recognizes chemical industry leaders for their exceptional health, safety, security and environmental (HSSE) performance and commitment to sound chemicals management. For 2018 Eagle Transport Corporation, headquartered in Rocky Mount NC, was the recipient.
The Responsible Care Partner of the Year Award recognizes superb performance and the safety record of companies involved in the distribution, transportation, storage, use, treatment, disposal, and/or sales and marketing of chemicals. Eagle has been Responsible Care Certified since 2015 and displays impressive leadership and perpetual enhancements within the Chemical Industry. With over 500 power units and 23 terminals located throughout the eastern United States, Eagle Transport is recognized as an industry leader in transporting petroleum products.
Since 1988, Responsible Care has helped ACC member and partner companies significantly enhance their performance and improve the health and safety of their employees, the communities in which they operate and the environment as a whole.
“Responsible Care means our industry is committed to developing products that benefit society, in safe, secure, environmentally sound facilities,” said ACC President and CEO Cal Dooley. “The companies and individuals that are honored give Responsible Care its credibility and strength--they are leaders in driving continuous improvement in the safety and sustainability of our industry’s products and operations.”
http://www.bulktransporter.com/tank-fleets/acc-names-eagle-transport-responsible-care-partner-year
-
3 Reasons the Deadly Lac-Mégantic Oil Train Disaster Could Happen Again
Jul 11, 2018 | DeSmog
By Justin Mikulka
In the five years since the oil train disaster in Lac-Mégantic, Quebec, claimed 47 lives, the world has learned much about the risks that hauling oil by rail poses. One of the clearest lessons is how little has been done to address those risks, which means that deadly event could easily happen again.
To mark the anniversary, Kathleen Fox, Chair of the Transportation Safety Board (TSB) of Canada, released a statement on oil-by-rail. “Much has been accomplished in the intervening years, but more remains to be done,” she said.
Fox is correct about one thing: more remains to be done. Much more.
Here are three main reasons history may yet repeat itself.
[Read this explainer for background on what unfolded during the fiery early morning hours of July 6, 2013 in Lac-Mégantic.]
Reason #1: Inadequate Safety Regulations
The Bakken shale oil carried on the runaway train that decimated the small Quebec town of Lac-Mégantic is a very light and highly volatile crude oil that ignites easily. Despite many calls for regulations in the U.S. to make that oil safer via a processknown as stabilization — including from Obama's Secretary of Transportation Anthony Foxx, the issue of stabilizing oil volatility on trains remains unaddressed on either side of the border.
Similar concerns are arising for trains shipping oil from Alberta (home of the tar sands) after multiple derailed trains have resulted in fires and explosions reminiscent of those involving Bakken oil.
Another apparent safety gap in regulations involves the outdated brake systems on oil trains, which is the case in both the U.S. and Canada. Rail experts have testified repeatedly that modern electronically controlled pneumatic (ECP) brakes would be a huge improvement over the current air braking system that was considered revolutionary in the 19th century. When the U.S. Department of Transportation released an overhaul of rules governing oil trains in 2015, ECP brakes were among the requirements. However, that measure was repealed in late 2017 due to intense industry pressure.
An important point to keep in mind here is that all of the major oil-by-rail carriers (BNSF, CSX, CN, CP) move oil from both the U.S. and Canada, which leads to something known as harmonization in the regulations. Because the trains couldn't easily cross the border if the rules were different in each country, the regulatory agencies in both must work together to ensure harmonization.
Canada's TSB Chair Fox noted in her recent remarks that the DOT-111 tank cars, which were carrying the oil that destroyed part of Lac-Mégantic are no longer permitted to move crude oil, in either Canada or the U.S. Those tank cars clearly were unsafe for transporting flammable liquids — something they were never designed to do.
However, Fox also noted that rail companies have until 2025 to phase in the new rail tank cars that will replace DOT-111s, and progress on that transition has been slow. The 2015 oil train rules mandate stricter standards for rail tank cars carrying hazardous materials, which means rail companies have a decade to switch to new DOT-117 cars. Yet Fox does not address the real issue at play with tank cars.
The real problem is that DOT-117 tank cars are also proving inadequate for moving oil safely, as evidenced when an oil train of cars meeting the new standards derailed in Iowa in June 2018. Many of the cars ruptured, resulting in a spill of 230,000 gallons of oil into a flooded Iowa river. These new DOT-117 tank cars don’t appear to offer any real safety benefits over the older cars. They may look nicer with the new paint and lack of grafitti, but that seems to be the only demonstrable improvement.
Another gap involves an automatic braking technology known as positive train control (PTC), which was first recommended in 1970. The rail industry resisted moving forward with PTC for almost 40 years until 2008 when Congress mandated that rail companies install PTC on all trains, passenger and freight, by 2015. Despite the congressional mandate, the industry refused to cooperate.
Instead, the rail industry threatened to shut down the U.S. economy if required to fulfill the legislative requirement. In response, Congress granted the industry a three year extension. As the third year of that extension winds down, the largest oil-by-rail company, BNSF, has asked for another two year extension.
Why would rail companies refuse to implement this well-known safety technology that reportedly could have saved nearly 300 lives between 1969 and 2015? Because it costs money to implement and it only costs a fraction of that money to hire lobbyists to fight the regulations.
That priority was starkly revealed in a 2015 story by The Intercept, which reports that during a 2009 investor call, a Wall Street analyst told rail executives they need to do more to “further educate” Congress about why the PTC mandate was unacceptable.
That exchange occurred six years before the industry was required to implement PTC, giving rail companies plenty of time to hire lobbyists to argue against implementing a safety technology now almost 50 years after it was first recommended.
Yet another example of a regulatory gap in rail safety measures stretches back to Lac-Mégantic, which involved a runaway train parked on a hill above the town. Corporate cost cutting and a lack of rules to prevent runaway trains helped lead to the 47 lives lost in that town. In her statement reflecting on the five years since the disaster, TSB Chair Fox mentions that “the issue of additional physical defenses, which the TSB has called for to help prevent uncontrolled movements, has yet to be sufficiently addressed.”
“Additional physical defenses” are ramps or locks placed in front of a train to prevent it from running away in the event something else goes wrong. A simple and proven solution. But starting and stopping trains with these safety devices in place takes longer, and because time is money in the rail industry, companies generally don't use them.
Despite being one of the easiest problems to solve, runaway trains, or “uncontrolled movements,” are increasing since Lac-Mégantic. CBC News reported that Faye Ackerman, a TSB board member, noted the situation is getting worse. “…in the last five years, the number of these uncontrolled movements has been on the rise,” Ackerman said.
In June 2017, an event eerily similar to Lac-Mégantic (minus the explosion and fatalities) unfolded when a 72 car train was not properly braked and ran away for “five kilometres onto a busy track just north of Toronto.”
There are many factors that could eliminate runaway trains. The train in Lac-Mégantic had back-up braking systems, but no rules require their use and the company policy was to not use them. In addition, positive train control could also prevent runaway trains, and modern ECP brakes would also help. But the simplest solution would be the “additional physical defenses” that Fox referred to.
Reason #2: Oil Trains Derail More Often
Another lesson revealed in the wake of Lac-Mégantic is that oil trains derail more often than similar trains carrying ethanol, another hazardous material. The reason is likely because oil trains tend to be longer and heavier and may be subject to more sloshing forces from the liquid moving inside the not-entirely-full tank cars. Unlike tanker trucks or other types of trains, oil trains don't have to be weighed, and some evidence indicates rail companies may be overfilling oil train cars beyond the current weight limits. And no regulations exist dictating the train lengths safe for transporting flammable materials like oil.
Of course, longer and heavier trains make more money for railroads. A recent article in the Wall Street Journal notes that one of the reasons the rail industry is shifting to ever-longer trains is due to pressure from “activist investors.” Activist investors — much like the one who told industry executives they need to lobby against positive train control — apparently are calling the shots about how companies operate their trains.
Given the lack of real safety improvements after Lac-Mégantic, this issue is not going away. Canada just reported record levels of oil-by-rail movements for April of this year. And that number is likely to increase significantly in the next several years, as the oil industry there continues to face pipeline constraints. U.S. oil-by-rail movements are increasing too but remain below the peak levels reached during the Bakken oil-by-rail boom, which lasted from about 2012 to early 2016.
After the recent oil train derailment in Iowa, Kevin Birn of IHS Markit, an energy analytics and consulting company, stated the obvious:
“The accident is a manifestation of increased crude-by-rail from Western Canada due to pipeline constraints.”
Despite the evidence showing that long, heavy trains filled with oil derail more often, very little has been done to improve the safety of moving oil by rail since Lac-Mégantic. As oil-by-rail continues on its latest uptick, another catastrophe like the one that claimed 47 lives in a small Quebec town is likely inevitable.
Reason #3: The Rail Barons Are in Charge
In December 2016, a group came together in Ottawa, Canada's capital, to discuss Lac-Mégantic and what the industry and regulators have learned since the devastating events of July 2013.
Brian Stevens, National Rail Director for Unifor, Canada’s largest private sector union, was one of the speakers. Stevens previously spent 16 years as an air-brake mechanic working on trains.
Stevens summed up the problem: “Nothing has changed. The railway barons are still there. And stronger than ever.”
And while this statement was made by a Canadian at a conference in Canada about an accident in Canada, the rail barons are on both sides of the Canadian-American border.
His statement even came before the Trump administration began its efforts to remove safety measures enacted during the Obama adminstration. Since then, the rail barons successfully had the regulations for modern ECP brakes repealed. Trump appointed the former head of rail company Conrail as the new top rail regulator at the Federal Railroad Administration. If you are a rail baron, this was all great news.
In the first Congressional hearing about rail safety in the Trump era, Rep. Bill Shuster got right to the point about the goal of any changes to regulations when he said that government should “allow the railroad industry to keep more of their profits.”
This statement reveals why so little has been accomplished to improve oil-by-rail safety. Moving oil-by-rail in a safe manner may be possible given the raft of potential safety measures outlined here, but it is highly unlikely that the venture would still be profitable for rail companies. As a result, the rail industry is favoring the status quo and federal regulators in the U.S. and Canada have done little to nothing to change that.
Five years after the derailment in Lac-Mégantic, all of the major risks related to moving oil by rail still exist, but the large portion of downtown Lac-Mégantic destroyed that day in 2013 does not. Its continued absence stands as a stark reminder of the very real dangers of the current oil-by-rail industry.
https://www.desmogblog.com/2018/07/11/lac-megantic-canada-oil-train-disaster-could-happen-again
-
Brett Kavanaugh’s Quotes Reveal His Stance on the Environment
Jul 11, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Fatima Hussein
Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh‘s previous opinions are drawing intense scrutiny for a glimpse into how he would rule on the nation’s high court.
The former clerk for Justice Anthony Kennedy has authored more than 300 opinions and dissents during his 12-year career on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
“My judicial philosophy is straightforward,” Kavanaugh said during his nomination acceptance speech July 9. “A judge must be independent and must interpret the law, not make the law.”
An examination of notable quotes from Kavanaugh’s higher-profile cases give some indication of how he could rule on environmental cases from the Supreme Court bench if confirmed.
(In-line citations to other cases were omitted.)
Authority to Regulate Ozone DepletionIn the 2017 case Mexichem Fluor v. EPA, Kavanaugh wrote an opinion that concluded the Environmental Protection Agency has no authority to require companies to replace refrigerant chemicals with more sustainable alternatives.
“The Supreme Court cases that have dealt with EPA’s efforts to address climate change have taught us two lessons that are worth repeating here. First, EPA’s well-intentioned policy objectives with respect to climate change do not on their own authorize the agency to regulate. The agency must have statutory authority for the regulations it wants to issue. Second, Congress’s failure to enact general climate change legislation does not authorize EPA to act. Under the Constitution, congressional inaction does not license an agency to take matters into its own hands, even to solve a pressing policy issue such as climate change.”
Considering Monetary Costs in Emissions RegulationsKavanaugh said in a dissent in White Stallion Energy Ctr. LLC v. EPA that the agency should have considered the cost to the power industry before regulating toxic air pollution in 2014.
“So it comes as a surprise in this case that EPA excluded any consideration of costs when deciding whether it is ‘appropriate'—the key statutory term—to impose significant new air quality regulations on the Nation’s electric utilities. In my view, it is unreasonable for EPA to exclude consideration of costs in determining whether it is “appropriate” to impose significant new regulations on electric utilities. To be sure, EPA could conclude that the benefits outweigh the costs. But the problem here is that EPA did not even consider the costs. And the costs are huge, about $9.6 billion a year—that’s billion with a b—by EPA’s own calculation.”
Interpreting the Clean Air ActIn the 2009 case Coalition for Responsible Reg. v. EPA, Kavanaugh dissented in the case that stems from whether the Clean Air Act and D.C Circuit’s previous decision in Massachusetts v. EPA prohibits the agency from considering whether regulations addressing greenhouse gases would mitigate certain risks.
“Of course, our role is not to make the policy choices or to strike the balance between economic and environmental interests. That job is for Congress and the President when considering and enacting legislation, and then as appropriate for the Executive Branch—here, EPA, under the ultimate supervision of the President—when exercising its authority within statutory constraints. Our job as a court is more limited: to ensure that EPA has acted within the authority granted to it by Congress. In this case, I conclude that EPA has exceeded its statutory authority.”
EPA’s Cross Air Pollution RuleIn EME Homer City Generation L.P. v. EPA, Kavanaugh’s opinion in the 2015 case struck down chunks of the EPA’s Cross-State Air Polllution rule, because it required some upwind power plants to control their emissions more than necessary for downwind states to meet federal standards.
“Despite those rather clear transgressions of the statutory boundaries as set forth by the Supreme Court in EME Homer, EPA argues that petitioners’ over-control challenges should fail. EPA advances two main arguments, neither of which is persuasive in light of the Supreme Court’s opinion.”
Deferring to Scientific ExpertiseIn the 2014 case Wild Earth Guardians v. EPA, Kavanaugh wrote the opinion that touched on how courts should respect federal agency’s scientific expertise.
“The arbitrary and capricious standard is deferential; it requires that agency action simply be “reasonable and reasonably explained.” As a general matter, we grant EPA significant deference in setting the NAAQS. We also “give an extreme degree of deference to the agency when it is evaluating scientific data within its technical expertise.” We “do not look at the decision as would a scientist,” but only to ensure that EPA adheres to “certain minimal standards of rationality.”
EPA’s Affirmative DefensesIn the 2014 case Natural Resources Defense Counsel v. EPA, Kavanaugh wrote an opinion striking down an affirmative defense for cement kilns that violate toxic pollution standards.
“In wading through this back-and-forth, we ultimately need not decide whether EPA’s reading is the better or only reading of this statutory provision, but simply whether it is a permissible reading. EPA administers the Clean Air Act, and we must defer to its reasonable interpretation of any ambiguities in the statute. Here, even if the statute does not compel EPA’s reading, and indeed even if EPA’s reading is not the better reading, the statute at a minimum is sufficiently ambiguous on this point to permit EPA’s reading of ‘other authority.’ Because EPA’s reading is at least reasonable, we reject petitioners’ argument and rule for EPA at Chevron step two.”
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/brett-kavanaughs-quotes-reveal-his-stance-on-the-environment
-
EPA Readies Draft Plan for State Oversight but Some Fear Regional Limits
Jul 10, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Dave Reynolds
EPA is preparing to float a draft policy that a top agency official says will make regions' oversight of state programs more consistent and efficient, an effort that state officials are welcoming even as they caution that the agency should not undermine existing regional flexibilities that many states rely on.
In a recent interview with Inside EPA, Henry Darwin, EPA's chief of operations, outlined a general framework for the agency's draft audit policy, scheduled for release at the upcoming meeting of the Environmental Council of the States (ECOS), that aims to streamline regional offices' reviews of states' implementation of federal environment programs.
He also detailed some criteria that the agency is likely to consider in assessing the shortcomings of programs deemed inadequate, such as adequacy of state resources.
“We wanted to set forth a set of principles that we would share with all the states through the ECOS that says generally speaking this is what state oversight is going to look like,” Darwin told Inside EPA.
Darwin argued that a consistent policy for EPA regional reviews of state programs would improve the accountability of agency reviews and ensure state regulators know what to expect from federal oversight.
Darwin also argued greater consistency is generally good management practice. “We collectively have a responsibility to oversee the activity being done in the states,” he said.
“If we were to design that system what would it look like,” he said. “It certainly wouldn't look like letting every region do it on their own, and in their own way, and some [regions] treating some states differently than other states that are similarly situated.”
He acknowledged that regions may need to deviate from general practice, but said there should be a reason for any deviation.
And he strongly backed the need for consistent operations across regions, citing a 1984 memo from Reagan-era EPA Administrator William Ruckelshaus that calls for “a comprehensive, consistent, and constructive approach to over-sight of state programs."
When asked in a follow-up email for specific criteria for determining whether a state's delegated permitting or enforcement programs are adequately implementing federal laws, Darwin said EPA is still crafting those measures.
He also said certain criteria would likely be used to assess a program's shortcomings rather than flagging a program as failing. Those criteria may include the adequacy of state resources and training, as well as the efficiency of state practices and priority-setting.
“We are currently developing the criteria that will be used to ensure that state programs and activities are adequately protective and complying with the law. With that said, we will always start with what the law says. So as we are piloting a new process of oversight with the states input, we are using what the law says, verbatim, as a starting point.”
“The adequacy of state resources will likely only be part of a root cause analysis if performance is not meeting expectations,” he added.
“In other words, there are lots of reasons why performance does not meet expectations -- resources is just one; lack of efficient process is another, failing to properly train to process, or prioritize work are others."
In a follow up, Darwin said the agency's new acting administrator Andrew Wheeler is expected to continue the effort as one of a series of steps intended to make the agency more efficient.
Darwin said that EPA and state officials are currently piloting the audit policy and plan to release a draft version at ECOS' Fall Meeting Aug. 27-30 in Stowe, VT. He also said regulators would seek comment on the policy.
'Be Careful Not To Fix What Ain't Broke'
The agency's push for a consistent audit policy responds to calls from ECOS officials who have sought faster reviews that do not second-guess state regulators' judgment unless something suggests state oversight is inadequate.
And while ECOS officials are welcoming Darwin's efforts, they are also raising concerns that the approach may unnecessarily limit regions' flexibility.
"ECOS members appreciate Mr. Darwin's attention to efficiency and consistent treatment of similarly-situated states, and can see benefits to standardizing best practices across regions,” ECOS Executive Director Sam Sankar said in a July 10 statement to Inside EPA.
“At the same time, EPA should be careful not to fix what ain't broke; state and federal relationships in some regions are very good, and states in those regions might be concerned if EPA headquarters were to mandate changes that would adversely affect those relationships," he added.
ECOS officials July 9 released a set of principles that also sought to increase consistency while preserving some regional flexibility. “EPA should manage its internal decision-making processes so it can be clear, transparent, and as consistent as possible given regional differences,” the document says. “EPA decisions should reflect coordination and agreement among all the relevant parts of the agency, including the National Program Manager offices and Regional offices."
Any draft plan is also likely to face a complex response from other stakeholders. For example, industry officials have also welcomed EPA's streamlining efforts, saying that technical or legal questions can cause EPA permit reviews to drag on.
But environmentalists, who have faulted some state programs as inadequate, fear that streamlining the EPA reviews will weaken environmental protections, especially in states where industry has significant political influence.
For example, environmentalists have vowed to challenge EPA's approval last month of Oklahoma's first-in-the-nation coal ash permit program, charging that the program falls short of public-participation mandates and that Oklahoma lacks resources to adequately enforce it.
Additionally, environmentalists have argued that the Trump administration's proposals to cut EPA's budget by roughly one-third would gut agency grants that help fund state programs, further weakening environmental oversight.
ECOS officials also have opposed calls to cut state and tribal assistance grants that comprise roughly one third of states' budgets for environmental programs, and some state regulators have argued that the proposed cuts undercut the Trump administration's calls for cooperative federalism.
Overarching Principles
Darwin described the framework as consisting of a set of overarching principles that will guide regional offices' reviews, supported by specific guidance or points to consider in reviewing state programs implementing specific statutes.
He said the program-specific guides or templates would inform aspects of regions' reviews, including statutory provisions such as whether the review is mandatory or discretionary, how long it should take, whether the review is de novo, how to elevate any disputes between regional and state staff to ensure prompt resolution, as well as what EPA is measuring the state program against.
He also said that every region's review will use “what the law says” as a starting point.
The program specific guidance documents will ensure that “no matter where you are in the country, and what state or region we're talking about, when they're doing oversight of this program this is the document that guides what the oversight is supposed to look like,” Darwin said.
While states and EPA have been in talks to craft an audit policy for months, Darwin argued that both the 1984 Ruckelshaus memo and the Trump administration's plan released last month on “reforming” the federal government back the efforts former Administrator Scott Pruitt had launched to streamline EPA's processes, including state oversight.
The White House's June 21 reform plan punts on any major reorganization of EPA, in lieu of launching a review of the agency's field presence to determine whether changes are necessary.
The Ruckelshaus memo says, generally, that EPA retains responsibility for ensuring that states with delegated programs adequately enforce federal environmental laws, and the importance of those efforts requires that EPA develop a consistent approach to state oversight.
Darwin argues that decades later, EPA has yet to establish a consistent process for reviewing state programs. “This was the way that Congress set up the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act,” he says. “They set it up so that the primary responsibility for implementing those programs was with the states, but the federal government had a responsibility of overseeing and ensuring national consistency, and if there were states that weren't performing up to expectations EPA could step in."
EPA needs a consistent process “for overseeing the states so that we make sure that the states that need our help are getting our help, and the states that don't need our help, we're not wasting our time spending time with.”
Industry sources have argued an audit or oversight policy could significantly speed the reviews by providing greater clarity to states and regulated entities, which would limit EPA regional officials' requests for additional data, and prevent technical or legal issues from stalling audits of state permit-related programs.
But industry sources also note that not all steps in permit reviews can be shortened, citing statutory requirements for public input on certain permits as an example. And while EPA could look to narrow time frames for conducting the reviews, included in agreements between states and EPA, that can be a lengthy process.
Darwin acknowledged that revising such agreements can be a messy and time-consuming process he hopes to avoid, though he left the door open to potentially revising the agreements.
“We haven't found anything yet that suggests the process that we're using is contrary to any individual [agreement],” he said. So “we don't think we have to modify them, but ultimately we may decide that in order to memorialize the work that we're doing we may want to reopen them but we haven't gotten to that” stage yet.
Darwin described the audit policy as one of a series of efforts EPA is taking to improve efficiency through Lean management systems. In April, he and other headquarters officials visited Kansas City, MO, to review Region 7's permitting, inspection and other programs in a review intended to serve as a template for other regions.
Lean process reviews are often cited in business as a way to boost value for “customers” of a company or organization. EPA headquarters officials have tapped Region 5 as the next regional office to undergo a Lean review process, with others following in future months.
An official with an EPA employee union has criticized Lean as suggesting “Less Employees Are Needed."
Darwin acknowledged that EPA faces budget cuts, suggesting that is a fact of life for federal and state regulators.
“There's no denying the fact that we have pressure on us to become smaller, and because we're becoming smaller we need to find ways to be more efficient in our operations,” he said. “The best way to do that is to start looking at the way we perform our work and seeing if there is a more effective way for us to do so, that's basically what we're doing.”
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/epa-readies-draft-plan-state-oversight-some-fear-regional-limits
-
Single State Can’t Block Regional Air Cleanup Extension, Court Rules
Jul 11, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Amena H. Saiyid
Delaware lacked the power to prevent the EPA from giving its neighboring states more time to meet federal air quality standards, a federal appeals court ruled July 10.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that Delaware did not have the ability to block the EPA’s 2016 extension given to Pennsylvania, Maryland, and New Jersey to control air pollution because it—unlike its three neighboring states—hadn’t sought an extra year to meet the federal ozone air quality standards.
Significantly in its July 10 opinion, the federal appeals court that handles most appeals of agency Clean Air Act actions said the EPA is authorized to grant an extension to a region struggling to meet the air quality standard if “any” state within that region—not “every” state within that region—seeks one.
When the Environmental Protection Agency in 2008 updated its National Ambient Air Quality Standards for ozone, it designated 45 areas across the country in nonattainment.
Philadelphia Air QualityThe issue centered on air pollution in the greater Philadelphia area, and the role the four surrounding states played in causing it, and eventually helping to clean it up.
The EPA had found that the Philadelphia-Wilmington-Atlantic City region was in “marginal nonattainment” for failing to meet the 2008 national ozone standard of 75 parts per billion.
As such, Maryland, Delaware, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania were required by the Clean Air Act to make changes to their state plans to ensure that the region met the standard by July 20, 2015.
“Around the time of that date, EPA received requests from Maryland, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania for a one-year extension,” D.C. Circuit Judge Thomas B. Griffith wrote for the three-judge panel. “In their requests, Maryland and Pennsylvania certified that they had complied with their” state implementation plans. “Although Delaware had not submitted any such request, EPA proposed a rule finding the entire Philadelphia Area eligible for a one-year extension.”
Region in ComplianceDuring the extra year, all four states states were able to get their plans in line, so that the region came in compliance.
But Delaware, which hadn’t wanted that extension, had instead wanted EPA to bump up its nonattainment category from marginal to moderate, a classification that would require greater controls at factories, power plants and vehicles that are sources of ozone forming pollution.
Delaware went to federal court seeking that change and arguing that the EPA did not have the authority under the Clean Air Act to grant an extension to a region unless every state sought one. Its petition for review was denied July 10.
The Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control didn’t respond to a phone call and email seeking comment.
The case is Delaware Dep’t of Nat. Res. and Envtl. Control v. EPA, D.C. Cir., No. 16-1230, 7/10/18.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/single-state-cant-block-regional-air-cleanup-extension-court-rules
-
More Americans Accepted Global Warming During Hot Spring
Jul 11, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Kelsey Brugger
Amid miserably hot temperatures this May, more Americans said they believed in global warming than did a decade ago, a new study has found.
The percentage of Americans who say they believe in global warming — 73 percent — reached a record high, according to the National Surveys on Energy and Environment (NSEE) (Greenwire, July 10). However, that percentage is only slightly higher than it was in 2008, when NSEE first conducted the survey. In 2010, acceptance of global warming had sharply dropped.
"We're now seeing a leveling out," said Barry Rabe, a professor of public policy at the University of Michigan, who worked on the study. The survey has been conducted by phone every fall and spring for the past 10 years.
This spring, the survey was performed in late April and May, when temperatures were the warmest ever recorded by NOAA. Rabe explained that it's hard to know the extent to which that weather, or any human experience, shapes people's opinions.
The survey also found that a greater proportion of Americans believe human activity is to blame for warming — at least in part. An even 60 percent of respondents said they believe humans are either mostly or partially responsible for rising temperatures. That's 2 percentage points higher than the previous record found in 2008, 2009 and 2017.
At the same time, a respondent's political beliefs have never influenced his or her views on climate change more than now. "The divide between Democrats, Republicans and Independents in regards to multiple aspects of global warming has been significant over the past decade and the most recent findings indicate this divide is large and mostly widening," the analysis said.
Ninety percent of Democrats think there is solid evidence of global warming, compared to 50 percent of Republicans, according to the survey.
"I think we've seen this pattern for some time and it demonstrates how polarizing all dimensions of this are," Rabe said.
The party divide is even greater when looking at the role that humans play in warming. A record 78 percent of Democrats believe that global warming is occurring at least in part because of human activity, compared to just 35 percent of Republicans.
It's worth highlighting, the report points out, that fewer Republicans today say humans are causing global warming compared to a decade ago.
The survey contacted 751 U.S. adults between April 29 and May 25 by phone. Most of the calls were on cellphones rather than land lines. The margin of error is 4 percentage points.
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2018/07/11/stories/1060088757
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested