Preview Newsletter
AM ACC 8/23/2018
-
(ACC Mentioned) Chemical Groups Cite Duty Relief Bill at China Hearing
Aug 23, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Len Bracken
Congress is likely to suspend duties on upwards of one thousand chemicals, two industry representatives said Aug. 22 at a hearing reviewing China-specific tariffs. -
(ACC Mentioned) Lyondell Can Mitigate Steel Tariffs at New $2.4 Bil Plant, Says Exec
Aug 23, 2018 | Platts
By Kristen Hays
Global chemical, plastics and refining company LyondellBasell is confident its contingency plans for a new $2.4 billion propylene oxide/tertiary butyl alcohol plant near Houston can absorb higher steel costs stemming from tariffs on steel imports... -
(ACC Mentioned) Even Trump Admits: Winning Trade War with China Would Take a Long Time
Aug 23, 2018 | Washington Examiner
By Sean Higgins
The Trump administration may be willing to fight a trade war with China, but even it is not promising a victory anytime soon. -
(ACC Mentioned) US Hearing: Trump's Tariff Plan Disrupts Companies’ Supply Chains and Hurts Consumers
Aug 22, 2018 | China Global TV Network (CGTN)
As the Office of the US Trade Representative holds a six-day hearing which began Monday on the proposed tariffs on 200 billion US dollars of Chinese goods, dozens of companies voiced concerns that the tariffs are disrupting American companies’ supply chains... -
(ACC Mentioned) U.S. Rep. Peter Roskam Says Trump Isn't Abe Lincoln, Sean Casten Calls President a 'Walking Disaster'
Aug 23, 2018 | Chicago Tribune
By Patrick M. O'Connell and Mike Riopell
A day after President Donald Trump’s former lawyer implicated him while pleading guilty to breaking campaign finance laws, Republican U.S. Rep. Peter Roskam tried to both voice support for elements of Trump’s agenda while calling his behavior a “mixed bag.” -
(ACC Mentioned) Quantifying Environmental Benefits of Recycled Plastic
Aug 23, 2018 | Plastics Recycling Update
By Jared Paben
Researchers have calculated substantial upsides from making products out of recycled PET, HDPE and PP instead of prime plastics. -
(ACC Mentioned) Save The Bay to Offer Beach Cleanup Leader Training for 2018 International Coastal Cleanup
Aug 23, 2018 | Newport Now
This year’s International Coastal Cleanup—a global shoreline cleanup event—will take place during September and October, and Save The Bay is looking for motivated cleanup leaders to support Rhode Island’s participation in the effort. -
China, U.S. Fire Off New Tariffs in Middle of Trade Talks
Aug 23, 2018 | Wall Street Journal
By Liyan Qi
China and the U.S. launched a fresh round of tariffs on $16 billion in each other’s goods, even as officials from both governments sat down for negotiations to resolve their monthslong trade fight. -
How Trump's Legal Woes May Alter Enviro, Energy Issues
Aug 23, 2018 | E&E Daily
By Geof Koss and George Cahlink
Political fallout from President Trump's mounting legal troubles is reverberating in Congress, with Democrats and Republicans jostling over how it will affect the ongoing Supreme Court battle, spending fights and the midterm elections. -
(ACC Mentioned) US NGOs: 'Science Transparency' Policy Contravenes TSCA
Aug 23, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
Environmental and consumer advocacy groups say that the US EPA’s proposed ‘science transparency’ rule is in direct contravention to the US Toxic Substances Control Act mandates, and are urging the agency to withdraw the "unlawful" proposal. -
Brian Mast Asks HHS to Help Get to Bottom of Glioblastoma Concerns in St. Lucie County
Aug 22, 2018 | WPTV
By Meghan McRoberts
U.S Congressman Brian Mast is asking the federal government to do more to get to the bottom of cancer concerns in St. Lucie County. -
EPA Postpones IRIS Webinar
Aug 22, 2018 | Inside EPA
EPA has postponed a webinar on a pending assessment of the human health risks of the chemical napthalene by its influential Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) program the day before it was scheduled to take place, providing no explanation for the last-minute change. -
EU Committee Gives Opinion on Safety of Sunscreen Ingredient
Aug 23, 2018 | Chemical Watch
The EU’s Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS) concluded that the use of phenylene bisdiphenyltriazine – S86 – is safe as a UV-filter in sunscreen products at a concentration of up to 5%. -
EU CLP Poison Centres Notification Deadline ‘Impossible’ to Meet
Aug 23, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
It will be "impossible" for the European Commission to deliver the IT tools needed for the 1 January 2020 deadline for harmonised information relating to emergency health response (poison centres), according to Cefic, the European chemical industry body. -
Canadian Draft Concludes Naphthenic Acids Are Not Harmful
Aug 23, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Andrew Turley
Naphthenic acids – petrochemicals found in lubricants, greases, paints and coatings – are not harmful at current exposure levels, Canada has provisionally concluded. But the finding comes just weeks before more hazard information becomes available under EU REACH. -
U.S. Pipelines Take Another Trade-War Hit with New Trump Duties
Aug 22, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rachel Adams-Heard and Joe Deaux
U.S. oil and gas pipelines were dealt another blow from President Donald Trump’s trade policies, with anti-dumping duties on pipes adding to recent steel tariffs. -
Agencies Play Tug of War over Pipeline Protection
Aug 23, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Blake Sobczak, Sam Mintz and Peter Behr
Natural gas pipeline companies are being pulled in three different directions as federal agencies mull how to handle new security threats to an increasingly vital resource. -
New Capacity Driving Growth in U.S. Pipeline Exports to Mexico, Says EIA
Aug 22, 2018 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jeremiah Shelor
U.S. natural gas pipeline exports to Mexico are on the ramp thanks to recent expansions to cross-border capacity... -
Colorado Governor’s Race Highlights Anxiety Over Drilling Measure
Aug 22, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Catherine Traywick
Colorado’s Democratic candidate for governor once bankrolled efforts to restrict fracking. Now, he is working hard to reassure the state’s oil industry that he’s on its side. -
N.J. Agency Seeks Review of FERC Orders on PennEast Pipeline
Aug 22, 2018 | Miguel Angel Cordon
A New Jersey agency in charge of protecting state ratepayers asked a federal appeals court to review the US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission approval of PennEast Pipeline's 1.1-Bcf/d natural gas pipeline project. -
Industry Sues Okla. County over Pipeline Restrictions
Aug 23, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By Mike Lee
Oklahoma's oil and gas industry is pushing back against a county's attempt to regulate part of the drilling business, the latest in the struggle over how best to regulate production in energy-producing states. -
Sherwin–Williams Defeats Class Action Over N.J. Paint Plant
Aug 22, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Peter Hayes
Sherwin-Williams Co. brushed back a proposed class action by residents living near a New Jersey paint plant suffering from cancer and other illnesses. -
Despite ‘Disaster Risk,’ Trains Haul Highly Flammable Gas Cargo Across South Florida
Aug 23, 2018 | Miami Herald
By Ann Henson Feltgen
About the same time Florida East Coast Railway executives were convincing Florida’s East Coast cities and counties to back privately owned passenger trains traversing downtowns and densely populated neighborhoods, FEC quietly sought and won permission to haul extremely flammable... -
Brightline Tracks Ship Possibly Dangerous Natural Gas by Rail Through Miami
Aug 22, 2018 | Miami New Times
By Jerry Iannelli
Most of Florida East Coast Railway's train tracks in Miami-Dade County pass through highly populated urban areas. If a gigantic tanker of liquid natural gas were to spill, ignite, or explode, it's fair to assume a lot of homes or innocent people would stand in harm's way. -
Railroads in Illinois, N.M., Texas and N.J. Secure $73m in Positive Train Control Grants
Aug 22, 2018 | Railway Track & Structures
By Mischa Wanek-Libman
News began to trickle out from congressional offices regarding which properties have been awarded federal grants that will be applied toward the cost of implementing Positive Train Control (PTC). -
EPA Calls for 2015 Ozone NAAQS Suit Argument Amid Designations Fight
Aug 22, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Stuart Parker
EPA, states, industry groups and environmentalists are calling on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to schedule oral argument in long-delayed litigation over the Obama EPA's decision in 2015 to tighten the ozone ambient air limit... -
How Trump Plays the Long Game on Enviro Rollbacks
Aug 23, 2018 | PoliticoPro
By Alex Guillén and Eric Wolff
President Donald Trump has been actively tearing down his predecessor's biggest environmental achievements, but it's the administration's stealthy bid to rewrite some long-established pollution rules that may have the most far-reaching impact on how the country regulates its air and water. -
What Trump’s Coal and Car Plans Could Mean for Climate Change
Aug 22, 2018 | New York Times
By Brad Plumer and Henry Fountain
Before getting to the bigger-picture questions, it’s been a busy week in coal news. Here’s what happened: -
Big Oil Asks Government to Protect It from Climate Change
Aug 22, 2018 | AP (In The Washington Post)
By Will Weissert
As the nation plans new defenses against the more powerful storms and higher tides expected from climate change, one project stands out: an ambitious proposal to build a nearly 60-mile “spine” of concrete seawalls, earthen barriers, floating gates and steel levees on the Texas Gulf Coast. -
Trump’s Latest Step Backward for the Climate
Aug 22, 2018 | New York Times
By Jason Bordoff
It has been a bad month for the fight against climate change. Amid heat waves, wildfires, droughts and Arctic ice melt, President Trump has taken aim at the two central pillars of his predecessor’s ambitious efforts to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. -
Will Trump Listen to His Science Adviser?
Aug 23, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Scott Waldman
Kelvin Droegemeier has a long history of advocating for sound science and pushing back on those who want to politicize it. -
Wash. Girds for Heavyweight Fight over Carbon Tax
Aug 23, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Nick Sobczyk
Carbon pricing will be on the ballot in Washington state in November, and the money is pouring in from big-name environmental groups backing the initiative and oil companies hoping to kill it.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) Chemical Groups Cite Duty Relief Bill at China Hearing
Aug 23, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Len Bracken
Congress is likely to suspend duties on upwards of one thousand chemicals, two industry representatives said Aug. 22 at a hearing reviewing China-specific tariffs.
More than 1000 of the 1800 items in the duty suspension bills that have passed both houses of Congress are chemicals, according to one of the representatives.
A prerequisite for the chemicals to be in these bills is that they are not available domestically, according to Matthew Moedritzer, manager of legal and government relations for the Society of Chemical Manufacturers and Affiliates. The legislation (H.R. 4318) is designed to make U.S. manufacturers more competitive through lower-priced inputs.
The third set of China-specific tariffs that was proposed by the Office of the U.S. Trade Representative and is under review by an interagency committee would “disproportionately affect the specialty chemical industry,” Moedritzer said.
John Logue, chief executive officer of Royale Pigments & Chemicals, Inc., told the panel headed by USTR—which included members from several government departments—that the majority of chemicals imported from China are not made in the U.S.
The Senate- and House-passed miscellaneous tariffs bills are still pending as they need to be reconciled in conference, Logue said, adding that the increased manufacturing costs from the proposed China-specific tariffs would negatively impact exports.
European competitors would be able to undercut U.S. producers of the pigments and chemicals that Royale Pigments & Chemicals, Inc., sells to electronic and aerospace manufacturers, because of the tariffs, he said.
Michael Huff, chief executive officer of Ascensus Specialties LLC, a chemical producer, said Aug. 20 -- the first day of the six-day hearing -- that his company produces sodium borohydride, which is used to make anti-retroviral, antibiotic, and antidepressant medications.
Testifying on the need to keep sodium off the third tariff list, Huff said a DuPont, Inc. plant in Niagara, NY, that produced the chemical was closed in 2016. A Chinese company bought the equipment from the Niagara site and took it back to China, he added.
The tariffs would put Ascensus at a disadvantage to its Chinese competitors, he said, as sodium is a main ingredient in sodium borohydride.
Initial List
The USTR included scores of drugs and chemicals needed by pharmaceutical manufacturers on an initial list, proposed in April, of Chinese goods that would be subject to 25 percent tariffs.
Robert Helminiak, vice president, legal and government relations with the Society of Chemical Manufacturers and Affiliates, told Bloomberg Law that many pharmaceutical-related chemicals did come off the initial list.
His group, he said, told USTR during the public comment period that there were no alternatives to Chinese sources in the U.S. or elsewhere for many of these specialty chemicals that are used specifically in pharmaceuticals.
Separately, a representative from a major pharmaceutical company told Bloomberg Law while the public review was under way in May, the industry was privately impressing upon USTR Robert Lighthizer the importance of Chinese imports for the U.S. medical supply chain.Rosemary Gibson, a senior adviser with the Hasting Center, a bioethics research group, told Bloomberg Law that pharmaceuticals were on the first list proposed by USTR because biotechnology is an industry that China is targeting in its industrial plans.
Penicillin G amidase is on the new list, according Gibson, who said it is a fast-acting drug that is widely used to treat pneumonia, strep throat, and cellulitis, among other conditions.
Companies that depend on Chinese chemical imports will face higher costs when a second set of U.S. tariffs goes into effect Aug. 23.
The American Chemistry Council (ACC), whose members include companies such as Bayer Corp., DuPont, Dow, and Eli Lilly and Co., said the second U.S. product list will hit $2.2 billion in chemicals and plastics products.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/chemical-groups-cite-duty-relief-bill-at-china-hearing
-
(ACC Mentioned) Lyondell Can Mitigate Steel Tariffs at New $2.4 Bil Plant, Says Exec
Aug 23, 2018 | Platts
By Kristen Hays
Global chemical, plastics and refining company LyondellBasell is confident its contingency plans for a new $2.4 billion propylene oxide/tertiary butyl alcohol plant near Houston can absorb higher steel costs stemming from tariffs on steel imports imposed by the Trump administration in March, a top executive said at the facility's groundbreaking ceremony on Wednesday.
Potentially higher costs are "well within the contingencies we have in place," Jim Guilfoyle, executive vice president of advanced polymer solutions and global supply chain for LyondellBasell, said in an interview at the company's Channelview complex east of Houston. The new plant will use 13,000 tons of steel, the company said.
The American Chemistry Council, the US chemical industry's trade group of which Lyondell CEO Bob Patel is chairman, has strongly argued against tariffs on steel imports that could chill plans to build steel-heavy facilities.
Individual companies can seek exemptions to tariffs on materials, but the application process can be lengthy, requiring separate requests for materials that may differ in makeup, rather than a single request for varied types.
Lyondell faces another headwind on the tariff front with its new high-density polyethylene plant under construction along the Houston Ship Channel, about 17 miles from the Channelview complex.
On Thursday the US and China are slated to impose $16 billion in tariffs on each others' products, and China's chemical-heavy list includes HDPE, a resin used to make milk jugs and grocery bags. The new plant is slated to start up next year.
Lyondell's 550,000 m/year HDPE plant is part of 9.2 million mt/year of known US polyethylene capacity starting up from 2017 through 2020 and beyond. All or most of that new capacity will be exported, largely to Asia -- with China and India the top target destinations because those regions have the highest demand growth projections.
However, China's $16 billion list of retaliatory tariffs on US products -- to be implemented after the US imposes a $16 billion list of taxes on Chinese goods -- includes HDPE and linear low density polyethylene, which make up 80% of that known new PE output.
Guilfoyle said that demand won't change, though trade flows will, creating inefficiencies -- and higher costs -- as flows adjust. "Demand will need to be met in some way, but those inefficiencies will be passed to the consumers in the end," he said.
A market source said Wednesday that even as trade flows shift, other markets likely cannot absorb volumes targeted for China, where demand growth is expected to surpass other regions.
"There are not too many markets big enough to absorb what China can absorb," the source said. "Losing China is going to be a big blow no matter how you look at it." Lyondell's new PO/TBA plant, which will be the world's largest when it starts up in 2021, is among a slew of major chemical infrastructure projects that have started up, are under construction or planned along the US Gulf coast and southwestern Pennsylvania as the natural gas boom unearths bountiful cheap feedstocks.
While several other global petrochemical manufacturers opted to build new ethane-fed steam crackers and polyethylene plants as well as some other derivatives, Lyondell expanded ethylene output from existing crackers to feed the new HDPE plant and postponed another ethylene debottlenecking project at Channelview to focus on the PO/TBA plant at that complex.
The new plant will process cheap propane and butane into feedstocks for polyeurethanes, used to make mattresses, seat cushions, spray insulation and other products, as well methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE) and ethyl tertiary butyl ether (ETBE), high-octane gasoline additives.
Lyondell expects global propylene oxide demand to grow by 4%-5% over the next five years, largely in Asia and India, and the company aims to sell PO and its derivatives into domestic and international markets. Lyondell said the global TBA market is expected to rise by 3%/year through 2028 as Asia Pacific and Latin American regions seek cleaner-burning gasoline, and most output will be sold into those markets, though some TBA in the form of isobutylene will be sold domestically for use in tires and lubricants.
In addition, Lyondell is pursuing growth through major acquisitions. On Tuesday the company closed its $2.25 billion acquisition of plastic compound and resin supplier A Schulman, expanding its reach in compounding beyond automotive to markets involving packaging and consumers, electronics and appliances.
Lyondell is also in talks with Brazilian engineering and construction firm Odebrecht to buy its controlling interest in petrochemical producer Braskem, which would build on Lyondell's Latin American distribution network with a production footprint in Brazil, South America's largest economy. A deal would also give Lyondell controlling interest in Braskem's US and European polypropylene operations.
But more greenfield projects could come. The company is considering additional new polyethylene, polypropylene and propane dehydrogenation (PDH) projects in the US and Europe, but executives on Thursday declined to elaborate beyond saying those projects were in the early planning stages.
https://www.spglobal.com/platts/en/market-insights/latest-news/petrochemicals/082218-lyondell-can-mitigate-steel-tariffs-at-new-24-bil-plant-says-exec
-
(ACC Mentioned) Even Trump Admits: Winning Trade War with China Would Take a Long Time
Aug 23, 2018 | Washington Examiner
By Sean Higgins
The Trump administration may be willing to fight a trade war with China, but even it is not promising a victory anytime soon. Officials from the president on down have repeatedly stated that they are taking the “long view” on China and that the therefore the tariffs from both sides – and the pain they cause – will likely be around for a while.
In a late August interview with Reuters, for example, Trump said that resolving the fight with Beijing will “take time because China’s done too well for too long, and they’ve become spoiled,” adding “I’m like them; I have a long horizon.” Trump made the comments just days before a Chinese delegation was set to meet with administration officials to re-start talks over a potential deal.
It is a sharp contrast to the Trump administration's rhetoric in other trade disputes, such as the North American Free Trade Agreement renegotiation, in which it often claims a deal is just within reach, and to its usual rah-rah “we are winning” messages. Instead, the White House sees China as a long-term battle of attrition.
That’s likely because the White House recognizes a difficult truth about the fight with China: Even if Beijing’s leaders were willing to make a deal on trade, they might not be able to. China’s economy makes that too difficult to do.
“China cannot make many of the changes we want quickly," said Derek Scissors, resident scholar at the American Enterprise Institute and an expert on China’s economy. "They can't just wipe out dozens of huge state-owned enterprises which currently block competition. Related to that, they can't reduce widespread industrial overcapacity very quickly. The huge trade deficit the president points to can't be deeply cut in less than two years.”
In little-noticed comments to the Senate Appropriations Committee in July, U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer explained that China’s “dumping” of steel and other products on international markets wasn’t necessarily an intentional economic weapon. Rather, years upon years of communist central planning had created an industrial base in China far beyond what it actually needed – a development that would not easily be undone.
"As these things do, it got out of control and then they got so big they swamped the entire world,” Lighthizer told the committee, referring to China's over-development of steel. The same scenario applies with aluminum, solar panels and other products, he added.
In other words, China dumps things like steel because they have to get rid of it somehow. Getting rid all of that excess capacity would require shuttering a major part of its industry, a wrenching change for the country and its economy. The only comparable example of a de-industrialization of that size would be Russia in the 1990s following the collapse of the Soviet Union, a period of deep economic depression. Its hard to imagine China voluntarily doing that. Just allowing modest market reforms was a big deal for them.
“China in 1980s and 90s made modest steps to have a more market-oriented economy, slashing tariffs dramatically and allowing people to keep a bit of what they produced," noted Bryan Riley, director of the National Taxpayer’s Union’s Free Trade Initiative. "That was pretty radical for a communist country."
The Trump administration is nevertheless bent on trying to get them to do it.
The U.S. has imposed tariffs of 25 percent on steel imports and 10 percent on aluminum ones, policies primarily directed at China. The White House has placed 25 percent tariffs on $50 billion of goods specifically from China, and is currently in the process of placing 25 percent tariffs on another $200 billion in Chinese goods. Trump has threatened to put even higher levies on top of that. “We have to create a situation where it's more painful for them to continue their bad practices than it is to reform them. That's the purpose of the whole exercise,” Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross told Fox Business in August.
The administration appears to believe it is winning, too. China’s currency fell 9 percent against the dollar between April and August. When China's moved in early August to slap tariffs of between 5 and 25 percent on $60 billion worth of U.S goods, White House officials pointed out the amount was smaller than they expected, indicating China didn’t have much to fight back with.
“Their economy’s weak, their currency is weak, people are leaving the country," White House economic advisor Larry Kudlow told Bloomberg in August. "Don’t underestimate President Trump’s determination to follow through.”
That may be wishful thinking, said David Dollar, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. "Technocrats over there seem pretty confident that through 2018 and 2019 they can keep their economy growing. They're not happy about the trade war, but I don't see them making any major concessions. It is true that this has hit the Chinese economy more than the U.S. economy but I think the hits on both sides are rather small so far and the Chinese have a lot of ability to adjust to this," he said.
The administration's stance talk unnerves a lot of business leaders since it implies that the tariffs will be around for a long time. “We cannot really see the winning part of this right now … But it seems like the administration is committed to moving forward,” said Edward Brzytwa, director of international trade for the American Chemistry Council.
It is worth noting, though, that Trump administration has a loose definition of what victory means, and might be satisfied if Beijing gave it enough to warrant backing down. AEI’s Scissors notes that China could offer to crack down on cyber-thieves or stop policies that coerce companies into giving over technology, issues the White House has raised, as potential deals. If not, the tariffs will be around for a long time.
“They definitely don't want to shrink the state sector and allow open competition. So it's very hard to justify waiting for China to change, even though any changes would legitimately take time,” he said.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/economy/even-trump-admits-winning-trade-war-with-china-would-take-a-long-time
-
Aug 22, 2018 | China Global TV Network (CGTN)
As the Office of the US Trade Representative holds a six-day hearing which began Monday on the proposed tariffs on 200 billion US dollars of Chinese goods, dozens of companies voiced concerns that the tariffs are disrupting American companies’ supply chains by raising the costs of raw materials they import.
“Maintaining supply chains doesn’t exist in a vacuum,” said Edward Brzytwa, director of international trade for the American Chemistry Council. “They can’t easily be reconfigured to meet the whims of US trade policy.”
Natural Products Association President and CEO Dan Fabricant, also testified during the first day of hearings. Among his warnings. He said that many businesses could be forced to close due to unsustainable and unaffordable tariffs, as China is the single largest supplier of many of the listed dietary ingredients.
No longer equipped to produce many materials that US depend on for their products
“There is no leather upholstery business in the US anymore, none,” said David Mathison, a co-founder of Leather Miracles, which is based in Hickory, North Carolina.
“Shifting to another country requires time, economies of scale and significant capital investment,” said Bob Margevicius, executive vice president of Specialized Bicycle Components in Morgan Hill, California.
Jim Day, a vice-president at the ’47 Brand hat company, said it would take at least a decade for the US to develop the manufacturing capacity to produce the hats he sells because such facilities were shuttered many years ago.
egative impact felt in short term, price increases seen for long term
The medical device industry has also found itself in the crosshairs of a tit-for-tat trade war. Northfield, Illinois-based Medline is one medical device company adversely affected.
"In the near term, the tariffs would negatively affect our business' profitability, with consequences for our US investments and employment. Overtime, the tariff will cause price increases for hospitals, surgery centers, nursing homes and individual consumers who purchase our healthcare products," Pigott said.
Medline is the largest privately held medical supply company in the US. It has 18,000 employees worldwide and more than 550,000 products, most of which are commodity in nature.
According to Pigott, the company's imports from China are "inexpensive, low-technology, large-volume products that are not subjected to patents".
"We have never been required to transfer any technology or intellectual property to China," Pigott said. "The Made in China 2025 strategy does not prioritize these low-technology, low-margin, high-volume products."
https://news.cgtn.com/news/3d3d514e776b6a4e79457a6333566d54/share_p.html
-
Aug 23, 2018 | Chicago Tribune
By Patrick M. O'Connell and Mike Riopell
A day after President Donald Trump’s former lawyer implicated him while pleading guilty to breaking campaign finance laws, Republican U.S. Rep. Peter Roskam tried to both voice support for elements of Trump’s agenda while calling his behavior a “mixed bag.”
Roskam said Trump has “demonstrated a lot to be desired as it relates to being forthcoming.” His Democratic challenger, Sean Casten, meanwhile, called the president “a walking disaster.”
The two candidates appeared before the Chicago Tribune Editorial Board on Wednesday, sparring on an array of policy issues, including taxes, health care and immigration. But Trump — and the recent developments in federal court — loomed over the issues in the race for the pivotal suburban 6th Congressional District, which voted for Democrat Hillary Clinton two years ago.
“I’m aware, obviously, of the environment in which I’m operating,” Roskam said.
The Tuesday guilty plea of Trump’s personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, and the conviction of his former campaign manager, Paul Manafort, on tax and bank fraud charges were “significant,” Roskam told reporters after the meeting. The Wheaton Republican congressman said the question now becomes how special counsel Robert Mueller proceeds with his investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election. Roskam said he fully supports Mueller’s investigation.
“Does it bring me any joy to be having this discussion about the president of the United States? No,” Roskam said.
Casten said after the editorial board meeting that he believes Trump is “hands down the worst president of my lifetime. This guy is a walking disaster. The sooner he’s out of office the better.”
But the political newcomer and businessman from Downers Grove stopped short of saying Trump should be impeached. Instead, he said Democrats’ best way to combat Trump is to take back control of the House so they can provide a counterweight and more oversight of the president.
Roskam is trying to win a sixth term in Congress. He’s a veteran politician from Wheaton who started in the Illinois House in Springfield in the mid-1990s and rose to be part of former House Speaker John Boehner's leadership team in Washington.
Casten is playing a central role in Democrats’ national efforts to flip control of the House, having emerged from a crowded, competitive primary field in March. Democrats see the November election as a rare opportunity to topple an established congressman such as Roskam even though his home base of DuPage County long has been a power center for Illinois Republicans. In 2016, Hillary Clinton prevailed over Trump in the district by 7 percentage points.
It’s against that backdrop that Roskam has backed elements of Trump’s agenda, including tax policy, his support of the military and the appointment of Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch. Asked on Wednesday if Trump is ethical, Roskam cited Illinois’ most famous president using a tale most often told about George Washington.
“Never telling a lie, Abraham Lincoln, is that the standard?” Roskam said of Trump. “No, I wouldn’t put him in that category.”
And he said local voters, as they have in the past, can separate their opinions about Trump from their policy preferences on matters such as taxes and health care.
“This is a district that is discerning and capable of separating out different responsibilities,” Roskam said.
Casten, meanwhile, didn’t directly answer whether he’d vote for House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi for speaker if his party takes control of the chamber.
“I want to understand what the choices are,” he said.
The two candidates have debated before, most recently at a forum Fox-32 broadcast last month. That matchup showed they agree about almost nothing and are comfortable attacking each other. Wednesday’s meeting was more subdued. They spent much of it locked in a wonky discussion about taxes, health care and immigration — topics on which they sharply disagree.
Roskam helped write Republicans’ federal tax overhaul last year and said the benefits of cuts for individuals and businesses are worth the costs.
“We borrowed money to get a simpler and updated tax code,” Roskam said, later adding: “The other thing that we get is a growing economy.”
“There's a lot of words there, I disagree with almost all of them,” Casten replied. He contends that giving companies tax breaks is no guarantee they’ll create jobs.
On health care, Casten criticized Republicans for “a complete dismantling” of the Affordable Care Act. Roskam countered that the ACA fell far short of what was promised.
“We were told if you liked your doctor you could keep your doctor, that didn’t happen,” Roskam said. “We were told if you liked your coverage you could keep your coverage, that didn’t happen.” He repeated his view that Casten wants to “protect, defend and expand” the ACA.
And Roskam sought to deflect Casten’s criticism that he hasn’t held enough town hall meetings, saying the country is “running above idle right now” and such large-scale gatherings aren’t productive.
Instead, Roskam said he’s held hundreds of smaller events and meetings at businesses, schools and other places to meet with thousands of constituents over time.
“We need less drama. We need less hyperbole. We need less shouting. And we need more of an ability to work with other people on the other side of the aisle,” Roskam said. “And my experience is that if you’re sitting down in a smaller group, even if somebody is disagreeing with you, you can actually have a discussion.”
Casten pledged to hold four town hall meetings per year if elected, saying he was “truly baffled by Peter’s thought process” on the topic.
“The last time you had a town hall, Lehman Brothers existed, Uber didn’t, and America had never known a black president,” Casten said.
Roskam, 56, is no stranger to an expensive, closely watched race with national implications. Twelve years ago, he narrowly defeated now-U.S. Sen. Tammy Duckworth, bucking that year’s midterm trend of GOP losses as Democrats took back control of the U.S. House. Duckworth at the time had the backing of party heavyweights such as U.S. Sen. Dick Durbin and now-Mayor Rahm Emanuel, and her story of her Black Hawk helicopter being shot down in Iraq was fresh in voters’ minds.
Casten, 46, could be bolstered by the national Democratic tail winds that may accompany the midterm elections.
Showing the heavy interest in the race, national groups have begun spending big money in the 6th District. The Congressional Leadership Fund aligned with Republican House Speaker Paul Ryan has run a pair of TV ads in the district bolstering Roskam and criticizing Casten. And the group has set up a field office to talk to voters directly. That’s on top of the American Chemistry Council’s early campaign ads in support of Roskam.
Roskam had $2.3 million in the bank, but Vice President Mike Pence made a fundraising stop for him last month to help him add to that total. Casten, meanwhile, had $647,000 on hand.
But while campaign fundraising can be more difficult for challengers than sitting congressmen, Casten has been able to use his personal wealth to help pay for his campaign so far. Records show he put $630,000 into his bid before the primary, and on Wednesday he announced his first TV ad of the campaign.
The 30-second spot tries to defend Casten’s business record from the GOP attack ads. “Peter Roskam, using the Trump playbook: lies and dishonesty,” a narrator says in Casten’s commercial.
Roskam unveiled a new TV ad, too. It adopts a strategy of Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner’s, attempting to tie Casten to Democratic Illinois House Speaker Michael Madigan.
“Casten and Madigan would make us pay a lot more. Sean Casten’s just another shady Illinois politician who’d make things worse,” a narrator says.
The sprawling 6th District stretches from the far northwest suburbs and sweeps southward through DuPage County.
Wednesday’s meeting before the Tribune Editorial Board was a session for the candidates to make their pitches for the newspaper’s endorsement. The board operates independently from the newsroom.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/politics/ct-met-peter-roskam-sean-casten-il6-tribune-20180821-story.html
-
(ACC Mentioned) Quantifying Environmental Benefits of Recycled Plastic
Aug 23, 2018 | Plastics Recycling Update
By Jared Paben
Researchers have calculated substantial upsides from making products out of recycled PET, HDPE and PP instead of prime plastics.
For example, using RPET may generate half the greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) of virgin plastic, according to preliminary data released by Franklin Associates. The reductions may be even greater for recycled polyolefins.
Franklin Associates is conducting the research on behalf of the Association of Plastic Recyclers (APR). APR’s president, Steve Alexander, noted that brand owners will be able to reference the data to calculate progress toward their sustainability goals when they use recycled plastic. He called the life cycle inventory research “a critical tool to utilize and market the value of recycled materials.”
“We need this information today more than ever if we want to continue to grow and develop the market for recycled plastics,” he said.
Sneak peek at the numbers
APR on Aug. 21 held a webinar to unveil preliminary results from the research. Initiated about 18 months ago, the project involves updating and expanding on PET and HDPE research Franklin Associates released in 2010. For the 2018 update, Franklin Associates, a division of Eastern Research Group, also looked at recycled PP for the first time.
The research investigated GHG emissions from “cradle to gate,” including collection, transportation, sorting and processing into flake or pellet. Franklin Associates didn’t attempt to study impacts associated with manufacturing finished products because of the wide variety of products made from plastics and their varying environmental impacts.
Bev Sauer, senior project manager and life cycle analyst at Franklin Associates, presented during the webinar. She released preliminary findings, noting they’re still subject to change after Franklin Associates receives additional information from plastics reclaimers.
She estimated that if a food and drink packaging manufacturer ditches virgin plastic in favor of “solid-stated” RPET pellet, it would cut GHG emissions by about half (solid-stated means the plastic has been decontaminated for food contact and its intrinsic viscosity boosted). “And for HDPE and PP, it’s looking like the savings are even greater, in the range of 65 to 70 percent,” Sauer said.
The most important part of the analysis was collecting data from plastics reclaimers, Sauer said. Her company gathered detailed information from seven PET reclaimers, five HDPE reclaimers and three PP reclaimers.
The work found that the majority of greenhouse gases generated within the recycling chain come via the reclaimers. For food-contact PET, nearly 90 percent of their gases were associated with reclaimer operations. For HDPE and PP pellet, 70 to 75 percent were generated by the processing steps. PET was higher because of the additional environmental impacts from the decontamination steps, she said.
Where project goes from here
Sauer said her research team is still gathering follow-up information from reclaimers that could shift the numbers. After finalizing the recycled plastic numbers, the recycled flake and pellet numbers will be compared with those for virgin plastics.
For the 2018 report, Franklin Associates added new categories. The 2010 document covered energy usage, solid waste generation, water consumption, GHG emissions, and other atmospheric and waterborne emissions. The 2018 report will go deeper into how air and water emissions affect acidification, eutrophication (excess nutrients in water that can lead to oxygen depletion), smog and ozone depletion, according to Sauer’s presentation.
After completion, the data will be uploaded to the U.S. Department of Energy’s Life Cycle Inventory Database, she said. It will be presented on the “unit process level” so that anyone can adapt the numbers to their particular circumstances to generate more accurate results, she said.
For example, Franklin Associates developed weighted average data sets for each resin based on the amount of material collected at the curb, drop-offs or through container deposit redemption systems. But if a reclaimer that uses only curbside-collected feedstock wanted a number more specific to the company, it could use information from the project to make that assessment.
Sauer also noted her firm is conducting an update to a study of environmental impacts of virgin plastic on behalf of the American Chemistry Council (ACC). That report is expected to be completed near the end of the year.
Kara Pochiro, APR’s communications director, said APR members will get an early look at the recycled PET, HDPE and PP report before it’s released to the public this fall. The data will also be available at the group’s Oct. 9-11 meeting in St. Petersburg, Fla.
https://resource-recycling.com/plastics/2018/08/22/quantifying-environmental-benefits-of-recycled-plastic/
-
Aug 23, 2018 | Newport Now
This year’s International Coastal Cleanup—a global shoreline cleanup event—will take place during September and October, and Save The Bay is looking for motivated cleanup leaders to support Rhode Island’s participation in the effort. On Thursday, Aug. 30, Save The Bay will hold a Community Cleanup Leader Training, from 6-7:30 p.m., at 100 Save The Bay Drive in Providence.
“While our beautiful shoreline is one of our state’s greatest treasures, it is under constant threat from litter either left on beaches or washing ashore. Leading a cleanup is easy, and one of the best things you can do to fight trash on our beaches,” said Save The Bay Volunteer and Internship Manager July Lewis.
The organization is seeking community members, as well as small groups, to lead cleanup efforts at a variety of shoreline locations, neighborhood beaches, fishing areas, boat launches and rights-of-way, and favorite hidden locations around the state.
The International Coastal Cleanup, organized globally by the Washington, D.C.-based Ocean Conservancy, and locally by Save The Bay, removes coastal debris from around the world every year. Volunteers record the amount, type and location of trash removed from shorelines, and results are published in a global report that includes a state- and country-specific Ocean Trash Index. This data-rich report is a crucial reference for policy makers and environmental advocates around the world.
Last year in Rhode Island, 2,629 community members participated in 90 cleanups in 25 towns. The volunteers removed 16,484 pounds of trash and debris from along 65 miles of the state’s coastline. Unsurprisingly, the most commonly collected trash items included cigarette butts and plastic items—such as bottles, bags, and straws—which threaten the health of marine animals that mistake these items for food. Plastics, which are continually deposited in oceans and waterways, are of particular concern because they also break down into tiny pieces of microplastics that are ingested by marine life.
“Community volunteers play a pivotal role in preserving shorelines for recreation and the health of our oceans. We’re always looking for more people to join the cleanup effort,” Lewis said.
Those interested in attending the August 30 training can sign-up online at bit.ly/CCLtraining. Individuals interested in participating in an ICC cleanup can explore all opportunities and register at bit.ly/ICC-RI. Questions should be directed to July Lewis at jlewis@savebay.org.
Rhode Island’s 2018 International Coastal Cleanup is supported by local businesses and corporations offering financial support and volunteer teams, including: National Grid; Citizens Bank; Bradford Soap Works; Bay Coast Bank; Caster Communications, Inc.; Falvey Insurance Group; MetLife Auto & Home; American Chemistry Council; Allegra, Providence; and Strategic Retirement Partners. For more information about the International Coastal Cleanup, visit savebay.org/icc.
https://www.newportnow.online/articles/save-the-bay-to-offer-beach-cleanup-leader-training-for-2018-international-coastal-cleanup/
-
China, U.S. Fire Off New Tariffs in Middle of Trade Talks
Aug 23, 2018 | Wall Street Journal
By Liyan Qi
China and the U.S. launched a fresh round of tariffs on $16 billion in each other’s goods, even as officials from both governments sat down for negotiations to resolve their monthslong trade fight.
Just after the U.S. Customs and Border Protection order went into effect at 12:01 a.m. Thursday, China’s Commerce Ministry announced the imposition of retaliatory measures. The tit-for-tat 25% duties cover Chinese-made chemicals, machinery, tractor parts and U.S.-produced fishmeal, industrial lubricants, engines and trucks, among other goods.
China’s Commerce Ministry also said it plans to file a complaint with the World Trade Organization about the latest round of U.S. tariffs. “The Chinese side resolutely opposes this and we cannot but continue to take necessary countermeasures,” the ministry said in a statement.
The timing for Thursday’s exchange of tariffs was set earlier this month. Since then, both governments agreed to restart negotiations. The talks, which opened Wednesday in Washington, are set to conclude later Thursday.
The negotiations are being held by lower-level officials, rather than by Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin and Vice Premier Liu He, who tried and failed to resolve the impasse in May. And both sides have played down expectations for major progress in the current round.
A Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman on Thursday reiterated hopes for a positive outcome. He declined to disclose details of the discussions, as did U.S. officials.
Thursday’s tariffs follow an earlier round of 25% levies on $34 billion worth of each other’s exports. The Trump administration is holding hearings this week on targeting another $200 billion in Chinese goodsand could impose those penalties as early as next month. Since China imports far less from America than the U.S. does from China, Beijing plans to retaliate by slapping levies on $60 billion in U.S. exports.
The Trump administration has unleashed tariffs to try to pressure Beijing into curbing a trade imbalance that was $375 billion in China’s favor last year and to end practices that the U.S. says discriminate against American companies. Beijing attributes the trade imbalance to larger macroeconomic trends such as a lower U.S. savings rate, and denies its policies put foreign companies at a disadvantage.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/china-u-s-fire-off-new-tariffs-in-middle-of-trade-talks-1535018365?mod=searchresults&page=1&pos=1
-
How Trump's Legal Woes May Alter Enviro, Energy Issues
Aug 23, 2018 | E&E Daily
By Geof Koss and George Cahlink
Political fallout from President Trump's mounting legal troubles is reverberating in Congress, with Democrats and Republicans jostling over how it will affect the ongoing Supreme Court battle, spending fights and the midterm elections.
It is too soon to know whether this week's guilty plea by former Trump attorney Michael Cohen and the federal convictions of former campaign manager Paul Manafort will turn GOP fortunes.
Another possibility, as has often been the case in the Trump era, is that the latest political storm will pass while Republicans, who control all of government, press their agenda with Democrats having few options to halt it.
Here are three ways the political and legal wrangling surrounding Trump could have direct and indirect impacts on energy and environmental agencies and issues.
Supreme Court delay
"It's a game-changer. Should be," Schumer said of the legal fallout that came after his session with Kavanaugh.
Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii) — who along with Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) announced yesterday that she had canceled her planned meeting with Kavanaugh — called Trump an "unindicted co-conspirator in a criminal matter," who did not deserve the courtesy of a meeting. She noted that the nominee in the past has argued presidents should be immune from indictment.
But Republicans dismissed those calls as an attempt to derail a conservative nomination that seems inevitable. They remain committed to beginning the hearings the day after Labor Day.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), who is scheduled to meet with Kavanaugh today and whose vote would be critical to his confirmation, rejected Schumer's call for a delay in the confirmation hearings. "I think probably we should continue with the process that we've got set forward now," she told E&E News.
Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), a senior Senate Judiciary Committee member, was surprised a proposed delay was even raised.
"Why are we even talking about this?" he asked.
Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), a Judiciary member, criticized the proposed postponement as "just another baseless ploy to delay the Senate's work."
"Nothing in historical practice or the text of the Constitution prevents President Trump from carrying out his presidential power to nominate a Supreme Court justice," he said.
Some environmental interest groups, though, echoed the calls for a postponement, with Sierra Club President Michael Brune saying the Judiciary Committee should first "thoroughly investigate the serious accusations made against Donald Trump" before considering Kavanaugh's record.
Appropriations meltdown
While the Senate has been making unusual progress on passing the annual appropriations bills, fallout from the Manafort verdict and Cohen's guilty plea could test the bipartisan agreement to avoid controversial amendments to the spending bills.
A breakdown in comity could hamper efforts to move a final version of the fiscal 2019 energy and water spending bill as soon as the first week in September. It could also hamstring talks over a fiscal 2019 Interior-EPA spending bill that lawmakers want to finish before the new fiscal year begins on Oct. 1.
Moreover, a partisan fight could make it harder for Congress to pass a stopgap spending bill that will be needed for at least some agencies when the new fiscal year begins. If short-term funding were not approved, it could force a partial government shutdown.
Appropriations Chairman Richard Shelby (R-Ala.) said yesterday that he was hopeful that angst over Trump's former campaign manager and personal lawyer wouldn't spoil the cooperation that has prevailed on the spending bills, noting that Democrats and Republicans alike share the goal of restoring some semblance of normality to the appropriations process.
"I think they're not directly tied together," Shelby said in an interview. "I would think it would not, but you never know what's going to happen around this place. It's always a surprise."
Senior appropriator Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) sidestepped questions yesterday about whether there could be a shutdown. Durbin and other Democrats have consistently said they are willing to support advancing fiscal 2019 spending bills provided they avoid contentious policy riders.
Trump, meanwhile, who has persistently threatened a government shutdown if Congress does not meet his demands for border funding, might be in less of a position to make that argument if his legal woes continue.
Furthermore, Republican leaders, who oppose a shutdown, may be more emboldened to buck the White House over funding if they see the president as damaged politically.
Midterms
An already tough electoral environment for many Republicans, given that the majority party often faces losses in the midterms, likely just got tougher as a result of the legal and political turmoil surrounding Trump.
Concern is especially acute in the House, where Democrats are increasingly seen as well-positioned to win the majority for the first time since 2010.
A Democratic victory could stall the Trump agenda, including a slew of environmental regulatory rollbacks, and could put action on climate change and other environmental issues on the House agenda for the 116th Congress.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) circulated a letter to her Democratic colleagues yesterday, urging them to stress economics in their campaigns but also making clear their party is running on cleaning up Washington, D.C.
"House Republicans are now wallowing in the swamp that they have enabled and deepened at the expense of working families everywhere," said Pelosi, linking two of her party's key election themes.
Republicans concede they will face stronger-than-usual political headwinds this fall with a president who has negative national approval ratings.
"I don't think it helps any. It's just one more narrative of people around the president doing bad things," Graham said when asked about the impact of this week's legal actions on the elections.
Sen. Mike Rounds (R-S.D.) offered a preview of the GOP defense against Democrats' accusations that Trump is presiding over a culture of corruption in Washington.
"You see a judiciary that is responding appropriately," he told reporters after emerging from the Senate GOP luncheon yesterday. "You saw prosecutors prosecuting when you have a Republican administration, and they were prosecuting Republicans and doing so successfully."
Several senators, including National Republican Senate Committee Chairman Cory Gardner (R-Colo.) and Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), declined to weigh in on the impact of this week's court actions.
Other GOP lawmakers all but cringed when asked how Congress would react to presidential pardons of Manafort or a firing of special counsel Robert Mueller.
"I think the pardon should be used very sparingly and should be saved for extraordinary circumstances," South Dakota Sen. John Thune, the Senate's No. 3 Republican, said when pressed on the issue.
Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), also a member of Senate leadership, suggested the party should focus on legislative accomplishments, like moving spending bills, and the political clouds would lift.
"If President Trump has taught us if one thing, if not anything else, is how quickly people are willing to move on to whatever comes next in this environment," he said. "I'd be surprised if what happens this week has much impact on what happens in November."
Reporter Amanda Reilly contributed.
https://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2018/08/23/stories/1060095043
-
(ACC Mentioned) US NGOs: 'Science Transparency' Policy Contravenes TSCA
Aug 23, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
Environmental and consumer advocacy groups say that the US EPA’s proposed ‘science transparency’ rule is in direct contravention to the US Toxic Substances Control Act mandates, and are urging the agency to withdraw the "unlawful" proposal.
The latest opposition has come in a consultation on the agency’s controversial proposed rule, ‘Strengthening transparency in regulatory science’. This seeks to ensure that science underpinning regulatory decisions is available for public validations.
Nearly half a million individuals and organisations have weighed in on the rule, with the majority reiterating concerns that the proposal could require the agency to discard legitimate science. But recent comments have also highlighted the ways in which the proposal runs counter to EPA’s requirements under the recently reformed TSCA law.
TSCA science requirements
As amended by the 2016 Lautenberg Act, TSCA requires the EPA to rely on "best available" science and "reasonably available information". And it must make decisions consistent with the "weight of scientific evidence".
But in comments submitted on behalf of nearly 90 organisations, Earthjustice argued that the proposal "directly contravenes the specific mandate" of TSCA.
TSCA establishes a "comprehensive scheme for how EPA is to consider scientific data", wrote the environmental law nonprofit. "A rule that deliberately excludes this best science cannot be reconciled with these firm Congressional mandates and public health purposes," it added.
The Environmental Protection Network – a group of former EPA employees – commented that although Congress detailed the types of science that EPA should use in TSCA, "availability of sufficient underlying data for the public to ‘validate’ or ‘reproduce’ study results is not even among the factors the agency is to consider, much less a determinative factor nullifying all those enumerated".
And the group argued the proposal runs against the requirement for decisions to be based on the "weight of the scientific evidence", as it blocks evidence from the weighting process entirely.
Earthjustice also pointed out that because the proposal only applies to ‘significant regulatory actions’, EPA could arguably use non-public science to support a determination that a substance does not pose an unreasonable risk – as this would result in no regulatory activity – but not to regulate a harmful one. This, it says, is "arbitrary and capricious and cannot stand".
"In sum, EPA’s proposed rule is inconsistent with TSCA’s plain text," wrote the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF). "EPA should not adopt the proposed rule because it cannot be reconciled with the agency’s duties under TSCA."
Industry view
The American Sustainable Business Council – representing more than a quarter million businesses – agreed with NGO comments that the rule would run counter to TSCA’s ‘best available science’ mandate.
"The more research the EPA considers, the more informed and appropriate their response can be to findings about harmful effects of chemicals," said the business coalition.
But a coalition of three paving, stone and concrete associations – the NAPA, NSSGA, and NRMCA – said that increased transparency under the rule would help EPA carry out its ‘best available science’ requirements, particularly with respect to its mandates surrounding "suitability, documentation and consideration of uncertainty and variability."
And the American Chemistry Council said in a public statement that it believes that the approach outlined in the proposed rule is one Congress demonstrated its support of when it modified TSCA’s science provisions in the law’s 2016 overhaul.
"When it comes to the science, EPA should ‘show its work’," said the trade group.
And it suggested in its comments that the EPA’s Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) programme should also be subject to the new policy.
Nonetheless, the ACC said that the rule should be tailored to each environmental law it affects, and "implemented by regulations specific to the objective and scientific disciplines of each statute," including TSCA.
https://chemicalwatch.com/69911/us-ngos-science-transparency-policy-contravenes-tsca
-
Brian Mast Asks HHS to Help Get to Bottom of Glioblastoma Concerns in St. Lucie County
Aug 22, 2018 | WPTV
By Meghan McRoberts
U.S Congressman Brian Mast is asking the federal government to do more to get to the bottom of cancer concerns in St. Lucie County.
This past spring, WPTV first reported about concerns over a seemingly high number of glioblastoma cases in the county within a close proximity.
WPTV’s investigation found more than 50 cases of glioblastoma diagnosed in St. Lucie County in the last 5 to 6 years.
At least a dozen and counting are within just a few miles of each other and some on the same street.
The state's cancer registry did not find the number alarming, but residents still want a deeper look at the close proximity of some cases.
WPTV brought the concerns to Brian Mast’s office shortly after the first reports, and his staff began their own research.
Tuesday, Mast said they took further action to get answers as to whether something in the county is causing people to get sick.
He said his team researched Trevor’s Law, which passed in 2016. The law, named after an Idaho man who was diagnosed with cancer as a child, was to give the federal government more direction to investigate potential cancer clusters, and better track and document them.
"It was basically a demand that Health and Human Services and Disease Control and other federal entities go out there and they work together with the states to provide that research as a mandate,” Mast explained.
He said his team found the law, while on the books, is not being implemented.
“I wish I could give you the answers as to why the implementation of so many of these really good laws, why it takes implementation time for them to do them, but what I can say is that it shouldn’t be happening,” Mast said.
Tuesday, he sent a letter to the U.S Department of Health and Human Services, requesting that the federal agency expedite implementing the law.
The letter addressed to Secretary Alex Azar said the following:
Dear Secretary Azar:
I am writing to request that the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) expedite implementation of Trevor’s Law, otherwise known as Section 21 of the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act (P.L. 114-182).
In one of the counties that I represent there are more than one dozen cases and counting of Glioblastoma, which is an aggressive type of cancer that occurs in the brain or spinal cord and affects roughly 13,000 people in the United States each year. We owe these families every conceivable effort to determine if the prevalence of this deadly disease in St. Lucie County qualifies as a cancer cluster.
As you know, Trevor’s Law requires HHS to provide technical assistance for state and local health departments, consult with community members as investigations into potential cancer clusters are conducted, and collect and disseminate reports on investigations into cancer clusters. I am, therefore, requesting an explanation for delays in implementation of this law and a written response detailing all steps taken to date to implement section 21 of P.L. 113-182.
Furthermore, I urge you to coordinate with the Florida Department of Health specific to the potential cancer cluster in zip code 34982, and in the interim, I would like to personally invite you to St. Lucie County, Florida to meet with the families impacted by this disease personally.
Thank you for your attention to this life-or-death matter. I look forward to greater coordination with you on these important issues.
Mast said he will be following up with the agency after they receive the letter to track their action.
“People need answers for their youth that are coming up so that this isn’t something we’re seeing as multi-generational. People deserve to have this support not just at the state level but at the federal level.”
https://www.wptv.com/news/region-st-lucie-county/brian-mast-asks-hhs-to-help-get-to-bottom-of-glioblastoma-concerns-in-st-lucie-county
-
Aug 22, 2018 | Inside EPA
EPA has postponed a webinar on a pending assessment of the human health risks of the chemical napthalene by its influential Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) program the day before it was scheduled to take place, providing no explanation for the last-minute change.
An EPA spokesperson did not respond to a request for comment but the 11th-hour action comes weeks after acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler ordered a broad review of IRIS and its agenda of chemicals slated for review.
“What I have asked the IRIS program is that we need to make sure we have identified the customer for analysis,” Wheeler told reporters at July 25 event on the renewable fuel standard in Washington, D.C. “I have asked them to come back to me with some information about how we are going to use the assessments for the regulatory program,” he added.
Wheeler said that Congress' 2016 reform of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) “is supposed to be the state of the art on risk assessments and I want to make sure that we understand how IRIS fits into that. . . . They are supposed to get back to me with a game plan for how we are going to implement that across the board.”
EPA's IRIS program was scheduled to host an Aug. 23 public webinar on its assessment plan (IAP) for napthalene. The program released the document in July, and is accepting public comments on it through Sept. 5.
The agenda for the meeting included discussion of scientific concepts developed during IRIS staff's development of the IAP, an early stage in the IRIS process.
The meeting agenda indicated that EPA sought information on “species differences in toxicokinetics” and “mode of action for carcinogenicity,” with a number of invited speakers and registered public speakers.
But late in the afternoon of Aug. 22, the IRIS program sent an email stating, “EPA is postponing the August 23, 2018 IRIS Public Science Meeting. . . . The IRIS Program is working to identify suitable public science meeting dates in the near future.”
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/epa-postpones-iris-webinar
-
EU Committee Gives Opinion on Safety of Sunscreen Ingredient
Aug 23, 2018 | Chemical Watch
The EU’s Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS) concluded that the use of phenylene bisdiphenyltriazine – S86 – is safe as a UV-filter in sunscreen products at a concentration of up to 5%.
Because of the insoluble nature of S86 and as no data were provided on safety via inhalation exposure, the SCCS said it considers its use safe only in dermally applied products and not in products that would lead to inhalation exposure.
It added that S86 may contain impurities (NMP and hydrazine), which are classified as category 1B carcinogenic, mutagenic and reprotoxic (CMR) chemicals and identified in the EU as SVHCs.
Therefore, the SCCS recommended the level of NMP and hydrazine be kept to trace levels. Potential effects of the substance on the environment were not assessed by committee.
https://chemicalwatch.com/69910/eu-committee-gives-opinion-on-safety-of-sunscreen-ingredient
-
EU CLP Poison Centres Notification Deadline ‘Impossible’ to Meet
Aug 23, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
It will be "impossible" for the European Commission to deliver the IT tools needed for the 1 January 2020 deadline for harmonised information relating to emergency health response (poison centres), according to Cefic, the European chemical industry body. This is because of delays and unresolved issues, it says.
The deadline falls under Annex VIII of the classification, labelling and packaging (CLP) Regulation. It will require importers and downstream users to notify national appointed bodies if they are placing hazardous substances on the market, specifically for consumer use, by this date.
Trade associations and member states have been commenting on the requirements at recent meetings of the competent authorities for REACH and CLP (Caracal).
In a paper published after the 12 June meeting, Cefic said that with 18 months to go, the Commission would be unable to "deliver results for a quality workability study" and solve "highly important issues".
The workability study was launched shortly after the Cefic paper. It will address stakeholder concerns over the practicalities of new requirements on the submission of information. The year-long exercise will focus on industries with complex material inputs and supply chains and propose solutions to the problems raised.
Interim results will be discussed in the study steering group and stakeholder advisory group at the start of 2019, as well as at Caracal meetings.
Cefic said it anticipates the study will "demonstrate the need [for] amending the text of the annex to make it workable". It added that progress on an Echa notification portal has been "slow" and the decision to develop an agency database is "still open".
The trade body also said that the time allowed for building the poison centres notification (PCN) format and the "delays the pilot projects have suffered make the proposed dates unrealistic for such a complex project".
Industry, it said, will need to dedicate "considerable resources" to comply with Annex VIII and therefore it "cannot accept" the use of "overcomplicated" tools.
"Cefic considers it will be impossible for companies to prepare for compliance with this amount of uncertainty remaining over basic features."
The notification deadline for companies marketing substances for professional use is 1 January 2021, and for industrial use 2024.
Member states
Meanwhile, member states are considering the possibility of hosting their own database in case Echa does not have a centralised one in place, Cefic said.
They are also preparing to include national requirements. "The exercise of harmonisation will be completely futile if this happens," it said. Cefic has asked the Commission to convey this message to member states to "ensure alignment".
However, Cefic added that it accepts parallel national submission systems "if when no additional information is required the PCN format can be used and when submissions through the central portal are also accepted".
In its paper, Poland’s competent authority said it expects the Commission to adopt the draft of its Decision "as soon as possible" so it is ready for a vote in the Echa Management Board meeting on 20-21 September.
It added that although a "keen supporter" of the EU central system, it is concerned about future financing. It would like the Commission to provide certainty, via a legal instrument, that member states would be free from additional Echa fee requirements.
https://chemicalwatch.com/69914/eu-clp-poison-centres-notification-deadline-impossible-to-meet
-
Canadian Draft Concludes Naphthenic Acids Are Not Harmful
Aug 23, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Andrew Turley
Naphthenic acids – petrochemicals found in lubricants, greases, paints and coatings – are not harmful at current exposure levels, Canada has provisionally concluded. But the finding comes just weeks before more hazard information becomes available under EU REACH.
The Canadian draft screening assessment concludes that the substances do not meet the criteria of paragraph 64 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (Cepa). If confirmed, the finding would rule out regulatory action against the "commercial naphthenic acids", a group of substances comprising naphthenic acids and their calcium salts, known as calcium naphthenates.
Naphthenic acids occur naturally in crude oil and are captured during processing of extracted petroleum distillates, such as jet fuel, kerosene and diesel. While they are also produced as a byproduct of oil sands mining, extraction and processing of crude oil, the assessment did not cover this exposure scenario because it is already under consideration via other programmes.
The assessment describes the number of laboratory studies providing human health toxicity information as "limited" and finds that the risk to humans is low. Furthermore, it finds that the environmental hazard potential is "moderate", but the risk to the environment is "low" owing to "low exposure potentials".
Meanwhile, more hazard data, with relevance to human health and the environment, is set to become available next month under EU REACH. According to a 2016 dossier evaluation Decision by Echa, registrants for naphthenic acids (cas number 1338-24-5) have until 12 September to update their dossier with data from:
· a prenatal developmental toxicity study;
· a long-term toxicity study of effects on aquatic invertebrates; and
· a fish, early-life stage (FELS) toxicity study.
Fatty acids and derivatives
The Canadian government also provisionally concluded that 10 fatty acids and fatty acid derivatives are not harmful, via another, separate draft screening assessment.
The substances are:
· undecylenic acid;
· α-linolenic acid (ALA);
· tung oil;
· margosa fats and glyceridic oils;
· tall oil fatty acid;
· potassium tallate;
· evening primrose oil;
· trimer acid;
· dimer acid; and
· ethylhexyl cocoate.
People are most likely to be exposed through food and cosmetics, as well as natural and non-prescription health products.
The Canadian government has launched 60-day public consultations on the assessments, with interested parties having until 17 October to submit comments.
https://chemicalwatch.com/69912/canadian-draft-concludes-naphthenic-acids-are-not-harmful
-
U.S. Pipelines Take Another Trade-War Hit with New Trump Duties
Aug 22, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rachel Adams-Heard and Joe Deaux
U.S. oil and gas pipelines were dealt another blow from President Donald Trump’s trade policies, with anti-dumping duties on pipes adding to recent steel tariffs.
The U.S. Commerce Department said Aug. 21 it will issue duties on welded pipes with diameters greater than 16 inches. The penalty will range from 3.5 percent to 132.6 percent on pipes from Canada, China, Greece, India, South Korea and Turkey, the department said in an emailed statement.
The decision comes as pipeline companies are already trying to navigate a separate 25 percent tariff on foreign steel. Plains All American Pipeline LP has said the tariffs will lift costs for its Cactus II crude pipeline by $40 million. And Kinder Morgan Inc. could be forced to pay as much as twice as that for its Gulf Coast Express gas conduit if Trump moves forward with a plan to hike tariffs on Turkish steel to 50 percent.
Though preliminary, Tuesday’s measure will impact most oil and gas pipelines in the U.S. that depend on material from those countries, according to Tudor Pickering Holt & Co. analyst Colton Bean. Only smaller gathering lines, which are typically 14 inches in diameter or smaller, will likely be spared.
In a statement immediately following the announcement, the Interstate Natural Gas Association of America urged the independent agency undertaking the investigation to “consider that domestic capacity differs for different types of line pipe.” The trade group cited an industry-funded study from last year that found that there is limited U.S. availability of the type of pipe used in cross-state gas projects.
For the U.S. steel industry, the anti-dumping duties will provide a boost but won’t change the game, Philip Gibbs, a steel analyst at Keybanc Capital Markets in Cleveland, said in a telephone interview.
“It will be nice for the guys in that market, but is it going to be a huge victory for them?” he said. “It’s not that big of a product.”
The Commerce Department is scheduled to announce final determinations on or around Nov. 6 for the China and India probe and on or around Jan. 3 for the Canada, Greece, Korea and Turkey investigations.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/us-pipelines-take-another-trade-war-hit-with-new-trump-duties
-
Agencies Play Tug of War over Pipeline Protection
Aug 23, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Blake Sobczak, Sam Mintz and Peter Behr
Natural gas pipeline companies are being pulled in three different directions as federal agencies mull how to handle new security threats to an increasingly vital resource.
Should the U.S. government bail out competitors to natural gas to ease the power grid's reliance on the fuel, as called for by a leaked plan from the Department of Energy?
Should policymakers preserve the status quo, counting on voluntary cooperation from the sector and a slim staff of specialists to gain a window into pipeline security, as the Department of Homeland Security favors?
Or should U.S. lawmakers consider beefing up gas security oversight and moving it out of DHS's hands, an idea raised in the halls of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission?
Shared among all three agencies — and the energy firms lobbying them — is a sense that cyberthreats to the gas pipeline networks are only set to rise as companies digitize operations and hackers backed by foreign intelligence services grow more intrusive.
"We now are dealing with nation states," said Dave McCurdy, CEO of the American Gas Association (AGA), at a July 31 cybersecurity conference in New York City. "The government isn't necessarily organized for this 21st-century paradigm ... you've got some challenges with the federal agencies, if you're in industry."
The path chosen will inevitably reverberate in the bulk power grid, which in recent years has grown to rely on natural gas more than any other fuel source for generating electricity.
"There's more concern about what is the impact of what would happen if there is an interruption in the gas supply," McCurdy said.
The gas industry has pushed back against proposals to require baseline security standards for large pipelines and related infrastructure.
"The threat evolves too quickly for a regulation or mandate to be the most effective method of maintaining the highest level of safety," McCurdy said. Beyond opposing mandatory security standards, the gas industry is also opposing any independent assessments of whether its cyber and physical defenses adequately protect its networks.
The DOE plan
To the Department of Energy strategists, grid security concerns already justify intervention through use of the Federal Power Act and a 1950s-era defense statute to prop up alternatives to natural gas.
In a draft policy memo leaked in June, DOE claimed that pipelines' distributed nature, coupled with menacing online threats to their digital control systems, makes them harder to secure from attack.
DOE has floated propping up economically ailing coal and nuclear plants to pre-empt a future in which the country's power grid relies overwhelmingly on "just-in-time" supplies from gas pipelines. DOE has not yet disclosed how many coal and nuclear plants it would support, how they would be chosen, and what subsidies would cost.
Because coal and nuclear plants have on-site fuel, the thinking goes, they would be more resilient in the face of cyber or physical attacks.
Energy Secretary Rick Perry has played up this argument, laying the rhetorical groundwork for a policy that has pre-emptively drawn fierce opposition from environmentalist and some energy industry quarters.
"Wind and solar are interruptible, and so [are] gas pipelines. The only forms that are not interruptible are coal and nuclear — because they've got fuel on-site," Perry said at a conference in Texas earlier this month (Energywire, Aug. 6).
Perry's critics says his rationale is a policy proposal in search of a security problem. A major attack on U.S. grid infrastructure is as likely to focus on high-voltage transmission systems or local power distribution utilities as on pipelines. If adversaries take down part of the grid, power flow from all generation is halted, experts note.
Nuclear plants are the only "unique" generators from a security standpoint, and are likely to have the most stringent cybersecurity and physical defenses imposed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, said Dewan Chowdury, founder and CEO of the cybersecurity company MalCrawler and a consultant to major gas and electric utilities.
The DHS plan
The Transportation Security Administration, better known for its role guarding the nation's airports, is charged with ensuring that vital gas pipelines are adequately protected against various threats.
E&E News reported last year that the DHS agency has assigned six full-time staffers to oversee the more than 300,000 miles of gas transmission lines crisscrossing the nation (Energywire, May 23, 2017). A TSA spokesperson confirmed that the number of full-time employees working on pipeline security remains the same.
"TSA has exercised security responsibilities over pipelines since 2002 and continues to exercise those responsibilities while working in conjunction with industry partners," the agency said in a statement.
The office relies on voluntary cooperation with large pipeline companies and industry groups like the AGA to gain a window into the sector's security practices and defenses.
Earlier this year, TSA published updates to nonbinding pipeline security guidelines that urge companies to lock down their corporate and operational networks from hackers.
But compliance with the guidelines is not enforced, and agency officials have said there is no specific timeline for pipeline firms to complete "enhanced cybersecurity measures" for their most critical facilities.
An E&E News report in 2017 documented TSA's lack of cybersecurity staffing and the absence of any systematic review of gas pipeline cyberdefenses, either by TSA, FERC or the industry itself.
An update of that reporting showed that that lack of oversight and accountability on cyber vulnerabilities has not significantly changed.
Meanwhile, homeland security officials have warned of Russia-linked hackers probing U.S. critical infrastructure networks across the country (Energywire, March 16).
While no cyberattack is known to have disrupted the flow of gas or electricity anywhere in the United States, hackers have interrupted third-party billing and document-sharing services used by large gas and power utilities. Several years ago, hackers thought to be linked to the Chinese government also launched a series of cyber intrusions into gas pipelines' corporate networks, according to law enforcement officials and DHS briefings.
"I do think you need to have this different conversation both with TSA, with DOE, with [FERC], with NERC and with the gas industry about how you get that door protected," said Steven Naumann, vice president of transmission and NERC policy at utility giant Exelon Corp. "I know it's an old adage, but if you're a burglar, you're going to go to the easy target. And if you're spending all this money, all this time, all this effort on protecting the cyber health of the electric system, and then you can attack the gas system, water system, railroad system ... then we're so vulnerable."
Gas industry representatives contend that the nature of the commodity — slowly moving through pipelines, rather than the near-instantaneous path of electrons — intrinsically helps protect gas pipelines from certain threats.
Jennifer O'Shea, AGA vice president for communications, noted that the dispersed, redundant design of the U.S. pipeline system heads off risks from single points of failure carrying major consequences.
She said the industry "actively partners with multiple federal and law enforcement agencies, exchanging threat intelligence with the government through the Downstream Natural Gas Information Sharing and Analysis Center (DNG-ISAC).
Still, the extent of the gas industry's voluntary compliance with TSA standards isn't clear. E&E News asked AGA and the Interstate Natural Gas Association of America (INGAA) whether the industry has put in place any comprehensive review procedures of how well interstate pipelines are complying with TSA's voluntary guidelines. The query asked how many interstate pipeline companies had received TSA cyber reviews this year, and what the industry's expectations were for the timetable and scope of TSA future reviews of critical pipelines. Neither organization answered these questions.
The FERC plan
FERC has signaled that the independent agency wants to move to take on a larger role in ensuring the security of the pipelines that feed into America's growing fleet of gas-fired power generators, although officials have been cautious to avoid stepping on the toes of other entities.
"There should be no aspect of our nation's energy infrastructure that is left unprotected in a cyber sense, by whatever means we need to do that," said Republican FERC Chairman Kevin McIntyre at a June press conference.
He said he had not formulated a personal view on which government agency should be assigned oversight, or whether there should be mandatory standards, but did suggest that FERC could take on more authority in the future.
"I am not speaking for a formal FERC initiative or anything like that, but I wouldn't be terribly surprised to see if we were to move in that direction at some appropriate time; we're just not there now," he said.
His statements were noticed by others, including fellow Republican Commissioner Neil Chatterjee, who had suggested in a joint op-ed with Democratic Commissioner Richard Glick earlier this year that pipeline cybersecurity oversight be moved from the TSA to DOE.
"[McIntyre] wasn't ready to commit to commission action, but he did indicate he could see us taking action in the area," Chatterjee said in a recent interview.
Chatterjee, who called TSA's pipeline oversight office "clearly undermanned," noted that FERC is responsible for grid reliability, which could be endangered by cyberthreats to pipelines.
"FERC has a very serious role to play in this, but by suggesting the [oversight move to] DOE and not at FERC, this isn't just some jurisdictional grab," he said.
The PJM Interconnection, an eastern U.S. grid operator, has called on FERC to insist that all gas pipelines provide more information about operations and vulnerabilities to the power generators that depend on them. "In PJM's view, confidential information sharing should be both uniform and mandatory when the information is identified as needed to enhance the reliability" of grid and gas systems, said the grid operator.
"PJM urges the commission to drive further coordination through the exercise of its authority over both natural gas pipelines and the electric industry," the organization said (Energywire, April 17).
Now the gas industry must hold its breath to see to what extent FERC will intervene, possibly by requiring independent assessments of gas pipeline cyber vulnerabilities to cyber or physical attacks, or natural disasters, that would cut off fuel supply to essential gas-fired power generators.
FERC Chief of Staff Anthony Pugliese highlighted the possibility of intervention earlier this month when he told an industry audience that FERC's staff was working with DOE, the Department of Defense and the National Security Council "to identify the plants that we think would be absolutely critical to ensuring that not only our military bases, but things like hospitals and other critical infrastructure are able to be maintained, regardless of what natural or man-made disaster might occur."
Pugliese singled out pipelines as a target for state-sponsored cyberattacks. "More and more, you have adversarial countries ... who see pipelines, for example, as an area of great opportunity; let's put it that way."
The INGAA challenged Pugliese's statements about pipeline vulnerability, with INGAA spokeswoman Cathy Landry pointing to a fact sheet on the industry's preparation.
"It appears that Mr. Pugliese could use a refresher on some basic facts and our industry's commitment to this very serious issue," Landry said in a statement.
INGAA also released a statement from its president, Don Santa, who said the DOE plan "represents a solution to a problem that does not exist. If the Energy Department acts, consumers will be saddled with as much as $11.8 billion to pay for the uneconomic coal and nuclear plants.
"That might be justifiable if these facilities increased the reliability of the grid. But they don't."
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2018/08/23/stories/1060094769
-
New Capacity Driving Growth in U.S. Pipeline Exports to Mexico, Says EIA
Aug 22, 2018 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jeremiah Shelor
U.S. natural gas pipeline exports to Mexico are on the ramp thanks to recent expansions to cross-border capacity...
§ Access to full text unavailable – subscription required.
Story can be found here: http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/115521-new-capacity-driving-growth-in-us-pipeline-exports-to-mexico-says-eia
-
Colorado Governor’s Race Highlights Anxiety Over Drilling Measure
Aug 22, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Catherine Traywick
Colorado’s Democratic candidate for governor once bankrolled efforts to restrict fracking. Now, he is working hard to reassure the state’s oil industry that he’s on its side.
A ballot proposal to limit drilling in the state has sent stocks of oil and gas producers on a roller coaster ride during the past month. Rep. Jared Polis, running for the state’s top office, has come out strongly against the proposal, defying his own party. His opposition highlights what is at stake for the energy industry, which is pumping record volumes of oil and gas as hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling propel Colorado into the upper echelon of shale producers.
The proposal, known as Initiative 97, would increase the buffer zone between oil wells and occupied structures, and could block drilling in half the state, according to Colorado’s energy agency.
“Initiative 97 would all but ban fracking in Colorado—a position I have never supported,” Polis said at the annual Colorado Oil and Gas Conference in Denver on Wednesday. “Let me be very clear where I stand on this: As I said during the Democratic primary, I oppose Initiative 97.”
Producers are nervous about the prospect of Polis, a millionaire businessman from Boulder, occupying the state’s highest office. In 2014, he personally financed campaigns to tighten regulations on fracking, although he later backed away from those efforts. And he continues to insist that communities should have more control over oil and gas development, a position that’s discomfiting to drillers active in Denver’s growing suburbs.
Republican gubernatorial candidate Walker Stapleton, speaking in Denver Aug. 22, sought to remind the energy industry of Polis’s shifting stance on oil and gas development. He also challenged Polis’s position on Initiative 97, questioning whether the Democrat’s opposition to the measure would change if he wins office.
Denver-Julesburg BasinIf enacted, the measure could curb output in one of the country’s most prolific shale plays, the Denver-Julesburg Basin, which helped drive Colorado oil production to a record-high 447,000 barrels a day in April.
“It has the potential to be nothing but catastrophic to the energy industry,” Crystal Heter, president of natural gas transportation at Tallgrass Energy Partners LP, said Aug. 21.
Highpoint Resources Corp., which is focused in the basin, is already evaluating how it would comply with the ballot measure if it becomes law in November. Chief Financial Officer Bill Crawford questioned whether three-mile laterals would suffice during a panel Aug. 21. “We’re trying to plan for making the ballot” while hoping it won’t succeed, he said.
By contrast, DCP Midstream LLC is speeding up projects ahead of the election. “There are some decisions to make in the first week of November,” Chief Executive Officer Wouter Van Kempen said Aug. 21. “Hopefully this is going the right direction so we don’t have to course correct.”
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/colorado-governors-race-highlights-anxiety-over-drilling-measure
-
N.J. Agency Seeks Review of FERC Orders on PennEast Pipeline
Aug 22, 2018 | Miguel Angel Cordon
A New Jersey agency in charge of protecting state ratepayers asked a federal appeals court to review the US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission approval of PennEast Pipeline's 1.1-Bcf/d natural gas pipeline project.
The New Jersey Division of Rate Counsel in a Monday letter asked the US Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit to review a FERC order that issued a Natural Gas Act certificate to the project and another order that turned down a request that the commission reconsider that approval. The state agency said it was "aggrieved" by the FERC rulings.
The New Jersey agency has disagreed with the federal commission's conclusion that the project was needed. During the pipeline's federal review, the state agency submitted evidence that it said demonstrated a lack of gas demand from New Jersey gas utilities (US Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit docket 18-2853).
FERC recently issued a number of orders that shut down challenges to its approvals of major interstate gas pipeline projects. One of these orders rejected a rehearing request by the Delaware Riverkeeper Network related to the FERC approval of PennEast. The environmental group has asked the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to review the FERC approval and rehearing orders on PennEast.
The PennEast pipeline would run from Pennsylvania to New Jersey to deliver gas from the Marcellus Shale. Shippers for the project, including local distribution companies and electric power generators, have subscribed to about 1 Bcf/d of the project's firm transportation capacity in binding precedent agreements. The project would consists of a 36-inch-diameter pipeline running 120 miles from Luzerne County, Pennsylvania, to an interconnection with Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line in Mercer County, New Jersey (CP15-558).
https://www.spglobal.com/platts/en/market-insights/latest-news/natural-gas/082218-nj-agency-seeks-review-of-ferc-orders-on-penneast-pipeline
-
Industry Sues Okla. County over Pipeline Restrictions
Aug 23, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By Mike Lee
Oklahoma's oil and gas industry is pushing back against a county's attempt to regulate part of the drilling business, the latest in the struggle over how best to regulate production in energy-producing states.
The commissioners in Kingfisher County voted in May to ban companies from using temporary pipelines to transport oil and gas wastewater, sometimes known as brine or produced water. County officials say it's a commonsense move to protect against leaks and spills, but the Oklahoma Oil and Gas Association (OKOGA) filed a lawsuit Tuesday in the state Supreme Court to overturn the decision.
The trade group asked the court to affirm that the Oklahoma Corporation Commission has primary authority over the oil industry. They say the local rules could open the door to a patchwork of regulations by different jurisdictions.
"That sort of chaos and uncertainty is precisely why this state has long adhered to a unified system of regulation in oil and gas production," OKOGA President Chad Warmington said in a statement.
The tension between local communities and state agencies, which often are charged with promoting as well as regulating the energy business, has been a flashpoint around the country for the last five years. Texas and Oklahoma both enacted laws that ban cities and counties from regulating drilling (Energywire, April 30, 2015).
Courts in Colorado, New Mexico and Ohio have overturned local ordinances blocking all or parts of the drilling process.
Kingfisher County, a rural area northwest of Oklahoma City with a population of about 15,000, lies over the STACK formation. Like most oil fields, the STACK produces large amounts of salty wastewater that has to be either disposed of or reused in other wells.
The issue wasn't on the county's radar until March, when an oil company asked whether the county allows the use of temporary lines to move the fluid around, Heath Dobrovolny, the county engineer, said in an interview.
The county frequently issues permits for temporary freshwater lines to cross county roads and run along county rights of way. But Dobrovolny said he and the county commissioners were concerned about the possibility of contamination if the lines were used for wastewater.
Produced water can be several times saltier than seawater, and it sometimes contains traces of oil and drilling chemicals. When it spills, it frequently kills the surrounding vegetation and can sterilize the soil for years.
After a local landowner said he'd had a wastewater spill from a temporary line near his property, Dobrovolny said he found six pipeline permits that might've been used for produced water.
The oil and gas association said that banning temporary lines for wastewater would force companies to ship the wastewater in trucks, raising the cost and making it more difficult to reuse the fluid. If Kingfisher's ban is allowed to stand, other counties could adopt similar measures, the association's suit says.
County Commissioner Ray Shimanek said there are already frequent spills from the freshwater pipes because of accidents and vandalism, and there would be too much risk if companies began moving large amounts of produced water along county rights of way.
The county isn't opposed to the oil industry, Shimanek said. He's a former oil field worker, and two of his sons work in the industry.
"When this boom peters out again, the people that live here still deserve a decent-looking landscape," he said. "The produced water with all the bad stuff in it is the only thing we're fighting them on."
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2018/08/23/stories/1060095031
-
Sherwin–Williams Defeats Class Action Over N.J. Paint Plant
Aug 22, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Peter Hayes
Sherwin-Williams Co. brushed back a proposed class action by residents living near a New Jersey paint plant suffering from cancer and other illnesses.
The claims fail because the suit challenged an ongoing Superfund cleanup. Superfund cleanup actions selected by the Environmental Protection Agency are not subject to judicial review, the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey said.
The residents’ medical monitoring claims also fail because they didn’t identify the specific substances, the levels of exposure, the diseases they are at an increased risk of developing, the potential risks, the types of medical monitoring required, or how it monitoring would protect them.
The complaint alleged that toxic chemicals and carcinogens—including lead, arsenic, mercury, zinc and benzene—migrated from the plant to the surrounding neighborhood, contaminating the groundwater, surface water, soil, sediment, vapor samples, and more in surrounding areas.
Judge Robert B. Kugler issued the opinion.
Seeger Weiss LLP represented the residents.
Brown & Connery LLP and Hollingsworth LLP represented Sherwin-Williams.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/sherwinwilliams-defeats-class-action-over-nj-paint-plant
-
Despite ‘Disaster Risk,’ Trains Haul Highly Flammable Gas Cargo Across South Florida
Aug 23, 2018 | Miami Herald
By Ann Henson Feltgen
About the same time Florida East Coast Railway executives were convincing Florida’s East Coast cities and counties to back privately owned passenger trains traversing downtowns and densely populated neighborhoods, FEC quietly sought and won permission to haul extremely flammable liquified natural gas along the same tracks.
Liquefied natural gas (LNG) is a hazardous material that had never been transported by railroad in the continental United States, according to the Federal Railroad Administration, which provides permits for LNG transportation.
The FEC began transporting LNG for profit last year. In South Florida, that includes tracks from its affiliated Hialeah Rail Yard LNG supply terminal in Medley to PortMiami and to Port Everglades for commercial export. Some of that track is also used by Brightline, the intercity passenger railroad operated by FEC subsidiary All Aboard Florida.
In the first six months of 2018, FEC transported 148.7 million cubic feet of LNG from Hialeah Yard to Port Everglades bound for Grand Bahama Island or Barbados, according to U.S. Department of Energy records. No LNG was shipped out of PortMiami during the same period.
Fred Millar, an Arlington, Virginia-based chemical disaster expert and independent consultant, is appalled the federal government is allowing FEC to transport LNG along the East Coast of Florida.
“The disaster risk with LNG is considered a high-risk situation that has never been allowed to happen until now,” said Millar. “People are being kept in the dark about this enormous risk. A vapor cloud could travel a couple of miles and someone starts their car and the whole place blows up. Some people will die before they can get out.”
Federal Railroad Administration spokeswoman Desiree French said, however, that FEC has been safely “transporting LNG shipments for over a year and has had no issues with any of the shipments.”
FEC’s regulatory approval “allows it to transport LNG over its entire system,” including 351 miles of mainline track from Miami to Jacksonville. French also noted that LNG has been moved safely for decades by trucks and ships in thermos-like intermodal portable tanks.
“From a surface transportation standpoint, hazardous materials moving by rail are statistically much safer than moving the material by highway,” she said.
Chilled natural gas
Liquefied natural gas (LNG) is just what the name suggests — natural gas that has been chilled to minus 260 degrees F, at which point it becomes a liquid. The liquid is pumped into specialized temporary cryogenic containers that keep it chilled and stable when stored or transported.
LNG is regarded as a cleaner, more efficient fuel that is both environmentally friendly and widely available. It can be warmed to make natural gas used for cooking and heating, or to generate electricity. LNG is also cheaper than diesel, and can fuel both some locomotives and cruise ships. Last year, FEC converted its 24-locomotive fleet to LNG.
The downside is what happens if an LNG container is punctured during shipment.
In December 2015, Martin County Fire Rescue conducted a “vulnerability analysis” of FEC’s transportation of LNG. It used Environmental Protection Agency software to predict what could happen on a typical afternoon if a train crash punctured a 4-inch hole in a single LNG container car that led to an explosion.
If an accident occurred at the intersection of tracks at Southeast Cove Road and Southeast Dixie Highway in Stuart, 2,410 people would be affected, Fire Rescue Chief Dan Wouters said in a PowerPoint presentation to the county commission. Of that total, nearly 400 would experience life-threatening injuries or death.
Such a nightmare scenario has gone unexamined by first responders farther south. A spokesman for Broward County Emergency Management said it has not made its own assessment of the impact of a disastrous LNG accident. Miami-Dade County Emergency Management does not appear to have addressed the issue either, and authorities there did not return phone calls seeking comment.
Booming LNG market
LNG, predominantly methane, is a byproduct of fracking. Railroads are hoping to fill the gap left by declining transport of coal and oil, as well as a booming market for LNG. The primary markets for LNG are Caribbean countries, India, China and Japan. LNG is shipped from plants to ports, where the containers are loaded on freighters for the final voyage.
While the gas is nontoxic, a spill or puncture of a container during a train derailment can be deadly. The liquid expands rapidly when it vaporizes and can burst into flames when it hits the air. It burns at extremely high temperatures and cannot be extinguished, according to a report to Congress from 2004.
“The proposed transportation of LNG by rail is a new opportunity for railroads and a new challenge for safety regulators,” stated Karl Alexy, staff director, of the Federal Railroad Administration’s Hazardous Material Division in 2017. “We know any release of LNG in a non-controlled environment is dangerous, but the transportation of large quantities of LNG in a single train present unique safety risks.”
An FEC spokesman declined to be interviewed about the production or transportation of LNG at the direction of its new owner, the Mexican transportation firm Grupo Mexico Transportes.
FEC began shipments of LNG soon after receiving a March 13, 2017, letter of authorization from the railroad agency. Last November, FEC touted its success in Jacksonville at an annual industry convention that pushes natural gas as a cost saving “solution to high horsepower equipment operators.”
FEC “is beginning to explore additional opportunities around the transportation of LNG as a commodity,” the trade publication Railway Age reported. “The railway is currently moving LNG containers between [New Fortress Energy’s] liquefaction plant in Hialeah to PortMiami and Port Everglades.”
New Fortress is a subsidiary of Fortress Investment Group LLC, the parent company of FEC and All Aboard Florida, which operates the Brightline passenger service that currently runs from Miami and Fort Lauderdale to West Palm Beach. The company wants to extend service to Orlando.
FEC records submitted to the Federal Railroad Administration state that the 15-mile trip from the Hialeah Yard to PortMiami passes through areas with average populations of 9,500 per square mile. The 28 miles of track from Hialeah Yard to Port Everglades have an average population of 9,150 per square mile.Rigorous safety procedures
FEC says it maintains “rigorous safety procedures” when transporting LNG that include “head-hardened, continuous welded rail, concrete ties, defect detectors and Automatic Train Control (ATC) technology, which prevents train-to-train collisions on the rail network.”
Still, not everyone is convinced that it is safe to transport LNG by rail.
Indian River County Commissioner Bob Solari wrote to the railroad administration in 2016 inquiring about the safety of transporting LNG by rail. He received a pat-on-the-head reply that safety is the agency’s top priority.
Martin County Fire Rescue conducted its safety study in 2015.
“When compared with propane, LNG is much safer,” said Martin County’s Wouters. However, Wouters said that if a train derailed and a car carrying LNG ruptured, the odorless and lighter-than-air gas would form a vapor cloud with potentially deadly explosions.
The Martin County report examined a trio of accident scenarios, showing how people in various zones around the crash site could be affected. The risk is greatest to those closest to the train. In all, the “threat zone” is nearly one mile in circumference with the red or “lethal zone” nearly a quarter of a mile surrounding the explosion.
The analysis estimated that if an LNG car exploded next to Southeast Cove Road and Southeast Dixie Highway in Stuart, it would kill or severely injure 396 people in 164 homes within the red zone — approximately two blocks around the blast.
Another 521 people in 243 homes in the orange zone, which extends out another block in all directions, would suffer “irreversible or other serious, long-lasting adverse health effects or an impaired ability to escape,” the report says.
The 1,493 people in the yellow zone farthest from the blast point would experience “notable discomfort, irritation or sensory effects, but (the) effects are not disabling and are reversible.”
Vapor cloud
Adding to the risk, a vapor cloud can travel up to three miles from the accident site, putting others in danger of an explosion if the gas was ignited.
The risk of an accident increases in areas where FEC shares tracks with Brightline passenger trains, which can travel up to 110 miles per hour. Freight trains typically travel 10 to 15 mph in highly populated or congested areas and 30 to 40 mph on long runs.
“Lower-speed freight trains and high-speed passenger trains will be on the same track and that increases the likelihood” of an accident, Wouters said.
FEC joined an Alaskan pilot project on LNG transport begun in September 2016. The Alaska experiment was in a remote area away from large cities and communities. In Florida, however, LNG runs on rails that bisect populous cities like Miami, Fort Lauderdale and Jacksonville with frequent highway-rail crossings.
Millar, who has worked as a lobbyist and environmental advocate for Friends of the Earth, said there is little oversight of LNG transport by rail and approvals happened with virtually no public debate. He said the Trump administration has overturned or gutted rules and laws that keep people safe. He suggests that communities take it upon themselves to ensure safety.
In July, Reuters reported that U.S. Energy Secretary Rick Perry proposed reducing the lengthy public interest review process for granting export permits to small-scale LNG producers. The “small-scale review rule” is now in the approval process, according to Reuters.
FEC has reported no incidents in shipping LNG, according to the Federal Railroad Administration.
Conditions for approval
The Federal Railroad Administration’s letter authorizing FEC to ship LNG contains a 10-point list of conditions, including a limit on the number of cars carrying LNG per train and how much liquid gas they can hold. Tracks and tankers must be inspected at least yearly and all findings must be sent to the agency for review.
“Both the shipper and the rail carrier have responsibilities to ensure safety and compliance with the hazardous materials regulations. The shipper must ensure the material is packaged and prepared for transportation correctly, and the carrier must observe all appropriate handling requirements,” said railway agency spokeswoman French.
“Failure to comply with these requirements could lead to civil or criminal penalties, or both.”
New Fortress Energy, which operates the Hialeah Yard LNG production plant, plans to construct similar small LNG plants nationwide, according to a July 2015 brochure.
In Florida, the company wants to add a small-scale LNG plant in Titusville, and is eying other proposed points of export including ports in Palm Beach, Tampa and Jacksonville.
The Titusville plant is on hold. Rules governing the siting of LNG plants require they be at least a mile from airports, schools and hospitals. The proposed site is .06 miles from an airport.
FEC’s plunge into LNG transport expresses the vision of former CEO James Hertwig, who described his hopes for commercial exploitation in a 2015 briefing for stock analysts.
As reported by American Shipper Magazine, Hertwig noted the Caribbean’s need for LNG due to the high cost of electricity.
“I think you’ll see the laws change where you can ship [LNG] to the entire Caribbean. When that happens, we see hauling these 10,000-gallon ISO [intermodal] containers, double-stacked to ports in Jacksonville, Everglades or Miami, where they will be put on vessels” for export.
https://www.miamiherald.com/latest-news/article217176680.html
-
Brightline Tracks Ship Possibly Dangerous Natural Gas by Rail Through Miami
Aug 22, 2018 | Miami New Times
By Jerry Iannelli
Most of Florida East Coast Railway's train tracks in Miami-Dade County pass through highly populated urban areas. If a gigantic tanker of liquid natural gas were to spill, ignite, or explode, it's fair to assume a lot of homes or innocent people would stand in harm's way.
But according to multiple public documents the watchdog news site Florida Bulldog dug up this morning, the railroad has already been transporting liquid natural gas (LNG) tankers through Miami-Dade to PortMiami and Hialeah. The railroad's former parent company, Fortress Investment Group, just so happens to own a natural-gas-pumping subsidiary, New Fortress Energy, which operates a gas plant in Hialeah.
Per Federal Railroad Administration records, the natural-gas cars are making 15-mile trips from Hialeah to PortMiami through areas with 9,500 people per square mile. The trip from Hialeah to Port Everglades in Broward County takes 28 miles and passes through similarly populated areas.
Spokespeople for Miami-Dade County Emergency Management did not immediately return messages from New Times today about when the county became aware of the natural-gas shipping plans. It's worth noting the urban tracks pass through densely populated areas without so much as a fence — earlier this year, a New Times reporter witnessed an SUV barely avoid smacking into a train on those tracks.
As Florida East Coast lobbied for months to build the privately owned passenger train Brightline from South Florida to Orlando, rumors had swirled across South Florida that the railroad also wanted to use its tracks to carry natural gas. Those rumors appear to have been true: The railroad announced in the November 2017 issue of the trade journal Railway Age that all of its tracks through Florida — from Jacksonville to Miami — would begin carrying natural-gas trains.
That announcement somehow eluded South Florida reporters until the Bulldog dug it up today.
"We are proud to be the first North American railroad to operate its entire main line fleet on LNG,” the railway's CEO, Fran Chinnici, told Railway Age. “We hope that our efforts will help other railroads and industries with this paradigm shift.” (A railroad spokesperson declined to speak to the Bulldog. Fortress still owns the Brightline train itself but sold its stake in the Florida East Coast Railway, specifically, to Grupo México Transportes in 2017.)
The federal government approved the railroad's natural-gas shipping plans in March 2017, documents show.
This is reportedly the first time liquid natural gas has been shipped by rail anywhere in the United States — a fact that worried some rail-safety experts who spoke to the Bulldog because outside safety experts are not positive that LNG is safe enough to ship through populated areas. The gas is supercooled into liquid form for travel purposes, but if a tanker were to be punctured, the train could explode. Though many scientists believe the gas to be safer than propane, it is still virtually impossible to extinguish once ignited.
Environmentalists have long been skeptical of attempts to ship other energy sources by rail. Green activists often refer to crude-oil tankers as "bomb trains" and warn that crude oil should not be shipped near populated areas. The Natural Resource Defense Council warns that 25 million Americans live within a crude-oil-train blast radius.
According to Martin County documents the Bulldog published, Florida government entities have been aware of the natural-gas shipping plans since at least 2015. A PowerPoint presentation that year predicted dire consequences for Martin County residents if a tanker were to blow up: In a worst-case scenario, 396 people living in a "red zone" near train tracks along Dixie Highway in Martin County could be injured or killed if a tanker were to explode.
A bulleted list attached to the presentation raises other concerns:
Summary
• LNG is a new hazardous chemical being added to rail transportation
• Population centers, neighborhoods are close to these railway corridors
• Risk increases as the amount and frequency of hazardous materials are transported through our community
• LNG along same rail lines as high-speed passenger rail increases risk of accidents
• Increase in potential for accidents to occur = unquantifiable
• Such emergencies can exceed local response capabilities
• Need for training and preparedness plans to respond to such emergenciesOf course, the railroad and its federal regulators insist the new transport method is safe. Natural gas has also been shipped by truck for years, and it is significantly safer to ship the substance by train than by risking the tankers on a crowded highway. There have been no reported natural-gas accidents on railways.
Demand for natural gas is high in Caribbean nations. Rumors had swirled among environmentalists for years that the railroad's operators were positioning themselves to become a major natural-gas exporter if the federal government loosens regulations on overseas gas shipments.
The railroad is arguably the most consequential company in the history of Florida. Henry Flagler's railway brought northern settlers to South Florida and turned the region into the urban center it is today. With both Brightline and natural-gas shipping plans in place, the railroad seems to be mounting a new pitch for relevancy in the 21st Century.
Of course, it helps that the company also got a handy assist from Florida Gov. Rick Scott. The Miami Herald reported earlier this month that Scott and his wife invested in Fortress, the railroad's former parent company, despite also playing a role in approving the construction of Brightline.
Correction: This piece previously misstated the current owner of Florida East Coast Railway.
https://www.miaminewtimes.com/news/florida-east-coast-railroad-ships-liquid-natural-gas-in-miami-10654689
-
Railroads in Illinois, N.M., Texas and N.J. Secure $73m in Positive Train Control Grants
Aug 22, 2018 | Railway Track & Structures
By Mischa Wanek-Libman
News began to trickle out from congressional offices regarding which properties have been awarded federal grants that will be applied toward the cost of implementing Positive Train Control (PTC).
Announcements from elected officials have revealed that six properties will receive $73 million to install the safety overlay technology. The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) issued a Notice of Funding Opportunity in May that $250 million was available. The PTC System Grants were open to passenger, commuter and freight rail railroads.
Illinois, thus far, has received the largest share of the grants with $33.2 million to be distributed to three area commuter and passenger railroads. Metra will receive $22,983,308; Chicago Rail Link will receive $1,640,925 and Belt Railway Company of Chicago will receive $8,600,000 in grant funding.
Rio Metro Regional Transit District will receive $29.36 million for the New Mexico Rail Runner Express commuter rail. A statement from the office of Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.) explained that without the grant, the Rio Metro Regional Transit District would have likely needed to cut service significantly on the Rail Runner to accommodate the cost of PTC.
Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) has been selected for $9.5 million in funding and Middletown and New Jersey Railroad will receive $1.2 million.
“Safety is our top priority – this grant will allow us to install cutting edge technology to further protect our train operations and the communities they serve in Orange County,” said Al Sauer, president and CEO, Middletown & New Jersey Railroad LLC.
The grants are part of the Fiscal Year 2018 Positive Train Control Grants under the Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements Grant Program.
https://www.rtands.com/cs/railroads-in-illinois-n-m-texas-and-n-j-secure-73m-in-ptc-grants/
-
EPA Calls for 2015 Ozone NAAQS Suit Argument Amid Designations Fight
Aug 22, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Stuart Parker
EPA, states, industry groups and environmentalists are calling on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to schedule oral argument in long-delayed litigation over the Obama EPA's decision in 2015 to tighten the ozone ambient air limit, amid a growing legal fight over attainment designations for the stricter standard.
In a joint unopposed motion to the court Aug. 22, parties in the consolidated litigation over the 2015 standard in Murray Energy Corp. v. EPA ask for nearly three hours of argument time to work through a diverse range of viewpoints they intend to present.
The suit combines challenges by environmentalists seeking a tougher national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS), from states and industry seeking a weaker standard, and by other states seeking to defend EPA's 2015 limit. The Obama EPA in 2015 tightened the limit to 70 parts per billion (ppb), down from the 75 ppb standard set by the George W. Bush EPA in 2008.
The stricter standard is at the upper end of a range of 60 ppb to 70 ppb twice recommended by the agency's Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee, leading environmentalists to argue it is too weak and does not include the “adequate margin of safety” required by the Clean Air Act.
However, states opposed to the standard and their industry allies argue that the scientific evidence did not support toughening the standard -- a claim former EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt echoed when he launched a formal process to decide on potentially reconsidering the decision to tighten the standard.
The case was fully briefed prior to the transition to President Donald Trump's administration, but the D.C. Circuit put it on hold at EPA's request while Pruitt considered whether to reconsider the standard.
Pruitt resigned on July 6 following a series of ethics scandals, and the agency on Aug. 1 then told the court it would not reconsider the 2015 decision. The court then set an Aug. 22 deadline for parties involved in the litigation to suggest how the fight over the 70 ppb limit should proceed.
The unopposed motion suggests the case will now likely proceed to argument, with questions including the role of naturally occurring or overseas “background” ozone in the decision to revise the NAAQS.
EPA is now embarking on an accelerated review of the 2015 standard, as required by the air law every five years. The agency aims to meet its October 2020 deadline to complete the review, which will draw on fresh scientific evidence -- but may also be subject to a Trump EPA science policy restricting EPA's use of science to studies that use publicly available data. This could exclude some highly influential science, critics argue.
Meanwhile, at least six groups of petitioners have sued EPA over its belated nonattainment designations issued this spring and summer for the 2015 ozone standard, many of them environmental groups or cities seeking more areas to be designated nonattainment. Groups filed the suits Aug. 1-3 in the D.C. Circuit. The findings are necessary before a Clean Air Act mandate begins for states to craft state implementation plans for reducing ozone-forming emissions.
Organizations filing suit include: the Board of County Commissions of Boulder County, CO, and Center for Biological Diversity and National Parks Conservation Association; Sierra Club; Clean Wisconsin; Environmental Law and Policy Center and Respiratory Health Association; City of Chicago and State of Illinois; and City of Sunland Park, NM, and Familias Unidas Del Chamizal.
It appears likely that the suits will seek to expand nonattainment areas around Denver, Chicago, and El Paso to include neighboring zones that emit ozone-forming pollution contributing to locally elevated ozone levels. In the Chicago area, this is likely to mean areas around Racine, WI, which EPA initially eyed for a nonattainment designation, but then designated attainment. The area is set to host a large manufacturing facility for computer components maker FoxConn.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/epa-calls-2015-ozone-naaqs-suit-argument-amid-designations-fight
-
How Trump Plays the Long Game on Enviro Rollbacks
Aug 23, 2018 | PoliticoPro
By Alex Guillén and Eric Wolff
President Donald Trump has been actively tearing down his predecessor's biggest environmental achievements, but it's the administration's stealthy bid to rewrite some long-established pollution rules that may have the most far-reaching impact on how the country regulates its air and water.
Amid Trump's overhaul of Barack Obama's carbon rules for power plants, shredding of the Paris climate agreement and planned rollback of the Waters of the U.S. rule, the administration has quietly embarked on an ambitious effort to soften the rules that form the bedrock of some of the nation's most pivotal environmental protections of the past half century.
That effort would represent a sea change that could affect everything from the rules governing power plants and manufacturing operations to the economic development of vast stretches of protected land that house endangered species.
“We’ve been waiting even in Republican administrations for the types of institutional reforms that have been put forward,” said Tom Pyle, president of the energy industry-backed American Energy Alliance.
Case in point: EPA's high-profile power plant carbon proposal issued Tuesday, which would replace the Obama administration's 2015 landmark climate change rules. Tucked inside that plan is a measure long-sought by the power sector that would weaken rules governing whether power plants can expand or upgrade their facilities without triggering environmental reviews.
That revamp of the 1977 New Source Review rule is one of several environmental regulations up for rewrite by Trump's agencies. It comes after years of pressure from fossil fuel and other industry groups, which have long complained that regulators and environmental groups have imposed expensive and restrictive rules that weighed on the economy.
Trump, who has long dismissed climate change as a hoax and played down concerns about U.S. pollution problems, is lined up squarely behind industry and conservative efforts to overhaul the environmental regulations.
“There’s nobody cleaner than us and it’s getting better and better, but I’m getting rid of some of these ridiculous rules and regulations which are killing our companies, our states and our jobs,” Trump told a rally in Charleston, W. Va. Tuesday night.
Other long-standing rules targeted by the Trump administration include those implementing: the 1973 Endangered Species Act, which protects the habitats of threatened plant and animal species; the National Environmental Policy Act, which took effect in 1970 and examines the impacts to the environment from federal projects; EPA's rules governing the use of scientific studies, which the agency is tightening to exclude many of the type of health-based findings underpinning current laws; and the parameters used in cost-benefit analyses, which EPA is aiming to alter in a way that would make it more difficult to justify new regulations.
Green critics warn that rewriting the use of scientific studies and cost-benefit analyses in particular could have far-reaching impacts on how future administrations can implement their own environmental policies.
"The administration or future administrations would get to limit the data that informs rulemaking and be able to distort administrative record to a particular outcome," said Pat Gallagher, legal director for the Sierra Club.
And opponents say the changes to the NSR permitting program in the new EPA proposal will help utilities keep older, dirty coal plants operating for potentially decades longer than they would under current rules. Supporters say the change would enable the plants to become more efficient, producing more power from less coal -- even though the proposed rule acknowledges the accompanying pollution increases could cause up to 1,400 premature deaths a year by 2030.
Joseph Goffman, a former senior EPA air adviser and a key architect of the Obama administration’s Clean Power Plan rules for power plants, said the Trump EPA has been advancing these huge changes quietly.
“I guess the mistake the Obama administration made was when we made major policy changes, we actually tried to be as transparent about it as possible and call everybody’s attention to it,” said Goffman, now executive director of Harvard Law School's Environmental & Energy Law Program. In fact, the NSR changes could end up having a bigger effect on the utility sector than the overall Trump carbon rule, he added.
“It’s quite possible that if this proposal were to be fully implemented, in three, four, five years from now, we would look back on it and say, ‘Boy, the thing that really made a difference was the changes in NSR,’” he said.
While EPA has been a focus of deregulation under Trump, the move to weaken NEPA, which deals with major federal projects like highways, airports and pipeline approvals, has been led by the White House’s Council on Environmental Quality. And the Interior Department is pushing significant changes to how it implements the Endangered Species Act, which Republicans and industry say has stymied economic growth in the West.
"The implication there is the regulatory change isn’t concentrated in a rule or any specific decision, it’s systematic," said Ali Zaidi, an attorney with Kirkland & Ellis and a former energy adviser to Obama.
For conservatives and industry, the Trump administration’s actions are fulfilling requests dating back before the Obama years.
“I decided to get into politics because I saw firsthand how regulations, especially environmental regulations, hinder economic development around the country,” Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.), who was elected to the Senate in 1994, told POLITICO in a statement. “President Trump gets that too — no regulation is 'too small' to address, especially when these lesser known regulations come with millions of dollars of compliance costs that get passed on to consumers.”
Ross Eisenberg, vice president of energy and resources policy at the National Association of Manufacturers, said these regulatory procedure issues are top of the list for thousands of companies across the U.S.
“It’s because this is where they get hit,” he said. “We can fight all we want about the big picture issues, but where the real problems come into play is where you’re trying to get a permit to open something or do a modification or do some sort of construction, and all of a sudden you find out that your six-month timetable is now a three-year timetable.”
The NSR program in particular has been a top target of both industry and conservatives for years. The George W. Bush administration tried to make several changes to the permitting program, most of which were overturned in court.
Wehrum downplayed the reach of the change on Tuesday, telling reporters that the new scheme would apply only to coal plants required to install new equipment under the ACE rule.
Goffman dismissed the notion that the NSR change would have a limited effect. Coal plants are the leading source of health-harming pollutants like soot and sulfur dioxide, he said. “That’s like saying, ‘The victim was burned on only 80 percent of his body,’” he said. “The world ‘only’ is doing a ludicrous amount of work in that sentence.”
This is at least the fourth major change EPA has sought for the permitting program since Trump took office.
In December, EPA said it would ease up NSR enforcement. In March, the agency changed how it calculates a project's emissions, which could help companies avoid the NSR program. And in May, Wehrum changed an EPA policy on how facilities are bundled together, another complex update that could help companies avoid NSR permitting.
“When you add up all of these actions, it amounts to an all-out assault on our lungs from tailpipes, smokestacks and every source of pollution that is backed by the best lobbyists that money can buy,” said Jeremy Symons, vice president of political affairs for the Environmental Defense Fund.
While the Trump administration has taken major strides already, industry groups still have plenty more they want EPA and other agencies to accomplish.
“We obviously see real opportunity in some of this regulatory procedure space,” said Eisenberg, noting that manufacturers are interested in getting EPA to give their plants the same NSR relief that it's pushing for utilities.
Anthony Adragna contributed to this report.
https://subscriber.politicopro.com/energy/article/2018/08/how-trump-plays-the-long-game-on-enviro-rollbacks-747034
-
What Trump’s Coal and Car Plans Could Mean for Climate Change
Aug 22, 2018 | New York Times
By Brad Plumer and Henry Fountain
Before getting to the bigger-picture questions, it’s been a busy week in coal news. Here’s what happened:
We learned early details of the Trump administration’s plan to overhaul some Obama-era climate change regulations. And on Monday, the acting head of the Environmental Protection Agency signed a proposal to weaken regulation of coal-fired power plants. The E.P.A.’s own numbers showed how this could lead to as many as 1,400 premature deaths a year by 2030.
Then, President Trump had a rally Tuesday night in West Virginia, where he told supporters, “We’re putting our great coal miners back to work.” We fact-checked his claims about coal. And yet, as we wrote today, all this may help a few coal plants in the short term — but still won’t save the coal industry.
We also profiled the former industry lawyer who is leading the E.P.A.’s air office, and who, before that, spent the better part of a decade fighting his current employer over air pollution rules.
This all raises the question …What do Trump’s pollution rules mean for climate change?
The Trump administration has been particularly busy this August rolling out its plans to weaken federal climate policies.
First, there was the proposal early in the month to prevent fuel-economy standards for cars and light trucks from continuing to get stricter after 2021.
Then, this week, the Environmental Protection Agency announced its intention to replace the Obama-era Clean Power Plan, a sweeping program aimed at pushing states away from coal and toward cleaner sources of electricity, with a less-stringent rule that would only encourage coal plants to make modest efficiency upgrades and allow states to regulate lightly.
From a climate perspective, these two moves together could have a sizable impact if they’re finalized. Weaker vehicle rules could add an extra 28 million to 83 million metric tons of carbon dioxide to the atmosphere in 2030 alone, according to a Rhodium Group analysis. The proposal to relax rules for coal plants would add another 47 million to 61 million tons of CO₂ that same year, according to the E.P.A.’s own numbers.
To put that in context: At the high end, that’s the climate equivalent of putting an extra 31 million cars on the road. It’s more carbon dioxide than many midsize nations like Belgium or Greece put out in an entire year. And it comes at a time when global emissions are still rising, while scientists say they need to be falling rapidly to avoid the worst impacts of global warming.
That said, it’s not yet certain that this higher emissions scenario will come to pass, and there are a few things we’ll be watching closely in the months ahead.
First, it’s worth noting that the Trump administration’s proposals are far from finalized and, like all regulations, are certain to lead to fierce court battles. (Note that the Obama-era Clean Power Plan never actually took effect because it is still tied up in court.)
Lately, federal courts have been striking down a number of the administration’s regulatory moves. California plans to sue over the vehicle rollbacks, arguing that the proposal constrains the state’s longstanding authority to set its own car standards. And environmentalists are likely to challenge a section of the coal rule that would exempt plants from certain pollution controls if they invest in upgrades.
We’ll also be watching what’s happening in the fast-changing electricity sector, which accounts for one-third of the nation’s carbon emissions. The Trump administration’s power plant proposal could plausibly give a second life to some coal plants and slow the transition toward cleaner energy. But how this plays out will depend on a complex mix of factors, like state-level policies, energy prices and the growth of wind and solar power. (Much will also depend on whether the Energy Department decides to pursue a separate, highly contentious bailout of struggling coal plants.)
Which is all to say that this story is still in flux and even the most careful predictions about what different policies mean for global warming could change over time. Stay tuned.
Without ice, Earth’s future looks (literally) shaky
When the last ice age retreated, the Earth’s crust sprang back up again as the weight of the ice was pressing down no more. Question: Would the melting of the ice caps cause the Earth’s crust to shift and cause more quakes or volcanic activity?
Here’s another reason to be concerned about global warming: It might lead to more earthquakes, at least near the poles.
In addition to the other problems that the eventual melting of the thick ice sheets in Greenland and Antarctica would create (soaring sea levels centuries from now, for one thing), it would remove a huge weight from the two land masses and affect stresses in the faults beneath them.
“I would expect it,” said Göran Ekström, a geophysicist at Lamont-Doherty Earth Observatory, part of Columbia University, of the possibility that earthquakes might result. “That’s a very large stress change.”
There are indications that this happened in the past, as the large ice sheets that covered much of the Northern Hemisphere and Antarctica during the last ice age began to retreat 12,000 years ago and the land began to rise (a process called postglacial rebound, which continues today). Scientists have found evidence in northern Scandinavia of large faults that ruptured after the ice retreated.
Much more recently, relatively small changes in mass at or near the Earth’s surface have been thought to cause quakes. Several earthquakes in the 1970s and 1980s in a natural gas field in Uzbekistan, for instance, were believed to be the result of removing so much gas by drilling operations. And some scientists have linked a strong earthquake that struck Sichuan Province in China in 2008 to the filling of a reservoir behind a new dam.
As for volcanoes, Dr. Ekström was less certain what the impact would be. There are indications, for example, that higher sea levels in the ancient past reduced volcanism at midocean ridges, as the extra weight of water acted to constrain molten rock, or magma. So loss of the ice sheets might be expected to lead to increased volcanic activity on the newly exposed land. “To the extent that a load should affect the magma bodies underground, there should be a connection,” Dr. Ekström said.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/22/climate/trump-coal-car-regulations-climate-change.html
-
Big Oil Asks Government to Protect It from Climate Change
Aug 22, 2018 | AP (In The Washington Post)
By Will Weissert
As the nation plans new defenses against the more powerful storms and higher tides expected from climate change, one project stands out: an ambitious proposal to build a nearly 60-mile “spine” of concrete seawalls, earthen barriers, floating gates and steel levees on the Texas Gulf Coast.
Like other oceanfront projects, this one would protect homes, delicate ecosystems and vital infrastructure, but it also has another priority — to shield some of the crown jewels of the petroleum industry, which is blamed for contributing to global warming and now wants the federal government to build safeguards against the consequences of it.
The plan is focused on a stretch of coastline that runs from the Louisiana border to industrial enclaves south of Houston that are home to one of the world’s largest concentrations of petrochemical facilities, including most of Texas’ 30 refineries, which represent 30 percent of the nation’s refining capacity.
Texas is seeking at least $12 billion for the full coastal spine, with nearly all of it coming from public funds. Last month, the government fast-tracked an initial $3.9 billion for three separate, smaller storm barrier projects that would specifically protect oil facilities.
That followed Hurricane Harvey, which roared ashore last Aug. 25 and swamped Houston and parts of the coast, temporarily knocking out a quarter of the area’s oil refining capacity and causing average gasoline prices to jump 28 cents a gallon nationwide. Many Republicans argue that the Texas oil projects belong at the top of Washington’s spending list.
“Our overall economy, not only in Texas but in the entire country, is so much at risk from a high storm surge,” said Matt Sebesta, a Republican who as Brazoria County judge oversees a swath of Gulf Coast.
But the idea of taxpayers around the country paying to protect refineries worth billions, and in a state where top politicians still dispute climate change’s validity, doesn’t sit well with some.
“The oil and gas industry is getting a free ride,” said Brandt Mannchen, a member of the Sierra Club’s executive committee in Houston. “You don’t hear the industry making a peep about paying for any of this and why should they? There’s all this push like, ‘Please Senator Cornyn, Please Senator Cruz, we need money for this and that.’”
Normally outspoken critics of federal spending, Texas Sens. John Cornyn and Ted Cruz both backed using taxpayer funds to fortify the oil facilities’ protections and the Texas coast. Cruz called it “a tremendous step forward.”
Federal, state and local money is also bolstering defenses elsewhere, including on New York’s Staten Island, around Atlantic City, New Jersey, and in other communities hammered by Superstorm Sandy in 2012.
Construction in Texas could begin in several months on the three sections of storm barrier. While plans are still being finalized, some dirt levees will be raised to about 17 feet high, and 6 miles of 19-foot-tall floodwalls would be built or strengthened around Port Arthur, a Texas-Louisiana border locale of pungent chemical smells and towering knots of steel pipes.
The town of 55,000 includes the Saudi-controlled Motiva oil refinery, the nation’s largest, as well as refineries owned by oil giants Valero Energy Corp. and Total S.A. There are also almost a dozen petrochemical facilities.
“You’re looking at a lot of people, a lot of homes, but really a lot of industry,” said Steve Sherrill, an Army Corps of Engineers resident engineer in Port Arthur, as he peered over a Gulf tributary lined with chunks of granite and metal gates, much of which is set to be reinforced.
The second barrier project features around 25 miles of new levees and seawalls in nearby Orange County, where Chevron, DuPont and other companies have facilities. The third would extend and heighten seawalls around Freeport, home to a Phillips 66 export terminal for liquefied natural gas and nearby refinery, as well as several chemical facilities.
The proposals approved for funding originally called for building more protections along larger swaths of the Texas coast, but they were scaled back and now deliberately focus on refineries.
“That was one of the main reasons we looked at some of those areas,” said Tony Williams, environmental review coordinator for the Texas Land Commissioner’s Office.
Oil and chemical companies also pushed for more protection for surrounding communities to shield their workforces, but “not every property can be protected,” said Sheri Willey, deputy chief of project management for the Army Corps of Engineers’ upper Texas district.
“Our regulations tell us what benefits we need to include, and they have to be national economic benefits,” Willey said.
Once work is complete on the three sections, they could eventually be integrated into a larger coastal spine system. In some places along Texas’ 370-mile Gulf Coast, 18 feet is lost annually to erosion, threatening to suck more wetlands, roads and buildings into rising seas.
Protecting a wide expanse will be expensive. After Harvey, a special Texas commission prepared a report seeking $61 billion from Congress to “future proof” the state against such natural disasters, without mentioning climate change, which scientists say will cause heavier rains and stronger storms.
Texas has not tapped its own rainy day fund of around $11 billion. According to federal rules, 35 percent of funds spent by the Army Corps of Engineers must be matched by local jurisdictions, and the GOP-controlled state Legislature could help cover such costs. But such spending may be tough for many conservatives to swallow.
Texas “should be funding things like this itself,” said Chris Edwards, an economist at the libertarian Cato Institute. “Texans are proud of their conservatism, but, unfortunately, when decisions get made in Washington, that frugality goes out the door.”
State officials counter that protecting the oil facilities is a matter of national security.
The effects of the next devastating storm could be felt nationwide,” Rep. Randy Weber, a fiercely conservative Republican from suburban Houston who has nonetheless authored legislation backing the coastal spine.
Major oil companies did not return messages seeking comment on funding for the projects. But Suzanne Lemieux, midstream group manager for the American Petroleum Institute, said the industry already pays into programs such as the federal Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund and the Waterways Trust Fund, only to see Congress divert that money elsewhere.
“Do we want to pay again, when we’ve already paid a tax without it getting used? I’d say the answer is no,” she said.
Phillips 66 and other energy firms spent money last year lobbying Congress on storm-related funding post-Harvey, campaign finance records show, and Houston’s Lyondell Chemical Co. PAC lobbied for building a coastal spine.
“The coastal spine benefits more than just our industry,” Bob Patel, CEO of LyondellBasell, one of the world’s largest plastics, chemicals and refining companies, said in March. “It really needs to be a regional effort.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/energy-environment/big-oil-asks-government-to-protect-it-from-climate-change/2018/08/22/518cdf66-a61e-11e8-ad6f-080770dcddc2_story.html?utm_term=.aa46754a00ae
-
Trump’s Latest Step Backward for the Climate
Aug 22, 2018 | New York Times
By Jason Bordoff
It has been a bad month for the fight against climate change. Amid heat waves, wildfires, droughts and Arctic ice melt, President Trump has taken aim at the two central pillars of his predecessor’s ambitious efforts to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. After proposing in early August to freeze a scheduled increase in fuel economy standards for cars and light trucks, the Trump administration on Tuesday said it would seek to significantly weaken the Obama-era Clean Power Plan, aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions from coal-fired power plants.
Those two economic sectors — transportation and electricity production — are the biggest contributors to greenhouse gas emissions in the United States, accounting for 56 percent of the total.
In taking on the Clean Power Plan, Mr. Trump says he wants to save coal, but the reality is that coal is not coming back. Market forces conspire against it. Even without any policy, the economic imperatives driving the transition to cleaner fuels are expected by 2030 to reduce carbon dioxide emissions in the power sector by 33 percent of their 2005 levels, according to the Environmental Protection Agency. With the Obama plan, the reduction would be 36 percent; with the Trump administration’s new Affordable Clean Energy Rule, it would be 33 to 34 percent.
Coal’s decline is being driven far less by government regulation than by cheap natural gas prices and the falling costs of renewable energy. Therefore, scrapping President Barack Obama’s Clean Power Plan can’t save coal — although the Trump administration’s misguided plan to subsidize uncompetitive coal plants could, at least in the short term.
So why does this proposed rollback of power sector climate regulations matter if it won’t change the carbon emissions trajectory much?
First, firm policy direction from the government provides investors and utilities with certainty about the investment outlook and ensures emissions reductions even if the market shifts. Just as few predicted the collapse in natural gas prices a decade ago, there is a wide range of uncertainty about what energy prices will look like in the future.
The Energy Information Administration projects that market forces alone will lead in 2030 to power sector emissions 28 percent below their 2005 level. This reflects the agency’s assumptions that natural gas prices will rise roughly 50 percent from their current levels and that improvements in renewable and electricity storage technologies will proceed conservatively.
By contrast, the Rhodium Group, an independent research firm, assumes in its baseline scenario that today’s low natural gas prices will persist and that renewable costs will continue to fall at their recent pace, and finds that power sector emissions will be 35 percent lower in 2030.
Second, the right way to assess whether a policy makes sense is not just to look at its emissions impacts but also to compare its costs with its benefits. Even by the current E.P.A.’s own analysis, which makes assumptions that play down the climate benefits and increase the implementation costs, the Clean Power Plan delivered far more net benefits for the American people than the proposed replacement. That is because reducing coal use in the power sector not only delivers carbon emission reductions but also lower levels of local pollutants like particulate matter.EDITORS’ PICKSThe Scientist Who Scrambled Darwin’s Tree of LifeOpinionA Free Press Needs YouThe Iraqi Spy Who Infiltrated ISIS
Third, and most important, even though the Clean Power Plan fell far short of the emission reductions needed to avoid severe climate change impacts, it was a starting point to clean up the power sector. It would send investment signals and provide a foundation for deeper reductions in carbon dioxide emissions to meet the globally agreed upon target of limiting temperature rise to well below two degrees Celsius, or 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit.
For instance, a carbon tax starting at $50 per ton (which is roughly the Obama administration’s estimate of the cost of harm from carbon emissions) would result in power sector emission reductions in 2030 relative to 2005 that are roughly twice what they would be under the Clean Power Plan, according to an analysis I helped to prepare for the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University.
Neutering the Clean Power Plan is a major step backward. But what’s most important to remember is that even if a future president puts back in place Mr. Obama’s climate policies, more comprehensive and stringent policies are still needed to deal with the rising threats of climate change that we see all around us. That reality is understood by the American public and increasingly even among oil companies and some Republicanswho have come out in favor of a carbon tax.
The damage done by the Trump administration’s reversal of Mr. Obama’s climate policies is less a sharp rise in carbon emissions than it is the loss of American leadership and missed opportunity to save future generations from climate change’s severe impacts.
Jason Bordoff (@JasonBordoff), a former special assistant to President Barack Obama, is a professor of professional practice in international and public affairs and the founding director of the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/22/opinion/trump-climate-emissions-backward.html
-
Will Trump Listen to His Science Adviser?
Aug 23, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Scott Waldman
Kelvin Droegemeier has a long history of advocating for sound science and pushing back on those who want to politicize it.
He could soon be the top scientist in an administration that has called for slashing hundreds of millions of dollars from federal research and for restricting the use of science in regulations.
Droegemeier, who stepped down as vice president for research at the University of Oklahoma this week, will testify today before the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee, a key step on his path toward likely confirmation as director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy. He enjoys the backing of conservative think tanks as well as Democrats who support climate change policies.
If he's confirmed, part of Droegemeier's job will be to talk about climate change with a president who has referred to it as a "Chinese hoax" and who has waited twice as long as any other president to nominate anyone for the position.
A key question: Will Droegemeier be able to sway Trump on science?
Droegemeier is a lifelong Republican and secretary of science and technology for Oklahoma Republican Gov. Mary Fallin. He served on the National Science Board during the George W. Bush and Obama administrations, rising to vice chairman, and has repeatedly advocated for the importance of federally funded research.
He has criticized the efforts by congressional Republicans to slash funding for climate research as nothing more than a political act. He has also taken on those who he says rely too heavily on climate models and called out researchers who belittle members of the public who don't believe in climate change.
Observers say these qualities could help prioritize science within the Trump administration. Droegemeier has a history of giving straightforward answers on science, no matter the audience, said Ryan Maue, a meteorologist and adjunct scholar at the conservative Cato Institute.
"He's going to give even-keeled, honest advice; he's not going to sugarcoat it with anything political or partisan. I don't think he's going to hold back on his opinions and tell Trump what he wants to hear," Maue said.
'Walk away'
Droegemeier has expressed little tolerance for those who reject science and once told a room of researchers at the South Central Climate Science Center in Oklahoma to walk away if they are locked into a conversation with someone who doesn't accept established research, because that person is essentially a lost cause.
"Science is about respecting opposing views and getting in and arguing, arguing and letting the research tell the story," he said. "Some people just get vilified if they even bring a topic up. If you're in a situation like that, somebody is so adamant that their view is right and that you're an idiot, walk away, walk away. Don't have the conservation with them; it's not going to be valuable."
The Trump administration has sidelined science at a number of agencies. Climate change websites have been deleted. Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke recently blamed California wildfires on "environmental terrorists" and downplayed connections to climate change. The administration's budget proposals have routinely targeted hundreds of millions of dollars in federal climate research. EPA is considering a science "transparency" plan that would restrict the agency's use of science.
Some who have fought against the administration's approach to science see reason for hope in Droegemeier's appointment, even if there is little evidence he can sway Trump on major policies.
"It appears that this president doesn't really take advice on a lot of things, so I don't think there is any obvious reason to think all of a sudden he's going to be deeply engaged with a science adviser," said Andrew Rosenberg, director of the Center for Science and Democracy at the Union of Concerned Scientists.
However, the Office of Science and Technology Policy can play an important role in the Trump administration, and Droegemeier has a record that suggests he would ably handle the job, Rosenberg said. He could ensure that the government maintains critical data sets, including those related to climate change, and make sure it is not sidelining science. He could also get involved in the congressionally mandated National Climate Assessment to ensure that it is published on schedule later this year, he said.
"He could make sure scientific integrity policies are being followed. He could push back if there is an effort to politically manipulate scientific studies to exclude ones that are inconvenient," Rosenberg said. "He can provide a scientific perspective they're not getting right now."
One area where Droegemeier could shift the administration is on EPA's proposed science overhaul.
Former EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt launched the effort to limit the studies used in rulemaking to those for which the data are made publicly available. The plan is now being considered by acting EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler, but Droegemeier has acknowledged the challenge researchers face when sharing data.
In an interview with The Christian Science Monitor in 2015, he said experiments can take years to perform, involve complicated procedures and be expensive.
"Due to that complexity, it's become more difficult to reproduce results," he told the paper.
Climate adviser
Droegemeier's nomination surprised many observers who thought Trump would support someone like William Happer, an emeritus Princeton University professor who questions basic climate research and who was rumored to be a finalist for the position.
If Droegemeier is confirmed, it's unclear whether he will also be given the title of "assistant to the president," which would have him reporting directly to Trump rather than to the White House chief of staff.
Droegemeier would take over an office that's half the size it was during the Obama years. A politics major from Princeton has held the most senior title since Trump took office more than 18 months ago. The administration has not nominated any of the other five senior political positions in the science shop (Climatewire, Feb. 14).
Although Obama's science adviser, John Holdren, focused on climate science, the Trump administration isn't likely to do so. One of the objectives on which Droegemeier could focus is space, said Maue, the meteorologist and Cato Institute scholar. He said there is a need to connect the realm of scientific research with economic development.
On climate change, Maue said Trump would likely view the issue through a political lens, but Droegemeier could show him the nuances in the field. And if Democrats take control of the House in November, Trump may be more motivated to craft a bipartisan climate policy that reflects the science, Maue said.
"If Republicans remain in control of both houses, then this is a waste of time and space. It's just not going to happen," he said. "Let's say that the Democrats win, there's a blue wave in Washington; that could immediately change the climate debate in Washington, and having somebody in a White House adviser who is well-versed in climate science — maybe he doesn't understand or know all the policy, but he is obviously able to read up on it and become quickly acclimated; he's going to hire people who are going to support him in that role. If Trump seeks out the advice, he will get honest, the best state-of-the-art advice there is."
On a questionnaire to Congress, Droegemeier listed the 2014 video of his talk to young researchers as an example of his scientific approach. And although he is firm in his commitment to science, he also encourages researchers to find ways to talk to the public about politically loaded subjects like climate change without criticizing them if they misunderstand the findings. He told them to get out of the lab and visit local Kiwanis and Rotary clubs as well as church groups and dorms.
"You can't just go in and tell somebody, 'This is the way it is, folks; this is the way science works,'" he said. "You're dead on arrival, and you should be, frankly, because you don't value other people's opinions. We have to listen, OK; we have to listen and we have to communicate. And, in fact, in a lot of cases, what science tells us does conflict with people's core beliefs, and we can't just say, 'Well, they're idiots; if the public were just smart, if they just had a master's degree, if they just went to university, if those idiots in the public would just get it, life would be good,' and that's the attitude of a lot of people, especially with climate science."
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2018/08/23/stories/1060095047
-
Wash. Girds for Heavyweight Fight over Carbon Tax
Aug 23, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Nick Sobczyk
Carbon pricing will be on the ballot in Washington state in November, and the money is pouring in from big-name environmental groups backing the initiative and oil companies hoping to kill it.
The ballot measure, Initiative 1631, would impose a $15 fee on each metric ton of carbon dioxide beginning in 2020 and increase $2 annually until the state reaches its emissions goals.
Supporters, including a wide range of environmental and labor organizations, view it as potentially historic and a much better option than the revenue-neutral carbon pricing ballot measure that failed in Washington in 2016.
But they find themselves up against an old foe. Two opposition campaign groups are funded almost entirely by the oil and gas industry, according to state disclosure forms.
A campaign called "No on 1631" is sponsored by the Western States Petroleum Association, and it has already raised almost $9 million in cash contributions. That includes a $3 million contribution from BP PLC last week and a $3.5 million donation from Phillips 66 Co. earlier in the month.
Dana Bieber, a spokeswoman for the No on 1631 campaign, said she expects farmers, labor unions and small-business groups to join the opposition in the coming months.
Meanwhile, Clean Air Clean Energy Washington, which is funding the yes campaign, has raised about $3.8 million altogether, including cash and in-kind contributions, according to disclosure forms. Its top donor is the Nature Conservancy, with big chunks of cash coming from individuals and other big-name environmental groups, such as the Sierra Club and Washington Conservation Voters.
"We do expect that we'll be outspent by the oil industry pretty significantly," said Nick Abraham, a spokesman for Yes on 1631.
Despite the cash gap, supporters say their advantage lies in their large coalition of renewable energy advocates, labor unions, progressively minded businesses, American Indian tribes and communities of color.
That, they say, should allow this year's proposal to fare better than the carbon tax ballot initiative that was roundly rejected in 2016 or the carbon fees proposed by Gov. Jay Inslee (D). Those failed to gain traction in the state Legislature.
Many progressive groups opted not to support the 2016 measure, in part because it would have cut taxes rather than making direct investments in lower-income communities.
Revenue from the current plan would be used differently. Instead of flowing toward other tax cuts or existing state government programs, the fee would be invested in things like pollution cleanup and a new clean energy fund to be set up by the state treasury.
Another part of the fee would be directed to "programs, activities, or projects to prepare communities for challenges caused by climate change and to ensure that the impacts of climate change are not disproportionately borne by certain populations."
In other words, the money would go to the people who most stand to benefit from the investment and who suffer most from the effects of climate change, said Aiko Schaefer, director of Front and Centered, a coalition of organizations representing communities of color and low-income residents.
"They're areas that have the nexus of high levels of pollutions and areas where the economy would benefit from investments," she said. "For us, that was an important aspect of transitioning away from a reliance on fossil fuels. We felt like a revenue-neutral carbon tax would give away that opportunity to invest in solutions."
Big Oil's case
Oil and gas companies that publicly voice support for carbon pricing say there are practical reasons to oppose the Washington ballot measure.
Most pressing is that some of the state's largest polluters — namely its massive aerospace industry and the Centralia coal-fired power plant — would be exempt from the fee, putting refiners in the state at a disadvantage.
In a letter to state lawmakers earlier this month, Robert Allendorfer, the manager at BP's Cherry Point refinery, wrote that the company had attempted to work with the sponsors of 1631 but called the final version "a poorly designed policy." BP employs nearly 10,000 people in the state, he said.
"It would exempt six of the ten-largest stationary source emitters in the state, including a coal-fired power plant, an aluminum smelter and a number of pulp and paper plants," Allendorfer wrote. "This would undermine the goal of reducing emissions, while effectively subsidizing certain companies at the expense of others."
In a statement, BP spokesman Jason Ryan reiterated the company's support for carbon pricing, noting its membership in the Climate Leadership Council, an organization that champions a conservative carbon fee and dividend model.
Bieber, from the no campaign, said opposition to the carbon tax is not a challenge to climate science or the idea that the state needs to reduce its carbon emissions.
"There are a couple things we can all agree upon. Climate change is a serious challenge, and we need to address it," she said. "But 1631 is not a serious solution."
The policy would cover more than 80 percent of state emissions, said Mike Stevens, Washington state director for the Nature Conservancy. As for the exemptions for aerospace and other emissions sources, he said, "it doesn't make sense to essentially create a set of incentives or requirements that would lead a company to move its operations or its jobs out of Washington and move to another state or another country where their production is actually going to be more carbon-intensive."
The other issue opponents have with the measure, however, is that the goal posts can easily shift, Bieber said.
The carbon fee would stop increasing "when the state's 2035 greenhouse gas reduction goal is met and the state's emissions are on a trajectory that indicates that compliance with the state's 2050 goal is likely," the initiative reads.
It would create a public oversight board to oversee implementation. But the board would have power to amend those goals and allow the carbon fee to continue increasing, despite little guarantee the plan would actually reduce emissions, Bieber said.
"They wrote it so cleverly that even if they don't reduce carbon emissions, they actually get more money," Bieber said.
Supporters say that's not a fair criticism. The plan is designed to meet specific emissions goals, and the board would still be accountable to state government, Stevens said.
Abraham, from the yes campaign, said opposition to the carbon tax is based on industry interests — it would hurt oil companies' profits.
"Look, the oil industry has been telling us that they're waiting for a plan that they love for three decades," he said, "and they're never going to get on board with something because they don't want to find a solution."
Inslee weighs in
Disclosure forms for opponents and supporter groups reveal different campaign strategies as the fight gears up.
Money from the no campaign has flowed mostly from oil and gas companies to consultants, pollsters and strategists, according to disclosure forms.
The campaign in July doled out just under $300,000 to Amplified Strategies Inc., a Seattle-based company, for research and a direct mail campaign.
Moore Information Inc., a company that specializes in opinion research and voter data, has taken in nearly $150,000 overall from the no campaign, as has Winner & Mandabach Campaigns, a California-based consulting group.
Bieber and another spokesman declined to provide much detail about what those companies are being paid to do, but she said the lead-up to November will largely involve education about the initiative, which she said is "misleading" and "complex."
"I don't want to hand out our playbook, but I can tell you this: We are committed to making sure voters have the facts about the measure," Bieber said.
The Yes on 1631 campaign, meanwhile, has put the bulk of its expenditures toward employee wages and smaller expenses, like postage stamps and printing.
Its biggest payment — $12,500 — went to Trinity Interactive LLC, a digital media consulting company, last month. An additional $7,500 went to Northwest Passage Consulting.
The campaign's biggest strength is its ability to go door to door and speak one on one with local politicians in places like Centralia, home of the state's only coal-fired power plant, Abraham said.
Part of the reason the plant is exempt from Initiative 1631 is that it's set to close in the next decade.
So far, however, supporters have spent about $1.2 million more than the largest opposition group, even if they've raised less. The plan is to launch some television ads, Abraham said, and the group has already been running some small-dollar spots on Facebook.
Stevens added that the campaign is continuing its fundraising push to counter messaging by the oil industry on the airwaves.
Inslee has also thrown his voice behind the measure, particularly as wildfire smoke continues to block out the sky in parts of the state.
"Today, this smoke [may] be opaque. But when it comes to children's health, it has made something very clear, and that is the state of Washington needs to pass this clean air initiative, so these children can breathe clean air," Inslee said last week, according to Seattle's KING 5 News.
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2018/08/23/stories/1060095019
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested