Preview Newsletter
ACC PM 29/08/18
-
California Passes Professional Cosmetics Labelling Measure
Aug 29, 2018 | Chemical Watch
California’s legislature has passed a bill requiring cosmetics used in professional settings to bear a label listing the product ingredients. -
(ACC Mentioned) NGO Drops Legal Challenge to TSCA New Chemicals Guidance
Aug 29, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
US NGO the Natural Resources Defense Council has moved to withdraw its legal challenge to the TSCA new chemicals programme. -
EPA Issues 29 TSCA Significant New Use Rules
Aug 29, 2018 | Chemical Watch
The US EPA has issued TSCA significant new use rules (Snurs) for 29 substances, subject to section 5(e) consent orders. -
NRDC Moves to Dismiss Petition for Review of New Chemicals Decision-Making Framework
Aug 29, 2018 | The National Law Review
On August 27, 2018, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) filed a motion in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit asking to dismiss voluntarily its petition for review of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) “New Chemicals Decision-Making Framework: Working Approach to Making Determinations under Section 5 of TSCA.” -
(ACC Mentioned) California Poised to Approve Wide-Ranging Flame Retardants Bill
Aug 29, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
California's legislature is poised to approve a bill restricting the use of most flame retardants in mattresses, upholstered furniture and children's products. -
(ACC Mentioned) Does Formaldehyde Cause Leukemia? A Delayed EPA Report May Hold the Answer
Aug 29, 2018 | PBS News Hour
By Amanda Grennell
The Environmental Protection Agency has been evaluating the link between formaldehyde and leukemia, a type of blood cancer, for more than a decade, but it has not yet reached a final decision. -
What’s Next in Court for Bayer Crop-Chemical Claims
Aug 29, 2018 | Bloomberg (In The Washington Post)
By Joel Rosenblatt
Many Bayer AG investors didn’t realize just how much litigation risk they were getting when the German company spent $66 billion in June to acquire Monsanto Co., the giant U.S. seed and herbicide maker. -
Bipartisan Bill Would Track Mercury Pollution
Aug 29, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Niina Heikkinen
A new bipartisan bill announced this week aims to more comprehensively track contamination from mercury found in soil, air and wildlife. -
EPA Finds High Cancer Risk Near Chicago Fumigation Business
Aug 29, 2018 | Chicago Tribune (In E&E Greenwire)
By Michael Hawthorne
People who live near two Chicago buildings owned by a company that fumigates medical instruments, pharmaceutical drugs and food to kill bacteria and pests face some of the highest cancer risks from air pollution in the country, according to new research. -
Texas Energy Group Takes Issue with Duke University Water Study
Aug 29, 2018 | Houston Chronicle
By Rye Druzin
A Texas energy group has taken issue with the conclusions of a recent Duke University that water use in the booming Permian Basin oil field of West Texas skyrocketed between 2011 and 2016. -
Three Regions Account for Half of U.S. Natural Gas Production
Aug 29, 2018 | Houston Chronicle
By Katherine Blunt
Three regions are driving the growth of U.S. natural gas production as the Gulf of Mexico claims a smaller share of the total. -
The Shale Dividend for Utilities Is Ending
Aug 29, 2018 | Bloomberg (In The Washington Post)
By Liam Denning
Forget Saudi Arabia; maybe it’s utilities Elon Musk should have been courting for his take-Tesla-private fling. -
Iran Sanctions Offer Trump New Opportunity To Help American Oil Producers
Aug 29, 2018 | Forbes
By Dan Eberhart
As the Trump administration prepares to renew sanctions on Iran’s energy sector, it has an opportunity to help the U.S. oil and gas industry with the right enforcement policy. -
U.S. Crude Oil Inventories Decline, Boosting Oil Prices
Aug 29, 2018 | Houston Chronicle
By Katherine Blunt
Domestic crude oil inventories again fell last week, lifting the U.S. benchmark toward $70 a barrel after weeks of fluctuation. -
FERC Says Stalled Project Can Restart Construction
Aug 29, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
Federal regulators are allowing most construction to resume on the Mountain Valley pipeline, a natural gas project stalled by court action this summer. -
Local Experts are the Vital Piece to Solve the Infrastructure Puzzle
Aug 29, 2018 | The Hill - Congress Blog
By Tony Hyde
With so much attention focused on the national level on what Congress will do to address our infrastructure needs, it’s critical to remember that local experts play a vital role in addressing our challenges. -
Union Pacific Reports PTC Progress
Aug 29, 2018 | American Journal of Transportation
Union Pacific continues to make significant progress implementing positive train control (PTC). -
Port Manatee Garners Federal Security Grant to Enhance Access Control
Aug 29, 2018 | American Journal of Transportation
Port Manatee has been awarded a $326,456 federal security grant, enabling the Central Florida Gulf Coast port to enhance its access control system. -
Trump's EPA Unveils Weaker Alternative to Obama Power Plant Rule
Aug 29, 2018 | Reuters (In The New York Times)
By Susan Heavey and Nichola Groom
The Trump administration on Tuesday proposed replacing a signature Obama-era policy to combat climate change with a weaker plan that would let states write their own rules on coal-fired power plants, prompting critics to warn of dire environmental and health consequences. -
New Power Plant Rule Sounds a Lot Like Dead Climate Bill
Aug 29, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Robin Bravender
The Trump administration's proposal for replacing President Obama's signature climate change rule has an appealing name with a catchy acronym: the Affordable Clean Energy rule, or ACE. -
Trump Admin Flips on HFC Phaseout to Align with Kavanaugh
Aug 29, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Amanda Reilly
The Trump administration is changing its stance on the phaseout of potent heat-trapping refrigerants known as hydrofluorocarbons. -
Wheeler Rejects Premature-Death Worries from Rule Redo
Aug 29, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Niina Keikkinen
Acting EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler is dismissing concerns that the agency's replacement for the Clean Power Plan will increase the risk of premature death in the United States. -
Texas Sues Trump EPA Over San Antonio's Ozone Designation
Aug 29, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Sean Reilly
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and the Trump administration — fast friends on environmental issues — have parted company over EPA's decision to deem the San Antonio area out of compliance with the 2015 ground-level ozone standard. -
California Lawmakers Set Goal of 100 Percent Renewable Energy Use by 2045
Aug 29, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Miranda Green
California lawmakers have adopted a plan for the state to transition to an energy grid devoid of electricity generated from fossil fuels by 2045. -
Facebook Aims to Run on Clean Energy by 2020
Aug 29, 2018 | Financial Times (In E&E Greenwire)
By Ed Crooks
Facebook Inc. plans to cover all of its electricity use with renewable energy by the end of 2020.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
-
California Passes Professional Cosmetics Labelling Measure
Aug 29, 2018 | Chemical Watch
California’s legislature has passed a bill requiring cosmetics used in professional settings to bear a label listing the product ingredients.
Under existing federal law, retail cosmetics sold to consumers must have ingredients labels. But this does not extend to products used by salon workers.
The bill (AB 2775) seeks to extend existing labelling requirements to professional cosmetics products. According to its author, this "gives salon workers and consumers the ability to view ingredients in an open way that is already standardised across our food, cleaning, and retail cosmetics".
If the bill is signed into law by the governor, this requirement will take effect from 1 July 2020.
AB 2775 passed both chambers of the legislature without dissent. It is backed by an array of NGOs and several businesses and industry groups, including the Personal Care Products Council, the California Chamber of Commerce and Unilever.
https://chemicalwatch.com/69977/california-passes-professional-cosmetics-labelling-measure
-
(ACC Mentioned) NGO Drops Legal Challenge to TSCA New Chemicals Guidance
Aug 29, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
US NGO the Natural Resources Defense Council has moved to withdraw its legal challenge to the TSCA new chemicals programme.
The NGO initially filed its opening brief in a New York appeals court in May, arguing that the agency’s approach for reviewing the safety of new chemicals was in violation of TSCA.
The NRDC’s petition, which involved the EPA’s November draft New Chemicals Decision-Making Framework, alleged the agency had issued the guidance in violation of administrative procedure and that it "illegally narrows" the risk assessments that it conducts for new substances.
But in its 27 August motion, the NRDC requested a voluntary dismissal of its petition for a court review of the document. This, it said, was in view of evidence presented by the agency that it has not been implementing the approach described in its guidance.‘Snur-only’ approach
Chief among the NGO's concerns was that the EPA document calls for a ‘Snur-only’ approach in situations where the agency has concerns with a substance’s ‘reasonably foreseen’ conditions of use, but not its intended uses. In such cases, the EPA would allow the substance to come to market without imposing a consent order on the original pre-manufacture notice (PMN) submitter, and subsequently issue a significant new use rule (Snur).
Yet according to a July EPA brief, the agency has made 150 determinations on PMNs since November, and in none of these cases did it follow the ‘Snur-only’ approach.
For 131 of these substances, the agency imposed a section 5(e) consent order on the PMN submitter. The basis for a "significant number of these determinations" was related to a substance’s reasonably foreseen use, rather than the known or intended uses described in the PMN, the EPA brief says.
The EPA determined that the remaining 19 substances were not likely to present an unreasonable risk. But in none of these determinations did the agency "consider a Snur as a factor in determining that unreasonable risk was unlikely".
"Notwithstanding the agency’s pronouncement in the framework that it anticipated using significant new use rules in similar cases, none of these determinations followed that approach," the EPA brief added.
"In light of these representations", the NRDC’s motion says, the group "has elected to move for voluntary dismissal of this petition for review".Concerns remain
NRDC Director Daniel Rosenberg told Chemical Watch that the NGO mounted the legal challenge to block implementation of the new chemicals approach described in the framework document, and data provided by the EPA indicates this to be the case.
Nevertheless, Mr Rosenberg said the organisation remains concerned with the agency’s approach to new chemicals, even if EPA continues to impose 5(e) consent orders alongside Snurs. He said NRDC will "look carefully at individual PMN decisions", and explore "various options for opening the [new chemicals review] process up for greater public scrutiny".
And if the EPA later finalises the guidance in a way the NRDC feels is not in accordance with the law, that will "be the point of another decision on a legal challenge".
The American Chemistry Council, which intervened in the case on behalf of the EPA, said it was pleased to see the petition withdrawn.
"In our view, NRDC’s suit lacked merit, and we are confident that EPA would have prevailed on the merits of the case," the trade group said.
And, the ACC added, it was disappointed the litigation had been brought, as this activity "consumes EPA’s and stakeholder’s resources that could otherwise be dedicated to the efficient and effective implementation of TSCA".
The agency declined to comment on pending litigation. But the NRDC’s motion indicates that the EPA will not oppose its request to dismiss the case.
https://chemicalwatch.com/69953/ngo-drops-legal-challenge-to-tsca-new-chemicals-guidance
-
EPA Issues 29 TSCA Significant New Use Rules
Aug 29, 2018 | Chemical Watch
The US EPA has issued TSCA significant new use rules (Snurs) for 29 substances, subject to section 5(e) consent orders.
The covered chemicals are varied, but include several substances intended for use as coatings additives.
Once finalised, these Snurs will hold users of the covered substances to the same requirements as those negotiated with the original pre-manufacture notice (PMN) submitters and agreed to in the consent orders.
The requirements for each of the substances differ, but may include limitations on the uses of the substance, hazard communication, personal protective equipment use and the submission of certain toxicity testing data.
These protective measures are designed to address potential unreasonable risk that the EPA identified while reviewing the request to bring each new substance to market.
The rules correspond to consent orders that were agreed to more than a year ago, and – in one case – as long ago as November 2016.Rulemaking process
The EPA issued the Snurs in two batches: one set of 10 and another of 19.
Like two recent groupings – 27 Snurs on 17 August and 145 others on 1 August – the agency has promulgated these as both direct final rules and proposed rules. The former takes effect on a faster timeline than through a traditional rulemaking process, but requires that the agency hears no significant adverse comment in order for them to be finalised.
Both of the direct final rules are to take effect from 26 October. But for any substance for which the EPA receives significant feedback before 10 September, it will drop those Snurs from the direct final rule and address them through the proposed rulemaking process.
https://chemicalwatch.com/69954/epa-issues-29-tsca-significant-new-use-rules
-
NRDC Moves to Dismiss Petition for Review of New Chemicals Decision-Making Framework
Aug 29, 2018 | The National Law Review
On August 27, 2018, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) filed a motion in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit asking to dismiss voluntarily its petition for review of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) “New Chemicals Decision-Making Framework: Working Approach to Making Determinations under Section 5 of TSCA.” NRDC v. EPA, No. 18-25. NRDC petitioned the court on January 5, 2018, for review of EPA’s November 2017 Framework Document. In its petition for review, NRDC described the Framework Document as a final rule, and argued in its May 1, 2018, opening brief that, based on the Framework Document, EPA “limits its review of a new chemical substance to the manufacturer’s intended conditions of use and disregards Congress’s instruction to address risk concerns through enforceable orders and regulations.” On July 31, 2018, EPA filed its opening brief, which included a declaration from Dr. Jeffery Morris, Director of EPA’s Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT). According to Morris, EPA considers the “conditions of use” of the premanufacture notice (PMN) when making determinations under TSCA Section 5(a)(3). Morris notes that under TSCA Section 3(4), the term “conditions of use” means “the circumstances, as determined by the Administrator, under which a chemical substance is intended, known, or reasonably foreseen to be manufactured, processed, distributed in commerce, used, or disposed of.” Since EPA issued the Framework Document for comment, it has made 150 determinations on PMNs under TSCA Section 5(a)(3), but “has not yet followed the SNUR approach described in the Framework.” For 19 PMNs, EPA determined that the new chemical substance was not likely to present an unreasonable risk. According to EPA, “[f]or none of these determinations did EPA consider whether a significant new use rule had been issued in concluding that unreasonable risk was unlikely.” Additionally, for 131 determinations, EPA made a determination under TSCA Section 5(a)(3)(B) related to the sufficiency of information regarding the substance, and then issued orders under TSCA Section 5(e). The basis for a significant number of these determinations was related to the reasonably foreseen conditions of use of the new chemical substance at issue. Notwithstanding EPA’s pronouncement in the Framework Document that it anticipated using significant new use rules in similar cases, “none of these determinations followed that approach.” NRDC states that, in light of these representations, it “has elected to move for voluntary dismissal of this petition for review.”
https://www.natlawreview.com/article/nrdc-moves-to-dismiss-petition-review-new-chemicals-decision-making-framework
-
(ACC Mentioned) California Poised to Approve Wide-Ranging Flame Retardants Bill
Aug 29, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
California's legislature is poised to approve a bill restricting the use of most flame retardants in mattresses, upholstered furniture and children's products.
The state's Senate passed an amended version of AB 2998 by a 29-9 margin on Monday evening. The Assembly approved its own version in May.
The measure calls for banning the sale of covered products that contain – or that have constituent components containing – flame retardants at levels above 1,000 parts per million (ppm). The ban will take effect from 1 January 2020.
And although passage of the law would not be the first ban on flame retardants from children's products and upholstered furniture in the US, mattresses have thus far been largely excluded from the debate.
In this way, California's action would extend beyond similar measures in Maine and in Rhode Island.Senate amendments
A key change in the Senate's version of the bill from that already passed by the Assembly limits the flame retardant restriction for mattresses to the products' foam. Other mattress components, as well as thread or fibre used to stitch these together, are explicitly exempted.
Such a concession is significant, given that mattresses are required to meet federal flammability standards that include an 'open flame' test. California has worked in recent years to remove a similar requirement from upholstered furniture flammability standards, amid concerns that manufacturers use added chemical flame retardants to achieve compliance.
However, the amended bill calls for the International Sleep Products Association to conduct a survey of mattress products to submit to the state on a triennial basis. The data collected by the trade group is to include a list of fibres and materials used to meet flammability standards, flame retardants used above 1,000ppm and how those chemicals are incorporated, among others.
The Senate's version of the bill also narrows the flame retardants covered. These are now defined as substances with a functional use of resisting or inhibiting the spread of fire, and that are:a halogenated, organophosphorus, organonitrogen or nanoscale chemical;a 'designated chemical' under California's biomonitoring programme; orincluded in Washington state's list of chemicals of high concern to children (CHCC) list.
The measure does not, however, preempt San Francisco's flame retardant ban. Unlike AB 2998, the city’s regulation also extends to electronic components of the products it covers.For and against
The bill is co-sponsored by the California Professional Firefighters organisation and by NGOs Center for Environmental Health (CEH) and Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC). Dozens of other groups have also filed their support, including the business alliance Sustainable Furnishings Council, architecture firm Perkins+Will, healthcare provider Kaiser Permanente and furniture retailer Room & Board.
Groups that have come out in opposition include the American Chemistry Council (ACC), the California Chamber of Commerce, the Juvenile Products Manufacturers Association (JPMA) and the Retail Industry Leaders Association (Rila).
The Assembly is widely expected to concur with the Senate's changes and send the bill to the governor's desk to be signed before its legislative deadline on 31 August.
https://chemicalwatch.com/69971/california-poised-to-approve-wide-ranging-flame-retardants-bill
-
(ACC Mentioned) Does Formaldehyde Cause Leukemia? A Delayed EPA Report May Hold the Answer
Aug 29, 2018 | PBS News Hour
By Amanda Grennell
The Environmental Protection Agency has been evaluating the link between formaldehyde and leukemia, a type of blood cancer, for more than a decade, but it has not yet reached a final decision.
The National Cancer Institute first found a link between formaldehyde and leukemia, a cancer of blood-forming tissues like bone marrow, in 2003. Based on more than 25,000 workers at 10 industrial plants over 40 years, the study found that the risk for leukemia increased for people exposed to relatively high levels of formaldehyde levels at 0.1 to 4 parts per million.
Formaldehyde is a common chemical that is found in, but not limited to, types of wood glue, embalming fluid, refinery pollution, makeup and vehicle emissions. Everyday exposure levels, even in congested areas like New York City, are up to thousands of times lower than the exposures linked to leukemia.
A second investigation in 2010, conducted by toxicologist Luoping Zhang at the University of California Berkeley, strongly supported this link. The study examined about 100 workers split between factories with and without formaldehyde.
Formaldehyde excels as a preservative, and can keep bodies in good condition for years. Here, a shark preserved in a tank of formaldehyde is an art installation at the Tate Modern gallery in London. Photo by REUTERS/Toby Melville
After controlling for certain lifestyle factors, the team found that workers exposed to 0.6 to 2.5 parts per million of formaldehyde had fewer red and white blood cells and blood platelets. The researchers also detected a higher prevalence of DNA mutations in the blood stem cells of exposed workers.
Later in 2010, the International Agency for Research on Cancer, a part of the World Health Organization, voted to classify formaldehyde as a cause of leukemia.
We have a country that says we want to be protected from these low level risks, and IRIS is the best science we have now.
News reports say the EPA’s analysis may connect exposure to any level of formaldehyde with a risk of leukemia, which could spur new regulations on the chemical industry. In July, Politico, citing current and former agency officials, reported that the formaldehyde report has been complete since Donald Trump took office, but top EPA advisors refuse to hold the meetings necessary to publicly release it. In January, former EPA chief Scott Pruitt told Congress he believed the assessment was complete.
The department conducting the report — EPA’s Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) — provides guidance on health hazards due to exposure from chemicals. But in 2011, the National Academy of Sciences found significant problems with a publicly released draft of the report, forcing the EPA to completely overhaul its evaluation process. In the meantime, plenty of research has surfaced on the health consequences of formaldehyde.
Here’s what you need to know about what has been discovered and what the EPA report might mean for your future health.Scientists and the chemical industry clash over formaldehyde
Formaldehyde is a tiny molecule — one carbon atom, one oxygen atom and two hydrogen atoms. Formaldehyde is also made naturally in every mammal as a byproduct of biochemical reactions.
Though it is small, formaldehyde packs a punch — humans can smell it at levels of around one part per million, which can irritate the skin, eyes and lungs. At higher levels, around four parts per million, formaldehyde causes a rare nasal cancer, but historically, only embalmers or factory workers have faced this amount of exposure. People who are exposed consistently develop a tolerance to the irritation.
Picture a water molecule — two hydrogen atoms attached to one oxygen atom. Now stick a carbon atom between the oxygen and hydrogens and you’ve got formaldehyde, pictured here as a ball-and-stick model. In the model, hydrogen is white, carbon is black, and oxygen is red.
Zhang subsequently found additional types of DNA mutations in the workers that are linked to leukemia. In mouse experiments, she also discovered that inhalation of formaldehyde leads to bone marrow cell damage, a reduction in blood cell counts similar to the human workers and other leukemia predictors.
Bernard Goldstein said Zhang’s 2010 study changed his mind about formaldehyde. As a hematologist, a doctor who treats patients with blood disorders, Goldstein took special note of the data on blood cell counts.
“If somebody were to tell me they’ve got a new chemical, it’s great for keeping your lawn green or whatever, and by the way it seems to cause these low blood counts, I would say don’t even go near it, don’t manufacture that,” said Goldstein, a former dean of the University of Pittsburgh School of Public Health and assistant EPA administrator for research and development from 1983 to 1985. “That’s what leukemogens [leukemia-causing agents] do.”
Goldstein said the mutations found in Zhang’s studies resemble ones made by benzene, a known leukemia-causing agent that also lowers blood counts.
Human brains stored in formaldehyde at a brain bank in New York City. Brain banks preserve brains so researchers can study traumatic brain injury and diseases like chronic traumatic encephalopathy. Photo by REUTERS/Carlo Allegri
Kimberly White, toxicologist and senior director for the American Chemistry Council’s chemical products and technology division, said that after the EPA’s draft report on formaldehyde, the council launched a research program to address problems laid out by the National Academy’s peer review.
The American Chemistry Council has funded several research investigations to re-examine the 2003 and 2010 epidemiological studies, including a recent review paper in 2017. The review focused on exposure levels for individual workers, rather than the averages for the whole group.
They found individuals exposed to high levels of formaldehyde did not always have low blood counts, while some in the unexposed group did have low blood counts.
“You have this human data which is basically weak and inconsistent,” White said. “There are some studies with a positive association and some with a negative association.”
White also noted that none of the animals in academic studies of formaldehyde develop leukemia, though rodents exposed to chemicals — outside of chemotherapies in combination with radiation — are not known to develop the cancer.
I would strongly fault industry for not repeating that [2010] study. They’ve had plenty of time. Instead they hire consultants to poke holes in it.
Zhang disagreed with the American Chemistry Council’s assessment.
“The human evidence is not weak but strong, particularly in highly exposed embalmers and medical technicians,” Zhang said. She added that most meta-analyses — the best validation for combining multiple epidemiological studies — “showed very consistent positive results.”
Zhang also said that benzene, which clearly causes leukemia in humans, has never induced leukemia in animal studies.
Goldstein said epidemiological studies on leukemia rates, like the National Cancer Institute’s 2003 study, may not be the strongest evidence because too few people develop leukemia, even with high exposure to formaldehyde. Rather than focus on the total number of people who develop leukemia, Goldstein said scientists and industry experts should look to studies — like Zhang’s — that could predict leukemia.
“I would strongly fault industry for not repeating that [2010] study. They’ve had plenty of time. Instead they hire consultants to poke holes in it,” Goldstein said.Why IRIS could be a deciding factor
White and the American Chemistry Council question how formaldehyde could cause leukemia without ever reaching the bone marrow — the chemical reacts on contact with nose and lung tissue. The American Chemistry Council argues if formaldehyde can’t interfere with the creation of new blood cells in bone marrow, then it can’t cause leukemia.
Zhang and Goldstein said it could be possible. Recent research contradicts the long-held idea that blood stem cells are only made in bone marrow — instead, the nose and lungs may also be a producer. If formaldehyde reaches these blood stem cells in the nose and lungs, Zhang said it could damage them and lead to leukemia.
[Agencies] are going to assume that what’s in the IRIS report is the best available.
The EPA’s upcoming IRIS report, like its predecessors, will try to pin down how much chemical exposure will make a person sick. Departments within the EPA and other government agencies will use the report to determine safety levels of formaldehyde, White said.
“[Agencies] are going to assume that what’s in the IRIS report is the best available,” White said. So the evidence needs to be weighed carefully, she said.
Goldstein said IRIS makes it easier to calculate formaldehyde’s risk. Regulators can determine how much daily exposure over an entire lifetime increases the chance of getting a disease by using a simple multiplication table published at the end of the report.
In 2004, liquor diluted with formaldehyde killed nine people and landed another 42 in the hospital in Guangzhou, China. If ingested, formaldehyde is highly toxic, reacting with stomach acid to create a potent carcinogen. It can also permanently damage the eyes.
“We have a country that says we want to be protected from these low level risks, and IRIS is the best science we have now,” Goldstein said. “They are reasonable estimates, but are they perfect? No.”
White said that there is evidence for a safe level according to animal studies of formaldehyde pointed out by the National Academy’s peer review in 2011.
The EPA told the NewsHour it is reviewing the updated draft with other federal agencies and did not indicate when the report would be released.
“Assessments of this type are often the result of needs for particular rulemakings and undergo an extensive intra-agency and interagency process,” said an EPA spokesperson in an email.
Goldstein said evidence from Zhang’s 2010 study supports the idea of a safe level, but added that more evidence is still needed, and until then, formaldehyde should be considered “guilty until proven innocent.”
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/science/does-formaldehyde-cause-leukemia-a-delayed-epa-report-may-hold-the-answer
-
What’s Next in Court for Bayer Crop-Chemical Claims
Aug 29, 2018 | Bloomberg (In The Washington Post)
By Joel Rosenblatt
Many Bayer AG investors didn’t realize just how much litigation risk they were getting when the German company spent $66 billion in June to acquire Monsanto Co., the giant U.S. seed and herbicide maker. On Aug. 13, Bayer shares plunged as much as 18 percent -- the most since 2001 -- after a San Francisco jury awarded $289 million to a groundskeeper who said he contracted cancer from Monsanto’s blockbuster weedkiller, Roundup. While Bayer is seeking a mistrial, more than 8,000 additional plaintiffs are making similar claims. And with fresh lawsuits emerging over another Monsanto herbicide, dicamba, investors are left to ponder the final cost of Bayer’s increased legal exposure.
1. Why is Roundup such a big target for litigation?
It contains the weed-killing chemical glyphosate, which has become widely used by commercial farmers and home gardeners. Over more than four decades, about 3.5 billion pounds of glyphosate was sprayed in the U.S. The lawsuits were filed after glyphosate was declared a probable human carcinogen in 2015 by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, an arm of the World Health Organization. However, like other regulators around the world, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency last year said glyphosate isn’t likely to be carcinogenic to humans at current exposure levels. Monsanto developed Roundup in the 1970s, and then created a multi-billion-dollar business around seeds that it genetically modified to resist the chemical.
2. Why was the San Francisco case so alarming to investors?
When Bayer sought to acquire Monsanto, much of the attention was focused on the regulatory obstacles of combining global makers of crop chemicals. But the Aug. 10 verdict -- a jury awarded $289 million in damages to a onetime groundskeeper who is dying of cancer -- put a spotlight on the potential risk of litigation sparked by Roundup and other crop chemicals. The share decline on Aug. 13, the first trading day after the verdict, erased $11 billion of Bayer’s market value. A state judge in Oakland is overseeing hundreds of similar Roundup claims, and California courts allow expedited trials for dying patients, meaning some could face a jury sooner rather than later. Jonas Oxgaard, an analyst at Sanford C. Bernstein & Co., estimates Bayer may face $5 billion in legal costs and plaintiff payouts as a result of its Monsanto acquisition, which would rank among the biggest ever by a company facing damage claims made by private individuals.
3. What’s Bayer’s strategy for limiting its exposure?
Bayer said the Johnson jury ignored scientific research that shows no link between Roundup and cancer in humans. The company is seeking a mistrial in California state court and may appeal the verdict if necessary. Bayer has pledged to mount a more robust defense at the next Roundup trial scheduled Oct. 22 in St. Louis, Missouri. The company also is concentrating on getting wins in federal court in San Francisco, where more than 400 cases have been combined and the company may stand a better chance of success. U.S. District Judge Vince Chhabria expressed skepticism about the evidence linking Roundup to cancer, and is likely to be rigorous in filtering information that can be presented to juries. The judge is acting as a gatekeeper for Roundup trials under a multi-district litigation program, which could result in bellwether rulings that strengthen the company’s defense and limit prospects for other plaintiffs.
4. Where are the next trials happening?
At least one more trial is scheduled for early 2019 in St. Louis, where Monsanto was headquartered for 117 years and Bayer now runs its North American crop-science business. Bayer can’t count on a hometown advantage. The circuit court for the city of St. Louis has produced some of the largest plaintiffs’ verdicts in U.S. product-defect claims, including a $4.7 billion jury award in July in an ovarian cancer case involving Johnson & Johnson’s iconic baby powder. Plaintiffs lawyers had been flocking to the city court, seeking favorable juries and quick trial dates, but were thwarted last year by a U.S. Supreme Court decision that limited combining lawsuits in state courts by non-residents. That decision, in a case involving Bristol-Myers Squibb, led to reversals of two large 2016 J&J ovarian cancer verdicts and slowed or thwarted multiple other lawsuits. Bayer, as a local defendant, has little chance of blocking the trials given recent Missouri court decisions.
5. How big are Bayer’s other Monsanto-related risks?
While Bayer expects glyphosate to remain the world’s biggest herbicide for years, some weeds are growing resistant to the chemical. That’s led to development of genetically modified seeds that can be used in conjunction with another weedkiller, dicamba. However, dicamba can vaporize after application and drift onto nearby fields of non-resistant crops. Last year, an Arkansas farmer was shot and killed by his neighbor in a dispute over dicamba damage. So far, 181 growers in at least eight states (Arkansas, Illinois, Kansas, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, South Dakota, Tennessee) have sued Monsanto over its dicamba product, known as Roundup Ready Xtend Crop System. The farmers are demanding compensation for soybeans, cotton, fruit trees and vegetable crops damaged by dicamba spraying, and they are seeking class-action status that could represent thousands of claims.
6. What’s Bayer doing about dicamba?
Before the takeover, Monsanto developed new formulations that it said would keep the weedkiller on the plants where it’s been applied, preventing drift onto untreated crops. Bayer says it expects the EPA to renew its dicamba-based product, XtendiMax with VaporGrip, before the 2019 growing season. This year, U.S. farmers are spraying dicamba on about 50 million acres of soybean and cotton crops. Of that, about 1 million acres of soybeans were damaged by the herbicide. Should litigation or the EPA restrict dicamba and related products, Bayer could lose $1 billion in annual sales from a business that is key to expanding the agrochemical businesses it acquired from Monsanto.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/whats-next-in-court-for-bayer-crop-chemical-claims/2018/08/29/16b6a7d6-ab56-11e8-9a7d-cd30504ff902_story.html?utm_term=.5ded0bf955c4
-
Bipartisan Bill Would Track Mercury Pollution
Aug 29, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Niina Heikkinen
A new bipartisan bill announced this week aims to more comprehensively track contamination from mercury found in soil, air and wildlife.
Sens. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and Tom Carper (D-Del.) introduced S. 3394, the "Comprehensive National Mercury Monitoring Act," yesterday, which they say would enable scientists and policymakers to gather more data for understanding the connections between mercury emissions and harm to human health and the environment.
The monitoring system would help identify where mercury is entering the environment and where levels of the pollutant are too high, the senators said.
Collins described mercury, a neurotoxin that is especially dangerous to developing fetuses, as one of the nation's "most persistent and dangerous pollutants."
"This legislation would establish a comprehensive, robust national monitoring network for mercury to provide the data needed to help make decisions to protect the people and environment of Maine and the United States," she said in a press release.
Carper, ranking member of the Environment and Public Works Committee, said in a statement that both he and Collins had worked for more than a decade to reduce mercury contamination. He noted that over that time period, the number of babies exposed to unsafe levels of mercury had gone from about 600,000 to 200,000.
"We must continue to build on that progress," Carper said.
The bill comes as EPA is considering reviewing its Mercury and Air Toxics Standards, which controls mercury pollution from power plants.
Although industry is already in compliance with the rule, EPA's air chief Bill Wehrum has raised questions about the legality of certain components of MATS (E&E Daily, Aug. 27).
If enacted, the bill would require a number of federal agencies, including EPA, NOAA and the Fish and Wildlife Service, to work together to measure and keep track of mercury levels in water and soil chemistry; in air and watersheds; and in marine, freshwater and terrestrial life. The agencies would then have to produce a report to Congress every two years on their findings and recommendations.
The bill would also establish an advisory committee and a centralized database to compile both new and existing data on mercury pollution. The senators call for an authorization of $95 million over three years to put the legislation into effect.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/08/29/stories/1060095423
-
EPA Finds High Cancer Risk Near Chicago Fumigation Business
Aug 29, 2018 | Chicago Tribune (In E&E Greenwire)
By Michael Hawthorne
People who live near two Chicago buildings owned by a company that fumigates medical instruments, pharmaceutical drugs and food to kill bacteria and pests face some of the highest cancer risks from air pollution in the country, according to new research.
EPA found that ethylene oxide, the gas used by Sterigenics International, is more dangerous than experts previously thought.
The agency estimates that the cancer risk in one tract near the plant is over nine times the national average.
The company is owned by a private equity firm that Illinois Gov. Bruce Rauner (R) co-founded. He left the firm a year later to run for public office.
Rauner criticized EPA for releasing the report to the public without an explanation of the findings.
"This is not an emergency. This is not a public health immediate crisis. This is something we are managing," Rauner said. "We are going to work with the federal government to monitor this whole situation ... and try to reduce exposures from this as much as we can."
Others did not take the finding as lightly.
"This is just staggering," said Peter Orris, a veteran occupational and environmental medicine researcher at the University of Illinois, Chicago. "They shouldn't be using this chemical as a sterilizer because it can't be controlled."
Sterigenics' parent company said it is still reviewing the study.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/08/29/stories/1060095401
-
Texas Energy Group Takes Issue with Duke University Water Study
Aug 29, 2018 | Houston Chronicle
By Rye Druzin
A Texas energy group has taken issue with the conclusions of a recent Duke University that water use in the booming Permian Basin oil field of West Texas skyrocketed between 2011 and 2016.
The study, published in mid-August, said water use in the Permian had increased 767 percent between 2011 and 2016, and that water use across all six of the U.S. shale plays studied had increased. The report was compiled by researchers at Duke University's Nicholas School of the Environment and was published by science journal Science Advances.
In a statement, John Tintera, president of the Texas Alliance of Energy Producers, said his group "appreciates" the resources that Duke University put into the studies on hydraulic fracturing, the process used to crack shale rock and extract oil and gas. But he noted that North Carolina, where the university is located, does not have an crude oil reserves or production.
Tintera made his own summary of the Duke University report -- "If you use water to drill oil wells, and you drill more and bigger oil wells, you will use more water."
He pointed to the increase in oil production in Texas, which the Department of Energy says increased from 529 million barrels in 2011 to 1.17 billion barrels in 2016.
According to a study by the Texas Bureau of Economic Geology, he added, water use for shale gas in the state was reported at less than 1 percent of statewide water withdrawals. The 2012 study, however, noted that water use on the local level could vary.
In the Barnett Shale near Dallas, water for fracking -- the method used to crack and extract oil and gas from shale reservoirs -- represented around 9 percent of the water used by the City of Dallas.
https://www.chron.com/business/energy/article/Texas-energy-group-takes-issue-with-Duke-13190823.php
-
Three Regions Account for Half of U.S. Natural Gas Production
Aug 29, 2018 | Houston Chronicle
By Katherine Blunt
Three regions are driving the growth of U.S. natural gas production as the Gulf of Mexico claims a smaller share of the total.
The U.S. Energy Department reported that the Appalachian Basin in the Northeast, the Permian Basin in West Texas and the Haynesville Shale straddling Texas and Louisiana have grown to account for almost 50 percent of domestic production, up from 15 percent in 2007.
The Gulf of Mexico, meanwhile, accounts for 3 percent of U.S. natural gas production, down from 12 percent in 2007. Producers have shown greater interest in offshore projects in recent months but new wells remain pricier to drill than those onshore.
U.S. natural gas production has surged during the last decade alongside crude oil production, which topped 11 million barrels a day last month for the first time. Tapping gas-rich shale rock with hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, has unleashed a cheap and steady supply of natural gas that has fed a petrochemical boom along the Gulf Coast and boosted domestic exports to Mexico and overseas.
U.S. natural gas production in the last several months has approached 100 billion cubic feet a day, roughly 10 percent higher than the same period last year.
The Appalachian Basin, which includes the Utica and Marcellus shale basins in Pennsylvania and Ohio, accounted for 29 percent of total production last month. The Permian, meanwhile, accounted for an estimated 11 percent.
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/energy/article/Three-regions-account-for-half-of-U-S-natural-13189305.php
-
The Shale Dividend for Utilities Is Ending
Aug 29, 2018 | Bloomberg (In The Washington Post)
By Liam Denning
Forget Saudi Arabia; maybe it’s utilities Elon Musk should have been courting for his take-Tesla-private fling.
In a power-sector workshop convened by Bloomberg New Energy Finance in June, more than two-thirds of industry attendees said they think U.S. electricity demand will have peaked by 2030. Looking at the past decade, hooking up millions of vehicles to the grid may offer the best route to ensuring it hasn’t peaked already:
Given that flattened-out line, it may surprise you to learn the fixed assets of America’s investor-owned utilities actually doubled between 2006 and 2016.
In a report published last month, Hugh Wynne and Eric Selmon of Sector & Sovereign Research looked at the apparent mismatch between stagnant electricity demand and utilities’ surging spending.
It’s worth recalling at this point that utilities recover their costs and earn a return on their investment set periodically by regulators. These costs (including their return) are spread across the kilowatt-hours sold to ratepayers (you and me, essentially).
Wynne and Selmon found that net electric plants in service for investor-owned utilities increased at 7.2 percent a year between 2006 and 2016, more than twice the level of GDP growth. Meanwhile, operation and maintenance expenses other than fuel – which also go into your bill – rose by 3 percent a year. Yet the average revenue per customer went up by only 0.5 percent a year in that time – which makes you wonder how on earth this happened:
Cheap shale gas is how it happened. Wynne and Selmon estimate roughly half of the various costs utilities need to recover in bills relates to the investment in net plant and non-fuel costs, split evenly. Combined, that means utilities would have required 2.6 percent increases in revenue per year to cover them. But the cost of fuel and purchased power weighs in at 45 percent of the pie. And this actually fell by 3.5 percent per year, largely because of cheaper natural gas pushing down generation costs, bringing the rate of growth in revenue requirement down to just 1 percent a year. Add in the impact of a growing number of customers, and there’s your 0.5 percent figure.
In short, cheap gas was a windfall that helped offset an investment spree. The industry shouldn’t expect another. Indeed, almost half the attendees at BNEF’s workshop expected fuel prices to recover and push up wholesale generation costs by 2030. That looks unlikely given the comatose state of the gas market and the growing impact of renewable energy. But costs aren’t likely to drop much either. Assuming they stay flat, SSR’s analysts project customer bills would have to rise by 2.3 percent a year over the next five years in order for utilities to recover their costs, based on current capital expenditure plans.
That doesn’t seem like a lot. But it would represent a meaningful change, with average bills rising faster than inflation after a decade of being comfortably below it. All else equal, bills that rose by about 5 percent over the course of 10 years would jump by 12 percent in five. That’s before considering what rising interest rates – also exceptionally low for the past decade –could mean for utilities’ rate-of-return requests to regulators. Incidentally, it would also make customers’ burden of bailing out struggling coal-fired and nuclear plants, as the Trump Administration wants, that much harder to bear.
The attendees at BNEF’s workshop largely seem to think regulators will have their back on all this, with 64 percent agreeing to some extent that considerable increases in fixed charges would be approved between now and 2030. Large majorities also expected support for utilities playing a big role in owning and managing distributed energy resources and electric-vehicle charging infrastructure.
Utilities have inherent strengths, not least ownership of the grid. But the jury is out on all this, as suggested by the name of BNEF’s workshop: “Future of the North American Power Company.” Notably, when asked to mock up a 2023 Bloomberg Businessweek cover on the industry, all groups selected the same two images, including one indicating Amazon.com Inc. moving into the power market. Might Jeff Bezos take away from utilities (even as Elon Musk potentially gives)? It’s unclear, but disruption was clearly on everyone’s mind. (Disclosure: my wife runs a start-up developing a distributed-energy platform.)
While this plays out, the challenge of balancing growth plans – many utilities target annual earnings increases of 4 to 6 percent – with pressure on customers looks set to become harder as the shale dividend fades. Besides in-house efficiency drives, mergers can offer a quicker route to savings, so consolidation may pick up further in the next few years. Keeping a lid on operating costs will help alleviate pressure on the bottom line. Perhaps just as importantly, it would appease regulators during a period of potentially far-reaching change.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/the-shale-dividend-for-utilities-is-ending/2018/08/29/7da740a6-ab95-11e8-9a7d-cd30504ff902_story.html?utm_term=.1913ae1335b5
-
Iran Sanctions Offer Trump New Opportunity To Help American Oil Producers
Aug 29, 2018 | Forbes
By Dan Eberhart
As the Trump administration prepares to renew sanctions on Iran’s energy sector, it has an opportunity to help the U.S. oil and gas industry with the right enforcement policy. But at the moment, the White House appears to be missing the boat by rolling out the Obama-era regime of Iran sanctions. That outdated policy ignores the rapid growth in recent years of U.S. energy exports, particularly gas condensates.
Condensates, ultra-light liquid hydrocarbons used as feedstock for the petrochemical and manufacturing industries, are a byproduct of oil and gas production. The shale boom has turned America into one of the world’s leading condensate exporters, making up a good chunk of the 3 million barrels a day of liquid hydrocarbons America ships abroad. That wasn’t the case four years ago when the previous administration excluded condensates from its sanctions because allies like South Korea relied heavily on imports of Iranian condensates.
The Trump administration has yet to signal that it will include condensates under the new sanction regime, even after President Trump himself promised in May to apply economic sanctions on Iran at the “highest level.”
Months after Trump’s May 8 decision to pull out of the Iran nuclear deal and renew sanctions, the administration has still not clarified its approach to condensates. Indeed, it has sent mixed messages even about its goals for Iran’s crude exports, first saying it aspired to take them to zero and then hedging by adding that countries could earn exemptions by making “significant reductions” to their Iranian oil imports. Moving past the rhetoric, it appears the Trump administration is following the same sanctions policy as President Obama.
This is a mistake. While it’s possible sanctions could once again cut Iran’s oil exports by as much as 1 million barrels a day, the U.S. oil and gas sector is unlikely to capture the Islamic Republic’s share of the market. That’s because Iran’s export oil grades are heavier and sourer than America’s light, sweet crude that shale producers are cranking out in record amounts. Neighboring Iraq may end up being the biggest beneficiary of sanctions.MORE FROM FORBESUNICEF USA BRANDVOICEAddressing The Root Causes That Force Migrants To FleeGrads of Life BRANDVOICEHow To Win The Tech Talent WarCivic Nation BRANDVOICEHow Mentors And Community College Took Me From Honduras To Tufts University
The real market opportunity for U.S. producers is in condensates.
The oil industry has received no explicit guidance from the administration on whether it will include condensates as part of its ban on Iranian oil exports. Enforcement remains a bit of a mystery both to producers at home and buyers abroad. It is possible that the administration does not want to irritate oil markets too severely with traders now focused on the impact of the sanctions, which take effect Nov. 4. International benchmark Brent oil prices are back over $75 a barrel this week. Spooking the market now could lift prices ahead of midterm elections giving Democrats one more chance to take back the House of Representatives.
With Trump’s trade policy already hurting the domestic oil sector, President Trump shouldn’t let the condensate opportunity get away. The escalating trade war between the United States and China is already affecting U.S. producers, even though Beijing has so far held off on 25% tariffs on U.S. oil and liquefied natural gas (LNG). China, the world’s largest oil and gas market and a top destination for growing U.S. exports, may be holding its cards close for leverage later in trade talks.
The risk of losing this all-important export market is real, and China has imposed punishing tariffs already on some U.S. energy products. The latest round of tariffs from Beijing on $16 billion of U.S. goods included liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), kerosene, diesel, ethylene and naphtha. These products are used by many Asian countries as feedstock for petrochemicals and plastics and are integral to their manufacturing sectors.
China has effectively shut U.S. producers out of the Asia market. Like condensates, U.S. exports of LPG such as propane, have surged on the back of the shale boom. China was the third largest importer of U.S. propane in 2017, purchasing about 124,000 barrels a day, according to the Energy Information Administration. The market has shrunk considerably to around 37,000 barrels a day in May as trade tensions have increased.
Enforcing sanctions on Iran’s condensate sales and shutting down its exports of roughly 300,000 barrels a day would open the door for U.S. producers to increase exports, specifically to key Asian markets now dominated by Iranian supplies, including South Korea, Thailand and Singapore.
For President Trump, this would show that his administration is willing to take a tougher stand on Iran than his predecessor. It would also deliver a boost to the energy sector, which has become increasingly wary of current trade policies. It is a rare win-win opportunity for President Trump.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/daneberhart/2018/08/29/iran-sanctions-offer-trump-new-opportunity-to-help-american-oil-producers/#2a398bb96d91
-
U.S. Crude Oil Inventories Decline, Boosting Oil Prices
Aug 29, 2018 | Houston Chronicle
By Katherine Blunt
Domestic crude oil inventories again fell last week, lifting the U.S. benchmark toward $70 a barrel after weeks of fluctuation.
Commercial crude stockpiles declined by 2.6 million barrels to roughly 406 million barrels, consistent with the five-year average at this time of year, the Energy Department reported Wednesday. Gasoline inventories declined by 1.6 million barrels, but stockpiles remain about 5 percent above the five-year average.
Domestic refineries ran at just over 96 percent of capacity last week to process 17.6 million barrels of crude oil a day. Gasoline production increased to 10.2 million barrels per day.
RELATED: U.S. crude inventories fall sharply, lifting oil prices
Total petroleum stockpiles, including jet fuel and distillates used in diesel and heating oil, fell by 1.7 million barrels last week.
Crude prices were up more than 1 percent in late morning trading in New York, hovering at about $69.30 a barrel.
https://www.chron.com/business/energy/article/U-S-crude-oil-inventories-decline-boosting-oil-13190816.php
-
FERC Says Stalled Project Can Restart Construction
Aug 29, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
Federal regulators are allowing most construction to resume on the Mountain Valley pipeline, a natural gas project stalled by court action this summer.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission today granted approval for work to continue on all but 4 miles of the project.
"In consultation with staff, I have determined that protection of the environment along the Project's right-of-way across non-federal land is best served by completing construction and restoration activities as quickly as possible," Terry Turpin, director of FERC's Office of Energy Projects, wrote in a letter this afternoon.
FERC halted work along the full length of the pipeline a month ago after the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals scrapped two other agencies' decisions to greenlight Mountain Valley's crossing of the Jefferson National Forest in Virginia and Army Corps of Engineers land in West Virginia. The court ruled that the Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service didn't adequately study their decisions.
Now developers can continue working on all parts of the route except those two crossings of federal land. FERC's move follows BLM's recent submission of its court-ordered analysis of alternatives to Mountain Valley's route across federal lands.
In the new review, BLM took a closer look at route alternatives that would track more closely with existing rights of way in the national forest. BLM concluded that they are not practical for a variety of reasons, including increased disturbance of federal lands, bypassing of mid-route gas delivery points and state restrictions on pipeline siting along highways.
Mitchell Leverette, acting director of BLM's Eastern States office, and Joe Balash, Interior's assistant secretary for land and minerals management, signed the new analysis.
The review is dated Aug. 23 and was published on FERC's docket today. BLM must separately issue a formal decision document to reauthorize the pipeline right of way. The agency did not respond to a question about the timing of that decision.
Last month's 4th Circuit ruling also requires the Forest Service to revisit its approval of Mountain Valley's forest route. That review is ongoing.
Environmental lawyers who fought the BLM and Forest Service approvals of the pipeline's route said they are reviewing the new analysis.
Mountain Valley, which is backed by EQT Corp. and other companies, celebrated the news.
"With the FERC granting approval for MVP to recommence its construction activities, with exception of areas in proximity to the Weston Gauley Bridge Turnpike Trail and Jefferson National Forest, we are pleased that we will soon be able to bring back a significant amount of workers who were temporarily suspended from their duties on the project," spokeswoman Natalie Cox said in an email.
"Moving forward," she added, "we will continue to coordinate with the agencies to address the Court's remaining issues and look forward to continuing with the safe, responsible construction of the pipeline along the full 303-mile route."
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/08/29/stories/1060095435
-
Local Experts are the Vital Piece to Solve the Infrastructure Puzzle
Aug 29, 2018 | The Hill - Congress Blog
By Tony Hyde
With so much attention focused on the national level on what Congress will do to address our infrastructure needs, it’s critical to remember that local experts play a vital role in addressing our challenges. It’s the local leaders who know exactly what parts of our infrastructure is in imperil, and for years now, they have been warning about what’s buried in the ground.
The buried pipes that carry clean drinking water to our communities are some of the most vital infrastructure we have. But we don’t think about what we don’t see until something happens. We should, though. In fact, we should think about water infrastructure in the same way and with the same urgency with which we consider the bridges and roads we drive on every day. We expect bridges to last for decades, if not longer; we should have the same high expectation for our water systems.
To make this infrastructure last when it is put into the ground, it is important that design decisions are made at the local level. Local engineers and water system experts know the needs of our communities. They know, for example, the specific soil conditions and topography of our cities, each being unique. Local experts are the ones we should trust to choose the best water pipe material for the job – not politicians in Washington or in far removed state capitals. Our politicians, in most cases, don’t have the technical know-how to solve the puzzles of complex engineered integrated infrastructure systems.
Keeping decisions about what materials are most suitable in the hands of local experts is so important that the National Association of Counties (NACo) has again passed a resolution saying it “supports local control of water infrastructure procurement decisions” and “opposes federal legislation that sets mandatory state requirements.” Municipal leaders know that a one-size solution for all does not fit for water infrastructure .Long-term investments in infrastructure will be a key topic at the Water Finance conference in Washington D.C. this month where leaders from every level of government and water utility operators from across the country will gather to hear from experts and from each other. I will be joining a panel there to talk about how I approached challenges in my community in Oregon where I was a mayor and county commissioner to keep water infrastructure investments affordable for our constituents. I will stress the importance I placed on the knowledge and expertise of utility professionals, project managers and local engineers through my more than 27-year career in public service. With increasingly tight budgets and competing priorities, it is vital to lean on the local experts to help municipal leaders make the best long-term investments.
Traverse City, Mich., City Commissioner Richard I. Lewis recently wrote, “Municipal systems are operated locally and local governments have the obligation to design, operate and maintain them to ensure the protection of the public’s health and safety. Several times now, legislation that would restrict the ability of local project managers and engineers to decide the best pipe investment to use in their communities has been introduced by Michigan lawmakers. These bills across states have been introduced under the guise of opening municipal bids to more competition and driving down costs. Unfortunately, all this legislation does is undermine local water professionals and local control.” Across the country similar state level bills have been defeated time and again.
NACo and each state should be congratulated for standing up for the skill and knowledge that is demonstrated on a daily basis by local experts in cities and counties. We have seen the damage that the gravitational pull of moving decisions away from local technical experts to politicians can do.
It’s up to municipal leaders to make sure that local decisions continue to be made by local experts. That’s the only we way we can be sure that our communities will have the safest, most dependable water delivery systems for generations.
Tony Hyde was a Columbia County, Ore., commissioner, the former mayor of Vernonia, and also on the Board of Directors for the National Association of Counties.
http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/politics/404184-local-experts-are-the-vital-piece-to-solve-the-infrastructure
-
Union Pacific Reports PTC Progress
Aug 29, 2018 | American Journal of Transportation
Union Pacific continues to make significant progress implementing positive train control (PTC). The company will meet all required deadlines for installing PTC on its network. As allowed by federal law, Union Pacific will continue to implement, test and refine the complex suite of technologies comprising the system in 2019-20.
Union Pacific’s PTC footprint is the largest of all North American railroads, encompassing more than 17,000 route miles, roughly one-third of all U.S. PTC miles and 45 percent more required miles than the next largest railroad. Union Pacific is in regular contact with the Federal Railroad Administration officials regarding its PTC progress.
Installing and implementing PTC across the U.S. rail network is costly and complex. One of the most challenging parts of PTC implementation is ensuring system interoperability among all U.S. rail lines and locomotives. Given the various readiness levels of North American freight and passenger railroads, including publicly funded commuter lines and short lines, it is important that all railroads continue working together to maintain the health, safety, resiliency, and fluidity of the rail network during PTC implementation.
Between April 1, 2018, and August 17, 2018, Union Pacific’s accomplishments included:Preparing additional track segments for PTC operations, bringing the total number of track segments to 180, or 99 percent complete. These track segments are equipped with wayside devices such as signals, switches and radios and have defined GPS coordinates, which identify thousands of precise locations for system wide PTC coordination.
Educating more than 25,690 additional employees on PTC operations, or 97 percent. Training materials are tailored to a variety of employee roles, including engineer, conductor, dispatcher, maintenance of way/engineering, mechanical, signal, telecom and information technologies.
Increasing by approximately 1,020 the number of installed PTC route miles, bringing the total number of route miles in PTC operations to 11,920, or 70 percent.https://www.ajot.com/news/union-pacific-reports-ptc-progress
-
Port Manatee Garners Federal Security Grant to Enhance Access Control
Aug 29, 2018 | American Journal of Transportation
Port Manatee has been awarded a $326,456 federal security grant, enabling the Central Florida Gulf Coast port to enhance its access control system.
“Port Manatee is highly appreciative of this latest funding, as well as previous federal grants that are facilitating leading-edge security at our dynamic seaport,” Port Manatee Executive Director Carlos Buqueras said today, following notification of the most recent award.Port Manatee’s north gate is being expanded thanks to a fiscal 2017 Port Security Grant Program award, while a fiscal 2018 grant is destined for access control system enhancements.
The latest funding, through the fiscal 2018 Port Security Grant Program of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s Federal Emergency Management Agency, is to be matched by the port with a 25 percent cost share of about $108,000 to advance modernization of Port Manatee’s access control system. When Port Manatee activated its original Transportation Worker Identification Credential-based system in 2012, it was among the first U.S. ports to have such a TWIC-based system in operation.
Port Manatee and its users also look to benefit from another fiscal 2018 Port Security Grant Program award, that being a $180,414 grant to the North River Fire District, to be used toward acquisition of a response boat with firefighting capabilities.
“As cargo volumes continue to swell at Port Manatee, it becomes increasingly essential for safety and security demands to be fulfilled,” said Vanessa Baugh, chairwoman of the Manatee County Port Authority. “We are very grateful that our significant advances on this vital front will continue thanks to this most recent grant.”
Currently, a $946,950 federal security grant awarded in fiscal 2017 is being joined by a 25 percent port match in expanding Port Manatee’s north gate, including doubling the number of exit lanes to four. Prior competitive federal security grants totaling nearly $400,000, awarded in fiscal 2015 and fiscal 2016, have enabled Port Manatee’s bolstering of resiliency and recovery through emergency power generation capabilities at the port’s primary operational building, acquisition of a specially equipped response vehicle and installation of security-related software upgrades.
Located “Where Tampa Bay Meets the Gulf of Mexico,” Port Manatee is the closest U.S. deepwater seaport to the expanded Panama Canal, with 10 40-foot-draft berths serving container, bulk, breakbulk, heavylift, project and general cargo customers. The port generates more than $2.3 billion in annual economic impact for the local community, while supporting more than 24,000 jobs, without levying ad-valorem taxes.
https://www.ajot.com/news/port-manatee-garners-federal-security-grant-to-enhance-access-control
-
Trump's EPA Unveils Weaker Alternative to Obama Power Plant Rule
Aug 29, 2018 | Reuters (In The New York Times)
By Susan Heavey and Nichola Groom
The Trump administration on Tuesday proposed replacing a signature Obama-era policy to combat climate change with a weaker plan that would let states write their own rules on coal-fired power plants, prompting critics to warn of dire environmental and health consequences.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proposal would require states to submit plans for improving efficiency of coal-fired power plants. The federal government will set carbon emission guidelines, but states will have the leeway to set less-stringent standards, taking into account a facility's age and the cost of upgrades.
The rule also could allow power plant owners to sidestep costly permits for those improvements.
"The era of top down, one-size-fits-all federal mandates is over," EPA Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler said on a conference call.
The attorneys general of Virginia and New York quickly criticized the EPA announcement and said they would sue to block the rule if it becomes law.
ADVERTISEMENT
EPA projected the new plan would result in $400 million a year in economic benefits and reduce retail power prices by up to 0.5 percent by 2025. Yet documents released on Tuesday showed the EPA estimated carbon dioxide emissions would be higher than under the Obama policy, while pollution-related premature deaths, hospital admissions, asthma cases and school absence days could be higher by 2030.
The agency's assistant administrator for the Office of Air and Radiation, Bill Wehrum, said that under the new rule, power sector emissions would be similar to the goals set under the Obama administration's Clean Power Plan (CPP) because of how much the industry has already shifted toward cleaner fuels.
"Things have changed a lot since the CPP was put in place," Wehrum said to reporters on the EPA conference call. "The industry continues to transform before our very eyes."
The administration's Affordable Clean Energy Rule is limited in its scope to coal-fired plants. The Obama-era plan, which has been put on hold by the U.S. Supreme Court, set overall carbon-reduction goals for each state using a series of different measures.
EPA forecast that under the new rule, coal production would rise by up to 5.8 percent by 2025.
California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, asked in an interview whether his state would sue to block the plan, said "we're moving in that direction" but would see the administrative process through.EDITORS’ PICKSThe Iraqi Spy Who Infiltrated ISISThe Scientist Who Scrambled Darwin’s Tree of LifeThe Super Bowl of Beekeeping
ADVERTISEMENT
"We think that there is a strong case to be made that they are violating the very laws they are supposed to enforce," Becerra said.
EPA's 236-page proposal is open for a public comment period, with a final rule expected later this year.
The effort to re-write the plan is the latest move by Trump administration to roll back environmental rules put in place by Obama.
Trump, who has scheduled a rally on Tuesday in coal-producing state West Virginia, has vowed to end what he termed "the war on coal" and boost domestic fossil fuels production.
Environmental groups warned the focus on improving efficiency of coal-fired generators could raise overall carbon emissions.
"A coal plant that operates more efficiently may be called upon to run more hours, increasing the total amount of CO2 emitted overall," Lissa Lynch, an attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council, said in a statement.
The CPP, which Obama's EPA finalized in 2015, sought to reduce emissions from power plants to 32 percent below 2005 levels by 2030. The Supreme Court put the brakes on it in 2016 after energy-producing states sued the EPA, saying it had exceeded its legal reach.
ADVERTISEMENT
In many states, the CPP's limits on emissions have already been met because the cost of generating power from natural gas and renewable energy like wind and solar is cheaper than coal.
An EPA study forecast that compliance costs relative to the CPP would be slightly lower or higher depending on the assumed cost of making efficiency improvements to the coal-fired plants. That is because the electricity sector has already become far less carbon intensive in recent years.
https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2018/08/29/us/politics/29reuters-usa-epa-climate.html
-
New Power Plant Rule Sounds a Lot Like Dead Climate Bill
Aug 29, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Robin Bravender
The Trump administration's proposal for replacing President Obama's signature climate change rule has an appealing name with a catchy acronym: the Affordable Clean Energy rule, or ACE.
That sounds a lot like "ACES," or the "American Clean Energy and Security Act" — the sweeping climate bill that passed the House in 2009 before fizzling in the Senate.
It's unclear whether the similar acronyms are intentional or accidental; EPA's press office didn't respond to a request for comment about the process for naming the draft rule. But the similarity of the acronyms wasn't lost on House Democratic staffers who worked on the cap-and-trade measure.
They found the title of the Trump EPA's regulation ironic, given that it's expected to allow far more greenhouse gas emissions than the Obama-era rule would have and is much narrower in scope than the House climate bill.
"People have noticed it," said Greg Dotson, who was the lead environmental and energy staffer for then-Rep. Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) when the climate bill passed the House. The legislation was widely known as the Waxman-Markey bill after its co-sponsors, including Massachusetts Democratic Rep. Ed Markey, who's now a senator.
Dotson, who now teaches climate law at the University of Oregon, said associating a similar name "with a policy that actually is designed to slow down the deployment of clean energy and have more pollution is fairly cynical."
Another former House aide who worked on the Waxman-Markey bill had a similar reaction.
"ACES was trying to do so much to protect our country from climate, and this is going so much in the opposite direction," the former staffer said.
Naming the ACES bill was a fairly simple process, Dotson recalled.
"The members made the decision, and they wanted information that would capture what the bill actually did but would also be something that people could be drawn to, and clean energy is just a very popular concept," he said. "There's any number of public polling results available that show that people like the idea of renewable energy, they like the idea of energy efficiency."
Dotson added, "In the case of ACES, that's what the bill actually did. So I think they were on solid ground with that name."
Dotson and others said the similarities between the ACES and ACE names are likely unintentional.
"My experience has been over the years that EPA is a very thoughtful agency in how it does things." But, he added, it "seems as though based upon other regulatory actions that a lot of things have been happening at the agency without a great deal of thought." Dotson said the administration was likely "trying to pick a name that's going to be popular."
Joe Goffman, a former Senate Democratic staffer and one of the architects of Obama's Clean Power Plan, said it "seems to me that the last thing the authors of ACE would want to do is remind people of Waxman-Markey. The latter was a supremely serious effort at making climate policy. ACE, in contrast, all but makes a mockery of climate policy."
Andrew Wheeler, EPA's acting administrator, has a history of fighting climate legislation in the Senate during his tenure in the 2000s as a top aide to Senate Environment and Public Works Chairman Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.). He worked behind the scenes to push Democratic members away from the legislation he argued was bad for the economy (Climatewire, Oct. 6, 2017).
He had left Capitol Hill and was an energy lobbyist in private practice when the ACES bill passed the House and companion legislation died in the Senate.
In a presentation Wheeler delivered to clients about the policy and politics of the climate bill, he noted that the legislation was bipartisan and had "areas for compromise." The PowerPoint, which he provided to the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee during his confirmation process, also includes a handwritten note that the bill's renewable energy standard was "getting almost as much attention as the climate piece."
It was after political obstacles killed ACES that the Obama EPA released regulations to curb greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act, although the administration had expressed a preference for legislation over EPA rules.
It's unclear how much of a hand Wheeler had in naming the proposal to replace the Clean Power Plan. Much of the groundwork was likely done before he was confirmed as deputy administrator in April and took over as acting chief in early July.
Still, EPA's messaging surrounding the rollout and his comments about the draft rule echo his argument — and that of many critics of the Clean Power Plan and the Waxman-Markey bill — that those efforts would be too expensive.
"The ACE Rule replaced the prior administration's overly prescriptive and burdensome Clean Power Plan (CPP) and instead empowers states, promotes energy independence, and facilitates economic growth and job creation," EPA said in a statement when it announced the proposal earlier this month.
"The ACE Rule would restore the rule of law and empower states to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and provide modern, reliable, and affordable energy for all Americans," Wheeler added.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/08/29/stories/1060095431
-
Trump Admin Flips on HFC Phaseout to Align with Kavanaugh
Aug 29, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Amanda Reilly
The Trump administration is changing its stance on the phaseout of potent heat-trapping refrigerants known as hydrofluorocarbons.
In the early days of the administration, EPA and the Department of Justice defended a rule that the Obama administration issued calling for phasing out HFCs. Government attorneys argued in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit that the rule was a proper exercise of EPA's authority (Greenwire, Feb. 17, 2017).
But DOJ now says it agrees with Judge Brett Kavanaugh, President Trump's Supreme Court nominee, who last year wrote a D.C. Circuit majority opinion throwing out the rule.
The administration urged the Supreme Court on Monday to keep the 2-1 split opinion intact.
"Although EPA argued below that it had 'authority to require manufacturers to stop using HFCs' ... EPA has revisited the issue in light of the court of appeals' ruling," DOJ said in a brief.
The Obama administration had made phasing out HFCs, greenhouse gases that are thousands of times more potent than carbon dioxide, a key part of its climate change agenda.
To phase out their use, EPA relied on the Clean Air Act's Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program, which is geared toward eliminating ozone-depleting substances.
But the D.C. Circuit agreed with two HFC manufacturers that the SNAP program did not extend to phasing out non-ozone-depleting substances such as HFCs for climate change reasons.
"However much we might sympathize or agree with EPA's policy objectives, EPA may act only within the boundaries of its statutory authority. Here, EPA exceeded that authority," Kavanaugh said in his opinion, one of a number of rulings the Supreme Court nominee has issued questioning federal agency authority (Greenwire, Aug. 8, 2017).
Both industry and environmentalists have called for the Supreme Court to overturn the Kavanaugh decision and restore the 2015 Obama rule, which targeted HFC use in aerosols, air conditioning for new cars, retail food refrigeration and foam blowing.
Honeywell International Inc. and the Chemours Co., both manufacturers of alternatives to HFCs, say the D.C. Circuit ruling allows entities to "forever" continue using substances, "no matter how harmful they are compared to safer substitutes that enter the market" (Greenwire, June 26).
A coalition of states, along with Carrier Corp. and four other companies that together make up more than 75 percent of U.S. residential and commercial refrigeration manufacturing, has filed briefs in their support.
But the Trump administration, which had stayed conspicuously silent while the D.C. Circuit considered rehearing requests, says Kavanaugh was correct in finding that EPA didn't have authority under the SNAP program to issue the rule.
"Give EPA's current position, the question presented is of limited prospective importance," DOJ said, urging the Supreme Court to pass on the case. "Granting review to consider an interpretation of EPA's authority that EPA itself no longer supports would serve little or no purpose."
Government attorneys also noted that EPA plans to issue a new rule based on the court's interpretation of the Clean Air Act that may resolve some of the plaintiffs' concerns.
"To be sure, 'regulated entities' have expressed 'confusion and uncertainty' regarding the meaning of the court's decision," the government said. "But EPA's notice in the Federal Registerdispelled the immediate confusion, and the purpose of the upcoming rulemaking is to resolve the remaining uncertainty."
In the meantime, the administration issued a guidance that stated EPA would not apply any of the 2015 rule's provisions, even ones that were not thrown out by the court. States and environmentalists have sued EPA over that six-page document (Climatewire, June 28).
Greens and their allies in Congress yesterday slammed EPA's legal about-face on the issue.
"Sad to see the poisonous Trump administration denying public protection from yet another class of dangerous pollutants — the super-potent HFCs — even though most HFC industries support the rules!" tweeted David Doniger, the senior strategic director of the Climate and Clean Energy Program at the Natural Resources Defense Council.
Sen. Tom Carper of Delaware, the top Democrat on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, vowed to "continue fighting" to pass a bill that he and Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) introduced in February to phase down HFCs.
"This is yet another decision by the Trump EPA to abandon a common-sense solution that is a win-win for our environment and for American jobs," Carper said.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/08/29/stories/1060095411
-
Wheeler Rejects Premature-Death Worries from Rule Redo
Aug 29, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Niina Keikkinen
Acting EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler is dismissing concerns that the agency's replacement for the Clean Power Plan will increase the risk of premature death in the United States.
EPA's regulatory analysis for its recently released Affordable Clean Energy (ACE) rule found that the proposal could lead to up to 1,400 premature deaths from incremental increases in fine particle pollution in 2030.
Speaking in Columbus, Ohio, yesterday, Wheeler contended that the proposal is not a step backward in environmental protection and that the agency is maintaining rules specifically aimed at controlling particulate matter, nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide.
"This regulation and the Obama regulation both were supposed to just address CO2 and energy efficiency. The Obama administration calculated what are called co-benefits. All of those, particulate matter, NOx, SO2, those are all regulated under other regulations. We are not touching any of those regulations," Wheeler said.
He pointed to EPA's recent air quality trends report that found the country's air is 73 percent cleaner than it was in the 1970s immediately after the passage of the Clean Air Act.
"All the regulations that got us to that 73 percent cleaner are still in effect. They will still be in effect tomorrow; they will still be in effect next year. We're not doing anything to relax or remove the health-based environmental regulations," he said.
But both researchers and former EPA officials have warned that the agency's existing rules do not fully prevent emissions of harmful pollutants from power plants.
For example, extensive public health research has shown that fine particle pollution at levels below what is regulated by the National Ambient Air Quality Standards is linked to higher risk of premature death.
The scholars and former officials also say that considering co-benefits of implementing a rule has long been standard practice (Climatewire, Aug. 6).
Joseph Goffman, a former EPA official and architect of the Clean Power Plan, said on NPR's "1A" program this morning that the agency's proposal would also undercut public health protections in local airsheds through proposed revisions to permitting requirements under the New Source Review program. Goffman and other critics have warned that the changes would allow older, polluting power plants to further extend their life spans.
In addition to its finding on the higher risk of premature death from fine particle pollution and ozone exposure, EPA's analysis on ACE cited a number of health-related risks associated with the proposed rule.
As many as 120,000 people in 2030 could experience exacerbated asthma. The plan could also lead to a collective loss of up to 48,000 work days from fine particle pollution and as many as 140,000 school absences from high ozone levels.
Echoing the talking points of his predecessor, Scott Pruitt, Wheeler said the replacement plan would no longer be "picking winners and losers." Wheeler described the plan as allowing states to regulate carbon emissions on a "plant-by-plant" basis.
"What we've done is looked at the Clean Air Act and the laws Congress gave us, and we put forward a proposal that is legal and will be upheld by the courts," Wheeler said.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/08/29/stories/1060095409
-
Texas Sues Trump EPA Over San Antonio's Ozone Designation
Aug 29, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Sean Reilly
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton and the Trump administration — fast friends on environmental issues — have parted company over EPA's decision to deem the San Antonio area out of compliance with the 2015 ground-level ozone standard.
"We are continuously and successfully reducing ambient ozone concentrations without stifling economic or population growth, and we will continue to do so without the EPA's overreaching regulations," Paxton (R) said yesterday in a release announcing a lawsuit against EPA's "marginal nonattainment" designation for Bexar County, which encompasses San Antonio.
The suit, filed with the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on behalf of Gov. Greg Abbott (R) and the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, doesn't spell out the grounds for the challenge.
But Texas officials had previously insisted EPA had leeway to declare the county in compliance with the 70-parts-per-billion standard even though air quality monitors repeatedly registered ozone levels above the threshold.
While the state had initially recommended a nonattainment designation for Bexar County, Abbott warned last September of serious economic and national security consequences if EPA followed through (Greenwire, Jan. 29).
In signing off on the nonattainment designation last month, acting EPA chief Andrew Wheeler predicted that Bexar County will meet the 70-ppb limit well before a 2021 deadline. At the same time, EPA named seven other counties in the San Antonio area in compliance with the threshold (E&ENews PM, July 18).
Ozone, a lung irritant and the main ingredient in smog, is formed by the reaction of nitrogen oxides and volatile organic compounds in sunshine.
In a news release, a Texas representative of the Environmental Defense Fund assailed the state's decision to go to court. "It is irresponsible and dangerous for Texas to waste taxpayer money on this lawsuit instead of spending that money to clean up our air," Colin Leyden said.
The Obama-era EPA had tightened the standard three years ago from 75 ppb to 70 ppb on the basis of research showing that ozone posed health dangers at lower levels than previously thought.
Texas is among 10 Republican-leaning states challenging that decision in a separate suit before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. In another break with its usual allies, the Trump administration recently signaled that it will leave the 70-ppb standard in place for now (Greenwire, Aug. 2).
The Texas attainment designations were the last of three rounds for the 2015 standard. EPA is already facing a half-dozen lawsuits over decisions to deem parts of Wisconsin, Texas and several other states in compliance with the standard.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/08/29/stories/1060095397
-
California Lawmakers Set Goal of 100 Percent Renewable Energy Use by 2045
Aug 29, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Miranda Green
California lawmakers have adopted a plan for the state to transition to an energy grid devoid of electricity generated from fossil fuels by 2045.
The state assembly passed the bill on Tuesday and it now awaits Gov. Jerry Brown's (D) signature. If enacted, it would put California on track to become the first state to adopt a power grid consisting of 100 percent renewable energy.
If signed by Brown, the move will also make California the world's largest economy to commit to relying completely on renewable energy generated from solar, wind and water. California is the world's fifth largest economy.
The bill additionally increases the state's clean energy goals from 50 percent by 2030 to 60 percent by 2030.
Brown has 30 days to sign the bill.
The vote this week is in tandem with a number of other clean energy pushes in the state, which houses a number of renewable energy companies.
Last week, two Democratic lawmakers wrote a letter to Brown urging him to put a cap on any new fossil fuel projects and set a timeline for a hard stop on oil and gas extraction throughout the state.
Brown's office responded saying: "Clearly, the world needs to curb its use of oil and the phase out is already underway in California where the state is committed to cutting consumption in half. At the same time, oil production in California has dropped 56 percent."
Over the past year, California officials have set up the state as a leading voice on climate change as the Trump administration has worked to rollback environmental regulations.
During the same month that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced it would be weakening Obama-era regulations on vehicle fuel standards that were adopted in close conjunction with California officials, the Golden State announced that it had met its 2020 greenhouse reduction goals early.
The state, along with others, has additionally promised to sue the Trump administration over its roll-back of the fuel emissions rule. California's Attorney General Xavier Becerra (D) has sued the Trump administration over environmental related issues at least 19 times.
Last week, California lawmakers additionally voted to pass a law that would ban plastic straws from being offered at all full-service restaurants in the state unless customers specifically asked for them. That bill is also awaiting Brown's signature.
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/404133-california-poised-to-become-first-state-to-commit-to-100-renewable
-
Facebook Aims to Run on Clean Energy by 2020
Aug 29, 2018 | Financial Times (In E&E Greenwire)
By Ed Crooks
Facebook Inc. plans to cover all of its electricity use with renewable energy by the end of 2020.
The company's data centers run all hours of the day. Last year, the social media giant used 2.46 terawatt-hours of electricity, enough to power all the homes in Vermont.
Facebook signed power purchase agreements, or "green tariff" deals, with local utilities to meet its electricity demand. Over half the company's electricity use in 2017 was covered by these deals, which support new solar, hydropower and wind capacity.
The data centers can't connect directly to wind and solar facilities because those sources are too variable to provide constant power.
"The realities of the grid and current storage technologies make it prohibitively expensive to directly supply 100 percent renewables at all times," said Adam Brandt of Stanford University.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/08/29/stories/1060095405
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested