Preview Newsletter
PM ACC - September 5, 2018
-
(ACC Mentioned) Insight: Third Round of US-China Tariffs to Hit China Finished Plastics Exports Hardest
Sep 5, 2018 | ICIS
By Joseph Chang
As the third round of US-China tariffs looms, China finished plastics products will be in the crosshairs, along with additional US exports of commodity chemicals. -
(ACC Mentioned) U.S. Chemical Production on an Uptrend: 5 Stocks to Scoop Up
Sep 5, 2018 | Zacks
By Anindya Barman
U.S. chemical production continues to leap, with July seeing a rise in production on gains in output across all chemical producing regions amid an increase in manufacturing activity, according to the recent monthly report from the American Chemistry Council ("ACC"). -
(ACC Mentioned) Alexandra Dunn Tapped for EPA Chemicals Office Lead
Sep 5, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
The US EPA has confirmed early reports that Alexandra Dunn will be nominated to assume the lead role at the agency’s Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP). -
Trump's EPA Is Flouting the Law When Approving New Chemicals. Here Are 3 Examples.
Sep 5, 2018 | Environmental Defense Fund
By Richard Denison
This summer, New York-based International Flavors & Fragrances got the green light from the Environmental Protection Agency to begin importing a potentially toxic chemical known as Jeffamine diacrylamide to the United States. -
EPA Submits TSCA Fees Rule to OMB
Sep 5, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
The US EPA has submitted its final rule covering how it will administer fees under the reformed TSCA to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval. -
Removing Toxic Fluorinated Chemicals From Your Home’s Tap Water
Sep 5, 2018 | Environmental Working Group
By EWG Science Team
The family of fluorinated compounds known as PFAS chemicals includes more than 4,700 chemicals – some linked to cancer, thyroid disease, weakened immunity and developmental defects, and others whose health effects are unknown. -
Schools Across the U.S. Find Elevated Lead Levels in Drinking Water
Sep 5, 2018 | Wall Street Journal
By Kris Maher
Schools in multiple states are tearing out water fountains and old faucets after finding elevated levels of lead in their drinking water. -
EU Proposal for SCCP Waste Limit in Global Treaties ‘Reckless’
Sep 5, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Clelia Oziel
A group of NGOs has urged the European Commission to propose a significantly lower hazardous waste limit for short-chain chlorinated paraffins (SCCPs) under the Basel and Stockholm Conventions. -
Bayer Says More Americans Are Alleging Monsanto Weedkillers Cause Cancer
Sep 5, 2018 | Wall Street Journal
By Ruth Bender
Bayer AG BAYRY -1.13% said the number of American plaintiffs alleging its recently acquired weedkillers cause cancer has risen sharply, adding to concerns about potentially lengthy and costly litigation stemming from its acquisition of Monsanto. -
Democrats Criticize GOP'Inaction' on PFAS Contamination
Sep 5, 2018 | AP (In E&E Greenwire)
By David Eggert
Democratic lawmakers in Michigan yesterday accused majority Republicans of "inaction" on the contamination of tap water with old industrial chemicals, demanding that hearings be held to strengthen Michigan's standard and to study why an internal... -
Democrats Look to Amend Bill to Push Small-Scale Exports
Sep 5, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Sam Mintz
The House will debate two Democratic amendments this week to a bill aimed at expediting small-scale natural gas exports. -
Energy Transfer Partners, Magellan Join with Refiners to Build New Permian Crude Pipeline
Sep 5, 2018 | Platts
By Janet McGurty
A new Permian-to-US Gulf Coast pipeline announced Tuesday will deliver heavily discounted crude to Delek and Marathon Petroleum refineries, while providing additional takeaway capacity for crude exports. -
Carbon Dioxide Emissions Fall as Nation Uses Less Coal and More Natural Gas
Sep 5, 2018 | Houston Chronicle
By L.M. Sixel
The electric power industry made such a dramatic shift last year away from coal and toward natural gas and renewable energy sources, contributing to the industry's 4.6 percent decrease in emissions of carbon dioxide, the Energy Department reported. -
ACLU Alleges Planned Effort to Quash Keystone XL Protests
Sep 5, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
The Trump administration and local law enforcement agencies are working together to suppress any protests that rise up around construction of the Keystone XL pipeline, civil rights advocates say. -
Trump Taps Critic of Climate Science as Top Adviser
Sep 5, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Hannah Northey
William Happer, a physics professor and vocal critic of mainstream climate science, has joined the White House as a top adviser. -
Agency Targets 3 Big Obama Rules After Pruitt Exit
Sep 5, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Robin Bravender and Maxine Joselow
In rapid succession, the Trump administration last month took aim at a trio of President Obama's biggest air pollution and climate change rules. -
The Energy 202: How Kavanaugh May Get Grilled About His Environmental Record
Sep 5, 2018 | Washington Post
By Dino Grandoni
If the first day of Brett M. Kavanaugh's hearing in the Senate is any indication, Democratic senators are ready to press President Trump's Supreme Court nominee about his views on a number of high-profile cases on things like abortion rights and gun control. -
Kavanaugh Defends His Environmental Record
Sep 5, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
Environmental issues got aired early during today's Senate hearing on Brett Kavanaugh, President Trump's nominee to the Supreme Court. -
How Jerry Brown Can Seal His Legacy as a Climate Champion
Sep 5, 2018 | New York Times
By Justin Gillis
This is a message, and a plea, for Gov. Jerry Brown of California.
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 - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
-
Sep 5, 2018 | ICIS
By Joseph Chang
As the third round of US-China tariffs looms, China finished plastics products will be in the crosshairs, along with additional US exports of commodity chemicals.
The proposed third round of tariffs, which the US plans to put on an additional $200bn in Chinese imports, and China on $60bn of US imports, raises the stakes in chemicals and plastics.
While the second round on $16bn in imports on both sides already in effect since 23 August impacted around $2.0bn in US chemicals and plastics exports and $2.2bn in China’s, round three targets another $8.8bn in US exports of these products, and $16.3bn in China exports, according to the American Chemistry Council (ACC).
The first round of tariffs from the US and China on $34bn of imports implemented on 5 July did not include chemicals.
The bulk of the US tariffs in the third round target China’s finished plastics products, In round two, about $1.4bn in these exports were put under tariff. In round three this jumps to $5.8bn, according to an ICIS analysis of 2017 US International Trade Commission (USITC) statistics.
The products under tariff in rounds two and three include everything from plastic tubes, pipes and hoses, plates, sheets, films, containers, bags and sacks, lids and caps, to wall, ceiling and floor coverings, and gloves and ponchos.
In volumes, for the finished plastics products where China exports to the US are measured in kilograms, the second round captured 128,000 tonnes while this amount more than doubles to 284,000 tonnes in the third round. This could diminish China’s overall demand for polymer resins.
If the third round of tariffs are implemented, the combined impact on $7.2bn of finished plastics from China to the US will represent about 30% of US imports of these specific products under tariff, and 19% of US imports of all finished plastics products, including many not under tariff.
BULK CHEMICALS IMPACT
In the second round of China’s retaliatory tariffs already in effect, the US bulk chemicals and polymers most impacted in terms of trade volumes to China are ethylene dichloride (EDC), styrene, high density polyethylene (HDPE), linear low density PE (LLDPE), monoethylene glycol (MEG) and polypropylene (PP) in that order, according to an analysis of trade statistics in the ICIS Supply and Demand Database.In contrast, the impact of US tariffs on China’s commodity chemicals and polymers exports to the US are minimal in the second round at under 10,000 tonnes per product in 2017. This compares to US exports to China of 371,000 tonnes of EDC and almost 500,000 tonnes of HDPE and LLDPE combined last year.
In round three, US exports to China most impacted in terms of volume would be paraxylene (PX), ethylbenzene and methanol. But the overall impact on commodity chemicals would be less than in the second round.
For China bulk chemical exports to the US, the third round would be somewhat more impactful than the second round, but still relatively minimal. Notable products affected would include acrylic acid, acrylates, acetic acid, toluene diisocyanate (TDI) and vinyl acetate monomer (VAM).
While methanol would be the largest China chemical export to the US under tariff in round three by volume, the US and China shipped more or less an equal amount of methanol to each other last year.
US LOCAL MARKET IMPACT
Even if overall volumes of bulk chemicals from China to the US under tariff are relatively small, it can have a significant impact on US buyers of these chemicals.For example, US imports of around 5,800 tonnes of butyl acetate (butac) from China in 2017 represented 67% of total butac imports. US imports of 10,700 tonnes of acrylic acid and 10,500 tonnes of TDI from China were 23% and 22% of total imports, respectively.
And of course, there are plenty of specialty chemicals and materials impacted by the tariffs. For example, proposed US tariffs on China rare earths in the third round pose a problem for producers of fluid catalytic cracking (FCC) catalysts.
The ACC is increasingly concerned about potential escalation in the US-China trade war, and is seeking certain exemptions for its members through the Miscellaneous Tariff Act Bill of 2018 which would reduce or eliminate tariffs on products not made in the US.
This bipartisan legislation passed the House of Representatives and was previously amended in the Senate.
“US manufacturers often rely on inputs that are not available or made in the US to create products that cost less, yet perform at the high level our downstream customers have come to expect from us,” said the ACC in a 4 September statement.
“Tariffs unnecessarily raise the costs of those inputs, deter innovation and economic growth, and ultimately weaken our country’s competitive advantage. Eliminating tariffs just makes good economic sense,” it added.
Contributions from Al Greenwood and Fanny Zhang
https://www.icis.com/resources/news/2018/09/05/10257200/insight-third-round-of-us-china-tariffs-to-hit-china-finished-plastics-exports-hardest/
-
(ACC Mentioned) U.S. Chemical Production on an Uptrend: 5 Stocks to Scoop Up
Sep 5, 2018 | Zacks
By Anindya Barman
U.S. chemical production continues to leap, with July seeing a rise in production on gains in output across all chemical producing regions amid an increase in manufacturing activity, according to the recent monthly report from the American Chemistry Council ("ACC").
July Readings Show Broad-based Regional Gains
The Washington, DC-based chemical industry trade group said that the U.S. Chemical Production Regional Index ("CPRI") rose 0.4% in July on a monthly comparison basis, following a 0.8% increase a month ago and a 1.1% rise in May. The U.S. CPRI, which is measured using a three-month moving average, was created by Moore Economics to track chemical production in seven regions nationwide.
Per the ACC, production went up across all regions in the reported month. Output from the Gulf Coast region -- the epicenter of the U.S. specialty chemicals and petrochemicals industry -- edged up 0.1%. Production from Midwest and Northeast rose 0.6% in the reported month. Output rose 0.2% in Ohio Valley while Mid-Atlantic and Southeast saw 0.5% and 0.3% increase, respectively. West Coast racked up the highest gain of 0.7% in July.
By products, chemical production was mixed in July. Gains across organic chemicals, coatings, adhesives, other specialties, pesticides, fertilizers, industrial gases, consumer products, and synthetic dyes and pigments were neutralized by lower production of plastic resins, synthetic rubber, chlor-alkali and other inorganic chemicals.
According to the ACC, activity for the U.S. manufacturing sector – the largest consumer of chemical products – was up 0.4% in July. The sector is a major driver for the chemical industry which touches around 96% of manufactured goods. Manufacturing activity is also a key indicator for chemical production.
Within the manufacturing sector, production rose in several chemistry end-user markets in July including aerospace, construction supplies, machinery, computers & electronics, semiconductors, petroleum refining, plastic products and textile mill products.
Overall chemical production also went up 2.6% on a year over year comparison basis in July with all regions scoring gains.
U.S. Chemical Industry Set to Ride High
The ACC expects an upswing in the global economy, healthy demand across automotive and housing markets, an upturn in U.S. manufacturing, improving export markets and favorable shale gas economics to contribute to the growth of the U.S. chemical industry this year.
The trade group sees U.S. chemical production (excluding pharmaceuticals) to rise 3.4% in 2018. It expects production to continue to expand across all regions of the United States this year, with the Gulf Coast region seeing the strongest gains. The growth in output is expected to be spurred by higher demand across light vehicles and housing markets, capital investments and strengthening export markets. While the automotive sector is expected to remain at high levels, steady recovery in housing is expected to continue in 2018.
The ACC also envisions strong gains in production in agricultural chemicals, consumer products, coatings and bulk petrochemicals and organics this year. Moreover, output of plastic resins is forecast to rise at the fastest clip since 2012 on the back of new capacity and firming demand for both domestic and overseas customers. Improving industrial activities are also expected to contribute to the growth of the specialty chemicals segment.
The United States also remains an attractive investment destination for chemical investment and domestic chemical industry continue to enjoy the competitive advantage of access to abundant supplies of shale gas and natural gas liquids (NGLs). Economics of shale gas is driving strong capital investment in new chemical projects, leading to growth in the domestic chemical industry.
5 Chemical Stocks Worth a Wager
The U.S. chemical industry’s upturn is expected to continue on continued demand strength across major end-markets, gains in exports and an upswing in U.S. manufacturing. Amid such a backdrop, it would be prudent to invest in chemical stocks with compelling growth prospects.
We highlight the following five stocks with a Zacks Rank #1 (Strong Buy) or 2 (Buy) that are good options for investment right now. You can see the complete list of today’s Zacks #1 Rank stocks here.
Celanese Corporation (CE - Free Report)
Irving, TX-based Celanese sports a Zacks Rank #1 and has long-term expected EPS growth of 10%. The company also has expected earnings growth of 40.8% for 2018. Moreover, it delivered positive earnings surprise in each of the trailing four quarters, with an average positive surprise of 11.5%. The stock has also gained around 19% over a year.
Huntsman Corporation (HUN - Free Report)
Our next pick in the space is Texas-based Huntsman, armed with a Zacks Rank #1. The company has expected earnings growth of 41.9% for 2018. It delivered positive earnings surprise in each of the trailing four quarters, with an average positive surprise of 22.5%. Moreover, the stock has gained around 14% over a year.
Ingevity Corporation (NGVT - Free Report)
South Carolina-based Ingevity is another attractive choice. It carries a Zacks Rank #1 and has an expected earnings growth of 44.2% for 2018. It delivered positive earnings surprise in each of the trailing four quarters, with an average positive surprise of 20.6%. The stock has also rallied roughly 59% in a year’s time.
Trinseo S.A. (TSE - Free Report)
Pennsylvania-based Trinseo carries a Zacks Rank #2 and has an expected earnings growth of 14.5% for 2018. The company also has an expected long-term EPS growth of 12%. The stock has also returned around 11% over a year.
Air Products and Chemicals, Inc. (APD - Free Report)
Based in Pennsylvania, Air Products carries a Zacks Rank #2. The company has expected earnings growth of 18.1% for fiscal 2018. It also has an expected long-term EPS growth of 16.2%. Moreover, Air Products has topped the Zacks Consensus Estimate in each of the trailing four quarters, with an average positive surprise of 4.9%. The stock has also gained roughly 14% in a year’s time.
Looking for Stocks with Skyrocketing Upside?
Zacks has just released a Special Report on the booming investment opportunities of legal marijuana.
Ignited by new referendums and legislation, this industry is expected to blast from an already robust $6.7 billion to $20.2 billion in 2021. Early investors stand to make a killing, but you have to be ready to act and know just where to look
https://www.zacks.com/stock/news/321404/us-chemical-production-on-an-uptrend-5-stocks-to-scoop-up
-
(ACC Mentioned) Alexandra Dunn Tapped for EPA Chemicals Office Lead
Sep 5, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
The US EPA has confirmed early reports that Alexandra Dunn will be nominated to assume the lead role at the agency’s Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP).
The assistant administrator nominee, who currently serves as an administrator for EPA region 1 covering New England, has past experiences representing state environmental agencies, teaching environmental justice, and as counsel to industry.
EPA Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler said Ms Dunn is "highly qualified and well-suited" for the role.
"She will use her experience and wealth of knowledge to help EPA faithfully implement the Toxic Substances Control Act and ensure chemicals in the marketplace are safe," he added.
Deb Markowitz, a visiting professor at the University of Vermont, was among the former business associates to write to Congress in support of her nomination.
She is "an excellent choice to oversee implementation of the nation’s chemical regulatory programmes," especially the amendments to TSCA, Ms Markowitz wrote.
"Ms. Dunn and I worked together, in our prior professional roles, as [the Lautenberg Act] was negotiated, to ensure that states would maintain meaningful chemical regulatory authorities," Ms Markowitz said. "Her deep knowledge of key issues and passion for the portfolio of work in this EPA office will ensure her success."
The American Chemistry Council also praised the nomination. Having experiences with academia, environmental groups and industry makes her a "well-qualified candidate for this important position", the trade body said.
"She has earned a reputation for striving to build consensus and for considering all sides of an issue before acting," the ACC said. It called on the Senate to act quickly to confirm her for the role.
Comments from the NGO community following the nomination were generally less critical of Ms Dunn than those issued in response to the administration’s first OCSPP pick, Michael Dourson.
But the Environmental Working Group’s vice president of government affairs, Scott Faber, cautioned the Senate not to confirm Ms Dunn for the role unless she "clearly commits to follow the law – unlike the team of former chemical industry lobbyists she has been nominated to work with and supervise".
Mr Faber specifically sought a commitment to finalise proposed bans on certain uses of the solvents methylene chloride, N-methylpyrrolidone (NMP) and trichloroethylene (TCE).
The Environmental Defense Fund added that a new assistant administrator should be equipped to "facilitate a fundamental shift in TSCA implementation back to a course that comports with the law, reflects strong science, and is protective of public and worker health".
https://chemicalwatch.com/70095/alexandra-dunn-tapped-for-epa-chemicals-office-lead
-
Trump's EPA Is Flouting the Law When Approving New Chemicals. Here Are 3 Examples.
Sep 5, 2018 | Environmental Defense Fund
By Richard Denison
This summer, New York-based International Flavors & Fragrances got the green light from the Environmental Protection Agency to begin importing a potentially toxic chemical known as Jeffamine diacrylamide to the United States.
The company says it will import 1,000 kilograms of the chemical annually for use in a wide array of industrial, commercial and household products such as floor cleaners, cat litter and fabric refresher sprays to reduce “malodors.”
Political appointees at the EPA quietly overruled the recommendations of its own professional staff, ramming through an approval of the chemical in direct contempt of the 2016 amendments to the Toxic Substances Control Act.
Here are three reasons EPA’s decision is so alarming – and what it tells us about the agency’s intentions for chemical safety going forward.
1. EPA sidestepped requirements under 2016 federal law
In its July 30 decision, the EPA determined that Jeffamine diacrylamide is “not likely to present an unreasonable risk” under TSCA. That means IFF can begin to import and sell the chemical on the American market without any conditions or limits.
This is a complete reversal from the interim decision EPA professional staff made when the company filed its initial notice. They recommended restricting the chemical because of insufficient information about its health effects, and its structural similarity to known and highly toxic chemicals.
Because of the radical shift by President Trump’s political appointees, however, the EPA will not regulate Jeffamine diacrylamide – meaning, it won’t place a single limit or require more information or additional testing of the chemical.
That’s in spite of the fact that Jeffamine diacrylamide falls under the “acrylamides” category. This class of chemicals can cause cancer and be toxic to human reproductive, developmental and neurological systems.
2. EPA gave a possibly toxic chemical unfettered access to market
The stamp of approval the EPA gave Jeffamine diacrylamide gives free rein to any company that wants to make this chemical in any amount, and for any use. Companies that want a piece of the market also won’t have to test the chemical themselves – much less tell the EPA how or where they market it.
Because the EPA has allowed this chemical to enter the market without any conditions whatsoever, there’s no way to know where it may pop up. In fact, IFF has indicated that it’s also interested in selling it for use in “down-the-drain” products such as general cleaners, laundry detergents and bar soaps.
EPA’s reckless approach for a potentially dangerous chemical such as Jeffamine diacrylamide doesn’t bode well for chemical safety in America.
3. EPA ignored serious health concerns
Interestingly, IFF itself indicated that its chemical falls under the toxic acrylamides category, the class of chemicals known to be highly hazardous to human health.
With its final decision on Jeffamine diacrylamide, however, the EPA made a surprise move. With scant explanation and no additional data or publicly available analysis, it instead assigned the chemical into a second category that the EPA says poses significantly fewer health concerns. Voilà, toxic problem gone.
This shift radically departed from the key alert identified by both the company and the EPA’s own assessment tools, and ignored very real health concerns surrounding Jeffamine diacrylamide. Moreover, the agency has not made its full risk assessment public.
So what happens if the agency’s reassessment is wrong and it just gave carte blanche to a chemical that can harm people? We may not know until it’s too late:
Because there’s no order or limits placed on manufacturing, processing or use, the chemical will now enter the market in any number of everyday products, and there will be no testing to determine just how real that health risk is to us.
What’s clear is just how reckless the EPA’s review process for new chemicals has become.
https://www.edf.org/blog/2018/09/05/trumps-epa-flouting-law-when-approving-new-chemicals-here-are-3-examples
-
EPA Submits TSCA Fees Rule to OMB
Sep 5, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
The US EPA has submitted its final rule covering how it will administer fees under the reformed TSCA to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and approval.
The 31 August submission marks the beginning of the standard inter-agency review process for significant rules, which must take place before the final version is published in the Federal Register.
The EPA published a proposed version of the rule in February. It sets out a schedule for how the agency plans to collect some $20m in fees from industry each year.
This figure represents 25% of the estimated $80.2m annual cost to run its chemical review activities – a number disputed by some in the consumer advocacy community as too low.
In a consultation on the proposal, industry groups complained that the fees on new chemicals have been set too high and will threaten innovation. And several groups requested that the EPA replace its "relatively simplistic" structure with a tiered approach for charging industry the costs of risk evaluations.
The agency extended the consultation in April to take comments on how it will define small businesses under the rule – a crucial distinction, as they will be eligible for an 80% discount on specific fees relative to larger businesses.
It remains to be seen whether the EPA will significantly amend its proposed fees in the final rule. Other major TSCA rulemakings – including the risk evaluation and prioritisation rules – saw marked differences in their final versions compared with first drafts.
https://chemicalwatch.com/70093/epa-submits-tsca-fees-rule-to-omb
-
Removing Toxic Fluorinated Chemicals From Your Home’s Tap Water
Sep 5, 2018 | Environmental Working Group
By EWG Science Team
The family of fluorinated compounds known as PFAS chemicals includes more than 4,700 chemicals – some linked to cancer, thyroid disease, weakened immunity and developmental defects, and others whose health effects are unknown. One thing’s for sure: You don’t want them in your body.
Drinking water is one of the most common sources of exposure. PFAS chemicals could contaminate the drinking water for 110 million Americans nationwide. EWG’s interactive map shows areas of known contamination. If you know or suspect these chemicals are in your tap water, the best way to protect yourself is by installing an in-home water filter.
But which kind?
Based on information from state health agencies, testing labs, scientific researchers and water filter companies, the most effective choice for in-home treatment of PFAS-tainted tap water is a reverse osmosis filter, followed by an activated carbon filter – a slightly lower-cost option.
But many questions remain unanswered. More research is urgently needed to better understand how to ensure removal of the many types of PFAS compounds. To help with your choice, below are details of what is currently known.
Disclaimer: EWG is not recommending any specific brand of filter and cannot guarantee that a filter’s performance will match the results reported below.
States Leading Response to PFAS Contamination Crisis
The Environmental Protection Agency has set a health advisory level for the two most-studied PFAS compounds in drinking water – PFOA, formerly used to make DuPont’s Teflon, and PFOS, formerly an ingredient in 3M’s Scotchgard. The advisory level is 70 parts per trillion, or ppt, for the two chemicals combined. But the best and most current scientific research says that’s much too high, and the EPA’s advisory level is not legally enforceable.
That’s why some states with extensive PFAS drinking water contamination are taking steps to set more health-protective limits or advisory levels. For example, New Jersey has set a legal limit of 13 ppt for perfluorononanoic acid, or PFNA, and proposed enforceable limits of 14 ppt for PFOA and 13 ppt for both PFOS. Other states such as Washington, Michigan, and North Carolina are conducting additional testing to further evaluate the extent of contamination in drinking water.
Some of these states have issued recommendations for water filters to remove PFOA and PFOS, including:
· Michigan;
· Minnesota;
· New Hampshire;
· New Jersey; and
· New York.
Guidance and factsheet documents from these states recommend two types of filters for removing PFAS chemicals: activated carbon and reverse osmosis. The states provide information on the pluses and minuses of the two types, and tips on how to maintain them to ensure effective filtering. They also compare the two types of filter installations: “point of use,” which are installed under the kitchen sink or in the refrigerator, and “point of entry,” which treat the water for the whole house.
In communities with the worst contamination, such as in Minnesota or Michigan, whole-house filtration is often used. It is effective, but expensive in comparison to point-of-use filtration and may not be necessary in most cases. Further, since whole-house systems also remove chlorine, they may introduce additional risks of harmful bacterial growth in plumbing.
Filters Certified for PFAS Chemical Removal
NSF International, a testing and certification company, developed a certification standard for removal of PFOS and PFOA in 2016. The certification requires that the filter reduce these two chemicals only to EPA’s health advisory level of 70 ppt. Currently, 71 productsfrom seven manufacturers are certified to meet this standard.
However, drinking water can contain other PFAS chemicals, sometimes at higher levels than PFOS and PFOA. PFOS and PFOA, which are now banned, are called ‘long-chain’ compounds because they have eight carbon atoms, while the chemicals that have replaced them are called ‘short-chain’ compounds because they have fewer carbon atoms. While similar, these so-called “next-generation” compounds have different molecular structures, and the effectiveness of filters certified for PFOS and PFOA for removal of replacement PFAS chemicals is unknown.
Filter Testing by State Agencies
In 2007, the Minnesota Department of Health commissioned testing of home water filters to determine their efficacy in removing PFAS. Six activated carbon filters and eight reverse osmosis filter types were tested. The tests determined that four of the six carbon filters and seven of the eight reverse osmosis filters provided sufficient reduction of PFAS chemicals. In field testing, four activated carbon devices and seven reverse osmosis systems, all equipped in tandem with activated carbon filters, removed PFOA, PFOS and PFBA to the detection limit of 50 ppt.
The study noted that for the carbon filters, the effectiveness of removal of PFOA, PFOS and another chemical, PFBA, decreased over operating life in five of the six filters tested in laboratory conditions. That means that users will have to replace the filters on the recommended schedule to ensure effective filtration of PFAS chemicals.
In 2017, Minnesota released the results of a study for a faucet-mounted carbon filtermade by PUR. The filter was tested for seven PFAS chemicals typically seen in groundwater in Washington County in Minnesota. The state concluded that this low-cost filter could be used to effectively reduce PFAS contamination. Six of seven contaminants including PFOA and PFOS were removed below the reporting limits of 5 and 10 ppt, respectively, achieved in the 2017 study. In contrast, levels of the shorter chain PFBA were only reduced by 75 percent.
Filter Testing by Academic Institutions
Professor Detlef Knappe and his research group at the University of North Carolina have independently tested numerous home water filter options. To date they have tested at least 27 home-use filters.
Last year, Knappe told the Star News of Wilmington, N.C. that an under-sink reverse osmosis filter was probably the best choice for home treatment. He said it’s not only effective, but its continued effectiveness can be easily verified with an electrical conductivity tester, a inexpensive tool that people can use at home.
Detailed testing results were publicly presented in 2017 for four under-sink reverse osmosis filters and one whole-house activated carbon filter. These filters that were tested for removal of a dozen PFAS chemicals, including both long-chain and short-chain compounds.
Three out of four reverse osmosis filters reduced the long-chain compounds to below 10 ppt, with the other filter reducing them to a slightly higher level. The four reverse osmosis systems also removed between 95 and 99 percent of short-chain compounds.
One whole-house activated charcoal filter from Aquasana was tested. It provided no reduction of PFAS levels. In contrast, an activated carbon filter made by Hydroviv delivered results similar to the reverse osmosis filters.
EWG Contacted Water Filter Companies
EWG surveyed 51 water filter companies to find out about their filters’ capabilities to remove PFAS. We heard back from 14 companies, but only four of them verified that their filters remove any PFAS chemicals.
Only Berkey provided EWG with test data for their carbon filters, which reported removal of nine PFAS chemicals, including PFOA and PFOS, all below the detection limit of 2 ppt. However, only 25 gallons of water were filtered, instead of the recommended 6,000 gallons to measure lifetime efficacy. Aqua Systems and Triple Clear stated that removal for their products was only to the EPA advisory levels and Crystal Quest reported that removal was variable.
Reverse Osmosis Filters vs. Activated Carbon Filters
In general, reverse osmosis systems more consistently removed PFAS compared to activated carbon systems.
Most reverse osmosis systems also have the benefit of an additional activated carbon filtration stage included in the system. Reverse osmosis systems remove a wider range of other contaminants from drinking water and their effectiveness can be tested at home using an electrical conductivity meter. But activated carbon filter systems are significantly less expensive than reverse osmosis systems. Carbon filters must be changed on schedule as they will lose their effectiveness over time.
Recommendations
Check out EWG’s interactive PFAS map to see if your drinking water has high levels of PFAS chemicals or if there is a contamination site near your community. If you live in an area with contamination, contact your local health department for current information. If you have a private well and suspect PFAS contamination, consult your state health department about having your well tested. The best bet to filter PFAS chemicals out of your water is an in-home reverse osmosis filter under your sink or at your tap. To ensure that the reverse osmosis filter is working, use an inexpensive conductivity meter. These filter systems remove ions and total dissolved solids in addition to other contaminants, and a low conductivity reading for the filtered water indicates that the filter is overall effective. You can also consider an activated carbon filter that will most often provide effective removal. Results have been inconsistent and the filters become less effective with time. If possible, choose a filter that has been tested for PFOS, PFOA and additional PFAS chemicals that may be present in your water.
EWG Research Intern Michael Ong, Research Analyst Carla Burns, and Senior Scientists Tasha Stoiber, Ph.D., and David Andrews, Ph.D contributed to research for this project.
https://www.ewg.org/news-and-analysis/2018/09/removing-toxic-fluorinated-chemicals-your-home-s-tap-water#.W5ALTugzZ3g
-
Schools Across the U.S. Find Elevated Lead Levels in Drinking Water
Sep 5, 2018 | Wall Street Journal
By Kris Maher
Schools in multiple states are tearing out water fountains and old faucets after finding elevated levels of lead in their drinking water.
Indiana tested 915 schools in recent months and found that 61% had one or more fixtures with elevated lead levels. Schools in Colorado and Florida, among others, are taking steps to address lead in drinking water.
Some testing is mandated by new state laws, as in Maryland. In Montgomery County, Md., outside Washington, D.C., the district is midway through replacing 238 fixtures that had elevated lead.
There isn’t a national standard for what level of lead, measured in parts per billion or ppb, is acceptable in school drinking water specifically. Districts and states are struggling to find individual solutions.
The Environmental Protection Agency requires public water systems to take action to reduce lead when more than 10% of samples from homes exceed 15 ppb. Its voluntary guidance for schools, set in the 1990s, states that schools should take individual water fountains and other fixtures out of service if lead exceeds 20 ppb.
Schools face a balancing act because cutting lead to lower levels is costly. Indiana’s statewide testing cost $4.7 million, said a spokeswoman for the Indiana Finance Authority, which paid for the program using state and federal funds.
“We have chaos around the country,” said Marc Edwards, a professor of civil engineering at Virginia Tech. “Each school system is trying to find their own way.” Mr. Edwards, who helped uncover lead contamination in Flint, Mich., in 2015, sparking greater national awareness of the issue, called the voluntary EPA protocol “totally outdated.”
An EPA representative said the agency plans to update its guidance for public schools, possibly as early as this year.
Lead exposure can affect nearly every system in the body, and there is no safe level of lead in blood for children, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention guidelines.
Last week, the Detroit public school system shut off water across the district, before its 47,000 students started school on Tuesday, after finding higher-than-expected levels of lead or copper at some schools. Officials said schools would pass out bottled water until new water coolers arrived.
In most cases, water problems are a result of old plumbing that contains lead, not municipal water supplies. Water that sits in school pipes over weekends or school breaks tends to have higher lead concentrations, experts say.
A July report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office found that 43% of school districts it surveyed had tested for lead in 2016 or 2017. Of those, about 37% showed elevated lead in drinking water, a
s defined by the districts. About 41% of school districts hadn’t tested for lead in the 12 months before completing the survey, and 16% said they didn’t know if they had tested.
All school districts that detected elevated lead reported taking steps to reduce or eliminate the exposure, the report said, including by replacing water fountains, installing filters or new fixtures or providing bottled water.
In the past few weeks, Pueblo City Schools in Pueblo, Colo., concluded its first-ever water testing at its 31 schools. Of more than 580 water fountains and other fixtures tested, the district disabled or repaired 27 which had lead above 15 ppb, the EPA’s standard for public water systems.
“The majority of our schools are aging facilities,” said Dalton Sprouse, a spokesman for the district. Now that the district has its test results, he said, it can take further action if the EPA lowers its guidance for lead in water.
Indiana officials also chose a standard of 15 ppb lead and found that 8% of fixtures in schools statewide were above that level. In Warrick County, 11 of 17 schools had at least one fixture over the level.
Brad Schneider, superintendent for the Warrick County School Corp., said he immediately replaced the fixtures. “You can’t solve a problem when you don’t know you have a problem,” he said.
Laura Stewart, a parent and PTA leader in Silver Spring, Md., wants the Montgomery County Public Schools to follow Washington, D.C., and a handful of states to adopt a lead limit of 5 ppb in school drinking water. Tests in the district, the state’s largest with 206 schools, found 238 of 13,248 fixtures had lead above the 20 ppb threshold. Ms. Stewart said several thousand were above 5 ppb. She wants schools to flush water lines more regularly and use filters to be get below the 5-ppb level.
“Everything is constrained by money,” said Ms. Stewart, 47, who has two school-age boys.
Derek Turner, a spokesman for the district, said it is working with state health officials to explore using a lower lead limit.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/schools-across-the-u-s-find-elevated-lead-levels-in-drinking-water-1536153522?mod=searchresults&page=1&pos=1
-
EU Proposal for SCCP Waste Limit in Global Treaties ‘Reckless’
Sep 5, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Clelia Oziel
A group of NGOs has urged the European Commission to propose a significantly lower hazardous waste limit for short-chain chlorinated paraffins (SCCPs) under the Basel and Stockholm Conventions.
In a letter addressed to Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker, 14 NGOs including the Center for International Environmental Law (Ciel), Ipen and the European Environmental Bureau (EEB) asked the EU to "exert leadership" in the conventions' processes and support a limit of 100ppm (parts per million) for SCCPs.
The current EU proposal is 10,000ppm for content level of low persistent organic pollutants (POPs) under the Stockholm Convention.
The limit will have an impact on the circular economy, health, environment and the internal market, the NGOs said.
SCCPs are a class of industrial chemicals primarily used in metalworking, but also as flame retardants and softeners in plastics, including children’s products. They adversely affect the kidney, liver and thyroid, disrupt endocrine function and are anticipated to be human carcinogens, they added.
The limit is being discussed for these substances and other POPs at a meeting of the Basel Convention open-ended working group from 3-6 September.
Governments will finalise these at the Conferences of Parties for the treaties in April/May 2019. On the global stage, the EU is an important nominator of SCCPs for listing in the Stockholm Convention.
In their letter, the NGOs say the EU proposal of 10,000ppm has "disturbing implications" that could include:
· significant new releases of POPs with threats to environmental health because waste with high levels of SCCPs will be considered "clean";
· "poisoning" the circular economy as plastics containing SCCPs with less than 10,000ppm would be considered acceptable and used, reused and recycled, further dispersing SCCPs into products;
· opening the door to dumping of waste with very harmful SCCP levels in developing and transition countries that cannot measure or manage them;
· discouraging implementation of "superior" waste disposal techniques that can destroy all POPs content; and
· normalising "recklessly" high ‘low POP content levels’ in the Stockholm Convention that undermine the objectives of the treaty.
'Weak' stance
In 2015 the Commission set a limit of 0.15% by weight (1,500ppm) for SCCPs in articles. The NGOs said the EU should use its experience of convention processes to strengthen its own "weak" SCCPs regulation, "rather than seeking to globalise unacceptable concentration limits".
The EU's current proposal for low POPs content in waste raises questions about its commitment to the convention's objectives, they said. According to them it is the "weakest" proposal for a low POPs content level in the history of the conventions and "200-fold weaker than the limits for PCBs and other similar POPs".
In their letter, they also call on the EU to support more protective low POPs content limits for other substances. These are:
· PCDD/Fs + dl-PCBs – 1ppb;
· hexabromocyclododecane (HBCD) – 100ppm (100mg/kg); and
· sum of polybrominated diphenyl ethers or PBDEs (including decaBDE with a limit of 10ppm) – 50ppm (50mg/kg).
Under scrutiny
Member states and NGOs have been scrutinising the content of SCCPs in consumer products. In April, the Swedish Chemicals Agency (Kemi) reported several companies to environmental prosecutors, after it found the subtances in small electronics and soft plastics items that children can put in the mouth.
In December, tests in Norway on sports and leisure products found that 40% of those sampled contained environmental pollutants, including SCCPs and in a fifth these were above the permitted limit value.
And an Ipen report from November last year found them to be widely present in plastic toys and food preparation materials in ten countries around the world. According to this, 96% of toys with measurable concentrations contained levels of 10ppm or greater. Other consumer products on the EU market with SCCPs greater than 10ppm included wallpaper (56.6ppm) and a gym ball for children (9,715ppm).
https://chemicalwatch.com/70056/eu-proposal-for-sccp-waste-limit-in-global-treaties-reckless
-
Bayer Says More Americans Are Alleging Monsanto Weedkillers Cause Cancer
Sep 5, 2018 | Wall Street Journal
By Ruth Bender
Bayer AG BAYRY -1.13% said the number of American plaintiffs alleging its recently acquired weedkillers cause cancer has risen sharply, adding to concerns about potentially lengthy and costly litigation stemming from its acquisition of Monsanto.
The German chemicals company on Wednesday also lowered its full-year earnings outlook because of delays in closing its $63 billion purchase of Monsanto, which included a portfolio of herbicides that contain glyphosate, notably flagship product Roundup.
Bayer said it faced some 8,700 plaintiffs across the U.S. as of late August—mainly cancer patients who claim to have fallen ill after being exposed to the glyphosate-containing Monsanto herbicides. As of late July, the number of plaintiffs stood at about 8,000, up from 5,200 a few months earlier.
Last month, not long after Bayer closed the acquisition, Monsanto was ordered to pay a plaintiff $289.2 million by a California state jury. It found that Monsanto’s Roundup and Ranger Pro products presented a “substantial danger” to consumers, and that Monsanto knew or should have known of potential risks and failed to warn users.
Bayer rejected the verdict as “wrong,” and is seeking a review of the court decision. It said it would appeal if necessary, a process the company said could take up to a year. Such large jury awards are often ultimately reduced and in some cases overturned. Bayer hasn’t disclosed any provision for liabilities linked to the cases. The company argues some 800 studies have proven that the chemical is safe and doesn’t cause cancer.
Bayer’s shares opened 2.9% lower after the company reported its second-quarter results and reduced outlook, and the stock finished the day down 1.6%. The shares have lost over 15% since the August 10 weedkiller verdict.
“Despite overall reassuring results, the glyphosate litigation uncertainty will likely remain an overhang in the midterm,” Jefferies analysts wrote in a note to investors.
Bayer said it hasn’t seen a decline in demand for its glyphosate products because of the litigation and doesn’t expect any as regulators haven’t changed their stance that the chemical was safe. “Glyphosate has been used and trusted for over 40 years,” said Liam Condon, head of Bayer’s Crop Science business, which now includes Monsanto.
Roundup has come under increased scrutiny after a unit of the World Health Organization in 2015 said that glyphosate was probably carcinogenic. Yet further studies have produced mixed results about the potential danger. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in September 2017 wrapped up a decadeslong assessment of glyphosate risks and found the chemical not likely carcinogenic to humans.
Bayer on Wednesday didn’t say how much money it was setting aside to cover legal costs or potential payments for weedkiller lawsuits. “We continue to believe that we have meritorious defenses and intend to defend ourselves vigorously in all of these lawsuits,” the company said in a statement.
A case was set to go to trial in Missouri in late October but Bayer Chief Executive Werner Baumann on Wednesday said it likely won’t start until 2019. So far, the majority of cases were filed in Missouri, Delaware and California, Bayer said.
The Monsanto deal closed on June 7 following two years of regulatory review during which Bayer had to shed more assets than originally planned to get the green light. The Leverkusen-based company on Wednesday blamed its lowered earnings outlook on the longer-than-expected review.
“The acquired business generates the majority of its sales and, above all, earnings in the first half of the year,” Mr. Baumann said.
Bayer said it now expects full-year core earnings per share of between €5.7 ($6.6) and €5.9, lower than consensus expectations and below 2017’s €6.64 a share, a restated figure to account for the integration of Monsanto. Bayer had previously targeted a flat result.
Bayer does expect the acquisition to boost its full-year sales, which it now projects at more than €39 billion, compared with its previous forecast of €35 billion.
Bayer reported a fall in second-quarter net profit to €799 million from €1.22 billion a year earlier after Bayer further reduced its stake in plastics company Covestro AG . Sales rose 8.8% to €9.48 billion from a restated figure of €8.71 billion, boosted by the integration of Monsanto, which offset weakness in the company’s pharmaceuticals and consumer-health segments.
—Nathan Allen contributed to this article.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/bayer-says-more-americans-are-alleging-weed-killers-cause-cancer-1536145735?mod=searchresults&page=1&pos=2
-
Democrats Criticize GOP'Inaction' on PFAS Contamination
Sep 5, 2018 | AP (In E&E Greenwire)
By David Eggert
Democratic lawmakers in Michigan yesterday accused majority Republicans of "inaction" on the contamination of tap water with old industrial chemicals, demanding that hearings be held to strengthen Michigan's standard and to study why an internal state report that warned of dangers was ignored.
The renewed calls came a day before the GOP-led state Legislature was to return to session after a summer break during which residents in the city of Parchment and Cooper Township in Kalamazoo County were told not to drink their municipal water for a month due to high levels of perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS. The industrial compounds — which were used in products like firefighting foam and carpets — also have been found in at least 34 other sites in 19 communities.
State Rep. Winnie Brinks, a Grand Rapids Democrat, said at a Capitol news conference that the state does not have an enforceable PFAS limit established in law, and the combined standard of 70 parts per trillion — set by Gov. Rick Snyder's administration in January, mirroring a federal advisory level set in 2016 — should be 5 parts per trillion.
"This cap would be the lowest in the country and would ensure that the water coming out of Michiganders' taps is worth of being called pure," said Brinks, who introduced legislation in December to lower the PFAS standard. "Access to clean, safe drinking water is a fundamental right."
A response team created by the Republican governor last year is reviewing the science and may make a recommendation on the PFAS standard.
Asked why no hearings have been held, a spokesman for GOP House Speaker Tom Leonard said Republicans "are focused on getting the state's emergency response up and running first." Gideon D'Assandro said lawmakers have allocated more than $60 million for lab equipment, initial cleanup, health care and getting boots on the ground in affected communities.
"The state is still working on testing water systems statewide and finding affected communities, and the Legislature's focus needs to remain on this emergency testing and response until experts can determine the extent of the problem," D'Assandro said in a statement. "This simply has to be done first."
Democrats said hearings should be held, however, especially after MLive.com reported in July that a state regulator's 2012 warning about PFAS was largely ignored by the former director of the Department of Environmental Quality (Greenwire, July 11).
"That report was buried for six years. Michiganders deserve to have some answers," said state Rep. Kevin Hertel of St. Clair Shores, the top-ranking Democrat on the House Oversight Committee.
Snyder — who is pushing a fee increase to in part help clean up PFAS sites — said last week that the reason Michigan is finding the man-made chemicals is because it is proactively testing for them unlike in other states, after learning lessons from the Flint water crisis.
The governor said of the 2012 report: "You can do a lot of what-ifs, but we're doing the right things today and we're doing them pretty well. But we've got to keep it up and we can't take anything for granted."
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/09/05/stories/1060095843
-
Democrats Look to Amend Bill to Push Small-Scale Exports
Sep 5, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Sam Mintz
The House will debate two Democratic amendments this week to a bill aimed at expediting small-scale natural gas exports.
The legislation, H.R. 4606 from Rep. Bill Johnson (R-Ohio), would direct the Department of Energy to automatically approve applications to export 0.14 billion cubic feet of gas per day or less, as long as they do not require an environmental assessment under the National Environmental Policy Act.
Johnson and the Republican majority have said it would provide certainty to American companies hoping to export liquefied natural gas to markets like the Caribbean.
But Democrats are arguing both that the bill is unnecessary because it would replicate a DOE regulation that was finalized in August and that an "unrestricted" natural gas export policy could lead to higher gas prices and exacerbate climate change.
In a Rules Committee meeting on the bill last night, Georgia Republican Rep. Rob Woodall defended the legislation against those claims.
"Either of those could be true. This is the law of the land so the bill changes nothing, or this bill is going to make dramatic changes to the law of the land, and thus consequences for consumers may occur," Woodall said. "What I don't understand is how both can be true."
Johnson, the sponsor of the legislation, also made an argument last night against Democrats' suggestion that H.R. 4606 could allow companies to skip the review process for larger projects by splitting them into smaller pieces that would qualify for the expedited process.
"These LNG companies are building to economies of scale. The financial viability of stacking or combining many small-scale trains is simply not viable," he said. "The operating costs would surely cause the cost of the gas to be uncompetitive in the global market."
Johnson also said his staff had consulted with DOE's Office of Fossil Energy and been assured the agency would not accept requests by LNG companies trying to combine more than one small-scale export authorization.
One of the amendments that will be up for debate when the bill hits the House floor, from Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.), would require export applications to show that the gas to be exported was produced using techniques to minimize methane emissions.
The other, from Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.), ranking member on the Energy and Commerce Committee, would require a hearing and public input on applications before they are approved.
The Rules Committee declined to make in order two other Democratic amendments.
https://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2018/09/05/stories/1060095785
-
Energy Transfer Partners, Magellan Join with Refiners to Build New Permian Crude Pipeline
Sep 5, 2018 | Platts
By Janet McGurty
A new Permian-to-US Gulf Coast pipeline announced Tuesday will deliver heavily discounted crude to Delek and Marathon Petroleum refineries, while providing additional takeaway capacity for crude exports.
The Permian Gulf Coast, or PGC Pipeline, has received sufficient shipper interest to proceed, Energy Transfer Partners, Magellan Midstream, Delek US Holdings and MPLX said Tuesday. MPLX is Marathon Petroleum's midstream master limited partnership.
"The 600-mile pipeline system is expected to be operational in mid-2020 with multiple Texas origins, including Wink, Crane and Midland," said a joint statement said.
"The pipeline system will have the strategic capability to transport crude oil to both Energy Transfer's Nederland, Texas terminal and Magellan's East Houston, Texas terminal for ultimate delivery through their respective distribution systems," the statement added.
In July, Energy Transfer said it was making "significant progress" as it looked with partner Magellan for "other strategic shippers" for the 30" pipeline to carry Permian crude from Loving Station in West Texas to its terminal in Nederland, Texas, on the USGC.
At that time, initial line capacity of 600,000 b/d was envisioned by Energy Transfer and Magellan, with the possibility the line could be expanded to 1 million b/d.
No capacity was given Tuesday, but the companies said they are able to "increase the pipe diameter to expand the capacity based upon additional commitments received during the upcoming open season." The partners will launch an open season seeking additional shipper volume commitments late this week, the statement added.
"While no ownership interests were disclosed, ETP commentary that they would ultimately expect to own about 25% likely signals ratable interests," said Tudor Pickering Holt analyst Matthew Blair in a research note.
MARATHON, DELEK CEMENT PERMIAN ACCESS
This is Marathon Petroleum's second Permian crude oil pipeline stake, as it vies for committed space with crude export market to ensure supply of cost-advantaged Permian crude for its two massive US Gulf Coast plants.
Marathon's first Permian pipeline stake in the Gray Oak Pipeline will allow it to back out light, sweet crude imports at its 571,000 b/d Galveston Bay refinery in Texas City, Texas, and replace it with 200,000 b/d of Permian and Eagle Ford crude.
Marathon's Gray Oaks stake came with its purchase of fellow refiner, Andeavor. Also owned by refinery Phillips 66's MLP, Gray Oaks will have 800,000 b/d of capacity when it comes online at the end of 2019 with the possibility of an expansion to 1 million b/d.
The PGC Pipeline announced Tuesday will give Marathon's 556,000 b/d Garyviille, Louisiana, refinery greater access to Permian crude. The completion of Energy Transfer's Bayou Bridge pipeline by the end of the year will connect the Nederland, Texas, terminal to the Louisiana oil hub of St. James.
While the Garyville refinery imports mostly medium to heavy sour crudes, bringing in about 220,000 b/d in June, it has the capability to run virtually any kind of crude, Marathon CEO Gary Heminger has noted in the past.
Refiner Delek US will also benefit in owning a stake in the new pipeline, as it looks reach its goal of running more Midland crude to optimize operations at its 80,000 b/d Krotz Springs, Louisiana, refinery.
Delek US's four refineries all run some amount of Permian Basin crude, but volumes differ according to location and ease of access. Krotz Springs lags the other three plants operationally partially from lack of advantaged crude.
The 73,000 b/d Big Spring, Texas, plant located in the Permian Basin ran 100% local in the second quarter, comprised of 72% West Texas Intermediate and 28% West Texas Sour, according to the company.
On the other end of the spectrum, Krotz Springs processed 74,625 b/d of crude in the second quarter, with only 54.9% of it from the Permian.
Krotz Spring's second quarter refining margin, net of expenses, averaged $4.95/b, compared with the $13.31/b at Big Spring.
"We have added more Midland barrels to the Krotz Springs crude slate as promised in previous quarters, which has improved overall performance," said Delek CEO Uzi Amin on the August 8 second quarter conference call.
"There will be opportunities in the Permian. Don't be surprised if there will be some announcement over the next few quarters," he said.
PROLIFIC PERMIAN EXPORTS
While exports of crude from the Permian remain strong, volumes are hampered by a lack of takeaway capacity capable of bringing volumes to USGC ports like Magellan's East Houston terminal.
This means exports are "expected to grow at a much slower place during the second half of 2018 due to takeaway constraints from the region," according to S&P Global Platts Analytics.
Slowing exports and growing production will continue to discount Permian crude until those constraints are solved, a boon for refiners like Delek, Valero, and Phillips 66.
So far this quarter, WTI Midland is averaging at a $15.28/b discount to WTI at Cushing, Oklahoma, compared with the 79 cent/b discount in the third quarter of 2017, Platts prices assessments show.
In June, USGC crude exports averaged 2.082 million b/d, according to Energy Information Administration data, up from the 1.875 million b/d exported in May.
Permian production averaged 3.387 million b/d in August, according to the EIA, which expects September production to average 3.421 million b/d
Current Permian pipeline takeaway capacity is roughly 3.1 million b/d, with an additional 100,000 b/d capable of being railed out of the region.
By end-2019, pipeline takeaway capacity is expected to rise by 2.125 million b/d, and by end 2020, another 2.1 million b/d of capacity is being planned.
https://www.spglobal.com/platts/en/market-insights/latest-news/oil/090518-energy-transfer-partners-magellan-join-with-refiners-to-build-new-permian-crude-pipeline
-
Carbon Dioxide Emissions Fall as Nation Uses Less Coal and More Natural Gas
Sep 5, 2018 | Houston Chronicle
By L.M. Sixel
The electric power industry made such a dramatic shift last year away from coal and toward natural gas and renewable energy sources, contributing to the industry's 4.6 percent decrease in emissions of carbon dioxide, the Energy Department reported.
The decline was enough to offset emissions increases from all other business sectors.
Electricity producers cut their emissions of carbon dioxide, a greenhouse gas that traps heat in the atmosphere and increases worldwide temperatures, by relying more on natural gas, a cleaner, more efficient fuel source that uses less energy to generate each kilowatt hour of power. Electricity generation from wind and solar power is also on the rise which does not emit carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
ess demand for electricity is also playing a role in reducing carbon dioxide emissions, the government reported.
Electricity sales last year were the lowest they've been since the economic recession in 2009. The government attributed last year's lower sales to milder weather. Cooler summers don't require as much energy for air conditioning and warmer winters lowers the need for heating.
Overall, energy-related carbon dioxide emissions decreased last year to 5.14 billion metric tons, about 1 percent lower than they were in 2016.
Energy-related emissions of carbon dioxide have fallen in seven of the past 10 years, the Energy Department reported, and are 14 percent lower than what they were in 2005.
https://www.chron.com/business/energy/article/Carbon-dioxide-emissions-fall-as-nation-uses-less-13206349.php
-
ACLU Alleges Planned Effort to Quash Keystone XL Protests
Sep 5, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
The Trump administration and local law enforcement agencies are working together to suppress any protests that rise up around construction of the Keystone XL pipeline, civil rights advocates say.
In a lawsuit filed yesterday, the American Civil Liberties Union says federal and local agencies are conducting surveillance on likely protesters and coordinating response plans.
"In light of the government's excessive and violent responses to pipeline protests at Standing Rock, we are very concerned about the specter of government and law enforcement officials plotting to silence opposition to the Keystone XL Pipeline in Montana," Caitlin Borgmann, executive director of the ACLU of Montana, said in a statement.
"We don't want to see that kind of governmental overreach and abuse in our state," she added.
The ACLU says the government is seeking to avoid the kind of intense demonstrations that followed the Dakota Access oil pipeline in North Dakota.
Keystone XL, which would deliver oil from Canada to the United States, received a critical cross-border permit from the Trump administration last year, and the company says it's ready to begin construction next year.
Separate legal action forcing the State Department to conduct additional environmental review may delay that process (Energywire, Aug. 16).
The ACLU's lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana under the Freedom of Information Act. The group is seeking records related to coordination among federal, state and local officials on anticipated protests of the TransCanada Corp. pipeline.
"Plaintiffs believe that public agencies are involved in pre-emptive planning and coordination with private, local, and federal entities to assist in efforts to further suppress Indigenous rights and environmental justice activism," the lawsuit says.
Named in the suit are the departments of Defense, Justice, the Interior and Homeland Security. The agencies do not comment on pending litigation.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/09/05/stories/1060095873
-
Trump Taps Critic of Climate Science as Top Adviser
Sep 5, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Hannah Northey
William Happer, a physics professor and vocal critic of mainstream climate science, has joined the White House as a top adviser.
Happer, 79, told E&E News in email that he began serving yesterday on the National Security Council as the senior director for emerging technologies. NSC officials confirmed Happer's new role but declined to provide further detail about the appointment, which CNN first reported.
When asked about his new NSC role, Happer said he would do his best to ensure that federal policy decisions "are based on sound science and technology."
An emeritus physics professor at Princeton University and a former Energy Department official under the George H.W. Bush administration in the 1990s, Happer is well-known for his public criticism of mainstream climate modeling and his ties to the Trump administration.
Happer last year was considered a leading candidate to head the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy and met with the president in Trump Tower before the inauguration. Happer told E&E News in an interview earlier this year that Trump asked him about Russia during that meeting (Climatewire, Jan. 25).
Happer told The Scientist that the significance of climate change has been "tremendously exaggerated" and has "become sort of a cult movement in the last five or 10 years." Happer also said President Trump, who has referred to climate change as a Chinese hoax, agreed with his assessment.
More recently, Happer has appeared in internal emails obtained under the Freedom of Information Act advising the Trump administration's efforts to challenge mainstream climate science, including assembling and vetting proposed participants for former EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt's "red-team, blue-team" debate (Climatewire, May 10).
Happer, who is not a climate scientist by training, is known in physics for his development in the 1980s of the sodium guide star that was initially used for missile defense technology and has now gained broader application in astronomy. According to his Princeton bio, he's credited as one of the pioneers in the field of optically polarized atoms.
But his criticism of climate science stands out.
Happer has accused both NOAA and NASA of manipulating temperature records and claimed that higher concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere would accentuate plant life, citing satellite data showing a greening of the planet.
"The public in general doesn't realize that from the point of view of geological history, we are in a CO2 famine," he told E&E News during the interview in January.
Many researchers say other impacts of climate change, such as rising temperatures and changing rainfall patterns, have a negative impact on plant life and that higher CO2 levels may not be a boon to all plants, even in the short term.
Happer told E&E News in January that he supported Trump's decision to pull the United States out of the Paris climate accord but said he wished the president had focused on how the agreement "did not make scientific sense." Trump had cast the pact as detrimental to the U.S. economy.
"There is no problem from CO2," Happer said. "The world has lots and lots of problems, but increasing CO2 is not one of the problems. So [the accord] dignifies it by getting all these yahoos who don't know a damn thing about climate saying, 'This is a problem, and we're going to solve it.' All this virtue signaling. You can read about it in the Bible: Pharisees and hypocrites and phonies."
Reporter Robin Bravender contributed.
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2018/09/05/stories/1060095825
-
Agency Targets 3 Big Obama Rules After Pruitt Exit
Sep 5, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Robin Bravender and Maxine Joselow
In rapid succession, the Trump administration last month took aim at a trio of President Obama's biggest air pollution and climate change rules.
EPA signaled last week that it will overhaul Obama's toxic air pollution limits for power plants. That came on the heels of announcements earlier in August that the agency is moving to ease fuel efficiency standards for cars and to issue a weaker version of Obama's signature climate change rule for electric utilities.
With legal challenges ahead for the administration's policies, EPA is racing to finalize some of its biggest priorities to give its lawyers time to defend them in court. The actions take aim at Obama's legacy. They also lay the groundwork for policies that could be among Trump's most significant moves on the environment.
"It's been a very active summer at EPA with all these different initiatives. It's been a lot to keep up with," said Sean Hecht, co-executive director of the Emmett Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at UCLA.
EPA announced last week that it will reconsider a contentious Obama-era rule that restricts mercury and toxic air emissions from power plants (known as the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards, or MATS). The Obama team touted that regulation as one of its biggest moves to safeguard public health, and large utilities already comply. But some coal-fired power plants see the Trump EPA's move as a way to avoid more stringent future regulations (Greenwire, Aug. 30).
Earlier in August, EPA moved to dismantle both the Obama-era clean car rules and the Clean Power Plan in what Obama EPA air chief Janet McCabe described as a "one-two punch for the climate" (Climatewire, Aug. 24).
"It does seem that this Administration has targeted all of the significant health protective rules promulgated by the prior Administration, and is determined to undo them," McCabe told E&E News last week in an email.
EPA's own analysis suggests that replacing Obama's climate standards for cars and power plants with Trump's proposals would increase carbon emissions by as much as 141 million metric tons in 2030 — the equivalent of running around 35 coal-fired power plants for a year.
"Certainly the clean cars rule and the Clean Power Plan were the two most important actions by the Obama administration to reduce greenhouse gases. The MATS rule would have important collateral benefits for reducing greenhouse gases," said Michael Gerrard, director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University. "So together, these are extremely damaging actions, if they actually proceed.
"Delays under Pruitt?
The rapid-fire moves have come since Andrew Wheeler took over for Scott Pruitt as EPA chief in early July. The departure of the ex-EPA leader — who left the agency amid a torrent of scandal allegations — may have affected the timing of EPA's policy rollouts.
"I do think that the Pruitt problems caused some delays," said Myron Ebell of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, who led Trump's EPA transition team. "There were just people who weren't able to spend their time working on substantive stuff."
But Ebell and others say looming litigation and a push to come through on Trump's campaign promises were likely bigger factors than Pruitt's exit.
"I think there has been a dawning recognition since about late winter, early spring that they've been falling behind on some of these things and if they don't pick up the pace they're not going to get them all litigated in the next two years," Ebell said.
John Walke of the Natural Resources Defense Council said Trump's EPA under Pruitt likely would have had "an identical or near-identical schedule" in August.
He attributed the flurry of activity to EPA's air chief, Bill Wehrum, who was nominated to lead the air office by President George W. Bush but wasn't confirmed during that administration. Under Trump, he's made headway on some of his biggest priorities.
"In many ways, I just see this as the eighth or ninth month of Bill Wehrum heading the air office and having had time to develop these concerted attacks on marquee Obama EPA achievements," Walke said. "None of these things just magically sprang from dust in August, they have been worked on for a very long time under orders from Wehrum and Pruitt, presumably."
Jeff Holmstead, an industry attorney at Bracewell who worked with Wehrum in EPA's air office during the Bush administration, said, "The people right around Pruitt were pretty much focused on everything that was going on with him, but the air office was continuing to go about its business."
Hecht of UCLA said it's typical for administrations to release several major initiatives at this point in a presidency with an eye toward defending the proposals in court.
"There are typically regulatory initiatives in progress, and the president doesn't want there to be a disruption if the next president is of the other party," he said.
Litigation is "the whole game from now until the end of this administration's term," Walke said.
"Everything proceeds backward from that fact, and I think it's an even more interesting motivation than your ordinary first-term administration," he added. "The first term of the Bush administration and the Obama administration did not proceed with the same frenzied energy as the Trump administration."
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2018/09/05/stories/1060095817
-
The Energy 202: How Kavanaugh May Get Grilled About His Environmental Record
Sep 5, 2018 | Washington Post
By Dino Grandoni
If the first day of Brett M. Kavanaugh's hearing in the Senate is any indication, Democratic senators are ready to press President Trump's Supreme Court nominee about his views on a number of high-profile cases on things like abortion rights and gun control.
So far, environmental issues have taken a back seat to those topics. But with several days of testimony from Kavanaugh still ahead of him before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Democrats laid the groundwork for grilling the judge about how much power he thinks the executive branch should have when writing rules meant to stop pollution.
Throughout his time on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, Kavanaugh tended to take an industry-friendly approach to interpreting enviromental law. Importantly, Kavanaugh only wants to give the government more authority to regulate businesses when Congress clearly states it wants it to be that way.
With that judicial philosophy, according to Democrat Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, Kavanaugh is exactly the sort of Supreme Court justice that industry wants.
“Lots of big Republican influencers are polluters who like to pollute for free,” Whitehouse told Kavanaugh during the hearing. “Big polluters, clearly, have big expectations for you on their deregulatory effort.”
Whitehouse's office declined to say what the senator will ask Kavanaugh about this week. But in a statement by email, the senator noted that Democrats have not had the chance to review a vast number of documents from the nominee’s time working as a staffer in George W. Bush's White House.
“We may never know which polluters are paying for a multi-million dollar ad campaign to pave the way for his confirmation,” Whitehouse wrote in the email to The Energy 202. “We do know that for heavy-spending polluters, tearing down protections for our environment is a big payback, and all of Kavanaugh’s signaling is that he’s there to help.”
Of course, this is only one point of view from a Democrat opposed to Kavanaugh's nomination.
The judge presented himself during the hearing as an impartial jurist who rules “sometimes for environmentalists and sometimes for coal miners.” And Republicans on the committee defended Kavanaugh by describing him as a judge who simply follows the letter of the law.
“Contrary to the Onion-like smears that we hear outside, Judge Kavanaugh doesn't hate women and children, Judge Kavanaugh doesn't lust after dirty water and stinky air,” said Sen. Ben Sasse (R-Neb.). “No, looking at his record, it seems to me that what he actually dislikes are legislators that are too lazy and too risk-averse to do our actual jobs.”
Since Congress has passed few major environmental laws since the 1970s, presidents have had to use those old statutes to address new challenges such as global warming. That legislative stalemate between Republicans and Democrats has given the courts an increasingly critical role in determining how far those laws reach.
Expect Democrats to highlight the significance of Kavanaugh's pro-business approach when it comes to climate change. Kavanaugh has held that the Environmental Protection Agency does not have the authority under the Clean Air Act to compel companies to curb the emission of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases. That put him at odds with former President Obama's administration, which did interpret the law that way and issued carbon-emissions rules for coal-fired power plants before the Supreme Court halted their enforcement.
Last year, for example, Kavanaugh's court ruled against an Obama-era EPA program compelling manufacturers to phase out a particularly potent type of greenhouse gas called hydrofluorocarbons. “However much we might sympathize or agree with EPA's policy objectives,” Kavanaugh wrote, “EPA may act only within the boundaries of its statutory authority.
Another topic Kavanaugh may be pressed on is his insistence the EPA consider the financial impact of its actions. When dissenting in a 2-1 decision upholding the EPA's decision to block a permit for a coal mine in West Virginia due to potential harm to aquatic life, he wrote the agency "never considered the costs to humans."
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/the-energy-202/2018/09/05/the-energy-202-how-kavanaugh-may-get-grilled-about-his-environmental-record/5b8ed9821b326b3f31919f68/?utm_term=.795a47251c3f
-
Kavanaugh Defends His Environmental Record
Sep 5, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
Environmental issues got aired early during today's Senate hearing on Brett Kavanaugh, President Trump's nominee to the Supreme Court.
Kavanaugh defended his record, noting a number of times he ruled in favor of environmental regulations during his 12 years on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
"In environmental cases, some cases I've ruled against environmentalist interests, and in many cases I've ruled for environmentalist interests," he said.
The answer was teed up by Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah), who opined during today's Senate Judiciary Committee hearing that his Democratic colleagues who are concerned about Kavanaugh's environmental record might be simply frustrated that they haven't been able to get their own policies passed.
Kavanaugh shared a list of cases in which he upheld regulations from EPA and other agencies. His highlights:
· American Trucking Associations v. EPA: a 2010 decision affirming EPA's approval of California emissions limits.
· National Association of Manufacturers v. EPA: the 2014 ruling upholding EPA standards for fine particulate matter under the National Ambient Air Quality Standards.
· Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA: a 2014 decision upholding an EPA rule for emissions from steam generating units.
Kavanaugh also cited the D.C. Circuit's decision to reject as premature Murray Energy Corp.'s challenge to the Clean Power Plan before it was finalized.
Finally, he pointed to his vote in Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA, in which the court rejected an "affirmative defense" for cement makers' accidental emissions of hazardous air pollutants.
"I wrote the opinion saying, 'No, it's not in the law, and yes, that might be a problem for industry, but we follow the law regardless,'" he said.
Environmental advocates aren't convinced. They're concerned about a collection of other decisions in which Kavanaugh has struck down environmental protections and, in their view, applied an overly narrow view of agency authority.
Chevron doctrine
Kavanaugh also spoke to Hatch about his views on judicial deference to agencies, known as the Chevron doctrine, after the landmark 1984 Supreme Court case Chevron USA Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council.
Although not calling to get rid of Chevron deference entirely, the judge has expressed some skepticism about the doctrine, under which courts typically defer to an agency's judgment when a law is ambiguous on an issue.
Kavanaugh said the executive branch too often fails to persuade Congress to pass its policies and then tries to fashion new authority out of old laws by claiming they are ambiguous.
"We don't rewrite those laws," he said. "The executive branch also shouldn't be rewriting those laws."
Kavanaugh said his approach doesn't mean he's skeptical of agency regulations in general.
"I've heard it said that I'm a skeptic of regulation," he told Hatch. "I'm not a skeptic of regulation at all. I'm a skeptic of unauthorized regulation, illegal regulation that is outside the bounds of what the laws passed by the Congress have said."
Environmental groups have urged senators to delve into other legal issues with big implications for environmental law, including EPA's authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions and weigh public health benefits when crafting rules (E&E Daily, Sept. 5).
Judicial independence
Other members of the judiciary panel focused their questions this morning on executive power, reproductive rights and sexual harassment allegations against his former boss, recently retired Judge Alex Kozinski.
Kavanaugh maintained that he knew nothing about the allegations against the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals judge before they were announced and said the news was "a gut punch" that left him disappointed and angry.
Senators on both sides also zeroed in on judicial independence, asking Kavanaugh whether he would feel pressure to be loyal to Trump or any other politician.
"Senator, if confirmed to the Supreme Court and as a sitting judge, I owe my loyalty to the Constitution," Kavanaugh told Hatch. "That's what I owe loyalty to."
The panel's initial round of questions is expected to last well into the night. The senators have a follow-up round tomorrow, and outside witnesses are slated to speak Friday.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/09/05/stories/1060095913
-
How Jerry Brown Can Seal His Legacy as a Climate Champion
Sep 5, 2018 | New York Times
By Justin Gillis
This is a message, and a plea, for Gov. Jerry Brown of California.
Please sign the bill.
This is also a message for his constituents. If you care about moving the world onto a hopeful path on climate change, Governor Brown needs to hear from you. The message he needs to hear is: For the sake of our children’s future and your own legacy as a climate champion, please sign the bill.
The measure, known as Senate Bill 100, passed the California Legislature last week. It commits the state to a 100 percent clean electricity grid by 2045. Rumors are swirling in Sacramento that the governor might veto that bill. His office has not said what he will do, which is ominous.
This bill could well be the most important piece of climate legislation ever passed by any government. Putting the nation’s largest state on a path to a clean electric grid would send an unmistakable signal to the rest of world that the odious Trump administration is not going to stop climate progress in the United States. It would encourage other states and countries to follow California’s lead.
It is true that Hawaii already passed a 100 percent commitment, three years ago, but the California economy is 30 times larger than Hawaii’s. If the electric grid can be cleaned up in California, it can be cleaned up anywhere.
Putting this measure on the books would also indicate that the world’s governments may yet muster the political courage to do what must be done to head off catastrophic climate damage: cut greenhouse emissions to zero by the middle of this century. China has been carefully watching, and sometimes emulating, California climate policy.
Governor Brown has been one of the world’s most important voices on climate action. So why would he conceivably want to veto this bill?
Alas, nothing is ever simple in Sacramento. The author of the bill was Kevin de León, a state senator from Los Angeles who has long butted heads with Governor Brown. Mr. de León is running this fall against Senator Dianne Feinstein, a longtime Brown ally (the two, both Democrats, were the top finishers in a nonpartisan primary in June). Vetoing the bill would have the effect, if not the intent, of denying Mr. de León a big victory on which to run.
The bigger issue, though, is that the governor had his own priorities in the legislative session that just ended. He wanted lawmakers to pass a bill that would have linked California’s electric grid more closely to that of other Western states. That would have made it easier for California to import clean electricity from, say, wind farms in Wyoming, and to export the state’s surplus of solar power.EDITORS’ PICKSThis Is the Way Paul Ryan’s Speakership EndsNational Enquirer Had Decades of Trump Dirt. He Wanted to Buy It All.Every Generation Gets the Beach Villain It Deserves
Senator de León fought to keep the issues separate, and he won. The legislature declined to act on the governor’s requests, though it is expected to revisit the issue next year, after he leaves office.
So it is understandable that the governor is perturbed. I thought he had a good argument about expanding the grid, but some environmental groups feared that bill would open the door to mischief, allowing the fossil-fuel puppets in the Trump administration to force California to take more dirty coal power. This is not a crazy fear, since the federal government has some jurisdiction over interstate power sales.
The sausage-making played out as it did, and now we have what the governor likely sees as an uncooked sausage sitting on his desk. Yet to veto the legislation that passed would be a black mark on his remarkable record of climate leadership.
The bill is clever. It commits California to procuring more renewable energy from wind and solar farms, which will have to supply 60 percent of the state’s power by 2030. But the bill recognizes that other sources of clean energy will likely be needed to drive emissions to zero.
So for the remaining 40 percent, the bill allows any low-emissions source to compete. California will, I hope, set up a robust market in which new types of power plants can win a share, so long as they offer a reasonable price. The potential options include advanced nuclear reactors, geothermal plants tapping the earth’s interior heat, floating offshore wind turbines, and gas-burning power plants that capture and bury their emissions.
In other words, California could well be the place where the electric grid of the future gets invented. Building these new-age power plants will ultimately be a huge global business, and the bill will likely help California win more than its share of the jobs and economic growth.
Arnold Schwarzenegger, the former Republican governor who signed one of California’s most important climate bills, made this point the other day on Twitter.
“We are Californians,” he wrote. “We don’t wait. We build the future economy here.”
Recall that Jerry Brown has been the governor twice. He started pushing for clean energy during his first term back in the 1970s, when most people thought his starry-eyed talk about solar and wind power was crazy. Those and other exploits earned him the sobriquet “Governor Moonbeam.”
Now we know he was not a moonstruck hippie; he was a visionary.
Today, solar panels and wind farms supply 8 percent of America’s electricity and nearly 20 percent of California’s. They are growing rapidly, and the costs have plummeted.
The state simply would not be in a position to make a 100 percent commitment if Governor Brown had not risked scorn to start California down this path so many decades ago, when Mr. de León was still in elementary school.
I write these words with admiration for Senator de León’s work — and with even deeper admiration for everything the governor has accomplished for California. He is not just a brilliant political tactician; he is a former seminary student who wrestles with the moral questions embedded in our messy politics.
This is a time, Governor, to look past the messiness and the rivalries. I hope your ethical compass will tell you there is only one thing to do.
Justin Gillis, a former Times editor and environmental reporter, has been a contributor to the Opinion section since January 2018. He is working on a book about energy policy.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/09/05/opinion/jerry-brown-climate-california.html
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 - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested