Preview Newsletter
PM ACC Clips Report - September 11, 2018
-
U.S, EU Negotiators Meet in Bid to Ease Trans-Atlantic Trade Tensions
Sep 11, 2018 | The Wall Street Journal
By Emre Peker
Top trade officials from the U.S. and the European Union reached no breakthrough Monday in Brussels on laying out a pact that would deliver on their presidents’ earlier agreement to avert a trans-Atlantic economic fight by slashing tariffs and boosting commerce. -
The EPA Isn’t Putting Asbestos Back Into Buildings
Sep 11, 2018 | Law 360
By Andrew Knudsen
This summer, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency sparked public outrage with its proposed “significant new use” rule, or SNUR, addressing certain commercial uses of asbestos. -
(ACC Mentioned) US Shale-Related Chem Industry Investments Hit $200bn - ACC
Sep 11, 2018 | ICIS
By David Haydon
US chemical and plastics industry investment related to shale-based domestic supplies of natural gas and natural gas liquids (NGLs) has surpassed $200bn, the American Chemistry Council (ACC) said on Tuesday. -
(ACC Mentioned) SPF Benefits Support California’s Energy Goals
Sep 11, 2018 | SprayFoam.com
By Stephen Wieroniey
Each year, an estimated 10 percent of California homes are built with Spray Polyurethane Foam (SPF) insulation. -
Alaska Reaches New Deal For Access To Exxon Gas
Sep 11, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By Margaret Kriz Hobson,
The state of Alaska has reached a preliminary agreement to buy Exxon Mobil Alaska's North Slope natural gas and sell it to Asian customers through the state's proposed Alaska liquid natural gas export project. -
Alaska LNG Gains Momentum with ExxonMobil Agreements
Sep 11, 2018 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Carolyn Davis
Alaska officials on Monday clinched an agreement to purchase ExxonMobil Corp.’s share of 30 Tcf of natural gas from the Prudhoe Bay and Point Thomson units, giving more validation to the 2 Bcf/d-plus export project. -
Enterprise Products starts expansion on Houston Ship Channel terminal
Sep 11, 2018 | Chron
By Jordan Blum
Houston's Enterprise Products Partners said it is starting construction on an expansion a Houston Ship Channel export terminal so it can ship out more propane and butane. -
Company To Invest Nearly $300 Million In West Texas Natural Gas Pipelines
Sep 11, 2018 | Chron
By Rye Druzin
An Oklahoma company will invest nearly $300 million to expand its natural gas liquids pipeline system in West Texas' Permian Basin. -
New Tribal Lawsuit Takes Aim At Keystone XL
Sep 11, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
A pair of American Indian tribes has launched a new bid to reverse the Trump administration's approval of the Keystone XL pipeline. -
Want A Carbon Tax? Wait Until Next Year, Top Advocates Say
Sep 11, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Mark Matthews
A top advocate for carbon taxes argued in a report yesterday that a $40 levy on greenhouse gases would lead to a dramatic reduction in U.S. emissions -
Ewire: EPA Proposes To Weaken Oil & Gas Methane Rule
Sep 11, 2018 | Inside EPA
The Trump administration is proposing to weaken EPA's Obama-era methane standards for new oil and gas equipment, launching the latest in a series of rollbacks of Obama-era climate change regulations, as well as the first of multiple steps officials are weighing to ease regulation of the sector. -
EPA Plan: Increased Emissions, 'Adverse' Health Effects
Sep 11, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Niina Heikkinen
EPA today proposed to reduce methane leak monitoring for the oil and gas industry, a move it says would increase greenhouse gas emissions and potentially harm public health. -
EPA Proposes Easing Obama Methane Rule For New Oil And Gas Wells
Sep 11, 2018 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Alex Guillen
EPA issued a new rollback of the Obama administration’s regulation curbing methane emissions today, proposing to reduce how often oil and gas producers must check for leaks of the powerful greenhouse gas from new wells. -
Jerry Brown Is the Face of America’s Climate-Change Resistance
Sep 11, 2018 | Bloomberg
By Emily Chasan and Mark Chediak
U.S. President Donald Trump is the "enemy of the people" for hampering efforts to reverse potentially catastrophic increases in carbon emissions, California Governor Jerry Brown said Monday, blasting White House environmental policy after signing a bill that will move the state toward 100 percent clean energy use by 2045.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News - There are no clips to report at this time.
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
-
U.S, EU Negotiators Meet in Bid to Ease Trans-Atlantic Trade Tensions
Sep 11, 2018 | The Wall Street Journal
By Emre Peker
Robert Lighthizer and Cecilia Malmström launch bid to give form to deal Trump and Juncker proposed
Top trade officials from the U.S. and the European Union reached no breakthrough Monday in Brussels on laying out a pact that would deliver on their presidents’ earlier agreement to avert a trans-Atlantic economic fight by slashing tariffs and boosting commerce.
After their first meeting since President Trump and his EU counterpart, Jean-Claude Juncker, declared that intention in July, U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer and European Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmström said they had a “constructive” and “forward-looking” encounter, but provided no details.
The talks follow public spats between American and European officials over whether Messrs. Trump and Juncker’s proposed deal would cover agriculture, a contentious trade sector that has emerged as an early threat to the talks’ progress.
The latest push for an EU-U.S. trade deal marks the third effort since 2007 to tighten links in the world’s largest bilateral trade and investment partnership. With $1 trillion in annual bilateral goods-and-services trade, the U.S. and the EU have repeatedly tried and failed to cut already-low trans-Atlantic duties of less than 3% on average, align regulations and open new markets for both sides by liberalizing sectors including agriculture and public procurement.
Mr. Trump has repeatedly threatened to impose tariffs on car imports from Europe, but officials have agreed that Washington will hold off on any move toward auto-industry tariffs against the EU while the two economies negotiate toward a trade pact.
“While this refound enthusiasm for strengthening trans-Atlantic economic ties holds promise, both the United States and the European Union have learned from experience that progress is not guaranteed,” said Peter Rashish of the American Institute for Contemporary German Studies, a nonpartisan think tank at Johns Hopkins University.
Mr. Lighthizer and Ms. Malmström said they would meet again at the end of September and start hammering out a deal in the coming months.
“We discussed how to move forward and identify priorities on both sides, and how to achieve concrete results in the short to medium term,” Ms. Malmström tweeted. “Lots of work remains this autumn.”
The two trade officials will complete a framework for cutting tariffs and non-tariff trade barriers in November, the USTR said in a statement Monday.
“Specifically, we hope for an early harvest in the area of technical barriers to trade,” Mr. Lighthizer’s office said.
A USTR spokeswoman declined to comment and an EU spokesman didn’t respond to inquiries about Monday’s meeting.
Underpinning the effort is a July 25 EU-U.S. agreement reached at the White House to work toward “zero tariffs, zero non-tariff barriers, and zero subsidies on non-auto industrial goods.” Messrs. Trump and Juncker said they would also cut barriers to services, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, medical products and soybeans to boost trade.
“This will open markets for farmers and workers, increase investment, and lead to greater prosperity,” the presidents said in a joint statement.
But within days the leaders and their deputies began sparring over the context. Mr. Trump said his administration opened European markets for American farmers and Mr. Lighthizer said agriculture was on the table. The EU rejected the idea, saying it only agreed to boost its soybean purchases—which jumped 280% in July compared with the same month last year as retaliatory Chinese tariffs on U.S. agriculture drove down prices and stoked EU imports.
Three weeks before Monday’s high-level meeting in Brussels, EU and U.S. trade negotiators discussed the scope of a potential deal in Washington. Again, no clarity emerged.
Ms. Malmström subsequently told the European Parliament on Aug. 30 that the EU suggested going further than the Trump-Juncker agreement by also slashing car tariffs to zero. But, she added, there remained “profound disagreements.”
Mr. Trump rejected the offer on autos as “not good enough,” telling Bloomberg News that European consumers still wouldn’t buy American cars.
Even amid the disagreements, EU and U.S. officials have continued dialogue and maintained hope for an arrangement. Mr. Rashish said the engagement could lead to parallel talks on several tracks and enable both sides to notch up victories. That, in turn, would facilitate more free trade while building confidence for politically difficult negotiations in areas such as agriculture and public procurement, he added.
“There’s a lot of things on the board and I’d say the relationship is growing between the U.S. and the EU,” Larry Kudlow, Mr. Trump’s chief economic Adviser said Friday on CNBC. “I really like the goodwill.”
https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-eu-negotiators-meet-in-bid-to-ease-trans-atlantic-trade-tensions-1536608293?mod=searchresults&page=1&pos=7
-
The EPA Isn’t Putting Asbestos Back Into Buildings
Sep 11, 2018 | Law 360
By Andrew Knudsen
This summer, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency sparked public outrage with its proposed “significant new use” rule, or SNUR, addressing certain commercial uses of asbestos. Publications like Rolling Stone, Newsweek and The Daily Beast criticized the EPA for loosening its regulations to pave the way for asbestos to be reintroduced to the market, allowing asbestos-containing construction materials to be used in homes and other buildings again for the first time in decades. National figures like Senator Brian Schatz and Chelsea Clinton drew attention to the proposal, while condemning the agency for increasing public exposure to this well-known carcinogen.
There’s just one issue: The EPA’s proposed action does the opposite of what these critics claim. The SNUR would impose substantial new prohibitions on the listed uses of asbestos — which currently are not regulated by the EPA at all — while giving EPA the necessary legal “hook” to restrict or even ban these uses outright in the unlikely event that a company actually tries to resume them.
How can news reports have gotten it so backward?
The confusion probably stems from the collision of a poorly understood statute and a high-profile chemical. The public generally isn’t familiar with the nuances of the Toxic Substances Control Act, or TSCA, and the processes the EPA must go through to regulate chemical substances under that statute. But people are aware of the health risks of asbestos, which are well-documented and have led to discontinuation of its commercial use in all but a few niche applications, even absent any effective federal restrictions to date.
At the same time, President Donald Trump’s stated views on asbestos are … unorthodox. He suggested at one point that reports of asbestos’s cancer-causing effects are a hoax perpetrated by “the mob,” and one Russian asbestos producer reportedly considers him to be so supportive of their industry that they printed his face on their packaging. In this context, perhaps it’s unsurprising that a proposal with the words “asbestos” and “new use” might be greeted with reflexive skepticism.
To see why the proposed SNUR is a step toward stricter regulation of asbestos, one first has to understand how the TSCA works. The law establishes separate regulatory tracks for “existing” chemicals (i.e., those listed on the EPA’s inventory, which includes asbestos) and “new” chemicals — including new uses of existing chemicals. For existing chemicals, regulation proceeds in two phases under Section 6 of the TSCA.
First, the EPA must perform a risk evaluation to assess whether the chemical’s “manufacture, processing, distribution in commerce, use, or disposal” presents an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment, without regard for cost or other nonrisk factors, under the chemical’s conditions of use. If the EPA determines use under the conditions examined does not present unreasonable risks, no regulation is warranted. But if the EPA finds use under any of those conditions does present an unreasonable risk, it must impose sufficient regulations to eliminate that risk. Under the TSCA’s deadlines, this entire process from commencement of the risk evaluation to adoption of final restrictions may take from five to seven years.
For “new” chemicals, the TSCA proceeds differently. Under Section 5 of the TSCA, no person may manufacture, import or process a new chemical (or an existing chemical for a new use) without first giving notice to the EPA. After receiving the notice, the EPA reviews it to decide whether the new chemical or use presents an unreasonable risk to health or the environment.
If there is such a risk, the EPA must adopt regulations as necessary to prevent it — up to and including a ban on specific uses. Manufacture cannot proceed until the EPA has completed its review, issued a risk determination and promulgated any restrictions necessary to address unreasonable risks. The TSCA generally requires the EPA to complete its review within 90 to 180 days.
So where does the asbestos SNUR fit in this process? Asbestos is considered an “existing” chemical, and the specific conditions of use addressed by the SNUR — as a component of various adhesives, sealants, coatings, floor tiles and other building materials — were fairly widespread in the past, although they have long since been discontinued in the United States. Accordingly, any restrictions on these uses would currently have to come through the TSCA’s section 6 process for existing chemicals.
But in the SNUR, the EPA is proposing to find that these uses have been discontinued for so long that any effort to revive them would constitute a “new” use that must be reviewed under TSCA Section 5 before it may resume. Effectively, then, the SNUR would establish a blanket prohibition on the listed uses of asbestos that applies until the EPA receives a premanufacture notice, and has an opportunity to take more definitive long-term action.
To see why this is meaningful, consider the alternative. Without the SNUR, the listed uses of asbestos would fall under the Section 6 process for existing chemicals. Although the EPA’s risk evaluation for asbestos is already underway, under the TSCA’s deadlines, the agency is not required to issue final regulations addressing any unreasonable risks it finds until the end of 2021 at the earliest. In the interim, manufacturers could resume these uses without facing any federal restrictions under the TSCA.
More importantly, the EPA interprets Section 6 to not require evaluation of risks from “legacy uses” of a chemical (that is, activities that are not ongoing) or disposal of chemicals from those uses. Because the uses of asbestos discussed in the SNUR have been discontinued for years, the EPA’s recent “problem formulation” document for asbestos classifies them as “legacy uses” that will be excluded from the scope of its risk evaluation.
By contrast, the SNUR immediately would make it unlawful to manufacture, import or process asbestos for the listed uses, at least until the EPA has an opportunity to review their risks after receiving a premanufacture notice. Critics may argue that this still leaves a window open for manufacturers to reintroduce asbestos-containing building materials to the market after they give the required notice, but, realistically, that is implausible.
To avoid restrictions or an outright ban, the manufacturer would have to show that its proposed use is unlikely to present an unreasonable risk to health or the environment — yet it was the well-known and substantial health effects of these asbestos-containing materials that drove them out of the market in the first place. If nothing else, the SNUR provides greater protection than continuing to classify these as “existing” uses, which allows manufacturers to resume them at any time without giving notice and receiving clearance from the EPA.
In short, the EPA is not proposing to place asbestos construction materials back on the market, or into homes, schools or hospitals, as some media outlets have claimed. To the contrary, the EPA is taking the necessary first steps to freeze these uses, and set the stage for future restrictions if a manufacturer does attempt to reintroduce them.https://www.law360.com/articles/1080861/the-epa-isn-t-putting-asbestos-back-into-buildings
-
(ACC Mentioned) US Shale-Related Chem Industry Investments Hit $200bn - ACC
Sep 11, 2018 | ICIS
By David Haydon
US chemical and plastics industry investment related to shale-based domestic supplies of natural gas and natural gas liquids (NGLs) has surpassed $200bn, the American Chemistry Council (ACC) said on Tuesday.
A total of 333 chemical projects worth an accumulative $202.4bn have been announced since 2010, the ACC said.
Of those, 53% complete or underway, the ACC said, while 41% of projects are still in the planning phase.
“This is an exciting milestone for American chemistry and further evidence that shale gas is a powerful engine of manufacturing growth,” ACC CEO Cal Dooley said. “The US remains the most attractive place in the world to invest in chemical manufacturing.”
ACC analysis showed that $202.4bn in capital spending could lead to $292.0bn/year in new chemical and plastics industry output.
The output would also translate to 786,000 jobs by 2025 including:
- 79,000 chemical industry jobs
- 352,000 jobs in supplier industries
- 355,000 jobs in communities where workers spend their wages
The ACC noted that the US chemical industry’s competitiveness hinges on its robust supply of NGLs. US crackers rely predominantly on gas-based ethane and other NGLs, while much of the world relies on oil-based naphtha.
Caution should be taken with the data, the ACC said, as US manufacturers often rely on foreign inputs.
“Protectionist trade policies such as tariffs and quotas unnecessarily raise the costs of those inputs, deter innovation and economic growth, and could ultimately weaken our country’s competitive advantage,” the ACC said.
https://www.icis.com/resources/news/2018/09/11/10258678/us-shale-related-chem-industry-investments-hit-200bn-acc/
-
(ACC Mentioned) SPF Benefits Support California’s Energy Goals
Sep 11, 2018 | SprayFoam.com
By Stephen Wieroniey
California's Priority Product ListingEach year, an estimated 10 percent of California homes are built with Spray Polyurethane Foam (SPF) insulation. This results in energy efficiencies that could help eliminate approximately 800,000 metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions annually, the equivalent of removing 2,700 cars from California’s roads each year. Further, taking advantage of SPF could help California achieve the energy-efficiency and climate-change goals mandated by Governor Jerry Brown and California’s landmark climate-change legislation—AB 32. And in a market where electricity costs have been estimated as among the ten highest in the nation, SPF provides important value for consumers and businesses.
Despite SPF’s benefits, California’s Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) announced on May 1 regulations listing SPF Systems with Unreacted Methylene Diphenyl Diisocyanates (MDI) as a Priority Product under the Safer Consumer Products program.
The listing does not restrict or limit the ability to use SPF in California and only address application of the SPF, not the cured foam. Homeowners and builders can and should continue to rely on SPF products. Installed SPF, which is chemically inert, is an effective and proven building material with a 40-year track record of success.Continuing Engagement
While the new regulations were scheduled to go into effect on July 1, 2018, the Spray Foam Coalition of the American Chemistry Council has initiated a process that seeks to have DTSC reconsider the regulations. The SPF industry is committed to California stakeholders and will continue to promote the appropriate use of SPF.
Extensive resources on regulatory compliance, chemical safety, personal protection for installers, and best practices and training for users of all SPF products are readily available in English and Spanish at www.spraypolyurethane.org. •
https://www.sprayfoam.com/foam-news/spf-benefits-support-californias-energy-goals/3358
-
Alaska Reaches New Deal For Access To Exxon Gas
Sep 11, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By Margaret Kriz Hobson,
The state of Alaska has reached a preliminary agreement to buy Exxon Mobil Alaska's North Slope natural gas and sell it to Asian customers through the state's proposed Alaska liquid natural gas export project.
The Alaska Gasline Development Corp. (AGDC), a state-owned company that's managing the Alaska LNG project, had reached a similar deal in May to buy BP Alaska's gas reserves. Meanwhile, the state is continuing negotiations to also acquire ConocoPhillips Alaska Inc.'s North Slope gas.
The three companies own roughly 25 trillion cubic feet of conventional natural gas at the state's North Slope Prudhoe Bay oil fields and another 8 tcf at the Point Thomson facility just west of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
None of the parties have disclosed how much the state would pay for the gas or the terms of the agreements. But in previous presentations, state officials have suggested that AGDC could offer between $1 and $2 per British thermal unit for the gas.
Exxon Mobil Alaska President Darlene Gates said in a statement that the company's agreement to sell its gas to the Alaska LNG project "represents a significant milestone to help advance the state-led gasline project. As the largest holder of discovered gas resources on the North Slope, ExxonMobil has been working for decades to tackle the challenges of bringing Alaska's gas to market."
To commercialize the state's gas, AGDC is proposing to build a $44 billion megaproject made up of a gas treatment plant on the North Slope, an 800-mile pipeline through the heart of the state, and a liquefaction and export facility in Nikiski south of Anchorage.
The Alaska LNG operation was initially advanced through a partnership between the state of Alaska and the three oil companies. But in late 2016, the corporate partners bowed out, leaving the state in charge.
Since then, AGDC has reached tentative agreements with three Chinese companies to provide 75 percent of the funding for the project. The state would repay that loan by providing China with 75 percent of the LNG capacity of the pipeline for the length of the agreement. A decision on whether to move forward with those agreements is due by the end of the year.
Alaska has also secured memorandums of understanding to sell gas to companies in Japan, South Korea, Vietnam and several other interested parties that have asked AGDC not to disclose their names.
AGDC President Keith Meyer noted that the Alaska LNG project "has made meaningful progress over the past year. We have secured the customers, we have advanced the project with regulators, and now we have Exxon Mobil's Gas Sales Precedent Agreement executed."
The Exxon gas sales agreement was signed shortly after the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission announced a new schedule for completing its draft environmental impact statement on the Alaska LNG project.
Under the new timeline, FERC expects to complete the draft assessment by February 2019, a month earlier than regulators had originally planned. The final EIS is now due in November 2019, with the official record of decision expected in February 2020.
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2018/09/11/stories/1060096449
-
Alaska LNG Gains Momentum with ExxonMobil Agreements
Sep 11, 2018 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Carolyn Davis
Alaska officials on Monday clinched an agreement to purchase ExxonMobil Corp.’s share of 30 Tcf of natural gas from the Prudhoe Bay and Point Thomson units, giving more validation to the 2 Bcf/d-plus export project.
Access to full text unavailable – subscription required. For full story: http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/115736-alaska-lng-gains-momentum-with-exxonmobil-agreements
-
Enterprise Products starts expansion on Houston Ship Channel terminal
Sep 11, 2018 | Chron
By Jordan Blum
Houston's Enterprise Products Partners said it is starting construction on an expansion a Houston Ship Channel export terminal so it can ship out more propane and butane.
Enterprise bought 65 acres earlier this year and the expansion is expected to cost less than $50 million. Enterprise said it will be able to load six Very Large Gas Carrier vessels simultaneously once the expansion is completed in the second half of 2019.
The project will allow the Enterprise Hydrocarbon Terminal to load another 175,000 barrels of liquefied petroleum gas - primarily propane and butane - per day, or about 5 million barrels a month. The expansion will bring increase the terminals LPG export capacity to 720,000 barrels daily, or 21 million barrels a month. That growth will allow Enterprise to load Very Large Gas Carriers in less than 24 hours.
Enterprise already serves as the world's largest propane exporter. Enterprise Chief Executive Jim Teague noted that U.S. propane and butane production easily exceeds U.S. demand, prompting the need for greater export volumes.
Natural gas liquids like ethane, propane and butane often are produced out of oil and gas wells, and increasingly more so as the U.S. churns out record volumes of oil and natural gas.
"Without access to international markets, excess LPG (propane and butane) supplies would lead to a curtailment in U.S. crude oil and natural gas production growth," Teague said. "Marine terminal expansions like ours will be essential to balancing the market and meeting growing global demand for U.S. hydrocarbons."
https://www.chron.com/business/energy/article/Enterprise-Products-starts-expansion-on-Houston-13219003.php
-
Company To Invest Nearly $300 Million In West Texas Natural Gas Pipelines
Sep 11, 2018 | Chron
By Rye Druzin
An Oklahoma company will invest nearly $300 million to expand its natural gas liquids pipeline system in West Texas' Permian Basin.
ONEOK of Tulsa announced Monday that it would invest $295 million to expand its West Texas LPG Limited Partnership pipeline system. The expansion would support six natural gas processing plants in the Permian Basin that are expected to have a daily production of 60,000 barrels a day of natural gas liquids, which usually include ethane, propane and butane.
ONEOK plans to build four new pump stations, upgrade two existing pumps and add pipelines that would increase the system's mainline capacity 80,000 barrels a day. The expansion is expected to be completed by the first quarter of 2020.
In July ONEOK took full control of the West Texas LPG Pipeline when it paid $195 million to Martin Midstream Partners LP of Kilgore. The system consists of approximately 2,600 miles of natural gas liquids pipelines throughout Texas and New Mexico, and provides transportation from nearly 40 natural gas processing plants to the Mont Belvieu market in east Texas.
The Permian Basin is the second largest natural gas producing shale field in the U.S. natural gas production has risen 31.3 percent in the last year to over 11.5 billion cubic feet a day.
https://www.chron.com/business/energy/article/Company-to-invest-nearly-300-million-in-West-13220265.php
-
New Tribal Lawsuit Takes Aim At Keystone XL
Sep 11, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
A pair of American Indian tribes has launched a new bid to reverse the Trump administration's approval of the Keystone XL pipeline.
The Rosebud Sioux Tribe and the Fort Belknap Indian Community filed a new lawsuit yesterday challenging the State Department's decision to issue a cross-border permit for the Canada-to-U.S. oil project.
The challenge was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana, the same court fielding litigation from environmental and tribal advocates over the TransCanada Corp. pipeline.
The filing alleges various violations of the Administrative Procedure Act, National Environmental Policy Act and National Historic Preservation Act during the Keystone XL permitting process.
The tribes argue that the Trump administration did not justify its 2017 reversal of an Obama-era decision to reject the project. Further, they say the State Department never adequately consulted with the tribal governments.
The lawsuit comes less than a month after the same federal court ordered State Department officials to conduct an additional round of environmental analysis for the pipeline to account for route changes in Nebraska. That review is ongoing (Energywire, Sept. 6).
"President Trump permitted the Keystone XL pipeline because he wanted to," Native American Rights Fund attorney Natalie Landreth, representing the tribes, said in a statement. "It was a political step, having nothing to do with what the law actually requires. NARF is honored to represent the Rosebud Sioux and Fort Belknap Tribes to fully enforce the laws and fight this illegal pipeline."
The State Department does not comment on active litigation.
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2018/09/11/stories/1060096443
-
Want A Carbon Tax? Wait Until Next Year, Top Advocates Say
Sep 11, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Mark Matthews
A top advocate for carbon taxes argued in a report yesterday that a $40 levy on greenhouse gases would lead to a dramatic reduction in U.S. emissions — so much so that it would exceed the 2025 targets set by the landmark Paris Agreement.
But there's a catch.
In order for the plan to work, Congress would have to pass a carbon tax as soon as next year and put it in place by 2021. Both are extremely tall orders — even for a group like the Climate Leadership Council, which is promoting the carbon tax plan and is supported by corporate heavy hitters such as BP PLC, Exxon Mobil Corp. and General Motors Co.
It's a challenge both advocates and activists said underscores the difficulty in quickly addressing climate change — and one that first could require a realignment of Congress, including a Democratic takeover of the House.
"We just need to have more adults in the room," said Marty Hayden, vice president of policy and legislation at environmental group Earthjustice.
The proposal put forward by the Climate Leadership Council would slap an initial $40-per-ton tax on carbon emissions that would increase steadily over time. In doing so, U.S. industry would have an economic incentive to reduce its carbon footprint.
At the same time — to make a carbon tax more palatable to the public and the corporate world — checks or "carbon dividends" would be sent to U.S. families, and industry would be freed from a slate of existing carbon regulations.
The report, published yesterday by the Climate Leadership Council, estimated that by 2025, this approach would cut U.S. emissions 32 percent below 2005 levels — a pace beyond the U.S. goal of 26 to 28 percent.
"The plan would accomplish this through a series of grand bargains, including trading a robust and rising carbon price for regulatory relief, thereby appealing to environmentalists, businesses and conservatives at the same time," wrote a group of supporters that includes former Federal Reserve Chairwoman Janet Yellen and former Treasury Secretary Lawrence Summers.
One of the biggest hurdles to a grand bargain, however, is the legislative branch.
Just a few months ago, the House passed a resolution sponsored by House Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.) that labeled carbon taxes as "detrimental" to the U.S. economy; just six Republicans joined with the Democratic minority to oppose it.
Meanwhile, a separate carbon tax plan proposed by Rep. Carlos Curbelo (R-Fla.) has barely budged — and is unlikely to go anywhere in the current session of Congress.
It's for this reason that Hayden, of Earthjustice, suggested that a Democratic House majority is likely a prerequisite for near-term attempts to address climate change.
"A Democratic House might give more chance for action on climate, period," he said.
A spokesman for the Climate Leadership Council said the coalition plans next year to release a detailed carbon tax proposal that lawmakers could turn into a federal bill.
"We would certainly hope it would inform future legislation," said Greg Bertelsen, a spokesman for the group.
He said buy-in from both parties is critical to getting a carbon tax through Congress.
"Members who are interested in finding a serious solution understand this will have to be bipartisan," he said. "As with every major piece of legislation, there will have to be some give and take."
One potential sticking point is what Congress would do with the revenue from a carbon tax — a question that has led to a variety of ideas.
The Climate Leadership Council wants to send the money back to taxpayers, but Democrats and other carbon tax supporters have advocated a variety of other uses, from tax cuts to infrastructure spending to job programs.
Alex Flint, executive director of the conservative Alliance for Market Solutions, said his group likes the idea of using it for tax cuts — and that this kind of carrot could be a way to sell the idea to Republicans.
"Carbon tax is emerging as the conservative alternative to cap and trade," he said.
Flint added that Curbelo's introduction of carbon tax legislation this summer signaled a potential turning point among GOP voters and lawmakers.
"We think that's indicative of a change that's happening in the Republican caucus," he said.
Still, support is far from widespread. As of yesterday, only two Republicans had signed onto Curbelo's bill as co-sponsors.
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2018/09/11/stories/1060096477
-
Ewire: EPA Proposes To Weaken Oil & Gas Methane Rule
Sep 11, 2018 | Inside EPA
The Trump administration is proposing to weaken EPA's Obama-era methane standards for new oil and gas equipment, launching the latest in a series of rollbacks of Obama-era climate change regulations, as well as the first of multiple steps officials are weighing to ease regulation of the sector.
The agency released the proposed rule Sept. 11, which seeks to modify the 2016 new source performance standards (NSPS) for the sector, which imposed first-time limits on the potent greenhouse gas methane.
EPA says the proposed changes include “aligning requirements between EPA's rule and existing state programs; modifying the frequency for monitoring leaks (also known as “fugitive emissions”) at well sites and compressor stations; and making it easier for owners and operators to use emerging measurement technologies in their leaks."
But an agency press release notes that it “continues to consider other policy issues in the 2016 rule, including the regulation of greenhouse gases in the oil and gas sector, and will be addressed in a separate proposal at a later date.”
Also, the New York Times reports Sept. 10 that the Interior Department, “in the coming days,” will finalize its February proposal to largely scrap separate methane standards for existing oil and gas drilling equipment on federal land.
Both of the current rules are aimed at finding and fixing leaks.
EPA's proposal is expected to be followed by a more aggressive proposal that reportedly would seek to drop methane limits in favor of a rule that directly targets volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and achieves methane cuts as a co-benefit. Fixing leaks at drilling sites generally captures emissions of both pollutants.
That regulatory distinction is important as a legal matter, because the latter approach would likely foreclose any future standards of the potent greenhouse gas methane for existing equipment in the sector.
That is because Clean Air Act section 111 -- under which the NSPS is developed -- requires the agency to craft existing source rules after it develops new source standards for a particular source category.
However, that section bars development of existing source rules if the agency is regulating one of six criteria pollutants. VOCs are an ozone precursor, while methane is not a criteria pollutant.
That means EPA is prohibited from crafting an existing source standard expressed as a VOC limit, while it would be required to do so if the agency continues to directly regulate methane.
According to the Times, the just-issued proposal would also allow operators to inspect for leaks annually, up from a current requirement of once every six months. Operators of low-producing wells would be able to conduct inspections once every two years.
In addition, operators would get 60 days to fix leaks, up from the current 30 days limit.
Further, the plan would allow firms operating in states with their own methane standards to comply with the state limits in lieu of federal standards. While many states such as Colorado and Wyoming are considered to have leading standards, others such as Texas, are considered “more lax,” according to the report.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/ewire-epa-proposes-weaken-oil-gas-methane-rule
-
EPA Plan: Increased Emissions, 'Adverse' Health Effects
Sep 11, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Niina Heikkinen
EPA today proposed to reduce methane leak monitoring for the oil and gas industry, a move it says would increase greenhouse gas emissions and potentially harm public health.
The agency this morning released its proposed revisions to the Obama administration's New Source Performance Standards for new and modified oil and gas sources (Greenwire, Sept. 11).
Under the proposal, the industry would have to monitor wells on an annual basis, and low-production ones every other year. The Obama-era rule required methane monitoring twice a year.
EPA is also suggesting semiannual and annual monitoring for compressor stations and annual monitoring for compressor stations on the Alaska North Slope. The Obama-era rule required methane monitoring twice a year.
The agency is taking a look at various technical requirements in the Obama rule. EPA is re-evaluating certification requirements for closed vent systems.
It is also studying provisions on alternate emissions limitations, well completions, onshore natural gas processing plants and storage vessels, and is planning some technical corrections.
The proposed amendments are the third in a series of regulatory rollbacks aimed at greenhouse gases, following moves to change the Clean Power Plan and vehicle emissions standards.
The Interior Department is also expected to release its own revisions to methane rules covering the oil and gas industry on public lands.Impacts
EPA said changes in monitoring frequency would provide cost savings. At the same time, it estimated the changes would lead to higher emissions, degraded air quality, and "adverse health and welfare effects."
EPA estimated the foregone climate-related benefits of the rule at between $13.5 million and $54 million between 2019 and 2025.
This calculation is based on a domestic social cost of carbon, which considers a dollar value for the harm caused by climate change.
The metric is different from the one adopted by the Obama administration, which relied on a global social cost of carbon value.
The agency's analysis of the proposal found that monitoring emissions on an annual basis from compressor stations between 2019 and 2025 would increase fugitive methane emissions by 100,000 short tons, volatile organic compounds by 24,000 tons and hazardous air pollutants by 890 tons, compared with monitoring on a semiannual basis.Reactions
Janet McCabe, who was acting head of EPA's air office as the Obama rule was finalized, noted that the oil and gas industry is the third largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in the country, after mobile sources and power plants.
"There is nothing ground-breaking about the technologies or activities called for in the 2016 rule. In this Administration's drive to de-regulate, they are heedless of the cost to the public health and the cost to the future of the planet," McCabe said in an email.
Howard Lerner, executive director of the Environmental Law & Policy Center, slammed EPA for moving to undo "common sense" methane reduction standards.
"The Administration's ideology is trumping common sense methane reduction standards that avoid energy waste and protect the public and our environment from dangerous smog-forming pollution," Lerner said.
During remarks at a climate conference today, California Gov. Jerry Brown (D) said, "That is insane. It borders on criminality."
Industry groups cheered the proposed changes. "We welcome EPA's efforts to get this right and the proposed changes could ensure that the rule is based on best engineering practices and cost-effective," said Howard Feldman, senior director of regulatory and scientific affairs at the American Petroleum Institute, in a statement.
Feldman touted technological advances in hydraulic fracturing that have helped to cut carbon emissions. "U.S. air quality continues to improve as the natural gas and oil industry remains committed to reaching our shared goals of protecting public health and the environment while meeting the nation's energy needs," he added.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/09/11/stories/1060096529
-
EPA Proposes Easing Obama Methane Rule For New Oil And Gas Wells
Sep 11, 2018 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Alex Guillen
EPA issued a new rollback of the Obama administration’s regulation curbing methane emissions today, proposing to reduce how often oil and gas producers must check for leaks of the powerful greenhouse gas from new wells.
EPA also proposed easing a requirement for certain wells to install pneumatic pump technology; allowing oil and gas producers to certify closed vent systems with in-house experts instead of outside professional engineers; and expanding an option for well owners to use emerging technologies as a "alternative means" of curbing methane pollution. The proposal includes some other minor technical changes.
The changes will save the oil and gas industry $484 million in regulatory costs from 2019 through 2025, according to EPA. It identified foregone domestic climate benefits at $54 million and the lost value of the methane at $62 million.
The agency estimated the proposal would lead to an increase of 380,000 tons of methane, equivalent to about 8.5 million metric tons of carbon dioxide. It would also increase volatile organic compound emissions by 100,000 tons and hazardous air pollutants by 3,800 tons, according to the proposal.
EPA said there are further issues it plans to reconsider in a separate, upcoming rulemaking, including the broader issue of how and whether to regulate greenhouse gases from the oil and gas sector.
WHAT’S NEXT: EPA will take public comment on the proposal for 60 days once published in the Federal Register.
https://subscriber.politicopro.com/energy/whiteboard
-
Jerry Brown Is the Face of America’s Climate-Change Resistance
Sep 11, 2018 | Bloomberg
By Emily Chasan and Mark Chediak
U.S. President Donald Trump is the "enemy of the people" for hampering efforts to reverse potentially catastrophic increases in carbon emissions, California Governor Jerry Brown said Monday, blasting White House environmental policy after signing a bill that will move the state toward 100 percent clean energy use by 2045.
"Trump is not just AWOL on climate change, he has designated himself saboteur-in-charge," Brown said in a telephone interview, citing the administration’s actions against California’s emissions standards, electric-car mandates and clean-power rules. "He has designated himself basically enemy of the people. I’m calling him out because climate change is a real threat of death, destruction and ultimate extinction."
Jerry BrownPhotographer: David Paul Morris/Bloomberg
Brown helped organize a Global Climate Action Summit that begins Wednesday in San Francisco. Among dozens of scheduled speakers are local and national government officials from around the world -- though none representing the Trump administration. Another of the co-chairs is Michael Bloomberg, owner of Bloomberg News parent Bloomberg LP.
For Brown, the summit will be a high-profile opportunity to pound his bully pulpit as he prepares to leave his post as governor of the most populous U.S. state in January. Under his leadership, California has become a hotbed of resistance to Trump policies on everything from immigration to public lands. On climate change, which Brown has said poses an “apocalyptic threat,” the governor said: "We’ve got to move forward."
Brown said the goal of the event is to motivate states, cities and companies to do their part in reaching the goals of the Paris climate agreement. Commitments attendees will make at the event will leave people "greener than before they came," he said.
For California, it will be part of a journey toward ambitious emission reductions, Brown said, saying that once the state reaches zero emissions in 2045, it will have to aim for "negative emissions" and "widespread carbon sequestration.”
"The fact that it may take 100 or 150 years doesn’t detract from the fact that carbon is building up," Brown said. "Over 90 percent of scientists are telling us that."
Three days ago, when Brown signed bills to block new offshore-oil drilling that could thwart a federal plan to open vast areas off the coast to exploration, he issued a statement typical of his draw-the-line approach: “California’s message to the Trump administration is simple: Not here, not now.” A White House spokesman declined to comment on Brown’s remarks Monday.
While Brown will surely leave a climate-change fighting legacy, he has been criticized for what critics view as an uneven record. They complain that he failed to push for bans on fracking and on the permitting of new oil and gas wells in the state. Activists are planning protests during the summit.
“This is a place where he could be on the absolute cutting edge in the next climate fight,” said Bill McKibben, an author and co-founder of the anti-carbon group 350.org. “He has been completely unwilling.”
Brown said he doesn’t think gasoline can be cut out immediately but requires an "ambitious" phase-out plan the state already has in place. California needs to focus on affordability, sustainability and feasibility in meeting its climate change goals, the governor said, warning that rash action could slow down the fight.
"If we try to just move the bus without worrying about the consequences or the sticker shock, there will be a backlash and we will lose ground instead making up the ground that we have to to get to the goal," Brown said.California Debate
There’s also debate about the impact of what California is doing as the U.S. government moves in the opposite direction. Given that it puts out less than 1 percent of the world’s carbon emissions, even radical change in a $2.7 trillion economy -- the state is the world’s fifth largest, behind Germany -- won’t “fundamentally move the needle,” said Severin Borenstein, a professor at the Haas School of Business at the University of California at Berkeley.
Still, he said, California and Brown serve as crucial role models for the possible. The state’s tailpipe-emissions limitations are among the strictest in the world, and its carbon cap-and-trade program among the most ambitious. Economic growth hasn’t suffered while the state has cut emissions. Under Brown, California set the extraordinarily ambitious goal of slashing greenhouse-gas emissions by 40 percent from 1990 levels in just the next 12 years and became the first state to require solar panels on new homes.
The Brown mission on the environment began when he was a two-term governor the first time, from 1975 to 1983. In his more recent two terms, he has aggressively built on the work of his predecessor, Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger, who in 2006 signed landmark legislation to reduce carbon dioxide emissions from an array of sources in the state. Schwarzenegger is filming the latest Terminator movie in Hungary, but will send a video to the summit, a conference spokesman said.
Lieutenant Governor Gavin Newsom, a Democrat and former San Francisco mayor who has said he is in line with Brown on climate-change theories and approaches, is leading in polls to succeed the governor in the November election. In a survey conducted by the Public Policy Institute of California in July, 57 percent of likely voters said global warming poses a very serious threat.
Many in the state have already experienced it. The strength and scope of wildfires in California this year broke horrific records set in 2017, and scientists have concluded that was largely due to rising temperatures. The future looks bleak in many ways; two-thirds of California beaches may be washed away by the end of the century, according to the latest state Climate Change Assessment Report.
At this point, California alone “can’t solve the problem, but it can definitely help with breaking the path forward,” McKibben said. “You need people out in front breaking trail.”
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-09-11/jerry-brown-challenges-trump-with-demand-for-100-clean-energy
Industry and Association News
LCSA News - There are no clips to report at this time.
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