PM ACC Clips Report - September 13, 2018

Industry and Association News

1. (ACC Blog) Chemical Industry Keeps A Weather Eye On Hurricane Preparedness

   Sep 12, 2018 | American Chemistry Matters

   As another summer comes to an end, hurricane season in the Atlantic is just reaching its peak with several active storms churning out in the ocean, including Florence.
2. (ACC Mentioned) Most Economists See Tariff Effects on U.S. Economy as Limited

   Sep 13, 2018 | The Wall Street Journal

   By Harriet Torry
   
   
   Tariffs have yet to meaningfully affect the U.S. economy because of the relatively small amounts imposed so far, but trade tensions remain the biggest risk to the economic outlook, according to forecasters surveyed by The Wall Street Journal.
3. (ACC Mentioned) These Are 3 Little-Known Metrics That May Tell Us if a Recession Is Coming

   Sep 13, 2018 | Entrepreneur

   By Gene Marks
   
   
4. (ACC Mentioned) Prices for LDPE, LLDPE, some HDPE Grades Drop 3 Cents in August

   Sep 13, 2018 | Plastics News

   By Frank Esposito
   
   
   A chaotic month of North American resin pricing ended with 3-cent per-pound reductions for all grades of low and linear low density polyethylene and for flexible and film grades of high density PE.

LCSA News - There are no clips to report at this time.

Chemical Management News

5. White House Reviews EPA Plans For Nonstick Compounds

   Sep 13, 2018 | E&E Greenwire

   By Ariel Wittenberg
   
   
   The White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs is reviewing draft cleanup recommendations for a toxic class of nonstick chemicals.
6. Human Study Suggests BPA Could Trigger Insulin Resistance

   Sep 13, 2018 | Chemical Watch

   By Dr Emma Davies
   
   
   A small US study of humans appears to reinforce animal results that suggest bisphenol A (BPA) may affect the body's insulin response to glucose, paving a possible route to type II diabetes.
7. REACH Registrants Mostly Not Contesting Eogrts As Standard Requirement

   Sep 13, 2018 | Chemical Watch

   By Andrew Turley
   
   
   Official documents show that REACH registrants are for the most part not appealing Echa dossier evaluation Decisions requiring extended, one-generation, reproductive toxicity study data.
8. Pigment Companies Should Share 'Sensitive' Nano Data, Says EUON Report

   Sep 13, 2018 | Chemical Watch

   By Dr Emma Davies
   
   
   Companies should share 'sensitive' data on how they produce and use nano-sized pigments to help build exposure scenarios for risk assessments, according to a report commissioned by the EU Observatory for Nanomaterials (EUON).
9. EU Trade Groups Join Call To Ditch Proposed DecaBDE Threshold

   Sep 13, 2018 | Chemical Watch

   By Leigh Stringer
   
   
   A group of trade associations has called for a European Parliament proposal to set a concentration limit for the flame retardant decaBDE to be revised and aligned with REACH.
10. UK Teaching Union Calls For Action On Asbestos Mats

    Sep 13, 2018 | Chemical Watch

    By Clelia Oziel
    
    
    Britain's biggest teaching union is to call on headteachers to take immediate steps to remove all current supplies of gauze mats routinely used with Bunsen burners in school science laboratories – until it can be established for certain that they do not contain asbestos
11. UK Audit Office: 'Serious Damage' Possible To Chemicals From No-deal Brexit

    Sep 13, 2018 | Chemical Watch

    By Clelia Oziel
    
    
    Britain's chemical sector could be "seriously damaged" under a no-deal Brexit scenario and the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (Defra) is ill equipped to address all of the risks on its own, the UK's National Audit Office has said.

Energy News

12. (ACC Mentioned) US Shale-Linked Chemical Spending Hits $200B: 5 Stocks to Buy

    Sep 13, 2018 | Zacks

    By Anindya Barman
    
    
    U.S. chemical capital spending linked to shale gas have crossed the $200-billion mark, according to the American Chemistry Council (“ACC”), marking a significant milestone for the U.S. chemical industry. Economics of shale gas is driving strong capital investment in new chemical projects.
13. Efficiency: The Low-Profile Core of a Smart Energy Policy

    Sep 13, 2018 | Environmental Working Group

    By Grant Smith, Senior Energy Policy Advisor
    
    
    Solar panels and wind turbines get the headlines, but efficiency – designing appliances, electronics, cars and buildings to use less energy – is also an important part of the story of the clean energy revolution.
14. U.S. 'Likely' Has Taken Over As The World's Top Producer

    Sep 13, 2018 | AP (In E&E Greenwire)

    By David Koenig
    
    
    The United States may have reclaimed the title of the world's biggest oil producer sooner than expected.

Chemical Security News

15. DOE: Perry Pressed Russian Energy Official On Grid Cyberattacks

    Sep 13, 2018 | PoliticoPro Whiteboard

    By Darius Dixon
    
    
    Energy Secretary Rick Perry signaled his "disappointment" in Russian attempts to undermine the U.S. electric grid in a meeting today with his Kremlin counterpart in Moscow, according to DOE.
16. Chemical Plants In The Carolinas Gird For Hurricane Florence’s Fury

    Sep 13, 2018 | Chemical & Engineering News

    By Rick Mullin
    
    
    As Hurricane Florence barrels down on the coasts of North and South Carolina, chemical companies that C&EN reached as of Sept. 12 say they are executing well-established plans for severe weather for their facilities in those states.

Transportation and Infrastructure News

17. Untangling The Train Wrecks: Congress Holds Yet Another Hearing On Its Mandate To End What’s Causing Most Of Them

    Sep 13, 2018 | The Washington Post

    By Ashley Halsey
    
    
    Robert S. Sumwalt, chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board, has been there before and on Thursday he virtually begged a congressional subcommittee to end the habit of holding hearings without more meaningful results.
18. Amtrak May Put Passengers on Buses in Fight Over Safety Upgrade

    Sep 13, 2018 | Bloomberg

    By Alan Levin
    
    
    As railroads across the nation race to complete a congressional deadline for installing safety technology, Amtrak is threatening to substitute buses for trains on lines that lack the equipment, triggering a furious response from the mostly rural areas.

Environment News

19. 'We Are Still In.' Advocates Press On Despite Trump

    Sep 13, 2018 | E&E Climatewire

    By Debra Kahn
    
    
    State and local governments and businesses are shouting from the rooftops that America is still committed to climate action.
20. The Glaring Loophole In Our Climate Policies

    Sep 13, 2018 | The Washington Post

    By By Ali Hasanbeigi and Daniel Moran
    
    
    The 1990s were a crucial decade in the history of climate policy. Following the launch of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in 1992, negotiators from over 50 countries successfully shepherded the Kyoto Protocol to fruition in 1997 — thus formally inaugurating the modern era of international climate policy, with its focus on national contributions toward global emissions reduction targets.
21. EPA Staff Co-wrote Study Linking Emissions To Death

    Sep 13, 2018 | E&E Climatewire

    By Scott Waldman
    
    
    As EPA rolls back emissions regulations, its own researchers are part of a major study that has found that global air pollution kills far more people than has previously been revealed.
22. States Press EPA To Extend ACE Rule Comment Deadline

    Sep 13, 2018 | Inside EPA

    Nearly two dozen state attorneys general (AGs) are pressing EPA to extend by 60 days the comment deadline on its proposed replacement for the Obama-era Clean Power Plan, the latest request for the agency to give the public more time to weigh in on major deregulatory efforts.
23. Starbucks To Build 10,000 'Greener' Stores By 2025

    Sep 13, 2018 | CNBC

    By Kate Rogers
    
    
    Starbucks announced Thursday it is deepening its commitment to sustainability with a plan to build 10,000 "greener stores" around the globe by 2025, a move that will encompass new stores and renovations.

Industry and Association News

1. (ACC Blog) Chemical Industry Keeps A Weather Eye On Hurricane Preparedness

   Sep 12, 2018 | American Chemistry Matters

   As another summer comes to an end, hurricane season in the Atlantic is just reaching its peak with several active storms churning out in the ocean, including Florence. Each season brings an uncomfortable amount of uncertainty as we try to predict the path and severity of each developing storm.

   Take Hurricane Harvey for example. It served as an important reminder of what’s at stake and how each storm can bring its own set of unique challenges for everyone in its path. Unlike other hurricanes to hit the United States before it, Harvey dropped an unprecedented 33 trillion gallons of water, 15 trillion of which flooded the Houston, Texas area alone. By all measures it was a historic storm of epic proportions that overwhelmed many in its path displacing more than 30,000 people and causing an estimated $125 billion in damage.

   Of course, Harvey was not the first major storm to hit the United States nor will be it the last, which is why planning for the next one is a year-round effort for the chemical industry, especially for facilities along the Gulf Coast. A large share of the chemical production in the United States is located in Texas and Louisiana because of access to many transportation options and to raw materials such as petroleum and natural gas, which are used to make basic chemicals that are needed to manufacture everyday items throughout the country.

   Since storms present a real risk to these vital operations, facility operators stress the importance of planning early and not waiting until the next hurricane season rolls around to take action. Planning for extreme weather events typically involves focusing on three phases: preparation, response, and recovery.

   Preparation

   Once a storm hits a manufacturing facility, its response options can be severely limited, therefore much of the outcome is dependent on what a facility has done upfront to minimize the impact of a storm.

   Preparedness starts as early as when a company begins construction of a facility. Many years of experience have taught companies that flooding presents a real risk to the operation of a facility and the safety of employees, which is why an important part of planning a new facility – and the government permitting process – includes consideration of floodplain data.

   Extreme weather events also have a major influence in how facilities are designed. There are three elements of a hurricane that can damage a facility: high winds, storm surge, and excessive rain. The severity of hurricanes is usually based on the first two elements, but Hurricane Harvey provided a strong reminder not to underestimate the damaging effects from extreme rainfall.

   Designing a facility to withstand a storm involves erecting physical barriers to keep the water and wind at bay — everything from door and window seals to storm berms, which are used to both protect storage tanks and contain spills. Companies also elevate critical infrastructure, like the control room and backup generators, so it’s more difficult for the flood waters to reach.

   In addition to planning early, facilities also understand the importance of building relationships before they are needed. Dealing with a hurricane extends well beyond the fence line of a facility and requires close coordination with local emergency responders. Everyone needs to be on the same page well before a storm hits, which is why companies work closely with their local emergency planning committees, or LEPCs, to establish points of contact and contingency plans well ahead of time.

   None of this planning and preparation is treated as a one-time thing. Chemical companies review and revise these plans on a regular basis to incorporate lessons learned from previous storms and any new site-specific information or safety practices.

   Response

   As a storm approaches, chemical companies need reliable minute-by-minute projections for when the storm will impact the facility, projections that require more than your standard Weather Channel forecasts. Companies subscribe to specialized weather forecasting services to ensure that they have the most accurate and up to date projections on the severity and path of incoming storms to activate their emergency plans.

   The early stages of those plans include testing backup generators, taking stock of emergency supplies and securing loose or vulnerable materials and equipment. As conditions worsen operators begin to evacuate non-essential personnel and ensure they are able to track employees and to obtain outside assistance if needed.

   One of the most vital decisions a company makes during a storm is whether to shut down a facility or keep it in operation. While an outside observer might think it’s always prudent to cease operations, it’s the shutting down and starting up of a facility that presents the greatest risk, so in many cases, it’s better from an environmental and safety standpoint to maintain operations during a storm.

   Ride-out crews are often kept at a safe, predetermined location to monitor the facility and report or address any incidents that result from the impact of the storm. The crews consist of employees who are well trained to deal with emergency situations and make on the spot decisions to keep everyone safe.

   Recovery

   Eventually the storm passes, and the focus shifts from weathering the storm to getting people back on their feet and bringing operations back online.

   Assisting employees is the first order of business following a storm. This includes everything from making sure employees and their families have a safe place to stay and the ability to travel to work. In some cases, this involves renting out large blocks of hotel rooms or purchasing trailers and other temporary housing.

   The full extent of damage from a storm might not be immediately obvious so restoring operations is done with extreme care. It begins with bringing in an inspection crew to conduct a thorough assessment of the site’s condition before allowing other employees to come back to work.

   Recovery also extends well beyond the fence line of a facility, to neighbors and into surrounding communities. Companies donate money, supplies, and even labor to help others who were displaced by the hurricane. The most recent example of this effort was in the wake of Hurricane Harvey when companies donated equipment and money to help communities in the Houston area, and thousands of chemical industry employees aided in refurbishing homes and rescued those stranded by the flood waters.

   Looking Ahead

   Every storm leaves us with lessons that can be used to get ready for the next storm, which unfortunately is definitely coming. Harvey taught us many new things: to prepare for longer duration events that can last for days not just hours, to build stronger and more comprehensive support networks for obtaining and sharing information, and that we need to double our efforts as a nation to rebuild our critical infrastructure to help better weather these extreme storms.

   Extreme weather events can certainly be unpredictable but a well-orchestrated plan can help tackle unwanted surprises.  As we can see from the predictions for increased and more extreme storms in the future, the next test for our industry is just be around the corner.

   You can learn more about hurricane safety and the chemical industry here.

   https://blog.americanchemistry.com/2018/09/chemical-industry-keeps-a-weather-eye-on-hurricane-preparedness/
   

   Return to headline | Return to top

2. (ACC Mentioned) Most Economists See Tariff Effects on U.S. Economy as Limited

   Sep 13, 2018 | The Wall Street Journal

   By Harriet Torry

   Tariffs have yet to meaningfully affect the U.S. economy because of the relatively small amounts imposed so far, but trade tensions remain the biggest risk to the economic outlook, according to forecasters surveyed by The Wall Street Journal.

   More than three quarters of economists surveyed between Friday and Tuesday, 78.4%, said the reason why tariffs on U.S. imports and exports so far don’t seem to be having much of an effect on the strength of the U.S. economy was because the amount hasn’t been significant....RELATED VIDEO

   Return to headline | Return to top

3. (ACC Mentioned) These Are 3 Little-Known Metrics That May Tell Us if a Recession Is Coming

   Sep 13, 2018 | Entrepreneur

   By Gene Marks

   Is a recession coming? Absolutely, positively yes. When? Who the heck knows?

   Even with the economy as strong as it is, some economists warn that it could be sometime in the next year. Others are not so pessimistic. The media reports that unemployment is low and that Gross Domestic Product is on the rise. But then "They" say that housing starts have stalled and that wages are stagnant. But then "they" say that small and consumer confidence is at an historical high. Is all this conflicting data really helpful?

   I've learned, as a result of the Great Recession of 2009, to keep an eye on three little known metrics that helped me to gauge whether or not an economic slowdown is coming. Of course, they're not completely foolproof. But they each have a reliable history of predicting downturns.

   Related: The Recession Is Coming: How to Set Up Your Company for SurvivalThe Baltic Dry Index

   No, this not a measurement of the price of spices in the Baltic. It's a freight index. It measures the cost of freight for products being shipped across the Baltic Sea, which is one of the world's busiest shipping lanes. The idea is that when global shipping begins to decline there is less of a demand for freight and therefore the price of transportation falls. This decline often precedes an actual turndown in the global economy, so a trend downward may give you a strong indication that slower times are coming. The good news is, as of today, the index has been holding steady around the same level as four years ago and is even trending up a little. But keep an eye out -- a decline over a few months period of time means that demand is weakening.SM Report on Business

   According to its website, the Institute for Supply Management is “the first and largest not-for-profit professional supply management organization worldwide” and has more than 50,000 members located in 100 countries. It's basically an organization of people in the supply management chain. You know: purchasing managers. You know: the guy from the big company who beats you up on pricing and delivery and drives you crazy with his demands because that's what he does all day, every day, every week of the year. So who better to ask about the state of the economy?

   Every month the ISM polls their membership about their current and future orders, production, inventory, employees, purchasing plans and business conditions to come up with their Report on Business for both manufacturers and non-manufacturers. You won't find these results mentioned on the evening news, but you'll notice economists talking about this data. More good news: last month's manufacturing index grew for the 112th straight month. A slowdown should raise your antenna.Chemical Activity Barometer

   Let's face it -- one of the facts about modern society is that all of the products that we use (and eat) contain some form of chemicals. Ugh.

   But they’re not all that bad, and it's natural to contend that the more chemicals that are being produced and purchased, the more products are being sold. Of course, the opposite is true, too. The American Chemistry Council, an industry group for the chemical industry, likes to track that in their monthly Chemical Activity Barometer. This leading metric is a composite index that takes into account different sectors from chlorine to plastic resins and measures sales, prices, production, hours worked, orders and even building permits. The result is a two-to-14 month leading indicator that gives a pretty good idea where the economy is heading. Last month's index was flat, which may be a concern. The next barometer will be released on September 25th.

   Yes, I'm leaving out a bunch of other interesting metrics. But these are the ones I personally use and c’mon…let’s not get too complicated here. The important thing to remember is that you, as a business leader, must decide on a few good macro-metrics to make sure you're getting some idea of the future so that you can navigate your business through any upcoming downturn. That's your job and mine. Too many people -- our customers, suppliers, partners, employees...and their families -- are relying on us to be doing this. So please, have a few good metrics. People’s livelihood may depend on it.

   https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/319998
   

   Return to headline | Return to top

4. (ACC Mentioned) Prices for LDPE, LLDPE, some HDPE Grades Drop 3 Cents in August

   Sep 13, 2018 | Plastics News

   By Frank Esposito

   A chaotic month of North American resin pricing ended with 3-cent per-pound reductions for all grades of low and linear low density polyethylene and for flexible and film grades of high density PE.

   The drops ended a stretch in which prices for all grades of HDPE and LDPE had been flat for four consecutive months. LLDPE prices had been flat for two straight months after sliding 3 cents in May.

   Market analyst Mike Burns said that the August drops were supplier driven.

   "July had one of the highest PE production months of all time," added Burns, who is with Resin Technology Inc. in Fort Worth, Texas. "Demand is good for all [PE] resins, but supply is outpacing demand."

   "All of the Hurricane Harvey hiccups [from 2017] have been resolved and new capacity is beginning to show. Exports were very high in July and inventories grew, which is not a good thing for producers."

   Other market sources said that U.S. PE exports were down in August, especially for material being shipped from the Houston Ship Channel. Massive PE capacity expansions are hitting the market as a result of abundant North American supplies of shale gas feedstock.

   In 2017, more than 7 billion pounds of PE capacity was added in North America through projects from DowDuPont, ExxonMobil, Chevon Phillips and Ineos Sasol. Around 3 billion more pounds from DowDuPont, Sasol and Formosa Plastics is set to be added by the end of 2018. For 2019, another 2 billion pounds is expected from Sasol and LyondellBasell.

   Although domestic market demand growth has been solid, a good portion of this capacity had been earmarked for foreign markets. That situation became complicated in August when China retaliated against U.S. tariffs on a wide range of Chinese products by placing tariffs on many U.S.-made grades of PE.Tariffs shake shipping industry

   Chinese tariffs of 25 percent on U.S. HDPE and of a staggering 93 percent on U.S. LLDPE went into effect on Aug. 23, according to consulting form MTS Logistics of New York. These tariffs "have shook the shipping industry," MTS executive M. Can Fidan wrote in a Sept. 10 blog post on the firm's website.

   Despite higher PE volumes being exported at the beginning of 2018, the ongoing trade war between the U.S. and China has started reducing demand for U.S. PE exports, he added. U.S. tariffs of 25 percent on more than $16.5 billion worth of plastics goods imported into the U.S. from China also will negatively affect demand for U.S. PE in China, Can wrote.

   "Unfortunately for the U.S., alternative [PE] markets are mostly much smaller than China," he added. "Those markets also don't have as many sophisticated buyers as China, so U.S.-grade product may not be a good fit for them."

   According to Can, if U.S. producers don't reduce PE prices — and the U.S.-China trade war continues — the Asian market "may further slow down without China's huge capacity fueling demand."

   As much as 20 billion pounds of new U.S. PE capacity could be affected by the tariffs, according to a recent report from market data firm S&P Global Inc. of New York. HDPE and LLDPE account for almost 80 percent of all new U.S. PE capacity, the report said.

   The first wave of Chinese tariffs, put in place earlier this year, targeted only LDPE, which makes up a smaller amount of the new capacity.

   The report added that "at least some U.S. [PE] producers are likely to feel the pinch, after building plants that saw Asia's largest countries as their main export targets."

   Another recent report from market data firm ICIS of London said that the introduction of trade tariffs by China and the U.S. "is the first step in a trade war that could turn into a global [PE] price war as the wave of new U.S. production is sent to new markets, likely Europe."China 'impossible to ignore'

   Market analyst Phil Karig said that "it's impossible to ignore the importance of China to the North American PE market."

   "In the short-term, the tariff quarrel is going to cause China to source PE in other parts of the world such as the Mideast," said Karig, who's managing director of Mathelin Bay Associates LLC in St. Louis. "What China doesn't buy from North America is going to have to go somewhere, but there are not a lot of other market choices for resin producers."

   Europe is already a strong market for Mideast PE, either shipped directly or from Mideastern producer owned plants in Europe, he explained. South and Central America are and will continue to be important PE export markets, Karig added, but there's only so much they can consume and they'll never replace the bulk of lost Chinese demand.

   Longer-term, according to Karig, if the tariff spat becomes a continuing and full-fledged tariff war, questions will start to arise about the continued expansion of North American capacity. "Unfortunately for those resin producers well along the way to starting up plants in the next few years, stopping construction midstream is much like trying to stop an ocean liner on a dime," he said.

   Paul Bjacek, chemicals research Lead for consulting firm Accenture Research in Houston, said that PE "is a commodity that flows globally, with price direction set by the global balance, so any time new capacity comes online, there will be trade flow adjustments with short-term price impacts."

   "Trading global commodities is like Chinese checkers," he added. "If one avenue is blocked, another is open."

   For instance, Bjacek explained that Europe is a large PE importer largely being served by the Middle East, importing 1.8 billion pounds of HDPE from there in 2017. So, he added, in that example, U.S. product may be diverted to Europe and the Middle East then could divert product to China.

   Major U.S. plastics and chemicals trade groups have been critical of the trade war.

   "These tariffs will close off China's market to U.S. exports just when our industry was ready to supply China's large and growing demand for chemicals," Ed Brzytwa, ACC's director of international trade, said Aug. 20 at a U.S. Congressional hearing. "Trade flows between the U.S. and China will contract as tariffs are imposed on each side."

   In July, Plastics Industry Association CEO Bill Carteaux said that tariffs would raise prices in the U.S. manufacturing supply chain and be a "net negative" for U.S. industry.

   "Small- and medium-sized companies in the plastics industry will be subjected to a profit squeeze due to higher costs of inputs of production," he said, noting that plastics companies supply a broad range of end-markets such as medical, automotive, building and construction, electronics, consumer products and packaging.

   "We urge [the U.S. Trade Representative] to pursue other strategies that would instead lead to greater market access of plastics materials and products in China," Carteaux added.

   Backed by new production capacity, export sales of PE had fueled U.S./Canadian PE growth in the first seven months of 2018, according to the American Chemistry Council. Exports of LLDPE in particular had exploded, growing 80 percent vs. the same period in 2017.

   LLDPE exports, combined with domestic demand growth of 4 percent, lifted total regional LLDPE market growth to almost 21 percent for the period.

   HDPE exports from the region were up an impressive 25 percent for the seven months. Those levels and 7 percent domestic growth created seven-month HDPE growth of more than 10 percent. Growth in LDPE exports was far more modest at almost 2.5 percent. That combined with domestic sales growth of just over 1 percent produced seven-month LDPE growth of 1.5 percent.

   Exports accounted for almost 33 percent of U.S./Canadian LLDPE sales for the first seven months of the year, up from about 22 percent in the same period in 2017. HDPE's export market share grew from 18 percent to almost 21 percent in the same comparison, while LDPE's export market share remained steady at around 26 percent.

   http://www.plasticsnews.com/article/20180913/NEWS/180919947/prices-for-ldpe-lldpe-some-hdpe-grades-drop-3-cents-in-august
   

   Return to headline | Return to top

LCSA News - There are no clips to report at this time.

Chemical Management News

5. White House Reviews EPA Plans For Nonstick Compounds

   Sep 13, 2018 | E&E Greenwire

   By Ariel Wittenberg

   The White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs is reviewing draft cleanup recommendations for a toxic class of nonstick chemicals.

   The draft interim recommendations, which went to OIRA in August, are expected to help guide the remediation of several Superfund sites and other areas contaminated by per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS.

   "This is the third step of the four-step action plan announced in May," EPA spokeswoman Molly Block said.

   Former EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt announced the plan at a May summit regarding the chemicals, which was marred by EPA's initially turning journalists away at the door (Greenwire, May 22).

   At the meeting, EPA also committed to begin the process of declaring perfluorooctanoic and perfluorooctanesulfonic acids as hazardous substances, which would allow the agency to hold companies liable for polluting lands and waters with them.

   The agency is also currently considering whether to set a maximum contaminant level for the chemicals and develop toxicity values for two other types of PFAS, GenX and perfluorobutanesulfonic acid.

   https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/09/13/stories/1060096935
   

   Return to headline | Return to top

6. Human Study Suggests BPA Could Trigger Insulin Resistance

   Sep 13, 2018 | Chemical Watch

   By Dr Emma Davies

   A small US study of humans appears to reinforce animal results that suggest bisphenol A (BPA) may affect the body's insulin response to glucose, paving a possible route to type II diabetes.

   Although epidemiological studies have suggested a correlation between BPA exposure and insulin resistance/type II diabetes, the effects have not been studied in a controlled way in humans.

   An 'exploratory' study, led by Frederick vom Saal from the University of Missouri-Columbia, exposed healthy men and women to a single BPA dose at the reference or 'safe' level defined by the US EPA (50 micrograms BPA per kg body weight per day).

   The test subjects avoided canned food and drink and minimised handling of cash till receipts for 48 hours before tests to reduce background BPA levels. On two separate testing days, they downed a drink containing ethanol and tonic water, one of which was laced with BPA.

   After giving the participants a glucose tolerance test drink, the research team monitored blood samples for insulin and proteins. They also measured levels of glycated haemoglobin or HbA1c, which is created when glucose sticks to red blood cells. Medics use high levels as an indicator of high blood sugar levels and a risk of developing type II diabetes.

   The researchers found a positive correlation between glycated haemoglobin levels and changes in the so-called insulinogenic index, which indicates insulin response, for BPA compared with controls. They suggest that BPA exposure at the selected dose may alter glucose-stimulated insulin response in humans.

   They are clear that the results do not show that the effects of BPA are related to metabolic disease. Instead, the study is an "initial step" towards investigating whether exposure to oestrogen-like chemicals, including other bisphenols, could contribute to insulin resistance by triggering an innate insulin-resistance mechanism.

   "From a regulatory perspective, identifying any physiological response in humans to BPA at the presumed 'safe' daily BPA dose would indicate that key assumptions in the regulatory process are incorrect," the researchers write in the Journal of the Endocrine Society.

   In its BPA risk assessment published in 2015, the European Food Safety Authority's Panel on food contact materials, enzymes, flavourings and processing aids (CEF) reduced the tolerable daily intake (TDI) for BPA to a temporary level of 4 micrograms/kg body weight/day. Efsa is stil collecting information for re-evauation of BPA and its TDI.

   https://chemicalwatch.com/70272/human-study-suggests-bpa-could-trigger-insulin-resistance
   

   Return to headline | Return to top

7. REACH Registrants Mostly Not Contesting Eogrts As Standard Requirement

   Sep 13, 2018 | Chemical Watch

   By Andrew Turley

   Official documents show that REACH registrants are for the most part not appealing Echa dossier evaluation Decisions requiring extended, one-generation, reproductive toxicity study data.

   Industry developed the Eogrts in the 2000s as a replacement for the two-generation study and the OECD adopted it in the form of a test guideline (TG) in 2011, opening the door to use in regulatory risk assessment.

   Initially, proposals for its use under REACH were limited to a relatively small number of cases. In 2015, however, submission of Eogrts data became a standard information requirement under REACH for many registrants, and the number of proposals increased significantly. As of 24 August, Echa had adopted 115 dossier evaluation Decisions requiring the data.

   Registrants normally get three months to appeal dossier evaluation Decisions. However, by 24 August, the appeals period had lapsed for about 100 of the 115 adopted Decisions and only seven of the 100 had led to appeals. Furthermore, not all of those challenged the need for Eogrts.

   Echa told Chemical Watch that in this respect the ongoing implementation of the Eogrts standard information requirement was "running smoothly". Discussion on the study design, mainly relating to the addition of modules (see box), however, was needed for some of the cases, it added.Initial uncertainty

   Eogrts uses fewer animals than its predecessor, the two-generation reproductive toxicity study, and on this basis has been lauded by industry and animal welfare organisations as a step forward in toxicity testing.

   But its use under REACH was initially hampered by uncertainty about how to deal with a growing backlog of already submitted testing proposals based on the two-generation study.

   In 2015, the EU adopted amendments to REACH Annexes VIII, IX and X that replaced the two-generation study with Eogrts as the standard information requirement. Meanwhile, the Commission cleared the backlog– which by then amounted to 216 cases – by asking registrants to update their dossiers with testing proposals based on it.

   The first deadline for submission of REACH Eogrts data was in March. The deadline applied to floral pyranol, also known as florosa, a multi-constituent substance (Cas number 63500-71-0) used as an odour agent in various consumer products. The data can now be viewed in the registration dossier via the Echa website.Modular method

   Eogrts is unusual among test methods in that it can be customised via a modular framework. Extra modules can be bolted on to provide additional data on specific hazard endpoints, such as developmental neurotoxicity (DNT) and developmental immunotoxicity (DIT).

   When the EU adopted it, some member states and NGOs considered that the extra modules should be mandatory to generate data essential for proper protection of human health and the environment.

   Animal welfare organisations, however, said that the requirement to justify their addition prevented unnecessary use of animals. Each extra module increases the number of animals used, or the number of testing days, and the total cost, in euros, by several hundred thousand.

   Therefore, there is considerable interest in how frequently, and under what circumstances, these are requested.

   Of the 115 adopted dossier evaluation Decisions, 22 (19%) required the functional fertility of offspring module, 32 (28%) the DNT module and 18 (16%) the DIT module.

   The DIT module is being triggered primarily by cell counts and observed effects on the thymus, spleen, bone marrow and lymph nodes, Ingo Bichlmaier from Echa said last week at scientific conference Eurotox.

   The first deadline for submission of REACH Eogrts data that included data from the controversial extra modules was 6 September. The deadline applied to tetrahydrofurfuryl alcohol, which is primarily used as a solvent and chemical intermediate.

   https://chemicalwatch.com/70306/reach-registrants-mostly-not-contesting-eogrts-as-standard-requirement
   

   Return to headline | Return to top

8. Pigment Companies Should Share 'Sensitive' Nano Data, Says EUON Report

   Sep 13, 2018 | Chemical Watch

   By Dr Emma Davies

   Report highlights knowledge gaps and a need for exposure scenarios

   Companies should share 'sensitive' data on how they produce and use nano-sized pigments to help build exposure scenarios for risk assessments, according to a report commissioned by the EU Observatory for Nanomaterials (EUON).

   The report highlights 'knowledge gaps' in hazard and risk assessments for such pigments, with missing information on exposure and nano-specific toxicological data.

   Researchers from consultancy EcoMole and the VŠB Technical University of Ostrava, Czech Republic, scoured the literature for information on nano-sized pigments on the EU market. Their detailed findings were mostly restricted to inorganic nanomaterials such as titanium dioxide, zinc oxide and nano silica. In general, they discovered that available toxicological data are often inconsistent and reported contradictory results, partly because of a lack of standardised test methods.

   The EUON authors were careful to point out that although dry pigments could be inhaled and ingested, exposure to nano-sized pigments integrated into polymer, paint or coating matrices is unlikely to be significant, unless they are further processed by abrasion, for example by sanding.

   However, they suggest that knowledge gaps and uncertainty should increase the emphasis on exposure assessment and control.

   "Sharing of exposure data and development of comprehensive, well-designed and realistic exposure scenarios is essential for increasing our knowledge in exposure to nanomaterials in the workplace and among consumers," the report states.

   Developing standard exposure scenario 'libraries' would be an "important step" for nanomaterials' safety management, it adds.Lack of test methods

   "All pigments and fillers on the European market are registered according to the REACH legislation and have necessarily provided all required data. The term knowledge gap is therefore not comprehensible — at least not for those products present in significant tonnages, as defined by REACH," said Heike Liewald from Eurocolour, the umbrella association for manufacturers of pigments, dyes and fillers in Europe.

   Most pigments have had the same chemical composition for decades, with colorimetric properties determined by particle size, she added. The report's selected materials and studies "do not reflect the reality of the market", she said.

   "From our point of view the main important point is the lack of readily available, easy to perform and commonly accepted measurement methods to determine whether or not a material is a nanomaterial according to the EU recommendation," Dr Liewald said.

   Industry has long been calling for standardised test methods. Indeed, the EUON report states that currently available techniques and instrumentation for field exposure measurements are "complicated and expensive". It identifies a need to develop and standardise "simple, low-cost and robust measurement techniques".

   "The main knowledge gap we can see is the lack of a reliable accepted method to measure with sufficient precision the nano content of our products. Without this information, exposure scenarios and risk assessment can only be based on very rough assumptions," Pierfrancesco Fois, deputy executive director of the Ecological and Toxicological Association of Dyes and Organic Pigments Manufacturers (Etad), said.

   "The uncertainty in deciding whether our products are nanomaterials or not has led to the approach to consider them all as nanomaterials," he added.EUON inventory

   EUON, which is funded by the European Commission and Echa hosts, has also built an inventory of 77 nano-sized pigments and four filler pigments, based on information from Echa's REACH database, Danish, French and Belgian nano inventories, and the current EU catalogue of nanomaterials used in cosmetic products.

   However, the report points out that resources are "far from comprehensive" and the authors suspect that the real number of available nano-pigments is higher.

   Echa suggests that the upcoming revision of information requirements for nanomaterials registered under REACH will improve the availability of data for them.

   In April, member states voted to amend the REACH annexes to include new requirements for reporting nanoforms of substances. These will provide information on basic characteristics; uses; handling techniques; potential risks to human health and the environment; and risk control methods.

   The European Parliament and Council are scrutinising the draft Regulation, with the revised annexes, before final adoption by the Commission. It is due to enter into force in 2020.

   https://chemicalwatch.com/70301/pigment-companies-should-share-sensitive-nano-data-says-euon-report
   

   Return to headline | Return to top

9. EU Trade Groups Join Call To Ditch Proposed DecaBDE Threshold

   Sep 13, 2018 | Chemical Watch

   By Leigh Stringer

   A group of trade associations has called for a European Parliament proposal to set a concentration limit for the flame retardant decaBDE to be revised and aligned with REACH.

   In plans to recast the EU's persistent organic pollutants (POPs) Regulation, the European Parliament has proposed setting a concentration limit the same as for REACH, equal to or below 10mg/kg, or 0.001% by weight, for decaBDE in substances, mixtures and articles.

   Ahead of an MEP vote on the proposal next month, the associations (see box) have released a joint position paper opposing the limit.

   The European automotive manufacturers association (Acea) and the European recycling industry association (EuRIC) raised their concerns in July. However, this joint paper illustrates that the proposal concerns the whole value chain, Mélissa Zill, EuRIC scientific officer told Chemical Watch.

   "Indeed, if this limit of [0.001%] is adopted, the recycling targets for WEEE and ELV will not be met, which is a concern for the producers, not just recyclers."

   In 2019, the collection rate for waste electrical and electronic equipment (WEEE) will rise to 65%, from the current 45%. For end-of-life vehicles (ELVs), the reuse and recycling rate has been 85% of an average weight vehicle per year since 2015.

   The 10mg/kg threshold applies to other brominated flame retardants listed in the EU POP Regulation – tetraBDE, pentaBDE, hexaBDE, heptaBDE. However, for articles and mixtures containing these substances, a threshold of 0.1% applies if they are produced "partially or fully from recycled materials".

   The joint paper says that this is vital for the recycling industry: "it is simply not possible to guarantee a maximum level of POP-BDE of [0.001%] in recycled plastics from WEEE and ELVs".

   A recycling exemption is not mentioned in the EU proposal. The MEP putting forward the proposal, Julie Girling, rapporteur of the European Parliament's environment committee (Envi), did not respond to Chemical Watch's question, asking why this has not been included.

   The trade associations are calling for an exemption – for "at the least" recycled plastics – to allow them a 0.1% threshold.

   "This would be fully in line with the existing REACH Restriction for decaBDE, hence contributing to regulatory consistency between the POP and REACH Regulations, as well as with the current rules for other congeners of the same PBDE substance family," the paper says.

   Alternatively, it recommends suspending the decision on setting any concentration limit for decaBDE until international discussions on the substance are complete.

   A limit-value and derogations under the UN's Stockholm Convention will be discussed at the Conference of the Parties (COP) next year. For those countries signed up, international treaties supersede national/regional regulations.

   "Once these discussions are concluded and a scientifically valid limit value is determined based on health and environmental considerations, the Commission can then move to align the EU POP Regulation via the procedures foreseen in the POP Recast," the paper says.

   However, at COP8 last year, an exemption for recycled materials and articles was proposed and defeated.

   Co-signatories of the joint paper:the European automotive manufacturers association (Acea);the European recycling industry association (EuRIC);the International Bromine Council (BSEF);DigitalEurope;the European Electronics Recyclers Association (EERA);the European Recycling Platform;the European Association of Lighting (EucoLight);European Plastics Converters (EUPC);Plastics Recyclers Europe; andthe WEEE Forum.

   https://chemicalwatch.com/70302/eu-trade-groups-join-call-to-ditch-proposed-decabde-threshold
   

   Return to headline | Return to top

10. UK Teaching Union Calls For Action On Asbestos Mats

    Sep 13, 2018 | Chemical Watch

    By Clelia Oziel

    Britain's biggest teaching union is to call on headteachers to take immediate steps to remove all current supplies of gauze mats routinely used with Bunsen burners in school science laboratories – until it can be established for certain that they do not contain asbestos

    The National Education Union's call comes after the UK's Health and Safety Executive revealed that schools and colleges have been supplied with mats containing the known carcinogen.

    In a statement this week, the HSE said the risk from asbestos is "extremely low" from normal use of the gauze with a tripod placed over a burner.

    Any free fibre release into the air will be minimal for normal use, it said. However, the material is "soft and crumbly" and some small particles or fragments may detach on occasions, including during use and storage, it added.

    The HSE said a limited quantitative analysis showed that where asbestos was detected, it was in the range of around 20% to 30%. The asbestos was identified as tremolite, one of six regulated asbestos types.

    So far, the HSE said it has identified two suppliers of scientific equipment selling the gauzes. Steps have been taken to prevent further supplies by them.

    However, Sarah Lyons, lead officer for health and safety at the NEU, said: "Nearly 20 years after the use of all types of asbestos was banned, it is extremely disturbing to find out that asbestos-containing products have been introduced into schools by companies trusted by schools to supply a safe product.

    The teaching union, Ms Lyons added, expects the HSE "to take the strongest possible action against these suppliers who have behaved recklessly in respect of the health and safety of children and staff"HSE advice

    In its advice the HSE said gauzes containing asbestos should not be used. Instead they should be safely disposed of as asbestos waste. If users are unsure about the gauze coating, "they should assume that it contains asbestos," it warned.

    The two suppliers will be contacting all their customers, the agency said. When sourcing replacement gauzes, buyers should seek confirmation from their suppliers that the supply chain is assured and that new gauzes do not contain any level of asbestos.

    To be certain, items originating outside the EU must be analysed by a laboratory accredited for asbestos identification by the UK Accreditation Service, it added.

    Meanwhile, the NEU will be sending out advice shortly to headteachers in an e-bulletin. Among other things this advises: "Science departments may need to reschedule practical science lessons until they can secure a fresh supply of safe gauzes."

    https://chemicalwatch.com/70297/uk-teaching-union-calls-for-action-on-asbestos-mats
    

    Return to headline | Return to top

11. UK Audit Office: 'Serious Damage' Possible To Chemicals From No-deal Brexit

    Sep 13, 2018 | Chemical Watch

    By Clelia Oziel

    Defra must 'rebuild' IT capability to ensure it works over long term

    Britain's chemical sector could be "seriously damaged" under a no-deal Brexit scenario and the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (Defra) is ill equipped to address all of the risks on its own, the UK's National Audit Office has said.

    In a comprehensive review of Defra's preparations for the UK's departure from the EU on 29 March, the NAO – which scrutinises public spending for the British Parliament – said:plans for a REACH-equivalent IT system may need to be "significantly reworked" to allow further long-term enhancements;Defra has not yet started to consider the new regulatory role it will take on or the ongoing cost; andthe department has been unable to support businesses because of government-imposed restrictions on stakeholder communications.

    The verdict on the UK's IT capability in the event of a 'no-deal' contrasts with comments by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) in August that the IT system is mostly built and would "work tomorrow" if needed.

    The HSE told Chemical Watch that it stands by its earlier comments. The NAO points are about the longer-term full operational capability, it said, not about Day 1.

    What really matters now, the NAO said, is that Defra "accelerates" medium-term planning for a withdrawal agreement while finalising its contingency plans for a no-deal Brexit.

    Defra also needs to make sure that ministers are "fully aware" of the elements it is unlikely to deliver and of the impact on key industry sectors, including chemicals.

    UK chemical exports to the EU totalled £17bn in 2017, representing 60% of all chemical exports. The chemical industry is the UK’s second largest exporter to the EU after the automotive industry, the auditor said.

    The UK's position, set out in a Brexit white paper in July, is to seek continued participation in Echa, and to ensure UK businesses can continue to register substances directly. However, "this is dependent on a negotiated settlement," the NAO said.

    Without a deal, UK manufacturers would no longer be able to export to EU member states and would need to re-register their products on the EU system via an affiliate or representative located in an EU member state. This is a lengthy process that cannot be started until the UK has left, the report warns.IT challenge

    Building an IT system that is compatible with REACH is one of Defra's "most challenging" Brexit IT projects, the NAO said.

    The new system must be in place to allow product registrations from 29 March but may need to be "significantly reworked" or rebuilt at extra cost to allow long-term improvements, it said.

    Due to time pressures, Defra has had to focus on registrations and processing of data that may be needed in a no-deal scenario. But the risk of further work to meet future operational capability has not been "explicitly acknowledged".

    Furthermore, the NAO said, it was agreed that the IT screen work would aim to maintain the look and feel of the UK government portal GOV.UK, but this means that UK companies operating in both the EU and the UK will have to navigate two "slightly different systems".

    "We saw no evidence that Defra had considered the impact this dual approach would have for chemical companies," the report said.

    Poor engagement with stakeholders is another concern. Although Defra has been able to communicate informally and on a one-to-one basis with trade associations and key business groups, government restrictions have prevented more open consultations with a wider pool of stakeholders.

    Until July, Defra's webpage on how to comply with EU chemicals legislation contained "no reference at all" to Brexit while the government has yet to publish its "technical notification" on chemicals — one of 70 it has promised by September. Twenty-eight new Brexit no-deal planning documents were published on 13 September, in addition to 25 others in August, but the chemical sector has not been a focus of the advice so far.Making progress

    Defra responded that in the months since the NAO report was written, it has continued to prioritise resources, expanded its workforce and "made further progress" in preparing for a range of Brexit scenarios.

    In the case of 'no-deal', it said, Defra would establish a UK-specific chemicals regulations framework to replace the EU’s REACH Regulation, with HSE acting as the lead regulatory authority. A detailed draft of a statutory instrument to transfer Echa's responsibilities to a UK agency is due in Parliament this autumn.

    Regarding IT development, Defra said it is using an "agile approach" to develop and build systems "in stages" as future requirements become clearer.

    It is also working to ensure any potential new burdens on UK companies are "minimised" saying it will "continue to engage" the chemicals industry in testing the new IT system.

    The NAO report mentions that Defra's legislation team is expanding from 65 to 89 full-time equivalent staff during 2018-19. By June, the department had completed the first draft of 33 of the 93 statutory instruments it needs for Brexit.'Serious concerns'

    NGO ChemTrust said it has "serious concerns" about Defra's proposals for chemical regulation in the event of a no-deal Brexit.

    The introduction of new and "potentially conflicting" UK chemicals legislation could have "huge impacts" on the sector if registrations on the EU system are no longer recognised, it warned.

    ChemTrust's Executive Director Michael Warhurst said he received "limited information" at a meeting with Defra in July which pointed to the creation of a new chemical agency with minimal "engagement and oversight by stakeholders, along with no commitment to follow EU decisions on controlling chemicals".

    Defra's intention seems to be to remove all the layers of oversight Echa currently has in place, and replace them only with an ability or obligation to obtain external scientific advice, Dr Warhurst said. "This is not an effective way of ensuring well-informed and well-balanced decision making."

    ChemTrust summarised its concerns over the no-deal plan as follows:lack of any commitment to mirror EU outcomes on chemical regulation;lack of effective methods for overview and involvement of stakeholders and others in the UK agency;no commitment to update regulations in line with REACH. It is not clear that there is any plan to automatically update UK regulations;an unreliable level of protection from chemicals imported into the UK, through an inability to ensure the new IT system can meet future capability. A proposal to 'copy and paste' the REACH database raises serious concerns regarding intellectual copyright of the data; andlack of preparations to prevent disruption to the chemical manufacturing industry.

    https://chemicalwatch.com/70311/uk-audit-office-serious-damage-possible-to-chemicals-from-no-deal-brexit
    

    Return to headline | Return to top

Energy News

12. (ACC Mentioned) US Shale-Linked Chemical Spending Hits $200B: 5 Stocks to Buy

    Sep 13, 2018 | Zacks

    By Anindya Barman

    U.S. chemical capital spending linked to shale gas have crossed the $200-billion mark, according to the American Chemistry Council (“ACC”), marking a significant milestone for the U.S. chemical industry. Economics of shale gas is driving strong capital investment in new chemical projects.

    The Washington, DC-based chemical industry trade group said that 333 chemical projects (both on new plants and capacity expansions) have been already announced by chemical makers since 2010 worth $202.4 billion, 68% of which is foreign direct investment or involves an overseas partner. Moreover, 53% of the announced chemical investment are complete or under construction with the balance currently in the planning stage.

    The ACC expects the capital spending announced so far could lead to $292 billion in new chemical and plastics industry output annually and support 786,000 jobs across the U.S. economy by 2025, including 79,000 chemical jobs.

    Shale Boom Fueling U.S. Chemical Investment

    The shale gas revolution in the United States has been a huge driving force behind chemical investments in plants and equipment in the country. And currently, the U.S. chemical industry is in the middle of a shale-induced investment boom leveraging access to abundant and cheaper feedstocks.

    The United States remains an attractive investment destination for chemical projects and domestic chemical makers continue to enjoy the advantage of cheap ethane feedstock extracted from shale gas and natural gas liquids (NGLs).

    The shale bounty has provided U.S. producers a compelling cost advantage over their global counterparts, which use oil-based feedstock such as naptha. This is driving investment in chemical production projects in the U.S. Gulf Coast to beef up capacity.

    New methods of extraction such as horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing (or fracking) are boosting shale production, bringing down prices of ethane (derived from shale gas) in the process.

    The shale boom has incentivized a number of companies including DowDuPont Inc. (DWDP - Free Report) and LyondellBasell Industries N.V. (LYB - Free Report) to plough billions of dollars for setting up facilities (crackers) in the United States to produce key feedstocks like ethylene and propylene in a cost-effective way.  

    Such investments are expected to boost capacity and export over the next several years.  New capacity is expected to provide a boost to chemical production as these investments come on stream.

    But Trade War Could Play Spoilsport

    Escalating trade tensions between the United States and China pose as headwinds to the chemical industry. Concerns over a fierce trade war between Washington and Beijing have gripped the markets since March 2018.

    The United States and China, last month, levied a 25% tariff on $16 billion worth of each other’s products, ramping up the trade tussle between the world's two biggest economies. The Trump administration, in July, had imposed tariffs on $34 billion in Chinese goods that led to China retaliating with tariffs on American products of equal value.

    China’s list of U.S. goods hit with tariffs include chemicals and plastics. Beijing’s retaliatory tariffs would harm a major market for a range of chemicals and plastics produced in the United States.

    China is one of the biggest export markets for U.S. chemicals and thus, leaves the American chemical industry heavily exposed to Beijing’s retaliatory trade actions. The tariffs have created an uncertain demand environment for U.S. chemical products in this major market. This is worrisome as export markets are expected to significantly contribute to the growth of the U.S. chemical industry this year and the next.  

    Moreover, tariffs on U.S. chemical exports by China and the Trump administration’s actions to impose heavy tariffs on steel imports have raised concerns that chemicals companies would reconsider their investments in new projects, which could lead to a slowdown in growth. The hefty steel tariffs are likely to push up the costs of building chemical plants that use a significant amount of steel, thereby eroding the economic benefits of chemical projects. This may harm the U.S. chemical industry’s competitiveness.

    U.S. Chemical Set to Ride Growth Wave

    The U.S. Chemical Industry has recovered from the damaging effects of hurricanes and is set for solid growth in 2018. The ACC sees U.S. chemical production (excluding pharmaceuticals) to rise 3.4% in 2018.

    The growth 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 trade group also expects U.S. chemicals exports to expand 7.2% in 2018 to $139.2 billion on the back of the basic chemicals sector.

    5 Stocks to Scoop Up

    Notwithstanding the trade-related worries, the U.S. chemical industry is poised for solid upside this year on continued demand strength across major end-markets, gains in exports and significant capital investment on capacity additions. 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 also has expected earnings growth of 40.8% for 2018. Earnings estimates for the current year have been revised 12.3% upward over the last 60 days. Moreover, Celanese delivered positive earnings surprise in each of the trailing four quarters, with an average positive surprise of 11.5%. The company also has an expected long-term earnings per share (EPS) growth of 10%. The stock has also gained around 13% 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. Earnings estimates for the current year have been revised 7.5% upward over the last 60 days. Ingevity 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 43% in a year’s time.

    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. Earnings estimates for the current year have been revised 10% upward over the last 60 days. Huntsman delivered positive earnings surprise in each of the trailing four quarters, with an average positive surprise of 22.5%. The company also has an expected long-term EPS growth of 8.5%.

    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. Earnings estimates for the current fiscal year have been revised 1.1% upward over the last 60 days. Moreover, Air Products has topped the Zacks Consensus Estimate in each of the trailing four quarters, with an average positive surprise of 4.9%. It also has an expected long-term EPS growth of 16.2%. The stock has also gained roughly 11% in a year’s time.

    Albemarle Corporation (ALB - Free Report)

    North Carolina-based Albemarle carries a Zacks Rank #2. The company has an expected earnings growth of 17.4% for 2018. Earnings estimates for the current year have been revised 2.7% upward over the last 60 days. Albemarle also has an expected long-term EPS growth of 14.2%. Moreover, the company delivered positive earnings surprise in each of the trailing four quarters, with an average positive surprise of 6.6%.

    Today's Stocks from Zacks' Hottest Strategies

    It's hard to believe, even for us at Zacks. But while the market gained +21.9% in 2017, our top stock-picking screens have returned +115.0%, +109.3%, +104.9%, +98.6%, and +67.1%.

    And this outperformance has not just been a recent phenomenon. Over the years it has been remarkably consistent. From 2000 - 2017, the composite yearly average gain for these strategies has beaten the market more than 19X over. Maybe even more remarkable is the fact that we're willing to share their latest stocks with you without cost or obligation.

    https://www.zacks.com/stock/news/322925/us-shalelinked-chemical-spending-hits-200b-5-stocks-to-buy
    

    Return to headline | Return to top

13. Efficiency: The Low-Profile Core of a Smart Energy Policy

    Sep 13, 2018 | Environmental Working Group

    By Grant Smith, Senior Energy Policy Advisor

    Solar panels and wind turbines get the headlines, but efficiency – designing appliances, electronics, cars and buildings to use less energy – is also an important part of the story of the clean energy revolution.

    Energy efficiency may not be glamorous, but it should be at the core of a smart energy policy, because it not only saves energy and money but creates millions of jobs:Advances in energy efficiency saved Americans an estimated $800 billionbetween 1980 and 2014, according to the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy.About 2.25 million Americans in every corner of of the nation are employed in energy efficiency – twice as many as work in all sectors of the fossil fuel economy, says a new report from E4 the Future and Environmental Entrepreneurs.Increased efficiency in just 21 kinds of appliances, electronics, heating and cooling systems could eventually save enough electricity each year to power 50 million average homes, if enough states adopted the efficiency standards recommended in a report by by the Appliance Standards Awareness Project, or ASAP, and American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy, or ACEEE.

    Notice that the last point specifies efficiency standards adopted by states, not the federal government. That’s because most of today’s national standards started out at the state level.

    The ASAP/ACEEE report is pessimistic about the prospect of improved federal efficiency standards, pointing out that the Trump administration is holding up final national standards for three of the 21 products. But if enough states adopt the recommendations, manufacturers will, by necessity, offer products nationally that conform to the state standards.

    The recommended standards would not only save electricity and reduce the use of natural gas. They could also save hundreds of millions of gallons of water a year. And they would reduce air pollution by millions of tons of carbon dioxide and hundreds of thousands of tons of nitrogen and sulfur each year.

    Cleaner air would have a huge impact on public health. According to another ACEEE report issued jointly with Physicians for Social Responsibility, reducing national energy demand by just 15 percent would prevent six premature deaths a day and nearly 30,000 asthma attacks a year.

    By dragging its feet on product standards, the Trump administration is once again looking to the past rather than embracing the economic and public health benefits of clean, renewable and efficient energy. To fill the void in leadership, the states should step up.

    https://www.ewg.org/news-and-analysis/2018/09/efficiency-low-profile-core-smart-energy-policy#.W5qT9egzZ3g
    

    Return to headline | Return to top

14. U.S. 'Likely' Has Taken Over As The World's Top Producer

    Sep 13, 2018 | AP (In E&E Greenwire)

    By David Koenig

    The United States may have reclaimed the title of the world's biggest oil producer sooner than expected.

    The U.S. Energy Information Administration said yesterday that, based on preliminary estimates, America "likely surpassed" Russia in June and August after jumping over Saudi Arabia earlier this year.

    If those estimates are right, it would mark the first time since 1973 that the U.S. has led the world in output, according to government figures.

    EIA and the International Energy Agency, a global group of oil-consuming nations, had predicted that the U.S. would eventually pass Russia and Saudi Arabia but possibly not until 2019.

    U.S. production jumped in recent years because of techniques including hydraulic fracturing, which is driving a drilling boom in the Permian Basin under Texas and New Mexico. The practice is controversial, however. Opponents say fracking results in toxic contamination of groundwater and increases the number of earthquakes in places like Oklahoma and Texas.

    The U.S. energy agency estimated that the United States produced an average of 10.9 million barrels a day in August, compared with about 10.8 million barrels a day by Russia and around 10.4 million from Saudi Arabia. It said the U.S. passed Saudi Arabia in February for the first time in more than two decades, and this summer it topped Russia for the first time since 1999.

    The agency expects the U.S. will continue to top Russia and Saudi Arabia for the rest of this year and through 2019.

    U.S. production has soared since 2011, led by output from the Permian Basin, North Dakota and the Gulf of Mexico. The pace of drilling slowed after oil prices tumbled starting in 2014, but roared back as operators learned to produce oil more efficiently and crude prices rebounded.

    Production has been relatively steady in Russia and Saudi Arabia, both of which took part in an OPEC agreement to limit output beginning in 2016 to drive up prices.

    The U.S. agency said its data on Russian production come mainly from the Russian Ministry of Oil but also oil companies and industry publications. The agency said figures on Saudi output are based on its own internal estimates.

    The U.S. led the world in oil production for much of the last century until the Soviet Union and later Saudi Arabia passed it during the 1970s. Until the last few years, it seemed far-fetched that the U.S. would ever regain the No. 1 spot.

    https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/09/13/stories/1060096913
    

    Return to headline | Return to top

Chemical Security News

15. DOE: Perry Pressed Russian Energy Official On Grid Cyberattacks

    Sep 13, 2018 | PoliticoPro Whiteboard

    By Darius Dixon

    Energy Secretary Rick Perry signaled his "disappointment" in Russian attempts to undermine the U.S. electric grid in a meeting today with his Kremlin counterpart in Moscow, according to DOE.

    Perry and Russian Energy Minister Alexander Novak also discussed how to use their prowess in oil and natural gas production to "ensure world energy market stability, transparency, and sustainability," DOE spokesperson Shaylyn Hynes said in a readout of the meeting.

    Hynes said Perry expressed his “disappointment and concern about Russia’s continued attempts to infiltrate the American electric grid.” A Wall Street Journal report this summer that some cybersecurity experts have criticized said that officials at the Department of Homeland Security have been warning utility executives since 2014 about a long-running campaign by Russian-affiliated hackers to infiltrate U.S. critical infrastructure.

    Perry made it clear that “Moscow can no longer use energy as an economic weapon,” Hynes said. DOE has sought to leverage recent data showing that the U.S. recently overtook Russia as the world’s largest crude oil producer for the first time in nearly two decades.

    Despite the tensions over issues like the Nordstream 2 gas pipeline and attempted cyberattacks, the two men pledged to continue having an open line of communication.

    Perry and Novak, Hynes said, agreed to continue this “previously dormant energy dialogue and to search for ways to work together, within the guidelines and limitations of our current bilateral relationship. The future of our energy relations is predicated on successfully addressing our broader disagreements.”

    https://subscriber.politicopro.com/energy/whiteboard
    

    Return to headline | Return to top

16. Chemical Plants In The Carolinas Gird For Hurricane Florence’s Fury

    Sep 13, 2018 | Chemical & Engineering News

    By Rick Mullin

    BASF and Chemours are shutting down facilities

    As Hurricane Florence barrels down on the coasts of North and South Carolina, chemical companies that C&EN reached as of Sept. 12 say they are executing well-established plans for severe weather for their facilities in those states.“We’re monitoring the progress of Hurricane Florence and have been implementing some preventative steps that are aimed to protect our employees and local communities and safeguard our operations,” says Bob Nelson, corporate communications manager at BASF.

    The company has a standing emergency response plan, and staff are trained for adverse weather and other events, he says. BASF has several sites in areas that the hurricane may impact, including an R&D center in Research Triangle Park, N.C, and a polyacrylamide manufacturing plant in Suffolk, Va.

    “They are well versed in this,” Nelson says. It’s not the first time the plants have carried out the emergency response plans, he adds.

    The company’s North Charleston, S.C., dispersions and pigments plant has already shut down, Nelson says. Operations at the Suffolk plant will be idled on Sept. 14 and a crew to ride out the storm, including operation, maintenance, and security personnel, will remain on site until the storm passes.

    Chemours sent C&EN a statement saying the company is preparing its Fayetteville, N.C., fluoropolymers facility for hurricane-related flooding and high winds. Workers at the site, which is about 130 km from the coast of the Atlantic Ocean where Hurricane Florence is expected to come ashore, will clear equipment of remaining product and shut down manufacturing units before the evening of Sept. 13.

    Chemours plans to have its sites cleared and secured 24 to 48 hours before the storm is expected to hit. A team of essential personnel will be sheltered in place during the storm and start-up will commence once conditions are deemed safe, the company says.

    Lindau Chemicals, a small specialty organics producer in Columbia, S.C., about 190 km from the coast, is preparing for heavy storm conditions but had no plans to shut down as of Sept. 11. The company’s international shipping, which routes through Charleston, S.C., a city along the Atlantic, is a concern, however, according to Bill Cranford, the company’s president.

    “We’re trying to ship everything we can before storm hits,” Cranford says. “But we don’t think we’re going to be hit too badly.”

    None of the chemical industry’s severe weather plans have been significantly altered since last year’s Tropical Storm Harvey pummeled the Houston area, where some larger corporations have plants that fared well through that natural disaster’s flooding and high winds. In the wake of the heavy damage Harvey caused to some facilities, the U.S. Chemical Safety & Hazard Investigation Board last November urged companies to reassess their preparedness for hurricanes and floods.

    https://cen.acs.org/business/Chemical-plants-Carolinas-gird-Hurricane/96/web/2018/09
    

    Return to headline | Return to top

Transportation and Infrastructure News

17. Untangling The Train Wrecks: Congress Holds Yet Another Hearing On Its Mandate To End What’s Causing Most Of Them

    Sep 13, 2018 | The Washington Post

    By Ashley Halsey

    Robert S. Sumwalt, chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board, has been there before and on Thursday he virtually begged a congressional subcommittee to end the habit of holding hearings without more meaningful results.

    Testifying before the House Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines, and Hazardous Materials, he rattled off a list of fatal train wrecks that would not have happened had a device known positive train control (PTC) been put in place by the railroads.

    “Let me spell it out,” Sumwalt said, “for each day we go without PTC, we are at risk for another Chatsworth, another Bronx, another Amtrak in Philadelphia, another DuPont or another Cayce, S.C.”

    Those five train wrecks alone killed 42 people and injured hundreds. As Sumwalt knew all too well, they are among the many human-error train crashes that could have been avoided with PTC. He said his agency has investigated 22 train wrecks since the crash 10 years ago in Chatsworth, a Los Angeles neighborhood, that PTC would have prevented.

    “These accidents have resulted in 29 deaths, more than 500 injuries and over $190 million in property damage,” Sumwalt said.

    Thursday’s hearing was deja vu for Sumwalt. He’d been before the same subcommittee in February. Then he said, “The NTSB is extremely concerned about any further delay to this lifesaving technology.” In 2016, months after rushing up to an Amtrak wreck in Philadelphia — eight dead, 185 passengers taken to the hospital — he lamented, “Every day that PTC is not in place, we run the risk of another Amtrak crash. Is it going to take another five years or another three years for it to be implemented? If that’s the case, that’s unacceptable.”

    Sumwalt on Thursday got an answer to that question he asked two years ago: Some railroads have PTC in place, 65 percent of them are either operational or in testing, and 35 percent of 41 railroads will fall short. It’s unclear on exactly how many railroads PTC is operational — and it’s important to remember that several rail lines can operate on the same track — but the Federal Railroad Administration anticipates that most railroads that qualify will need extensions from a Dec. 31, deadline to make their PTC operations functional.

    “While railroads are making progress, FRA [believes] that most railroads will need to request an [extension beyond December] to complete testing, obtain systems certification and complete interoperability requirements,” said Ronald L. Batory, administrator of the Federal Railroad Administration. Interoperability is jargon for the ability of trains from other rail lines to use PTC signals from towers operated by their host railroad.

    Despite Batory’s contention, Edward R. Hamberger, president of the freight railroad lobby Association of American Railroads, told the committee that 80 percent of railroads covered by the rule would have PTC in operation by year’s end.

    “While some class 1 railroads expect to be fully operational by the end of the year, all class 1 railroads will be fully implemented no time later than sometime in 2020,” Hamberger said.

    Hamberger added, “Rigorous and repeated testing is the only way to make sure it works."

    Susan Fleming of the Government Accountability Office told the committee that as of June 30, many railroads remained in the early stages of PTC implementation and that many had begun testing their systems.

    “Moving for field testing . . . has taken an average of two years to complete,” Fleming said. “About a quarter of the railroads told us they had encountered software bugs.”

    The frustration of the House subcommittee has surfaced with regularity at the multitude of hearings on PTC.

    “I have zero sympathy for the railroads that have done nothing,” said Rep. Michael E. Capuano (D-Mass.) “It’s only a matter of time before the next accident happens and someone dies. How much is a life worth?”

    The NTSB is an independent body created by Congress to investigate transportation crashes. Unlike Congress or federal agencies, it has no hand in shaping policy. All it can do is make recommendations to Capitol Hill or federal agencies. It has recommended implementation of PTC since 1990.

    “Is that acceptable?” Sumwalt said of the PTC delay at Thursday’s hearing. “It’s certainly not acceptable to the NTSB.”

    Since a 1988 train wreck just south of Philadelphia when an Amtrak train collided with a piece of railroad maintenance equipment, injuring 34 people, the NTSB says that PTC could have prevented 141 deaths and 2,426 injuries.

    A pivotal moment for PTC came 10 years and a day before Thursday’s hearing. A Metrolink commuter train whose engineer was busy swapping text messages with a friend missed a signal in Los Angeles and allowed his train into the path of an oncoming Union Pacific freight train. The trains, weighing 1,800 tons between them, slammed into each other head-on at 85 miles an hour. The Metrolink train was split open like a can opener, killing 25 people and injuring 102.

    Though Congress already had been considering a requirement for some form of PTC, the wreck in Los Angeles catapulted it into action. It passed legislation — signed into law by President George W. Bush a month later — that mandated PTC be installed on 58,000 of the nation’s 134,000 miles of railroad track, including those most heavily used by passenger rail lines.

    The railroad industry, however, bridled at what it said was an investment of almost $15 billion to install computers in locomotives, trackside towers to communicate with those computers and to train workers to use them. After Republicans became the majority party in the Senate in 2015, railroads that had contributed about $58 million to House and Senate campaigns, were able to prevail on Congress to extend the PTC deadline by three years to 2018, and to allow exemptions until 2020 for railroads that were making substantial progress toward implementation.

    The NTSB has said that since the crash of Sept. 12, 2008, in the Los Angeles neighborhood of Chatsworth, among the fatal train wrecks that PTC could have prevented were these:

    •Red Oak, Iowa — Two crew members died when their coal train hit a maintenance train in 2011. Contributing factor? The NTSB report says: the “absence of a positive train control system.”

    •Mineral Springs, N.C. — Hours before dawn, two crew members died when their speeding train slammed into the back of a train waiting for a signal to change in 2011. NTSB conclusion: “Had a positive train control system been installed on this track, it could have prevented the collision.”

    •Goodwell, Okla. — In 2012, three crew died in a head-on train crash when an engineer missed a signal. The NTSB cited the “lack of positive train control, which would have stopped the train and prevented the collision regardless of the crew’s inaction.”

    •Bronx — In 2013, an engineer dozed off on an early-morning commuter train, allowing it to speed into a turn at close to three times the posted limit. Four passengers were killed. Had PTC been in place, the NTSB said, “that would have automatically applied the brakes to enforce the speed restriction.”

    Hoxie, Ark. — In 2014, dozing crew members missed a signal at 2:28 a.m. and crashed head-on into another train, killing two of them. The NTSB said, “A functioning positive train control system would have prevented this accident.”

    •Philadelphia — An engineer’s “loss of situational awareness” caused an Amtrak train to barrel into a curve at more than twice the permissible speed in 2015. Eight passengers were killed. NTSB said: “The accident could have been avoided if positive train control . . . had been in place.”

    The NTSB has not determined the probable cause of crashes in Washington state in December and South Carolina in February that killed five people and injured 154 combined. But the agency’s preliminary reports suggest that PTC could prevented both crashes.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/transportation/2018/09/13/untangling-train-wrecks-congress-holds-yet-another-hearing-its-mandate-end-whats-causing-most-them/?utm_term=.e671dd4ee925
    

    Return to headline | Return to top

18. Amtrak May Put Passengers on Buses in Fight Over Safety Upgrade

    Sep 13, 2018 | Bloomberg

    By Alan Levin

    As railroads across the nation race to complete a congressional deadline for installing safety technology, Amtrak is threatening to substitute buses for trains on lines that lack the equipment, triggering a furious response from the mostly rural areas.

    Amtrak says it’s just one measure being considered as it seeks assurances that local governments will help fund needed improvements. Local officials and U.S. lawmakers from Kansas, Colorado and New Mexico said such a move would be devastating to their communities.

    “It’s just frustrating that we didn’t sit down and talk about how to do that nine months ago, before the bomb dropped on the busing,” said Steve Cottrell, assistant to the city manager in Garden City, Kansas. Garden City is a stopping point for Amtrak’s iconic Southwest Chief, which runs once a day in each direction from Chicago to Los Angeles.

    The subject is likely to be raised Thursday as the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee’s railroad panel holds a hearing on the safety system known as positive train control. The system is supposed to be installed by Jan. 1, though some railroads say they won’t make the deadline. Scot Naparstek, Amtrak’s executive vice president and chief operating officer, is among those scheduled to testify.

    Senators are trying to enact legislation that would put a one-year moratorium on the substitution of buses for trains.

    QuickTake: Why Train Travel in U.S. Has Never Been a Smooth Ride

    The dispute highlights long-term tensions over funding of a national passenger rail system that has far less traffic than its counterparts in Europe and Asia, as well as the competing interests of safety verses economics.

    The Southwest Chief, like many of the long-distance train routes outside the Boston-Washington corridor, brings in significantly less revenue than it costs to operate and the tracks Amtrak leases -- most of which are owned by Berkshire Hathaway Inc.’s BNSF Corp. -- are in need of millions of dollars in infrastructure investment.

    About 4.5 million people rode the Chief in 2016, according to a June presentation by Richard Anderson, the passenger railroad’s president and chief executive officer. It costs more than $1 billion a year, yet brings in less than $600 million, he said.

    Earlier: Senators Give Railroads an Ultimatum on Crash Prevention Control

    The line also lacks positive train control, which automatically prevents trains from colliding with each other and prevents engineers from accidentally going too fast. On 219 miles of BNSF’s track, there are no longer any freight trains, so Amtrak is solely responsible for installing upgrades and the safety technology.

    Amtrak was roundly criticized last December when one of its trains derailedin Washington State on a route from Seattle to Portland that didn’t have positive train control. The engineer was traveling 50 miles (80 kilometers) per hour over the speed limit, something positive train control is designed to prevent by automatically slowing a train in that situation.

    Three people died in the wreck.

    The lightly traveled route from Dodge City, Kansas, to Albuquerque, New Mexico, is mostly exempt from U.S. law requiring railroads to install positive train control. New Mexico, which operates the remaining section of track, is applying for an exemption and hopes to have it in place by the end of the year.

    “Replacing rail service with bus service for the nearly 11-hour bus ride from Dodge City to Albuquerque would disrupt service for passengers, increase barriers to travel and hobble local economies,” Senator Thomas Udall, a New Mexico Democrat, said in an email. “On top of that, trading trains for buses is less safe and reduces ridership.”

    But Amtrak officials have told local governments that their board of directors’ policy is to err on the side of safety and have the system on all its routes. The Raton Pass in northern New Mexico is the steepest mainline railroad grade in the U.S., making the need for the safety system even more critical, they said.

    “Last month, Amtrak officials met with stakeholders from New Mexico, Colorado and Kansas to review the challenges associated with a limited portion of the existing Southwest Chief route and possible changes to service for that segment,” said Amtrak spokeswoman Christina Leeds.

    “At present, no changes to the current service have been made and we are working with various stakeholders on long-term options to address the unique capital and operating costs associated with Amtrak’s operation over these segments owned by BNSF Railway and the State of New Mexico,” Leeds said.

    Amtrak is conducting a safety review to determine whether it may be possible to operate the Southwest Chief and other routes without positive train control at reduced speeds or with other measures to reduce risk, she added.Service Disruption

    Anderson, in testimony to Congress in February, raised the possibility of disruptions to service as a result of railroads that lease track to the passenger system not meeting the deadline. Other states are concerned that buses may be substituted on certain routes.

    In Vermont, U.S. Senator Patrick Leahy, a Democrat, believes Amtrak has “sent too many mixed signals’’ about whether it will continue train service on two lines without positive train control, said his spokesman David Carle. The railroad hasn’t responded to Leahy’s request to say whether or not it plans to suspend service, Carle said.

    Leeds said that "Amtrak’s aim is to continue service across all of its network, including the routes in Vermont, and to ensure that we can do so with a common level of safety."

    BNSF, which owns most of the Southwest Chief’s track, has installed the technology on all 11,500 miles of track on which it’s required, spokeswoman Amy Casas said. The company is also installing it in some but not all sections where it’s not required, Casas said. Federal mandates include an exemption for lightly traveled tracks.

    Lawmakers including Senators Jerry Moran, a Kansas Republican, and Udall have jumped into the controversy, sponsoring legislation that would prevent the use of buses for a year and set aside money for track upgrades. The measure was attached to a budget bill that is working its way through Congress.

    If buses are used for a stretch of track that’s almost 600 miles long, it would kill demand for the train, said Evan Stair, an activist who runs a group called Passenger Rail Oklahoma that is also active in Kansas and other states where the Southwest Chief operates.
    Urban-Rural Divide
    

    The bus plan would “only further the great divide between the urban and rural communities in this country,” Dodge City Mayor E. Kent Smoll, said in a statement. “We have Dodge City residents who rely heavily on these services particularly the elderly and disabled who do not desire to fly or drive long distances.”

    In a meeting last month in New Mexico, Amtrak officials signaled that they were considering alternatives to using buses, said Bill Sauble, chairman of the Colfax County Commission in that state.

    Still, local governments remain frustrated with what they see as a sudden change in Amtrak’s policy on the Southwest Chief and the railroad’s demands for guaranteed funding for the line, Sauble said.

    “Nobody is arguing that PTC or some safety feature isn’t necessary,” he said. “It’s just the time table for getting it installed.”

    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-09-13/amtrak-may-put-passengers-on-buses-in-fight-over-safety-upgrade
    

    Return to headline | Return to top

Environment News

19. 'We Are Still In.' Advocates Press On Despite Trump

    Sep 13, 2018 | E&E Climatewire

    By Debra Kahn

    SAN FRANCISCO — State and local governments and businesses are shouting from the rooftops that America is still committed to climate action.

    Despite the Trump administration's proposals to withdraw from the U.N. Paris Agreement, roll back federal fuel economy rules, replace the Clean Power Plan for the power sector and weaken methane regulations for the oil and gas industry, environmental leaders are unbowed.

    "It's about not letting the president of the United States, as one example, say we are not in," Mindy Lubber, president of the sustainable investor advocacy group Ceres, said at an event here organized to coincide with Gov. Jerry Brown's (D) Global Climate Action Summit.

    The United States is still on track to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2025, two-thirds of the way to its Paris pledge, according to a report released yesterday by the Rocky Mountain Institute and sponsored by former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

    Separately, under the banner of "We Are Still In," Ceres has collated more than 3,500 commitments from local and state governments, businesses, tribes, colleges, museums and religious groups totaling $9.4 trillion in economic activity. McDonald's Corp., for example, is aiming for a 31 percent reduction from 2015 levels in emissions intensity in its food and packaging supply chains by 2030.

    The overall message that has been coalescing since Trump announced his planned withdrawal from the Paris Agreement in June 2017 is that the United States is still capable of achieving ambitious emissions cuts via nonfederal policies and business decisions.

    And even the loss of the federal government as a policy driver is something of a silver lining, as it has emboldened local governments and the private sector to step forward.

    "I think this notion of a federal government and a gap is a common narrative," said RMI Managing Director Paul Bodnar. "But in doing this work, I think we found something quite different, which is that if you don't assume it's the federal government's job to take care of the problem, you find an amazingly powerful set of tools, and sometimes it's just a matter of exposing people who have the power to do something about it."

    It's a somewhat incongruous message coming from a group that is largely made up of Democrats who have championed federal authority. But it's a shift that may persist into the next time Democrats are in control of the federal government.

    "When I first got into doing environmental work back in the '70s," said California Air Resources Board Chairwoman Mary Nichols, "everybody thought the answer was more federal action. And increasingly now, I think what we're seeing is people saying: 'Well, maybe not. Maybe we could actually do it better if the next level up would just get out of our way and maybe give us back some of our tax revenues.'"

    Bodnar, a former Obama administration official who worked on a 2014 climate agreement with China that set the stage for the Paris Agreement, now sees states, cities and businesses taking the mantle of American climate leadership.

    The Obama administration's Climate Action Plan "was a good step," he said Tuesday at a briefing on the report.

    "But this is a real climate action plan for the United States," he added. "This is a much more definitive map of who can do what. ... This is just a different way of looking at the climate challenge and how to solve it than the notion that it's for the federal government to lead and for everyone else to follow and implement."

    The RMI report projects that the United States will reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 1.6 percent annually through 2025 and then 2.1 percent through 2030, due to slow-turnover sectors like transportation and buildings. That approaches the 2.3 percent annual rate that's needed to reach 80 percent below 2005 levels by 2050.

    Not all projections are so rosy. Another study, released in June by the Rhodium Group, projects that the country is roughly on track to get halfway to its Paris pledge, or 12 to 20 percent below 2005 levels (Climatewire, June 28).

    But according to environmentalists, states are moving the ball so far forward, particularly in the electricity sector, that a new climate-friendly federal administration will have to pick up significantly ahead of where the Obama administration left off.

    RMI's report finds that accelerated climate action within "realistic legal and political limits," particularly on agriculture and other land use, would generate enough reductions to take the United States to 24 percent below 2005 levels by 2025.

    Until then, the most significant federal contribution would be to tackle methane emissions, which contribute about 84 times as much of a warming effect as carbon dioxide in the short term.

    "The one place where the new administration in 2020 could make a rapid difference would be in methane emissions from public lands," former Sierra Club Executive Director Carl Pope said Tuesday. That would take reductions to around 3 percent per year.

    "You can't get the 3 percent without federal re-engagement," he said.

    And although environmentalists and climate-friendly politicians wish things had gone differently on the federal level, the bootstrapping message ultimately is preferable to despair.

    "The question is, do we just sit there and say, 'You, the federal government, need to save us from this'?" said Lou Leonard, the World Wildlife Fund's senior vice president and leader for climate and energy.

    "Or is there a more empowering narrative that's good for people to hear, that's good for the companies that ultimately are the target of any regulation, policy or incentive, to show that there's impactful things that they can do on their own?"

    https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2018/09/13/stories/1060096889
    

    Return to headline | Return to top

20. The Glaring Loophole In Our Climate Policies

    Sep 13, 2018 | The Washington Post

    By By Ali Hasanbeigi and Daniel Moran

    The 1990s were a crucial decade in the history of climate policy. Following the launch of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change in 1992, negotiators from over 50 countries successfully shepherded the Kyoto Protocol to fruition in 1997  — thus formally inaugurating the modern era of international climate policy, with its focus on national contributions toward global emissions reduction targets.

    What the climate negotiators of the 1990s did not know at the time was that a parallel and simultaneous set of global trade agreements would create a glaring loophole in their efforts to contain the carbon dioxide emissions that contribute to climate change. The formation of the World Trade Organization in 1995 opened the valves of global trade and ushered many new producers into the modern global economy, bringing prosperity and modernity to hundreds of millions of people. But it also set off a surge in carbon emissions.

    In 2015 (the most recent data), about 25 percent of global greenhouse gas emissions passed through this glaring “carbon loophole,” one of the most critical and under-discussed problems in international climate policy circles. Last week, we released new research that updates previous efforts to fully quantify the carbon loophole and shows why closing it is increasingly urgent. Our findings reveal that in many cases, countries that have claimed net reductions in carbon emissions see those reductions fully — or mostly — wiped out once the carbon loophole is taken into account.

    The reason for this is that the targets of the Kyoto Protocol and the Paris Agreement only measure domestic emissions — that is, the greenhouse gasses emitted directly inside a country’s borders. When the Kyoto Protocol was drafted, the concept of emissions fleeing regulation was discussed but was ultimately not included in the treaty, presumably because it was too complex.

    But while virtually every nation on Earth participates in the global system of trade, the emissions associated with the products they import — which often constitute significant shares of a nation’s economic activity — are not counted in the Paris targets. The foreign portion of a country’s consumption-based carbon footprint is therefore effectively invisible. With the loophole, traded emissions are attributed to producers while consumer nations enjoy the benefits of “meeting their targets” without having to reduce pollution that results from their economic activity.

    According to our research, the overall trend is that high-income, high-consuming countries, such as the United States, Japan, Australia and Western European states, have Paris Agreement targets calibrated to their domestic emissions, even though their true carbon footprints are much larger. The United Kingdom stands out in particular. Its territorial emissions today are near or below its 1990 levels, but its consumption-based emissions (including the emissions embodied in trade) have increased substantially. Many other nations are in the same predicament.

    A first step toward closing the carbon loophole is simply to get a good measurement of it by quantifying the carbon footprint of imported products. A fast-growing field of tools and standardized methodologies, including the Eora model, the 190-country supply chain database used in our report, makes it easier than ever for governments and private companies to identify high-carbon products in their supply chains.

    The next step is to establish rules that favor the purchase of cleaner, low-carbon products and that drive clean innovation through the power of the purse. Policy solutions, such as California’s Buy Clean Act, set carbon standards for some of the heaviest-emitting sectors, such as steel. By adopting “buy clean” principles more widely, nations and private companies can unleash the power of low-carbon investment and innovation. This approach aligns spending and climate priorities and can be deployed rapidly, often at zero cost to both governments and private companies alike.

    Governments are major purchasing agents. They operate fleets, construct schools and buildings, and commission major projects that use large amounts of steel, cement and other carbon-intensive products. When governments “buy clean” as a matter of policy, they can have a real impact in closing the carbon loophole.

    Other solutions include concepts such as border tax adjustments, which would essentially tax imported products based on their carbon intensity. This would help ensure that clean, domestic industries aren’t penalized by uneven climate policy among trading partners. Another solution could involve “climate clubs” for countries that want to form low-carbon trading blocks.

    But the key principle in closing the carbon loophole is to understand that carbon emissions don’t respect borders. The policies we enact to reduce them must reflect that. California’s new climate laws announced this week are a standout example in this regard.

    With 25 percent of global carbon emissions potentially unregulated, addressing the carbon loophole is not optional. By adopting the underlying principles of California’s Buy Clean Act, countries and companies can work together to help unleash investment in clean technologies, maintain a competitive edge and close the carbon loophole.

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/theworldpost/wp/2018/09/13/carbon-emissions-2/?utm_term=.714a0ee96ae9
    

    Return to headline | Return to top

21. EPA Staff Co-wrote Study Linking Emissions To Death

    Sep 13, 2018 | E&E Climatewire

    By Scott Waldman

    As EPA rolls back emissions regulations, its own researchers are part of a major study that has found that global air pollution kills far more people than has previously been revealed.

    The study, published last week in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, found that fine particulate matter kills almost 9 million people worldwide. That's more than double a previous estimate from the World Health Organization.

    It's also a higher mortality rate than smoking, which causes about 6.3 million deaths, and slightly less than diet, which causes 10.3 million deaths, according to the study.

    "Our estimates are severalfold larger than previous calculations, suggesting that outdoor particulate air pollution is an even more important population health risk factor than previously thought," the authors wrote.

    Two EPA researchers were part of the international team behind the study: Neal Fann of EPA's Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards and Bryan Hubbell of the Office of Research and Development.

    The findings come as the Trump EPA works to replace the Obama administration's Clean Power Plan with the Affordable Clean Energy plan. According to the agency's own findings, the weakening of the regulations, which were designed to reduce the power sector's carbon dioxide emissions, will cause 1,400 additional deaths annually from air pollution by 2030. The Clean Power Plan, by contrast, would have averted 3,600 deaths.

    Fine particulate matter — otherwise known as PM2.5 because it is 2 ½ microns or smaller — can get lodged in the lungs and is linked to deadly health problems, including cardiovascular disease, lung cancer and respiratory disease. It is chiefly produced by burning fossil fuels, and its primary sources in the United States are vehicles and power plants.

    A new study released yesterday by Resources for the Future, a Washington-based think tank, found that 47.6 million people in the United States live in an area that fails to meet the health standard for fine particle pollution, about twice the number originally thought (Greenwire, Sept. 12).

    The PNAS study shows that although air pollution is particularly dangerous in places like India and China, where it can be 10 times more potent than here, it can also have serious health effects in places like the United States, where levels are relatively low, said Richard Burnett, the study's lead author and a senior research scientist with the Healthy Environments and Consumer Safety Branch of Health Canada.

    "Not only are we finding larger effects in relatively low pollution environments like Canada and the United States, but we're also finding much larger effects in places that have very high pollution," he said.

    "Anything that is going to raise pollution levels and exposure levels," he added, "is going to increase public health impacts, and that's one of the clear things that this study has shown, so that even a sort of small degradation of air quality is going to translate into degradation in public health."

    The new study shows that the effects of air pollution on the human body are worse than researchers believed even a short while ago, said C. Arden Pope, one of the co-authors and an air pollution expert at Brigham Young University.

    The findings reflect studies conducted around the world, with data from 41 cohorts in 16 countries, according to Pope. The results come even as the United States has reduced some of the worst sources of air pollution, primarily from a reduction in emissions from coal-burning power plants and automobiles and a switch to cleaner fuels, such as natural gas and renewables.

    "They make me uncomfortable, too, they're pretty high," he said of the results. "There is certainly no evidence from these estimates and from the expanding literature that somehow we're overestimating the effects of air pollution; in fact we think we might be underestimating it. It just seems like the whole body of evidence is now becoming so compelling and the impact on burden of disease is not trivial, it's just quite large and larger than what we've been estimating."

    This is not the first time this year that EPA staff and funding have helped add to a growing body of research showing the adverse effects of air pollution.

    Earlier this year, a study by EPA researchers in the American Journal of Public Health found that poor and minority communities were disproportionately affected by soot and other forms of pollution.

    In a study released last month that received agency funding, scientists found that adolescent African-Americans who had asthma, but were receiving treatment, still suffered from reduced lung function when exposed to short-term ozone levels below EPA's recommended level. Both ozone and fine particles contribute to smoggy city air.

    Even as EPA's own researchers continue to expand the field of study on PM2.5 pollution, critics say the agency is engaged in a multipronged effort that may end up downplaying, or even ignoring, that science.

    Before he resigned amid multiple ethics investigations, former EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt replaced academic scientists on the agency's Science Advisory Board with industry researchers accused of making light of pollution risks. Some have received funding from the American Petroleum Institute to produce studies used to attack regulations.

    At the same time, the agency is weighing a proposed rule that would restrict studies used to craft regulations and that researchers say is tailored to prevent the agency from considering definitive air pollution studies.

    Critics have also accused the Trump administration of understating the benefits of pollution regulations (Climatewire, Aug. 6).

    In the PNAS study, the authors write that their findings indicate the benefits of reducing PM2.5 pollution are greater than previously realized.

    "This approach suggests that the health benefits of reducing PM2.5 are likely much larger than previously assumed, owing to much stronger relationships between air pollution and mortality at higher concentrations," they wrote. "The implications of this finding are particularly significant for countries with the highest air-pollution concentrations, as the potential health benefits of air-quality improvements in these areas are larger than previously recognized."

    https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2018/09/13/stories/1060096863
    

    Return to headline | Return to top

22. States Press EPA To Extend ACE Rule Comment Deadline

    Sep 13, 2018 | Inside EPA

    Nearly two dozen state attorneys general (AGs) are pressing EPA to extend by 60 days the comment deadline on its proposed replacement for the Obama-era Clean Power Plan, the latest request for the agency to give the public more time to weigh in on major deregulatory efforts.

    “Given the importance of this matter, the complexity of the proposal and its potentially significant impacts on public health and the environment, the requested extension is necessary to afford the States and Cities sufficient time to comment on the proposal,” write 20 AGs for New York, California and other states, as well as several cities, in a Sept. 11 letter to acting EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler.

    The state and city officials seek a total of 121 days to comment on the proposed “Affordable Clean Energy” rule.

    Specifically, they argue that the current comment period is inadequate because the proposal is “effectively three rules in one” -- a proposed revised determination on the “best system of emissions reduction” for power plants; a proposed “radical change” in federal-state relationship due to EPA's plan to “abdicate” setting a baseline level of emissions cuts for states to follow; and a proposal to relax new source review permitting requirements for fossil fuel generators.

    “Each of the three proposals within a proposal has features that would alone justify lengthening the public comment period beyond 60 days,” the letter says.

    The letter also requests that EPA bolster its public hearing schedule on the rule -- with only an Oct. 1 hearing in Chicago currently set -- to include “at least one public hearing” in California, Colorado, the Mid-Atlantic, the Northeast, North Carolina, the Pacific Northwest, and southern Florida.

    The states' request comes one day after a separate Sept. 10 letter from over 30 Senate Democrats asking EPA and the Department of Transportation to extend to 120 days the comment period on the Trump administration's proposal to gut the current vehicle GHG and fuel economy program after model year 2020.

    The request echos prior calls for a 120-day comment period on the auto rule from Democratic AGs and state air quality officials.

    The senators' letter also notes that a separate comment deadline on the draft environmental impact statement for the fuel economy rule, which does not current match the deadline for the comment on the proposed rollback, should be extended to coincide with the requested 120-day public comment period.

    “It is critical that all Americans have the opportunity to comment on it for this magnitude,” the letter states, criticizing the plan as damaging to fuel efficiency, human health, consumers, the auto industry workforce, and technological innovation. “Furthermore, the proposal of this scale -- which seeks to preempt state regulations and revoke California's Clean Air Act waiver -- would benefit from the additional time and opportunity for input” on the plan's effect on numerous states that have adopted California's GHG standards.

    https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/states-press-epa-extend-ace-rule-comment-deadline
    

    Return to headline | Return to top

23. Starbucks To Build 10,000 'Greener' Stores By 2025

    Sep 13, 2018 | CNBC

    By Kate Rogers

    Starbucks plans to build 10,000 "greener stores" around the globe by 2025.The plan encompasses both new stores and renovations.The company expects it will save some $50 million in utility costs over the next decade as a result of the plan

    
    

    Starbucks announced Thursday it is deepening its commitment to sustainability with a plan to build 10,000 "greener stores" around the globe by 2025, a move that will encompass new stores and renovations.

    The plan follows the coffee giant's pledge to eliminate single-use plastic straws from its stores around the globe by 2020.
    
    Starbucks plans to audit its company-owned stores in the U.S. and Canada. Since 2001, it has been working with the U.S. Green Building Council to help develop the LEED for Retail Program, opening up its first LEED, or green-certified store more than a decade ago. Today there are more than 1,500 LEED-certified Starbucks stores globally.

    The move will save Starbucks some $50 million in utility costs over the next decade, building on its current 10-year legacy of utility cost savings generated from its green practices already in place. Those steps save it some $30 million annually in operating costs, the company said.

    Starbucks' plans are being developed in concert with experts from the World Wildlife Fund, and will be audited and verified by SCS Global Services, which oversees Starbucks' Coffee and Farmer Equity Practices. The materials will also be shared so other retailers can follow suit, Starbucks said.

    "This framework represents the next step in how Starbucks is approaching environmental stewardship, looking holistically at stores and their role in helping to ensure the future health of our natural resources," said Erin Simon, director of R&D at World Wildlife Fund, U.S., in a release. "When companies step up and demonstrate leadership, other businesses often follow with commitments of their own, driving further positive impacts."

    Starbucks has long been committed to sustainability with initiatives including 99 percent ethically-sourced coffee, its pledge to develop and help bring to market a fully-recyclable and compostable hot cup, and offering discounts to customers who bring in reusable cups or tumblers at its company-owned stores globally, among others.

    https://www.cnbc.com/2018/09/13/starbucks-to-build-10000-greener-stores-by-2025.html
    

    Return to headline | Return to top