Preview Newsletter
PM ACC Clips Report - October 5, 2018
-
(ACC Blog) EPA Successfully Completes the Inventory Reset
Oct 5, 2018 | American Chemistry Matters
The 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) required EPA to keep an Inventory of all chemicals in commerce. The Inventory was one aspect of TSCA that turned out not to work so well over time. -
(ACC Mentioned) Rethinking the Way We Manage, Repurpose Waste
Oct 5, 2018 | Waste 360
By Cristina Commendatore
Waste-to-energy solutions, the concept of a circular economy, end-of-life product design and potential opportunities to help combat contamination and improve safety across the industry are just some of the topics discussed during the 2018 EEC/WTERT Bi-Annual Conference. -
(ACC Mentioned) DowDuPont Hit as Factory Splurge Boomerangs to Drive Up Costs
Oct 5, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Jack Kaskey
The U.S. shale boom has for years blessed chemical makers with cheap energy, prompting record spending on new factories. -
Petrochemicals to Become Dominant Driver of Oil Demand Growth — IEA
Oct 4, 2018 | Financial Times
By Anjli Raval
Petrochemicals are rapidly becoming the biggest driver of global oil consumption — ahead of trucks, aviation and shipping — accounting for more than a third of the growth by 2030, the International Energy Agency said. -
Ewire: ACE rule? What ACE rule?
Oct 5, 2018 | Inside EPA
The Trump administration is rolling back the Obama EPA's Clean Power Plan utility greenhouse gas standards, and replacing it with a narrow rule intended to lift the regulatory burden on coal plants. In response? Some electric utilities making their long-term plans doubt the rule will have any effect on them. -
EPIC Midstream to Convert NGL Pipeline to Crude to Aid Permian Bottleneck
Oct 5, 2018 | Houston Chronicle
By Jordan Blum
EPIC Midstream said it will temporarily convert the multibillion-dollar natural gas liquids pipeline it is building in Texas to crude oil service in order to help alleviate the pipeline shortage in West Texas' booming Permian Basin. -
In Your Backyard: Report Finds Over 124 Million Americans Live Near Toxic Threats
Oct 5, 2018 | WXPR
Chances are you or someone you know live near a potentially hazardous chemical facility, and may not even know it. -
Top EPA Union Official Attacks Senate Vote to Advance Kavanaugh
Oct 5, 2018 | Inside EPA
A top EPA union official is attacking the Senate's 51-49 procedural vote to advance to a final vote this weekend on whether to confirm Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, citing the appellate judge's history of rulings that the official argues prove the nominee would decide against EPA polices in high court cases. -
The Make America First Case for Carbon Capture
Oct 5, 2018 | Real Clear Energy
By Beau Rothschild
Next month, United Nations scientists are set to report that we can no longer win the battle against climate change by reducing carbon emissions: we have to start draining those emissions from the air. -
OIG to Review TRI Enforcement of Late-Reporting Companies
Oct 5, 2018 | Inside EPA
EPA's Office of the Inspector General (OIG) is preparing to begin a review of how the agency addresses situations in which companies who are required to report their environmental emissions to EPA as part of the Toxics Inventory Release (TRI) program do so after the TRI's statutory deadline. -
States Have 60 Days to Sue EPA over 'Good Neighbor' Decision
Oct 5, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Sean Reilly
EPA today opened a 60-day window for the filing of lawsuits challenging its rejection of two states' bids for help in dealing with upwind power plant pollution.
Industry and Association News - There are no clips to report at this time.
LCSA News
Chemical Management News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
-
(ACC Blog) EPA Successfully Completes the Inventory Reset
Oct 5, 2018 | American Chemistry Matters
The 1976 Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) required EPA to keep an Inventory of all chemicals in commerce. The Inventory was one aspect of TSCA that turned out not to work so well over time. Chemicals were added to the Inventory, nothing was removed, and there was no way to note which chemicals were actually active in commerce and which were no longer active.
Thankfully the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act of 2016, which amended TSCA, required EPA to “reset” the Inventory and designate chemical substances as either active or inactive in commerce.
EPA Successfully Completes the Inventory Reset
The reset process was conducted in two reporting phases. First, manufacturers and importers notified EPA of active chemicals in commerce. That reporting period was successfully completed by the statutory deadline thanks to the hard work and collaborative effort of industry and EPA’s dedicated staff.
In April, EPA released a draft Inventory with the results from the manufacturer reporting phase. At the time of the draft’s release, the total number of active substances reported was 38,304, which is a significant decrease from the 84,000 total substances on the Inventory. However, it is important to note that this number likely includes duplicates and errors not initially caught by EPA. It is also important to note there was no volume threshold for reporting; in other words the reset required that any chemical that entered commerce over the last 10 years—even those manufactured at relatively insignificant amounts—had to be reported.
It’s critical to put the Inventory reset effort into perspective. Under the Chemical Data Reporting Rule (CDR), only chemicals at meaningful production volumes— currently 25,000 pounds a year for most chemicals—are reported to EPA every four years. While there are some exceptions for chemicals reported at a lower threshold in the most recent (2016) CDR, the number of active chemicals reported on the public Inventory that year was just 8,707. The 8,707 substances are much more indicative of the actual chemicals in commerce than the 38,000 reported at the end of the manufacturers’ phase in the reset. For example, based on available CDR and other production volume data, only about 50 chemicals actually make up over 70 percent of volume production in commerce, and 99.8 percent of volume production the U.S. can be attributed to approximately 4000 chemicals.
The second phase of the reset process is an extended period for processors to voluntarily notify EPA of active chemicals in commerce that ends today, October 5th, 2018. Now that the reset process is complete, EPA will release a final active Inventory prior to the end of the year.
Once the final Inventory is released, manufacturers, importers, and processors will have 90 days to notify EPA of any additional active notifications or changes that should be made to the Inventory. Once that 90 day period has passed, EPA intends the Inventory to become effective, and any manufacturer, processor, or importer that wishes to move a chemical from inactive back to the active Inventory will be required to submit a Form B Notice of Activity.
Throughout this process, industry has been highly supportive of EPA’s mandate to update the Inventory so that it accurately reflects chemicals that are actually active in commerce. An accurate TSCA Inventory is fundamental to each key step of the TSCA implementation process from pre-prioritization to risk management. As implementation moves forward, we expect the Inventory, in conjunction with the CDR updates, to continue to provide EPA an up-to-date picture of chemicals in commerce. We look forward to EPA’s release of the final Inventory that accurately reflects the number of chemicals in commerce.
https://blog.americanchemistry.com/2018/10/epa-successfully-completes-the-inventory-reset/
-
(ACC Mentioned) Rethinking the Way We Manage, Repurpose Waste
Oct 5, 2018 | Waste 360
By Cristina Commendatore
Waste-to-energy solutions, the concept of a circular economy, end-of-life product design and potential opportunities to help combat contamination and improve safety across the industry are just some of the topics discussed during the 2018 EEC/WTERT Bi-Annual Conference.
The conference took place October 4 and 5 at the Earth Engineering Center (EEC) at the Grove School of Engineering, City College of New York. Here are some of the key highlights from the event.Circular Versus Linear Economies
Henrietta Goddard, a research analyst at the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, kicked off her discussion with the main principles of a circular economy:By thinking about the impacts of the materials from the very beginning of the design process, waste and pollution can be significantly reduced.Products are designed to stay in use and keep circulating to regenerate natural systems.
When deciphering the differences between a linear economy and circular economy, Goddard explained that although the current linear economy has brought increased wealth, it has also helped generate more waste. But in a circular economy, a laptop, for example, would be kept as long as possible; it would be durably built and designed to last.
She also pointed out that food waste is another big problem. And one of the most frequently wasted food items is bread. Again, in a circular economy, discarded bread could be recycled and reused, say in the brewing business to make beer. Furthermore, organic materials that can’t be used again could be anaerobically digested to create fuel, she added.
Waste-to-energy solutions, the concept of a circular economy, end-of-life product design and potential opportunities to help combat contamination and improve safety across the industry are just some of the topics discussed during the 2018 EEC/WTERT Bi-Annual Conference.
The conference took place October 4 and 5 at the Earth Engineering Center (EEC) at the Grove School of Engineering, City College of New York. Here are some of the key highlights from the event.Circular Versus Linear Economies
Henrietta Goddard, a research analyst at the Ellen MacArthur Foundation, kicked off her discussion with the main principles of a circular economy:By thinking about the impacts of the materials from the very beginning of the design process, waste and pollution can be significantly reduced.Products are designed to stay in use and keep circulating to regenerate natural systems.
When deciphering the differences between a linear economy and circular economy, Goddard explained that although the current linear economy has brought increased wealth, it has also helped generate more waste. But in a circular economy, a laptop, for example, would be kept as long as possible; it would be durably built and designed to last.
She also pointed out that food waste is another big problem. And one of the most frequently wasted food items is bread. Again, in a circular economy, discarded bread could be recycled and reused, say in the brewing business to make beer. Furthermore, organic materials that can’t be used again could be anaerobically digested to create fuel, she added.ADVERTISING
“Circular economy makes sure that designing doesn’t hurt the environment,” said Goddard. “It is important to think about linear versus circular systems and how [a circular system] could be incorporated into your businesses and day-to-day operations. Collaboration is key when it comes to creating systemic change.”
Kathryn Garcia, commissioner for the City of New York Department of Sanitation (DSNY), which collects about 10,000 tons of trash and 2,000 tons of recyclables a day, said that the city, “unfortunately,” is still a linear economy. But Garcia and Mayor Bill DeBlasio’s administration are looking to change that.
New York City is three years into its ambitious goalof sending zero waste to landfill by 2030.
“What I like to say is ‘I am not the one creating the waste. You are the one creating the waste,’” Garcia said to conference attendees. “I am the one creating the programs, so you can achieve zero waste.”
She also stressed the importance of a dual partnership between the department and New Yorkers. The city is currently working toward community engagement to divert the organic portion of waste from landfill because that is where greenhouse gases come from. Garcia explained that compost facilities in and around the city have given materials back to parks and city landscapers, so New Yorkers actually get back the materials they want to see used.
“This is really about New Yorkers being able to see a product that they can get from their waste,” she said. “But we have built on this for a long period of time. There has been dedication from a lot of community composters over the last 25 years doing backyard composting, teaching master composting classes and running waste drop-off sites. They have been the pioneers who said, ‘New Yorkers will bring you your waste if they can make it into something that is useful.’”
And though it might not seem like much, textiles comprise 6 percent of the waste that ends up in the trash every day in New York City. The problem, according to Garcia, is that people do not keep their clothing anymore, despite the fact that there is a robust nonprofit sector that will reuse clothing—Goodwill and Salvation Army, for example.
Not unlike many municipalities around the country, household hazardous materials, shopping bags and electronics have been challenging items for the city to manage. So, the city is working hard to try to eliminate nonrecyclables from the waste stream. The City Council passed legislation to put a fee on plastic bags, and DSNY has distributed 300,000 reusable 0x30 bags on the subways and in area communities.
DSNY has also spent much of its efforts trying to ensure the city diverts old electronics for recycling or proper disposal. In 2010, a law was passed saying these materials could not end up in the waste stream, and due to household drop-off programs and legislation, DSNY saw a 60 percent decrease in e-waste disposal after implementing an e-waste disposal ban.
Finally, the department is working with and actively trying to engage the housing authority to promote recycling. One of the biggest challenges has been building infrastructure, which wasn’t designed for waste. Garcia pointed out that community engagement remains a challenge since these communities don’t have lobbies or places for residents to gather.
“Trying to figure out how to, one, engage with residents but also give them the ability to do it right has been a struggle. But it is something we are continuing to work on,” explained Garcia.Public Engagement and Perception
Paul Davison is the managing director of Proteus Communications Group in the U.K., and he loves talking about waste.
“Waste is my favorite subject, and the reason why I love waste is because most other people hate it,” he quipped, noting public attitude is absolutely critical to delivering to the circular economy.
“Can I just say for a minute, never use the phrase ‘circular economy’ with the public. They’ll have no idea what you’re talking about, and if you use jargon like that, they will stop listening to you straight away, because that’s an exclusive language,” he said. “They will think you are trying to be better than they are and that you are trying to con them. We have to watch the language we use when we’re talking to the public.”
According to Davison, there are some simple processes that can be used to educate the public. He stressed that when talking to the public about energy-from-waste (EfW), generally speaking, the public will think of a facility that emits noxious fumes and will likely have a dated view of the way technology works. Ultimately, people will think filth and dirt.
But realistically, he pointed out, the industry has to better drive home the benefits of advanced technology and getting value out of something that is actually waste.
“In Denmark, when I am talking to people about energy-from-waste, I don’t have to explain to them the advantages. They know it. And we need to share that with other communities that don’t know it,” explained Davison. “I generally believe that the United States has a great opportunity to replace some of the filthiest, decrepit and out-of-date energy-from-waste plants I’ve seen on the planet. You’ve got to clean up those energy-from-waste plants. This technology is clean and has a purpose, and its role in a circular economy is essential. If you just show the public the dirty technology that is here in America, you will reinforce that image to the public, and it will make your job engaging the public that much harder.”
Davison pointed to three disconnects between the public and waste:
Disconnect 1: People don’t view it as their problem, that it is their waste. “We need to get the public to be prepared for change and to understand that it is their problem,” he stressed.
Disconnect 2: Over the last 10 to 15 years, the focus on recycling has isolated residual waste disposal.
Disconnect 3: Waste and resources are not the same thing. “We have to talk about it the way the public thinks,” he explained. “The last thing you do is leave it to the engineers to come up with the terms of communications. The engineers will save the planet, but when it comes to communications, I wouldn’t leave it with them. If you leave it with them, you have stuff like brilliant anaerobic digestion. But when we went out to the public and asked what they think anaerobic digestion is, we got answers ranging from something you have to go to the hospital for or something that will ruin your holiday. So, don’t leave it to the engineers to come up with a communications solution.”
In addition, Davison discussed challenges of EfW adoption, including:In some countries, energy-from-waste is seen as an unacceptable technology. In some U.S. states, it’s still banned.The internet allows outdated and inaccurate information to continue to be circulated via social media.The waste sector does not invest enough in proactive reputation management.Opportunities for Change
Mallory Szczepanski, editorial director for Waste360, who also spoke during the conference, discussed the recent efforts to reduce plastic waste and marine litter, new technologies—optical sorters and robotics—and emerging opportunities that materials recovery facilities (MRFs) could implement to help combat contamination and improve safety amid China’s waste import ban.
“A lot of people view the moves from China as a crisis, but some people view it as an opportunity,” said Szczepanski. “There are opportunities for more domestic infrastructure, more recycling, new best practices to be implemented and new partnerships to be formed.”
She went on to explain that the waste and recycling industry can work with other industries like the design and manufacturing industry to ensure that products and packaging are designed with end of life in mind.
“Product designers and manufacturers should be thinking about waste in the beginning of the design process, and there are a lot of steps people and businesses are taking to do just that. Furniture companies like Steelcase and Herman Miller are just two examples of companies that are designing products for end of life.”
She also spoke about the issue of contamination, which is an ongoing challenge for the industry. By ramping up education efforts, improving recycling programs and utilizing new technologies, contamination can be reduced and materials entering the recycling stream can become cleaner, she stated.
Touching on the growing problem of marine litter and plastic waste, Szczepanski discussed the Great Pacific Garbage Patch cleanup efforts, the state of California’s recently passed plastic pollution reduction bills and the Save Our Seas Act of 2018 and the growing number of establishments and municipalities banning plastic bags and single-use straws.
In closing, she spoke about the future of the industry and some of the changes the industry may see in the near future, including more technologies coming online, possibly more waste reduction bills brought to the table and more changes within companies and recycling programs as China’s list of banned imports expands later this year and next year.
Craig Cookson, senior director, recycling and energy recovery, for the American Chemistry Council, noted that according to the most recent data from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 68.6 percent of plastics packaging goes to landfill.
“We need better data to achieve the goal of packaging that is reused, recycled or recovered by 2040,” he said.
In order to achieve that goal, Cookson stressed that educating consumers is critical, as well as developing a breakthrough and disruptive technology that will really change the way things are done now. He added that the key to a circular economy is including the energy and chemical companies in the chain.
“Next to natural gas and crude oil, the nonrecycled plastics that we’re throwing away are the third biggest provider of fuel,” he pointed out. “So why are they going to landfill, but we’re still digging up oil? Let’s think about innovation to dig our way out of these problems and not focus on bans.”
When thinking about MRFs of the future, the American Chemical Council formed a group, Materials Recovery for the Future (MRFF), several years ago to study new technology that can sort materials, as well as study ways to reduce contamination at MRFs.
https://www.waste360.com/recycling/rethinking-way-we-manage-repurpose-waste
-
(ACC Mentioned) DowDuPont Hit as Factory Splurge Boomerangs to Drive Up Costs
Oct 5, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Jack Kaskey
The U.S. shale boom has for years blessed chemical makers with cheap energy, prompting record spending on new factories.
Now that unchecked growth is costing the companies big.
DowDuPont Inc., Exxon Mobil Corp., Chevron Phillips Chemical Co. and others invested billions in new plants to take advantage of rock-bottom prices for ethane, a key raw material for making plastic. But they built so much so fast that demand for the feedstock exploded. Prices soared 43 percent last month and have doubled so far this year.
That is turning ethane, which used to give chemical makers a reliable cost advantage, into a squeeze on profit margins—and a drag on shares. More ethane-fed plants are set to open next year, adding to the pressure on prices.
“Unfortunately, it could get worse,’’ said Kelly Van Hull, manager of energy analytics at RBN Energy. Ethane supplies may not be able to catch up to demand until 2020, she said.
DowDuPont, one of the largest consumers of ethane, is seeing its years-long competitive advantage for making plastics in the U.S. erode just as it’s planning to spin off its Dow materials unit early next year. As a smaller, standalone plastics maker, the spinoff will feel the pain even more acutely.
Stock DeclinesDowDuPont fell 7.7 percent last week, the most since February, and is poised to extend losses this week. Over the past month, the shares have posted the biggest decline on a Standard & Poor’s index of materials makers.
Smaller competitors LyondellBasell Industries NV and Westlake Chemical Corp. have also slid, given their heavy reliance on ethane-based production. Ten analysts in September reduced profit estimates for Westlake, and 14 did so for LyondellBasell, according to data compiled by Bloomberg. The companies also were downgraded by some analysts.
The problems originated in a bonanza: The U.S. drilling boom in shale formations has produced abundant oil and natural gas, as well as gas liquids like ethane. Chemical companies rushed to build more plants in the U.S. to process the cheap feedstock into ethylene—a basic building block for plastics.
More than $200 billion in U.S. chemical investments have been announced since the shale boom began, with about half the projects completed, according to the American Chemistry Council, an industry group.
Export GrowthNow, U.S. ethane is even being exported to plastics makers in Scotland and India, increasing the pressure on prices. Suddenly, energy producers can’t keep up with demand.
“We are in the midst of a bit of a demand surge,” said Steve Zinger, senior vice president for chemicals at Wood Mackenzie. “There is probably a little panicking in the market.”
There is a bright spot, however. Rising crude prices are pushing up costs for competitors outside the U.S., which is increasing prices for plastics. So plastic makers like DowDuPont and LyondellBasell will recapture profits from that end of the supply chain, Jonas Oxgaard, a Bernstein analyst, said in a note last week.
Hassan Ahmed, an analyst at Alembic Global Advisors, sees the spike in ethane prices reducing third-quarter earnings at the big U.S. plastics producers. But he’s not too concerned about what he sees as a temporary market issue.
More New PlantsNext year will bring even more demand. Ethane-fed ethylene plants in Texas and Louisiana are on the way in the coming year from Sasol Ltd., Shintech Inc., Indorama Ventures Plc, Formosa Plastics Group and a joint venture of Westlake and Lotte Chemical Corp.
Ethane prices are at risk of remaining elevated for nine to 12 months before energy producers can build enough infrastructure to pipe it to the Gulf Coast and extract it from raw natural gas, Zinger said.
Adding to the pressure for some ethylene producers: the surge in new plants has created a surplus that deflated prices 26 percent this year through September. That means those companies pay more at the front for ethane, then get less for the ethylene they produce. Profit margins from ethane-fed ethylene plants have dropped to the lowest in 15 years, down 80 percent from a 2015 peak, according to data compiled by Nexant Inc.
Until prices stabilize, companies have a few options to mitigate the damage, said Anne B. Keller, Genscape Inc.’s product director for natural gas liquids. Some ethylene producers can switch to other energy feedstocks that are now more competitive after ethane’s price spike.
Companies with new plants coming online can delay start up, and some are pulling back production at existing plants, Keller said.
Eastman Chemical Co. has temporarily idled an ethylene plant in Longview, Texas, said spokeswoman Tracy Kilgore Addington. Chevron Phillips reduced output at ethylene plants at two Texas plants, according to Keller. The company declined to comment. DowDuPont didn’t respond to a request for comment.
It will take a while until ethane supply and demand are balanced again, Keller said.
“We’ll be in a lot better shape next year,” she said, “but it could be end of the year.”
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/dowdupont-hit-as-factory-splurge-boomerangs-to-drive-up-costs
-
Petrochemicals to Become Dominant Driver of Oil Demand Growth — IEA
Oct 4, 2018 | Financial Times
By Anjli Raval
Petrochemicals are rapidly becoming the biggest driver of global oil consumption — ahead of trucks, aviation and shipping — accounting for more than a third of the growth by 2030, the International Energy Agency said.
The move comes as cars and other passenger vehicles become less aggressive users of oil because of efficiency improvements, alternative fuels, and electrification, the Paris-based energy body said in a report published on Friday Chemical products derived from oil and gas are used to make goods, from plastic packaging and detergents to mattress foams and coatings for television screens, which are increasingly the markers of modern life.
The sector is growing quickly and is expected to have an outsized impact on the energy sector, accounting for nearly half of oil demand growth by 2050. But the IEA said there is a policy “blind spot” when understanding the ramifications of this trend.
“As the global economy develops, the future of the petrochemicals industry is of major significance for both global energy security and the environment,” Fatih Birol, executive director, said in the report.
The plastics segment is the fastest-growing group of bulk materials in the world, compared with others such as steel, aluminium or cement. Meanwhile synthetic nitrogen fertilisers underpin nearly half the world’s food production.
The US and Europe, among other advanced economies, use 20 times as much plastic and up to 10 times as much fertiliser as many developing countries in Asia on a per capita basis, indicating the sector’s significant growth potential. But there has been mounting environmental concerns over plastics pollution in oceans.
A public outcry in Europe has led to unprecedented measures to tackle waste, including a ban on single-use cutlery, plates and straws. Mr Birol said without “drastic improvements” in waste management “the quantity of plastic waste, including that entering the oceans, [will continue to] rise from today’s already unacceptable levels.”
Even as more recycling of single-use plastics takes place, a sharp increase in consumption of these items in emerging economies will still far outweigh any reduced usage. This also means oil demand in the sector will stay robust, the IEA said.
Today, the petrochemicals industry absorbs approximately 14 per cent, or 13m barrels a day, of the world’s oil and 8 per cent, or 300bn cubic metres of gas, with much of this being used as feedstock.
Of the nearly 10m b/d growth in total oil demand projected for 2030, the chemical sector is on course to account for more than 30 per cent. It also accounts for 7 per cent of the roughly 850 bcm global increase in gas demand by 2030.
Royal Dutch Shell and Saudi Aramco are among those developing their petrochemicals business to tap into this market driven by a growing pool of wealthier people who demand improved living standards.
The push into this sector comes as they seek new revenue sources amid expectations that oil’s role as a transport fuel may shrink and as the world shifts towards cleaner forms of energy in the coming decades.
https://www.ft.com/content/9637b6a4-c824-11e8-ba8f-ee390057b8c9
-
Ewire: ACE rule? What ACE rule?
Oct 5, 2018 | Inside EPA
The Trump administration is rolling back the Obama EPA's Clean Power Plan utility greenhouse gas standards, and replacing it with a narrow rule intended to lift the regulatory burden on coal plants. In response? Some electric utilities making their long-term plans doubt the rule will have any effect on them.
“Based on what we know right now, we do not have any plants whose future would be affected by the adoption of the” Affordable Clean Energy (ACE) rule, says a spokesman for the massive Southeastern utility Duke Energy, according to a Reuters story.
The news service surveyed 44 utilities that have announced coal plant retirements about the impact of the ACE rule, which focuses on installing efficiency projects at coal plants. The survey “showed none of them currently expects the new EPA proposal will affect the timing of those retirements.”
It showed 23 utilities believe the plan will have no effect, while three say it is too early to know and seven declined to comment. The remainder did not respond.
A spokesman for another huge power company, NRG, said the “energy industry is reducing its carbon footprint based on economics and customer demand. NRG is part of this momentum.”
FirstEnergy Solutions -- which has urged the Trump administration to prop up coal plants in power markets -- did not comment on the survey but did confirm that it plans to shutter 12 units at three plants in Ohio, Pennsylvania and West Virginia by 2022. The Mid-Atlantic grid operator recently said those closures would not harm reliability.
Reuters' article underscores a development that many observers have long been watching. Inside EPA's Dawn Reeves recently looked at an example of the trend in miniature -- a new long-term resource plan for Colorado's largest utility, Xcel Energy.
There, the utility will shutter 1.2 gigawatts (GW) of coal power while replacing it with over 1.8 GW of wind, solar and storage -- one of the largest deployments of new storage resources. One attorney tracking the plan said the utility received “unbelievable” bids for the zero-carbon power.
“There may be a few plants out there” where continuing to use coal "strategically makes sense,” the attorney said. “But generally speaking if you look at the investor-owned utility world, all these folks are continuing to move on from coal-fired generation. There's risk. There's cost. Even if the federal rollback doesn't change, this is what the economics look like to folks who are responsible for delivering electricity.”
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/ewire-ace-rule-what-ace-rule
-
EPIC Midstream to Convert NGL Pipeline to Crude to Aid Permian Bottleneck
Oct 5, 2018 | Houston Chronicle
By Jordan Blum
EPIC Midstream said it will temporarily convert the multibillion-dollar natural gas liquids pipeline it is building in Texas to crude oil service in order to help alleviate the pipeline shortage in West Texas' booming Permian Basin.
San Antonio-based EPIC plans to bring its 730-mile NGL pipeline online in the third quarter of 2019 and the pipeline will deliver crude oil at least until January 2020 when its adjacent crude oil pipeline system is projected to start up.Recommended Video
The Permian is producing record volumes and there are pipeline shortages for oil, NGLs and natural gas. But the most dire bottleneck is for the delivery of crude oil, which is the highest-priced fossil fuel.
There's a race to build bevy of new pipelines from the Permian to refining and port hubs near Houston and Corpus Christi, but most of these projects aren't coming online until mid-2019 or later. In the meantime, Permian activity is plateauing because of the deep discounts on Midland oil triggered by the lack of transportation options.
"We are proud to be able to offer an interim solution for our customers, while we continue to build out the EPIC Crude Oil Pipeline to service this region," said Phillip Mezey, chief executive of EPIC.
EPIC, which is backed by the Los Angeles private equity firm Ares Management, lists its top customers as Houston firms Noble Energy, Apache Corp. and Midland-based Diamondback Energy.
https://www.chron.com/business/energy/article/EPIC-Midstream-to-convert-NGL-pipeline-to-crude-13283904.php
-
In Your Backyard: Report Finds Over 124 Million Americans Live Near Toxic Threats
Oct 5, 2018 | WXPR
Chances are you or someone you know live near a potentially hazardous chemical facility, and may not even know it.
A new interactive map and report from the Environmental Justice Health Alliance identifies 12,000 such facilities that it said present health and safety risks.
Based on the report, 124 million Americans live with a threat of harm - 39 percent of the country's population.
Eric Whalen, community coordinator with the alliance, said the map is a wake-up call to those who review it. "A lot of folks just aren't aware that there are over 12,000 chemical facilities in America - in neighborhoods and towns all across the nation - that could at any moment explode, or emit poisonous gas, and in some cases, kill thousands of people," Whalen said.
The analysis suggested that 125,000 schools and 11,000 medical facilities are vulnerable to a chemical disaster. The report recommended the public be made aware of the potential dangers, and whenever possible, that the risks be eliminated or reduced. Whalen and others noted that accidents or 'near-misses' aren't unusual, such as at the Torrance Refinery outside Los Angeles, owned by Exxon Mobil.
An explosion in 2015 prompted a near-miss with a massive piece of ductwork and a container of hydrofluoric acid. If the metal had hit the chemical, experts say thousands would have been killed or sickened. Sally Hayati, president of the Torrance Refinery Action Alliance, is fighting for the plant to use safer chemicals that her group says are already used by other facilities. "Those of us who are aware are desperate to get rid of it; it's an unnecessary hazard," Hayait said. "It's just hard for people to recognize a hazard before it happens. We have to recognize that this is a risk that just should not be tolerated." While the hazardous facilities present a risk to anyone nearby, Whalen added that some populations and neighborhoods are disproportionately affected. "People of color and the poor are overwhelmingly at risk; they're getting piled on" Whalen said. "So, they deal with the day-to-day pollution that these facilities emit.
They live closer to facilities on average, so they're more likely to face a chemical disaster. They also, unfortunately, face a higher risk of cancers and respiratory disease."
The Trump Administration recently attempted to block rule updates designed to improve chemical disaster-prevention measures at more than 12,000 facilities regulated under a program known as the Risk Management Plan. That move was defeated by the Environmental Justice Health Alliance and other groups that successfully sued to enact safety improvements.
http://www.wxpr.org/post/your-backyard-report-finds-over-124-million-americans-live-near-toxic-threats#stream/0
-
Top EPA Union Official Attacks Senate Vote to Advance Kavanaugh
Oct 5, 2018 | Inside EPA
A top EPA union official is attacking the Senate's 51-49 procedural vote to advance to a final vote this weekend on whether to confirm Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, citing the appellate judge's history of rulings that the official argues prove the nominee would decide against EPA polices in high court cases.
Following the Oct. 5 procedural vote, Mike Mikulka, president of the Association of Federal Government Employees Local 704 that represents EPA staff, said, “Kavanaugh brings imbalance to the Supreme Court and will give big polluters license to self-regulate and release more pollution.”
The mostly partisan cloture vote to proceed with consideration of the nomination -- with only Sens. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) and Joe Manchin (D-WV) crossing party lines -- signals an end to one of the most bitter fights over a Supreme Court pick in memory. It follows a series of sexual-assault allegations against Kavanaugh, nominated by President Donald Trump to replace the retired Justice Anthony Kennedy.
Kavanaugh, a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, faces a final confirmation vote on Oct. 6, though the outcome of that vote is not assured. Senators who voted on the cloture motion to advance to a final vote could still potentially vote against the nominee on the final roll call.
However, if Kavanaugh wins confirmation he is expected to solidify a conservative majority on the high court, replacing Kennedy, a swing vote on environmental issues, with a long-time opponent of broad environmental regulations -- prompting warnings from the top EPA union official.
“Instead of having confidence in the EPA’s scientific integrity, Kavanaugh is deferential to Trump’s so-called energy dominance and big business agenda. His record rejects federal regulators and past EPA rulemaking of the Clean Air Act as being too broad in its reach. Further, he will prevent EPA from tackling climate change,” said Mikulka, who is also spokesman for Save the U.S. EPA, a union-backed effort fighting proposed cuts to EPA's staff and budget.
Kavanaugh is poised to step onto the high court in a term with no cases on the docket that directly involve EPA, but the potential for major rulings in administrative law that would affect the agency’s power indirectly -- such as two pending cases that aim to expand the long-dormant “non-delegation doctrine” that limits the rulemaking discretion Congress can give executive agencies.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/top-epa-union-official-attacks-senate-vote-advance-kavanaugh
-
The Make America First Case for Carbon Capture
Oct 5, 2018 | Real Clear Energy
By Beau Rothschild
Next month, United Nations scientists are set to report that we can no longer win the battle against climate change by reducing carbon emissions: we have to start draining those emissions from the air. This conclusion simply adds to a growing scientific consensus that carbon removal technologies that actively remove CO2 already in circulation can be delayed no longer. Thus far, the U.S. government has only shown lukewarm support for these technologies, but America has as much to gain as anyone from their mass adoption. It’s time for President Donald J. Trump and his administration to take a second look at this issue to put America first in carbon capture technology.
The UN report is hardly surprising given the problems that have blighted the Paris climate agreement. Trump, of course, has already pulled out, and many other countries are showing indifference; a report earlier this year ranked three-quarters of EU member-states “poor” in their attempts to meet their Paris obligations. A recent meeting, supposed to lay down a set of rules for the agreement’s implementation, ended in deadlock – the latest in a series of tetchy summits that have exposed political fault lines in the accord.
As those lofty Paris targets recede into the distance, many scientists say it’s now too late. They add that, even if we manage to limit global warming to 1.5°C, this target is too conservative to avoid the worse effects of climate change. It’s time to start removing the carbon in our atmosphere rather than merely restricting it. The Royal Society, the Royal Academy of Engineering and the World Resources Institute (WRI) have all reached this conclusion in recent months, while America’s own National Academy of Sciences is expected to take the same line shortly.
Carbon removal can be achieved through a variety of means, from planting trees to more advanced forms of carbon capture and storage (CCS). One of the most exciting of these approaches, known as direct air capture, sucks the carbon directly out of the air – often using a chemical absorbent – before storing or using it. Swiss firm Climeworks has raised over $30m for a patent-pending technology that filters the CO2 out of ambient air, while Canadian firm Carbon Engineering has developed giant fans that vacuum up the gases.
Scientists believe that there’s no limit to the amount of CO2 that can be harvested through direct air capture technology, and geological surveys from the authority Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change shown that Earth has the capacity to sequester more than 1,000 years’ worth of CO2 – so there’s no lack of storage space. It’s also believed that retrofitting coal-fired power stations with advanced CCS mechanisms could reduce their emissions by up to 100%, a crucial benefit as so many countries still rely on fossil fuels.
But CCS technologies, particularly direct air capture, remain highly expensive. Climeworks, for example, says it currently costs between $600 and $800 to capture a ton of CO2. Although recent analyses have shown the cost of these technologies can be reduced exponentially, it requires a huge amount of investment at government level to realize these cost reductions and scale up the technologies.
The Trump administration has yet to fully commit to this technology, yet there have been some small steps forward. In May, for instance, the Department of Energy officially launched the Carbon Capture, Utilization, and Storage (CCUS) Initiative, which will be led by the U.S., Norway and Saudi Arabia along with other international partners. The government has expanded tax credits to accelerate investment in CCS, and extended eligibility to companies involved in direct air capture. And while the administration has slashed the DOE’s 2019 budget for R&D on CCS by up to 76%, it’s still backed a study to explore the viability of direct air capture.
If the government commits further resources to carbon removal, this process can eat up 25% of America’s emissions. President Trump understands that the global market for carbon removal is predicted to be worth $12 billion by 2023, and retro-fitting power plants with CCS technology will help the U.S. export more clean coal. CO2 can be recycled, from bricks to shoes (in fact, America is already using recycled carbon dioxide to boost its oil industry).
President Trump has already done some great work in this arena. America has achieved better emissions reduction figures than any other country since 2005; CO2 output from its power sector have fallen to 30-year lows. In contrast, current WRI projections show that, even in 30 years’ time, the technology will require around 7% of America’s entire energy output to capture a tiny fraction of its emissions. Yet we still have a ways to go, because the U.S. still has the world’s second-biggest carbon footprint, and it’s on track to miss its Paris targets by up to a third. A new study from Nature Climate Change suggests only India suffers more from carbon pollution than the U.S.
Activists will no doubt be watching with interest when Congress votes on a new piece of bipartisan legislation, which would establish a prize program for CCS technologies as well as an advisory board for direct air capture. Naturally, this would be a major boon to those working on carbon removal technologies. If America wants to be a leader in this field, this is a good first step.
Beau Rothschild, the founder of Rothschild Policy and Politics, formerly served as the members outreach director for the Committee on House Administration.
https://www.realclearenergy.org/articles/2018/10/05/the_make_america_first_case_for_carbon_capture_110349.html
-
OIG to Review TRI Enforcement of Late-Reporting Companies
Oct 5, 2018 | Inside EPA
EPA's Office of the Inspector General (OIG) is preparing to begin a review of how the agency addresses situations in which companies who are required to report their environmental emissions to EPA as part of the Toxics Inventory Release (TRI) program do so after the TRI's statutory deadline.
In an Oct. 4 memo to EPA enforcement chief Susan Bodine, a top OIG official explains that the office is “begin[ing] preliminary research” into the topic and “[o]ur project objective will address whether the EPA is taking enforcement actions against companies that delay required reporting of chemical release data to EPA’s TRI.”
TRI tracks releases of specified chemicals by air, land and water disposal, recycling and other releases to the environment as defined by its authorizing statute, the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA). EPCRA section 313 requires that each year, TRI reporters must submit the previous year's emissions data to EPA by July 1.
The TRI program also produces an annual National Analysis of data collected. The latest National Analysis, released last January, found releases of toxic chemicals to air decreased 58 percent, or by 829 million pounds between 2006 and 2016, with the most recent year marking another drop.
OIG's Christina Lovingood, director of its Land Cleanup and Waste Management Office of Audit and Evaluation, writes to Bodine that the OIG “project will include the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, and will involve the analysis of TRI reporting data from select regions to be determined at a later date.”
“The potential returns on investment for this project include recommendations that may result in additional enforcement penalties (potential monetary benefits) and enhanced integrity of TRI data,” Lovingood writes.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/oig-review-tri-enforcement-late-reporting-companies
-
States Have 60 Days to Sue EPA over 'Good Neighbor' Decision
Oct 5, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Sean Reilly
EPA today opened a 60-day window for the filing of lawsuits challenging its rejection of two states' bids for help in dealing with upwind power plant pollution.
Both Maryland and Delaware regulators had previously said they are considering filing such legal challenges. With publication of EPA's decision in today's Federal Register, they will have until early December to decide whether to pursue litigation with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.
The two states had brought the "good neighbor" petitions in 2016, asking EPA to clamp down on pollution from coal-fired power plants in a total of five states that they blamed for undercutting efforts to meet the 2008 ground-level ozone standard.
In denying the petitions last month, EPA said it was acting on the "best data available" (Greenwire, Sept. 17). The agency also underscored the role of its 2016 Cross-State Air Pollution Rule Update, which is intended to cut releases of ozone-forming emissions of nitrogen oxides (NOx) from electricity generators in 22 states, including the five named in the good neighbor petitions.
In the denial, EPA said there are no other "cost-effective" NOx reduction control measures beyond what's required in the cross-state pollution rule. Delaware and Maryland dispute that contention. The D.C. Circuit heard oral arguments this week on lawsuits challenging the cross-state pollution rule brought by states as well as industry and environmental groups (Greenwire, Oct. 3).
Ozone, the main ingredient in smog, is created by the reaction of NOx and volatile organic compounds in sunlight. The bulk of Delaware is currently in nonattainment for the 2008 standard of 75 parts per billion. In Maryland, Baltimore County — home to the state's largest city — and 10 other counties are similarly out of compliance.
In 2015, EPA tightened the standard to 70 parts per billion; the agency this year deemed most of the same areas in nonattainment for that benchmark as well.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/10/05/stories/1060100659
Industry and Association News - There are no clips to report at this time.
LCSA News
Chemical Management News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested