Preview Newsletter
ACC AM 09/10/18
-
(ACC Blog) Celebrate Nanotechnology on National Nano Day
Oct 9, 2018 | American Chemistry Matters
Happy National Nanotechnology Day! -
(ACC Mentioned) Demilec Wins 2018 Polyurethane Award
Oct 8, 2018 | Rubber and Plastics News
The Center for the Polyurethanes Industry of the American Chemistry Council named Demilec (USA) Inc. as the winner of the 2018 Polyurethane Innovation Award. -
Senate Moves Toward Vote on DOJ Environment Pick
Oct 9, 2018 | E&E Daily
By Ellen M. Gilmer
The Justice Department could soon have a new chief for environmental litigation. -
Science, Health and Climate Change
Oct 8, 2018 | The New York Times - Opinion
By Jennifer L. Costley, Doris Fenig, and Jeffrey Shaman
The validation of predictions is an essential component of the scientific method, and scientists are pleased when their predictions are realized. -
‘Forever Chemicals’ Seep Into Michigan’s Water (and House Races)
Oct 8, 2018 | Roll Call
By Jacob Holzman
Years after the Flint water crisis drew national attention, another water pollution issue has emerged in House races in Michigan. -
Oil Industry Raising Millions to Defeat Colo. Setback Proposal
Oct 9, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By Mike Lee
With less than a month until Election Day, the oil and gas industry is working on several fronts to defeat a ballot initiative that would move new oil and gas wells away from homes. -
Offshore Drillers Combining in $2.4 Billion Deal
Oct 8, 2018 | Houston Chronicle
By Rye Druzin
The combination of two offshore drilling companies in a $2.4 billion deal will likely not be the last merger in that industry as the offshore energy sector continues to consolidate during a slow recovery from the last oil bust. -
EPA Backs Down From New Energy Efficiency Ratings After Landlords Balk
Oct 9, 2018 | The Wall Street Journal
By Peter Grant
The Environmental Protection Agency has put on hold plans to update its system for rating the energy efficiency of office and industrial buildings, pausing after some big landlords complained the methodology would unfairly penalize their properties. -
Senators: Utility 'Woefully' Unprepared for Explosions
Oct 9, 2018 | AP (In E&E Energywire)
By Philip Marcelo
The natural gas company at the center of the explosions north of Boston last month was "woefully unprepared" to prevent or respond to the unfolding disaster, Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey said Friday after a review of internal company documents. -
West Virginia Joins International Energy Coalition
Oct 8, 2018 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jamison Cocklin
West Virginia has been accepted as the 14th member of the Energy Council, an international nonpartisan legislative organization whose members are focused on a wide variety of energy-related issues. -
Army Corps Halts Mountain Valley Permit in Va.
Oct 9, 2018 | AP (In E&E Energywire)
The Army Corps of Engineers has suspended a permit the Mountain Valley pipeline needs to cross Virginia waterways. -
Lawmakers to Explore 'Black Start' Power
Oct 9, 2018 | E&E Daily
By Blake Sobczak
The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee is set to review the process for restoring electricity to the bulk power grid following a major blackout. -
New U.N. Climate Report Says Put a High Price on Carbon
Oct 8, 2018 | The New York Times
By Brad Plumer
In its landmark report on the fast-approaching dangers of climate change, a United Nations scientific panel said on Sunday that putting a price on carbon dioxide emissions would be central for getting global warming under control. -
Carbon Tax Gets Renewed Attention but Still Faces Resistance
Oct 9, 2018 | AP (In The New York Times)
Advocates of taxing fossil fuels believe their position is stronger now because of an alarming new report on climate change and a Nobel Prize awarded to by two American economists, but neither development is likely to break down political resistance to a carbon tax. -
IPCC Report Lays Out Radical Path to Combat Global Warming
Oct 8, 2018 | PoliticoPro
By Paola Tamma
The world can keep global warming to below 1.5 degrees, but for that to happen it needs “rapid and far-reaching transitions” that include a deep cut in greenhouse gas emissions and a greater reliance on nuclear power, according to the summary of a U.N. climate science report published on Monday. -
ExxonMobil Gives $1m to Campaign for a Carbon Tax
Oct 9, 2018 | Financial Times
By Ed Crooks
ExxonMobil, the largest US oil group, is giving $1m to support a US campaign to address the threat of climate change by introducing a carbon tax, which would return revenues to the public in dividend payments. -
The Magic Kingdom Is Going Green
Oct 9, 2018 | The New York Times
By Bruce Horovitz
Even the visionary Walt Disney probably could not have imagined this one.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
-
(ACC Blog) Celebrate Nanotechnology on National Nano Day
Oct 9, 2018 | American Chemistry Matters
Happy National Nanotechnology Day! Celebrate today by helping to raise awareness of the benefits of nanotechnology and learning a little more about its amazingly tiny science.
Why is nanotechnology important? Nanotechnology is used across numerous scientific fields, including chemistry, biology, physics, materials science and engineering, and it is at the forefront of some incredible discoveries and technological advances.
Here are a few ways nanotechnology is changing our world in 2018:Helping to treat strokes and spinal cord injuries: An international team of American and Russian scientists have developed an innovative therapeutic substance based on synthesized nanoparticle antioxidants. These nanoparticles could help rehabilitate patients after acute spinal injuries, strokes and heart attacks.Sustainable farming: Researchers from Iowa State University have created a new, tiny tool that can take water measurements from plants and crops without hindering plant growth. This tool works by detecting critical information on water, which can help farmers optimize the growing environment and improve their methods.Diagnosing and treating cancer: University of New South Wales (UNSW) in Australia researchers have found that gold-plated nanoparticles would take only about 30 minutes to detect cancer, compared with the almost 12 hours required for current diagnostic methods. This diagnosis method could be more affordable and require less blood from a patient than what is currently needed.Safe drinking water: Clean, affordable drinking water continues to be a global challenge. Researchers from University of Texas recently published their results in using natural sunlight and nanotechnology to purify water. In fact, nanomaterials used for water filtration can create solutions for removing a wide range of contaminants from any type of water supply.Preserving history: Scientists from Heracles, a European research project, are studying the effects of climate change on ancient monuments around the world. The scientists have developed new mortar to strengthen important structures by adding nano- and microparticles that improve weather resistance and durability to our historic landmarks in changing climates.
Looking for more ways to celebrate nanotechnology?
The National Nanotechnology Initiative plays a critical role in coordinating research, investments and education efforts across the federal government. To celebrate National Nanotechnology Day, the National Nanotechnology Initiative and several schools, labs and organizations nationwide will be holding events to commemorate the date, including a challenge to run a 100 Billion Nanometer Dash (equal to 100 meters) and a series of podcasts featuring stories from the National Nanotechnology Initiative. A full list of events for the date and updates can be found on the official NNI website and on their twitter page, @NNInanonews.
Alongside these efforts, the American Chemistry Council’s (ACC) Nanotechnology Panel is at the forefront of guiding the responsible development of nanotechnologies domestically and internationally and providing a scientifically sound approach to nanotechnology policy.
To learn more about the Nanotechnology Panel or to inquire about joining the panel, contact Jay West at jay_west@americanchemistry.com.
You can also follow @AmChemistry on Twitter during our official nanotechnology Twitter takeover and retweet our facts and graphics on nanotechnology.
https://blog.americanchemistry.com/2018/10/celebrate-nanotechnology-on-national-nano-day/
-
(ACC Mentioned) Demilec Wins 2018 Polyurethane Award
Oct 8, 2018 | Rubber and Plastics News
The Center for the Polyurethanes Industry of the American Chemistry Council named Demilec (USA) Inc. as the winner of the 2018 Polyurethane Innovation Award.
The company won with Heatlok HFO, described by Demilec as a zero ODP, ultra-low GWP and high renewable/recyclable closed-cell foam for the insulation industry, according to a CPI news release.
The product series provides benefits for residential builders and commercial builds, Demilec said.
Finalists also included ICL-IP America In.c for VeriQuel R100, a phosphorus-based reactive flame retardant. SWD Urethane was also a finalist with Quik-Shield 108YM, an ultra-low-density open-cell spray polyurethane foam insulation product.
The finalists and winning entry were announced during the closing session of the 2018 Polyurethanes Technical Conference in Atlanta.
The award promotes an industry-wide goal of creating new products and technologies that benefit consumers around the world, CPI Senior Director Lee Salamone said in a statement.
The conference also feature 15 technical sessions, 22 posters, 78 papers and 55 exhibitors, as well as the Professional Development Program.
http://www.rubbernews.com/article/20181008/NEWS/181009943/demilec-wins-2018-polyurethane-award
-
Senate Moves Toward Vote on DOJ Environment Pick
Oct 9, 2018 | E&E Daily
By Ellen M. Gilmer
The Justice Department could soon have a new chief for environmental litigation.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) on Saturday took steps to push a procedural vote as soon as this week on the nomination of Jeffrey Bossert Clark, President Trump's pick to head the agency's Environment and Natural Resources Division.
The president selected Clark, a former DOJ official in the George W. Bush administration, in early 2017. He has cleared the Judiciary Committee twice but hasn't yet received a full Senate vote.
Clark drew criticism from Democrats and environmentalists for voicing doubts about climate science and calling the Obama administration's environmental agenda "out of control" (E&E Daily, June 29, 2017).
The nominee is a partner at Kirkland & Ellis LLP and represented BP PLC in litigation over the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill. If confirmed, he'll replace Jeffrey Wood, who has served as acting head of ENRD since early last year.
Clark cleared the Judiciary panel on party-line votes. He's expected to face similar division before the full Senate.
"I think it's going to be close," said University of Richmond law professor Carl Tobias. "I wouldn't be surprised to see a party-line vote. I think the Democrats had serious concerns about him heading up all the litigation involving the environment and natural resources, given his past practice."Judges
The Senate is also poised to take action this week on a full slate of federal judges.
Jonathan Kobes. Judiciary Committee
On Thursday, the Judiciary Committee will meet to vote on several individuals whose nominations were delayed during the past month of Senate wrangling over Brett Kavanaugh, who was confirmed to the Supreme Court on Saturday.
The nominees include Jonathan Kobes for the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The American Bar Association last month returned a "not qualified" rating for Kobes.
"The Committee believes that Mr. Kobes has neither the requisite experience nor evidence of his ability to fulfill the scholarly writing required of a United States Circuit Court Judge," ABA Standing Committee Chairman Paul Moxley wrote in a Sept. 14 letter.
The other nominees set for this week's markup are:Kenneth Bell to sit on the U.S. District Court for the Western District of North Carolina.Stephanie Gallagher for the District of Maryland.Mary McElroy for the District of Rhode Island.Carl Nichols for the District of Columbia.John O'Connor for the Northern, Eastern and Western districts of Oklahoma.Martha Maria Pacold for the Northern District of Illinois.Mary Rowland for the Northern District of Illinois.Steven Seeger for the Northern District of Illinois.
Separately, the panel has a hearing tomorrow on judicial nominees. The list has yet to be posted, and the schedule could change.
Schedule: The hearing is Wednesday, Oct. 10, at 10 a.m. in 226 Dirksen.
Witnesses: TBA.
Schedule: The markup is Thursday, Oct. 11, at 10 a.m. in 226 Dirksen.
https://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2018/10/09/stories/1060102017
-
Science, Health and Climate Change
Oct 8, 2018 | The New York Times - Opinion
By Jennifer L. Costley, Doris Fenig, and Jeffrey Shaman
To the Editor:
Re “E.P.A. to Eliminate Office That Gives Scientific Input” (news article, Sept. 28):
The validation of predictions is an essential component of the scientific method, and scientists are pleased when their predictions are realized. But there is no pleasure in seeing the outcome of predictions of a diminished role of science in the Environmental Protection Agency stemming from the installation of Andrew Wheeler as that agency’s acting administrator.
The E.P.A.’s website declares that its efforts to reduce environmental risks are “based on the best available scientific information.” Elimination of the Office of Science Advisor will undermine the foundational role of science in supporting credible decision-making to safeguard human health and ecosystems from environmental pollutants.
If the agency is to live up to its mandate, it needs accurate data and the expertise of a fully qualified science adviser to ensure that this data is correctly interpreted and appropriately applied to achieve the agency’s mission.
Jennifer L. Costley
New York
The writer is director of physical sciences, sustainability and engineering at the New York Academy of Sciences.To the Editor:
Re “Trump Prepares Major Weakening of Mercury Rules” (news article, Oct. 1):
I realize that there are many Americans who love President Trump. They shout praise at his rallies. Applaud his crude attacks on enemies and Democrats. Overlook with excuses his supposed sexual aggression. Believe his very distortion of the truth. Cheer him on in his every decision, irrespective of its plausibility.
But when his actions and his presidential orders are detrimental to the well-being of their own children and grandchildren, the cheering must stop.
Doris Fenig
Floral Park, N.Y.To the Editor:
Re “One Thing You Can Do: Divest” (climate newsletter, Sept. 26):
One more thing you can do: Become educated on the health effects of climate change and share this information with others. Broader awareness and understanding of this interconnection is crucial for progress to occur.
With climate change accelerating, we need an educated public and a cadre of informed clinicians and health workers who can prevent, reduce and respond to the resulting health effects.
Health-profession schools must provide the training and education, and in so doing develop a vital resource: tomorrow’s leaders and caregivers.
Our future doctors, nurses and public health professionals need this training, as it will make individual and public health more resilient, and provide a powerful, informed voice that can advocate for reducing greenhouse gas pollution, for mitigating climate change and cleaning our air, soil and water.
As health is an essential right, we must all better recognize how that right is linked to the environment we are radically altering.
Jeffrey Shaman
New York
The writer is director of the Climate and Health Program at the Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health.https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/08/opinion/letters/science-health-climate-environmental-protection-agency.html
-
‘Forever Chemicals’ Seep Into Michigan’s Water (and House Races)
Oct 8, 2018 | Roll Call
By Jacob Holzman
Years after the Flint water crisis drew national attention, another water pollution issue has emerged in House races in Michigan.
Residents are growing concerned about human exposure to so-called forever chemicals, known as perfluoroalkyl or polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS. The chemicals, linked to health problems such as hypertension in pregnant women and a higher risk of developing certain cancers, have been found in groundwater and drinking water systems across the state.
Along with other water-centric issues springing up through the summer, including an outbreak of lead contamination in Detroit public school drinking water systems, the current of bad news about Michiganders’ water has made the issue a “powder keg” in the election, said Bob Allison, deputy director of the Michigan League of Conservation Voters.
In July, Republican Gov. Rick Snyder declared a state of emergency in Kalamazoo County after drinking water in the town of Parchment tested at over 20 times the EPA’s health advisory limit for two forms of PFAS — PFOS and PFOA — which were phased out of production in 2000 amid concerns over their risks to human health.
The state so far had found at least 38 sites, including public drinking water utilities, rivers and streams, with high concentrations of PFAS, according to the Michigan PFAS Action Response Team, a multiagency program started in November 2017 to address the problem.
While officials are telling residents water that tests below the EPA threshold is safe to drink, a draft Health and Human Services Department toxicology profile released in June assessing certain forms of PFAS found EPA’s threshold may be between seven and 10 times too high.
“PFAS, like the Flint water crisis — they’re both examples that make it clear elections matter,” said Democratic Rep. Dan Kildee, whose district includes Flint and whose midterm race is rated Solid Democratic by Inside Elections with Nathan L. Gonzales. “Public policy is not some abstraction and it could really have an effect on people who don’t think about politics all the time.”
While Flint’s problem occurred in a historically Democratic district, PFAS have emerged as a problem in suburban and rural communities that traditionally vote Republican. Of 38 sites the state deemed contaminated by the chemicals, 23 are in GOP-held districts.
Local water activist Cody Angell started the clean water activist group Michigan Demands Action after high levels of PFAS contamination were found in the drinking water samples in his town of Plainfield Township coming from a nearby tannery. His group has grown to over 6,000 members.
Want insight more often? Get Roll Call in your inbox
Angell, who lives in Republican Rep. Justin Amash’s district, said he has been contacted by nearly every candidate running in the region and “their main platform right now is water,” he said. Amash’s re-election race is rated Solid Republican by Inside Elections.‘Talking point’
Two midterm contests in nearby GOP-held districts are rated Toss-ups by Inside Elections: the 11th District, where Democrat Haley Stevens and Republican Lena Epstein are vying to replace Republican Dave Trott, who’s not running for re-election, and the 8th District, where Democrat Elissa Slotkin is challenging incumbent Republican Mike Bishop.
“This is a massive talking point because this has been in the news so much,” Angell said. “People are demanding access to clean water.”
Democratic turnout in the state’s primary election, held less than two weeks after Kalamazoo County’s contamination was first announced, may be evidence of how PFAS is animating voters, especially in districts with contamination sites, he said.
In Kalamazoo County, overall turnout in the primary jumped to roughly 56,000 from roughly 27,000 in 2016. The district saw Democratic turnout nearly tripling the levels seen in its primaries since it was redrawn in 2010. Other GOP-held congressional districts with contamination sites found in the last year saw similar jumps, including Amash’s.
“When you have folks in Detroit and Flint struggling to have access to clean drinking water, and you have folks in Plainfield Township and [others] grappling with the same issue, it doesn’t matter if you’re Democrat or Republican,” said the League of Conservation Voters’ Allison. “What only matters is if you can trust the water that’s in your glass.”Issue for Upton
Few Republicans in Congress have been so quick to respond to news of PFAS contamination in their district as 16th-term Rep. Fred Upton, whose district includes Parchment.
Upton requested to join the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Environment to attend the first congressional hearing on PFAS contamination Sept. 6. Although a former chairman of the full committee, Upton is not a member of that subcommittee.
Near the end of the hearing, he announced he was working with other Michiganders on the subcommittee, Republican Tim Walberg and Democrat Debbie Dingell, to propose legislation to increase federal involvement in cleaning up PFAS.
That same week a poll from the Democratic-aligned Public Policy Polling firm found 74 percent of likely voters knew “some” or “a lot” about the contamination in Parchment, and 43 percent said they “do not think Congressman Upton is doing enough” to address the situation.
Upton introduced a bill shortly afterward to force the EPA to determine within a year whether PFAS should be considered “hazardous substances,” in what may be the boldest proposal from a congressional Republican so far.
He said he hoped to get the bill to the president by the end of this year. However, the House has already begun its fall recess, and the earliest the bill may be considered will be after Michigan voters go to the polls.
Upton’s opponent, Democrat Matt Longjohn, criticized the bill for focusing only on PFAS contamination resulting from federal sites such as military bases, characterizing the Republican as avoiding “a burden placed on businesses [so] that they would regulated and held accountable for their actions.”
“But he does recognize that that would be something we should pay for as taxpayers if it was the federal government who was involved in contaminated property,” Longjohn said. “It’s a different standard that he’s holding out there for corporations than for the public.”
Upton replied with a statement calling Longjohn a “Johnny-come-lately who has been sitting on the sidelines and is now taking potshots” and emphasizing that he is the one pushing for the bill to be “considered ASAP.”
“Those trying to spin this for their own political fortune are just making noise,” Upton said.
Two weeks ago, Upton’s 6th District seat was added to the Democrats’ map of targets to flip, shortly after Roll Call reported that internal polling by Longjohn found him 5 percentage points behind Upton head-to-head. The separate PPP poll found him within 4 points. Inside Elections rates the race “Likely Republican.”
https://www.rollcall.com/news/politics/forever-chemicals-seep-into-michigans-water-and-house-races
-
Oil Industry Raising Millions to Defeat Colo. Setback Proposal
Oct 9, 2018 | E&E Energywire
By Mike Lee
With less than a month until Election Day, the oil and gas industry is working on several fronts to defeat a ballot initiative that would move new oil and gas wells away from homes.
The industry has donated roughly $20.3 million in cash, advertising and other assistance to a campaign committee opposed to Proposition 112 between Aug. 1 and Oct. 1, with more than half the total coming from Houston-based producers Anadarko Petroleum and Noble Energy. That's more than 25 times what the nonprofit group Colorado Rising, which supports the proposition, reported raising between May and Oct. 1.
"We are doing everything we can to beat this measure and believe Coloradans will see this for what it is, a ban on businesses that would hurt Colorado working families across the state," said Scott Prestidge, a spokesman for the Colorado Oil & Gas Association, in an email.
Americans for Prosperity, the political arm of billionaire brothers Charles and David Koch, has announced plans to spend an unspecified amount of money opposing Proposition 112, reported The Gazette of Colorado Springs.
Proposition 112 would change state law to require new oil and gas wells to be at least 2,500 feet from occupied buildings and "vulnerable areas," which would include waterways, playgrounds and sports fields. The current setback is 500 feet between oil wells and homes, and 1,000 feet from schools.
Oil companies appear to be preparing for the measure to pass. There's a backlog of applications for new wells in front of the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission.
The industry is considering legal options, such as challenging the proposed law's constitutionality. And in Friday's debate between gubernatorial candidates Jared Polis (D) and Walker Stapleton (R), the moderators raised the possibility that the Legislature could alter the law before it goes into effect.
A separate ballot initiative, Amendment 74, would change the state constitution to require governments to compensate property owners, including the owners of oil and gas rights, for any reduction in value caused by a new regulation or law.
Proposition 112 is the the third attempt to pass a statewide setback law in Colorado this decade, and it comes after Colorado courts struck down most local attempts to ban drilling or hydraulic fracturing.
The first ballot initiative, in 2014, ended when Gov. John Hickenlooper (D) persuaded Polis to drop his support for the signature-gathering effort. A second petition drive in 2016 failed to gather enough signatures.
Last year, though, a leaking oil field pipeline set off an explosion that destroyed a home in Firestone, a suburb of Denver. Two people were killed, and a third person was severely injured. The pipeline and gas well involved in the explosion belong to Anadarko, which is the largest oil producer in Colorado. It acquired them in a swap with Noble Energy a few years before the explosion (Energywire, April 28, 2017).
The explosion highlighted how closely many Coloradoans live to oil and gas sites. That made it easy for Colorado Rising to conduct a largely word-of-mouth campaign to put Proposition 112 on the ballot.
While the group expects to boost its fundraising in the weeks before the election, it won't close the gap with the oil industry, spokeswoman Anne Lee Foster said in an interview. Environmentalists have won previous elections in cities and counties that imposed limits on drilling.
"We've seen multiple times where the industry has outspent us 20 to 1, 30 to 1 and we still won at the ballot box," Foster said.
She said the proposed law would stand up to a court challenge even if Amendment 74, with its new protections for property owners, passes at the same time. And if Proposition 112 passes and lawmakers attempt to overturn it, "I guarantee we're going to have a lot of angry soccer moms occupying the Legislature."
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2018/10/09/stories/1060102025
-
Offshore Drillers Combining in $2.4 Billion Deal
Oct 8, 2018 | Houston Chronicle
By Rye Druzin
The combination of two offshore drilling companies in a $2.4 billion deal will likely not be the last merger in that industry as the offshore energy sector continues to consolidate during a slow recovery from the last oil bust.
The London driller Ensco, which runs its North and South America operations from Houston, will buy Rowan Cos. of Houston in all-stock deal announced Monday. The acquisition, which will provide Ensco with newer rigs with more technology, is aimed at keeping pace with larger rival Transocean of Switzerland.Recommended Video
"Ensco is clearly making a chance to compete in that very similar space, the hi-spec, deepwater sector," said Leslie Cook, a principal analyst with Wood Mackenzie who analyzes the offshore drilling rig industry. "And they're not afraid to do it."
Rowan shareholders will receive 2.215 Ensco shares per Rowan share. The deal is expected to close in the first half of 2019. When completed, Ensco shareholders will control 60.5 percent of the combined company, with Rowan shareholders controlling the other 39.5 percent.
ANOTHER DEAL: Baker Hughes to pay $550 million for stake in Adnoc Drilling
The combined company will have 82 offshore rigs across six continents, including 28 floating rigs and 54 jack-ups, which operate in shallower waters.
Transocean, which operates largely out of Houston, last month announced the purchase of Ocean Rig for $2.7 billion. The company also bought Songa Offshore in Jan. for $1.2 billion.
The purchases are helping to expand Transocean's advanced offshore drilling rig fleet, where much of the competition is right now, Cook said. The offshore drill ships are used to drill into oil and gas reserves in deep water.
Offshore drillers have recovered much more slowly than their counterparts in onshore shale, which were able to make money at lower oil prices and are quicker to ramp up and down. Much of the new investment has flowed onshore, particularly to the Permian Basin in West Texas.
With oil prices rising above $70 barrel, a rebound in the offshore drilling rig industry got under way in the middle of this year, Cook said. In addition to higher crude price, operators of the newest and most advanced rigs are figuring how to squeeze out more money from them by adding more automation.
Continued consolidation will lead to added pressure on the remaining smaller players, said Cook, including the likes of Diamondback Offshore Drilling of Houston. The pending spin-off of Maersk Drilling from the Danish shipping company Maersk Group could also open up other opportunities for acquisitions, Cook said.
One of the biggest issues hanging over the offshore drilling rig market is persistent oversupply. Cook said day rates have remained low and drilling companies have signed shorter-term spot contracts rather than commit their rigs to three-year contracts at the lower rates.
She said that day rates are likely to continue to tick up as more rigs age out of the fleet and are replaced by more efficient models and oil stays at higher prices.
https://www.chron.com/business/energy/article/Offshore-drillers-combining-in-2-4-billion-deal-13290519.php
-
EPA Backs Down From New Energy Efficiency Ratings After Landlords Balk
Oct 9, 2018 | The Wall Street Journal
By Peter Grant
The Environmental Protection Agency has put on hold plans to update its system for rating the energy efficiency of office and industrial buildings, pausing after some big landlords complained the methodology would unfairly penalize their properties.
More than 200,000 properties across the U.S. participate in the Energy Star program, which generates scores of one to 100 to measure energy efficiency and rate buildings. The agency created the program to offer tenants and owners an easy way to compare how much energy each building uses, and a sense of how expensive their energy bills would be.
While the program isn’t mandatory, many landlords agree to participate because tenants increasingly seek more energy-efficient buildings. Some will only sign leases in buildings certified by the EPA as Energy Star, for top performance. Property investors also pay close attention because about 20% of a typical office building’s costs go to lighting, heating and cooling.
In August, the EPA told building owners how its updated rating system would work. It takes into account the growing number of participating buildings and new technologies, such as motion-sensitive lights and cloud-based energy-management systems.
The EPA had planned to start certifying buildings with top ratings under the new system soon, but the agency agreed to postpone implementation after listening to landlords who felt the new methodology was confusing and it unfairly downgraded some buildings.
Energy Star ratings can impact occupancy levels and the rents building owners can charge, both of which are big components in determining property values.
“The ramifications are huge,” said Anthony Malkin, chief executive of Empire State Realty Trust, owner of the Empire State Building and numerous other New York office buildings. Some of the company’s properties, like most buildings over 1.5 million square feet, might not qualify for Energy Star under the proposed rating system, according to industry officials.
The new Energy Star scores highlight how difficult it is to compare energy in buildings that are in different cities and use different sources, like steam in cities like New York. It is much easier to rate an appliance that can be evaluated in a testing facility.
“Surveying commercial buildings is tricky,” said Carl Blumstein, director of the California Institute for Energy and Environment. “It’s a mess to try to build a sample that’s representative.”
Landlords spend tens of billions of dollars to upgrade older properties and develop new buildings. They often can charge higher rents to employers trying to attract a younger, more environmentally aware workforce.
Many landlords expected some decline in ratings because thousands of new buildings have joined the Energy Star program and materials, designs and technology have improved energy efficiency, making it harder for buildings that haven’t upgraded to maintain high scores.
But many landlords were shocked when they started calculating what their scores would be under the new system EPA announced in August. They didn’t think their scores would fall so far they would no longer get the coveted Energy Star status.
“Revisions to Energy Star are much needed and very important,” said Jeffrey DeBoer, chief executive of the Real Estate Roundtable, a trade group, in an email. “However, to be truly effective the data sources and projections relied upon in the revision must be transparent and reflect industry leading practices.”
The buildings that would be especially impacted would be large office buildings in major cities such as New York, Boston, Chicago and Miami, according to Mr. Malkin who has invested heavily in energy upgrades and is chairman of the Roundtable’s Sustainability Policy Advisory Committee.
In September, the Roundtable expressed these concerns to the EPA. The agency agreed to hit the pause button on the Energy Star certification process to evaluate whether the complaints raised by the industry have merit.
“EPA is looking into concerns raised by industry that score changes for some buildings are different than expected,” an EPA spokeswoman said in an email.
Mr. DeBoer welcomed that response. “We are focused intently on assisting EPA during this review period,” he said.
Government efforts to collect data on building efficiency have had troubles in the past. Most of the actual data gathering is done by the Energy Information Administration, a Carter administration era agency, which turns its survey over to the EPA to determine building ratings.
The last Energy Information Administration survey had to be junked. “We took a chance on a different sampling design and it didn’t perform to our expectations and we couldn’t put our name on it,” said Eileen O’Brien, head of the administration’s Buildings Surveys Statistics Team. “It was a very unusual situation.”
The most recent survey relied on more traditional methods, she said: “We stand 100% behind its quality.”
The most recent commercial building survey used 2012 as its reference year. The survey that was junked was based on 2007 data. That means that the current Energy Star ratings on buildings are based on data that is about 15 years old.
“There’s a lot of pent-up change in the market now being reflected all at once and that is hard,” Ms. O’Brien said.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/epa-backs-down-from-new-energy-efficiency-ratings-after-landlords-balk-1539082802
-
Senators: Utility 'Woefully' Unprepared for Explosions
Oct 9, 2018 | AP (In E&E Energywire)
By Philip Marcelo
The natural gas company at the center of the explosions north of Boston last month was "woefully unprepared" to prevent or respond to the unfolding disaster, Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey said Friday after a review of internal company documents.
The Massachusetts Democrats said Columbia Gas didn't have adequate safety and response measures in place before Sept. 13, when more than 80 explosions and gas fires struck Lawrence, North Andover and Andover.
The explosions, likely caused by overpressurized gas lines, killed one person, injured 25 others, damaged or destroyed dozens of homes and left thousands of Merrimack Valley residents without natural gas to heat their homes as the winter approaches.
Warren and Markey said in an Oct. 4 letter that they had reviewed documents and statements provided by the company, including its Distribution Integrity Management Plan and Operations and Maintenance Manual.
They concluded the utility did not "properly contemplate the possibility that a disaster like this could occur, did not have sufficient safety measures in place to prevent a disaster, and was not prepared to respond."
The senators also criticized the company for not instituting "commonsense" measures — such as knowing the exact location of control lines and having the proper staff on-site during repair work — until five days afterward.
"The omission of these sorts of safety measures from Columbia Gas' operating procedures prior to this disaster is alarming and unacceptable," the senators wrote. "It raises serious questions as to why these policies were not previously in place for Columbia Gas' systems and whether that failure was the result of negligence, cost considerations, or incompetence."
Ken Stammen, a spokesman for NiSource Inc., Columbia Gas' parent company, said the utility can't comment on the cause of the incident or matters related to the ongoing National Transportation Safety Board investigation.
"We have been responding to the Senators' requests for information in a timely manner, and are reviewing this most recent letter," he said in a statement. "Our attention right now is focused on restoring gas service to customers in the Merrimack Valley."
Meanwhile, local government officials and Columbia Gas announced Friday they're offering hotel rooms, travel trailers, shelters and other temporary housing for those without gas service or otherwise unable to return to their homes.
At least 15 structures have been deemed uninhabitable, an additional 19 need significant repairs and an additional 102 sustained minor damage, state officials said.
Columbia Gas has deployed thousands of workers to replace 45 miles of aging pipeline and gradually restore service.
The company said all customers should have gas, including for heat and hot water, by Nov. 19.
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2018/10/09/stories/1060100741
-
West Virginia Joins International Energy Coalition
Oct 8, 2018 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jamison Cocklin
West Virginia has been accepted as the 14th member of the Energy Council, an international nonpartisan legislative organization whose members are focused on a wide variety of energy-related issues.
At its recent meeting in Oklahoma City the council voted unanimously to admit West Virginia, where shale gas development has pushed annual production well above 1 Tcf.
“Membership with the Energy Council is an important development for our state because it will give West Virginia lawmakers additional resources and a focused network to create and promote policies that encourage development of our state’s energy industry,” said state House Delegate Mark Zatezalo, who attended the meeting and announced the state’s membership.
Zatezalo, a Republican, represents Hancock County and parts of Brooke County in West Virginia’s northern panhandle near heavily drilled parts of the state and just south of the Utica Shale’s epicenter in Ohio and west of Marcellus Shale activity in Pennsylvania.
The council was formed in 1975 to provide a forum for member legislators to discuss and learn more about energy and environmental issues in their states and provinces. A policy statement was adopted at the Oklahoma City meeting dedicated to promoting the build out of a natural gas liquids (NGL) storage and trading hub in West Virginia. It urges federal policy makers to support the state’s efforts to develop the hub and strengthen Marcellus and Utica shale development in the state and region.
Proponents of an NGL storage hub want to link up Appalachian shale formations with a network of pipelines, equipment and underground storage. The hub, supporters say, could ease supply and demand imbalances and help create more regional buyers and sellers of the commodities, similar to the largest one in the country in Mont Belvieu, TX, which sits on a shallow salt dome used to store products. The Energy Council’s policy statement is the latest bit of support for the concept, which continues to evolve slowly.
Both the public and private sectors continue to promote the idea. Senators from West Virginia and Ohio have introduced legislation to study the feasibility of the hub, while studies have shown such infrastructure could generate billions of dollars in Ohio, Pennsylvania and West Virginia.
For now, two projects are underway. Mountaineer NGL Storage LLC is working with state regulators in Ohio to build a 3.5 million bbl underground storage facility at a site in Monroe County, but the project has faced delays as it works through permitting snags. In West Virginia, the Appalachia Development Group has been invited by the U.S. Department of Energy to submit a Part II application for a $1.9 billion loan guarantee for a similar underground storage project.
The Appalachian Basin is home to abundant natural gas storage. It's long been a staging area to move gas to the Northeast. But there are few NGL storage and pipeline facilities.
Former Energy Council chairmen Wyoming Senate President Eli Bebout and Oklahoma state Rep. Weldon Watson made motions to admit West Virginia as a member. Other members include Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Kansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Texas and Wyoming. The Canadian provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan are also members.
http://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/116044-west-virginia-joins-international-energy-coalition
-
Army Corps Halts Mountain Valley Permit in Va.
Oct 9, 2018 | AP (In E&E Energywire)
The Army Corps of Engineers has suspended a permit the Mountain Valley pipeline needs to cross Virginia waterways.
The Army Corps' Norfolk, Va., district sent a letter Friday to the company developing the pipeline, saying it was putting the permit on hold because of uncertainty following a federal court ruling earlier this week.
That ruling from the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals tossed a water-crossings permit issued by a West Virginia district of the Army Corps (Energywire, Oct. 3). Environmental groups have since asked federal regulators to halt all construction activity on the $4.6 billion project.
The letter says the Norfolk District finds it appropriate to "await clarity."
Developers are aiming to finish the project by the fourth quarter of 2019. A series of court challenges from environmental groups led to previous delays.
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2018/10/09/stories/1060100753
-
Lawmakers to Explore 'Black Start' Power
Oct 9, 2018 | E&E Daily
By Blake Sobczak
The Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee is set to review the process for restoring electricity to the bulk power grid following a major blackout.
Senators will also examine "other system restoration plans" in the utility industry during a hearing Thursday, according to a committee press release.
"Black start" resources are like jumper cables for the bulk power grid. During a widespread blackout, offline power plants can't draw electricity from the de-energized grid to get back on their feet.
They turn instead to small generation sites — often fueled by diesel — to kick-start operations, beginning the painstaking process of re-energizing the wider grid. These black start generators provide the critical first step along the "cranking paths" utilities chart to restore power and are strategically located throughout the United States.
Earlier this year, a review by regulators at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and the North American Electric Reliability Corp. found grid planners had "sufficient" black start capacity in place to recover from a grid disaster.
Regulators still reported a "decrease in the availability of blackstart resources" in certain areas, however, and urged further study of the issue.
To that end, analysts at the Energy and Homeland Security departments have begun to probe how black start resources would perform in degraded conditions, such as during a sustained cyber or physical attack on key facilities.
DOE's "Liberty Eclipse" exercise slated for early next month is expected to key in on potential gaps in black start defenses (Energywire, Aug. 3).
Schedule: The hearing is Thursday, Oct. 11, at 10 a.m. in 366 Dirksen.
Witnesses: TBA.
https://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2018/10/09/stories/1060101999
-
New U.N. Climate Report Says Put a High Price on Carbon
Oct 8, 2018 | The New York Times
By Brad Plumer
In its landmark report on the fast-approaching dangers of climate change, a United Nations scientific panel said on Sunday that putting a price on carbon dioxide emissions would be central for getting global warming under control.
More than 40 governments around the world, including the European Union and California, have now put a price on carbon, either through direct taxes on fossil fuels or through cap-and-trade programs. But many of them have found it politically difficult to set a price high enough to spur truly deep reductions in carbon emissions.
The concept of carbon pricing received another implicit endorsement on Monday from the Nobel Prize committee, which awarded Yale’s William D. Nordhaus a share of the 2018 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciencefor, among other things, making a case that “the most efficient remedy for the problems caused by greenhouse gas emissions would be a global scheme of carbon taxes that are uniformly imposed on all countries.”
Scientists who worked on the United Nations report hailed Professor Nordhaus’s work as influential for thinking about how to tackle climate change.
ADVERTISEMENT
“It’s great to see the importance of Bill’s work being recognized,” said Drew Shindell, a climate scientist at Duke University and an author of the report. “Though many think a price on carbon is too expensive, it’s really a way of getting the true impacts of emissions into the economy so we can make better decisions.”
In the 1970s, Professor Nordhaus conducted the first detailed look at the economic damages that global warming could inflict on human society, right as climate scientists were starting to sound the alarm about rising greenhouse gas emissions. He argued that companies that burn fossil fuels should be taxed at a rate that reflected the harms they were imposing on the rest of the world.ImageWilliam Nordhaus shared the Nobel prize in economics in part for showing that carbon taxes are an efficient way to reduce global carbon emissions.CreditChristopher Capozziello for The New York Times
Economists have long been enthusiastic about carbon pricing because of the policy’s efficiency. Give companies a financial incentive to reduce their fossil-fuel use, and they will find creative and cost-effective ways to do so without the need for heavy-handed government regulations.
To date, however, policymakers have often had more success in reducing emissions by relying on those heavy-handed government regulations. Examples include France’s state-led push to build nuclear power in the 1970s and 1980s and the United States’ strict fuel-economy standards for cars and light trucks, which have reduced domestic oil consumption by billions of barrels.
ADVERTISEMENT
“It is safe to say that policies other than carbon pricing have driven the majority of emissions reductions to date,” said Jesse Jenkins, a postdoctoral researcher at Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Government.
One possible reason for that: While government regulations can often be more expensive in reducing emissions on a per-ton basis, they also tend to hide their costs from voters, and therefore can be a safer political bet. A policy that requires utilities to build more renewable energy has visible benefits — more wind and solar — and murky costs. But a carbon tax that directly increases the price of gasoline at the pump or electricity rates brings more obvious pain, and hence is more likely to garner opposition.
A case in point: In 2012, the Australian government enacted a cap-and-trade program that effectively set a price on carbon of $23 per ton. Emissions fell nationwide under the program. Yet the policy faced a fierce political backlash from industry groups and voters, and when the nation’s more conservative Liberal Party swept into power in 2013, it quickly moved to repeal the program.
A recent report from the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development found that the average carbon price across 42 major economies was around $8 per ton in 2018, far below the level most experts say is necessary to address climate change. Those low prices, some researchers have argued, may reflect political constraints on pricing carbon directly.
For comparison, the United Nations report estimated that governments would need to impose effective carbon prices of $135 to $5,500 per ton of carbon dioxide pollution by 2030 to keep overall global warming below 1.5 degrees Celsius, or 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit.
The O.E.C.D. report did mention, however, that carbon pricing is starting to show signs of momentum in many parts of the world. Portugal launched its own carbon tax in 2015, and Chile followed suit in 2017. China has launched an early carbon-trading program in several of its provinces. California recently expanded its own cap-and-trade program to cover 85 percent of its statewide emissions. This fall, voters in Washington State will decide whether to enact their own statewide carbon tax.
Some scientists hope that the new United Nations report on the dangers of further climate change may spur nations to step up efforts like these. “If the report works and governments take it seriously, it should increase their ambition for expeditiously reducing emissions,” said Michael Oppenheimer, a climate scientist at Princeton.
But getting anywhere near the high levels of carbon pricing envisioned by the report may take creative new strategies, said Mr. Jenkins, the researcher at Harvard. In the short term, policies that are widely popular with voters, such as mandates for renewable energy, can help reshape the political landscape to make more ambitious climate action feasible. And policies that spur innovation and drive down the cost of cleaner alternatives to fossil fuels, such as electric vehicles, could potentially make higher carbon prices more palatable.
But whether they ultimately rely on carbon pricing, direct subsidies for clean energy or other types of policies, nations will have to do far more than they are currently doing for the world to have hope of avoiding drastic climate change.
In an interview with the Nobel committee on Monday, Dr. Nordhaus said he was “concerned about the fact that we’re doing so little.” He added: “The policies are lagging very, very far — miles, miles, miles — behind the science and what needs to be done.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/08/climate/carbon-tax-united-nations-report-nordhaus.html
-
Carbon Tax Gets Renewed Attention but Still Faces Resistance
Oct 9, 2018 | AP (In The New York Times)
Advocates of taxing fossil fuels believe their position is stronger now because of an alarming new report on climate change and a Nobel Prize awarded to by two American economists, but neither development is likely to break down political resistance to a carbon tax.
Previous alarms about global warming met with resistance from Congress and the White House. President Donald Trump withdrew the United States from the Paris agreement on climate change last year.
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, a panel of scientists brought together by the United Nations, warned in a report Monday that droughts, wildfires, coral reef destruction and other climate and environmental disasters could grow worse as soon as 2040, even with a smaller increase in temperatures than used to set the Paris targets.
A few hours later, the Nobel Prize in economics went to two Americans, including William Nordhaus of Yale University, who argues that carbon taxes would be the best way to address problems created by greenhouse-gas emissions.
ADVERTISEMENT
A carbon tax is a charge imposed on the burning of fossil fuels like coal, oil and natural gas, which produce carbon dioxide. The tax is designed to make users of those fuels pay for the environmental damage they cause. The ultimate goal of some tax backers is to price fossil fuels out of the market and replace them with sources of energy that produce little or no heat-trapping emissions.
Coal and oil and gas companies could pass the tax cost along to consumers, which would presumably give a price advantage to energy that is not taxed. That, advocates say, would help renewables such as solar and wind grow more quickly from their current single-digit share of the U.S. electricity market.
There is, of course, stark disagreement over the economic effect of a carbon tax.
Researchers at Columbia University estimate that a tax of $50 per ton of carbon dioxide emissions would increase average U.S. consumer electricity bills 22 percent by 2030, with amounts varying by region. A Tufts University authority estimates that it would add 45 cents a gallon to the price of gasoline. Both think the impact can be mitigated by distributing the money raised through taxes to households, and that many low- and medium-income families would come out ahead.
Opponents argue that a carbon tax would kill manufacturing jobs and hurt family income.
A 2014 report by the Heritage Foundation said that a tax of $37 a ton would cut economic output more than $2.5 trillion, or $21,000 per family, by 2030. This year, two dozen conservative groups endorsed an estimate that a carbon tax would cost more than 500,000 manufacturing jobs by 2030.
Noah Kaufman, an energy-policy researcher at Columbia and a proponent of carbon taxes, said the terrifying prognosis in Monday's report should highlight the central role of a carbon tax in addressing climate change. But, he acknowledged, such warnings are not new, and political opposition to a tax remains strong.EDITORS’ PICKSWhat the Mona Lisa Tells Us About Art in the Instagram EraThe Plot to Subvert an Election: Unraveling the Russia Story So FarThe Epicenter of the Housing Bust Is Booming Again. (That’s a Warning Sign.)
ADVERTISEMENT
"There are really high political barriers that continue to stand in our way," he said. "By far the biggest obstacle in the United States right now is the leadership of the Republican party, which is dead-set against any strong climate-change policy."
In July, the GOP-controlled House voted for a resolution rejecting carbon taxes as detrimental to the U.S. economy. Almost all Republicans, joined by a few Democrats, voted for the symbolic measure.
Prominent opponents of the carbon tax also believe that urgency over addressing climate change is exaggerated. They point out that U.S. carbon emissions have fallen in recent years as abundant natural gas has risen to rival coal in electric generation. Meanwhile, China's emissions grow rapidly, making it the world's largest emitter of greenhouse gases.
The scientists who prepared the UN-backed report "are trying to convince us all that there is an imminent crisis when in fact there is a potential long-term problem," said Myron Ebell of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, who worked on the Trump transition. Carbon taxes, he added, "are political poison once people figure out how much their energy bills are going to go up."
There are signs that the political ground could shift.
— A group of former Republican officials and big corporations plan to lobby for a tax of $40 per ton of carbon dioxide produced and to give the money to U.S. taxpayers. Oil giants Exxon Mobil, BP and Royal Dutch Shell support the plan, which also would protect them from lawsuits blaming them for climate change.
— A Republican congressman, Carlos Curbelo of Florida, bucked party leadership this summer by proposing a carbon tax.
— Voters in Washington state will decide next month whether to adopt a carbon fee.
"I am optimistic that the (UN-backed) report will make a difference, but I just think we're going to have to get a little distance from where we are right now in the politics," said Gilbert Metcalf, an economist at Tufts University and author of an upcoming book advocating a carbon tax. "It's going to take a longer time, a few years."
Nordhaus, the freshly minted Nobel winner, was also looking beyond the current political leadership in Washington, D.C. He said that outside the United States there is wide acceptance of the science and economics of climate change.
ADVERTISEMENT
"This administration won't last forever," Nordhaus said at a news conference. "All I can do is hope that we will get through this without too much damage."
Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform, another group that lobbied against carbon taxes, said Nordhaus ignored science and history in advocating a carbon tax.
"He should look at the history of the last 20 years and see that the United States has been reducing carbon emissions without a carbon tax," Norquist said.
https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2018/10/08/us/ap-us-nobel-economics-carbon-tax.html
-
IPCC Report Lays Out Radical Path to Combat Global Warming
Oct 8, 2018 | PoliticoPro
By Paola Tamma
The world can keep global warming to below 1.5 degrees, but for that to happen it needs “rapid and far-reaching transitions” that include a deep cut in greenhouse gas emissions and a greater reliance on nuclear power, according to the summary of a U.N. climate science report published on Monday.
“Limiting warming to 1.5 degrees is possible within the laws of chemistry and physics but doing so would require unprecedented changes,” said Jim Skea, a professor at Imperial College London and one of the authors of the report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the U.N. body that aims to give a scientific view of climate change.
The summary was vetted and endorsed by all 195 governments that are parties to the Paris Agreement in Incheon, South Korea, on Saturday, despite attempts by oil-exporting Saudi Arabia to block it, and leaked U.S. commentswhich criticized the report for downplaying the role of fossil fuels in lifting countries out of poverty.
Keeping the global temperature rise to within 1.5 degrees of preindustrial levels — a goal set by the 2015 Paris Agreement — would require carbon dioxide emissions to be cut by about 45 percent by 2030 compared to 2010 levels. By 2050, the world would have to achieve “net zero” emissions, meaning as much carbon would have to be absorbed as is emitted.
By 2100, a balance of zero would require removing anywhere from 100 to 1,000 gigatons of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.
Methods for carbon removal range from natural solutions such as planting trees and embracing farming practices that retain more CO2 in the soil, to technological solutions that capture and store CO2 emissions underground.
The authors warned against betting on technological fixes alone, because these ideas have not been deployed at scale and come with high costs and limited social acceptability.
“While it’s clear that some [carbon dioxide removal] is needed, it is really a policy choice which actions we want to go through,” said Joeri Rogelj, another of the report’s authors and a researcher at the Austrian International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis.
Avoiding over-reliance on carbon removal requires the world to peak carbon dioxide emissions “well before” 2030. This in turn has huge implications for the energy sector.
By 2050 renewables will have to produce 70 percent to 85 percent of power.
Coal will have to be phased out, and gas will have a limited role — generating only 8 percent of global electricity, and only as long as it’s used in combination with carbon capture and storage technology.
An area ranging from 1 million to 7 million square kilometers — the size of Egypt and Australia respectively — will have to be dedicated to growing crops used to generate energy.
Because of the competition with food crops, this transition will have to be “carefully managed,” but is indispensable, according to authors, especially as biofuels are the only alternative to fossil fuels in high-emission sectors like aviation and shipping.
“Only if we find technologies that can decarbonize air transport or freight, it would be possible to eliminate bioenergy,” said Skea.
Similarly, under all scenarios compatible with 1.5 degrees, the contribution of nuclear power increases.
The U.N. report, commissioned by governments in Paris in 2015, will feed into the discussions at December’s COP24 climate summit in Katowice, Poland.
EU environment ministers are meeting on Tuesday to discuss the bloc’s position for the summit, and green groups are calling on them to increase the EU’s 2030 target of cutting greenhouse gas emissions from 40 percent to “well beyond 45 percent,” said Wendel Trio, director of NGO Climate Action Network Europe.
Updated targets for renewable energy and energy efficiency — 32 percent and 32.5 percent by 2030 — respectively would already allow the EU to increase its 2030 target from 40 percent to at least 45 percent, the European Commission said in June.
But an updated target is not on the table at Tuesday’s meeting. According to draft conclusions seen by POLITICO and dated Oct. 1, ministers will note that the new energy and energy efficiency targets “have an impact on our level of ambition,” without pledging a higher level of emissions cuts.
This report first appeared on POLITICO.EU on Oct. 8, 2018.
https://subscriber.politicopro.com/energy/article/2018/10/ipcc-report-lays-out-radical-path-to-combat-global-warming-831416
-
ExxonMobil Gives $1m to Campaign for a Carbon Tax
Oct 9, 2018 | Financial Times
By Ed Crooks
ExxonMobil, the largest US oil group, is giving $1m to support a US campaign to address the threat of climate change by introducing a carbon tax, which would return revenues to the public in dividend payments. It is the first large oil company to support the campaign, which is seeking bipartisan support for its plan to put a relatively high price on carbon while abolishing existing regulations on greenhouse gas emissions. Exxon will give the $1m to the campaign over two years. Ted Halstead, chief executive of the campaign group called Americans For Carbon Dividends, argued that financial support from Exxon and other businesses would make a big difference to the US political debate over the plan. “What makes it real for members of Congress is when real companies start putting real money on the table,” he said. “That’s what takes it from a good idea to a viable idea.” Exxon has been a supporter of a carbon tax, in principle, for more than a decade. Back in 2007, then chief executive Rex Tillerson said he favoured “a uniform and predictable cost for carbon”. But the company appeared to put no lobbying weight behind the idea and critics often dismissed its position as merely a way to deflect questions about its position on climate policy. Its support for the carbon tax and dividend plan changes that, making the company an active supporter of a price on emissions for the first time. Recommended Climate change Scientists lay out vision of carbon neutral UK by 2050 Under chief executive Darren Woods, who took over at the start of 2017, Exxon has become a more active participant in strategies to address the threat of climate change, including an initiative to curb its leaks of methane, a potent greenhouse gas. Last month the company, along with Chevron and Occidental Petroleum, joined the Oil and Gas Climate Initiative, a group of leading international companies including Royal Dutch Shell, BP and Saudi Aramco, which has pledged to support the Paris climate agreement and is funding technologies for reducing emissions. The tax proposed by Americans for Carbon Dividends, to be set at more than $40 a tonne of carbon dioxide and then rising in real terms every year, would be one of the world’s highest, exceeding Canada’s intention to raise its carbon price to C$50 a tonne in 2022. Recommended Special Report: Rethinking Energy That price will put pressure on companies to cut their emissions and will hit demand for oil-based fuels. However, the plan also has advantages for oil companies as it includes a commitment to sweep away regulations on emissions, reducing compliance costs. The tax would also help push the power industry away from coal, potentially boosting demand for gas, which creates lower carbon dioxide emissions when used to generate electricity. The revenue raised by the tax would be returned to the public in regular payments. Exxon is a founding member of the Climate Leadership Council, a separate policy institute that also supports proposals for a carbon tax and dividends, along with BP, Shell and Total. That group is also backed by many companies outside the oil industry, including General Motors, Procter & Gamble, and Johnson & Johnson.
https://www.ft.com/content/9665a09a-cba9-11e8-b276-b9069bde0956
-
The Magic Kingdom Is Going Green
Oct 9, 2018 | The New York Times
By Bruce Horovitz
Even the visionary Walt Disney probably could not have imagined this one.
The Walt Disney Company is just months away from generating enough renewable solar energy to fully power two of its four parks at the Walt Disney World Resort in central Florida.
Before the end of 2018, Disney will flip the switch on a sprawling 50-megawatt solar power facility composed of more than a half-million solar panels, just outside Disney’s Animal Kingdom. The move is aimed, in part, at helping Disney achieve its larger plan to reduce its net greenhouse gas emissions 50 percent worldwide by 2020, compared to 2012.
“At our sites around the world, we’re investing in hidden magic to continually reduce our environmental footprint,” Bob Chapek, chairman of Disney Parks, Experiences and Consumer Products, said.
The soon-to-open Disney World solar facility, spread along a 270-acre designated renewable energy area, will produce enough energy to supply 10,000 homes annually and will reduce greenhouse gas emissions by more than 57,000 tons per year, according to Disney’s estimates. That is the annual equivalent of removing roughly 9,300 automobiles from the roads, the company says.
The energy will not actually go to Disney’s theme parks, but rather into the local power grid. Nonetheless, with one eye on its global reputation and another on its customers’ increasing focus on sustainability, Disney is emerging as a renewable energy force.
Disney’s move toward cleaner energy comes when brand image for global giants goes far beyond, say, merely a ride on Space Mountain — particularly among free-spending but environmentally sensitive millennials. Indeed, some 79 percent of consumers say they seek out products that are socially or environmentally responsible, according to a 2017 study by Cone Communications.
“Our guests tell us the environment is important, so it’s a big deal for us,” said Mark Penning, vice president of Disney’s Animals, Science and Environment. Since it’s a big deal to guests, it is also a huge deal to Bob Iger, chief executive of Disney, who has repeatedly said that he wants Disney to be the most admired company in the world, “Not just for creating incredible content, but for being a responsible citizen of the world,” says Dr. Penning, who is a veterinarian.
Disney’s solar and renewable efforts are not limited to Florida. In Tokyo, Disneyland’s electrical parade light show is fueled by solar panels from eight building rooftops, which generate more than 600 kilowatts of power. In Europe, Disneyland Paris uses geothermal energy to power two of its theme parks and a hotel.ImageIn Tokyo, Disneyland’s electrical parade light show is fueled by solar panels atop eight buildings.CreditTokyo Disney Resort
At Shanghai’s Disney Resort, a combined cooling and heating plant reduces emissions by 60 percent — partially by converting waste heat into energy. Disney also is building three new cruise ships that will be run on clean-burning liquefied natural gas when they head out to sea in 2021, 2022, and 2023.
But going green hasn’t always worked perfectly at Disney. For example, in 2015, when it first tried to “green” its bus fleet, executives thought the solution might be electric buses. But they discovered that electric buses failed to reduce carbon emission as much as using renewable fuels made with used cooking oil and non-consumable food waste.
While some renewable energy advocates would like Disney to do even more to reduce its reliance on fossil fuels, Disney’s leadership in this area is likely to encourage others. “What Disney is doing is an important part of the trend that’s changing the nation’s grid,” says Gregory Wetstone, chief executive of the American Council on Renewable Energy.
Just five years ago, very few companies were actively producing their own renewable powers, Mr. Wetstone said. But now, he said, “the most sophisticated companies are learning how to go out on their own and do it.” Of course, none can accomplish this without enlisting energy partners. Disney’s new facility in central Florida, for example, is a collaboration with the Reedy Creek Improvement District and solar project developer Origis Energy USA. Disney officials declined to discuss the financials of their renewable energy projects.
Also in central Florida, Disney — with the help of Duke Energy — opened a solar facility in 2016 that’s famously shaped like Mickey Mouse’s head. The five-megawatt solar facility on 22 acres near Epcot is made of 48,000 solar panels. Duke Energy sells the resulting alternative energy — enough to power 1,000 homes — to Reedy Creek.
In some cases, Disney park customers can already see solar at work.
At the flagship Disneyland Resort, solar panels sit atop the Radiator Springs Racers ride in Cars Land. The system — which opened in 2016 — generates electricity for the Disney California Adventure Park. The 40,000-square-foot operation features more than 1,400 high-efficiency solar panels and generates enough energy to annually power 100 Anaheim homes.
Could Walt Disney have imagined all of this renewable energy in his parks?
“I’m not sure if he could dream of this,” Dr. Penning said. “But his dreams did result in Epcot, which was meant to be the first sustainable development.”
Indeed, a sustainable lifestyle has become part of Dr. Penning’s daily routine. He has rid himself of single-use plastics — and instead of driving a car, he prefers to use a motorcycle. “Except when it’s pouring rain,” he said.
Some of Disney’s environmental actions sound almost like fairy tales. Take the Cinderella Castle at Disney’s Magic Kingdom in Florida. Its holiday display of 170,000 lights has been painstakingly switched to LED lighting. Since that change, the energy to power that eye-popping display has been reduced to an amount needed to power just four coffee pots.
Even for Disney, renewable energy requires more than pixie dust.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/09/business/energy-environment/the-magic-kingdom-is-going-green.html
Industry and Association News
LCSA News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested