Preview Newsletter
AM ACC Clips Report - October 17, 2018
-
(ACC Mentioned) Local Chamber Joins In Leadership Fly-In
Oct 17, 2018 | The Augusta Chronicle
A delegation of business leaders representing the chambers of commerce from Columbia County, Augusta, Aiken and North Augusta participated in the 2018 CSRA Leadership Fly-In to Washington, D.C., on Oct. 9 -11. -
USTR Notifies Congress Of Coming Trade Talks With EU, U.K., Japan
Oct 17, 2018 | PoliticoPro
By Megan Cassella
The Trump administration formally notified Congress on Tuesday that it plans to enter into trade negotiations with the European Union, Japan and the United Kingdom, paving the way for talks to begin early next year. -
EPA Finalizes TSCA Fees Rule But Legal Challenges Possible
Oct 17, 2018 | Inside EPA
EPA plans to publish in the Oct. 17 Federal Register its final rule authorizing the agency to begin collecting fees from the chemical industry to fund regulatory efforts under the revised Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), but publication also starts a 60-day clock for groups to file legal challenges to the rule. -
Fluorinated Coating Is Utterly Repellent
Oct 17, 2018 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Mark Peplow
me liquid-repelling coatings stay dry in a deluge of water, while others rebuff oils and organic solvents. Some can withstand harsh treatment, shrugging off harsh acids, high temperatures, or even healing themselves after being damaged. -
Amazon Unveils Chemical Policy For Private-Label Products
Oct 17, 2018 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Melody M. Bomgardner
A new chemical policy is coming to a small corner of Amazon’s vast online bazaar. The retailer says its private-label consumer products will be formulated without 54 chemicals found to be carcinogenic, mutagenic, persistent, bioaccumulative, or otherwise potentially harmful. -
Canada Permits Manufacture And Import Of Amides With Restrictions
Oct 17, 2018 | Chemical Watch
Canada's environment department has approved, with restrictions, the manufacture or import of the substance amides, tall-oil fatty, N-[3-(dimethylamino)propyl], effective from 25 September. -
Echa Has 'Lack Of Confidence In Human Data', Says NGO
Oct 16, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Emma Davies
Animal welfare NGO Cruelty Free International (CFI) has complained of a "lack of confidence in human data" that it finds "very worrying" following Echa decisions on two skin sensitising fragrance substances. -
China May Hike Tariffs on U.S. LNG as Spat Heats Up, Group Says
Oct 17, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Naureen S. Malik
China could more than double its tariffs on U.S. natural gas as the trade war intensifies, putting billions of investment dollars at risk in the race to build export terminals, according to an industry group. -
Growing Liquefied Natural Gas Exports Trigger Safety Audit
Oct 17, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sylvia Carignan
U.S. exports of liquefied natural gas are growing, and the Department of Transportation wants to ensure safety oversight for an increasing number of facilities handling the product. -
Energy Policy Goes To The Polls In Western US States
Oct 16, 2018 | Law 360
By Keith Goldberg
Voters in western U.S. states in November will weigh several initiatives that could have significant impacts on the energy sector, including Washington state's second attempt at a first-of-its-kind carbon tax on polluters and stiffer renewable energy mandates in Arizona and Nevada. -
Washington Governor Blasts Plan To Export Coal, Gas From Military Bases
Oct 16, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Michael Burke
Washington Gov. Jay Inslee (D) on Monday slammed President Trump's proposal to use military bases to export coal from the West Coast to Asia, saying in a statement that the idea is "reckless." -
Trump Plan to Export Natural Gas, Coal from West Coast Military Sites Slammed
Oct 16, 2018 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Charlie Passut
Democratic lawmakers are pushing back against a Trump administration proposal to use U.S. military installations or other federal property along the West Coast as potential export terminals for fossil fuel exports to Asia. -
How D.C. Unleashed Exports Despite Climate Worries
Oct 17, 2018 | Associated Press (In E&E Climatewire)
By Jie Jenny Zou
Energy Secretary Rick Perry's keynote speech at the World Gas Conference in June opened with a marching band and ended with an exhibition by the Harlem Globetrotters. It was a spectacle befitting the industry symposium. "We're sharing our energy bounty with the world," Perry gushed from a stage at the Washington Convention Center. -
Toxic Aliso Canyon Risks Draw Lawsuit From California Firefighters (1)
Oct 17, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By David McAfee
Sempra Energy’s Southern California Gas Co. knowingly exposed firefighters to cancer-causing chemicals like benzene and formaldehyde as they tried to protect citizens during a major toxic gas leak three years ago, according to a new lawsuit. -
Trump Team Releases Climate Regulatory Agenda
Oct 17, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Manuel Quiñones
The White House released its fall regulatory agenda late last night, updating its plans for undoing landmark Obama administration initiatives. -
Clean Energy, Climate Advocates See Room for Modest Gains in 2019
Oct 17, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Dean Scott
A push by Democrats for climate legislation next year in the House might appear to be a fool’s errand, given that the Senate is likely to remain in Republican hands. -
Draft EPA PM Study Could Boost Calls For Stricter NAAQS, Ultrafine Limits
Oct 17, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Stuart Parker
A draft EPA integrated science assessment (ISA) for its review of the 2012 fine particulate matter (PM) standard of 12 micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m3) suggests adverse health effects to PM exposure below the current limit, which could bolster environmentalists' calls for the agency to tighten the standard and regulate smaller ultrafine PM. -
Environmentalists Threaten EPA With Suit To Force States' SO2 Plans
Oct 17, 2018 | Inside EPA
The Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) and Sierra Club are threatening to sue EPA over the agency's allegeed failure to compel several states to submit adequate plans to implement the agency's 2010 sulfur dioxide (SO2) air standard, after EPA missed deadlines to make required findings of whether the states have submitted such plans.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) Local Chamber Joins In Leadership Fly-In
Oct 17, 2018 | The Augusta Chronicle
A delegation of business leaders representing the chambers of commerce from Columbia County, Augusta, Aiken and North Augusta participated in the 2018 CSRA Leadership Fly-In to Washington, D.C., on Oct. 9 -11.
Each year, a group of 40 private-sector and public leaders representing three counties and two states makes the trip to the nation’s capital. During its visit, the delegation meets with legislative members and various agencies to share information about critical issues to the Greater Augusta region.
During the 2018 trip, the delegation hopes to address several priority issues that include:
• Savannah River Site
• Plant Vogtle
• priorities for Fort Gordon
• Augusta Regional Airport
• New Savannah Bluff Lock and Dam -- specifically the current condition and the future repair that is needed
The group also heard from top officials from the U.S. Economic Development Administration, Department of Energy, U.S. Army Cyber Command, various cyber contractors and the American Chemistry Council on Trade/Tariffs.
“On the federal level, it is important that the respective chambers and business leaders work together to address these larger issues that impact our entire region. These priorities have contributed to the success of our region, and we will continue to ask for future missions and investments while protecting current projects,” said Tammy Shepherd, president and CEO of the Columbia County Chamber of Commerce.
https://www.augustachronicle.com/news/20181017/local-chamber-joins-in-leadership-fly-in
-
USTR Notifies Congress Of Coming Trade Talks With EU, U.K., Japan
Oct 17, 2018 | PoliticoPro
By Megan Cassella
The Trump administration formally notified Congress on Tuesday that it plans to enter into trade negotiations with the European Union, Japan and the United Kingdom, paving the way for talks to begin early next year.
“Under President Trump’s leadership, we will continue to expand U.S. trade and investment by negotiating trade agreements with Japan, the EU and the United Kingdom,” U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer said in a statement.
Lighthizer said the formal notification was an "important milestone" and added that the administration was "committed to concluding these negotiations with timely and substantive results for American workers, farmers, ranchers, and businesses.”
The formal letters to lawmakers kick off a 90-day clock after which the administration can begin negotiations with each of the three trading partners.
Guidelines under Trade Promotion Authority law also require the Trump administration to publish detailed negotiating objectives at least 30 days before talks begin. The timing of today's letters means that negotiations could start as soon as Jan. 14 with Japan and the European Union. Talks with the U.K. could start "as soon as it is ready" after it completes its exit from the European Union in late March, USTR said in its letter.
The notification came as welcome news to Republican leadership of the congressional committees with jurisdiction over trade, who hailed it as "encouraging" and a sign of "progress."
"New, ambitious, and high-standard trade agreements with each of these economies would expand our ability to sell ‘made in America’ products around the globe and deepen our partnership with these close trading partners and vital allies," House Ways and Means Chairman Kevin Brady (R-Texas) said in a statement.
Senate Finance Chairman Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) said he was "pleased" the administration was pursuing new trade talks and emphasized that trade law "guarantees that Congress and the administration will work hand-in-hand" on negotiations.
Across the aisle, some Democrats offered support for the announcement as well.
"With many sectors of the U.S. economy seized with anxiety over the impact of the president’s trade policies, perhaps these notices indicate that the Trump administration will finally try to create new economic opportunities for U.S. workers and businesses through constructive engagement with important U.S. trading partners and allies," Rep. Richard Neal, the top Democrat on Ways and Means, said in a statement.
Lighthizer told lawmakers last week that administration was interested in negotiating trade agreements with a range of trading partners, including the EU and Japan.
The Trump administration has already begun holding exploratory talks with Japan and the EU and has a working group to explore future trade arrangements with the U.K., once it completes its exit from the EU.
The letters sent to Congress regarding Japan are available here. Click here for letters on the EU and here for those related to the U.K.
https://subscriber.politicopro.com/energy/article/2018/10/ustr-notifies-congress-of-coming-trade-talks-with-eu-uk-japan-853545
-
EPA Finalizes TSCA Fees Rule But Legal Challenges Possible
Oct 17, 2018 | Inside EPA
EPA plans to publish in the Oct. 17 Federal Register its final rule authorizing the agency to begin collecting fees from the chemical industry to fund regulatory efforts under the revised Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), but publication also starts a 60-day clock for groups to file legal challenges to the rule.
The rule for the first time establishes a fee structure to defray up to 25 percent of the costs of implementing several key TSCA programs, such as new and existing chemical reviews, issuing test orders, and weighing claims of confidential business information or up to $25 million, whichever number is lower.
The rule's publication ends brief confusion expressed during an Oct. 10 EPA webinar over when companies must begin paying the new, greatly increased fees to EPA's toxics office.
“So the effective date for the fees rule is the day after publication [in] the Federal Register. . . . It's a bit confusing as [in] both the proposed rule and the final rule, we did indicate that manufacturers would begin incurring fees on Oct. 1 regardless of the effective date,” Ryan Schmit, of EPA's toxics office, said in response to questions on the webinar. “So as folks are aware, fees are beginning to be incurred already.” Schmit added that the publication date is “out of our control, but we hope in the next couple weeks, the rule will be announced in the Federal Register.”
A Sept. 28 memo from the law firm Bergeson & Campbell notes that “the final rule will apply to all submissions that are received starting October 1, 2018. EPA stated that it will invoice affected companies within 30 days of the effective date.”
Fees range from $9,800 for a TSCA section 4 test order to $16,000 for a pre-manufacture notice (PMN) for a new chemical under section 5 to $270,000 for a TSCA section 6 risk evaluation. For those evaluations EPA conducts at industry's request, EPA will charge a $1.25 million down payment, and then charge 50-100 percent of the remaining total cost of the evaluation, depending on the chemical selected.
The fees are either greatly increased from before the rule's implementation, or they are new fees. The increase is intended to directly defray the costs of more active federal regulation of industrial chemicals, in contrast to prior practice.
During the Oct. 10 webinar, an OPPT staffer said the prior PMN fees, for example, were capped at $2,500 since 1988, and “those fees have always gone to U.S. Treasury. They were not available to the agency to offset our costs.”
The final rule slated for publication Oct. 17, which EPA released publicly Sept. 27, is similar to the proposed version. The major changes are the agency's proposed charges for the TSCA section 6 risk evaluations and its definition of small businesses that are eligible for discounted fees. Generally, small businesses receive an 80 percent discount on the new fees. Section 6 risk evaluation fees are fixed based on cost to EPA, regardless of company size. Small business fees range from $1,950 for a section 4 test order to $2,800 for a section 5 PMN to $5,900 for a section 4 test rule.
EPA in the final rule changed its definition of a small business to one based on number of employees, rather than annual revenue, to match the approach used by the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA).
Bergeson & Campbell in its memo “appreciate[s] the regulatory and administrative coherence afforded by adopting the SBA’s approach. The SBA is also required by statute to periodically review and adjust its size standard to help keep the standard current with industry and market conditions. This will hopefully set the stage for periodic review by EPA . . . as part of the TSCA requirement to review fees every three years.”
The fees rule is the last of four TSCA “framework rules” that implement the updated statute's enhanced mandates for EPA. The first three rules, describing how EPA will prioritize existing chemicals for risk analysis, analyze them, and maintain an inventory of existing chemicals, were finalized last year to meet a statutory deadline.
Congress provided no such deadline for the fees rule, which lingered despite its importance to agency operations in part over disagreement among stakeholders over whether EPA had accurately assessed the costs of the new TSCA program, who should be assessed fees and how.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/epa-finalizes-tsca-fees-rule-legal-challenges-possible
-
Fluorinated Coating Is Utterly Repellent
Oct 17, 2018 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Mark Peplow
Transparent, self-healing film fends off more than 100 liquids, including concentrated acids and low-surface-tension solvents
Some liquid-repelling coatings stay dry in a deluge of water, while others rebuff oils and organic solvents. Some can withstand harsh treatment, shrugging off harsh acids, high temperatures, or even healing themselves after being damaged.
Now researchers have created a veritable Swiss Army knife of a repellent coating that combines all of these properties and more, thanks to its unique chemistry and texture (Nat. Mater. 2018, DOI: 10.1038/s41563-018-0178-2). “We’re controlling a range of different structures, from the chemical bond to the nanoscale to the microscopic level,” says Frank Caruso of the University of Melbourne, part of the team behind the super-omniphobic material.
The coating is a mixture of 1H,1H,2H,2H-perfluorohexyltrichlorosilane (PFTS) and n-butyl cyanoacrylate (n-BCA), combined in a dichloropentafluoropropane solution. When sprayed onto a surface, water vapor in the atmosphere triggers a series of polymerization reactions between PFTS and n-BCA to create a tough, transparent film. The coating contains polymer nanoparticles that aggregate to form a highly textured surface, which may trap tiny pockets of air to help ward off liquids.
In tests, the coating repelled more than 100 different liquids, including water, n-pentane, perfluorohexane, and concentrated hydrofluoric acid. Droplets of liquid typically formed almost spherical globules on the coating, with contact angles of at least 150 degrees—generally regarded as the mark of a super-repellent surface. Slightly tilting a surface—typically less than 5 degrees—was enough to make the droplets roll off cleanly. A jet of n-pentane, which has a very low surface tension and will wet most surfaces, simply bounced off coated surfaces.
The researchers say that n-BCA acts as a powerful adhesive to anchor the coating to a wide range of substances, including wood, metal, glass and polyester fabric. Caruso suggests that this strong adhesion may also reduce the risk of the coating escaping into the environment, a problem that has bedeviled other polyfluorinated compounds.
The coating continued to repel liquids at 100 °C and retained its properties after scratching, abrading, and washing. Only when the researchers scoured it with oxygen plasma did it lose its repellency. Even then, the material healed itself after 24 hours at room temperature, or in just 10 minutes if heated to 120 °C, regaining its full complement of super powers as its polymer chains reorganized themselves.
Many of these properties have been combined in previous materials, says Doris Vollmer at the Max Planck Institute for Polymer Research, who studies super-repellent coatings. But the coating’s ability to repel n-pentane is unusual, as is the complete recovery of n-pentane repellency after self-healing. “That is better than I’ve seen with other coatings,” she says.
The simple, spray-on method could also make this coating attractive for commercial applications, says Jas Pal S. Badyal, who develops functional surfaces at Durham University. “The one-step approach is good,” he says. However, using dichloropentafluoropropane as a solvent for the coating’s precursors could be a stumbling block, he adds, due to the environmental impact of such halogenated compounds.
Caruso suggests that the material could eventually be developed into a coating for chemical hazard shielding, and the team is already working with industry partners. “But there’s still a long way to go in terms of applications,” he adds, noting that they need to reduce the cost of the coating and assess its long-term durability.
https://cen.acs.org/materials/coatings/Fluorinated-coating-utterly-repellent/96/i42
-
Amazon Unveils Chemical Policy For Private-Label Products
Oct 17, 2018 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Melody M. Bomgardner
Online retailer to restrict chemicals of concern in baby, personal care, cleaning, and cosmetics products
A new chemical policy is coming to a small corner of Amazon’s vast online bazaar. The retailer says its private-label consumer products will be formulated without 54 chemicals found to be carcinogenic, mutagenic, persistent, bioaccumulative, or otherwise potentially harmful.
Private brands are a small but growing portion of Amazon’s sales. The site sells a handful of baby, personal care, cleaning, and cosmetics products labeled as Amazon Essentials, and AmazonBasics, and with less-obvious names such as Presto. The restricted chemicals generally fall under the categories of parabens, phthalates, nonylphenol and nonylphenol ethoxylates, and formaldehyde donor preservatives. Amazon’s list also includes the antimicrobial triclosan.
The move comes one month before the release of an annual report grading retailer chemical policies from Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families, a consortia of consumer advocacy groups. Amazon scored a D in the 2017 report.
Similarly, Rite Aid drug stores scored a D+ last year; last month, the chain expanded the list of chemicals it will restrict in private-brand items to 69 from eight. In a press release, Rite Aid acknowledged that it worked with Safer Chemicals in its efforts to replace chemicals of concern with safer alternatives.
“Our campaign and annual retailer report card has spurred a race to the top in the retail sector,” Mike Schade, director for Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families’ Mind the Store campaign tells C&EN. “Just like last year, we’ve seen a number of retailers announce significant new policies, or expand their programs, to tackle toxic chemicals.” Home Depot and Costco were among retailers that announced new policies ahead of the 2017 report.
Old-fashioned petitions and letter-writing campaigns can also convince retailers to stop selling certain products, Schade points out. His group helped organize consumer campaigns asking Lowe’s and other hardware stores to stop carrying paint strippers made with methylene chloride. Recently, AutoZone, PPG, and Kelly Moore also banned the products.
Meanwhile, the report card approach has been so successful that this year Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families will grade 12 additional companies on their chemical policies, or lack thereof. On the list will be grocery stores such as Aldi’s; Starbucks and McDonald’s; and the dollar-store chain 99 Cents Only.
https://cen.acs.org/business/consumer-products/Amazon-unveils-chemical-policy-private/96/i42
-
Canada Permits Manufacture And Import Of Amides With Restrictions
Oct 17, 2018 | Chemical Watch
Canada's environment department has approved, with restrictions, the manufacture or import of the substance amides, tall-oil fatty, N-[3-(dimethylamino)propyl], effective from 25 September.
The restrictions applied include strict terms of disposal because the substance is suspected of being toxic, or capable of becoming so, according to section 64 of the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (Cepa).
In addition to record-keeping, the notifier must also: only import the substance to incorporate it as a component of asphalt or bitumen emulsions, and transfer physical control only to those who will use it in that way;write to the environment minister at least 120 days before manufacturing, giving any information required by law, supplying the address of the Canadian facility producing it, describing the manufacturing process, providing a flow diagram and outline of the major steps in the process; andprovide written information about the terms and ministerial condition to any recipient in control of the substance, waste, containers or transportation vessels. They must also get confirmation that the information was received.Echa's database lists the substance as very toxic to aquatic life and causing severe skin burns and eye damage.
https://chemicalwatch.com/71064/canada-permits-manufacture-and-import-of-amides-with-restrictions
-
Echa Has 'Lack Of Confidence In Human Data', Says NGO
Oct 16, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Emma Davies
Animal welfare NGO Cruelty Free International (CFI) has complained of a "lack of confidence in human data" that it finds "very worrying" following Echa decisions on two skin sensitising fragrance substances.
Echa's Risk Assessment Committee (Rac) adopted Opinions on geraniol and citral, which have related chemical structures, at its meeting on 10–14 September.
The dossiers contained significant quantities of both human and animal data. Human data from patch test studies on selected patients supported the stricter classification but the Rac found it "quite a challenge" to bring together the extensive human and animal results in a weight-of-evidence approach, according to its chair Tim Bowmer.
"Human data, where available, should surely take precedence, because it does not have the issue of species differences, which we believe are more significant than issues of exposure," said Katy Taylor from CFI. "We find it astonishing that – where there is evidence from humans that a substance could be more harmful than the animal studies suggest – this is not given more weight."Potency problems
Denmark submitted harmonised classification and labelling (CLH) proposals that argued for a category 1A classification in both cases. However, the Rac concluded that the evidence warranted only the broader, category 1 classification, because a clear picture of the potency could not be established. Geraniol currently has no classification for skin sensitisation; citral already has the category 1 classification.
Potency is difficult to determine. The rodent local lymph node assay (LLNA) can be used to pick out chemicals that are clearly sensitising but it is "not always that easy" to put them into potency classes, added Dr Bowmer.
"In this case there are many studies and there are some contradictions with negative and positive results. Then you add in the human data, which cover various exposure situations, bioavailability and individual predisposition. So by the time you have all of the pieces of the puzzle on the table and put them together, you come to quite a complex picture," he said.Human data
Denmark is "pleased that it was agreed to classify geraniol as skin sensitiser 1, since it did not have a harmonised classification," said Toke Winther from the Danish EPA.
"When human data indicate strong potency these data should, in our view, be given a high priority, as it is concrete proof that strong sensitising effects are observed directly in the population. Also in cases where available animal data may not (clearly) support sub-categorisation as a strong sensitiser," he added.
He explained that the main issues discussed during the Rac meeting were: effects seen in animals were more moderate than those observed using human patch tests (for selected patients);although patch test studies on selected patients indicated strong sensitising effects, other available human information pointed to moderate potency;data from trials with selected patients were deemed less important than those with unselected patients; andconcerns over exposure levels in human trials.
These uncertainties prevented Rac from gaining a clear potency picture.
"Although we agree that human data are not designed for regulatory purposes and that it is not straightforward to use [them] for classification, we think it is a pity that it has proved so difficult to apply human data from dermatological clinics for classification. In general we should aim at making the best of the data we have available for the protection of human health," said Mr Winther.
https://chemicalwatch.com/71013/echa-has-lack-of-confidence-in-human-data-says-ngo
-
China May Hike Tariffs on U.S. LNG as Spat Heats Up, Group Says
Oct 17, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Naureen S. Malik
Center for Liquefied Natural Gas sees risk of 25 percent dutyAsian nation is poised to become world’s biggest gas importer
China could more than double its tariffs on U.S. natural gas as the trade war intensifies, putting billions of investment dollars at risk in the race to build export terminals, according to an industry group.
There’s “a real concern” that the Asian nation will boost its levy on liquefied natural gas to 25 percent from 10 percent, said Charlie Riedl, executive director of the Washington-based Center for Liquefied Natural Gas. That would bring the tariff to the level China initially proposed in August. The existing 10 percent duty is already complicating contract negotiations, according to Greg Vesey, chief executive officer of developer Liquefied Natural Gas Ltd.
Surging global demand for LNG—driven by China, which is on the cusp of becoming the world’s biggest gas importer—has spurred plans for new export terminals from Australia to the U.S. Gulf Coast. But the risk of higher tariffs, which could make U.S. gas too costly to ship to Asia, is threatening to derail some of those projects. The trade tensions come just as companies including Liquefied Natural Gas Ltd. and Tellurian Inc. look to turn discussions with potential Chinese investors into formal deals.
The Center for Liquefied Natural Gas is making the case to the Trump administration “that a tariff of 10 percent or 25 percent for a prolonged period is literally billions of dollars lost,” Riedl said in interview on the sidelines of Energy Dialogues LLC’s North American Gas Forum in Washington.
During a panel at the forum, Republican U.S. Senator Bill Cassidy of Louisiana—home to Cheniere’s Sabine Pass terminal, the first to export U.S. shale gas—described LNG as a casualty in a trade war that’s really a dispute over technology and economic power.
Riedl said his group has met with White House staff, U.S. agencies and Cabinet departments. The administration is serious about addressing the LNG industry’s concerns that the trade spat will hamstring project development, he said.
“We are hopeful that it will blow over,” he said.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/china-may-hike-tariffs-on-us-lng-as-spat-heats-up-group-says
-
Growing Liquefied Natural Gas Exports Trigger Safety Audit
Oct 17, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sylvia Carignan
DOT inspector general to audit Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
Agency to focus on liquefied natural gas pipelines
U.S. exports of liquefied natural gas are growing, and the Department of Transportation wants to ensure safety oversight for an increasing number of facilities handling the product.
The department announced Oct. 16 that it would audit the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. PHMSA’s Office of Pipeline Safety oversees liquid natural gas pipelines from their siting to their operation.
As national exports of the energy product increase, PHMSA will need “effective and efficient” oversight of those facilities, according to the Transportation Department’s inspector general.
U.S. exports of liquefied natural gas quadrupled in 2017, according to the Energy Information Administration. The exports all pass through Louisiana’s Sabine Pass terminal, operated by Cheniere Energy Inc. PHMSA ordered Cheniere in February to fix two of its tanks after finding they had accidentally released liquefied natural gas.
The inspector general’s audit will focus on liquefied natural gas facility operators’ compliance with the pipeline agency’s regulations, as well as states that inspect those facilities.
There are about 150 liquefied natural gas facilities in the U.S., spanning 38 states and territories. More facilities are being built around the country, including one in Louisiana, one in Georgia and two in Texas.
“As export capacity continues to increase, the United States is projected to become the third-largest [liquefied natural gas] exporter in the world by 2020,” according to the Energy Information Administration.
The inspector general plans to start the audit this month.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/growing-liquefied-natural-gas-exports-trigger-safety-audit
-
Energy Policy Goes To The Polls In Western US States
Oct 16, 2018 | Law 360
By Keith Goldberg
Law360 (October 16, 2018, 12:17 PM EDT) -- Voters in western U.S. states in November will weigh several initiatives that could have significant impacts on the energy sector, including Washington state's second attempt at a first-of-its-kind carbon tax on polluters and stiffer renewable energy mandates in Arizona and Nevada.
Nevada voters will also decide whether to deregulate their retail electricity market. And in Colorado, the controversial Proposition 112 could drastically limit new oil and gas development.
The number and nature of energy-related ballot initiatives reflect voters in West Coast states trying to build a "green wall" to impede the Trump administration's efforts to roll back climate change regulations and push fossil fuel development, according to Stoel Rives LLPenvironmental associate Rachel Cox, who is based in Seattle.
"There is a wave of policy movement from the public in response to the administration's actions on climate change-related regulations," Cox said. "We're seeing the public in various states, particularly in the West, take it upon themselves to initiate climate change-related regulation."
Law360 just took a detailed look at Colorado's Proposition 112. Here's a roundup of other major energy-related state ballot initiatives headed to the polls.
Washington
The significance of the passage of Washington's Initiative 1631 can be stated in a single sentence: It would be the first-ever carbon tax imposed by a U.S. state.
Initiative 1631 would impose a fee of $15 per metric ton on the carbon emissions of so-called "major emitters" starting in 2020, and increase by $2 per metric ton each year until the state reaches its 2035 goal of reducing its greenhouse gas emissions by 25 percent from 1990 levels. That could translate to a $55-per-metric-ton fee on carbon emissions in 2035.
A previous carbon fee initiative failed to pass in 2016. The current proposal, which has the backing of Gov. Jay Inslee, the Seattle City Council and state resident and Microsoft Corp. co-founder Bill Gates, may be even more controversial since it isn't revenue-neutral like the previous one, Cox said. Oil and gas industry groups bitterly oppose the initiative and Cox said legal challenges are likely even if it passes.
"There has been a lot of critique waged against this initiative for that particular reason," Cox said. "There will be a large bank of revenue generated as a result of this carbon tax and how it will be spent is quite vague under the language."
Initiative 1631 states that 70 percent of the carbon revenues raised go to clean air and clean energy initiatives, including more renewable energy deployment and decarbonizing the transportation sector. Another 25 percent would go to waters and forest preservation, and the remaining 5 percent would go to community climate adaptation efforts. But how that money gets doled out would be up to a 15-member board appointed by the governor, and the allocation can also be shifted under certain circumstances.
The initiative also contains an interesting backup mechanism, Cox said. If the carbon fee is rescinded in the future, the state's Department of Ecology must enforce its Clean Air Rule, crafted in 2016 to cap and reduce GHG emissions but blocked by a state court in March.
Arizona
Arizona voters are mulling Proposition 127, which would amend the state constitution to require that the state's utilities draw half of their electricity from renewable sources by 2030. Currently, the state's renewable portfolio standard, or RPS, requires utilities to draw 15 percent of their power from renewable sources by 2025.
Clean energy advocates and green groups, including the NextGen America political action committee backed by billionaire environmentalist Tom Steyer, have spent millions of dollars supporting Proposition 127. Meanwhile, Arizona Public Service, the state's biggest utility, has spent millions of its own opposing the initiative.
It's a partisan battle as well. In March, the GOP-controlled Arizona State Legislature passed and Gov. Doug Ducey signed a bill that would make violations of constitutional provisions related to energy standards subject to civil penalties, which would translate to fines for utilities between $100 and $5,000. That has Proposition 127 supporters crying foul, as they argue the costs of not complying with the mandate if it's enacted would be less than the costs of complying with the mandate.
"They passed a bill that basically made these into goals and not standards," Alston & Bird LLPenvironmental partner Jeffrey Dintzer said. "It takes the teeth out of these things."
Nevada
Like its southeastern neighbor, Nevada also has a Steyer-backed ballot initiative, known as Question 6, that would amend the state's constitution to boost the RPS for utilities to 50 percent renewables by 2030. The state's current RPS requires utilities to get 25 percent of their electricity from renewable sources by 2025, and Gov. Brian Sandoval last year vetoed a bill that would boost the RPS to 40 percent renewables by 2030.
But debate over Question 6 has been dwarfed by the controversy surrounding Question 3, which would by amend the state's constitution to eliminate state-sanctioned utility monopolies and direct state lawmakers to create a deregulated retail electricity market by 2023.
The measure is backed by some of the state's largest corporate electricity consumers, including casinos and data storage firms, while fiercely opposed by NV Energy, the state's dominant utility and a subsidiary of Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway Inc.
NV Energy's position is backed by several state Democratic politicians and labor unions, as well as environmental groups who mainly fear that deregulation will derail commitments made by NV Energy to double its renewable energy generation by the year 2023.
"There will be years of market uncertainty as the Legislature figures out how to implement complex restructuring, and even after that, electricity retailers have shown a reluctance to sign the long-term contracts it takes to get new renewables built," Dylan Sullivan, a senior scientist at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said in a July statement.https://www.law360.com/articles/1091110/energy-policy-goes-to-the-polls-in-western-us-states
-
Washington Governor Blasts Plan To Export Coal, Gas From Military Bases
Oct 16, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Michael Burke
Washington Gov. Jay Inslee (D) on Monday slammed President Trump's proposal to use military bases to export coal from the West Coast to Asia, saying in a statement that the idea is "reckless."
“This reckless, harebrained proposal undermines national security instead of increasing it, and it undermines states’ rights to enforce necessary health, safety and environmental protections in their communities," Inslee said.
U.S. Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke on Monday told The Associated Pressthat the Trump administration is considering using military bases and federal properties in states such as Washington, Oregon and California to ship coal and natural gas to Asia.
“I respect the state of Washington and Oregon and California,” Zinke told the AP. “But also, it’s in our interest for national security and our allies to make sure that they have access to affordable energy commodities.”
Zinke also said the Trump administration is interested in partnering with private companies to handle the exports.
Inslee in his statement said that "the men and women who serve at our military bases are there to keep our country safe, not to service an export facility for private fossil fuel companies."
He added that he hasn't personally heard from the Trump administration and has instead had to rely on news reports for information about the potential exports.
“Our state has been left in the dark about the Administration's latest scheme. We’ve seen the news reports but have yet to hear from them in person. This effort is just the latest attempt at an end run around Washington’s authority to safeguard the health and safety of our people," he said.
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/411588-washington-governor-blasts-plan-to-export-coal-gas-from-military
-
Trump Plan to Export Natural Gas, Coal from West Coast Military Sites Slammed
Oct 16, 2018 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Charlie Passut
Democratic lawmakers are pushing back against a Trump administration proposal to use U.S. military installations or other federal property along the West Coast as potential export terminals for fossil fuel exports to Asia.
Access to full text unavailable – subscription required. For full story: https://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/116132-trump-plan-to-export-natural-gas-coal-from-west-coast-military-sites-slammed
-
How D.C. Unleashed Exports Despite Climate Worries
Oct 17, 2018 | Associated Press (In E&E Climatewire)
By Jie Jenny Zou
Energy Secretary Rick Perry's keynote speech at the World Gas Conference in June opened with a marching band and ended with an exhibition by the Harlem Globetrotters. It was a spectacle befitting the industry symposium. "We're sharing our energy bounty with the world," Perry gushed from a stage at the Washington Convention Center.
Long undervalued, natural gas was once burned off indiscriminately as an unwanted byproduct of oil drilling. But the fuel's fortunes have changed. Cooled to minus 162 degrees Celsius, natural gas condenses into a liquid marketed as a clean alternative to coal. In just three years, the U.S. has emerged as a top producer of liquefied natural gas, or LNG, selling shiploads of the commodity to countries such as China, which are seeking low-carbon energy sources to combat climate change.
Natural gas, it turns out, isn't so great for the climate, but that hasn't stopped America from sending its fossil fuels abroad. Since Donald Trump took office in 2017, exports of LNG and crude oil have surged, rivaling the likes of Saudi Arabia and Russia. To achieve what it calls "energy dominance," the Trump administration has taken its cues from an unlikely source: its predecessor.
When Perry hawked LNG and coal to India in April, he was advancing a dialogue the Department of Energy began under President Obama in 2014.
Compared with Trump, Obama is regarded as an environmental champion. But history paints a more complicated picture. As the young senator promised "change we can believe in" during the 2008 presidential campaign, change was also sweeping American oil fields. Advances in hydraulic fracturing created a glut. Industry responded by pitching fossil fuel exports as a "win-win" that would benefit consumers and enhance American power. Helping to deliver the message was a coalition of White House advisers: academics such as Columbia University's Jason Bordoff, energy gurus such as Daniel Yergin and national security experts such as John Deutch — all with links to firms profiting from the boom.
Leading the charge within government was then-Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz, a nuclear physicist with long-standing ties to the oil and gas industry and an enthusiastic proponent of natural gas. Under his watch, the Energy Department moved swiftly to foster LNG exports in 2013 before shifting its focus to decades-old restrictions on the export of crude oil. Days after the Paris climate agreement was reached in 2015, Obama signed a budget bill to keep the federal government running; slipped inside was a provision allowing crude oil to be sold freely for the first time since 1975. The move was praised by an alliance of 16 companies, most of which are now capitalizing on an export-driven boom in the Permian Basin of Texas and New Mexico.
A growing body of research suggests natural gas isn't the climate panacea many promised it would be, with mounting concerns over its main component: methane, a greenhouse gas roughly 86 times more potent in the short term than carbon dioxide.'All of the above'
Moniz spearheaded the Obama administration's "all of the above" policy, which endorsed drilling alongside renewable energy. When he became secretary in 2013, among his top priorities was fast-tracking approvals for natural gas exports — as advocated by industry lobbying groups such as the American Petroleum Institute.
The Trump White House has taken the idea a step further. In August, the Energy Department announced it would automatically approve small-volume exports of LNG. Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke, a booster of increased drilling on federal lands and offshore, has called America's energy supremacy a moral imperative.
Moniz, now in the private sector, has continued to follow an "all of the above" approach. His Washington office houses his nonprofit think tank, the Energy Futures Initiative, and his for-profit firm, EJM Associates LLC. The two organizations were launched on the same day last year. EJM receives staff and administrative support from EFI. Both share an office with the Scowcroft Group, a consultancy founded by former national security adviser Brent Scowcroft that specializes in emerging markets like China and whose clients include oil and gas companies.
Scowcroft and Moniz aren't just office mates. According to their websites, their for-profit firms are engaged in a three-way partnership with McLarty Associates, a trade consultancy located in the same building. A press release describes EJM as a strategic energy advisor for McLarty Associates clients.
Headed by Thomas "Mack" McLarty III, a Clinton White House official and former natural gas executive, the firm has represented LNG investors Chevron and General Electric. McLarty's lobbying division has advocated for Shell on natural gas matters and a company behind a pipeline with ties to the Kremlin. Brent Scowcroft and Mack McLarty sit on EFI's advisory board.
During a recent interview with the Center for Public Integrity and Newsy, Moniz balked at the suggestion that his ties to the fossil fuel industry could pose a conflict of interest. He emphasized his climate credentials, saying, "I have been a champion of renewables for a long, long time."
Responding to follow-up questions, a spokesman wrote in a seven-page statement that Moniz "has no financial relationships with oil and gas producers," and that neither EFI nor EJM engages in "lobbying activities or foreign government representation." It also said, "EJM has had no discussions with McLarty on LNG export issues," but did not include a similar qualification for the Scowcroft Group. "To date, there are no joint projects with either [Scowcroft or McLarty]," the statement added.
Representatives of Scowcroft and McLarty declined to comment.
Moniz's oil and gas ties go back years. When named Energy secretary, he terminated his work as a paid consultant for companies such as BP. At the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Moniz ran a think tank, largely funded by the oil and gas industry, that published one of the earliest and most influential reports on natural gas. First publicized in interim form in June 2010, it affirmed the fuel as a "bridge" to ease the country's transition from coal.
The study's major sponsor was the American Clean Skies Foundation, a group created by Aubrey McClendon — then CEO of Chesapeake Energy — as part of a multimillion-dollar effort to market natural gas as a climate solution. Moniz and several co-authors aggressively promoted it.
In his statement, Moniz's spokesman said the study has "stood the test of time" and emphasized Moniz's support for an Obama-era rule that sought to rein in leaks of methane from oil and gas sites. That regulation has become the latest target of the Trump administration.
The MIT study was cited in a slew of other reports, including one from an Energy Department committee in 2011. Chairing the committee was Deutch, a former CIA director and then-board member of Cheniere Energy, a Houston-based company that later became the first to export LNG. Another member, Yergin, went on to publish several studies in favor of LNG and crude oil exports as vice chairman of IHS Markit, an industry consultancy. Yergin sat on the advisory board of Moniz's MIT think tank; Moniz was a private consultant for IHS Markit. Deutch did not respond to requests for comment, but a representative of Yergin's noted that IHS Markit is "solely responsible" for the contents of its studies, regardless of funding.
The studies helped buoy the idea of natural gas as an answer to the planet's climate woes, even though early research hinted that methane could derail that narrative. A 2018 study sponsored by the Environmental Defense Fund — a green group that has partnered with the oil and gas industry to investigate leaks of the greenhouse gas — has only furthered doubts. The study found methane emissions were 60 percent higher than previously estimated. "If natural gas is a bridge fuel," said Ramón Alvarez, a co-author and associate chief scientist at EDF, "methane leaks is a major structural fault in the integrity of that bridge."'Level the playing field'
During a July press conference in England with British Prime Minister Theresa May, Trump struck an upbeat tone. "We've become an oil exporter, which would not have happened under the past regime or a new regime if it weren't us," he declared.
In fact, America did begin exporting large volumes of crude oil under Obama. He approved a last-minute budget deal to avert a government shutdown in 2015, which also removed restrictions on crude sales for the first time in 40 years. However, the country still imports more crude than it exports — a trend experts believe will continue.
Congress had enacted the restrictions as a conservation measure in 1975 following the Arab oil embargo, which caused fuel shortages. Under the ban, companies had to refine crude oil into petroleum products such as gasoline or secure special exemptions from the Commerce Department to sell the resource abroad.
As was the case with LNG, interest in crude exports soared when hydraulic fracturing took off. With oil production climbing steadily in 2012, American Petroleum Institute President Jack Gerard was among the first to suggest the ban be thrown out. Shortly thereafter, crude oil exports became a priority for the GOP as well as some Democrats in drilling states.
But they became an albatross for the Obama White House. Boosting crude oil — which doesn't have any of LNG's purported climate benefits — would have put the administration at odds with its own climate agenda. So, in October 2015, the White House threatened to veto legislation lifting the ban, urging Congress to focus on "supporting our transition to a low-carbon economy."
Sens. Heidi Heitkamp (D-N.D.) and Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) responded by mustering congressional support for a provision in that year's budget bill allowing crude oil exports. By December 2015, the measure was part of a $1.1 trillion spending plan — veto-proof legislation needed to keep the federal government running. In exchange for backing exports, Democrats got five-year extensions on tax credits for wind and solar.
"It didn't strike us as the best deal," said Ana Unruh Cohen, managing director of government affairs for the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental group. Cohen was an aide to Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) when interest in the ban spiked on Capitol Hill. Markey was the deal's most vocal opponent, calling it a "Trojan horse" for "pumping up Big Oil's profits."
Climate change was an afterthought in the debate over the ban, Cohen said. Both sides were fixated on how crude oil exports would affect energy prices, not greenhouse gas emissions. And Democrats mistakenly banked on emissions-cutting policies such as the Clean Power Plan — one of several Obama-era regulations being tossed out by Trump — to drive investment in renewable energy.
Even though the Obama White House publicly discouraged efforts to undo the ban, it ultimately signed off on the deal. Tyson Slocum, director of Public Citizen's energy program, called it a "pathetic compromise."
On Jan. 4, 2016, ConocoPhillips — one of 16 companies that collaborated to overturn the ban — became the first to export American crude oil. This summer, the U.S. shattered records by exporting 3 million barrels of crude a day, trailing only Saudi Arabia and Iraq.
In a written statement, Heitkamp said crude oil exports have allowed the U.S. to "level the playing field in the global energy market." Obama representatives did not respond to requests for comment.
Slocum, of Public Citizen, said Trump administration officials are merely capitalizing on choices made years earlier that breathed new life into "vested fossil fuel interests."
"That's what folks in the Obama administration never really understood — that the decision they were making has implications for one or two generations," Slocum said. "That's the shortsightedness of this entire hysteria to promote exports."
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2018/10/17/stories/1060103485
-
Toxic Aliso Canyon Risks Draw Lawsuit From California Firefighters (1)
Oct 17, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By David McAfee
Firefighters say SoCalGas withheld safety information on benzene and formaldehyde
First responders suffered from several major illnesses
Sempra Energy’s Southern California Gas Co. knowingly exposed firefighters to cancer-causing chemicals like benzene and formaldehyde as they tried to protect citizens during a major toxic gas leak three years ago, according to a new lawsuit.
Dozens of firefighters sued SoCalGas and Sempra over the toxic gases that emitted for months out of the Aliso Canyon Natural Gas Storage Facility, saying the companies intentionally misled first responders about the potential dangers. As a result, the firefighters say they have experienced nosebleeds, migraines, dizziness, and even cancer.
The complaint alleges SoCalGas partnered with the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health to assure firefighters that there were “no hazards” and that the natural gas was not toxic despite actually knowing about the presence of benzene and formaldehyde.
“By withholding this vital information, SoCalGas failed to protect the community and the people protecting us,” attorneys for the plaintiffs wrote in the lawsuit filed in California Superior Court Oct. 15.
The lawsuit seeking damages for firefighters marks the most recent legal development in the aftermath of what has been called the biggest gas leak in U.S. history, coming after a $119.5 million settlement with Los Angeles and California regulatory agencies. The incident, which occurred from October 2015 to February 2016 near Porter Ranch, forced the evacuation of thousands of people.
“We have been advised that a complaint has been filed against SoCalGas on behalf of certain first responders relating to the 2015 Aliso Canyon gas leak,” Melissa Bailey, a SoCalGas representative, told Bloomberg Environment in an email. “We have not been served with the complaint and have not yet had the opportunity to review it.”
Benzene LevelsThe firefighters say the benzene levels during the leak were 100,000 parts per billion, 100,000 times higher than the state standard, in one gas well. In 1996, SoCalGas warned the public about a benzene risk, according to the firefighters’ attorneys.
Jesse Creed of Panish Shea & Boyle LLP in Los Angeles, an attorney for the firefighters,said first responders “deserve justice.”
“SoCalGas told them and the public it was safe because it cares more about its profits than our brave firefighters,” Creed told Bloomberg Environment in a statement Oct. 16. “Now their bravery and courage are being punished with illness and injury. Our first responders deserve a full accounting of the damage SoCalGas has inflicted on them.”
Another attorney representing the plaintiffs, Patricia Oliver of Parris Law Firm in Lancaster, Calif., said SoCalGas withheld important information and that the company “should be called to provide full disclosure of the composition of gas stored in this facility so that all of us are safe.”
The case is Ames v. S. Calif. Gas Company, Cal. Super. Ct., No. 18STCV00854, 10/15/18.
(Updates with SoCalGas comment in the sixth paragraph.)
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/toxic-aliso-canyon-risks-draw-lawsuit-from-california-firefighters-1
-
Trump Team Releases Climate Regulatory Agenda
Oct 17, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Manuel Quiñones
The White House released its fall regulatory agenda late last night, updating its plans for undoing landmark Obama administration initiatives.
The Office of Management and Budget's latest Unified Agenda, made public at around midnight, has EPA finishing its redo of the Clean Power Plan by March of next year. The comment period is still open for the proposed Affordable Clean Energy rule.
The administration also indicated that it hopes to finalize its revamped rules on vehicle emissions by March 2019. The plan would potentially freeze fuel economy standards on cars made between 2022 and 2026.
EPA will propose a rule as soon as next month to replace former President Obama's action on new or modified power plants, according to the regulatory agenda.
In a conference call with reporters yesterday, administration officials touted their rule-busting efforts across all federal agencies.
"We believe through these reform efforts, trying to get government out of the way, where the government isn't helping, will result in a better quality of life, lower consumer prices, more jobs and really hopefully, ultimately, improvements in well-being that can result from the advancement of innovation and new products and services," a senior administration official said.
The White House puts the net regulatory cost savings at more than $30 billion. Agencies have eliminated more than 170 regulatory actions, according to the administration official.
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2018/10/17/stories/1060103507
-
Clean Energy, Climate Advocates See Room for Modest Gains in 2019
Oct 17, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Dean Scott
Even with Democratic House, far-reaching climate bills likely to stay on the back burner
‘45Q’ carbon capture incentives, extension of wind, solar tax credits among modest measures seen in 2019
A push by Democrats for climate legislation next year in the House might appear to be a fool’s errand, given that the Senate is likely to remain in Republican hands.
But the prospect that Democrats will control the House for the first time since 2011 has spurred talk of at least some policy tweaks that could test whether both parties can rack up modest deals to boost incentives for clean energy and make infrastructure more resilient to climate impacts.
If the Nov. 6 election ends with a divided Congress, expect to see little progress on bills that attempt to tackle climate change but instead incremental policies that help boost wind and solar energy or modestly reduce U.S. greenhouse gas emissions.
“At least climate change won’t be a four-letter word anymore on Capitol Hill,” said Ana Unruh Cohen, a former climate and energy aide to Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) now with the Natural Resources Defense Council.
Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), who chairs the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, said she hopes to resurrect an energy package that included increased energy efficiency measures, which fell short of passage in the last Congress.Murkowski told Bloomberg Environment she’d back at least opening talks with Democrats on modest solutions to climate change.
“Let’s stand down on the rhetoric and really engage in an honest discussion about the issues,” she said.
Barrasso Eyes Carbon ReuseSen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), who chairs the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee and is a member of Senate Republican leadership, is touting his USE It bill (S. 2602), which would award prizes for technological advancements in the re-use of carbon dioxide.
The bill has backing from senators from both parties including Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), an advocate of climate action, and West Virginia Sens. Shelley Moore Capito (R) and Joe Manchin (D), backers of the coal industry.
A version of Barrasso’s measure, which would provide incentives for making commercial products from carbon dioxide, was approved by his Senate environmental panel in May.
“Carbon dioxide capture and removal technologies play an important role in lowering global carbon dioxide emissions,” Barrasso said in an Oct. 11 statement, adding that such technology-driven approaches “can both reduce emissions and transform carbon dioxide into a widely used, valuable product.”
Another priority for the Wyoming Republican: moving his Nuclear Energy Innovation and Modernization Act (S. 512) to provide a regulatory pathway for advanced nuclear reactors.
The environment panel approved an amended version of his his bill in May 2017 but it hasn’t been brought to the floor.
Maine Republican Sen. Susan Collins sees hope for resurrecting legislation also backed by Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) to cut emissions of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), which are greenhouse gases used in refrigeration and air conditioning, and short-lived climate pollutants such as methane.
Collins told Bloomberg Environment the recent report from the U.N.'s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change warning of severe climate impacts to come unless there is a quick global transformation was “alarming in presenting dramatic changes that are going to happen much more quickly than previous reports had indicated.”
Murphy said he was skeptical that even modest legislative gains on clean energy and climate legislation are in the offing, unless voters give Democrats control of both chambers.
“If we want to make any progress, even on some incremental basis, on climate we have got to win back both the House and Senate—and even then, the progress would only be incremental,” he said.
What Does Incremental Mean?Groups that back clean energy and tackling climate change, such as the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions, have been in talks for months strategizing on what incremental policies are possible in a divided Congress.
Bob Perciasepe, who was acting head of the EPA during the Obama administration and is now C2ES president, said he’s optimistic some modest measures can advance, but added that a Democratic-controlled House may be more focused on oversight of Trump administration agencies.
“If you make the assumption that the House will flip but it won’t be a big majority for them and the Senate stays narrowly Republican, that doesn’t suggest a lot of agreement on bills,” he said.
Perciasepe said there are two modest changes that could be passed with a divided government: further expansion of 45Q incentives—named for their tax code provision—for carbon capture and storage projects, and extension or expansion of existing credits for wind and solar energy.
“I think a simple extension at some level can send pretty strong signals to capital markets” that will help ensure wind and solar projects continue to attract investment, he said.
Common Ground for Divided PartiesThat’s not to say big legislative initiatives aren’t possible with a divided Congress. Alex Flint, a former staff director for the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, noted that a 2007 energy bill passed under a divided government—Republican President George W. Bush and a Democratic-controlled Congress.
That legislation strengthened vehicle efficiency standards and energy efficiency requirements, and ratcheted up renewable fuels targets.
Moving broader climate legislation, which is strongly opposed by most Republicans in Congress and much of the oil, gas, and coal industries, would almost certainly require Democrats to win control of both the House and Senate, and then would be an uphill battle to get past the White House.
But expect Democrats like Sens. Chris Van Hollen (Md.) and Whitehouse, whose competing cap-and-dividend bills would return the bulk of carbon tax revenue to households, to continue their efforts.
“Look, we understand the prospects of success depend a lot on the outcome of this election,” Van Hollen told Bloomberg Environment. “But I plan to reintroduce our bill and move it forward.” Van Hollen last introduced his bill, the Healthy Climate and Family Security Act (S. 2352), in January.https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/clean-energy-climate-advocates-see-room-for-modest-gains-in-2019
-
Draft EPA PM Study Could Boost Calls For Stricter NAAQS, Ultrafine Limits
Oct 17, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Stuart Parker
A draft EPA integrated science assessment (ISA) for its review of the 2012 fine particulate matter (PM) standard of 12 micrograms per cubic meter (ug/m3) suggests adverse health effects to PM exposure below the current limit, which could bolster environmentalists' calls for the agency to tighten the standard and regulate smaller ultrafine PM.
But despite the ISA findings, EPA's deputy air chief has already said that even if scientific data show harm from PM exposure at levels as low as 5 ug/m3, it might be technically impossible for the agency to set such a limit.
The newly-released draft ISA is a key document that will support EPA in its review of the current “primary” national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for PM, and especially fine particulate (PM2.5). EPA intends to complete the review of standards for PM2.5 and larger “coarse” PM (PM10) by December 2020, putting the agency on a tight schedule.
The Obama EPA in 2012 tightened the PM2.5 primary, or health-based NAAQS from 15 ug/m3 down to 12 ug/m3. Since then, more studies have shown adverse health effects from exposure to PM2.5 at levels sometimes below the current limit of 12 ug/m3, leading to calls from environmentalists and public health advocates for a tighter NAAQS.
In its new ISA, EPA staff reaches many of the same conclusions regarding the harmfulness of PM2.5 as the previous ISA found in 2009, but this time backed by more evidence. Further, the new evidence points toward harmful effects at concentrations lower than the current primary NAAQS.
“Evidence from U.S. studies examining short-term PM2.5 exposure and mortality indicate a linear relationship at concentrations as low as 5 µg/m3 with cut-point analyses providing no evidence of a threshold” below which effects can no longer be expected, the report finds.
For long-term exposures, the report similarly finds “Epidemiologic studies of long-term PM2.5 exposure and mortality . . . support a linear, no-threshold relationship for total (nonaccidental) mortality, especially at lower ambient PM2.5 concentrations, with confidence in some studies in the range of 5−8 µg/m3.”
The ISA finds increased risks for specific groups, including children, non-white people and those with preexisting cardiovascular and respiratory disease, those who are obese, and those of low socioeconomic status. This is relevant because EPA must set NAAQS sufficient to protect public health with an adequate margin of safety, enough to protect vulnerable groups -- again potentially bolstering calls for a more-stringent NAAQS.
The ISA strengthens some specific findings of health effects and adds some new ones. For example, EPA now finds that long-term exposure to PM2.5 is likely to have a causal relationship with cancer while in the 2009 ISA EPA concluded the evidence was “suggestive of, but not sufficient to infer, a causal relationship."
Ultrafine Particles
Evaluating the issue for the first time in an ISA, EPA now finds that “ultrafine particles,” which are 100 nanometers or less in diameter, have a “likely causal” relationship to adverse neurological effects, possibly adding pressure on the agency to regulate this class of particles. The finding is supported by “strong animal toxicological evidence of neurotoxicity and altered neurodevelopment” caused by ultrafine PM, the ISA says.
Those findings could revive environmentalists' and public health advocates' push for the agency to regulate ultrafine PM directly, although such calls have previously been frustrated by questions over the science on the particles and how to monitor them.
EPA's Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) will review the ISA. EPA last week announced its intent to streamline the review process by limiting consultation with CASAC, dismissing an existing panel focused on the PM review and restricting the committee's advisory role over the NAAQS to the seven-member chartered CASAC only.
The Trump administration has now replaced all seven members of the committee, and most are now state air regulators. Only one CASAC member is a research scientist, and the small size of the committee and its lack of expertise could hamper its ability to review both the PM ISA and a forthcoming ISA to support the ozone NAAQS review, critics say. The lack of “horsepower” on CASAC risks a cursory review of the science, says one former CASAC Chairman, Chris Frey of North Carolina State University.
Supporters of a stricter PM NAAQS still face a struggle in convincing the Trump administration to back a tougher standard, as the agency's deputy air chief has said a standard in the single digits is unlikely.
Clint Woods, deputy assistant administrator in the Office of Air & Radiation, told the Texas Environmental Superconference in Austin, TX, Aug. 2 that there will be a “robust” debate over the future of the PM2.5 standard. But he said such a strict limit would be technologically impossible to implement, given monitoring and other restrictions. “I think there's a lot of those who think that science that has been developed since 2012 suggests that that standard needs to be in the single digits, and maybe as low as 5 [ug/m3], which is well below what any current monitor can measure,” he said.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/draft-epa-pm-study-could-boost-calls-stricter-naaqs-ultrafine-limits
-
Environmentalists Threaten EPA With Suit To Force States' SO2 Plans
Oct 17, 2018 | Inside EPA
The Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) and Sierra Club are threatening to sue EPA over the agency's allegeed failure to compel several states to submit adequate plans to implement the agency's 2010 sulfur dioxide (SO2) air standard, after EPA missed deadlines to make required findings of whether the states have submitted such plans.
In an Oct. 15 letter giving notice of intent to sue, CBD says EPA has failed to act against states that have not submitted state implementation plans (SIPs) required to show measures to meet the 2010 SO2 national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS) of 75 parts per billion (ppb).
Further, EPA has failed to either approve or disapprove several states' SIPs by air law deadlines, CBD alleges. The group gives EPA 60 days to remedy the issue, after which time it may file suit.
EPA has failed to issue “findings of failure to submit” for required SIPs from Alton Township and Williamson County, IL; Anne Arundel County and Baltimore County, MD; and St. Clair, MI, CBD says.
Further, the agency has failed to approve or disapprove SIPs for multiple areas, including: Hayden and Miami, AZ; Jefferson County, KY; Allegheny, Beaver, Indiana and Warren, PA; and Marshall, WV.
“The law requires that the Trump administration act to cut dangerous sulfur dioxide pollution from the air we breathe, but it has ignored those deadlines for protecting the public and is instead turning a blind eye to corporate polluters,” said Sierra Club attorney Zachary Fabish in an Oct. 15 statement.
Meanwhile, environmentalists earlier this year criticized the agency's plan to retain the 2010 SO2 NAAQS of 75 ppb in its Clean Air Act-mandated five-year review of whether to update the limit. Environmental groups are calling on the agency to tighten the NAAQS to better protect public health.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/environmentalists-threaten-epa-suit-force-states-so2-plans
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
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