Preview Newsletter
AM ACC Clips Report - November 28, 2018
-
(ACC Mentioned) Democrats' Demands Threaten To Derail Trump's New NAFTA
Nov 27, 2018 | The Washington Times
By Dan Boylan
President Trump, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto are set to sign the renegotiated North American free trade deal when they meet on the sidelines of the Group of 20 summit in Buenos Aires later this week. -
(ACC Mentioned) EPA Chemical Office Nominee Alexandra Dunn Must Prioritize Science and Public Health
Nov 28, 2018 | Union of Concerned Scientists
By Gretchen Goldman
Behind the headlines of the Trump administration’s attacks on science is a quiet army of government scientists continuing to do their jobs protecting the nation’s public health, safety, and the environment -
EPA Seeks To Limit Industry Data Requests In Enforcement, Raising Concern
Nov 27, 2018 | Inside EPA
A refrigeration industry report is stressing the jobs and consumer benefits of implementing a 2016 global deal to cut refrigerant chemicals that act as potent greenhouse gases, aiming to persuade the Trump administration to send the pact to the Senate for ratification even as there is little indication the White House will move on the issue. -
Business Guide to Safer Chemicals 2018: BPA Could Get Canned
Nov 28, 2018 | Chemical Watch
Bisphenol A (BPA)-based epoxies have become the default option in the coating of metal cans for food packaging over the last 60 years. -
Seeing Gains, Industry Urges Trump To Back HFC Treaty
Nov 28, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Stuart Parker & Dave Reynolds
A refrigeration industry report is stressing the jobs and consumer benefits of implementing a 2016 global deal to cut refrigerant chemicals that act as potent greenhouse gases, aiming to persuade the Trump administration to send the pact to the Senate for ratification even as there is little indication the White House will move on the issue. -
Fire-Resistant Homes Don’t Have to Cost a Fortune, Report Says
Nov 28, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Christopher Flavelle
Homes in wildfire-prone areas around the U.S. could be built to better withstand blazes without increasing the cost of construction, according to a new report. -
Aise Suggests Review of GHS Labelling Hazard Pictograms
Nov 28, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Clelia Oziel
An EU trade body has called for a review of pictograms included on the labels of chemical products so hazard warnings are conveyed more clearly to users. -
Tankers Going Nowhere Indicate Gas Market Becoming More Like Oil
Nov 28, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Anna Shiryaevskaya
Some liquefied natural gas sellers aren’t in a rush to deliver their multimillion-dollar cargoes. -
U.S. Gas Export Boom Could In Fact Benefit Russia
Nov 28, 2018 | Forbes
By Jo Harper
Russia’s LNG project, Yamal LNG, concluded its first ship-to-ship transhipment in Norway this week. Few of the world’s press took much interest. But for those in the know, it was a move that could have large ramifications, both for the global energy market, but also for the changing configurations of the geopolitical tectonic plates. -
EAB Petitions Add To Push For Equity Review Of UIC Permits
Nov 28, 2018 | Inside EPA
A trio of newly filed Environmental Appeals Board (EAB) petitions are challenging EPA's approval of an underground injection control (UIC) permit for a hydraulic fracturing operation in Michigan, arguing that the agency failed to consider environmental justice, as well as potential seismic and drinking water impacts, from waste injections. -
Keystone XL Eyes February Construction Start Despite Legal Woes
Nov 28, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rachel Adams-Heard
TransCanada Corp. is asking a federal judge in Montana to authorize early work on its $8 billion Keystone XL oil pipeline even as the decade-long project faces outstanding legal challenges. -
Permit Waiver for Mountain Valley Gas Pipeline Tossed by Court
Nov 28, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rachel Adams-Heard
EQT Midstream’s Mountain Valley natural gas pipeline in West Virginia won’t be allowed a state waiver from water permitting, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ruled Nov. 27. -
Fears and Hopes on Cracker Expressed During OEPA Hearing in Shadyside
Nov 28, 2018 | The Intelligencer.
By Jennifer Compston- Strough
Dozens of local residents and environmental advocates turned out Tuesday to express their fear of the “plastic monster” Michelle Fetting believes PTT Global Chemical and Daelim will create if the companies construct an ethane cracker plant at Dilles Bottom. -
(ACC Mentioned) 'We Need To Know The Details': Croda Neighbors Have ‘Right To Know’ Extent Of Gas Leak
Nov 28, 2018 | Delaware News Journal
By Maddy Lauria
Ethylene oxide found leaking at its Atlas Point facility near the Delaware Memorial Bridge on Sunday night never reached unsafe levels beyond its property. -
Gasket Blamed for Gas Leak That Disrupted Bridge Traffic
Nov 27, 2018 | AP (In The New York Times)
A preliminary investigation has found that a gasket failure caused a chemical gas leak that forced the temporary closure of a heavily used bridge connecting Delaware and New Jersey on one of the busiest travel days of the year. -
Ex-Trump Adviser: Get States, Cities on Board for Infrastructure
Nov 28, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By David Schultz
Winning the approval of governors and mayors is crucial to any infrastructure overhaul effort, the White House’s former point person on the issue said Nov. 27. -
Climate Change Deniers Are Blocking Progress, UN Report Suggests
Nov 28, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Eric Roston
The United Nations’ annual assessment of global progress on climate change delivers familiar bad news this year—the problem is getting worse, not better—with a new twist: For the first time, political ideology is singled out for obstructing changes that would slow global warming. -
Lawmakers Roll Out Landmark Bipartisan Carbon Fee Bill
Nov 28, 2018 | E&E Daily
By Nick Sobczyk
A group of House lawmakers last night floated the first bipartisan carbon tax bill in nearly a decade, a move that boosters are calling a big step for climate policy heading into the next Congress. -
Bipartisan Group Of Lawmakers Propose Landmark Carbon Tax
Nov 28, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama and Miranda Green
A bipartisan group of lawmakers is introducing a landmark bill that would charge fossil fuel companies a tax for their carbon dioxide emissions. -
Dire Report 'Not Based On Facts' — White House
Nov 28, 2018 | E&E News PM
By Scott Waldman
The White House continues to reject the findings of a recently released climate report compiled by scholars from 13 federal agencies across the government. -
Sarah Sanders: Climate Change Report 'Not Based On Facts'
Nov 28, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Brett Samuels
White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders on Tuesday dismissed the findings of a government report that warned of the impending consequences of climate change, claiming it's "not based on facts." -
Highlighting Disconnect, Trump Climate Study Cites Obama-Era SCC Tool
Nov 28, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Doug Obey
The Trump administration's newly released assessment warning of significant economic damages from global warming also cites the social cost of carbon (SCC) metric the Obama administration used to estimate the benefits of emission cuts, even as the Trump EPA and other agencies are significantly curtailing use of the tool.
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
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) Democrats' Demands Threaten To Derail Trump's New NAFTA
Nov 27, 2018 | The Washington Times
By Dan Boylan
President Trump, Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Mexican President Enrique Pena Nieto are set to sign the renegotiated North American free trade deal when they meet on the sidelines of the Group of 20 summit in Buenos Aires later this week.
Fourteen months in the making and requiring more than 1,800 pages of text, the United States-Canada-Mexico Agreement (USMCA), as it has been formally labeled, has been heralded by negotiators as the centerpiece of the Trump administration’s new approach to international trade relations and a template for the raging U.S.-China trade war.
“It’s not NAFTA redone; it’s a brand-new deal,” Mr. Trump announced from the White House Rose Garden after the deal was struck on Oct. 1. But much remains before the deal goes into effect, and looming political changes in Washington and Mexico City could complicate what the partners had hoped would be a smooth and expedited process.
After the scheduled signing of the trilateral agreement, the pact moves to the incoming Congress for ratification, where Democrats will control the House of Representatives and have already said they want some changes to be made. More recently, conservative House Republicans have attacked certain provisions, including those on worker rights that many regard as international social engineering. Many economists also say that, despite Mr. Trump’s brutal rhetorical attacks on the original treaty and on Mexico’s large bilateral trade surpluses, the deal he negotiated is likely to fall short of many of his goals.
Rep. Bill Pascrell, the New Jersey Democrat who is set to be a key voice on trade in Congress, has openly said he wants changes.
“The jury is still out as to whether this deal meets my standard for a better deal for American workers,” he recently told Bloomberg News.
Eleven Senate Republicans wrote to Mr. Trump urging the administration to seek a vote on the renegotiated deal in the Republican-dominated lame-duck Congress. They warned that waiting until next year will make ratification “significantly more difficult.”
“We stand ready to assist in helping you secure a pathway to congressional consideration” in the lame-duck Congress, said the Republican lawmakers, organized by Sen. Patrick J. Toomey of Pennsylvania.
Still, support is flowing from high levels. Heavyweights from Ottawa and Mexico City who led the negotiations, including Mexico’s ambassador to the U.S., Geronimo Gutierrez Fernandez, advocating on its behalf. Supporters say the updated deal will preserve a free trade area that supports an estimated 14 million U.S. jobs and generates roughly $1.2 trillion in annual trade among the three partners.
“The deal that finally was nailed down was different from where we started the discussions,” Mr. Gutierrez said at a recent Brookings Institution briefing. “It is not perfect, but it works and, given the circumstances, that needs to be taken into account.”
The key to resolving disagreements, Mr. Gutierrez said, is to build “a broad coalition” of supporters alongside U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer and Canadian Foreign Minister Chrystia Freeland, which included business sectors and academic analysts.
Highlights of the final pact include new rules for automobile production, reduced barriers for American exports to Canada and revisions to a tribunal for resolving disputes that arise under the pact. Irritants that remain include tariffs that the U.S. imposed on imports of Canadian and Mexican steel and aluminum.
New dynamic on the Hill
After a required waiting period, which includes a U.S. International Trade Commission report on the economic impact of the deal, Congress can consider the updated NAFTA deal.
When Democrats take control of the House of Representatives, Mr. Trump might need to secure support from more than 30 members of the rival party, giving them a chance to leave their stamp on the agreement.
Although no major changes can be made to the 34 chapters of text, Congress can effectively determine the level of enforcement of certain provisions.
Securing those Democrats will take some serious behind-the-scenes deal-making.
“We will see objections in the new Congress,” said Earl Anthony Wayne, a former U.S. ambassador to Mexico. “But it is also important to remember that this is not just going to be a vote about the merits of this new treaty. There will also be political calculations about how the Democrats want to treat this.”
Senior House Democrats in line to play key roles on trade policy, led by likely House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Richard E. Neal of Massachusetts, have already planted some markers.
A major issue, they say, is imposing stronger, more enforceable labor standards, in particular those mandating that Mexico do more to allow the creation of independent unions. The AFL-CIO has argued that Mexico can dodge economic penalties if it violates labor measures in the USMCA and Washington does not punish the transgressions.
“The bar for supporting a new NAFTA will be high,” Mr. Neal said this month.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, likely the next speaker, has expressed similar concerns, as has Mr. Pascrell, who is positioned to take over the influential Ways and Means trade subcommittee.
While no key House Democrats have demanded a reopening of negotiations at the highest level, the White House has taken their threats seriously enough to schedule a meeting for the leadership next week with Mr. Lighthizer.
Another significant hurdle recently appeared in the House when 40 members of Mr. Trump’s own party condemned a provision requiring increased workplace protections regarding “sexual orientation and gender identity” issues.
“A trade agreement is no place for the adoption of social policy,” the Republicans said in the letter sent to the White House this month. “It is especially inappropriate and insulting to our sovereignty to needlessly submit to social policies which the United States Congress had so far explicitly refused to accept.”
A revolt of 40 House Republicans against the deal would mean as many as 50 Democrats would be needed to pass it.
A well-oiled relationship
As companies across the world continue studying the hundreds of pages of the USMCA’s legalese, economic factors will continue to drive the agreement’s destiny, former officials say.
“A lot of jobs are riding on this,” Mr. Wayne said. “The prosperity of farmers and companies. Our competitiveness in the world. These are all very much affected by having certainty over a well-oiled relationship between the three countries.”
Some believe the House Democrats will likely come around. While they may be reluctant to hand Mr. Trump an economic victory, they could be more worried about entering the 2020 election cycle being seen as the party that kills job growth and prosperity.
The steel and aluminum tariffs that the Trump administration imposed on Canada and Mexico could also be soon solved, Mr. Gutierrez said.
The tariffs, some say, are among the best cards in Mr. Trump’s negotiating deck, but he will readily surrender them to preserve the overall deal.
Last week, a coalition of 34 business groups, included the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the American Chemistry Council, the National Retail Federation, and the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers, urged the president to do just that.
While backing the updated trade deal, the coalition said the Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum have caused significant harm to the U.S. economy.
https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/nov/27/trump-nafta-trade-deal-threatened-democrats-demand/
-
(ACC Mentioned) EPA Chemical Office Nominee Alexandra Dunn Must Prioritize Science and Public Health
Nov 28, 2018 | Union of Concerned Scientists
By Gretchen Goldman
Behind the headlines of the Trump administration’s attacks on science is a quiet army of government scientists continuing to do their jobs protecting the nation’s public health, safety, and the environment. This week, we have the opportunity to ensure a new EPA leader can carry out that mission. On Thursday, the Senate is holding a hearing on the nomination of Alexandra Dunn as Assistant Administrator to run the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, the EPA office charged with protecting us from toxic chemicals and pesticides. Here’s what Senators should demand and expect her to prioritize at the EPA:
At the most basic level, Alexandra Dunn should prioritize protecting the public from harmful chemicals. The EPA oversees chemicals used at homes, in workplaces and the environment and helps ensure people can avoid hazardous exposures. This is a matter of life and death for many and a job that she should take seriously. For example, the EPA has so far failed to ban methylene chloride, a chemical in paint thinners that is responsible for more than 50 accidental exposure deaths. This is the kind of issue that EPA should be addressing immediately and Ms. Dunn can make a difference here.
Alexandra Dunn should resist pressures to bend to industry wishes. Ms. Dunn should resist the ever-present pressure from the chemical industry to weaken and delay chemical regulation of all kinds. The chemical industry lobby, the American Chemistry Council (ACC), has a long history of these efforts. For example, the group spent more than $11 million annually lobbying Congress while the Toxic Substances Control Act was under debate. The ACC has questioned the science around chemicals shown to cause harm and pressured the EPA to alter its science and delay public protections. Such pressures are amplified under the Trump Administration where we know officials are willing to lend an ear to industry voices.
Alexandra Dunn should stand up to colleagues who wish to compromise the science. Specifically, Ms. Dunn should stand up for science against her potential colleague Dr. Nancy Beck, the deputy assistant administrator in the chemical safety office, who came directly from working as the ACC’s director of regulatory science policy. For more than a decade, Dr. Beck has been fighting to question the rigorous EPA science that backs its chemical policies and delay implementation of life saving protections. When she worked in the White House under President George W. Bush, she helped the Department of Defense slow down EPA efforts to protect drinking water from perchlorate, an ingredient in rocket fuel. At the EPA now, Dr Beck has worked internally to narrowly interpret chemical policies in ways that minimize public protections, which brings me to my final point…
Alexandra Dunn should implement the Frank R Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21stCentury Act consistent with what Congress intended and prioritizing public protection. Enacted in 1976, the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) charges EPA with overseeing some 84,000 chemicals in consumer products. The law was overhauled in 2016 in response to its overwhelming ineffectiveness. (It successfully regulated just nine chemicals—far under 1%!) The reasons for this ineffectiveness were many and the bipartisan 2016 update was designed to address some of these problems. Ms. Dunn should work to ensure EPA is implementing the law as intended—to protect people from toxic chemicals and do so at a faster pace than the previous law enabled.
Unfortunately, Dr. Beck and colleagues have already wreaked havoc at EPA in TSCA implementation. Several interpretations of the revamped law serve to weaken its effectiveness. In one example, EPA guidelines look to exclude certain scientific studies from agency scientific assessments. Studies where all methods and data aren’t public along with the (mostly academic) studies that don’t employ a standard known as Good Laboratory Practices common in industry studies would be excluded from EPA assessments. Such needless exclusions on what scientific studies can be considered by the EPA are likely to restrict the agency’s use of the best available science and to result in favoring of industry studies over those by independent scientists.
In another example, the EPA is now employing a narrow interpretation of the law, considering only exposures involving a product’s intended use. This means the EPA wouldn’t worry, for example, about exposures to harmful chemicals through the air or water resulting from the disposal of a product. Such an interpretation doesn’t make a lot of sense when we look at the reality of how people are exposed to harmful chemicals. I have two kids under three. I can assure you they will put it in their mouth if they find it. Anything. This kind of exposure—children being exposed to chemicals by putting products in their mouth—wouldn’t be the intended use of many products, but it is reality. It is easy to see how excluding exposures outside of a product’s intended use overlooks many harmful exposures that the EPA should be thinking about how to prevent. Ms Dunn should work to change this and ensure that TSCA is as strong as its sponsors intended.
Additionally, here’s a list of other priorities that Ms Dunn should take on if she is confirmed:Finalize the bans on methylene chloride, n-methylpyrrolidone, and trichloroethyleneBan chlorpyrifos, as the courts have ordered and EPA scientists already recommended.Immediately release the long-delayed formaldehyde studyFinalize the agricultural worker protection standardReject the proposed rule to restrict EPA science that Dr Beck (and large swaths of the scientific community) has already raised concerns
The EPA Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention has an important job. I hope Alexandra Dunn is up to the task.
https://blog.ucsusa.org/gretchen-goldman/alexandra-dunn-must-prioritize-science-and-public-health
-
EPA Seeks To Limit Industry Data Requests In Enforcement, Raising Concern
Nov 27, 2018 | Inside EPA
A refrigeration industry report is stressing the jobs and consumer benefits of implementing a 2016 global deal to cut refrigerant chemicals that act as potent greenhouse gases, aiming to persuade the Trump administration to send the pact to the Senate for ratification even as there is little indication the White House will move on the issue.
The so-called Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocol was agreed to in December 2016 and is slated to take effect in January in countries that adopt it. It seeks to reduce use of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) not because they harm the ozone layer -- as the Montreal pact was originally intended -- but because HFCs have a high global warming potential (GWP) and contribute to climate change.
A Nov. 9 report, commissioned by the Air Conditioning, Heating & Refrigeration Institute (AHRI) and the Alliance for Responsible Atmospheric Policy finds that industry is ready for the transition and that the average market price of refrigerants are not expected to change significantly if the deal is implemented in the U.S.
It also finds a slight consumer benefit to the change, while warning of potential market disruption to the 589,000 direct United States jobs in the heating and air conditioning industry if the treaty is not implemented domestically.
The fate of the HFC deal remains in limbo, with the White House remaining mum on whether it will ask the Senate to ratify it, despite pressure from industry and Republican lawmakers. The Trump EPA has also backed away from its prior support of Obama-era rules that would have significantly eased implementation of the deal.
An August 2017 appellate court ruling in Mexichem Fluor, et al. v. EPA, et al., that largely vacated EPA's 2015 rules to limit HFCs will stand after the administration reversed course and asked the Supreme Court not to hear an appeal. The high court Oct. 9 declined to review the case.
However, four states -- California, New York, Maryland and Connecticut -- are moving to adopt EPA's vacated HFC standards, meaning the U.S. might still meet its initial targets under Kigali even if it hasn't ratified the deal.
The new report seeks to persuade the White House to embrace the amendment largely by focusing on jobs and consumer benefits rather than environmental results. Implementing the amendment “will both strengthen America's exports and weaken the market for imported products,” the report says.
It also addresses consumer impacts, noting that air conditioning sold in a “with Kigali” scenario will be 1.3 percent more energy efficient than “without Kigali,” and that equipment prices may rise if Kigali is not adopted. And it says maintenance costs “are reduced by 13 percent under the 'with Kigali' case, reflecting less frequent servicing to recharge lower leak-rate equipment.”
AHRI President and CEO Stephen Yurek said the report should assuage fears that transitioning to lower-GWP refrigerants will harm consumers. “Refrigerants are a minuscule part of the overall cost” of heating and air conditioning equipment. “If we have done our jobs correctly -- and we have -- this transition will be seamless for, and unnoticed by, consumers, which has been our goal through this entire process.”
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/seeing-gains-industry-urges-trump-back-hfc-treaty
-
Business Guide to Safer Chemicals 2018: BPA Could Get Canned
Nov 28, 2018 | Chemical Watch
A major can coatings producer has worked with other stakeholders to develop an alternative to bisphenol A-based epoxies
Bisphenol A (BPA)-based epoxies have become the default option in the coating of metal cans for food packaging over the last 60 years. About 80% of all metal packaging uses it, according to Thomas Mallen, technical director at Sherwin-Williams Packaging, which was known as Valspar until its acquisition by the coatings giant in June 2017.
BPA was put on the REACH candidate list of SVHCs due to its Category 1B reprotoxic properties in January 2017. Since 1 March 2018, all manufacturers, importers, or suppliers have had to classify and label mixtures containing BPA in this way.
In June 2017, Echa’s Member State Committee also voted to identify BPA as a SVHC because of endocrine disrupting properties which cause probable serious effects to human health, giving rise to an equivalent level of concern to carcinogenic, mutagenic and reprotoxic (CMR) substances. Finally, the BPA entry was also updated to include endocrine disrupting properties causing adverse effects to the environment.
The substance has been banned from infant feeding bottles across the EU since June 2011, while three member states have banned it in other materials that come into contact with food intended for infants and children under three years. France has banned it in all food packaging, containers and utensils. It is still permitted in food contact materials, but with maximum migration limits that the European Food Safety Authority (Efsa) is re-evaluating.
Thus, there is a clear regulatory driver towards removing BPA from the epoxies used in can coatings. However, doing this without making compromises in terms of safety, performance and high speed application is a huge challenge, Mr Mallen says. There are a number, of reasons technical, regulatory and societal, why this is so.
First, BPA is used twice in the synthesis of these epoxies, so two steps are impacted by any changes. Secondly, a means has to be found to achieve a high molecular weight linear (not branched) polymer, in order to preserve the material’s flexibility and ability to coat metals, and to ensure the same extremely low level of residuals that might migrate into the food.
"The replacement material must also be free of endocrine activity, to avoid regrettable substitutions," says Mr Mallen. "As we went through material discovery, we soon found that there is no one definition of what an endocrine-active material is, so that was a challenge too. And, once we had discovered one, it was important that society accepts that not all bisphenols are of concern. Many of them have no endocrine activity at all, but they are also not suitable for making polymers or monomers."
To get to the point where there are no concerns among stakeholders and society involved addressing several problems in the way regulatory agencies work, Mr Mallen continues. Food contact agencies generally focus on conventional safety and risk-based safety assessments, and are concerned with other toxicological endpoints than endocrine disruption. Chemical inventory regulatory agencies – like Echa with REACH or the US EPA with TSCA – require GLP-based procedures for human health and environment.
"Those have limitations in terms of fully utilising tests to look for other endpoints that may be of concern," Mr Mallen says. "And we recognise that there is a gap between testing for compliance and getting a more comprehensive answer that is sustainable in the long term."
In addressing this problem, Sherwin-Williams borrowed the concept of ‘Safety by Design’ from the pharmaceuticals industry. This is generally conceived as a funnel through which a large number of potential products is whittled down in stages through investigation of their regulatory characteristics until a much smaller number is left but with a much higher degree of confidence about the probability of success.
In its product development, Sherwin-Williams starts out with early material investigation, to find out if a product contains any chromophores or structural alerts that would give rise to concern later down the line. The next stage was "to impose on our R&D group endocrine testing for the components, as well as the materials that they make with those components – which is not a trivial issue".
Thus, many materials could be eliminated before the company needed to get further down in the process to toxicological assessment and migration testing, which are needed in order to do a risk assessment. "Eventually we started talking to regulators and others about these materials, submitting dossiers and notifications," Mr Mallen says.
Once Sherwin-Williams had a dataset it was comfortable with as a potential BPA replacement for can coating, it started reaching out to others to get their take on the dataset, its methods and anything missing to see what would convince them the materials were truly not endocrine active. They included:academic and state research bodies, such as Tufts University, Texas A&M University, UMass Amherst, Baylor College of Medicine and the UK’s Food & Environment Research Agency (Fera);NGOs, such as ChemTrust, Breast Cancer Action, the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), Clean Production Action (CPA), ChemSec and the Centre for Science in the Public Interest; andregulators, including the US Federal Drug Administration (FDA), Health Canada and France’s French Agency for Food, Environmental and Occupational Health & Safety (Anses).
Tufts and Baylor have already published on the material Sherwin-Williams developed and the company has conducted a GreenScreen evaluation for them with CPA. It also engaged with ChemSec and was invited to put its new material on the Swedish NGO’s Marketplace, which it saw as "a business-to-business opportunity for transparency," Mr Mallen says. "It really does help innovation to get noticed."
The product, ValPure 70, is described as a next-generation coating technology with epoxy-like performance. It is now being adopted in North and Central America and is being evaluated in Europe.
The monomer for this product, tetramethyl bisphenol F (TMBPF), had been registered under REACH by other companies in a substance information exchange (Sief) but only at low volumes and with little detail. Sherwin-Williams has therefore had to generate and send more information to the lead registrant (LR) to make the dossier acceptable at the highest volume level needed.
The epoxy was not pre-registered, so the company took that on itself, becoming LR for the Sief which others have joined. It is now going through the same process of testing and submission to Echa.
"One of the key things for us to develop trust between the stakeholders in society was to be transparent and put all the material from us and others on a dedicated website," Mr Mallen says. "We feel like we met the challenge, although of course the journey continues."
https://chemicalwatch.com/72408/business-guide-to-safer-chemicals-2018-bpa-could-get-canned
-
Seeing Gains, Industry Urges Trump To Back HFC Treaty
Nov 28, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Stuart Parker & Dave Reynolds
A refrigeration industry report is stressing the jobs and consumer benefits of implementing a 2016 global deal to cut refrigerant chemicals that act as potent greenhouse gases, aiming to persuade the Trump administration to send the pact to the Senate for ratification even as there is little indication the White House will move on the issue.
The so-called Kigali Amendment to the Montreal Protocol was agreed to in December 2016 and is slated to take effect in January in countries that adopt it. It seeks to reduce use of hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) not because they harm the ozone layer -- as the Montreal pact was originally intended -- but because HFCs have a high global warming potential (GWP) and contribute to climate change.
A Nov. 9 report, commissioned by the Air Conditioning, Heating & Refrigeration Institute (AHRI) and the Alliance for Responsible Atmospheric Policy finds that industry is ready for the transition and that the average market price of refrigerants are not expected to change significantly if the deal is implemented in the U.S.
It also finds a slight consumer benefit to the change, while warning of potential market disruption to the 589,000 direct United States jobs in the heating and air conditioning industry if the treaty is not implemented domestically.
The fate of the HFC deal remains in limbo, with the White House remaining mum on whether it will ask the Senate to ratify it, despite pressure from industry and Republican lawmakers. The Trump EPA has also backed away from its prior support of Obama-era rules that would have significantly eased implementation of the deal.
An August 2017 appellate court ruling in Mexichem Fluor, et al. v. EPA, et al., that largely vacated EPA's 2015 rules to limit HFCs will stand after the administration reversed course and asked the Supreme Court not to hear an appeal. The high court Oct. 9 declined to review the case.
However, four states -- California, New York, Maryland and Connecticut -- are moving to adopt EPA's vacated HFC standards, meaning the U.S. might still meet its initial targets under Kigali even if it hasn't ratified the deal.
The new report seeks to persuade the White House to embrace the amendment largely by focusing on jobs and consumer benefits rather than environmental results. Implementing the amendment “will both strengthen America's exports and weaken the market for imported products,” the report says.
It also addresses consumer impacts, noting that air conditioning sold in a “with Kigali” scenario will be 1.3 percent more energy efficient than “without Kigali,” and that equipment prices may rise if Kigali is not adopted. And it says maintenance costs “are reduced by 13 percent under the 'with Kigali' case, reflecting less frequent servicing to recharge lower leak-rate equipment.”
AHRI President and CEO Stephen Yurek said the report should assuage fears that transitioning to lower-GWP refrigerants will harm consumers. “Refrigerants are a minuscule part of the overall cost” of heating and air conditioning equipment. “If we have done our jobs correctly -- and we have -- this transition will be seamless for, and unnoticed by, consumers, which has been our goal through this entire process.”
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/seeing-gains-industry-urges-trump-back-hfc-treaty
-
Fire-Resistant Homes Don’t Have to Cost a Fortune, Report Says
Nov 28, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Christopher Flavelle
Insurer-funded study counters objections from states, builders
Safety groups urge tougher protections as wildfires get worse
Homes in wildfire-prone areas around the U.S. could be built to better withstand blazes without increasing the cost of construction, according to a new report.
The research released Nov. 27 was sponsored in part by the insurance industry and marks the first attempt to quantify the expenses associated with building residences that meet stringent flame-resistant criteria. Few states have adopted such codes, often citing housing costs, but the new findings suggest that fire-plagued communities could curb damage and save lives with minimal effect on homebuyers.
“It’s a proven method,” said Kelly Pohl, a research and policy analyst at the Montana-based wildfire policy consulting firm Headwaters Economics, who co-authored the report with the Insurance Institute for Business & Home Safety. “We now know that it’s also a cost-effective method.”
The findings come days after a sweeping report from scientists for 13 federal agencies, who said climate change will cause more devastating, costly and deadly fires, and communities haven’t done enough to prepare.
Insurers, safety advocates, and disaster policy experts have urged state and local governments to toughen building codes—a move that is often opposed by homebuilders over concerns it will increase housing costs, putting them out of reach of more potential buyers.
The new research suggests that at least when it comes to wildfires, those concerns could be overblown.
The report looked at a typical three-bedroom, 2,500-square-foot, single-story home constructed last year in Park County, Mont., an area at risk for wildfires. The authors compared two ways of constructing that home: one using standard techniques and materials and the other conforming to the International Wildland-Urban Interface Code, set by the nonprofit International Code Council in Washington.
They found that adding a fire-resistant roof, vents, and gutters on the home would increase material costs by $6,000, or about 27 percent. Fire-resistant doors and windows also would raise to the expenses by another $5,000.
But those additional costs would be offset by the use of fiber-cement siding, which is fire-resistant and less than half the price of more commonly used cedar-plank siding. Altogether, the authors found that building the home to comply with the model wildfire code would be 2 percent less expensive than traditional construction.
‘Accessible and Affordable’State and local government officials across the American West may not realize that fire-resistant building codes don’t raise housing prices, according to Stephen Quarles, chief wildfire scientist for the Insurance Institute for Business & Home Safety and the report’s co-author.
He said he hopes the report persuades officials, as well as homeowners, to demand stricter construction practices.
Wildfire research “is still a very new science,” said Quarles. “This new report adds another layer of evidence that resilience is accessible and affordable.”
But the resistance to building codes in many rural communities is as much cultural as economic, he added.
“There is, in some parts of the country, this desire not to be told how to build,” Quarles said. “It goes beyond how to build. It’s how to live your life.”
Steve Snezek, executive director of the Montana Building Industry Association, which represents homebuilders, said his members are constructing houses that are increasingly fire-resistant, even in the absence of codes requiring more stringent techniques.
“A lot of people that are building homes out in more rural areas are looking for a little bit more protection,” Snezek said in a phone interview. “The market is working.”
Still, Snezek agreed that people in Montana weren’t keen to have the government tell them what to do. “There’s certainly a live-and-let-live culture,” he said.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/fire-resistant-homes-dont-have-to-cost-a-fortune-report-says
-
Aise Suggests Review of GHS Labelling Hazard Pictograms
Nov 28, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Clelia Oziel
An EU trade body has called for a review of pictograms included on the labels of chemical products so hazard warnings are conveyed more clearly to users.
According to soap and detergents group Aise the need has intensified as take-up of the UN's globally harmonized system of classification and labelling for chemicals (GHS) spreads among developing nations.
In a document shared with the Competent Authorities for REACH and CLP (Caracal) on 21-22 November, it said existing hazard pictograms should be assessed for "comprehensibility and suitability" in developing regions where exponentially growing populations of millions of consumers "with low literacy are exposed to hazardous chemicals".
The content of many labels of chemicals exported there "are not clearly understood", Aise said in its document addressed to the GHS Subcommittee of Experts. The trade body asked it to explore possibilities in its next two-year work programme.
GHS classification has been adopted to varying degrees in nearly all major countries, with more and more developing countries endorsing it. The standardised labels under GHS include hazard pictograms, signal words such as 'Danger', and hazard statements.Language concerns
In addition, the trade body said in a joint submission with South African packaging body the RPMASA, the GHS subcommittee should consider replacing written statements such as 'Keep out of reach of children' with simple pictograms.
GHS currently has four types of precautionary statements covering prevention, response in case of accidental spillage or exposure, storage and disposal.
The current labelling requirements have led to information "overload" for the target audience which, as a result, often ignore it, the trade bodies said. They cited scientific studies confirming that graphical representations can be recognised more quickly.
The subcommittee should also consider the increased number of worldwide migrant workers using chemical products, where labels will be in a different language to their own, they said.
In July, the GHS subcommittee had agreed that precautionary pictograms could be included in the system, because they are already in use in a number of countries with high levels of understanding, Aise and the RPMASA added.Digital labels
In another Caracal meeting document, Aise and the RPMASA proposed digitalisation of GHS hazard information to reflect the growth of online commerce through the use of tablets, mobile phones and computers.
This is creating new challenges in the way GHS label information is displayed, they said. For example, mobile devices can only accommodate reduced information while desktop computers can display it in full.
Digitalisation also offers "substantial opportunities" in terms of hazard communication, they said. These include:language and font size adapted to user needs;customised search options for key words can allow swift identification of most important information, such as the presence of sensitisers; andsafe use instructions can be easily accommodated.
The groups proposed a "tiered approach" with the physical label on the product packaging containing the most relevant and critical elements, and more technical aspects of the GHS label given online.
Guidelines should be developed on how best to provide labelling information digitally, with consideration given to back-up solutions for users who are unable to connect to the internet, they said.
Earlier this month, the European Commission said it will explore ways to include endocrine disruption in the GHS classification.
https://chemicalwatch.com/72406/aise-suggests-review-of-ghs-labelling-hazard-pictograms
-
Tankers Going Nowhere Indicate Gas Market Becoming More Like Oil
Nov 28, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Anna Shiryaevskaya
Modern ships able to act as floating storage for the fuel
Booming LNG trade, flexible U.S. volumes help transform market
Some liquefied natural gas sellers aren’t in a rush to deliver their multimillion-dollar cargoes.
With uncertain demand and no signs yet of bitter cold, some traders are preferring to keep their fuel inside vessels in the hope prices will rise. While the sight of stationary cargoes might not be unusual in the more-established oil market, technology has only recently made it feasible to keep LNG at minus 162 degrees Celsius (minus 260 degrees Fahrenheit) for longer periods.
“There are cargoes parked close to Singapore, apparently waiting for the right market conditions to be delivered,” said Dumitru Dediu, an associate partner at McKinsey Energy Insights, which monitors LNG flows. “Some of the players are speculating.”
There are about 30 vessels currently flagged as floating storage globally, two-thirds of which are in Asia, the biggest LNG consuming region, according to cargo-tracking company Kpler SAS. That’s still a fraction of a global fleet of more than 500 vessels.
The practice of using tankers as floating storage is common in the more developed oil market. It happens during periods of contango—when storage on land is used up, immediate demand is weak, and the cost for later delivery is high enough to cover the expense of storing crude on a tanker.
Trading houses and oil majors from Vitol Group and Glencore Plc to BP Plc and Royal Dutch Shell Plc collectively made billions of dollars from 2008 to 2009 stockpiling crude at sea. At the peak of the floating storage spree, sheltered anchorages in the North Sea, the Persian Gulf, the Singapore Strait, and off South Africa each hosted dozens of supertankers.
Boil OffLNG, the fastest-growing fossil fuel, is starting to resemble the oil market in that sense. Holding it back is that some LNG is lost to keep it cool during its journey, known as boil off, and that most sales are through traditional long-term contracts without destination flexibility.
But that’s rapidly changing. Modern tankers are capable of serving as floating storage, especially for markets such as China that lack that capacity. They have lower boil-off rates, bigger capacity, and re-liquefaction units on board to keep the cargoes cool.
The global LNG fleet has transportation capacity of about 44 million tons, which pales beside the 372 million tons of the crude oil tanker fleet, according to Clarkson Research Services Ltd., a unit of the world’s biggest shipbroker. LNG tankers working as storage can tie up transport capacity, even if volumes are not significant in a global context, Alastair Maxwell, chief financial officer of LNG ship owner and operator GasLog Ltd., said earlier this month.
The biggest contributor to flexible supplies is the U.S., where destination-free LNG exports started in 2016. The nation is adding production terminals and will compete with Australia and Qatar for a top place in LNG trade, which the International Energy Agency expects will overtake volumes delivered by pipelines in the middle of the next decade.
Developers of U.S. LNG export projects will be among key speakers at the annual CWC World LNG Summit which starts Tuesday in Lisbon and gathers executives and traders of the super-chilled fuel.
If a cold snap suddenly comes and the spot price rises, a well-diversified player storing fuel may boost earnings by $2 million to $5 million, despite current high shipping rates and boil off, Dediu said.
“Playing contango on LNG has not been traditionally popular, but given the price volatility for gas we do see a lot more players doing this,” he said. “With higher volatility and given the unpredictable winter weather patterns, from one week to another, it might be a real option for some of the players.”
—With assistance from Grant Smith and Alaric Nightingale.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/tankers-going-nowhere-indicate-gas-market-becoming-more-like-oil
-
U.S. Gas Export Boom Could In Fact Benefit Russia
Nov 28, 2018 | Forbes
By Jo Harper
Russia’s LNG project, Yamal LNG, concluded its first ship-to-ship transhipment in Norway this week. Few of the world’s press took much interest. But for those in the know, it was a move that could have large ramifications, both for the global energy market, but also for the changing configurations of the geopolitical tectonic plates.
Thanks to the shale gas boom the US in 2011 became the world’s leading producer of natural gas and in 2016 US energy firm Cheniere launched LNG exports. Many are talking of the US LNG revolution that will change the way the world thinks about gas.
The Russian response
But Russia's energy sector has emerged as a beneficiary of the US’ actions as China is seen increasing imports of Russian oil and LNG, sidelining US LNG.
Russia operates two LNG export facilities, including the recently commissioned Yamal LNG project in the Russian Arctic. Yamal LNG effectively doubled Russian LNG output to just over 20 mtpa, making the country the fifth largest LNG exporter in the world.
Amid the changes in the global crude market, Russian companies presented the best alternative choice for China, according to Li Li, director of research at Shanghai-based research and consulting firm ICIS China.
Russian oil has the best prices and best availability," Li told The Global Times.
At the same time, the US is embroiling itself in trade wars, pushing some countries, like Poland and Germany, to consider the purchase of more US LNG as a means of appeasing Trump in their trade discussions.
Losing China, again?
China is the world's second largest LNG importer (only behind Japan) and will be the major driver of LNG import growth over the next five to 10 years.
China imposed a 10 percent tariff on US LNG in September after the US slapped tariffs on $200 billion worth of imports on Chinese goods and Beijing has said that it will not sign any more LNG deals until trade tensions are over.
China’s LNG demand grew by a record 8 mtpa in 2017 and is set to expand by a record 12 mtpa this year, making up 50 percent of all global LNG demand growth, energy consultancy Wood Mackenzie said.
The spike in LNG usage comes as Beijing goes ahead with a plan to offset coal usage to curb air pollution. Beijing wants natural gas to make up at least 10 percent of its power generation energy mix by 2020.
China is also interested in becoming a major investor in Russian LNG projects, including Novatek’s massive 19.8 mtpa Arctic LNG 2 project in northern Siberia which is slated to come on-stream in 2023.
As the so-called second wave of US LNG development unfolds, numerous projects will likely not reach the all-important final investment decision (FID) needed to go forward unless they can secure either Chinese funding, Chinese long-term off-take agreements or both.
Chinese LNG demand growth is the largest piece of demand growth out there, and Chinese buyers have got to feel reluctant to commit to US capacity when the US government sees trade as a means of exerting political leverage,” said Bob Ineson, managing director of North American natural gas at IHS Markit.
In the short term in 2019, China can easily ignore the US LNG market because Russia is preparing to pump more natural gas to Asia through the new Power of Siberia pipeline. In the long term, China may need to turn to Qatar, or to more Russian natural gas, in order to avoid US LNG exports.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/joharper/2018/11/27/us-gas-export-boom-could-in-fact-benefit-russia/#385555836f01
-
EAB Petitions Add To Push For Equity Review Of UIC Permits
Nov 28, 2018 | Inside EPA
A trio of newly filed Environmental Appeals Board (EAB) petitions are challenging EPA's approval of an underground injection control (UIC) permit for a hydraulic fracturing operation in Michigan, arguing that the agency failed to consider environmental justice, as well as potential seismic and drinking water impacts, from waste injections.
The petitions, filed by residents of Gladwin County, MI, target a Safe Drinking Water Act UIC permit for fracking waste injections from an oil and gas operation in the region, adds to an already-pending case that tests the weight EPA must place on equity when it sets permit terms for wastewater injections, as well as how far the agency must go to prevent water contamination or seismic disturbances.
“Here, the EPA premised its issuance of the Final Permit for the Jordan Development, LLC well in Gladwin County . . . upon clearly erroneous facts and a lack of exercise in discretion with regards to environmental impact and citizen’s concerns,” read two largely identical petitions filed by Gladwin residents Amy and Ronald J. Kruske.
The Kruskes, as well as Michigan resident Emerson Joseph Addison III, cite the low average income and education levels of the area as evidence that EPA should be treating it as an environmental justice community, which would require evaluating the permit for impacts on vulnerable populations such as the poor.
For instance, referring to tests for chemical contamination of drinking water, Addison writes, “These tests can be expensive, often costing hundreds of dollars a year. This is an impoverished community. The people who live here just don’t have the money to afford the tests that the EPA says they need to protect themselves and their families from the risks of this project, risks such as contamination of their drinking water. Clearly, this is an Environmental Justice issue that was inadequately addressed.”
All three petitioners say EPA rejected comments on equity, health and environmental concerns for the permits improperly, and should be required to re-examine them.
The petitions raise similar issues to an already-pending case, In re: Muskegon Development Company, which deals with another UIC permit for oil and gas wastewater in Michigan and involves a petition also filed by Addison. There, both EPA and the permit-holder recently filed briefs that said the petitions is a restatement of public comments on the permit and raises no new issues that would be ripe for EAB's review.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/eab-petitions-add-push-equity-review-uic-permits
-
Keystone XL Eyes February Construction Start Despite Legal Woes
Nov 28, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rachel Adams-Heard
TransCanada asked federal judge to amend or clarify injunction
Crude oil pipeline still faces outstanding legal challenges
TransCanada Corp. is asking a federal judge in Montana to authorize early work on its $8 billion Keystone XL oil pipeline even as the decade-long project faces outstanding legal challenges.
The Calgary-based company has asked U.S. District Court Judge Brian Morris to clarify or amend his ruling earlier this month to say the current injunction doesn’t apply to pre-construction activities, spokesman Terry Cunha said in an email. That work would allow TransCanada to start construction as early as mid-February, he said.
Without a change to the injunction, the project would likely be delayed, he said. A yearlong setback would cost the company $949 million in earnings and put off the hiring of about 6,600 workers, according to TransCanada.
The Associated Press reported earlier that TransCanada had sent a written statement to the court requesting clarification or an amendment to the injunction. The company declined to release a copy of the filing.
The 1,200-mile pipeline, which would help carry 830,000 barrels of crude a day from Alberta’s oil sands to U.S. Gulf Coast refiners, has faced legal holdups amid staunch opposition from environmental groups and landowners. TransCanada has yet to formally declare that it will build the conduit.
Environmental AssessmentEarlier this month, Morris found that the project’s 2014 environmental assessment by the Obama administration was inadequate. President Donald Trump used that review in a March 2017 decision allowing the project to proceed. Now, the government must consider oil prices and greenhouse-gas emissions and formulate a new spill-response strategy before allowing the pipeline to move forward, Morris wrote in the ruling.
The U.S. State Department has previously said it expects to publish a final supplemental review in December.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/keystone-xl-eyes-february-construction-start-despite-legal-woes
-
Permit Waiver for Mountain Valley Gas Pipeline Tossed by Court
Nov 28, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rachel Adams-Heard
EQT Midstream’s Mountain Valley natural gas pipeline in West Virginia won’t be allowed a state waiver from water permitting, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit ruled Nov. 27.
The opinion amends an earlier order vacating an Army Corps of Engineers nationwide permit.
The waiver would have allowed Mountain Valley to resume work if the Army Corps issued a new permit. Now, work can’t restart without a final water permit from West Virginia and a reissued nationwide permit from the Corps of Engineers.
“The waiver was invalid because it did not result from the notice-and-comment process order,“ the court said. “Federal law requires that the states establish notice-and-comment procedures for reviewing applications for certification of nationwide or individual permits.”
Bloomberg Intelligence analyst Brandon Barnes said the issue should be resolved by the end of the year as the state finalizes its water permit. The waiver would have served as “quick fix” until West Virginia issues its final water permit
The pipeline will carry gas from northwestern West Virginia to southern Virginia. The Project is joint venture of EQT Midstream Partners, NextEra Energy, Consolidated Edison, AltaGas Ltd., and RGC Resources. EQT Midstream will operate the line.
The Sierra Club, the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit, has received funding from Bloomberg Philanthropies, the charitable organization founded by Michael Bloomberg. Bloomberg Environment is operated by entities controlled by Michael Bloomberg.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/permit-waiver-for-mountain-valley-gas-pipeline-tossed-by-court
-
Fears and Hopes on Cracker Expressed During OEPA Hearing in Shadyside
Nov 28, 2018 | The Intelligencer.
By Jennifer Compston- Strough
SHADYSIDE — Dozens of local residents and environmental advocates turned out Tuesday to express their fear of the “plastic monster” Michelle Fetting believes PTT Global Chemical and Daelim will create if the companies construct an ethane cracker plant at Dilles Bottom.
Many others, though, are eager to welcome another industry to the Ohio Valley, saying they believe good-paying jobs and a higher quality of life will come with it.
Fetting, a representative of the Pittsburgh-based BreatheProject.org, described the monstrous impact she believes such a facility would have on the region. Her organization was formed in response to construction of a similar facility by Royal Dutch Shell at Monaca, Pennsylvania. She was one of 30 people who testified on the official record when the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency held a public hearing Tuesday evening at Shadyside High School.
The hearing was regarding a draft air pollution permit-to-install for the proposed petrochemical complex in Belmont County. A cracker plant processes ethane to create ethylene, a key component of plastic.
Prior to hearing testimony, OEPA officials outlined the project and described the permit that is under consideration for the roughly 100 people in the audience. The application for the permit was filed Aug 31. Public comments on the permit will be accepted through Dec. 11. Written comments can be emailed to kimbra.reinbold@epa.ohio.gov or sent to her at OEPA’s Southeast District Office, 2195 E. Front St., Logan, OH 43138.
While describing the project and answering questions from the audience, OEPA’s Mike Hopkins, assistant chief of permitting for OEPA, talked extensively about the plant’s anticipated emissions. He said his agency has been monitoring air quality in Shadyside for two years and will continue to do so for many years after the cracker plant begins to operate, if the project becomes a reality.
“The whole idea is to make sure we are protecting public health,” Hopkins said.
He compared expected emission levels at the cracker plant to those of several other types of polluters. While the cracker might emit about 396 tons of volatile organic compounds per year, for example, a typical gas station or dry cleaner emits 10 tons annually, he said. Larger facilities, such as small factories, emit 50-100 tons per year, while an auto assembly plant or steel mill might emit 1,000 tons each year. He said the largest polluters in Ohio are usually coal-fired power plants, which can emit more than 50,000 tons of VOCs annually. But the fact that he classified the potential PTT plant as a “medium to slightly larger than medium-sized plant in terms of emissions” did not alleviate the concerns of many members of the audience.
Jill Hunkler, of Barnesville, was the first to testify when the public hearing officially got underway. She told those present that hydraulic fracturing, commonly known as “fracking,” to extract natural gas and associated products from the ground is already taking a toll on the health of area residents. She said lots of people will become wealthy if the cracker plant is built, but she said she believes those people will be foreign investors who will not face the same risks as people who live near the site.
“We want clean jobs, healthy jobs for all the workers of our community,” Hunkler said.
Lisa Helms, of St. Clairsville, expressed similar concerns. She said she has traveled all around the world but “nowhere do I get sick except in the Ohio Valley.” She said that upon returning home, she was forced to again begin taking medications for asthma and respiratory issues. And, she said, she believes local air quality and respiratory ailments will worsen if the cracker is built.
“People die here because of asthma, because of COPD,” she said. “We have enough plastic in the Pacific Ocean to make up an area the size of Texas. … Enough!”
But other people who testified, such as Matthew Szollosi, support the project and look forward to the jobs it will create. Szollosi is executive director of Columbus-based ACT OHIO, part of the Affiliated Construction Trades organization. He said that “job creation and environmental accountability do not have to be mutually exclusive.” He added that thousands of people would be employed during construction of the facility, allowing workers to better support their families. He also expects maintenance and operation of the plant to continue to provide employment for many for decades to come.
Michael Kinsley, secretary/treasurer of the Ohio State Building & Construction Trades Council, expressed similar opinions, noting that the nearly 100,000 people his organization represents are trained, skilled workers who are dedicated to creating safe, secure projects that are sustainable. He also pointed out that the proposed plant site, the former location of the R.E. Burger coal-fired power plant, has been an industrial site since the 1920s. He said private investment by PTT from Thailand and Daelim from South Korea will help clean up and improve that area.
Several other people spoke on both sides of the issue. Kristopher Weiss, public involvement coordinator for OEPA, explained that the final decision on whether to approve the permit falls to OEPA Director Craig Butler. Weiss said all testimony entered on the record Tuesday will be considered, along with any comments that are submitted by Dec. 11. He added that questions asked on the record will be answered when a decision is issued, via a document known as the Response to Comments. All questions and comments regarding the permit should include the permit number, #P0124972.
The draft permit can be viewed online at epawwwextp01.epa.ohio.gov:8080/ords/epaxp/f?p+999:10:0. The director’s decision can be appealed to the Environmental Review Appeals Commission within 30 days after it is issued.
http://www.theintelligencer.net/news/top-headlines/2018/11/fears-and-hopes-on-cracker-expressed-during-oepa-hearing-in-shadyside/
-
Nov 28, 2018 | Delaware News Journal
By Maddy Lauria
Croda Inc. said: Ethylene oxide found leaking at its Atlas Point facility near the Delaware Memorial Bridge on Sunday night never reached unsafe levels beyond its property.
State environmental officials said: They won't know how much of the gas leaked until they conduct an investigation.
Holloway Terrace Fire Company spokesman George Greenley said: More than 70 percent of the contents of one of the chemical storage tanks had leaked.
Late Tuesday afternoon, the company said the leak was caused by an incorrect gasket fitted on one of the pipes at the company's new bio-ethanol manufacturing operation at Atlas Point.
They said they will not manufacture more ethylene oxide onsite until they are "confident that the plant can resume safe operations."
But it remains unclear how much gas escaped or how long it will take the state and company to release that information.
That also means no one can say whether the people and motorists nearby faced imminent danger from a chemical that is not only carcinogenic and flammable but also highly explosive.
“It all depends on the amount of ethylene oxide,” said Dr. Bala Subramaniam, a distinguished professor of chemical and petroleum engineering at the University of Kansas. “What is known is that there was a leak and nothing else. We need to know the details.”
Despite assurances from Croda that the risk was low as firetrucks and first responders surrounded the plant on Sunday night, Croda officials asked to shut down traffic on the Delaware Memorial Bridge from about 5 to 11 p.m.
However, Shawn Garvin, secretary of the Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, said on Monday that nearby state "air monitoring readings confirmed they were over the appropriate levels" as the gas was carried by wind heading toward I-295 and the bridge.
Worries about people inhaling the gas or it catching on fire prompted the shutdown of traffic, he said.
The following day, some people reported they had smelled the sweet, etherlike odor indicative of higher concentrations of ethylene oxide. Others said they had headaches from the fumes while they sat trapped in traffic.
They do not know if they inhaled the poisonous gas, but decades of studies on ethylene oxide show that it takes a relatively high concentration of the chemical to cause those health problems.
It is possible that those smelling the gas were in a place where the wind had carried a pocket of concentrated ethylene oxide. Generally, that sweet odor is not detected below 500 parts per million – a concentration high enough to be toxic to humans over short periods of time, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
“I think everybody has a right to know that the leak is indeed contained, why it happened and what steps will be taken so that it won’t happen in the future,” Subramaniam said. “People should really press for that. That’s certainly their right to know.”
The why, answered late Tuesday, prompted a "systematic review of all other equipment on the ethylene oxide plant pipework," the company said. Officials estimate that review will take about two weeks.
What is known is that ethylene oxide – a human carcinogen used in a slew of products and manufacturing processes that reportedly leaked from a storage tank at Croda’s plant north of New Castle – is highly flammable and explosive, and can cause both minor and serious health problems.
“Anywhere between 200-700 parts per million, you’ll begin to actually smell ethylene oxide … and that’s definitely a level where even a few minutes [of exposure] can cause irritation of the eyes, respiratory tract and so forth,” said Subramaniam, who also is executive editor of the American Chemical Society’s Sustainable Chemistry and Engineering journal.Fire and explosions often go hand in hand
While Garvin said the biggest concern beyond health impacts was fire, experts and research on the chemical say the explosive nature of ethylene oxide can pose a massive threat from any flame.
“With a spark, it ignites,” Subramaniam said. “And then it decomposes explosively because of the snowball effect created by the heat.”
But unless state or company officials release vital information about how much ethylene oxide leaked because of that incorrect gasket, no one will know if their homes, cars or lives were at risk of massive explosions.
“The higher the leakage, the higher the risk of explosive vapors – and that’s really the main concern with ethylene oxide," Subramaniam said.
The most recent incident with the gas causing injuries reported to OSHA occurred in 2004 at a Sterigenics plant in California where the chemical is used to sterilize medical equipment. An equipment malfunction involving 62 pounds of ethylene oxide caused an explosion that resulted in extensive damage and injured four employees.
That is a mild incident compared with those decades ago that illustrate exactly how reactive, volatile and explosive this widely used chemical can be. According to the American Chemistry Council, explosions from ethylene oxide can have devastating — and far-reaching — impacts.
In a 1962 incident, an ethylene oxide storage unit was contaminated by ammonia, causing a reaction that overpressured and ruptured the vessel and caused an explosion at a plant in Kentucky.
That explosion damaged everything within a 500-foot radius and could be heard more than 20 miles away. That first tank explosion set off a chain reaction of fires and blasted a nearby storage tank into a structure 400 feet away, according to the council's 2007 report on ethylene oxide.
That report outlines more than a dozen other catastrophic incidents involving fires and explosions stemming from ethylene oxide leaks and contamination. Some led to severe injuries and death.
Ethylene oxide has been produced around the world for more than a century, and the tragic lessons learned in that time have led to safer handling practices.
“The current ethylene oxide technology is quite mature,” Subramaniam said. “It’s rare to see accidents with that technology because it has, over the years, developed into a safe technology.”
Just as an airplane faced inherit risk each time it defies gravity, the same goes for handling ethylene oxide.
“I’d say this is quite unusual for an ethylene oxide technology, simply because it’s not new,” he said. “There are a lot of ethylene oxide plants that are running safety day in and day out.”
Ethylene oxide ranks 26th in volume among major industrial chemicals produced in the U.S., according to the CDC. Internationally, it is used as a fumigant and fungicide, to make ethylene glycol for antifreeze, to sterilize medical equipment and other consumer goods, and as a chemical intermediate.
At Croda, ethylene oxide is used in the company’s products, which include non-ionic surfactants that are sold to industrial users. They use it to make liquids that combine mixtures that otherwise would separate, like face creams and cosmetics.
About three months ago, Croda began manufacturing ethylene oxide with corn-based ethanol at its Atlas Point facility near the Delaware Memorial Bridge.Possible that leak’s risk was low
In an open-air environment, it is possible that even a large amount of ethylene oxide could be quickly dispersed. While ethylene oxide is heavier than air and tends to form vapor clouds when it escapes, windy conditions can make all the difference.
Just like airing out a home from a carbon monoxide leak, dispersing the gas often is the best solution. On Sunday, emergency crews sprayed water in the air to try to dissipate the gas.
Unlike an oil spill on water, which is relatively slow-moving and can be contained, whatever gas leaked from the Croda tank is lost to the atmosphere.
“It can travel as far as the wind can take it,” Subramaniam said.
Without knowing how much of the gas had leaked, but knowing the risks of a spark finding its way into an ethylene oxide vapor cloud, Subramaniam said the call to shut down the bridge was right.
“It’s certainly a precautionary measure and a prudent one because, depending on the amount of the ethylene oxide leak, the risk is proportional to that,” he said.
While the Croda plant predates the Delaware Memorial Bridge, Garvin said, its bio-ethanol-based manufacturing of ethylene oxide does not. The state granted a permit to build that new plant in 2015. Operations officially began when the first ethylene oxide was stored in tanks onsite in late August 2018, documents show.
"The goal is to make sure everything is operating properly," Garvin said. Approval of the new operation was appropriate because "it met all the criteria," he said.
https://www.delawareonline.com/story/news/local/2018/11/28/danger-unknown-until-croda-state-officials-release-details-gas-leak/2121694002/
-
Gasket Blamed for Gas Leak That Disrupted Bridge Traffic
Nov 27, 2018 | AP (In The New York Times)
DOVER, Del. — A preliminary investigation has found that a gasket failure caused a chemical gas leak that forced the temporary closure of a heavily used bridge connecting Delaware and New Jersey on one of the busiest travel days of the year.
Officials with Croda Inc. said Tuesday that initial findings show that an incorrect gasket fitted on a pipe during construction of its Delaware ethylene oxide production plant failed Sunday.
The company is sending the gasket to independent experts for analysis and confirmation. Production of ethylene oxide, which is highly flammable, has been suspended while other equipment is inspected over the next two weeks.
The leak forced the precautionary closure of the Delaware Memorial Bridge for several hours as the Thanksgiving holiday weekend wound down. The bridge which carries traffic on Interstate 295.
https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2018/11/27/us/ap-us-delaware-bridge-gas-leak.html
-
Ex-Trump Adviser: Get States, Cities on Board for Infrastructure
Nov 28, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By David Schultz
White House infrastructure plan faltered because states, cities weren’t on board, DJ Gribbin says
Former presidential adviser says hope for comprehensive plan not extinguished in White House
Winning the approval of governors and mayors is crucial to any infrastructure overhaul effort, the White House’s former point person on the issue said Nov. 27.
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.), who is waging a campaign to be speaker of the House in the upcoming session of Congress, has said infrastructure will be a top priority for Democrats.
DJ Gribbin, who served until earlier this year as special assistant to the president for infrastructure policy, said a more than $1 trillion plan that he helped draft last year stalled in Congress because it didn’t have the full support of these state and local officials. And they are the ultimate decision-makers on how to upgrade most of the nation’s roads, bridges, water pipes, and other infrastructure, he said.
In fact, Gribbin said, a misunderstanding about where the money for the White House’s plan would come from actually could have delayed local investments.
“If you think you’re going to get free federal money, you’re not going to raise revenue,” he said at a conference on public-private partnerships. “Lots of states and cities said, ‘Hey, there’s this talk of a $1 trillion plan. Let’s hold off and see if we can get some of that.’ ”
Incentives, Not MoneyThe plan didn’t include raising huge amounts of federal revenue, however.
It instead called for new incentives to get states and cities to raise revenue themselves, either through hiking taxes or engaging with the private sector. These incentives would trigger more than $1 trillion in projects, which would go toward upgrading roads, airports, water pipes, electrical grids, and even broadband internet service, according to the plan.
Gribbin, who left the White House in April and went on to found the consulting firm Madrus LLC in Leesburg, Va., said getting local officials and members of Congress all on the same page on the issue was a big hurdle.
Still Time?Because the White House won’t be ignoring the issue, time is still left to solve this problem, Gribbin said.
Internal polling that the White House conducted shows that infrastructure remains among the top two or three most important issues to voters, and President Donald Trump brings his personal experience as a real estate developer to the table, according to Gribbin.
“Don’t underestimate the power of the president being able to set an agenda,” he said. “I was the first special assistant whose sole job was to focus on infrastructure in history. That’s a window to to talk about infrastructure. That window may not stay open in the next administration.”
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/ex-trump-adviser-get-states-cities-on-board-for-infrastructure
-
Climate Change Deniers Are Blocking Progress, UN Report Suggests
Nov 28, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Eric Roston
Paris pledges must be three times more ambitious to hit goal, report says
Citizens can ‘question problems if policy solutions challenge’ their views, it says
The United Nations’ annual assessment of global progress on climate change delivers familiar bad news this year—the problem is getting worse, not better—with a new twist: For the first time, political ideology is singled out for obstructing changes that would slow global warming.
The annual calculation of the “emissions gap”—the chasm between global pollution and international efforts to limit it—lays new blame with behaviors and cultures that lead some nations, including the U.S., to fall short on pollution goals. “There is a tendency for citizens to question problems if policy solutions challenge their world views,” the authors write.
The assessment of human psychology, unusual for the otherwise traditional, policy-heavy report, comes five days before negotiators and envoys head to Poland to negotiate the finer details of implementing the 2015 Paris accord. The message is stark: In order to hit the agreement’s most ambitious goal, limiting warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius this century, national targets must be made five times more ambitious than those initially pledged.
After a three-year plateau, emissions rose in 2017. “Global emissions are heading in the wrong direction with no sign of peaking,” Stephanie Pfeifer, chief executive officer of the Institutional Investors Group on Climate Change, said. “The longer we leave it, the more costly and devastating the consequences. This is a wake-up call.”
U.S. Climate Forecast Describes ExpenseAlong with traditional policy solutions, the 2018 Emission Gap Report says behavioral change is critical to building support for climate policies. When it comes to selling citizens on carbon-pollution pricing, the authors say, policy makers need to confront what’s known as solution aversion, the common tendency to pretend a problem doesn’t exist if the solutions are particularly unappealing.
For the first time in the nine years the UN has issued this report, the authors acknowledge that climate policy is at risk because people aren’t the rational actors assumed by decades of economic research. The new report blames “costs and political behavioral barriers to fiscal reforms” for an outsize influence on the gap between existing carbon prices and what research suggests are optimal for cleaning up the energy sector and industry.
The overall results are consistent with the findings of other recent major studies, including the October report by the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change on meeting a 1.5 degree Celsius warming goal, and a U.S. assessment of past and future damage associated with warming published last week.
The new Emissions Gap report also quantifies the potential emission reductions from sub-national governments, companies and investors. The most optimistic estimates conclude that these commitments, if met, could save up to 19 billion tons of carbon dioxide a year by 2030—or enough to close the current emissions gap.
—With assistance from Mathew Carr and Jeremy Hodges.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/climate-change-deniers-are-blocking-progress-un-report-suggests
-
Lawmakers Roll Out Landmark Bipartisan Carbon Fee Bill
Nov 28, 2018 | E&E Daily
By Nick Sobczyk
A group of House lawmakers last night floated the first bipartisan carbon tax bill in nearly a decade, a move that boosters are calling a big step for climate policy heading into the next Congress.
The "Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act" would put a $15-per-metric-ton fee on carbon, rising by $10 per year, with all of the money given back to households as a rebate.
A co-chair of the Climate Solutions Caucus, Rep. Ted Deutch (D-Fla.), is the lead sponsor of the bill, joined by Reps. Francis Rooney (R-Fla.), John Delaney (D-Md.), Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.) and Charlie Crist (D-Fla.).
The bill isn't likely to pass in this Congress, but the co-sponsors say it would reduce U.S. carbon emissions by a third in only a decade and 90 percent by 2050, all compared with 2015 levels.
"I'd like to stress how significant this legislation is," Deutch said last night on a call with reporters, which was abbreviated due to technical difficulties.
He pointed to sea-level rise, stronger storms and shortened winter seasons affecting communities across the country.
"That is not some dystopian science fiction novel," Deutch said. "Those are the facts of climate change we are facing today."
The bill is the product of years of groundwork laid by the Citizens' Climate Lobby, the group behind the bipartisan Solutions Caucus.
It closely mirrors its long-standing fee and dividend proposal, but it's garnered rhetorical support from other carbon tax advocates, including the Alliance for Market Solutions and Climate Leadership Council, which pushes the Baker-Shultz carbon dividend proposal.
"This is a big deal," AMS Executive Director Alex Flint said in a statement. "The week after the Administration tried to downplay its own stark climate report, responsible policymakers, including Republicans, are proposing legislation to address climate change."
The Trump administration last week released a congressionally mandated report warning of stark economic and social consequences across American society if emissions aren't curbed (Climatewire, Nov. 26).Bill details
The final version of the bill would exempt agricultural fuels and nix certain EPA greenhouse gas regulations for stationary sources, though it would leave vehicle fuel efficiency standards and methane regulations in place. It would also restore regulatory authority if cumulative emissions targets aren't met after 10 years.
The regulatory provisions have been a sticking point for conservative climate advocates, who see regulations as duplicative with a carbon pricing structure.
However, the bill would not eliminate tort liability for greenhouse gas emitters. That's a feature of the Baker-Shultz proposal that has been widely criticized by environmental groups, which see it as an out for polluters.
As with other carbon tax bills, the "Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act" includes a border carbon fee adjustment. Imported carbon products would be hit with a tariff if the country of origin does not price carbon, while exports would get a refund.
The bill's sponsors say it would incentivize other countries to price carbon.
The measure joins several other carbon tax proposals floating around Congress. Florida Republican Rep. Carlos Curbelo rolled out his own carbon pricing measure this summer, while Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) and other Democrats have their own proposal. Sen. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) and Rep. Don Beyer (D-Va.) have also introduced a cap and dividend measure.
But the Deutch-led bill is among the most ambitious carbon pricing proposals, at least in the near term, according to an analysis authored by Noah Kaufman, a researcher at the Center on Global Energy Policy at Columbia University's School of International and Public Affairs.
"By 2030, carbon tax rates under the Deutch proposal would be at least 60 percent higher than under the Whitehouse and Baker proposals and at least two times higher than under the Curbelo proposal," Kaufman wrote.
Deutch acknowledged that his bill alone likely would not be enough to combat climate change.
"This bill won't solve all of our problems," he said. "We're not naive to think that it would, and starting on day one of the 116th Congress, we look forward to working with Democrats and Republicans alike to consider other parts of the climate change challenge."
Kaufman said a fuller analysis will be needed to look at the full economic effect of the bill.
But he said there is no question the bill would be a serious attempt to combat climate change.
"You can't look at this bill and say it's just greenwashing," Kaufman said.
https://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2018/11/28/stories/1060107547
-
Bipartisan Group Of Lawmakers Propose Landmark Carbon Tax
Nov 28, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama and Miranda Green
A bipartisan group of lawmakers is introducing a landmark bill that would charge fossil fuel companies a tax for their carbon dioxide emissions.
The Energy Innovation and Carbon Dividend Act, announced by two Republicans and three Democratic members of the House on Tuesday, would charge $15 for each ton of carbon emitted into the air and would increase that fee by $10 every year afterward, in an effort to fight climate change. Other than administrative costs, all of the money would go back to taxpayers.
Supporters say the bill would reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 40 percent in 10 years, and 91 percent by 2050. That’s a bigger cut than former President Obama’s Clean Power Plan or the United States’ commitment under the Paris climate agreement — a pact Trump has promised to exit.
Introduced weeks before Congress ends for the year, the legislation is unlikely to get serious House consideration in this session. But with Democrats ready to take control of the House in January, the bill is poised for potential future consideration and will likely be a major marker of where lawmakers from both parties can agree on tackling climate change.
The bill is the first bipartisan piece of legislation to be introduced to put a price on carbon in a decade. Its sponsors are Reps. Francis Rooney (R-Fla.), Brian Fitzpatrick (R-Pa.), Ted Deutch (D-Fla.), John Delaney (D-Md.) and Charlie Crist (D-Fla.).
“If we don’t act now, we are nearing a point of no return when it comes to the environment, when it comes to our health and when it comes to our economy,” Deutch, the lead Democratic sponsor, told reporters Tuesday.
He said the proposal “is the product of rigorous negotiations between Democrats and Republicans, liberal groups and conservative groups, environmentalists and business interests.”
The carbon tax proposal faces a number of headwinds. Washington state voters just this month rejected a state carbon tax proposal and President Trump is openly hostile to climate science, telling the Washington Post Tuesday “I don’t see” man-made climate change.
Similarly to Washinton measure, the bill would charge companies when they produce or import fossil fuels like coal, oil and natural gas, based on their expected greenhouse gas emissions.
But instead of using the money to pay for health or community projects, the new bill would distribute it to the public. Its backers say those “dividends” would offset the increased costs from the carbon tax, like higher utility and gasoline bills, for about 70 percent of households.
Dividend funds would be handed out by the Treasury Department under the bill, based on the number of people in a household.
“It's transparent and easily trackable. You know where the money is going. It protects the American family so that families are not adversely impacted. Dividends would protect most families from cost increases,” Ben Prendergast, senior director of government affairs at Citizens’ Climate Lobby, told The Hill.
“The market signals should still be there to guide things like fuel efficient cars and dividends protect people who can't make that transition immediately.”
The bill would also prohibit the federal government from regulating greenhouse gas emissions from the sectors that are taxed, unless the taxes aren’t effective after 10 years. That is an effort to attract support from Republicans, who are nearly united in opposition to Environmental Protection Agency climate regulations.
The legislation is similar in some respects to Rep. Carlos Curbelo’s (R-Fla.) Market Choice Act, which he introduced earlier this year. But only Republicans back that bill, and Curbelo lost reelection this month and will exit the House at the end of the year.
This latest bill comes within days of two climate reports released by the Trump administration and the United Nations that each warned of the measurable effects of climate change and the likely devastating impacts to humans.
An annual UN report released Tuesday signaled that countries were not doing enough to meet their goals of keeping global temperatures from rising to 2 degrees celsius above pre-industrial levels. At the current rate, the report found, the global temperature is expected to reach 3.2 degrees above the level by 2100.
A carbon tax could be one likely fix to that, with a forecast emissions cut of 91 percent by 2050.
“With the introduction of this bill, we are taking a monumental step forward in showing our colleagues and the country that there is a bipartisan solution to climate change that addresses the risks to our health, to the environment and to our economy,” Deutch said.
Ted Halstead, who leads the Climate Leadership Council, applauded the new legislation. His group is pushing another proposal to tax carbon dioxide emissions and to return the money to taxpayers, an effort backed by former Republican political leaders including former Treasury Secretary James Baker and former Secretary of State George P. Schultz.
Halstead said in a statement that the bill “provides a clear proof of concept that a conservative-inspired carbon dividends framework can attract bipartisan support.”
“While there are important policy differences between this legislation and the Climate Leadership Council’s Baker-Shultz Carbon Dividends Plan, we commend the representatives introducing this legislation as well as the Citizens’ Climate Lobby for their leadership to set the stage for a bipartisan climate solution.”
Some environmental groups applauded the bill too.
“This is the kind of smart, bipartisan proposal on climate change that we urgently need,” said Andrew Steer, president of the World Resources Institute.
But other groups were critical, saying that a carbon tax cannot get the dramatic reductions necessary to fight climate change.
"Carbon pricing schemes like this one are false solutions to climate change, and they provide a dangerous distraction from the bold policies required to avoid the worst effects of climate chaos in decades to come," Wenonah Hauter, executive director of Food and Water Watch, said in a statement.
“This carbon tax bill amounts to climate denial, not climate action."
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/418596-bipartisan-group-of-lawmakers-propose-landmark-carbon-tax
-
Dire Report 'Not Based On Facts' — White House
Nov 28, 2018 | E&E News PM
By Scott Waldman
The White House continues to reject the findings of a recently released climate report compiled by scholars from 13 federal agencies across the government.
At a White House press briefing this afternoon, spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders said the National Climate Assessment, which echoes the findings of every major science agency in the world, was "not based on facts."
"We think that this is the most extreme version and it's not based on facts," she said. "It's not data-driven. We'd like to see something that is more data-driven, that's based on modeling, which is extremely hard to do when you're talking about the climate."
Sanders' comments came a day after Trump said he did not "believe" the science contained in the report (E&E News PM, Nov. 26).
But the White House's talking points are based on "extreme" scenarios and those assertions are incorrect, according to the assessment's authors.
The 1,700-page report explores a wide range of scenarios and predicts tens of billions of dollars in damages, a rise in deadly heat waves and coastal communities increasingly threatened by rising sea levels if nothing is done to stem planet-warming emissions.
A report author, Katharine Hayhoe of Texas Tech University, pointed out on Twitter that the White House talking points were not true and easily disproved in the report.
"A WH spokesperson said the report was based on the 'most extreme' scenario," she tweeted. "No: the report considered a very broad range of scenarios, from one where carbon emissions go negative to one where they continue to grow."
Sometimes, the results do not vary much between scenarios. For example, the report highlights the estimated damage that would be associated with rising sea levels in the Southeast. It found the combined effect of sea-level rise and storm surge could cost $60 billion annually by 2050 in a higher-level scenario, compared with $56 billion under a lower scenario. That rises to $99 billion in 2090 under the higher scenario and $79 billion under the lower scenario.
"Modeling the climate is an extremely complicated science that is never exact," Sanders said.
The report, however, found that climate models have largely been accurate, that climate change effects were already measurable and that the observed trends mirror the higher scenarios.
"The observed increase in global carbon emissions over the past 15-20 years has been consistent with higher scenarios (very high confidence)," the report states.
https://www.eenews.net/eenewspm/2018/11/27/stories/1060107513
-
Sarah Sanders: Climate Change Report 'Not Based On Facts'
Nov 28, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Brett Samuels
White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders on Tuesday dismissed the findings of a government report that warned of the impending consequences of climate change, claiming it's "not based on facts."
“The president’s certainly leading on what matters most in this process, and that’s on having clean air, clean water,” Sanders told reporters at a press briefing. “In fact, the United States continues to be a leader on that front.”
Sanders disputed the report’s findings, claiming it’s “not based on facts” and arguing that modeling the climate “is never exact.” She did not indicate that Trump would call on world leaders at this week's Group of 20 summit to address the report's findings.
“We think that this is the most extreme version and it’s not based on facts,” she said. “It’s not data driven. We’d like to see something that is more data driven. It’s based on modeling, which is extremely hard to do when you’re talking about the climate.”
Sanders claims that the climate report by the Trump administration is "not based on facts" pic.twitter.com/Ga6peti5OB— CNN Politics (@CNNPolitics) November 27, 2018
The report was developed by multiple federal agencies. A version of it is mandated to be released every four years under the National Climate Assessment from the multiagency Global Change Research Program.
The hundreds of government and external scientists involved in the research concluded that climate change could cost the United States billions of dollars annually within decades if greenhouse gases aren’t dramatically reduced, and could worsen environmental disasters like wildfires and flooding. Its findings aligned with those of the broader scientific community.
Trump downplayed the report's findings, telling reporters on Monday's that he doesn't "believe" its warnings about the economic impacts of climate change.
The president has long voiced skepticism about the existence of climate change.
Democrats criticized that the report was released on Black Friday, the day after Thanksgiving, saying the timing was meant to bury it. They renewed calls for the use of renewable energy sources and other policies that could mitigate the effects of climate change.
Republican lawmakers have largely acknowledged that the climate is changing but have offered few concrete solutions to address the problem. Some lawmakers have emphasized the need to find innovations that would not adversely affect the economy.
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/418502-sarah-sanders-calls-climate-change-report-most-extreme-version-not
-
Highlighting Disconnect, Trump Climate Study Cites Obama-Era SCC Tool
Nov 28, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Doug Obey
The Trump administration's newly released assessment warning of significant economic damages from global warming also cites the social cost of carbon (SCC) metric the Obama administration used to estimate the benefits of emission cuts, even as the Trump EPA and other agencies are significantly curtailing use of the tool.
A prominent environmental law expert says the report's citation is fresh evidence of a disconnect between the growing understanding of climate risks and the Trump administration's efforts to roll back climate rules, even as many observers expect the report will bolster political and legal arguments against such rollbacks.
“This [report] will be part of the narrative for all of these cases,” New York University law professor Richard Revesz tells Inside EPA, referencing expected or pending litigation over the administration's moves to rollback the Clean Power plan, vehicle GHG standards and oil and gas methane controls.
The report's discussion of the SCC “will come up” as part of such battles, Revesz adds.
The second volume of the fourth National Climate Assessment (NCA), released Nov. 23, includes 29 chapters on a variety of climate impacts that are already occurring and expected to worsen, with a focus on “human welfare, societal and environmental elements of climate change and variability.”
The report concludes that annual losses in some economic sectors are projected to reach as high as “hundreds of billions of dollars by the end of the century” -- if GHG emissions continue with historic rates -- slashing as much as 10 percent off of the U.S. economy.
Its chapter on reducing risks through climate mitigation also projects that the benefits of such efforts by the end of the century could include avoiding “thousands to tens of thousands” of annual deaths from extreme temperatures, and “hundreds to thousands of deaths per year” from poor air quality.
It adds: “When monetized, each of these avoided health impacts represents domestic economic benefits of mitigation on the order of tens to hundreds of billions of dollars per year.”
But the new assessment also notes that benefits of GHG cuts “can be expressed” using the SCC, and it references an interagency working group (IWG) the Obama administration formed to develop the SCC and standardize across federal agencies the per-ton estimated damages from carbon dioxide.
The Trump administration has significantly curtailed such estimates, using an “interim” SCC measure that relies on a higher, 7 percent discount rate for estimating future damages and focuses on domestic rather than global damages.
The NCA's discussion of the SCC does not specifically criticize the Trump administration's approach, and it acknowledges that the SCC depends on “normative social values such as time preference, risk aversion, and equity considerations that can lead to a range of values” for the estimate.
'Right Starting Point'
But the NCA discussion also does not reference “interim” SCC values in use by the Trump administration, and Revesz says it lays out “how we should be thinking about” the SCC in ways that are both consistent with the IWG's approach and in conflict with the Trump administration's effort to gut the metric.
The report “suggests that the right starting point was the approach of the Obama [IWG] and that . . . the scientific improvements that had to happen bear absolutely no resemblance to anything the Trump administration did,” Revesz says.
He cites the assessment's reference to a 2017 National Academy of Sciences (NAS) study that outlined future routes to improving the SCC -- but not scaling it back. Some experts said at the time that the study implicitly pointed to emerging changes to the science that could boost estimated climate damages higher than the Obama administration figures.
Along these lines, the NCA says, “[a]lthough uncertainties still remain, advancements in climate impacts and economics modeling are increasingly providing new capabilities to quantify future societal effects of climate change.”
The NAS report also said regarding global or domestic calculations of carbon damages that a focus on domestic- damages is “feasible in principle,” but frowned on current models and methods for attempting to do so because they would inevitably underestimate climate damages.
“It is important to consider what constitutes a domestic impact in the case of a global pollutant that could have international implications that impact the United States,” the NAS study said.
“More thoroughly estimating a domestic [SCC] would therefore need to consider the potential implications of climate impacts on, and actions by, other countries, which also have impacts on the United States,” it added
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/highlighting-disconnect-trump-climate-study-cites-obama-era-scc-tool
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
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested