Preview Newsletter
AM ACC Clips Report - December 4, 2018
-
(ACC Mentioned) North American Plastics Industry Associations Support USMCA Signing, Urge Ratification of the Deal
Dec 3, 2018 | Canadian Plastics
North America’s three largest plastics trade groups are praising the Nov. 30 signing of a new trade agreement between Canada, the U.S. and Mexico. -
(ACC Mentioned) Economy Still Has 'Solid Momentum,' but GDP to Cool Next Year: NABE
Dec 3, 2018 | Staffing Industry Analysts
Economists surveyed by the National Association for Business Economics maintained their prior growth projections for the US economy in 2018, the association announced today. -
(ACC Mentioned) Student-Run Conference Maps “Interesting Crossroads” for U.S. Trade Policy
Dec 3, 2018 | Middlebury College News
By Jason Warburg
Ambassador Gregg Doud, the chief agricultural negotiator for the Office of U.S. Trade Representative (USTR), and Awinash Bawle MAIPS ’06, deputy director of the California Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development, were among the featured speakers at the Bi-Coastal TradeTalks Conference Nov. 30 at the Middlebury Institute. -
(ACC Mentioned) IRC Eyes Fix for Recycling Woes
Dec 4, 2018 | Altoona Mirror
By William Kibler
A member of the organization that coordinates recycling for the three central Blair County municipalities mandated to operate curbside programs wants to recruit young local talent to solve a problem that has frustrated recycling efforts. -
TSCA Citizens’ Petition on Asbestos Raises Specter of Precedent-Setting Litigation
Dec 3, 2018 | Lexology
By Andrew D. Knudsen
A pending petition for rulemaking under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) could represent the latest test of the scope of TSCA’s citizen petition provisions. -
(ACC Mentioned) The Grim Truth About Swimming Pools Revealed – the More It Smells of Chlorine the Dirtier It Is
Dec 4, 2018 | The Irish Sun
By Rosie Gizauskas
The strong smell of chlorine at a pool, while offensive to the nostrils, is usually seen as a sign that the water is going to be very clean. -
Northeast State Officials Eye Organized Approach On Assessing PFAS Risks
Dec 3, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Suzanne Yohannan
Prompted by a federal agency's strict draft risk values released earlier this year, toxicologists in New York and other Northeast states have held a dialogue on the risks posed by per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), an early informal, coordinated effort to prepare for a possible review should state regulators decide to craft drinking water standards. -
Mich. Businesses Are Discharging PFAS Chemicals — Report
Dec 3, 2018 | AP (In E&E Greenwire)
Michigan businesses are discharging large amounts of chemical contaminants into the state's waterways every day, according to a newspaper investigation. -
EPA Expanding Validated Testing Methods For PFAS In Various Media
Dec 3, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Suzanne Yohannan
As public concerns about per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) mount, EPA has updated and expanded its validated test methods for identifying the chemicals in drinking water, a move that will help laboratories determine which PFAS compounds are present in drinking water. -
Early Puberty Mystery Linked to Family Exposure to Household Chemicals
Dec 3, 2018 | Inverse
By Sarah Sloat
American girls are now going through puberty significantly earlier than in decades prior, a trend that’s been linked to physiological and psychological risks. -
Bill Would Limit Science Michigan Uses to Regulate Toxic Cleanups
Dec 4, 2018 | MLive
By Garret Ellison
New legislation has sprouted in lame duck session that public health advocates say would lock Michigan environmental regulators into using potentially outdated science when deciding how much cleanup a toxic contamination site requires -
EU Chemicals Laws Poses Challenges to U.S. Military Supply Chain
Dec 4, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Adam Allington
The Pentagon is constantly working to secure access to chemicals critical to military operations in the European Union, which restricts some substances commonly used to control corrosion and rust on aircraft, tanks, and ships. -
Industry Pushes Commission to Extend CLP Poison Centre Deadline
Dec 4, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Clelia Oziel
Several trade bodies have written to European Commission vice president Jyrki Katainen calling for the EU executive to postpone the deadline for harmonised information relating to emergency health response (poison centres). -
Revamped Carbon Rule for New Power Plants Could Come Soon
Dec 4, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Niina Heikkinen
EPA could soon release a new rule to cut greenhouse gas emissions from new and modified power plants. -
Trump-Xi Truce May Not Be Enough to Ease U.S. LNG Export Concern
Dec 3, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rachel Adams-Heard and Naureen S. Malik
A trade truce between Washington and Beijing may give U.S. natural gas cargoes a temporary boost, but new export projects that rely on Chinese investment will probably remain on hold until a final deal is reached. -
Big Fracking Profits at $50 a Barrel? Don’t Bet on It
Dec 4, 2018 | The Wall Street Journal
By Bradley Olson and Rebecca Elliott
The rapid decline of U.S. oil prices will test the claim of fracking companies that they can now prosper at $50 a barrel or less, a price level they have found challenging in the past. -
LNG Tanker Arrives at Cheniere Energy's Corpus Christi Plant
Dec 3, 2018 | Houston Chronicle
By Sergio Chapa
A liquefied natural gas tanker has arrived at Cheniere Energy's LNG export terminal in Ingleside, signaling that the facility may soon be ready to make its first shipment. -
Lawmakers Push Late Flurry of Bills
Dec 4, 2018 | E&E Daily
By Courtney Columbus
Lawmakers introduced a flurry of bills on energy and natural resources policy last week, a way for members to push policy priorities ahead of the new Congress. -
Permian Natural Gas Constraints Unlikely to Slow Oil Momentum, Says Raymond James
Dec 3, 2018 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Carolyn Davis
Warning lights were going off in the Permian Basin two years ago that a dearth of natural gas infrastructure would surpass production, but the issues can be resolved and overall not pressure oil activity, Raymond James & Associates Inc. said Monday. -
California Fires Spewed Nearly 1 Million Cars’ Worth of Greenhouse Gases
Dec 3, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Emily C. Dooley
Thick air pollution from California’s November wildfires blackened skies across the West, but the fires also spewed invisible greenhouse gases into the atmosphere equal to those created from 1 million cars using state roads for a year, according to federal and state statistics. -
Shell to Set Emissions Targets Tied to Executive Pay
Dec 3, 2018 | Bloomberg (In E&E Greenwire)
By Kelly Gilblom
Royal Dutch Shell PLC's decision to give more details on its emission-reduction plans sheds light on private discussions between the oil major and its shareholders, which led to a change in stance following years of resistance. -
Ocasio-Cortez: Fighting Climate Change Will Be ‘the Civil Rights Movement of Our Generation’
Dec 3, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Miranda Green
Speaking at a televised town-hall Monday, Rep.-elect Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said that the government’s next steps towards fighting climate change need to be as momentous as the Civil Rights movement or NASA's push to put a man on the moon. -
Quitting Paris? Pay a Carbon Tax, Macron Says
Dec 4, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Jean Chemnick
Threats are rumbling out of Europe to restrict trade deals with nations that shun the Paris climate agreement. -
Market Group Sees $1 Trillion Annual Savings on Climate Action
Dec 4, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Mathew Carr
The world economy can save $1 trillion per year by the end of the century if market-based tools are used to meet climate-protection pledges, according to a business group representing industries from oil to manufacturing and power generation.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation and Infrastructure News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
-
Dec 3, 2018 | Canadian Plastics
North America’s three largest plastics trade groups are praising the Nov. 30 signing of a new trade agreement between Canada, the U.S. and Mexico.
The Canadian Plastics Industry Association (CPIA), the Washington. D.C.-based Plastics Industry Association, and the Asociación Nacional de Industrias del Plástico in Mexico City have issued a joint statement in response to the signing of the U.S.-Mexico-Canada Agreement (USMCA), in which they “applaud the work of negotiators from the U.S., Mexico and Canada on the signing of a new, modernized trade agreement that sets the stage for greater certainty throughout the continent – certainty that will support continued business growth and innovation for the plastics industries of each party to the agreement.”
“The USMCA makes crucial upgrades and updates to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) that will enable the world’s strongest trilateral trade relationship to become even stronger,” the statement said. “We urge the legislatures of the U.S., Canada and Mexico to ratify this agreement and give the industry the certainty it needs to hire new workers and invest in the future, safe in the knowledge that North America once again has a vibrant, reliable trade regime to build on.”
The American Chemistry Council (ACC) also issued a statement in support of the USMCA signing, but also called on U.S. President Donald Trump to use the agreement to cancel tariffs on steel and aluminum. “The Section 232 tariffs on steel and aluminum still cast a shadow over the zero-tariff philosophy of the USMCA,” ACC said. “We urge President Trump to rescind all tariffs and avoid any quotas on steel and aluminum in order to maximize the job and economic growth made possible by the USMCA.”
https://www.canplastics.com/canplastics/north-american-plastics-industry-associations-support-usmca-signing-urge-ratification-of-the-deal/1003449286/
-
(ACC Mentioned) Economy Still Has 'Solid Momentum,' but GDP to Cool Next Year: NABE
Dec 3, 2018 | Staffing Industry Analysts
Economists surveyed by the National Association for Business Economics maintained their prior growth projections for the US economy in 2018, the association announced today. The median forecast calls for real GDP growth of 2.9% on an annual basis this year, unchanged from the October 2018 forecast. For 2019, respondents still predict a 2.7% annual growth rate in real GDP.
The panelists’ forecast for nonfarm employment growth was little changed.
“NABE Outlook panelists continue to view the economy as having solid momentum entering 2019, but they foresee GDP growth cooling from 2.9% this year to 2.7% in 2019,” said Kevin Swift, president at NABE and chief economist at American Chemistry Council.
“While panelists remain generally optimistic, three-quarters of respondents see risks being tilted to the downside,” said Survey Chair Gregory Daco, chief US economist, Oxford Economics. “Panelists view increasing trade tensions as the primary downside risk to their outlook, with 80% of respondents reducing their 2019 GDP growth outlook in response to trade policy developments. Even so, recession risks are still perceived to be low in the near term, with the panel expecting a 20% risk of recession by the second half of 2019, and a 30% chance by the end of 2020.”
Panelists now forecast nonfarm payroll growth to average 207,000 jobs per month in 2018, down slightly from 210,000 in the October survey. The panel continues to look for employment growth to moderate in 2019, with the median forecast calling for 166,000 net job gains per month, up from the October forecast of 162,000 jobs per month in 2019.
The average unemployment rate for 2018 as a whole is still expected to be at 3.9% in 2018, unchanged from prior forecasts, and then decline to 3.6% next year. On a quarterly basis, the median forecast is for the unemployment rate to fall to 3.6% in the first quarter of 2019, and remain unchanged until the fourth quarter, when panelists expect the rate to slip to 3.5%.
The median forecast for hourly compensation growth in 2018 was unchanged at 3.0% in the October survey, down from the 3.4% actual increase in 2017. Wage compensation is expected to pick up to a 3.2% annual average growth rate in 2019, also unchanged from the prior survey’s projection.
NABE is a professional association for business economists and others who use economics in the workplace. The survey included 53 professional forecasters and was conducted between Oct. 31 and Nov. 15, 2018.
https://www2.staffingindustry.com/site/Editorial/Daily-News/Economy-still-has-solid-momentum-but-GDP-to-cool-next-year-NABE-48280
-
(ACC Mentioned) Student-Run Conference Maps “Interesting Crossroads” for U.S. Trade Policy
Dec 3, 2018 | Middlebury College News
By Jason Warburg
Ambassador Gregg Doud, the chief agricultural negotiator for the Office of U.S. Trade Representative (USTR), and Awinash Bawle MAIPS ’06, deputy director of the California Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development, were among the featured speakers at the Bi-Coastal TradeTalks Conference Nov. 30 at the Middlebury Institute. The conference was hosted by the student club known as the Middlebury International Trade Association (MITA), many of whose members are enrolled in the Institute’s International Trade and Economic Diplomacy program.
“We’re at an interesting crossroads in the world,” said Ambassador Doud in response to a question from audience member Maria Onorato MAITED ’19 about whether President Trump’s trade policies serve the United States’ long-term interests. “I’ve met with folks from around the world with regard to what we’re doing, and their reaction is all the same: ‘Gregg, we’re right behind you.’ Everybody understands this issue, and understands that there are countries like Australia that are totally dependent on trade. If a country in that situation stepped in front of this train, they would have no way to deal with the economic consequences.”
The three panels featured at the conference focused on the future of free trade, the broader impact of locally-focused strategies, and export compliance in today’s complex regulatory climate. Most of the conference speakers participated in person, although Ambassador Doud and Deputy Assistant USTR for Agricultural Affairs Julia M. Doherty beamed in via videoconference from Washington, D.C., offering attendees real-time access to current policymakers. Other featured presenters included:Lisa Dyer - Former Director, Office of Intellectual Property Enforcement, Bureau of Economic & Business AffairsEd Brzytwa - Director for International Trade, American Chemistry CouncilTony Livoti - Founder/President, Monterey Bay International Trade AssociationJoe and Jia Hui Onorato - President & GM, Presidio Trade Group, San Francisco/BeijingDr. Katheryn Russ - UC Davis Economics ProfessorSean Barni - Manager, Worldwide Trade Compliance, TeslaGary C. Hufbauer - Senior Fellow, Peterson Institute for International EconomicsJessica Latham - Trade and Customs, KPMG; WIT-NC Vice PresidentJanice Whitaker - Senior Manager of Global Trade, Teledyne Technologies...not all trade policies originate in Washington, DC. The Monterey and Bay Area participants offered key insights on trade policy, California's prominent role in world trade, and how to implement effective export controls that should be incorporated in any government's policy discussions. — Lisa Dyer
Dyer commended the team for organizing such a “thoughtful and informative” conference, adding that it “underscored my view that not all trade policies originate in Washington, DC. The Monterey and Bay Area participants offered key insights on trade policy, California's prominent role in world trade, and how to implement effective export controls that should be incorporated in any government's policy discussions.”
The conference attracted a range of students and community members. Jenn Hart MANPTS ’19 explained that she has been considering taking some trade classes and “thought attending this conference would give me some added perspective. It definitely has – it’s been really interesting.”
MITA President Adam Anderson MAITED ’19 pointed to a moment during the third panel as the day’s highlight: “Before the Q&A, the panelists voluntarily steered the discussion to career advice for emerging trade professionals, offering their insights on what attitudes, practices, and qualifications best prepare new graduates for the real world.” He noted also that most of the panelists stayed to attend the networking mixer that followed the final panel, connecting with students and offering career advice. Anderson quoted one panelist as saying she was "shocked that such a professional conference had been organized entirely by first-year, much less first-semester students."
The steering committee for the conference included Anderson, Peter Skarlatos MAITED ’19, Benjamin Wollam MAITED ’19, Angelo Gonzalez MAIPD/MAITED ’20, and Benjamin Orenstein MAIPD/MAITED ’20. MITA member Pia Park MPA/MAITED ’20, who worked on marketing and sponsorships, called the conference “an awesome experience – a rollercoaster,” noting that her work on the conference increased her confidence in her project management skills.
For his part, Wollam was struck by the discrepancy heard at the conference between support in Washington D.C. for the administration’s protectionist trade policy, and skepticism from California government and private industry experts about the “extreme” tactics being used. He also agreed with Anderson’s assessment that the conference “exceeded all expectations,” with Anderson adding that “Without the full participation of every single member [of MITA], this conference would not have even been possible, much less have turned out to be such a remarkable success.”
https://www.middlebury.edu/institute/news/student-run-conference-maps-interesting-crossroads-us-trade-policy
-
(ACC Mentioned) IRC Eyes Fix for Recycling Woes
Dec 4, 2018 | Altoona Mirror
By William Kibler
A member of the organization that coordinates recycling for the three central Blair County municipalities mandated to operate curbside programs wants to recruit young local talent to solve a problem that has frustrated recycling efforts.
The problem is “miscellaneous” plastics — most plastic packaging, except for bottles, which the IRC accepts at curbside, and film, which supermarkets accept in containers in their lobbies.
The rest — including the ubiquitous “clamshells” that hold cookies, pastries, berries and self-serve salads and the packaging that holds many small items from flashlights to scissors — are no longer accepted at the IRC’s compost facility at the Buckhorn. Since several Asian countries stopped accepting the plastics in early 2018 because of rampant contamination, it’s been hard to market.
IRC member Jim Patterson wants the IRC to encourage the Greater Altoona Career and Technology Center to look into fixing the problem — perhaps by figuring out new uses for the hard-to-recycle plastics that now go into the trash in most homes.
Maybe GACTC can launch a pilot program for students inclined to study environmental issues — with topics that could include not only plastics recycling but also solar and wind power, Patterson said.
Miscellaneous plastics could be used in place of rocks in gabion baskets for shoring up streambanks, as an extender for asphalt or as building material in some form, Patterson suggested.
“There are a lot of bright kids over there,” Patterson said. “Give them a challenge.”
“Young minds respond to challenges,” IRC member Erik Cagle said.
Patterson’s overall idea is excellent, although the technical difficulties — coupled with environmental realities — make the problem of finding uses for miscellaneous plastics more difficult than it might seem, said IRC Executive Director John Frederick.
One issue with the idea of using it in gabion baskets or asphalt is the risk of it dissolving in the weather, running off with stormwater and adding to the microplastics pollution in the oceans, Frederick said.
Frederick places responsibility for a solution — and responsibility for having created the problem — on the plastics industry, which has made things worse since recycling took hold in the 1990s.
The problem is the numerous types of plastics that are incompatible for being recycled together. What’s needed is simplification, so consumers and recyclers can keep separate plastics and remanufacturers can get “the purity you need,” Frederick said.
Clamshells with No. 1 plastic, which is PolyEthylene Terephthalate (PET), and No. 6, which is polystyrene, not only look alike, the numbers that distinguish them within the familiar recycling triangle composed of arrows are small and hard to read.
No. 1 and No, 6 plastics have different melting points and can’t be recycled together, Frederick said.
PET tends to be used for items like cookies and berries and polystyrene for items like self-serve salads.
It would be better if clamshells were made of the same material, Frederick said.
Eggs are among the products that sometimes are in different kinds of plastic, Frederick indicated.
Worst of all are the “goofy” practices that include barrier layers and “sparkly wrappers” included in packages that are otherwise made of different, incompatible materials, he said.
Such hybrids are difficult to process, starting with the “picking” operation, if that is done by machine, he said.
“Meanwhile, the plastics packaging industry is making ungodly amounts of money, while the recycling industry tries to keep its head above water,” Frederick said.
There is a Design for Recyclability Guide, but the industry hasn’t used it wisely, according to Frederick. “There has to be some consideration for recyclability when designing.”
“The whole industry needs a reboot,” said IRC member Marla Marcinko. “I’m frustrated about what I can’t put into the (recycling) bin.”
The domestic recycling of miscellaneous plastic may be nowhere close to where it needs to be, but things are improving, said Keith Christman, managing director of plastics markets for the American Chemistry Council, speaking to the Mirror several months ago.
The goal is to recover 100 percent of plastic packaging by 2040, Christman said.
The shutoff by Asian countries could help spur the innovation necessary, he predicted.
http://www.altoonamirror.com/news/local-news/2018/12/irc-eyes-fix-for-recycling-woes/
-
TSCA Citizens’ Petition on Asbestos Raises Specter of Precedent-Setting Litigation
Dec 3, 2018 | Lexology
By Andrew D. Knudsen
A pending petition for rulemaking under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) could represent the latest test of the scope of TSCA’s citizen petition provisions. Denial of this petition would tee up a precedent-setting court battle addressing citizens’ ability to force EPA to exercise its TSCA section 8 authority to require chemical data reporting. And while the petition on its face is focused on requiring additional information collection, it could have important implications for EPA’s implementation of TSCA’s amended provisions regarding regulation of existing chemicals under section 6.
In its September 25, 2018, petition, the Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization (ADAO) is requesting that EPA amend its Chemical Data Reporting (CDR) rule in order to require greater reporting and disclosure of data on the production, importation and processing of asbestos and asbestos-containing products. The CDR rule, promulgated under TSCA section 8(a) and codified at 40 C.F.R. part 711, requires manufacturers and importers of more than threshold amounts of certain chemical substances to submit reports on the volume imported or manufactured, number of workers exposed, site operations information, downstream uses of the substance and potential for downstream exposure. The rule currently does not require reporting for naturally occurring substances (like asbestos) or for the manufacture or import of a chemical as an impurity, byproduct or part of an article. ADAO’s petition seeks to carve out asbestos from these exclusions, to lower the applicable reporting threshold for asbestos from 2,500 pounds per year to 10 pounds per year, to require reporting for asbestos processors as well as manufacturers and importers and to make all subsequent reports submitted on asbestos under the CDR rule publicly available regardless of any claims of protection for confidential business information.
ADAO submitted its petition pursuant to section 21 of TSCA, which allows citizens to request EPA action under various provisions of the statute, including section 8’s reporting provisions. The law requires EPA to respond to such a petition within 90 days. If EPA grants the petition, it must promptly begin proceedings to carry out the requested action. And if it denies the petition—or fails to respond within the allotted time—the petitioner may file suit in federal district court, where a judge will decide whether to compel EPA to take the requested action. Any such suit must be filed within 60 days after EPA’s denial. In the present case, EPA must respond to ADAO’s petition by December 24, 2018.
A pending case involving EPA’s denial of another petition illustrates the potential breadth of the judicial review afforded by TSCA section 21 where EPA denies a petition. In Food & Water Watch, Inc. v. EPA, a public health group is challenging EPA’s denial of a petition to ban the use of drinking water fluoridation chemicals under section 6 of TSCA. That case, filed in the Northern District of California, is the first citizens’ petition lawsuit filed after Congress amended TSCA in 2016. The parties have sparred over the correct interpretation of section 21, particularly with respect to the scope of judicial review provided. Section 21(b)(4)(B) states that where EPA denies a petition for issuance of a new rule, the court will consider that petition in a “de novo proceeding.” The parties disagreed as to the nature of that proceeding, including what information the court may consider. EPA argued that the court’s review in such cases should be limited to de novo consideration (i.e., without deference to EPA’s conclusions) of the administrative record before the agency, as is provided by the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) in some cases. But the court agreed with the petitioners that because TSCA provides a de novo proceedingrather than de novo review, a section 21 challenge involving a petition for a new rule is not limited to the administrative record. As a result, the court opened the door for these cases to include discovery, expert testimony and submission of scientific studies that were not presented to EPA in the underlying citizens’ petition, although the court also recognized that there will necessarily be some limitations on the additional evidence that petitioners may develop. The parties are currently engaged in discovery, with expert discovery closing in March 2019 and a bench trial set for August 2019.
If EPA denies ADAO’s petition to amend the CDR rule, TSCA’s citizen petition provisions may be put to the test again, with the potential for new precedent-setting rulings on important interpretive issues. One major question will be whether denial of ADAO’s petition is subject to the same “de novo proceeding” as in Food & Water Watch. Section 21(b)(4)(B) only provides for such a proceeding in cases involving “a petition to initiate a proceeding to issue a rule” under certain TSCA provisions. But ADAO’s petition seeks the amendment of a rule, not the issuance of a new one. And in Food & Water Watch, the court stated that petitions to amend or repeal a prior rule are subject to more limited “APA-like” review rather than the special “de novo” proceeding provided in section 21(b)(4)(B). ADAO may attempt to dispute this interpretation in the hopes of broadening the scope of the court’s inquiry and minimizing any deference to EPA’s conclusions.
Further, if ADAO is successful in extending the special review provisions of section 21(b)(4)(B) to its petition, it could raise additional questions about what standard of review should apply in the case. While most challenges to agency action under TSCA are governed by the APA’s standard of review, in cases governed by section 21(b)(4)(B), a different standard governs. No court has ever directly addressed how that standard of review applies to a petition for action under section 8(a) of TSCA. But based on their text alone, they appear to be in conflict.
Under section 21, a petition for rulemaking must “set forth the facts which it is claimed establish that it is necessary to issue, amend, or repeal” a rule. TSCA § 21(b)(1). Presumably this refers to the statutory criteria governing action under section 8. But once the petition is denied, the standard of review that applies in a de novo proceeding is stated differently: the petitioner must “demonstrate[] to the satisfaction of the court by a preponderance of the evidence that … the chemical substance or mixture to be subject to such rule or order presents an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment, without consideration of costs or other nonrisk factors, including an unreasonable risk to a potentially exposed or susceptible subpopulation, under the conditions of use.” TSCA § 21(b)(4)(B)(ii). In other words, if the petitioner can show the chemical presents an unreasonable risk, the court can force EPA to take action.
While this standard of review aligns with the criteria for EPA to regulate existing chemicals under section 6, it appears to be inconsistent with section 8(a), which generally grants EPA the discretion to require “such reports[] as the Administrator may reasonably require” without reference to the level of risk from any particular chemical. TSCA does not command EPA to require reporting for every chemical that presents an unreasonable risk. It is also inconsistent with section 14 (ADAO’s claimed authority for overriding claims of confidential business information), which, as relevant, only provides exemptions to its confidentiality protections where disclosure is “necessary to protect health or the environment” against an unreasonable risk or is “relevant” to a TSCA proceeding. Put simply, there appears to be a disconnect between the standard governing EPA’s implementation of these provisions and the standard by which a court in a special de novo proceeding may force EPA to act under these provisions.
Depending on how a court resolves this conflict, any litigation over ADAO’s petition could have important implications for EPA’s ongoing risk evaluation for asbestos. If the court holds that section 21(b)(4)(B) does govern its review of ADAO’s petition, then it might proceed to determine at trial whether asbestos presents an “unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment” under the conditions of use. But this is precisely the question that EPA is currently attempting to answer in its still-pending risk evaluation for asbestos under section 6, which is not due until at least December 2019. The result could be a bizarre scenario in which there are two parallel proceedings—one before EPA based on information developed through notice-and-comment rulemaking, and another before a district court judge in a “de novo proceeding” based on evidence developed by the parties through discovery and expert testimony—potentially reaching separate conclusions on the risks of asbestos under various conditions of use. Indeed, under that scenario it’s possible the court could rule on the “unreasonable risk” question before EPA’s statutory deadlines for conducting the risk evaluation have even expired, creating an end run around TSCA’s carefully designed regulatory framework.
Of course, this just one potential reading of section 21, and the court’s decision in Food & Water Watchindicates that ADAO’s petition would most likely be the subject of a more limited APA-like review that better harmonizes TSCA’s various provisions. But in light of the significant issues involved, industries affected by TSCA should be closely watching the proceedings involving ADAO’s petition in 2019.
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=94023258-5cdd-42f8-9fab-9b029b77cf77
-
Dec 4, 2018 | The Irish Sun
By Rosie Gizauskas
The strong smell of chlorine at a pool, while offensive to the nostrils, is usually seen as a sign that the water is going to be very clean.
But there’s actually a grim reason why some swimming pools smell stronger than others.
This is because the stronger the smell of chlorine, the dirtier the water in the pool is - and someone may well have peed in there.
Chlorine works by releasing two chemicals that destroy germs in the water.
These chemicals are hypochlorous acid and hypochlorite ion.
The odour you smell isn’t actually the chlorine itself, but actually chemical compounds called chloramines.
According to the American Chemistry Council, chloramines build up when the water hasn’t been properly treated.
They result from a combination of chlorine with sweat, oil and urine in the swimming pool.
So to prevent pools getting too stinky, it recommends that "By showering before entering the pool, and washing these substances from the skin, swimmers can help minimise pool smell.”
So next time you see sign reminding you to shower before getting in the pool, it’s best not to ignore it as doing so will contribute to a build of chloramines in the pool.
The Council advises that while swimmers worry that they might get red eyes because there’s too much chlorine in the water, it’s actually the opposite.
It advised: “You may be surprised to learn that there is no odour to a well-managed pool."
It continued: "Chloramines, which produce pool smell, can be eliminated using chlorine.”
The Water Quality and Heath Council adds that while indoor pools may “emit a light chemical odour”, it is best to stay out of the water if there is a “strong chemical smell present”.
Sun Online Travel previously revealed that there are parts of the sea that you shouldn't wee in - and this is why.
https://www.thesun.ie/travel/3473707/the-grim-truth-about-swimming-pools-revealed-the-more-it-smells-of-chlorine-the-dirtier-it-is/
-
Northeast State Officials Eye Organized Approach On Assessing PFAS Risks
Dec 3, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Suzanne Yohannan
Prompted by a federal agency's strict draft risk values released earlier this year, toxicologists in New York and other Northeast states have held a dialogue on the risks posed by per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), an early informal, coordinated effort to prepare for a possible review should state regulators decide to craft drinking water standards.
According to New York state officials, the state's Department of Health (NYSDOH) led an effort among risk assessors from New York and New England states to hold a series of conference calls about the risks posed by PFAS and how to assess them.
The states' effort sought to cut back on the workload individual states would need to undertake to examine the draft risk findings for PFAS released earlier this year by a federal health agency, and will allow toxicologists to be ready for the possibility of having to craft maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) or other drinking water levels for the contaminants in their individual states, one New York state official says.
The source says the group did not come to a consensus, and that the calls were technical, not at the policy level.
Still, the source says the coordination was extremely helpful, saving on the amount of work any one toxicologist had to do, and that it allowed for sharing different views. There are no immediate plans for future conference calls, the source says.
The discussions signal an organized but informal effort by states to prepare for any decisions their regulators may make to write advisory or regulatory limits for the chemicals in drinking water, as communities continue to pressure officials for action and EPA struggles to decide whether it will promulgate enforceable standards.
As a result, some states may look to write their own MCLs or advisory levels in the absence of EPA standards.
For instance, under state law, New Hampshire by Jan. 1 must initiate a process for developing MCLs for four PFAS, one state official says.
The states' discussions mark just the latest indication that groups are gearing up for policy action to address PFAS. Earlier this year, several PFAS manufacturers and industrial consumers, including 3M and Johnson Controls, launched a more-formal group known as Responsible Science Policy Coalition (RSPC) to advocate for industry stances among state and federal officials.
The group has already written comments criticizing the federal Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry's (ATSDR) draft report on four PFAS, charging its process did not follow the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) process for conducting human health assessments.
The states' talks came shortly after ATSDR in June released its draft report recommending risk values for two PFAS that are more conservative than those adopted by EPA for its drinking water advisory levels in 2016.
ATSDR's report came in the face of significant criticism from lawmakers and environmentalists after Inside EPA and other outlets reported that EPA and other Trump administration officials had urged the White House to block the document because it suggested more conservative values for perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) than EPA used when setting its advisory levels for the two.
Multi-State Process
ATSDR's draft toxicological profile proposed minimal risk levels (MRLs) -- which estimates the level of a chemical a person can be exposed to each day without a detectable non-cancer health risk.
The draft MRLs for "intermediate" duration oral exposures for PFOA and PFOS are between seven and 10 times stricter than EPA risk estimates underlying the agency's 2016 drinking water health advisories for lifetime chronic exposure to PFOA and PFOS. At the same time, ATSDR cautioned the public not to read its levels as cleanup or health effects standards, noting these levels are meant to act as a screening tool to aid public health professionals in further investigating.
The state risk assessors examined the MRLs, relative to EPA's 2016 health advisories for PFOA and PFOS, looking at strengths and weaknesses, one of the New York state officials says.
Their effort may already be helping guide states. During an Oct. 17 meeting of the New York Drinking Water Quality Council that focused in part on PFAS, officials with the NYSDOH Center for Environmental Health alluded to the multi-state coordinating process used to assess ATSDR's MRLs.
The dialogue among state toxicologists looked at both ATSDR's MRLs and other derivations for PFAS, NYSDOH Center for Environmental Health Director Gary Ginsberg told the forum.
"The multi-state process has really put us in an excellent position to present to the council . . . the various thoughts and permutations on the science," he said.
For instance, he said the multi-state group thoroughly examined the issue of mammary gland development studies that New Jersey built into its uncertainty factor used in that state's recommendation of 14 parts per trillion (ppt) for a drinking water maximum contaminant level (MCL) for PFOA.
According to a question-and-answer discussion earlier in the meeting, New Jersey based its reference dose on liver toxicity, but drew attention to studies related to prenatal exposures on mammary gland development and declined to use it to derive the MCL, but instead built it into the uncertainty factor it used.
The multi-state group took a long look at the matter and "really did not feel that the science on that had emerged to a point where we could put a lot of emphasis on that endpoint," Ginsberg said.
The assessors' talks come as some states may look to write their own MCLs or advisory levels in the absence of EPA regulatory standards.
EPA is expected to release a PFAS management plan early next year, in part making clear whether it will move ahead with an MCL for PFOA and PFOS, or not. The agency's top official on PFAS told lawmakers earlier this year that if the agency does decide to regulate the substances under various environmental laws, it would take years to complete. EPA has faced competing pressures on the issue, with the National Rural Water Association recently urging the agency to resist developing such a national, enforceable drinking water standard while states, environmentalists and many lawmakers have pressed the agency to craft one as a way to prevent a growing patchwork of state standards and ensure consistent national cleanup requirements for the ubiquitous chemicals.
'Accelerate Results'
Meanwhile, RSPC, the industry group, is also seeking a say on PFAS risk and policy development.
In slides presented by industry attorney James Votaw and Policy Navigation Group President Jonathan Gledhill in July to the Council of Western Attorneys General, the two say the group's objective is to offer "scientific resources to public policy decisions at federal and state level," and to "coordinate investments in research with other stakeholders to maximize value and to accelerate results."
They say they do not want to follow the path of perchlorate, showing a timeline where EPA varied in setting a health value, with NAS and EPA's science advisors at different points rejecting the approach.
On PFAS, they say there is "concern that we are accelerating action, but not following best practices," which would lead to "unnecessary delays and wasted resources." They say the goal of RSPC "is to accelerate research and promote best practices and best available science in policy decisions."
They criticize EPA, states and ATSDR in general for not following the NAS process. They say the NAS in 2005 through 2009 "found major problems" in six health assessments. The concern "is that skipping steps will ultimately delay public health protections," they say in the slides.
In response to ATSDR's draft tox profile for PFAS, RSPC submitted comments criticizing the agency for allegedly failing to follow NAS' advice for conducting human health assessments.
"ATSDR's draft profile relies on associational studies that suffer from inconsistency, incoherency, and fail to establish cause-and-effect relationships." As such, if it would have followed NAS' National Research Council recommendations on conducting systematic review and evidence integration, it would have reached different conclusions, the coalition says.
The coalition also raises the issue facing state regulators right now over whether to follow ATSDR or EPA's risk levels, with the group arguing that if ATSDR had collaborated with other agencies, it could have avoided the current situation where two different federal agencies are backing safe levels of PFAS that differ by an order of magnitude.
In a Sept. 25 blog by Union of Concerned Scientists, the group is skeptical of RSPC, saying that "so far, it seems to exist to encourage more relaxed regulation of PFAS chemicals -- a decision that is worth a lot of money to the organization's key members."
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/northeast-state-officials-eye-organized-approach-assessing-pfas-risks
-
Mich. Businesses Are Discharging PFAS Chemicals — Report
Dec 3, 2018 | AP (In E&E Greenwire)
Michigan businesses are discharging large amounts of chemical contaminants into the state's waterways every day, according to a newspaper investigation.
State officials began testing 93 treatment plants in February through an industrial pretreatment program to examine discharge being sent by commercial customers.
MLive.com obtained documents through the Freedom of Information Act that show that 16 of the plants received written orders over the past year to reduce industrial sources of perfluorinated chemicals, or PFAS, found in their discharges.
Exposure to PFAS has been linked in epidemiological studies to some cancers, thyroid disorders, low birth weights, elevated cholesterol and other chronic diseases.
At least 130 businesses have been considered as potential sources of PFAS. Many of the businesses releasing chemicals are plating companies that make chrome parts for the auto industry.
"We haven't used it in almost six years," Lacks Enterprises CEO Nick Hrynyk said of the chemicals. "But it's still there because it just clings."
The highest recorded discharge level was 240,000 parts per trillion of PFAS from Bronson Plating to the Bronson wastewater plant, which is about 25 miles south of Battle Creek. The plant discharges into Swan Creek, which connects to the St. Joseph River and Lake Michigan.
Environmental advocates say the numbers are concerning.
Levels that high "could take years to move through the system, and could cause significant public health impacts during that time," said James Clift, policy director of the Michigan Environmental Council.
Teresa Seidel, director of the Water Resources Division of the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality, said the state is working to stop contamination from both manufacturers and the treatment plants.
"We want to see reasonable progress, reasonable growth, reasonable improvement in the system," Seidel said. "We're seeing that from everyone we've asked to step forward and work on this."
Seidel said state officials hope the steps taken to reduce pollution don't come with "a whole lot of extra regulatory oversight." She said it's important that efforts don't put "Michigan at a disadvantage against other states for economic growth and development, and will still be protective of the environment."
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/12/03/stories/1060108499
-
EPA Expanding Validated Testing Methods For PFAS In Various Media
Dec 3, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Suzanne Yohannan
As public concerns about per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) mount, EPA has updated and expanded its validated test methods for identifying the chemicals in drinking water, a move that will help laboratories determine which PFAS compounds are present in drinking water.
At the same time, the agency is also developing new validated test methods for determining which PFAS are present in other media.
The agency announced Nov. 21 that it has updated its Method 537 -- calling it Method 537.1 -- which added four compounds to the methodology, including a test for the high-profile GenX, a newer perfluorinated compound that has drawn significant attention in North Carolina after being found in the Cape Fear River.
The addition of the GenX test appears to have been a priority for the agency.
Responding to a question on how the agency chose which PFAS compounds to add in the Method 537 update, Jody Shoemaker, a research chemist in EPA's Office of Research & Development (ORD) told a Nov. 28 webinar, "There was only one priority to include in the update to Method 537, and that was the GenX chemical."
GenX is one of thousands of PFAS that regulators are struggling to assess and regulate in the face of widespread contamination and exposure concerns. Many of the chemicals have been produced and used in large quantities in consumer and industrial products due to their non-stick and repellant qualities but they have been linked to various adverse health effects, including certain cancers, ulcerative colitis and thyroid disease.
Concern over GenX is especially acute in North Carolina where discovery of high levels of the substance in the Cape Fear River -- a drinking water source for four counties -- adjacent to a Chemours facility that produces the substance. As the findings have driven calls for protective risk levels, EPA recently released new draft toxicology assessments for GenX, and state officials and regulators recently agreed to settle litigation over the facility's releases.
"EPA's validated method, EPA Method 537.1, will ensure that both government and private laboratories can accurately and consistently measure 18 PFAS in their drinking water, which is a critical step for estimating people's exposure and potential risk to PFAS," EPA Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator for Science Jennifer Orme-Zavaleta said in a Nov. 21 press release from EPA. "This affirms EPA's commitment to providing ways for states and tribes to address PFAS in their communities."
But one PFAS expert cautions against states and municipalities measuring for PFAS only once if the tests show the chemicals fall below EPA's health advisory. The source explains that there is wide variability among individual sampling, and suggests water providers conduct regular monitoring of all resources to view how the levels fluctuate.
Identifying PFAS
Agency officials on the webinar also indicated EPA is developing several other test methods for identifying PFAS in various media. Among these is an effort by the Office of Water and ORD to develop a new method targeting shorter chain analytes, with plans to complete the method in June, said Christopher Impellitteri, an ORD researcher and EPA's co-lead on PFAS methods validation efforts, on the webinar. The method will address "select fluorotelomer sulfonates, perfluoroether compounds and PFBA," according to slides he presented on the webinar.
Also, for non-drinking water aqueous samples, EPA is working on validating Resource Conservation & Recovery Act (RCRA) SW-846 draft method 8327 for groundwater, surface water and wastewater effluent, he said. This method, which involves 24 PFAS, is focused on simplicity, robustness, and "maximizing throughput for production lab use," his slides say. "We hope this method will find a balance among sensitivity, ease of implementation and monitoring requirements for particular sites," he said. EPA's target date for releasing a draft version for public review is Jan. 2.
Further, EPA is working on developing RCRA SW-846 draft method 8328, a more complex method than method 8327 that will "afford options to meet [Defense Department (DOD)] requirements," his slides say. Due to its use of aqueous firefighting foam containing PFAS, DOD faces significant liability for cleanup at its fire training locations.
This will be for the same 24 analytes as method 8327, plus GenX, and will be for contaminants in surface water, groundwater, wastewater and solids such as soil, sediment and biosolids, the slides say. The method will "allow users to perform a deeper dive based on screening (e.g., 8327) results," they say. The timeline for this draft method is the spring.
Both draft methods 8327 and 8328 will use target quantitation limits of 10 nanogram/L, according to Impellitteri.
EPA is also working closely with ASTM International -- an international standard-setting organization -- to run an external, multi-laboratory validation of ASTM's D7968, a soil extraction/direct injection method for 24 PFAS analytes, he said. He noted though that this method would not supplant EPA's establishment of method 8328, but would be an additional option for field testing.
During the question-and-answer period following the ORD researchers' presentations, Impellitteri was asked about methods for testing PFAS in ambient air. He responded that research is ongoing at ORD on developing methods, but there are no plans yet for a formal validation procedure for those methods. "We are aware this is a high area of need and we will be addressing it," he said.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/epa-expanding-validated-testing-methods-pfas-various-media
-
Early Puberty Mystery Linked to Family Exposure to Household Chemicals
Dec 3, 2018 | Inverse
By Sarah Sloat
American girls are now going through puberty significantly earlier than in decades prior, a trend that’s been linked to physiological and psychological risks. The various factors thought to drive early puberty include obesity, toxic stress, and environmental elements. A landmark study published Monday looks at one particular type of environmental element — the chemicals in household items.
A long-running study on mothers and children published in Human Reproductiondetermined that the onset of female puberty is associated with exposure to chemicals like phthalates, parabens, and the antibacterial agent triclosan. These products in personal care products, like some brands of perfumes, cosmetics, and toothpaste. The same result was not found in populations of boys, whose timing of puberty was also examined in this study.
“We have known for the past 15 to 20 years that girls are entering puberty at an earlier age than they used to in the past,” lead author and University of California, Berkeley associate professor Kim Harley, Ph.D. tells Inverse. “We certainly know that obesity plays a role in that but now we also know that the hormone-disrupting chemicals that are in our homes and in our environment could be an additional factor that’s contributing to this.”
While it’s too soon to say conclusively whether these widely used chemicals are definitively causing early puberty, Harley believes that “we need to be paying attention to these chemicals and we are starting to have enough information about them to certainly be concerned.”
Discovering the cause of early puberty is important to scientists because the phenomenon is linked to a higher risk of developing depression, a greater risk for teen pregnancy, and an increased likelihood of developing diseases like breast cancer and heart disease.
The new study’s conclusions are based on data on pregnant women and the children they gave birth to who were enrolled in the Center for the Health Assessment of Mothers and Children of Salinas study between 1999 and 2000. When the women were at around 14 and 27 weeks’ gestation they gave the scientists consent to examine their urine samples for concentrations of phthalates, parabens, and phenols. After the women gave birth, the team collected urine samples and evaluated the pubertal development of the resulting 179 girls and 159 boys. Every nine months between the ages of 9 and 13, scientists checked in to see how puberty was affecting the children.
Overall, 90 percent of the urine samples showed concentrations of all the compounds they tested for. That was only detected in the 73 percent of the samples of pregnant mothers and 69 percent of samples taken from the nine-year old girls.
Mothers whose samples contained diethyl phthalate and triclosan had daughters that entered puberty earlier. For every doubling of triclosan in the mother’s urine, the timing of the girls’ first menstrual period shifted by just under a month and for every doubling in the samples for an indicator for phthalates, the development of girls’ pubic hair shifted by 1.3 months earlier. The urine samples taken from 9-year old girls revealed that, for every doubling in concentrations of parabens, the timing of the breast and pubic hair development, as well as their first period, happened one month earlier on average.
One reason these chemicals may affect puberty is because all of them are known endocrine disruptors. Previous studies on animals and humans have demonstrated that endocrine disruptors have the capacity to mimic, block, or otherwise interfere with the body’s hormones.
“They can bind to hormone receptors, such as estrogen receptors, and influence changes in our bodies,” explains Harley. “That’s what we are concerned about. We’ve known from animal studies that these chemicals can impact development in rats, particularly if the exposure is happening in utero, and now we’re starting to get research from human studies that they may also impact development.”
What’s difficult about sharing the results of this study, says Harley, is that for now all they can say is that these are “chemicals of concern.” The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention readily acknowledges that there’s widespread exposure to phthalates and parabens, with the majority of Americans who are tested containing evidence of these chemicals in their urine. However, the agency states that finding a measurable amount of these chemicals does “not imply that they cause an adverse health effect.”
Harley hopes that regulators look at studies like hers when they move forward in conducting policy decisions and regulations. As of now, she explains, there’s no established benchmark level that states when it’s no longer safe to be exposed to these chemicals. It’s not illegal to have them in personal care products because the science isn’t strong enough to say that they absolutely cause adverse health effects. They are controversial chemicals, and about 70 percent of Americans have them inside their bodies.
“These chemicals are basically ubiquitous,” says Harley. “The regulation isn’t really there and the science is still equivocal. But for people who are concerned, there are things you can do.”
The advice is simple: Reduce exposure to chemicals of concern by changing the personal care products that you use and by purchasing products that don’t contain them. Scientists can’t say for sure what will change for you if you do, but doing so certainly can’t hurt.
https://www.inverse.com/article/51055-total-body-scanner-human-body-video
-
Bill Would Limit Science Michigan Uses to Regulate Toxic Cleanups
Dec 4, 2018 | MLive
By Garret Ellison
New legislation has sprouted in lame duck session that public health advocates say would lock Michigan environmental regulators into using potentially outdated science when deciding how much cleanup a toxic contamination site requires.
The Senate Natural Resources Committee is scheduled to hear SB 1244 this week during meetings on Tuesday and Wednesday. Among other things, it would curb the state’s ability to consider scientific studies on the health impacts of toxic chemical exposure beyond those used by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Environmental policy experts call the bill an end-run around a years-long process underway at the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality to update the safety thresholds known as criteria values that regulators use to oversee cleanup at pollution sites.
The bill also appears to incorporate elements of stalled legislation meant to block Michigan from passing regulations more stringent than baseline federal standards.
Sen. Jim Stamas, R-Midland, introduced the bill Nov. 29.
It joins other lame duck bills either passed by or moving through the committee, chaired by Sen. Tom Casperson, R-Escanaba, which are intended to scale-back state or local environmental regulations related to, among other things, tree trimming and wetlands protection.
Stamas said the legislation is intended to address sticking points between the DEQ and private industry in a protracted effort to update Michigan pollution cleanup standards under Part 201 of the state’s Natural Resources and Environmental Protection Act.
The state has, for years, been going through more than 300 toxic chemicals to update cleanup standards based on advancements in scientific understanding of the risk posed by exposure. The standards are a controlling factor in toxic cleanups that, among other things, dictate which sites are considered contaminated, how polluters tackle a cleanup, and how much work they end up doing.
The update was expected to wrap up this year, but likely will not.
Business groups like the Michigan Chemistry Council (MCC), one of many “stakeholders” in the cleanup criteria updates, say the lengthy process has “left many parties uncertain as to the requirements and application of the generic cleanup criteria.”
“Over the past decade, a number of improvements to the Part 201 program have enabled increased remediation activity and growing success in moving forward with previously-contaminated sites,” said John Dulmes, director of the MCC, which “supports SB 1244 as a means of ensuring that this important work continues.”
But environmental and public health advocates are worries that, as written, the bill forces the DEQ to rely only on toxicity data from the EPA Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) database when setting cleanup standards under Part 201.
That’s problematic because, according to James Clift, policy director at the Michigan Environmental Council who served on a DEQ advisory group that helped draft updated criteria, “basically, this provision would tie Michigan’s hands and force DEQ to use old science when determining whether or not a standard was protective of human health.”
Clift said the IRIS database has suffered from a similar problem as the DEQ’s Part 201 criteria — it hasn’t been continually updated to reflect newer toxicity studies for older, more well-known chemicals, and it doesn’t have toxicity values for some emerging contaminants like per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS.
Once a contaminant has been entered into the IRIS database, “sometimes they don’t get back to it for decades,” he said. “There’s many instances in those updates where there’s an IRIS number today, but the DEQ used a more recent study or science to update its numbers."
The database does not have toxicity values for PFOS or PFOA, two individual PFAS compounds for which the state developed its own groundwater criteria in January.
The DEQ used that enforceable standard to sue Wolverine World Wide in federal court. The state and two local townships are negotiating with the shoemaker — which polluted the groundwater in northern Kent County with PFAS by dumping tannery waste into unlined landfills and gravel pits — to pay for extending municipal water to contaminated areas.
Legislation critics worry the bill would nullify those state-specific standards, leaving nothing in place until the DEQ promulgated new rules — an already lengthy process made more complex by a pair of new governor-appointed review panels with the power to veto proposed DEQ rules and overturn permitting decisions.
The DEQ declined to comment on the bill.
Stamas, reached by phone Monday, said the legislation includes a process that would allow the DEQ to work with emerging contaminants not within the IRIS database, but declined to elaborate. “I’m not going to get into the whole bill,” he said. The bill does include language directing the state to consider final minimum risk levels from the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) in the absence of values in the IRIS database.
Stamas called the IRIS database the “gold standard.”
When asked why he introduced it in lame duck session, Stamas said he’s been working on the bill for more than a year and “this is when I was able to get consensus on the largest part of it.”
Stamas said he’s worked with “a lot of stakeholders” in drafting the bill, naming specifically the Legislative Service Bureau and Warner Norcross & Judd attorney Troy Cumings. The law firm represents Wolverine World Wide and Cumings lobbies for the company.
Stamas said he’s open “to work with all stakeholders to improve the legislation.”
“I think we’ve gone too long without updating 201,” he said. “I hope that by addressing key issues here we can finally bring strong policies to protect our women, children and the residents of Michigan in the future.”
https://www.mlive.com/news/2018/12/bill-would-limit-science-michigan-uses-to-regulate-toxic-cleanups.html
-
EU Chemicals Laws Poses Challenges to U.S. Military Supply Chain
Dec 4, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Adam Allington
The Pentagon is constantly working to secure access to chemicals critical to military operations in the European Union, which restricts some substances commonly used to control corrosion and rust on aircraft, tanks, and ships.
“The basic problem with all of these anti-corrosive chemicals is that in order to protect things, they have to be chemically active, which means they’re toxic,” said Keith Legg, chief technology officer for Corrdesa LLC, a materials engineering consultancy that advises the department.
The subject was raised at a Nov. 29 symposium organized by the Defense Department’s environmental research wing, the Strategic Environmental Research and Development Program (SERDP).
High on SERDP’s list of concerns is the EU’s all-encompassing chemicals law, known as REACH (Regulation No. 1907/2006 on the registration, evaluation, and authorization of chemicals).
A number of chromate compounds—widely used in chrome-plating—or anti-corrosive paints are already on the REACH list of substances of very high concern, classifying them as carcinogenic, Legg told Bloomberg Environment. More than a dozen of these chromate chemicals have phaseout dates that have already passed, or will pass in 2019.
“There are substitute chemicals for these chromate compounds, but the substitutes don’t work the same way, and we can’t be sure they’ll work in every application,” Legg added.
Sustaining Mission-Critical SystemsThe U.S. has about 60,000 troops in Europe stationed at some 30 bases across the continent.
Chemical restrictions under REACH can hamper Pentagon operations in Europe by making it more difficult to obtain locally, or to import commercially, the chemicals and treatments used for some military operations or equipment.
If a chemical is classified as a substance of very high concern, it can still be authorized for restricted use under REACH’s Annex 14. But that only allows for limited uses over a short period of time.
“The [very high concern] list has become a touch point for other regulations and stakeholders,” said Cheri Kedrowski, director of global compliance and regulatory affairs at 3M Co., which provides a range of logistical support applications for the military.
Kedrowski said once a chemical is placed on the candidate list or formalized in Annex 14, it raises red flags. This in turn triggers diverse groups including the Dow Jones Sustainability Index, Walmart Inc., and other organizations that list problematic chemicals and suggests the compound may be on its way out.
“The global supply chain is very complex,” she said, “and the detection limits keep getting lower and lower, and hazard and risks assessments keep changing based on new science.”
In addition to the chromates currently used on metal alloys and aircraft skins, the Defense Department also has raised concerns that other Annex 14 compounds used in things such as magnesium gearboxes, primers, sealants, corrosion-resistant fasteners, and electrical connectors might soon become unavailable from local EU sources, or harder to import.
Hard to Find Replacements
The authorizations available under REACH grant companies several years—typically five—to come up with alternatives. But defense contractors say that’s not enough time to go through the lengthy procurement and testing process necessary to meet Defense Department technical specifications.
“We can’t just chop and change one compound for another,” said Will Martin, a product manager for restricted substances at Granta, a U.K.-based materials intelligence company.
Martin told Bloomberg Environment that developing the infrastructure to apply a new aerospace coating can take years.
“REACH generates a lot of business risk, that’s how we see it,” he said. “Even If you have a successful authorization, that basically locks you into a supply chain, and affects your ability to be resilient.”
Military contractors say the typical time frame for approving a product under military specifications is a decade or more.
“Ten years sounds like a long time, but it’s not really that much time,” said Andrew Rak, project manager at Noblis, a Virginia-based nonprofit contracted by the Pentagon to provide studies and analyses.
“The first year is when you request funds, by year three maybe you start doing research, and then it takes about four years to do the research,” said Rak, “And maybe after all that, the compound fails testing and you start over.”
Military SalesEuropean customers are already requiring various levels of REACH‐compliance on imported systems from the U.S., including mandating that REACH‐compliant chemicals are used for maintaining military systems.
Corrdesa’s Legg says the requirements necessary for developing REACH-compliant systems mandate additional testing and expense, and increase the risk associated with sales of U.S. equipment to EU military users.
“The F-35 Joint Strike Fighter is a perfect example” of how new military systems need to be REACH-compliant he said.
“Half of the parts are made and assembled in Europe,” he said. “So if the Europeans can’t get ahold of those chemicals, then they can’t make it.”
The aircraft has already eliminated materials classified as substances of very high concern, including chromated primers, hard chrome plate, and cadmium, as well as reformulations of various sealants and adhesives, Legg said.https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/eu-chemicals-laws-poses-challenges-to-us-military-supply-chain
-
Industry Pushes Commission to Extend CLP Poison Centre Deadline
Dec 4, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Clelia Oziel
Several trade bodies have written to European Commission vice president Jyrki Katainen calling for the EU executive to postpone the deadline for harmonised information relating to emergency health response (poison centres).
CLP Annex VIII requires companies placing hazardous mixtures on the EU market to provide member state authorities with certain information about them. The first deadline of 1 January 2020 is for substances placed on the market specifically for consumer use.
In their letter, dated 29 November, they cite "a clear lack of preparedness or legal certainty in several key areas".
It follows a move by soaps and detergents trade body Aise, which in October asked members of the Competent Authorities for REACH and CLP (Caracal) to consider postponing the first deadline by a year.
The trade bodies’ November letter does not suggest a new deadline, but asks the Commission to organise a "swift" meeting to assess how their proposal should be progressed.
A delay, the letter said, will not have significant negative effects "since national poison centres will continue to operate according to the already existing national schemes". It highlights lack of preparedness and legal certainty concerning:duty holders' future responsibilities;potential changes to legal requirements leading to updates of the Regulation; andguidance and IT tools being unready.
Aise has previously asked for the deadline for professional use mixtures to be pushed back by one year to 1 January 2022.
The Commission said it is not considering a postponement of the first deadline "for the time being".
A number of processes are still ongoing, in particular on the guidance document and the development of the IT tools, a spokesperson told Chemical Watch. "We are convinced that these will be finalised in time before the first application deadline."
The nine signatories to the letter are:Aise;Cembureau – European Cement Association;Eurogypsum;European Federation of Concrete Admixtures Associations;European Federation for Construction Chemicals;European Mortar Industry Organisation;European Ready Mixed Concrete Organisation;Feica – the association of the European Adhesive and Sealant Industry; andFuels Europe.Caracal support
Other industry associations demanded a postponement at the 22 November Caracal meeting, while several member states added their support, the letter to the Commission said.
In a separate submission to the recent meeting, Cefic reiterated its "deep concerns" over the Annex VII requirements due to the "very limited room for action, the uncertainty and the tight time schedule".
It asked the Commission to take "necessary actions" to guarantee obligations can be met. If not, it should consider "a reappraisal of the current deadline to allow the ongoing activities to be completed and analysed properly," it said.
Additionally, Cefic underlined data confidentiality as a key problem. The current timelines may not allow member state authorities to implement data protection standards – a major issue for downstream users whose formulations "absolutely demand protection", it said.
Meanwhile, in its submission to Caracal, the Downstream Users of Chemicals Coordination Group (Ducc) invited the Commission to "reflect seriously" on the situation and commit to taking "whatever action is necessary".
https://chemicalwatch.com/72506/industry-pushes-commission-to-extend-clp-poison-centre-deadline
-
Revamped Carbon Rule for New Power Plants Could Come Soon
Dec 4, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Niina Heikkinen
EPA could soon release a new rule to cut greenhouse gas emissions from new and modified power plants.
The Trump administration first announced its intention to review the Obama administration's New Source Performance Standards for power plants in April 2017, but little news of proposed changes has emerged since.
Like the Trump EPA's proposed replacement for the Clean Power Plan, which is aimed at reducing the carbon footprints of existing power plants, the Obama-era rule relied on cutting carbon emissions through power plant efficiency improvements.
An announcement on proposed changes is overdue. EPA stated in the White House's latest deregulatory agenda that it would release a notice of proposed rulemaking last month.
Observers expect the agency will look to eliminate the rule's recommended use of carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology as a way for new power plants to cut emissions.
Critics of CCS have argued that the controversial technology for limiting carbon emissions has not been sufficiently commercially demonstrated and should not be included in rulemaking.
But Joseph Goffman, a former EPA official under the Obama administration, noted that under the Clean Air Act, the standard is not whether technology has been tested commercially but rather whether it has been "adequately demonstrated."
"That distinction is important," Goffman said.
He added that, in the past, the agency had typically used NSPS to identify the most advanced demonstrated technology, determine whether that technology was available and then require sources to adopt it.
If EPA does ditch the use of CCS, it would be doing it after four years of an "exhaustive rulemaking process," Goffman added.
"There is a tremendously deep record of data and analysis supporting where the agency landed in 2015, which was the basis for the standard on the application of CCS," Goffman said.
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2018/12/04/stories/1060108651
-
Trump-Xi Truce May Not Be Enough to Ease U.S. LNG Export Concern
Dec 3, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rachel Adams-Heard and Naureen S. Malik
A trade truce between Washington and Beijing may give U.S. natural gas cargoes a temporary boost, but new export projects that rely on Chinese investment will probably remain on hold until a final deal is reached.
President Donald Trump and his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping jolted global markets over the weekend when the leaders agreed to halt any new tariffs for 90 days. China will buy “very substantial” amounts of American energy products, although the countries haven’t agreed on a number, according to a White House statement.
While the agreement assuaged concern that tariffs on U.S. liquefied natural gas would be hiked to 25 percent from 10 percent next year, uncertainty still exists about energy’s longer-term role in the trade conflict between the world’s two largest economies. That’s particularly problematic for the U.S. LNG industry, which depends on 15- to 20-year contracts to help finance massive export facilities that cool natural gas to a liquid.
“The temporary pause is a positive step because it lowers the temperature a bit on these trade negotiations, but there still needs to be a permanent trade deal so that LNG buyers are certain of the price they will pay prior to entering into these long-term agreements,” said John McCarrick, former deputy assistant secretary of state for energy resources in the Trump administration.
“Without certainty on price, LNG deals between U.S. companies and China are not likely to be consummated,” he said.
Short-Term DevelopmentsUntil a long-term trade agreement is reached, it’s likely that any ramp-up of Chinese energy imports will come in the form of spot purchases rather than long-term contracts, said Tim Boersma, director of global natural gas markets at Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy.
The weekend’s trade talks don’t necessarily point to the current 10 percent tariff on LNG being scrapped, “but it is a step in a more positive direction that should be beneficial,” said Ben Nolan, an analyst with Stifel Nicolaus & Co. in Chicago.
Shares of U.S. LNG export pioneer Cheniere Energy Inc. rose as much as 8.4 percent, the most intraday since May 2016.
Cheniere didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment. The company in February signed the first, and so far only, long-term U.S. LNG export deal with China. NextDecade Corp., which is trying to finance an LNG export terminal in Texas, said in a statement that it was “pleased with the progress that our governments appear to be making toward an agreement.”
But for China to sign more agreements that support the long list of U.S. export projects vying for a spot in the global market, buyers will need more certainty, said David Goldwyn, an energy consultant and former U.S. State Department special envoy under the Obama administration.
“Personally, I think it’s unlikely we’re going to see a comprehensive trade agreement with China in this administration,” Goldwyn said. “But I think a partial agreement is possible, and basically protecting energy trade or walling energy trade off from tariffs would be a win-win for both sides.”
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/trump-xi-truce-may-not-be-enough-to-ease-us-lng-export-concern
-
Big Fracking Profits at $50 a Barrel? Don’t Bet on It
Dec 4, 2018 | The Wall Street Journal
By Bradley Olson and Rebecca Elliott
The rapid decline of U.S. oil prices will test the claim of fracking companies that they can now prosper at $50 a barrel or less, a price level they have found challenging in the past.
For years, the companies behind the U.S. oil and gas boom, including Noble Energy Inc.NBL 5.31% and Whiting Petroleum Corp. WLL 6.31% , have promised shareholders that they have thousands of prospective wells that they can drill profitably even at $40 a barrel. Some have even said they can generate returns on investment of 30%.
But most shale drillers haven’t made much, if any, money at those prices. From 2012 to 2017, the 30 biggest shale producers lost more than $50 billion. Last year, when oil prices averaged about $50 a barrel, the group as a whole was barely in the black, with profits of about $1.7 billion, or roughly 1.3% of revenue, according to FactSet.
The disconnect between the figures cited by companies and their corporate returns lies in the widespread use of a metric called a break-even, often defined as the selling price frackers say they need to generate a small profit on individual wells or projects. While the figure can be quite low for some companies in certain hot spots, it can be a misleading measure of their overall profitability in periods of lower prices.
For one, break-evens generally exclude such key costs as land, overhead and even at times transportation. Companies also frequently tout the low break-even price point of a portion of their holdings, without citing the higher price for crude needed to profitably exploit the rest, or adjusting for the inflated cost for drilling contractors and other services that come with rising oil prices.
Estimates by consulting firm R.S. Energy Group peg break-evens excluding land costs and overhead at about $37 for the Permian Basin of West Texas and New Mexico, $42 for the Eagle Ford in South Texas and $47 for the Bakken in North Dakota.
But companies require much higher oil prices in order to come out ahead if more of those necessary expenses are taken into account, the consulting firm’s data show. All-inclusive break-evens are about $51 in the Permian, $57 in the Eagle Ford and $64 in the Bakken, according to R.S. Energy.
U.S. oil prices traded below $50 last week and closed Monday at $52.95.
Chris Duncan, an energy analyst at Brandes Investment Partners who helps manage $28 billion in diversified assets, said he usually ignores companies’ claims about the price at which their wells break even.
“You always scratch your head as to how they can have these well economics that can have double-digit returns on investment, but it never flows through to the total company returns,” he said.
Historically, the break-even number is rooted in an industry benchmark used to help executives decide whether to drill a well. Given that funds may already have been invested in land, infrastructure or overhead, it helps companies evaluate what price is needed for a new well to make economic sense.
After oil prices crashed earlier this decade, shale companies often touted the figure to help explain why they continued drilling even when prices had fallen so much. Generally, because of sunk costs, drilling additional wells made sense. But many of the companies curtailed drilling to their choicest acreage, which caused the break-even figures to fall significantly in 2016, and helped create the impression that shale companies could generate overall profits even at lower prices.
“There was a retreat to sweet spots,” said Robert Kleinberg, a senior research scholar at Columbia University’s Center on Global Energy Policy. “They went to the best areas, with the best crews and used the best equipment because they were under pressure to keep the lights on.”
Still, the perception that break-even prices reflect profitability levels for shale drillers has lingered—and now many have to contend with higher logistics costs and other challenges that have made it more expensive for them to operate in the black as many companies ramp up production at once.
Companies certainly have gotten better at producing at lower prices. In 2015, when crude averaged about $49 a barrel, the 30 biggest shale producers lost more than $80 billion.
Yet even as their overall operations have improved, many have struggled to deliver consistent profits across the board.
Noble Energy Chief Executive David Stover said last year that at $40 oil and $2 natural gas, the company would break even on more than 70% of its domestic inventory, or thousands of well locations. Still, the company wasn’t profitable overall in 2017, losing more than $1 billion, due in part to a loss on the sale of assets in the Marcellus Shale drilling region in the Eastern U.S.
Noble, which has turned a $758 million profit with higher prices this year, noted that it would have made money absent the one-time charge related to its Marcellus sale.
Brad McMillan, chief investment officer for brokerage Commonwealth Financial Network, said he treats companies’ break-even claims with a grain of salt.
“We look to history,” Mr. McMillan said. “What did you do the last time prices were at this level? I think that’s the best indicator.”
https://www.wsj.com/articles/big-fracking-profits-at-50-a-barrel-dont-bet-on-it-1543919401
-
LNG Tanker Arrives at Cheniere Energy's Corpus Christi Plant
Dec 3, 2018 | Houston Chronicle
By Sergio Chapa
A liquefied natural gas tanker has arrived at Cheniere Energy's LNG export terminal in Ingleside, signaling that the facility may soon be ready to make its first shipment.
The Liberian-flagged LNG tanker named Maria Energy arrived at the company's Port of Corpus Christi facility over the weekend.
Cheniere started production in mid-November at one of the three units planned for the $15 billion facility but has yet to make any shipments. The Houston-based company plans to use the terminal to take natural gas, liquefy it and ship it to customers around the globe.
An LNG tanker docked at the terminal during the facility's Nov. 15 grand opening but left days later without any cargo.
Cheniere expects to put a production unit named Train 1 into commercial service during the first quarter of 2019 but is expected to make its first physical shipment before then.
Once in operation, Cheniere's Corpus Christi facility will be the first major LNG export terminal in Texas and the third to enter service in the lower 48 states since the beginning of the shale revolution.
Cheniere officials declined to comment about the arrival of the Maria Express but stated that the company hopes to commission its first cargo in Corpus Christi soon.
https://www.chron.com/business/article/LNG-tanker-arrives-at-Cheniere-Energy-s-Corpus-13440629.php
-
Lawmakers Push Late Flurry of Bills
Dec 4, 2018 | E&E Daily
By Courtney Columbus
Lawmakers introduced a flurry of bills on energy and natural resources policy last week, a way for members to push policy priorities ahead of the new Congress.
S. 3676 by Colorado Sens. Cory Gardner (R) and Michael Bennet (D) would authorize federal funding for states' energy security plans.
Another new bill, S. 3677, by the same lawmakers would authorize the Department of Energy to assist electric utilities with physical and cybersecurity.
"Colorado and states across the country need to secure our energy grids and be better prepared against cyber-attacks that threaten our critical infrastructure," Gardner said in a statement.
Other new bills would address hydraulic fracturing on federal lands and the extension of a decade-old program aimed at preventing terrorism at high-risk chemical facilities. They include:
H.R. 7211, from Rep. Darren Soto (D-Fla.), to authorize the secretary of the Interior to regulate fracking on federal lands.
H.R. 7188, from Rep. John Ratcliffe (R-Texas), along with several other lawmakers, to extend the Department of Homeland Security's Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards program by two years. The program is currently set to expire in January.
H.R. 7194, from Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler (R-Wash.), along with Rep. Bob Gibbs (R-Ohio), to repeal the Waters of the United States rule finalized in 2015 and amend the definition of navigable waters under the Clean Water Act.
H.R. 7197, from Rep. Kathleen Rice (D-N.Y.), to authorize the secretary of Energy to award grants for heating and cooling systems based on renewable energy to local educational agencies for use in schools.
H.R. 7200, from Rep. Austin Scott (R-Ga.), to extend indemnity for wildfires and hurricanes.
H.R. 7202, from Rep. Peter Welch (D-Vt.), along with Rep. Mike Simpson (R-Idaho), to require a study to estimate the amount of nonhighway recreational fuel taxes paid to the secretary of the Treasury. It would also require subsequent studies at least once every five years.
With only weeks left in the current Congress and other priorities crowding the calendar, most new bills will have to be reintroduced next year.
https://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2018/12/04/stories/1060108643
-
Permian Natural Gas Constraints Unlikely to Slow Oil Momentum, Says Raymond James
Dec 3, 2018 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Carolyn Davis
Warning lights were going off in the Permian Basin two years ago that a dearth of natural gas infrastructure would surpass production, but the issues can be resolved and overall not pressure oil activity, Raymond James & Associates Inc. said Monday.
The Permian remains paramount as the “primary discussion point” for U.S. and global energy markets, analysts led by J.R. Weston and Justin Jenkins wrote in this week’s Energy Stat.
Two years ago, the management team at Enterprise Product Partners LP had warned gas production appeared headed for a train wreck with takeaway. Those constraints reached a pressure point last month, with Waha hub gas prices driving a “massive $4.00 differential to Henry Hub,” analysts said.
“As the Permian crude oil pipeline build-out has been ‘pulled forward,’ associated gas production is also arriving sooner rather than later...likely the impetus for the recent decline in Permian gas prices.”
From 2017-2020, the Raymond James team is forecasting as much as 6 Bcf/d of Permian gas growth, nearly doubling output in three years. That means gas pricing likely will stay longer for longer, a view of many analysts.
Jenkins and Weston said Permian gas takeaway capacity is not constrained in the traditional sense, as nominal pipeline takeaway exceeds production. They estimated total takeaway to be about 12 Bcf/d versus production of 9 Bcf/d year-to-date. However, that includes takeaway to “suboptimal” markets, including Mexico.
There’s enough Permian-to-Mexico takeaway, but utilization rates are low, while takeaway is short to evacuate volumes to western and northern markets.
Moving gas to western markets, and eventually to California, is competing with renewables. Gas moving north competes with Rockies/Midcontinent supply. Neither of those outlets are “tremendous options” for Permian exploration and production (E&P) companies, Jenkins and Weston said.
“Putting it simply, because many of these outlets lead to suboptimal gas markets, this means these pipes don't help regional pricing all that much...Our best guess is that Waha prices ‘zipper’ modestly up and right back down with each brownfield pipeline expansion coming online (followed by production gains) in 2018-19.” Smaller capacity additions should provide a bridge until the 2 Bcf/d Gulf Coast Express comes online late next year, followed by other big pipelines into 2020 and beyond.
“South of the border, trends are certainly positive, but slow moving relative to Permian supply growth,” said the Raymond James team. Mexico produces about half of the gas that it consumes, a gap that is expected to increase over time.
In addition, the inauguration on Saturday of Mexico's new president, Andrés Manuel Lopez Obrador, “is likely to reduce foreign investment in the country’s E&P industry,” which could mean more U.S. imports.
“Permian ethane recovery could also be a wildcard,” according to Jenkins and Weston. “As Gulf Coast ethane cracking demand and U.S. ethane export demand ramp up, the Permian is one of the likely contributors to meet the corresponding ethane supply growth needs. In other words, ‘recovering’ ethane in the Permian should increasingly make sense.”
Most Permian ethane already is recovered from the gas stream, but it provides an opportunity to reduce gas pipeline volumes.
Overall, however, the Permian gas constraints should have no impact on the basin’s massive oil production, analysts said. “Permian gas, while constrained, will be a non-event from a broader industry perspective due to several ‘workarounds.’”
First, gas flaring could be supplemented by waivers for E&Ps, resulting in 2-3 Bcf/d by the end of this year, if needed, they noted. Texas regulators are expected to be flexible when it comes to enforcing compliance with the state’s anti-flaring regulations.
If flaring is unavoidable, the basin’s liquids-weighted output economics still should work, even if lower West Texas Intermediate and higher Midland-Cushing differentials play a role in the equation.
The Permian has a “sizeable inventory” of legacy gas wells, which could be shut in before the liquids-rich production is stopped, Jenkins and Weston said.
“Simply put, we feel comfortable stating that there will be no slowdown of Permian crude oil production due to Permian gas takeaway issues.”
https://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/116654-permian-natural-gas-constraints-unlikely-to-slow-oil-momentum-says-raymond-james
-
California Fires Spewed Nearly 1 Million Cars’ Worth of Greenhouse Gases
Dec 3, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Emily C. Dooley
Thick air pollution from California’s November wildfires blackened skies across the West, but the fires also spewed invisible greenhouse gases into the atmosphere equal to those created from 1 million cars using state roads for a year, according to federal and state statistics.
The Camp Fire—the deadliest and most destructive fire in California history—released an estimated 4.3 million metric tons of carbon dioxide alone as it burned through the town of Paradise and surrounding areas, according to preliminary estimates from the U.S. Forest Service. (The state’s preliminary estimates were slightly different, putting carbon dioxide emissions from the Camp fire at 3.63 million metric tons.)
Airborne greenhouse gas emissions from all three major California fires that burned in November are estimated at 5.74 million metric tons, the California Air Resources Board said.
But getting precise numbers is complicated by the need for better data on the areas being burned, and the state often relies on outdated information about vegetation, nearby buildings, and other factors. It’s an area where forecasters are trying to improve.
“The wildfires—that’s definitely thrown a monkey wrench into some of our work,” said John Balmes, a professor of medicine at University of California, San Francisco, and a member of the California Air Resources Board, which has a dual role to improve air quality and fight climate change.
“Every one of these fires sets us back in terms of what we’re trying to do,” he said.Quantifying Fire Pollution
While the Camp Fire that leveled Paradise burned through 153,000 acres, destroyed more than 19,000 structures, and killed 88 people, it was hardly the largest to hit the Golden State this year.
As the state faces longer fire seasons brought on by climate change, high fuel loads, and invasive species, no surefire method exists to quantify what gets spewed into the air.
And it’s not just a California problem.
“It can affect communities in other parts of the state, even across the country depending on the amount of emissions and how the wind disperses these emissions,” said Sim Larkin, a climate scientist with the Forest Service and team leader of the AirFire Team at the service’s Pacific Wildland Fire Sciences Laboratory.
When greenhouse gas emissions and other types of pollution from wildfires are calculated, the numbers are rough estimates based on several variables.
Estimating EmissionsThe Forest Service’s AirFire team uses a program called BlueSky to estimate emissions and fuel loads based on location, type of fire, moisture levels, size, and vegetation, Larkin told Bloomberg Environment.
But data such as types of tree or shrubs is from 2014 and selected from a menu based on latitude and longitude, not recent on-the-ground observations. Satellites can add some details but only down to the tree canopy, not structures or growth on the ground. After fires, staff can go out and get more specific information but it’s a matter of time, money, and effort, he said.
“It’s a tough problem,” Larkin said. “It’s one where we’re just beginning to collect all the data we need.”
In 2017, wildfires burned 1.4 million acres, releasing an estimated 37.1 million metric tons of carbon dioxide emissions into the air, CARB data show. Those figures are more than double the carbon dioxide emissions from 2016, according to state figures.
But those estimates come with an uncertainty factor of between 50 and 200 percent, said David Edwards, a manager in CARB’s Air Quality Planning and Science Division. “It’s a highly uncertain estimate at this point,” Edwards told Bloomberg Environment.
CARB used details from CalFire on fire footprints, as well as U.S. Forest Service data from 2014 so vegetation information, recent fires, and other landscape details are not always current, Edwards said.
“We’re looking at ways to improve our technical capabilities on that, particularly with the increase in wildfires and how many we’ve been having,” Edwards said.
Forest ManagementIn September, Gov. Jerry Brown (D) signed into law a wide-ranging bill (SB 901) to improve wildfire response and recovery and establish ways to reduce fuels and prevent fires. Among the requirements is for CARB to calculate a baseline of wildfire greenhouse gas emissions prior to modern fire suppression efforts. The report is due by the end of 2020 and must be updated every five years to include emissions related to wildfire and forest management efforts.
“Unless the state significantly improves forest management and reduces the risk and intensity of wildfires, wildfire emissions will continue to erode the greenhouse gas emission reductions achieved from regulatory programs,” the bill said.
What’s more, emissions can continue long after a fire as greenhouse gases from dead and dying vegetation can be released for a decade or longer, according to the California Forest Carbon Plan, released in May.
The plan estimated that by 2100, wildfire emissions like carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, particulates, and black carbon are projected to increase by 19 to 101 percent if the region experiences medium to high temperatures.
The largest increases were predicted in Northern California, and if current forest management and greenhouse gas emissions continue “there will be a significant increase in wildfire smoke in the air at the worst times (i.e., late summer when air quality problems are already most severe),” the report said.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/california-fires-spewed-nearly-1-million-cars-worth-of-greenhouse-gases
-
Shell to Set Emissions Targets Tied to Executive Pay
Dec 3, 2018 | Bloomberg (In E&E Greenwire)
By Kelly Gilblom
Royal Dutch Shell PLC's decision to give more details on its emission-reduction plans sheds light on private discussions between the oil major and its shareholders, which led to a change in stance following years of resistance.
The capitulation will see the Anglo-Dutch company set carbon-output targets annually for the following three or five years as it works to halve its "net carbon footprint" by 2050. The goals will be tied to executive pay.
Shell will start setting targets in 2020, it said in a statement that — unusually — was co-signed by some of its largest investors. Most conversations about climate between oil majors and shareholders are held behind closed doors, making it hard for outsiders to know if they're adequately tackling the issue.
"This joint statement is the first of its kind," said Adam Matthews, director of ethics and engagement for the Church of England Pensions Board, which helped lead shareholder talks with Shell. It "gives us the confidence that Shell is committed to this path."
The oil company also said it will review its work with trade associations to ensure it's not financially supporting groups that could undermine its climate goals. It will publish the results of that review in the first quarter.
Shell last year announced long-term targets for reducing its net carbon footprint, which includes emissions from its oil and gas extraction as well as from the subsequent burning of the fuels by customers. Some competitors are also cutting their footprint, but mostly limit that work to their own operations.
In the past, Shell Chief Executive Officer Ben van Beurden has resisted calls for more detail on carbon-reduction plans, saying they can be fodder for lawsuits. For three years in a row, managers have successfully urged shareholders to reject resolutions from an investor group called Follow This, which wants the company to show clearly how it will align itself with the Paris climate accord.
The Church of England supported Follow This's filing earlier this year, which was voted down by 95 percent of Shell stockholders. That seemed like a definitive defeat, but Matthews said the Church was still intensely engaging the company behind the scenes. Over the past few months, those discussions crystallized into the request to set short-term climate targets.
In addition to the Church of England, Robeco, the Universities Superannuation Scheme and the Environment Agency Pension Fund have been among the most active participants in those talks, according to Matthews. Today's announcement was also co-signed by other members of an investor initiative called Climate 100+, including insurer Legal & General Group PLC, which owns 1.8 percent of Shell's B shares, and UBS Group AG.
"We hope that other companies will follow Shell," Corien Wortmann-Kool, chair of pension fund ABP, said in a statement. "That Shell has now embedded its ambition in its remuneration policy offers confidence."
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/12/03/stories/1060108487
-
Ocasio-Cortez: Fighting Climate Change Will Be ‘the Civil Rights Movement of Our Generation’
Dec 3, 2018 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Miranda Green
Speaking at a televised town-hall Monday, Rep.-elect Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said that the government’s next steps towards fighting climate change need to be as momentous as the Civil Rights movement or NASA's push to put a man on the moon.
“This is going to be the Great Society, the Moon Shot, the Civil Rights Movement of our generation. That is the scale of the ambition that this movement is going to require,” the New York Democrat said.ADVERTISEMENT
Sitting on a panel during the "Climate Change Town Hall" organized by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Ocasio-Cortez challenged the Trump administration's scaled-back approach to fighting global warming and called for more aggression from Congress once she joins the House in January.
“It’s unsurprising that the response to any bold proposal that we have is to incite fear. To incite fear of loss, to incite fear of others. To incite fear of our future. But the only way we are going to get out of this situation is to be courageous,” she said of the White House.
The comments from the bold progressive, who created shock waves over the summer with her primary win over veteran Rep. Joe Crowley (D-N.Y.), echo an initiative she’s been pushing since the midterm elections.
The Green New Deal is an idea Ocasio-Cortez first introduced during a sit down at Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi’s (D-Calif.) congressional office in late November. It has since been championed by 15 Democratic House lawmakers as a way to create a select committee to focus on transitioning the country towards 100 percent renewable energy.
Sanders, who has been a vocal supporter of the effort, highlighted the need for multiple venues of climate action during his town hall. As evidence for the need for swift action, Sanders pointed to recently released climate reports from the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change as well as one from the United States. Both warn of the irreversible effects of warming temperatures.
“We are dealing with what the scientific community tells us is the great crisis facing our planet and facing humanity, and that is climate change,” Sanders said.
“All of these reports make a very simple and profound point. And that is, time is late and as a planet that means countries all over the world, not just the U.S and Russia, are going to have to stand up and take on the fossil fuel industry...This is a crisis situation, it is unprecedented and we’ve got to act in an unprecedented away.”
Sanders blasted many of his colleagues, including some Democrats, who take money from the fossil-fuel industry in the form of campaign contributions.
Membership to the Green New Deal select committee would include a promise to not accept donations from any fossil fuel company.
Critics have blamed the industry and its lobbyists for binding the hands of Republicans in Congress who are either skeptical of the human role in climate change, or else argue moving towards renewable energy is not economically feasible.
Both Sanders and Ocasio-Cortez decried those as false talking points.
“First of all it’s just plain wrong, that idea that we are going to somehow loose economic activity,” said Ocasio-Cortez.
“It’s inevitable that we will create jobs. We can use the transition to 100 percent renewable energy as the vehicle to truly deliver and establish economic, social and racial justice in the United States of America.”
Ocasio-Cortez, an emerging progressive darling who has faced a number of pot-shots from Republicans and right-leaning publications during the transition period, took the opportunity at the town hall to chide her critics.
“It’s an interesting puzzle in how media, especially you know right-ring media, but all media treats me. Because in our journey, I am a working person who won a seat against all odds,” she said.
Sanders, interjected adding: “Can we interrupt this program to make an announcement on your shoes?”
The comment was a jab at Fox News morning TV show "Fox and Friends," which the day of the federal government's national climate report's release opted to focus a segment on the future congresswoman’s shoes.
Looking to the future, Ocasio-Cortez pushed the importance of organizing a holistic approach to fixing climate change.
“When we try to solve this issue piecemeal, we will not solve it in time,” she warned.
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/419564-ocasio-cortez-fighting-climate-change-will-be-the-civil-rights
-
Quitting Paris? Pay a Carbon Tax, Macron Says
Dec 4, 2018 | E&E Climatewire
By Jean Chemnick
Threats are rumbling out of Europe to restrict trade deals with nations that shun the Paris climate agreement.
French President Emmanuel Macron doubled down last week on his pointed idea to make the global climate accord a condition of any major trade deal between the European Union and the rare country that considers quitting the environmental pact.
Macron warned that if Brazilian President-elect Jair Bolsonaro pulls his country out of the 2015 climate deal, France would prevent the European Union from entering a trade agreement with four South American countries. The agreement has been in the works for decades. Instead, the European Union might strike a new deal with Argentina while omitting Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay, Macron suggested.
"From the French side, I do not agree with signing broad trade agreements with countries that do not respect the Paris Agreement," said Macron.
Bolsonaro threatened to withdraw from the landmark climate accord while campaigning for president, but he later backtracked.
Macron has made similar comments before, and his main target appears to be President Trump, who announced last year that the United States would withdraw from Paris in 2020. Every member of the Group of 20 but the United States signed a communiqué Saturday that reaffirmed the importance of the Paris accord.
For his part, Trump has set his sights on new bilateral trade deals with partners like the European Union that would replace trade accords he deems unfair to U.S. producers and business interests.
Macron grabbed headlines in September when he said in remarks to the U.N. General Assembly in New York that France would insist that countries honor their climate commitments.
"Let's sign no more trade agreements with powers that don't respect the Paris Agreement," Macron said from the General Assembly podium. "Let's ensure our trade commitments include our environmental and social obligations. Let's more heavily mobilize sovereign funds, which finance this low-carbon policy strategy."
Closer to home, Macron insisted in November that the United Kingdom, now negotiating its divorce from the European Union, must abide by Europe's commitment to reduce its emissions under the Paris accord. If it doesn't, the United Kingdom could face less favorable trading terms, he suggested.
The United Kingdom is in the process of phasing out coal-fired power and is eyeing climate targets that are more stringent than what the European Union now proposes. But Prime Minister Theresa May is struggling to balance the demands of hard-line proponents of Brexit in her own party, and continued participation in an E.U. regulatory system on climate could be viewed unfavorably.
Macron's argument is that the European Union should make Paris an "essential element" for countries that want favorable trade status. The European Union negotiates all trade deals as a bloc, and its negotiators adhere to what is called the "common approach," which mandates that E.U. commercial policy must not conflict with its principles on human rights, democratic norms, nuclear nonproliferation and other objectives.
"The effect of those clauses is basically to say that if one or the other parties to the trade agreement violate through a material breach of those obligations, those fundamental principles or rules, then it provides a legal basis for the other party to terminate or suspend the trade agreement," said one European government official.
Macron wants to add rejection of the Paris accord to that list of deal breakers. And he's not just saying so at summits. His government formally submitted that proposal to the European Commission earlier this year.
Macron wants the European Union to make sure that its trade partners comply with Paris and aren't just parties to it. The United States stands to be ineligible for broad new trade deals under those terms. But countries like Brazil and Australia might also be blacklisted if they stay in Paris but abandon their commitments to reduce emissions — as both countries seem poised to do.
Also, the French have proposed that the European Union impose border tariffs on goods entering the union from countries that fail to meet their promises to cut carbon dioxide. This would keep Europe's stringent energy and climate laws from placing its manufacturers at a competitive disadvantage, they say.
Greens say Macron is taking an important stand in defense of the climate agreement his country helped broker.
Steve Herz, senior international policy adviser at the Sierra Club, said bad actors on climate change deserve to enter the "rogues' gallery of countries."
"The precedent is we are saying that we're putting countries who don't contribute on climate in the same category as countries that violate the basic rights of their citizens," he said.
Herz said the Macron proposal adds teeth to the voluntary climate deal.
"Here are the French, and potentially all of Europe, saying there are going to be specific consequences," he said.
But the proposal isn't getting much traction in the European Commission, at least for now. The Brussels-based body, which is tasked with proposing legislation and upholding E.U. treaties, is looking for ways to better reflect European values on environmental and climate stewardship in its trade deals. Committees and working groups have held numerous meetings on the subject in the last two years and produced a "non-paper" of possible options in February.
Macron seems isolated in proposing such stringent demands, and the policy would need to be ratified by all members of the European Union. Coal-heavy nations in central and Eastern Europe were always going to be reluctant, but Germany has also pulled back as it grapples with political issues at home, including news that Chancellor Angela Merkel will depart after 2021.
"We no longer have the alliances we could have had with Germany and continental Europe because continental Europe has shifted away from climate concerns," said Tancrède Voituriez, who leads the sustainable finance program for France-based IDDRI.
Since the French made their pitch to the E.U. Environmental Council in June, there has been little progress, largely because the focus has been on U.S. tariffs on steel and other commodities. Then, on Wednesday, the commission put out its long-term strategy on climate change, rooted in a plan for the continent to become carbon neutral by 2050. Its release was timed ahead of this week's U.N. climate talks in Katowice, Poland.
The strategy was accompanied by supporting documents, including one on trade.
"I would assume that people who are specifically dealing with trade might make use of this new document from the commission to restart the debate around trade and climate change, which has kind of faded out over the last couple of months," said Wendel Trio, director of Climate Action Network Europe.
There are also practical and possibly legal questions around Macron's proposal.
While it's simple enough to determine whether a country is a party to Paris, assessing its level of "compliance" is trickier. Should the European Union judge the quality of other nations' climate regimes and determine whether they're likely to meet future targets?
European energy experts say levying carbon tariffs could be complex. Europe still distributes a significant share of its emissions allowances to its manufacturers for free. If imports are taxed and domestic firms get a break, that arrangement could quickly run afoul of World Trade Organization rules.
Voituriez said in a white paper that tariffs likely would be legal under WTO rules but perhaps not politically savvy, especially against the backdrop of Trump-era trade wars.
"We'll see," Karsten Sach, Germany's lead climate negotiator, said when E&E News asked whether he thought European border adjustments were in the offing. "I think it's an interesting debate because it highlights that there should be no free riders in the world."
He said low-carbon development is the smart economic bet for countries to make anyway.
Lutz Weischer of the environmental nongovernmental organization Germanwatch said it would be premature to dismiss Macron's proposal.
"I expect it to be a debate that will continue, that will even become more intense probably," he said.
In the case of Brazil, he said, Bolsonaro has made it clear that he plans to allow more clearcutting in the Amazon to make way for agricultural development, especially soy — an enterprise that's likely to release gigatons of carbon into the world's atmosphere every year.
One of the main objectives of the proposed trade agreement with Europe is to make it easier for Brazilian growers to export soy to Europe.
"Should we really increase trade in the commodity that is the driver of all this?" Weischer asked. "I think that's an example where this debate could become a little less academic."
At least one former adviser in Trump's White House is looking at ways to merge the climate and trade agendas. Former energy adviser George David Banks dismissed the French bid to extrapolate the carbon intensity of a country's exports from its membership in the Paris deal.
"It's not a real marker, because the nationally determined contribution is whatever you want them to be," he said, noting that a country could belong to Paris and plan to grow its emissions for years.
Instead, he suggested tweaking emissions accounting rules to track a country's global output of carbon dioxide, including the amount it exports in the form of manufactured products. The United States imports more carbon-intensive goods than it sells abroad, he said, because U.S. manufacturers tend to be among the most efficient in the world.
So the United States would likely come out looking better from a climate perspective than some of its trading partners that will stay in the Paris deal, Banks said.
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2018/12/04/stories/1060108645
-
Market Group Sees $1 Trillion Annual Savings on Climate Action
Dec 4, 2018 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Mathew Carr
The world economy can save $1 trillion per year by the end of the century if market-based tools are used to meet climate-protection pledges, according to a business group representing industries from oil to manufacturing and power generation.
The International Emissions Trading Association is urging United Nations envoys to adopt the Paris climate deal’s measures for carbon markets, which the Geneva-based group said will yield huge savings in the transition from fossil fuels. Climate envoys are meeting through Dec. 14 in Poland to hammer out the accord’s rules after three years of negotiations.
Should the world use the carbon market measures in the Paris deal, known as Article 6, that would allow double the emission reductions for the same cost, said Dirk Forrister, the association’s president, citing analysis by the Environmental Defense Fund.
“Whether framed as economic or environmental advantage, Article 6 is a key ingredient in whether Paris will succeed,” Forrister said by email.
Price of Global CooperationModel runs of climate pledges indicate significant cost savings when there is global cooperation using market measures, said the International Emissions Trading Association, which worked with the University of Maryland’s Joint Global Change Research Institute on the findings. The world’s economic output was worth about $81 trillion in 2017, World Bank data show.
The U.N. is in the early stages of setting up an international market for carbon credit trading, known as the Sustainable Development Mechanism.
Discussions also will center on how to fit existing carbon markets such as the European emissions trading system into the post-2020 Paris era, as well as how to make national carbon credits and reduction targets comparable across markets and ideas on how to raise transparency.
Carbon markets give polluters the option of buying carbon credits rather than undertaking more-expensive green projects. These credits are created by companies that build renewable power or energy-efficient projects that avoid emissions of carbon.
Large companies are focusing on emission cuts, prodded by investors seeking lower climate risks.
Royal Dutch Shell Plc, a member of the International Emissions Trading Association, said Dec. 3 that it will set short-term carbon-reduction targets, reversing its opposition to the idea. Shell will set the target annually for the next three- or five-year period. The process will start in 2020 and will run to 2050.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/market-group-sees-1-trillion-annual-savings-on-climate-action
Industry and Association News
LCSA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation and Infrastructure News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested