Preview Newsletter
PM ACC 12/21/2018
-
(ACC Mentioned) The Fossil Fuel Industry Is Worsening the Global Plastics Crisis
Dec 21, 2018 | Teen Vogue
By Maia Wikler
The global plastics crisis has mobilized action around the world, with governments implementing single-use plastic bans and grassroots groups addressing plastic pollution in the ocean. -
Year in Review: 18 Numbers That Tell 2018’s Story of the Environment, Health, and Climate
Dec 21, 2018 | Environmental Defense Fund
2018 brought with it a torrent of stories that now shape the world we live in and will shape 2019 and years to come. -
DOJ Environment Official Heads for the Exit
Dec 21, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
The political official who led the Justice Department's environmental practice for nearly two years is leaving the agency. -
US Home Improvement Chain Lowe’s Adopts Chemicals Policy
Dec 21, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Leigh Stringer
Home improvement retailer Lowe's has adopted a chemicals policy that focuses on the elimination and substitution of chemicals of concern. -
Firefighters Want in on CDC's Study of PFAS Chemical Health Effects
Dec 21, 2018 | New Hampshire Public Radio
By Annie Ropiek
Firefighters are asking the federal government for more attention on how their exposures to PFAS chemicals may be harming their health. -
NGO Urges EU Elimination of Hazardous Chemicals in Carpets by 2025
Dec 21, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
A European NGO has called on carpet manufacturers to agree to a target for all commercial and household carpets put on the EU market to be free of potentially harmful substances by 2025. -
US Offshore Energy Essential for National Security, Economic Prosperity
Dec 21, 2018 | Real Clear Energy
By Dennis Freytes
Last month marked the 100th anniversary of the armistice ending World War I, appropriately recognized by a wave of commentaries observing the unprecedented sacrifice, and the geopolitical impacts still reverberating today. -
Actual Emissions Reductions or Just More Red Tape?
Dec 21, 2018 | The Hill - Congress Blog
By Kathleen Sgamma
When it comes to climate change, do we care about actual results, or do we just care about virtue signaling? -
Trump Rocked Energy in 2018, But Next Year Could Be Wilder
Dec 21, 2018 | Bloomberg
By Liam Denning
President Donald Trump’s love of coal, rejection of climate science and disdain for things like fuel efficiency hark back to a smokier, smudgier era. Yet if this year has shown anything, he is one of the biggest disruptors in energy. He just does a different kind of disruption. -
2,600 Pounds of Explosive Gas Leaked in Nov. 25 Accident That Shut Delaware Memorial Bridge
Dec 21, 2018 | Philadelphia Inquirer
By Joseph N. DiStefano
The Nov. 25 industrial accident that shut Delaware Memorial Bridge for seven hours and snarled post-Thanksgiving Traffic on New Jersey Turnpike and I-95 released more than a ton of ethylene oxide, a highly flammable gas known to cause cancer, officials said Thursday. -
Fla. Suit Links Power Plants to Spike in Cancer Cases
Dec 21, 2018 | Orlando Weekly (In E&E Greenwire)
By Xander Peters
Florida residents who live near coal-fired Orlando Utilities Commission power plants filed a lawsuit yesterday alleging that the plants have polluted thousands of properties with cancer-causing toxins. -
Feds Award PTC Grants to Amtrak, Metra and NJ Transit
Dec 21, 2018 | Progressive Railroading
U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) yesterday announced $9.16 million in federal funding toward the installation of positive train control (PTC) along Amtrak's Southwest Chief line between Dodge City, Kansas, and Las Animas, Colorado. -
Ewire: House Democrats Eye Castor for Select Climate Panel Chair
Dec 21, 2018 | Inside EPA
House Democrats have tentatively picked Rep. Kathy Castor (D-FL) to chair their soon-to-be-revived select committee on climate change, according to news reports, with the lawmaker aiming to increase public awareness of global warming risks and mitigation options. -
Legal Fight Likely over EPA's Proposal to Soften Wood Heater Air Rules
Dec 21, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Stuart Parker
Environmentalists and the state of New York are preparing for a possible legal fight against EPA plans to allow a “sell-through” period for retailers to sell wood-burning heaters that do not meet coming tougher federal emissions limits, which critics say is an unlawful delay... -
Kids Want 9th Circuit to Lift Stay on Landmark Case
Dec 21, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Benjamin Hulac
Lawyers for a group of young Americans suing the Trump administration in a landmark climate case yesterday asked an appeals court to unfreeze the proceedings. -
EPA Undercuts Risks of Pollutants on Kids — Study
Dec 21, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Sean Reilly
EPA is failing to fully account for the harm that air pollution does to children, leading to a "serious undercounting" of the corresponding benefits of cleaner air for kids, researchers conclude in a new paper.
Industry and Association News
LCSA News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) The Fossil Fuel Industry Is Worsening the Global Plastics Crisis
Dec 21, 2018 | Teen Vogue
By Maia Wikler
The global plastics crisis has mobilized action around the world, with governments implementing single-use plastic bans and grassroots groups addressing plastic pollution in the ocean. But these efforts alone cannot address the sheer magnitude of plastics that are saturating water, food chains, and ecosystems worldwide. Only an end to the fossil-fueled plastics industry can.
The crisis is far greater than a consumer-behavior issue, like recycling: It is directly connected to the fossil fuel industry and to climate change, as 99% of plastics are derived from chemicals found in fossil fuels. Despite a recent United Nations climate report that says we only have 12 years to radically transform our entire economy to prevent the worst possible impacts of climate change, plastic production is set to ramp up, tripling the amount of plastic exports by 2030.
The future of the fossil fuel industry depends on plastics, and in the U.S., the recent rise in cheap shale gas fromfracking is driving the plastics boom. Since 2010, over $180 billion has been invested into new plastics production plants that convert natural gas into ethylene, which is used to make many plastics. This means that the fossil fuel industry, responsible for pipelines that fuel climate change, is also responsible for the plastics crisis. When water protectors and activists resist pipelines across North America, organize for divestment from fossil fuels, campaign for renewable energy and urgent climate action, they are also actively addressing the plastics crisis at the root.
“Fossil fuels and plastics are not only made from the same materials, they are made by the same companies,” Steven Fei, an attorney for the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) Climate and Energy Program, said in a recent CIEL report. Some of the big players in the fossil fuel industry driving plastic production are DowDuPont, ExxonMobil, Shell, Chevron, BP, and Sinopec.
Petrochemicals come from oil and natural gas feedstocks, which create a wide array of products, mainly plastics. According to a report in the Oil and Gas Journal, plastics and other petrochemical products will drive global oil demand by 2050. A recent International Energy Agency (IEA) report, The Future of Petrochemicals, shines a light on the petrochemical industry as one of the blind spots in the global energy debate, and also says petrochemicals will be the key driver for oil-demand growth. It is expected to account for more than a third of global oil demand by 2030, and nearly half of oil-demand growth by 2050, according to the Oil & Gas Journal. Oil demand for transportation is expected to slow by 2050, due to the rise of electric vehicles and more energy-friendly engines, but that will be offset by the rising demand for petrochemicals and plastic production.
From the extraction of fossil fuels for plastics production to waste and degradation, the life cycle of plastics threatens the health of the environment and people. Fracking, a process that involves the high-pressure injection of water and chemicals into shale rock, cracks open shale rock to release natural gas. Plastics production is fossil fuel intensive and carbon heavy; the extraction and refining of fossil fuels by fracking contributes to global warming through greenhouse gases emitted by leaks. Not only does the production of plastics release methane, a greenhouse gas, but plastics continue to release greenhouse gases as they degrade in the environment, which directly contributes to climate change. In turn, this affects sea level rise, land and ocean ecosystems, while increasing severe weather catastrophes such as wildfires, drought, and flooding. Once plastics are produced, the pollution impacts are staggering.
Today, we produce about 300 million tonnes of plastic waste every year. That’s nearly equivalent to the weight of the entire human population. Most plastics pollute the environment for significant periods of time, quite often breaking down into smaller plastic particles that can be swallowed by animals and fish and end up in our food and water. If current trends continue, our oceans could contain more plastic than fish by 2050. The life cycle of plastics shows that the fight against plastics pollution needs a more holistic approach. If we are going to effectively tackle climate change and plastics pollution, we need to stop plastic production at the source, which means transitioning away from fossil fuels.
A recent report in the Oil and Gas Journal said that whether or not aggressive action is taken to pursue renewable energy in the face of climate change, the plastics sector almost guarantees growth for oil and natural gas. The industry knows that plastics pollution is vast: The industry reports that the amount of plastics in the Pacific Ocean covers an area three times the size of France, while microplastics accumulate below the surface and enter food chains. Because of growing awareness of climate change and plastics pollution, they cite their support for recycling, but some would argue it’s a marketing strategy to help maintain the longevity of the fossil fuel industry.
“The movement to address single-use plastics is a necessary part of the strategy to end plastics pollution, but it isn’t enough unless there is widespread recognition that the plastics industry continues to expand,” Carroll Muffett, CIEL president and CEO, tells Teen Vogue. “The recycle triangle is effective in convincing consumers that they aren’t throwing something away, that it will be reused. But the truth is, less than 10% of plastics are effectively recycled.”
While corporations market recycling and waste management, they are also lobbying against plastic regulations. The American Chemistry Council (ACC) represents oil companies like ExxonMobil and Dow, and is reportedly responsible for lobbying efforts that successfully convinced the California Department of Education to edit environmental-curriculum textbooks to include positive statements about plastic bags, and also lobbied against a plastic-bag ban in the state.
Some of the companies fueling the plastics crisis are the same as those accused of climate change denial and muddling conversations on the subject. Exxon has spent millions to “confuse the public on global warming science,” according to a report by the Union of Concerned Scientists, and to prevent the U.S. from engaging in early implementations of climate agreements, like the Kyoto Protocol. The fossil fuel industry is now touting its support of recycling through marketing campaigns in order to keep the plastics sector booming.
There are current plans for a $10 billion plastic production facility is to be built in the small town of Portland, Texas, by ExxonMobil and Saudi Basic Industries Corporation (SABIC), and many in the community are resisting fiercely, in defense of their health.
“We took Exxon by surprise. They thought they were going to come in and convince everyone [that the plant was a good idea],” Errol Summerlin, an organizer with Portland Citizens United, tells Teen Vogue. He says the proposed site would be located across the street from homes and within one mile of local schools. (Teen Vogue has reached out to Exxon for comment, but has not yet received a response.) “We’re up against billions of dollars, Exxon and the Saudi royal family,” Summerlin adds. “We have elected officials saying it’s a wonderful thing for our local area, and we 100% disagree.”
Summerlin claims that the amount of fresh water the plastics production plant requires, which he says is 7.3 billion gallons a year, is more than the 7.1 billion gallons all of the region’s residents use. He says that local counties have been on water restrictions because of ongoing droughts, and says further that the government is proposing seawater-desalination facilities to supply more water for industry.
Many industrial sites are being built in the backyards of marginalized low-income communities that may face health impacts from air and water pollution. These frontline communities have to pay the price of plastics expansion with the quality of their lives. Priscilla Villa, a Hispanic third-generation Texan, and organizer for Earthworks, works on the front lines of Karnes County in Texas, one of the topmost oil-producing counties in the state. “People have been reporting health issues every day since the fracking boom. They have to live with nosebleeds, chronic headaches, trouble breathing, skin reactions, burning eyes, sinus problems,” she tells Teen Vogue.
Adelita Cantu, PhD, RN, associate professor at UT Health San Antonio, School of Nursing, says these health problems may be related to fracking and oil industry: “As a public health nurse, I was concerned about how the environment impacts our health. What’s happening in Karnes county and similar areas with oil and gas drilling and fracking, there are big health concerns. In terms of reducing quality of life and life expectancy and overall what it does for people's well-being. There are huge health consequences from fracking and oil and gas drilling. We are working with individuals in the community to be citizen scientists, giving them air quality monitors so they can document what is happening in their environment." Cantu continues, "I’ve been a public health nurse for over 40 years and the environment does impact health and plays a role in quality of life. Knowing that connection is vital to the wellbeing of our communities. It’s imperative for us all to think about our environments when thinking about our health. I’ve interviewed people in Karnes County who certainly have nose bleeds, skin rashes, and respiratory issues — these are the main issues that come about from fracking and oil and gas sites.”
Villa describes one plastics facility as being the size of a football field, illuminated 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, and just 400 hundred feet away from a family’s back door. Villa adds that these sites are constant sources of noise and light pollution and that people have reported suffering from insomnia. Dr. Cantu tell Teen Vogue, “One man I’ve talked to has an oil well in his backyard and suffers from respiratory issues and insomnia, related to the fact that lights are on all the time at the drill site.”
“Community members are fed up with living near these sites and wish they could move, but how could they ever sell their house? No one would buy a house there. It’s inescapable,” Villa says. Community members feel that the government is prioritizing industry over the health of local communities.
The plastics boom means more fracking and greenhouse gas emissions that contribute to climate change while continuing to pollute oceans, food chains, and water supplies. It will perpetuate a fossil fuel economy that undermines efforts to address the climate and plastics crisis, and impacts front line communities and the wider public at every stage of plastics’ toxic life cycle. With only 12 years to prevent the worst possible impacts of climate change, the world cannot afford an expanding plastics industry in the time of crisis.
https://www.teenvogue.com/story/fossil-fuel-industry-is-worsening-the-global-plastics-crisis?verso=true
-
Year in Review: 18 Numbers That Tell 2018’s Story of the Environment, Health, and Climate
Dec 21, 2018 | Environmental Defense Fund
2018 brought with it a torrent of stories that now shape the world we live in and will shape 2019 and years to come.
From a disgraced EPA Administrator, to urgent reports on climate change, the year showed how far we’ve come and how much work remains—especially as President Trump and his administration continue to assault safeguards and deny the reality of a warming world.
Here, we recap the 18 numbers that encapsulate the year that was, and what we’ll be keeping a close eye on in the year to come.
1. Public Health Threat #1: Acting EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler. Former coal lobbyist Wheeler took the reins after the end of Scott Pruitt’s destructive tenure, and picked up right where Pruitt left off. Since then, Wheeler has targeted several foundational health and environmental safeguards. It’s now expected that Wheeler will be nominated for the post permanently. Keep reading to see how dangerous that could be to the American people and our planet.
2. Two mothers who lost their sons because of exposure to methylene chloride, a dangerous chemical in common paint strippers, met with Pruitt and members of Congress from both parties. These moms asked EPA to support a ban on consumer and most commercial uses of methylene chloride. Over 6 months ago, Pruitt said he’d do so, but no action has been taken since.
3. As for other chemicals the Trump EPA is flouting 2016’s Toxic Substance Control Act amendments, allowing potentially dangerous chemicals into the marketplace and consumers’ homes. Here are three examples.
4. Wheeler is proposing to gut the EPA methane rules, a move that could result in more than 400,000 tons of additional potent methane, even though some leading companies have asked EPA to regulate methane emissions from oil and gas.
5. Check out this list of five states that took bold action on climate change this year, showing the kinds of common-sense, economic solutions that can be implemented at scale while protecting people, our economy and our environment.
6. According to the World Health Organization air pollution kills an estimated 600,000 children every year under the age of 15 and accounts for almost 1 in 10 deaths in children under five. The report found links between air pollution and childhood cancers, asthma, pneumonia and other respiratory infections, making it one of the leading threats to child health.
7. It’s not all doom and gloom. Prompted by the urgency to act on climate and the advancement of affordable, renewable energy technologies, we’ve seen seven signs that the global energy economy is in transition.
8. Eight hurricanes formed in Atlantic waters this year, two of which—Hurricanes Florence and Michael—devastated states across the Mid-Atlantic and Southeast. These kinds of super storms are becoming more powerful—and more destructive—due to warmer water, higher seas, shifting weather patterns and increased moisture in the air.
9. On the other side of the country, California saw wildfires ravage the state, destroying entire towns and killing scores. In total, the fires are expected to cost insurers more than $9 billion and signal the kind of climate dangers the world could face more regularly if greenhouse gases are allowed to pollute our air unchecked.
10. Might that have something to do with the fact that fossil fuel industries outspent clean energy advocates on climate lobbying by a startling 10 to 1?
11. By EPA’s own calculations, the Mercury and Air Toxic Standards prevent as many as 11,000 deaths per year, yet the Administration reportedly wants to undercut the rule anyway, with a proposal expected imminently.
12. A concentrated effort by the oil industry to fight back against clean car standards resulted in more than a quarter of the 12,000 “public” comments submitted to the federal register reflecting the language written by a pro-industry group. Marathon Petroleum, the country’s largest refiner, lobbyists for Exxon Mobil, Chevron, and Phillips 66, joined a network funded by the Koch Brothers network in a massive effort to fight standards that would reduce pollution from vehicles and save Americans money at the gas pump.
13. The National Climate Assessment, issued by 13 federal agencies, sounded the alarm on the impacts America stands to suffer from climate change, yet went largely ignored by the Trump Administration, which has chosen to side with special interests and industry allies.
14. 414 investors across the globe—with $31 trillion under management—called for governments to take serious steps to curb climate pollution, citing the “ambition gap” between government commitments and what is needed to sufficiently prevent the world from reaching warming of 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels.
15. 2015 saw the adoption of the landmark Paris Agreement, setting nations on a hopeful path toward emissions reduction. Since then, the leadership once shown by America in critical climate talks has been abdicated, left vacant by an administration that chooses to cover its ears and place the world’s children and grandchildren at risk. This year’s climate summit, COP24, saw the creation of a “rule book” to implement the Paris agreement, but also showed that much more needs to be done.
16. A letter sent by coal baron Robert E. Murray to Vice President Mike Pence listed 16 wishes that the administration has largely taken up as policy. Several among them have led the administration to foolishly attempt to prop up the coal industry despite economic signals diminishing coal’s viability, not to mention its severe health and environmental effects.
17. After 17 months of countless scandals and reckless attempts to assault bedrock environmental protections, Scott Pruitt resigned his post as EPA Administrator. This list could extend dozens of items longer if we were to count Pruitt’s many offenses. American families and children will not miss him.
18. A cheery and hopeful note as we head toward the new year: 2018’s midterms saw a wave of pro-environment and climate candidates elected to office across the country. Those candidates-elect—ranging from governors and representatives, to mayors and councilwomen—are leading a charge toward ambitious climate action.
What we’ll be keeping our eye on in 2019:
· Wheeler hearing: President Trump is expected to formally nominate Andrew Wheeler as Administrator of EPA. This will likely set up a Senate confirmation hearing for January or February. Will the Senate endorse Wheeler’s attacks on environmental safeguards?
· Mercury and Air Toxics Standards: Wheeler may soon begin undoing federal mercury and air toxics standards , which limit dangerous mercury and other poisonous and cancer-causing substances from the nation’s coal plants. Will EPA move ahead with this dangerous move, even given industry and bipartisan support for the protections?
· Climate Action in Congress: There’s no question climate discussions in Washington are heating up. Will the new majority in the House of Representatives develop climate legislation? How will climate be addressed in any infrastructure bill? What movement will we see to advance clean energy?
· Congressional Oversight & Accountability: Will the new Congress return to its vigorous oversight function to hold Wheeler accountable for implementing President Trump’s attacks on environmental safeguards? What issues will Wheeler face?
· Climate Action in the States: Across the country, states have been stepping up to deal with climate change. Will there be surprises? Who which governors take the lead on climate action?
· Climate Change and Military Preparedness: The Defense Department is overdue in releasing a climate vulnerability report, identifying the armed services installations that are most vulnerable to climate change. Which bases will be found to be most at risk in a changing climate?
· Methane: Days before the holidays, Wheeler was also faced with an outpouring of opposition by health experts, moms, attorneys general and more to his proposal to weaken the EPA methane rules. Even ExxonMobil came out in support of regulating methane. Will Wheeler finalize this unpopular weakening of a common sense rule? Will he move forward with an even more severe attempt to gut regulations of this dangerous climate pollutant?
· Clean Car Standards: The Trump administration has proposed to roll back clean car standards—a step that would massively increase climate pollution and cost Americans hard-earned money at the gas pump. Will the administration finalize this rollback in 2019? Or will they listen to sound science and keep the strong standards in place, especially following a New York Times investigation uncovering the oil industry’s role in pushing the rollback?
· Censored Science: Wheeler may revive a widely discredited attempt to limit how much science EPA can use when assessing environmental safeguards that are key to protecting human health. The effects of his action could include looser restrictions on air pollution and deadly chemicals in our drinking water, paint and paint strippers and wood products.
· Chemical Safety: Industry lobbyists and conflicted political appointees controlling the EPA spent much of 2018 diligently working to undermine our strengthened chemical safety system. With the new year, there will certainly be new toxic chemicals allowed onto the market without adequate review and new attacks on the reformed Toxic Substances Control Act.
· Lead Exposure: Days before the holiday, the Trump Administration released a deeply disappointing federal “Lead Action Plan.” As the administration touts its efforts on tackling lead exposure, will Wheeler follow through with his promise to release the long delayed revision of the Lead & Copper Rule in spring and new lead dust standards in June — and will they actually offer better protections?
· Climate Action on the Campaign Trail: Last but certainly not least, the 2020 campaign is heating up. As polling shows that climate change is becoming a priority for more voters, will presidential candidates make dealing with climate change central to their platforms?
http://blogs.edf.org/climate411/2018/12/21/year-in-review-18-numbers-that-tell-2018s-story-of-the-environment-health-and-climate/
-
DOJ Environment Official Heads for the Exit
Dec 21, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
The political official who led the Justice Department's environmental practice for nearly two years is leaving the agency.
Jeffrey Wood's last day at the Environment and Natural Resources Division is today. Installed after President Trump's inauguration last year, Wood served as acting chief of ENRD until November and then as principal deputy assistant attorney general.
"It has been an immense honor to be able to serve at ENRD," he said in a statement. "Through these last almost two years, I have come to more deeply appreciate that our historic division is a powerful force for good in our nation, and that the ranks of our Division are filled with exceptional and dedicated public servants.
"And I am excited about the important work that is ahead for the Division under the leadership of [Assistant Attorney General] Jeff Clark."
He hasn't yet announced his next steps.
Wood spent 21 months as the stand-in head of ENRD, the longest tenure for an acting assistant attorney general in the division's history. Trump nominated Jeffrey Bossert Clark for the job in 2017, but Clark's nomination languished in the Senate until October, when he was finally confirmed.
Wood managed the division in the meantime, establishing its "back to basics" enforcement policy, defending the Trump administration's deregulatory agenda.
Some of his work drew the ire of environmentalists, but he was generally well-liked by career staff in the agency (Greenwire, Oct. 31).
Clark issued a statement today praising Wood's work.
"The Environment Division of the Justice Department will sorely miss Jeff Wood, and I will personally miss him as my Principal Deputy," Clark said.
"He has served with distinction, honor, and record longevity as the Acting AAG in the 21-month period before I was confirmed by the Senate," he said. "I know the whole Division wishes him and his family well in the next exciting chapter of his professional career."
Wood was a former staffer for Jeff Sessions, who left his role as attorney general in November.
In an email to the environment division last night, Wood praised the team as "a powerful force for good in our nation." He's now heading on vacation with his wife and four kids to visit national parks and other sites in Utah and Arizona.
"Along the way, I'll be proud to share with them how the lawyers and staff in this Division helped to establish, and now help to ensure the proper and lawful management of, these and so many other conserved areas in the country," he wrote in the message obtained by E&E News.
"I am very much looking forward to that time with my family," he added, "and then to thinking more about next steps after that."
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/12/21/stories/1060110403
-
US Home Improvement Chain Lowe’s Adopts Chemicals Policy
Dec 21, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Leigh Stringer
Home improvement retailer Lowe's has adopted a chemicals policy that focuses on the elimination and substitution of chemicals of concern.
The policy says that, while "regulations are being strengthened", certain chemical concerns remain unregulated and may impact the health and safety of its products. It does not include timelines, or name specific chemicals, but instead sets out a series of commitments. These are to:
· continue to adhere to applicable chemical regulations as they are strengthened to restrict substances of concern.
· continue to foster supply chain relationships and encourage suppliers to disclose chemicals
· strive to identify, reduce, and eliminate chemicals of concern and substitute them with safer alternatives wherever commercially feasible.
· actively drive the identification and availability of safer alternatives throughout its operations, including Lowe’s stores and offices.
· improve its engagement with supply chain partners to ensure requirements are understood and acted upon in a reasonable timeframe.
· strive to enhance consumer confidence in the products by increasing the number of eco-products that incorporate safer chemicals.
The company's 2017 corporate responsibility report says substances it is in the process of phasing out from its product portfolio include formaldehyde, ortho-phthalates and VOC paints. The company was also one of the first major retailers to commit to a phase out of paint stripper containing methylene chloride and NMP.
The report also says Lowe's "actively governs products" where the company is the importer through audits, testing and inspections.
"Annually, Lowe's authorised third-party laboratories conduct product and transit/packaging tests to verify compliance with applicable industry standards or state and federal regulations," it adds
Assessment framework
To achieve its policy commitments Lowe's says it will develop a framework to assess substances and manage chemical risks. Chemical risks, its policy says, can be managed in several ways including:
· requiring disclosure of chemicals in Lowe's products;
· reducing or eliminating toxic chemicals from Lowe's products or packaging;
· better educating consumers on product safety; and/or
· driving innovation by encouraging suppliers to transition to safer alternatives and green chemistry solutions.
The company plans to review its policy on an annual basis and report progress in its annual corporate responsibility report.
Collaboration
In addition, to better understand and manage chemicals in its products, Lowe's also plans to collaborative with third-party experts, internal and external stakeholders, supply chain partners and consumers.
For example, the company has been working with the Green Chemistry and Commerce Council (GC3) since 2016 to address chemicals of concern.
Lowe's did not respond to Chemical Watch's request for more detail on the policy commitments by the time of publishing.
https://chemicalwatch.com/72969/us-home-improvement-chain-lowes-adopts-chemicals-policy
-
Firefighters Want in on CDC's Study of PFAS Chemical Health Effects
Dec 21, 2018 | New Hampshire Public Radio
By Annie Ropiek
Firefighters are asking the federal government for more attention on how their exposures to PFAS chemicals may be harming their health.
Diane Cotter of Rindge has been trying to shed light on how the industrial chemicals may be sickening firefighters since her husband – then a firefighter in Worcester, Mass. – was diagnosed with prostate cancer in 2014.
He had to retire from the force, but is now cancer-free.
Cotter says they suspect firefighters like her husband have spent decades exposed to dangerously high levels of PFAS – through flame-retardant foams, and coatings on their protective gear.
Analysis by a researcher at the University of Notre Dame, provided to Cotter, shows elevated levels of various PFAS chemicals throughout a 2004 set of turnout gear.
The older forms of those chemicals have since been phased out of most American manufacturing. But they remain persisent in the environment and human bodies.
Studies suggest exposure to even low levels can put people at risk of kidney and liver disease, testicular cancer, reproductive problems and other diseases.
Cotter says that as firefighters’ gear heats up, it allows toxins to seep through into their bodies – including into reproductive systems and other sensitive organs.
Studies show firefighters have an elevated risk of developing certain cancers in those areas.
"Our political bodies do see us, but I think that they think that we're cared for and we're not,” Cotter says. “So we truly need this study now.”
New Hampshire Senator Jeanne Shaheen recently led a bipartisan call for the Centers for Disease Control to include firefighters in planned PFAS health studies. Activists like Cotter are now calling on Massachusetts Rep. Jim McGovern to lead a similar charge in the House.
The CDC will soon begin a first-of-its-kind national health study on the effects of PFAS, focusing in part on water contamination at Pease International Tradeport in Portsmouth.
Cotter says she hopes firefighters will be included, so they don’t have to wait longer for answers and aid.
https://www.nhpr.org/post/firefighters-want-cdcs-study-pfas-chemical-health-effects#stream/0
-
NGO Urges EU Elimination of Hazardous Chemicals in Carpets by 2025
Dec 21, 2018 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
A European NGO has called on carpet manufacturers to agree to a target for all commercial and household carpets put on the EU market to be free of potentially harmful substances by 2025.
And Zero Waste Europe has called for carpets to be separately collected, reusable and fully recyclable by that date.
Its comments, in a joint statement alongside companies providing innovative solutions to the carpet industry, comes in support of the release of a 'policy toolkit' by consultant Eunomia. Commissioned by NGO Changing Markets Foundation, this looks at opportunities to reduce the environmental and health impacts of carpet and increase carpet circularity.
The toolkit, aimed at EU member states, outlines two policy packages:
· a fully mandatory extended producer responsibility (EPR)-led approach, designed to meet the needs of those EU member states with the highest circular economy ambitions; and
· an alternative where EPR is not immediately possible, using additional "essential requirements" to drive eco-design and mandatory take back and taxes being used to respectively facilitate and pay for the waste management aspects.
The report also provides comprehensive individual policy measures and ways in which each one might best be applied to foster a circular economy.
Responding to the report, Zero Waste Europe says it wants the carpet industry to "go circular" and calls for mandatory rules to push the sector in this direction.
In order to make the 2025 goal a reality, it says the sector "must phase out hazardous substances and virgin materials, and transition towards safe and healthy components including an increasing rate of recycled or renewable content".
"The time is ripe for a circular economy for carpets, but this will only happen if a mandatory approach with ambitious policies is adopted."
Manufacturer support
Zero Waste Europe says it has contacted several carpet manufacturers, as well as industry associations, to join its move and take action. The initiative is already supported by DSM-Niaga, Interface and Tarkett.
Mandatory disclosure of ingredients is "an urgent part of extended producer responsibility, since it supports the consumer to make better choices and the supports recyclers to handle products in the right way,"’ Lukas Hoex, manager strategic growth at DSM-Niaga, said.
Geanne van Arkel, head of sustainable development (EMEA) at Interface, said the company has implemented circular solutions to create products "including identification and elimination of materials of concern, introduction of recycled materials and new processes to reclaim and reuse products across our global business".
And Myriam Tryjefaczka, sustainability and public affairs director (EMEA) at Tarkett, said that "material transparency, eco-design and either closed or open loops are fundamental to develop a healthy and circular economy in the long run".
In the US this month a group of research institutes and NGOs pressured US carpet manufacturers to increase efforts to remove chemicals of concern, such as PFASs and phthalates, from their products.
Meanwhile in Europe, the EU's non-toxic environment strategy, due by the end of the year, will be postponed until the new European Commission takes office in 2019, the EU executive recently said.
https://chemicalwatch.com/72966/ngo-urges-eu-elimination-of-hazardous-chemicals-in-carpets-by-2025
-
US Offshore Energy Essential for National Security, Economic Prosperity
Dec 21, 2018 | Real Clear Energy
By Dennis Freytes
Last month marked the 100th anniversary of the armistice ending World War I, appropriately recognized by a wave of commentaries observing the unprecedented sacrifice, and the geopolitical impacts still reverberating today. There is no shortage of lessons still relevant from The Great War – including the centrality of energy to national security.
In the words of energy historian Daniel Yergin, World War I was “the first war to run on oil.” When fighting started in 1914, Yergin writes, logistical planning centered on supplying three horses for every man. By the end, British and American forces included more than 100,000 trucks and, crucially, an American-designed innovation: the tank. Providing armored protection for soldiers crossing the no-man’s land between trenches, tanks turned the tide – in combination with the U.S.-supplied oil that powered them.
Granted, no one is suggesting the Pentagon go back to basing defense strategy on horses. So what’s the lesson? As usual, Winston Churchill put it best: "Safety and certainty in oil lie in variety and variety alone." Then first lord of the Admiralty, Churchill was trying to persuade the British Navy to look beyond locally produced coal to embrace the overseas oil that would win the war. But the same principle applies to U.S. failure to take full advantage of offshore oil and natural gas resources.
Fueled by advanced technology, U.S. producers are setting records. But the American energy revolution is primarily an onshore phenomenon. Government policy keeps 94 percent of federally controlled offshore acreage off limits to energy development, leaving promising resource basins in the Atlantic, Pacific, Arctic and half the Gulf of Mexico locked away.
The one area where development is allowed suggests what we’re missing. One limited section of the Gulf of Mexico supplies 1.6 million barrels of oil per day. That’s about 15 percent of our total crude production. Government estimates indicate there could be billions of barrels of oil, and natural gas supply measuring in the trillions, in restricted offshore areas.
It is a fact that we’ll need more energy. Projections show natural gas and oil will supply an estimated 60 percent of U.S. energy needs in 2040, even under optimistic scenarios for renewables. Where do we want that energy to come from – our own territory, or overseas nations who share neither our democratic values nor our strict safety and environmental standards?
Not only are U.S. safety practices the world’s gold standard, but offshore exploration is safer than it’s ever been. When Americans see a challenge – whether it’s winning a world war or flying to the moon – we mobilize our best experts, deploy our best technology, and find solutions. We applied the same all-hands-on-deck approach after the 2010 accident in the Gulf of Mexico. Joint efforts from government regulators and industry transformed offshore practices, creating or strengthening more than 100 safety standards.
Critics of the Trump administration’s proposal to expand offshore exploration rarely acknowledge the major safety advancement of the last decade, but it’s essential to the conversation.
Also essential: recognizing that offshore exploration is a vital component of U.S. energy security. Supplying more of our own energy makes us less vulnerable to overseas disruptions. And it strengthens our geopolitical influence. The growing reach of U.S. energy exports shows how. For decades, European allies have been perilously dependent on Russia for natural gas supplies – a vulnerable position given the Kremlin’s history of wielding energy as a political weapon.
Thanks to abundant U.S. natural gas production, our allies are building terminals to import U.S. energy and, with it, greater security. We are safer when our allies are safer – not to mention, the more market share we claim, the less revenue Moscow will have to fund anti-democratic activities around the globe.
Instead, developing offshore resources can generate revenue, and jobs, here at home. The latest studies show energy development in the Atlantic and Eastern Gulf of Mexico could contribute tens of thousands of jobs and $1 billion to $2 billion in tax revenue per state in Florida, South Carolina, North Carolina and Virginia within 20 years.
The Interior Department reevaluates offshore leasing policy in five-year plans, but the decisions impact U.S. energy security for decades – even generations. The Trump administration’s plan to expand safe, responsible offshore development is in America’s national interest. Churchill had it right 100 years ago. When it comes to energy and national security, variety is essential. In 2018, that means developing U.S. resources, onshore and offshore.
Lt. Col. Dennis Freytes USA (ret.) is a Member of the Florida Veterans Hall of Fame and the Florida State Chairman, Vets4Energy.
https://www.realclearenergy.org/articles/2018/12/20/us_offshore_energy_essential_for_national_security_economic_prosperity_110372.html
-
Actual Emissions Reductions or Just More Red Tape?
Dec 21, 2018 | The Hill - Congress Blog
By Kathleen Sgamma
When it comes to climate change, do we care about actual results, or do we just care about virtue signaling? Do we care that the United States has reduced greenhouse gas emissions more than any other industrialized country, or do we just care about participation in an empty Paris climate accord, for which most countries, notably climate scolds in the European Union, are simply missing their targets.
While the European Union backtracks, the United States has reduced emissions 14 percent under 2005 levels. The primary reason for that success has been fuel switching from coal to natural gas power plants. Energy Information Administration (EIA) data show over the last decade that natural gas has delivered 61 percent of the reductions in emissions from electricity, compared to 39 percent from wind and solar.ADVERTISEMENT
Yet despite that reality, a group of activist investors sent a letter to several major oil and natural gas companies asking them to oppose changes to an EPA rule that regulates methane. Besides fixing several technical problems with the 2016 rule that made it impractical in the field, the proposed rule enables greater flexibility to use new technologies and not just one technology that could become obsolete.
Industry continues to develop remote sensing solutions and airborne platforms to more quickly detect methane leaks so that companies can quickly fix them. Rather than the original rule that locked companies into physically going into the field using a particular technology at a set time, the new rule enables the use of new technologies that are more efficient, timely and effective.
EPA estimates the rule change would result in 1.4 million metric tons of additional greenhouse gas emissions per year, as measured in carbon dioxide equivalents that calculate in the higher potency of methane. That represents 0.02 percent of total annual U.S. greenhouse gas emissions. In comparison, last year use of natural gas in the electricity sector resulted in savings of 348 million metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalents, many times more than that leakage. Since the rule enables rather than impedes technological innovation, industry will likely erase that small emissions bump.
As in most things in life, there’s a tradeoff. Small methane leaks at the well head are more than offset by the huge reduction in greenhouse gases from power plants. But we’re not resting on our laurels. We will continue reducing those leaks, which many studies show are in the range of 1.5 percent of production. Those leakage rates are well below the 3.2 percent that EDF estimates will cause natural gas to lose its climate change benefit.
Likewise, regulation must be balanced with impact. Tying up American oil and natural gas production in too much red tape can reduce production, causing imports from unfriendly countries and prices for consumers to rise. The riots out of France show what can happen when prices rise too much for ordinary citizens.
So if we’re talking about such low levels of emissions and there’s a rule change that would enable the very technological innovation that is key to driving emissions even lower, why are these investor groups pushing strenuously against the new rule? Like those who ignore the United States’ real success in reducing actual greenhouse gas emissions and bewail President Trump’s withdrawal from the Paris agreement, it’s more about climate change virtue signaling than actual results.
Meanwhile, industry will continue to innovate and drive those emissions even lower. We have a four-decade record of success reducing methane emissions. Investor groups truly concerned about safeguarding oil companies’ value and protecting shareholders would welcome that success, not try to tie it up in further red tape.
Kathleen Sgamma is president of Western Energy Alliance.
https://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/energy-environment/422357-actual-emissions-reductions-or-just-more-red-tape
-
Trump Rocked Energy in 2018, But Next Year Could Be Wilder
Dec 21, 2018 | Bloomberg
By Liam Denning
President Donald Trump’s love of coal, rejection of climate science and disdain for things like fuel efficiency hark back to a smokier, smudgier era. Yet if this year has shown anything, he is one of the biggest disruptors in energy. He just does a different kind of disruption.
In a prescient essay published late last year, Jason Bordoff, founder of the Center on Global Energy Policy, wrote that Trump’s energy-specific policies would have less of an impact than his broader shifts in foreign and domestic policy. One look at the minimal impact of efforts to revive coal miningsuggests Bordoff was on to something. When it comes to Trump and energy, macro trumps micro.
As outgoing Defense Secretary James Mattis put with skewering politeness in his resignation letter, Trump personifies what you could call a profound shift in U.S. foreign relations. The prior constants of free trade and security guarantees underwritten by the U.S. were the product of a Cold War that ended three decades ago. See this column for a more detailed discussion, but suffice to say the post-1945 order that nurtured the world’s energy markets is now being challenged by its chief sponsor.
The shale boom – along with less-ballyhooed gains in energy efficiency – has emboldened the U.S. in this regard. America’s old approach was to “bring the rest of the world with it” in terms of energy security, says Sarah Ladislaw, senior vice president at the Center for Strategic & International Studies. Now, it is “less about shared common goods and more about dominance.” Or, as Peter Zeihan, a geopolitics strategist who has written extensively on this theme, puts it: “Disruption in global energy is a feature, not a bug, of U.S. policy.”
Take, for example, Twitter. Discreet calls to nudge foreign oil producers? Trump’s tweets dispense with such niceties. They are real-time, broadcast interventions in the world’s biggest commodity market by the leader of the world’s biggest producer and consumer of the stuff. They don’t alter physical supply and demand per se. But they affect expectations and, therefore, prices – and, therefore, supply and demand. Especially as their author has the means to really intervene with something like, say, sanctions on Iran.
This captures the central drama that ripped through the oil market this summer and fall. Ahead of the midterms, Trump tweeted repeatedly against rising oil prices, and Saudi Arabia and others raised production. Like many, they were counting down the days to new sanctions on Iran – a big reason why prices had risen in the first place – scheduled for early November. By then, though, signs of excess supply were knocking prices already, and news of sanctions waivers touched off a rout arrested briefly by OPEC’s renewed supply cuts.
While Trump’s tweets are real-time, another all-American innovation, fracking, also reacts to prices relatively quickly. This marriage of short-cycle shale production with even shorter-cycle volleys from the White House is a genuinely disruptive development. Shale effectively narrows the price-band in which OPEC tries to manage the oil market, while Trump’s tweets can drown out the likes of Saudi Arabia when they try to talk up prices or get immediate credit for promised supply cuts.
When the rules of the game change, some players just up and leave. This time last year, I was writing about the exit of Andy Hall, the veteran oil trader nicknamed “God” who closed down his main hedge fund, citing the disruption of elastic shale output and algorithmic trading. More energy-related hedge funds have either called it quits or suffered extreme whiplash this year.
Energy’s weighting in the S&P 500 is now less than 5.4 percent, the lowest in 15 years. Even pipeline stocks, which in theory should be benefiting from higher volume and efforts to clean up balance sheets and governance, have slumped again. Option-adjusted spreads on energy junk bonds have risen back toward 600 basis points for the first time since late 2016. Meanwhile, open interest in oil futures has plummeted.
Withdrawal creates its own side effects. In a series of recent reports, energy economist Phil Verleger argues persuasively that the recent sell-off in oil was exacerbated by the concentration of hedging by U.S. frackers in the $50 to $60 a barrel range. As oil prices fell through these levels, so swap dealers on the other side of those trades had to sell more futures to manage their own risk, intensifying the collapse. If the upshot is that exploration and production firms find it harder to hedge on good terms, this could ultimately curb production growth.
That holds out the tantalizing prospect of another turn in the cycle as supply falters. But, hold on, another turn already? The shortening of the cycle is itself an impediment to tempting dollars back into the sector. And besides algos and shale, all sorts of things have unmoored long-held certainties. OPEC’s power seems to diminish in inverse proportion to the number of countries it invites to Vienna, and Saudi Arabia is undergoing a jarring – and sometimes deadly – generational power shift. Rising renewables and electrification are eroding the walls separating energy’s fiefdoms, such as oil in road transportation. Demand for energy in general is becoming decoupled from economic growth. And lest we forget, the Federal Reserve is sounding the bell on the past decade’s reliable “buy the dip” approach on everything, not just energy.
Then there is Trump. Besides Iran and the tweets, the trade war with China looms very large over all commodities. Given the deep-seated issues at stake and evident antipathy, the current truce feels more like a pause than a prelude to imminent peace.
What could make 2019 even more volatile on this front is the changed context Trump confronts. Come January, most of the old hands surrounding him in his first two years will have departed (with Mattis leaving soon after). He will suddenly face an antagonistic House even as the Special Counsel’s investigation rumbles on, louder than ever. And he will begin his 2020 election campaign, potentially against a backdrop of a volatile stock market and other signs of a slowing economy.
In responding to such pressures, and facing a gridlocked Congress, it will be tempting to reach for those executive levers centered on foreign and trade policy. If it felt like energy’s world was rocked in 2018, it’s quite possible next year will trump that.
https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2018-12-21/trump-rocked-energy-in-2018-2019-could-be-wilder
-
2,600 Pounds of Explosive Gas Leaked in Nov. 25 Accident That Shut Delaware Memorial Bridge
Dec 21, 2018 | Philadelphia Inquirer
By Joseph N. DiStefano
The Nov. 25 industrial accident that shut Delaware Memorial Bridge for seven hours and snarled post-Thanksgiving Traffic on New Jersey Turnpike and I-95 released more than a ton of ethylene oxide, a highly flammable gas known to cause cancer, officials said Thursday.
The information was shared by Bob Stewart, managing director of operations at the chemical plant owned by chemicals company Croda, during a public meeting attended by concerned neighbors who wanted to know why dangerous industrial plants are allowed so close to busy highways and residential neighborhoods.
The 2,600-plus pounds is about what the ethylene oxide plant, which has been closed since the accident, was able to produce in 40 minutes, according to data that company officials gave on a tour of the facility the week before the accident. The company uses the material to produce surfactants, including mixing and separating agents for many industrial and retail products made by other chemical companies and corporate customers.
Some of the ethylene oxide, which government agencies list as a carcinogen to people who are exposed to it for long periods, was washed away and dissipated harmlessly as company, volunteer and state emergency responders sprayed more than a million gallons of water on the plant and its supply pipes.
And some leaked into the ground and is being monitored by the company, which is keeping the state informed of its findings, state and company officials said at the meeting, according to accounts in the Wilmington News Journal and WDEL radio.
According to the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, ethylene oxide may cause harm following exposure through inhalation, or skin or eye contact. Short-term exposure can cause nausea, headache, weakness, vomiting, and drowsiness. Skin contact can cause blisters, swelling, burns, frostbite and severe irritation. Long-term, chronic exposure can numb the sense of smell and lead to respiratory infection, anemia, and nerve damage. Chronic exposure has been linked to leukemia and stomach cancer, as well as miscarriage.
Croda had hoped to restart the plant as soon as two weeks after the accident but instead is continuing the investigation. The has kept its 250-member staff working, including 35 members hired for the now-closed unit, according to marketing director Cara Eaton.
Croda in 2016 said it would spend $170 million building the new unit at the plant complex, which dates to 1937. But Stewart, on a tour of the plant before the accident, would not confirm what Croda actually end up spending — whether the company had reduced the cost of the original plan or had ended up spending more than it expected.
The company asked state permission to reduce the size of some of the structures on the site in a revised permit application filed last summer, according to Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control records.PlayCurrent Time0:00/Duration Time0:00Loaded: 0%Progress: 0%0:00Fullscreen00:00Mute
The plant made ethylene oxide from relatively stable ethanol (the same alcohol that makes you drunk). Stewart and other Croda officials said that’s an environmentally friendlier process than hauling the volatile material to the site in railcars from manufacturers in the Houston area and other distant centers. But Croda has had to go back to railcar shipping, with its new unit shut down.
Neighbors at Thursday’s meeting questioned why state officials have allowed the production, use and storage of volatile and hazardous chemicals near highways and bridges that carry over 80,000 commuters and long-range drivers a day, and near residential neighborhoods.
But the Atlas Plant has been at that location since the 1930s, before the twin bridges were built, and has been using ethylene oxide at least since Croda’s predecessor, Uniqema, operated the plant and occupied a neighboring office building, now vacant, in the early 2000s.
Delaware’s recent Democratic governors have supported industry plans to update the aging chemical plants that line the west bank of the river between the Pennsylvania state line below Marcus Hook and the Chesapeake and Delaware Canal in Delaware City, in hopes of keeping relatively well-paid blue-collar jobs for their constituents and ensuring the chemical industry still has a home in the Delaware Valley, close to many of its customers in the northeastern United States.
Political leaders have felt pressure to ease the way for heavy industry, following the loss of thousands of old factory jobs in the closing of the state’s GM and Chrysler automotive assembly plants, shutdowns by the DuPont Co. and its spin-off companies, and the demolition of the Claymont Steel (Evraz) mill, in the past ten years.
The administration of current Gov. John Carney and the ruling Democrats in the state legislature earlier this year agreed to relax provision of the state coastal-zone act to make it easier to build and expand heavy industry along the Delaware River and Bay shoreline after a long moratorium. But the Thanksgiving-weekend accident at Croda has energized environmentalists who claim the chemical industry is not compatible with the region’s suburban sprawl.
Staff writer Marie McCullough contributed to this report.
http://www.philly.com/business/croda-toxic-gas-ton-delaware-memorial-bridge-public-meeting-ethylene-oxide-20181221.html
-
Fla. Suit Links Power Plants to Spike in Cancer Cases
Dec 21, 2018 | Orlando Weekly (In E&E Greenwire)
By Xander Peters
Florida residents who live near coal-fired Orlando Utilities Commission power plants filed a lawsuit yesterday alleging that the plants have polluted thousands of properties with cancer-causing toxins.
Residents' homes and public areas in Stoneybrook, Avalon Park and Eastwood were contaminated with a variety of pollutants, including radioactive residues, and the pollution is correlated with a rise in cases of rare cancers in east Orange County, the suit alleges. It calls for OUC coal plants to be closed.
Soil samples showed the power plants had "contaminated homes in these communities with carcinogenic toxins at levels in excess of state and federal regulatory standards critical to protecting human health," the firm representing the plaintiffs said in a news release.
"The danger of such exposure is borne out by an epidemiologic analysis based on data from the Florida Cancer Disease Registry and a site investigation, which found a higher incidence of, for instance, pediatric brain and blood cancers including two exceedingly rare pediatric brain cancers," the suit states, adding that the Stanton power plant has a "unique Contaminate fingerprint."
The suit also alleges that local developers and their associates sold homes without warning buyers about health risks or dealing with the pollution.
A spokesman for Avalon Park Group, one of those named in the suit, said the company doesn't comment on pending litigation. Another developer, Lennar Corp., did not immediately return a request for comment.
"The Stanton Energy Center's operations are highly regulated by both the state and federal governments," OUC spokesman Tim Trudell said in a statement. "OUC meets or exceeds all permitting requirements as environmental stewardship is one of the key principles of our organization. Due to the pending litigation, we cannot get into any additional detail at this time."
And a spokesperson for Orlando said, "It has always been the city's expectation that OUC operates within state and federal regulations".
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/12/21/stories/1060110399
-
Feds Award PTC Grants to Amtrak, Metra and NJ Transit
Dec 21, 2018 | Progressive Railroading
U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.) yesterday announced $9.16 million in federal funding toward the installation of positive train control (PTC) along Amtrak's Southwest Chief line between Dodge City, Kansas, and Las Animas, Colorado.
The funding was awarded through the U.S. Department of Transportation’s (USDOT) Consolidated Rail Infrastructure and Safety Improvements Grant Program. The Colorado and Kansas departments of transportation and Amtrak applied for the grant.
"This federal investment will help to make critical safety improvements along the Southwest Chief line,” said Bennet in a press release. “Our federal, state, and local governments are committed to preserving this vital component to southeastern Colorado's economy, and we will continue to partner with them and Amtrak to keep the route running."
Colorado, Kansas and Amtrak together contributed a 20 percent match — or $2.29 million — to the federal government's 80 percent contribution toward the PTC project's cost, according to the press release.
PTC will be installed across 179 miles of the mostly single-track route between Dodge City and Las Animas. Located in BNSF Railway Co.'s La Junta Subdivision, the territory is one of the remaining segments without PTC on the long-distance route.
The grant is the latest effort toward maintaining service on the Southwest Chief line. In August, the U.S. Senate passed an amendment to provide $50 million for maintenance and safety improvements along the route and require Amtrak to fulfill its promise to fund improvements along the line, according to Bennet's office.
In October, Amtrak officials told Congress they planned to maintain rail service as-is through fiscal-year 2019, which ends Oct. 1, 2019.
Meanwhile, U.S. Sens. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) and Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) announced Metra will receive $2,058,163 in federal funding from the USDOT for PTC implementation.
“Implementing PTC is vitally important to ensuring that our railroads have the highest level of safety for millions of riders and workers in Illinois and around the country. This technology will save lives,” said Durbin in a statement.In addition, U.S. Rep. Bill Pascrell Jr. (D-N.J.) announced the USDOT awarded $6.5 million to New Jersey Transit for PTC implementation.
"This funding can help make sure that our commuters are able to ride NJ Transit with more confidence," he said in a statement.https://www.progressiverailroading.com/ptc/news/Feds-award-PTC-grants-to-Amtrak-Metra-and-NJ-Transit--56360
-
Ewire: House Democrats Eye Castor for Select Climate Panel Chair
Dec 21, 2018 | Inside EPA
House Democrats have tentatively picked Rep. Kathy Castor (D-FL) to chair their soon-to-be-revived select committee on climate change, according to news reports, with the lawmaker aiming to increase public awareness of global warming risks and mitigation options.
“We need to raise the profile of the climate crisis,” Castor told the Tampa Bay Times. “People are demanding action and don't understand why we're not leading the world on climate change innovation.”
Castor, a member of the Energy and Commerce Committee, told E&E News that Speaker-designate Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) asked her to lead the panel, even though the decision wasn't 100 percent official.
Her selection as chair would have symbolic importance, given that Florida in many ways is most vulnerable to climate risks such as sea level rise and more extreme weather events.
And Castor's selection may also limit concerns from Rep. Frank Pallone (D-NJ), the chairman of the energy committee, who has opposed the creation of the panel due to fears it would undercut his committee's jurisdiction.
Lawmakers continue to debate the precise structure of the committee, which last operated when Democrats held the House from 2007 to 2011. Uncertainties include whether the select committee will have subpoena power, or whether it will bar members who have accepted campaign money from fossil fuel interests.
The latter request is supported by Rep.-elect Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), who has also pushed the new committee to focus solely on “Green New Deal” legislation, an amorphous proposal that would include a jobs program and an aggressive renewable mandate.
Castor appeared to reject both the campaign funding request and the call for a sole focus on a Green New Deal.
“I think they have some terrific ideas,” she told E&E, of advocates pushing for the program. “But that's not going to be our sole focus.” She added that limiting membership based on campaign donations could have First Amendment hurdles.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/ewire-house-democrats-eye-castor-select-climate-panel-chair
-
Legal Fight Likely over EPA's Proposal to Soften Wood Heater Air Rules
Dec 21, 2018 | Inside EPA
By Stuart Parker
Environmentalists and the state of New York are preparing for a possible legal fight against EPA plans to allow a “sell-through” period for retailers to sell wood-burning heaters that do not meet coming tougher federal emissions limits, which critics say is an unlawful delay of emissions reduction requirements that will harm public health.
Amid the concerns, raised at a Dec. 17 EPA hearing on the proposal in Washington, D.C., a bipartisan duo of senators is floating legislation to create a voluntary "change-out" program to subsidize the purchase of new wood stoves. They say this would be an effective way to encourage use of newer, lower-emitting, devices.
EPA in late November proposed to allow a further two years beyond May 2020 for retailers to sell their stock of wood-burning hydronic heaters and forced-air furnaces that do not meet tougher "Step 2" particulate matter emissions limits that would otherwise apply on that date. Wood heater soot emissions are a wintertime problem in several parts of the country, contributing to high air pollution levels in locales such as Fairbanks, AK.
The agency would not exempt manufacturers from meeting the tougher standards under EPA's 2015 new source performance standards (NSPS) for wood heaters, but would amount to de facto compliance extension for retailers, sources say. However, because many retailers are very large retail chains, the move would in fact benefit primarily small manufacturers that will not meet the tougher emissions limits ahead of time, one industry source claims.
The 2015 rule imposed tougher PM limits on wood stoves, pellet heaters, hydronic heaters and forced-air furnaces in two phases. The second-phase emissions limits for wood stoves, applicable five years after the rule's implementation, are set at 2 grams per hour (g/hr), tougher than the current Step 1 limit of 4.5 g/hr. Other limits apply to other types of devices, some of them first-time limits.
EPA set first-time emissions limits for similar devices such as hydronic heaters, forced-air furnaces and some previously unregulated pellet stoves. EPA's Step 2 limit for hydronic heaters is 0.10 pounds of PM per million British thermal units (lb/mmBtu), and is 0.15 lb/mmBtu for forced-air furnaces.
Some manufacturers are pushing back against the standards, having failed to secure a three-year extension of the Step 2 compliance date in Congress. The sell-through period in EPA's Nov. 21 proposed rule for hydronic heaters and forced-air furnaces will allow some manufacturers to continue making noncompliant devices longer.
In an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR) released with the proposal, EPA invites comment on a similar sell-through period for wood stoves and pellet stoves, which command a larger market.
But environmentalists and some state air regulators are warning that if EPA's proposal and ANPR result in final rules containing sell-throughs, those rules would result in higher particulate pollution and violate the Clean Air Act.
At EPA's hearing, environmental law firm Earthjustice warned EPA that the sell-through plans are unlawful. Attorney Timothy Ballo for Earthjustice said, delaying the effective compliance date of the NSPS "as EPA proposes applies a weaker standard than EPA previously concluded reflects the best system of emissions reduction.”
Ballo said, “To weaken a standard of performance as EPA proposes, EPA must show that revising the NSPS to increase emissions of harmful air pollutants is necessary because the standards EPA previously adopted no longer reflect the best system of emissions reduction that is adequately demonstrated."
But "EPA does not claim that the best system of emission reduction reflected in the NSPS is not achievable or adequately demonstrated, nor could it," Ballo said.
New York Assistant Attorney General Nicholas Buttino (D) echoed Ballo's concerns, saying, "the proposed sell-through provision is unlawful under the Clean Air Act because Congress did not authorize EPA to adopt a sell-through period after the effective date of a New Source Performance Standard."
Also, "the sell-through provision would raise legal issues under state consumer protection laws. Selling Step 1 heating devices that owners could not lawfully operate for their intended purpose may constitute consumer fraud. These legal problems are easily avoided by abandoning the sell-through proposal."
States' Concerns
The Northeast States For Coordinated Air Use Management (NESCAUM), a regional air regulators' group, also criticized EPA's plans. In testimony, the group said, "No further delay in fully implementing the NSPS is acceptable or warranted. The 2020 standards, which are long overdue and supported by the record established in the 2015 rulemaking, can be met by industry today." Further, "We also oppose a sell-through period for wood stoves," as floated by the ANPR.
NESCAUM faults EPA's cost-benefit analysis to support its proposed sell-through under the NSPS, saying EPA undercounts foregone benefits that would result. Yet "[e]ven using their flawed methodology, EPA concludes the foregone environmental benefits outweigh the cost to industry by 10 to 20 times," the group says.
The Western States Air Resources Council (WESTAR), a Western air regulators' group, also opposes the proposed sell-through. "WESTAR believes that there are far more residential wood heaters available to consumers (wood stoves, fireplace inserts and pellet stoves) that can meet the Step 2 standard than indicated" in EPA's proposal.
Further, "Our preliminary analysis leads us to conclude that Step 2 technology-based Best System of Emission Reduction established in the 2015 NSPS rulemaking has been adequately demonstrated for residential wood heaters, and a sufficient number of models will be available well before the May 2020 deadline to satisfy consumer choice. There is no need for an extension to the compliance deadline for this category of appliances."
Also, "EPA overstates the cost savings that would be realized by the regulated industry by reducing stranded inventories," WESTAR says.
The group is asking EPA for more time to submit written comments on the proposal. Currently, comments on the proposal are due Jan. 14, but WESTAR asks for comment to be extended by 45 days, until early March. Comments on the ANPR are due Feb. 13, but WESTAR requests an extension of 45 days, until early April. These requests mirror those of the National Association of Clean Air Agencies (NACAA) in Dec. 3 written comments to EPA.
Industry's Divisions
Industry groups are split over the merits of a sell-through, according to testimony at the hearing.
For example, The Hearth, Patio and Barbecue Association (HPBA) leads companies supporting the plans. Ryan Carroll, vice president of HPBA, said in testimony that sell-through periods are a "reasonable and necessary means of avoiding the significant economic harm" that would result "if Step 1 products are stranded in commerce after May 2020."
HPBA "emphatically supports the granting of additional sell-through" periods for wood stoves and pellet heaters, said Carroll.
Ranged against HPBA are other manufacturers that believe they can meet the Step 2 standards. The Alliance for Green Heat, representing such companies, said in testimony "Please spend EPA’s valuable resources on issues that will advance our industry and improve efficiencies, not prolong the old technology that threatens the health of rural communities." EPA's proposal "in effect subsidizes the worst performing technologies," the group said.
One industry source says that EPA's ANPR is surprising, because by the time EPA can propose and finalize a rule on a sell-through for wood stoves and pellet stoves, manufacturers will have already made key investment decisions and will be making products in 2019 for sale in 2020, rendering the eventual rule largely moot.
Legislative Proposal
Meanwhile, Sen. Tom Carper (D-DE), ranking member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee (EPW) and Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) have introduced a bill seeking to use federal funds to subsidize a voluntary wood stove change-out program that would encourage the public to switch out old stoves for new, cleaner ones.
While the EPA proposals address standards for new wood heaters, the bill introduced Dec. 19 by Sens. Carper and Murkowski, S. 3779, would address the large number of older heaters not affected by the NSPS.
"Older, inefficient appliances for wood heat can last a really long time, but newer options are better for both our health and the environment,” said Murkowski Dec. 20. “The bill Sen. Carper and I introduced yesterday would provide families with a cost-effective way to transition to appliances built with the most innovative wood-burning technologies to help reduce emissions."
The bill would authorize $75 million for each fiscal year through 2024 for an EPA grant program to encourage replacement of old wood heaters with new, NSPS-compliant ones.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/legal-fight-likely-over-epas-proposal-soften-wood-heater-air-rules
-
Kids Want 9th Circuit to Lift Stay on Landmark Case
Dec 21, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Benjamin Hulac
Lawyers for a group of young Americans suing the Trump administration in a landmark climate case yesterday asked an appeals court to unfreeze the proceedings.
The attorneys, representing 21 children and young adults through the legal advocacy group Our Children's Trust, filed court papers yesterday with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, requesting it remove its stay, issued last month, so trial can start.
Julia Olson, the lead attorney in the case, said in a statement that the window in which to address climate change is closing. Her clients' well-being and futures are at risk, she said.
"We are in a race against accumulating CO2 and we are running out of time for a remedy," Olson said. "These young people's rights continue to be violated every day."
The motion is the latest in legal wrangling between the plaintiffs and the administration, which is seeking to toss the case entirely.
Trial was supposed to begin in October, but the government first got the Supreme Court to issue a stay, and then the 9th Circuit (Greenwire, Nov. 9).
The plaintiffs sued the Obama administration in 2015, accusing it of breaking their constitutionally protected rights to live in a safe climate and of actively fueling climate change through fossil fuel policies.
Their legal team also possesses troves of government documents, dating back to at least the Kennedy administration, that show the federal government knew decades ago that fossil fuels were heating the planet.
"Our lawsuit is time-sensitive," Kiran Oommen, a plaintiff from Oregon, said in a statement. "We've established the facts around human-caused climate change and we know that it is hurting us now and threatening our futures."
Oommen and his fellow plaintiffs want a court order that the government had violated their rights and a court-mandated plan, based on climate science, to phase out fossil fuels nationwide.
The case is Juliana v. United States.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/12/21/stories/1060110415
-
EPA Undercuts Risks of Pollutants on Kids — Study
Dec 21, 2018 | E&E Greenwire
By Sean Reilly
EPA is failing to fully account for the harm that air pollution does to children, leading to a "serious undercounting" of the corresponding benefits of cleaner air for kids, researchers conclude in a new paper.
For the paper, scientists at Columbia University and other organizations reviewed more than 200 studies published since 2000 that explored the connection between pollution exposure and health effects around the world.
The overall findings in those studies provide "compelling evidence" that exposure to four types of pollutants — fine and coarse particles, nitrogen dioxide and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons — "adversely affect" birth outcomes and neurobehavioral development, along with adding to the risk of developing childhood asthma, the paper found.
"Given the size of the population exposed and at risk, there are clearly opportunities to realize substantial health benefits to children from policies that reduce emissions and exposure to these pollutants," all of which are associated with fossil fuel consumption, the authors wrote.
But an EPA program used to gauge the economic value of changes in air quality currently doesn't incorporate all of those potential benefits into its calculations, according to the paper. Although the Environmental Benefits Mapping and Analysis Program (BenMAP) looks at the link between pollutant exposure and ailments like acute bronchitis, it should also factor in the potential impact of cleaner air on childhood asthma risk and the other two "health outcomes," the authors wrote.
The agency has used BenMAP in many of the regulatory impact analyses intended to assess the cost and benefits of new rules, including its 2012 tightening of the ambient air quality standards for fine particulates.
Policies to cut fossil fuel emissions are a health benefit both because they cut air pollution and because they ease the effects of climate change, Frederica Perera, the study's lead author, said in a statement yesterday. "However, because only a few adverse outcomes in children have been considered, policymakers and the public have not yet seen the extent of the potential benefits of clean air and climate change polices, particularly for children."
Perera heads Columbia's Center for Children's Environmental Health. The paper was published online this month in the journal Environmental Research. Also involved were scientists from Boston University and Abt Associates.
After saying she would check, an EPA spokeswoman had not further responded to a request for comment by publication time.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2018/12/21/stories/1060110409
Industry and Association News
LCSA News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested