Preview Newsletter
AM ACC Clips Report - January 28, 2019
-
Hearing on Government Shutdown Impacts
Jan 31, 2019 | Energy and Commerce
Location: 2123 Rayburn / 10:00 AM -
(ACC Mentioned) US January Chemical Activity Falls as Economic Growth Slows
Jan 22, 2019 | ICIS
US chemical activity fell in January for the third consecutive month, indicating the economy is growing at a slower rate, the American Chemistry Council (ACC) said on Tuesday. -
(ACC Mentioned) ACC's CAB Falls in January, Suggesting Slowdown in US Economic Growth
Jan 28, 2019 | Chemical Week
By Jing Chen
Marks the third consecutive month-over-month drop. -
(ACC Mentioned) $1.5 Trillion U.S. Tax Cut Has No Major Impact on Business Capex Plans - Survey
Jan 28, 2019 | Reuters (In The New York Times, CNBC, EuroNews, Independent Journal Review)
By Lucia Mutikani
The Trump administration's $1.5 trillion (£1.14 trillion) cut tax package appeared to have no major impact on businesses' capital investment or hiring plans, according to a survey released a year after the biggest overhaul of the U.S. tax code in more than 30 years. -
(ACC Mentioned) Lobbyist Blames Ocean State's Plastic Pollution on Asia (Including Video)
Jan 25, 2019 | ecoRI
By Frank Carini
The meeting’s first speaker, a representative of the plastics industry, knew exactly where to place the blame: on foreigners and on alternatives to petroleum products. -
(ACC Mentioned) Florida Launches New Plastics Recycling Program
Jan 25, 2019 | Recycling Today
By Megan Smalley
The Florida Recycling Partnership, Tallahassee, Florida, partnered with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), Keep Florida Beautiful, Tallahassee, and other recycling stakeholders in the state for Florida Recycles Day at the Capitol on Jan. 24 to remind legislators and the public about the importance of recycling. -
(ACC Mentioned) U.S. Growth Outlook Weakens in Survey of Business Economists
Jan 28, 2019 | Bloomberg
By Chibuike Oguh
Forecasters are less optimistic about U.S. expansion this year, though they’re nearly unanimous in their expectations that a recession can be kept at bay until at least 2020, a National Association for Business Economics survey showed Monday. -
(ACC Mentioned) Blacks Need to Challenge the Shutdown
Jan 25, 2019 | Chicago Crusader
When America gets a “cold” Blacks will come down with “pneumonia.” -
(ACC Mentioned) Chevron Phillips CEO Talks Leadership, Pollution and Trade War
Jan 25, 2019 | Houston Chronicle
By Marissa Luck
Two things happened just as Mark Lashier became CEO of Chevron Phillips Chemical Co.: his grandson was born and Hurricane Harvey hammered the Gulf Coast. -
Nearly $600M Petrochemical Project Proposed in Pasadena
Jan 25, 2019 | Houston Chronicle
By Marissa Luck
A Houston energy company is proposing to build a nearly $600 million petrochemical project in Pasadena, newly-released state documents show. -
EPA Rule Addressing Methylene Chloride Risks Stalled by “Shutdown” … While Activists File First “New TSCA” Court Challenge for EPA Failure to Act
Jan 27, 2019 | Lexology
By Joseph J. Green
During confirmation hearings before Congress last week, Acting EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler indicated that a long-awaited EPA rule to restrict consumer and commercial uses of methylene chloride as a paint and coating remover has been delayed by the government shutdown, after being submitted to the Office of Management and Budget on December 21st. -
2019 Environmental, Health, and Safety Outlook For Manufacturers
Jan 25, 2019 | The National Law Review
By Megan Baroni
...Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) reform is an EPA priority, and we can expect that to continue in 2019. -
The U.S. Military Plans to Keep Incinerating Toxic Firefighting Foam, Despite Health Risks
Jan 27, 2019 | The Intercept
By Sharon Lerner
The U.S. military plans to incinerate unused firefighting foam containing hazardous chemicals, even with the health and environmental risks this poses. -
Newly Formed PFAS Task Force Calls for Action to Clean Up Toxic Chemicals
Jan 25, 2019 | Union of Concerned Scientists (Blog)
By Genna Reed
Earlier this week, members of Congress announced the creation of a bipartisan task force intended to shine a light on the dangers of nationwide PFAS contamination. -
Chemours Shipped Toxic Waste From Netherlands to North Carolina
Jan 25, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Andrew M. Ballard
The Chemours Co. was shipping GenX chemical waste from its facility in the Netherlands to its plant in Fayetteville, N.C., where management of such material is under scrutiny. -
New York Pushes Back Cleaning Products’ Disclosure Deadline
Jan 28, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto and John Herzfeld
Procter & Gamble Co., Unilever, and other makers of cleaning products will have three extra months to comply with New York state’s requirements to disclose their chemical ingredients. -
Anxiety Spills Over as U.K. Chemical Companies Face Down Brexit
Jan 28, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ali Qassim
U.K. chemical companies are hoping for the best—but preparing for the worst—as Prime Minister Theresa May struggles to win parliamentary support for a Brexit divorce deal with the European Union. -
Drillers Are Easing Off the Gas
Jan 28, 2019 | Wall Street Journal
By Ryan Dezember and Stephanie Yang
Some of the companies responsible for flooding the U.S. with natural gas are dialing back on drilling amid worries that supplies of the fuel are outpacing demand and potentially sending already depressed prices into a tailspin. -
Trump Eyes Action to Limit States’ Powers to Block Pipelines
Jan 28, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ari Natter and Jennifer A. Dlouhy
The Trump administration is considering taking steps to limit the ability of states to block interstate gas pipelines and other energy projects, according to three people familiar with the deliberations. -
EPA to Back Up Power Rule Rewrite with New Analysis, Air Chief Says
Jan 26, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Abby Smith
The EPA is working on analysis that shows greenhouse gas cuts from its rewrite of Obama-era power sector carbon controls wouldn’t be all that different from the limits under the rule it would replace, the agency’s top air official said. -
Colo. Bows out of Clean Power Plan Challenge
Jan 28, 2019 | E&E Climatewire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
Colorado's new Democratic attorney general is pulling the state out of a legal challenge to the Obama-era Clean Power Plan. -
List of Regulation Rollbacks for Oil, Gas and Coal Industry
Jan 27, 2019 | AP (In The New York Times)
Under President Donald Trump, federal agencies have moved to roll back regulations for companies that extract, transport and burn oil, gas and coal. -
Trump Rollbacks for Fossil Fuel Industries Carry Steep Cost
Jan 27, 2019 | AP (In The New York Times)
As the Trump administration rolls back environmental and safety rules for the energy sector, government projections show billions of dollars in savings reaped by companies will come at a steep cost: more premature deaths and illnesses from air pollution, a jump in climate-warming emissions and more severe derailments of trains carrying explosive fuels. -
Lawmakers Introduce Energy, Resource Bills
Jan 28, 2019 | E&E Daily
By Courtney Columbus
Lawmakers last week introduced a flurry of energy and natural resource bills as Congress begins to move away from the shutdown crisis and into legislative work. -
Renewable Chief: 'I'm Not Concerned' About Pallone
Jan 28, 2019 | E&E Energywire
By David Ferris
Dan Simmons, the new head of the Department of Energy's renewables and efficiency office, says he doesn't have an opinion on the "Green New Deal." -
Western States Fight Potential Trump Limits on CWA 401 Power
Jan 25, 2019 | Inside EPA
Western state governors are fighting a potential Trump administration effort to narrow states’ Clean Water Act (CWA) section 401 authority to review federally permitted pipelines and other projects, amid reports that the White House is considering revising current EPA draft guidance on implementing the CWA to boost energy production. -
US LNG Export Project Timelines Face Uncertainty in Market Amid Regulatory Questions
Jan 25, 2019 | Platts
By Harry Weber and Maya Weber
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's inaction on Venture Global LNG's permit application for its Calcasieu Pass export terminal in Louisiana is raising concerns in the market about a broader impact on approval schedules set for other projects. -
Shutdown Stalls Cybersecurity Work on Gas Pipelines, Group Says
Jan 25, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Naureen S. Malik
The shutdown of the U.S. government has halted work by a federal agency on cybersecurity risks faced by the nation’s 2.5 million miles of natural gas pipelines, according to an industry group. -
A Greener New Deal, CO2eight: Cutting Carbon, Income Taxes, and Poverty
Jan 25, 2019 | Real Clear Energy
By Mark Mackie
Not a new chemical element, CO2eight is a call to cut CO2 emissions and modernize taxes with enactment of the 28th Amendment to the US Constitution. -
Trump EPA Official: Addressing Climate Change 'One of Many Priorities'
Jan 25, 2019 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
A Trump administration official said Friday that addressing climate change is a “priority” for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), but said it can rank behind other issues. -
Democrats Eye Early Deals On Modest Climate Policies Before Bigger Bills
Jan 25, 2019 | Inside EPA
By Doug Obey
House Democrats are contemplating bipartisan deals on power grid modernization, fixing pipeline leaks and energy efficiency as initial steps to address climate change, according to a top staffer on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, who adds such efforts would come before more ambitious steps to tackle the growing threat. -
Nations Recognize Warming as Threat to Peace and Security
Jan 28, 2019 | E&E Climatewire
By Jean Chemnick
There's a growing global consensus that climate change is a threat to peace and security that deserves the same kind of attention afforded to terrorism and other risks. -
Samsung Is Getting Rid of Plastic Packaging for Phones, Tablets and TVs
Jan 28, 2019 | CNN
By Sherisse Pham
Samsung is joining a growing number of international companies that are pledging to reduce the amount of plastic waste from their businesses.
Congressional Hearings
Industry and Association News
TSCA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
-
Hearing on Government Shutdown Impacts
Jan 31, 2019 | Energy and Commerce
-
(ACC Mentioned) US January Chemical Activity Falls as Economic Growth Slows
Jan 22, 2019 | ICIS
US chemical activity fell in January for the third consecutive month, indicating the economy is growing at a slower rate, the American Chemistry Council (ACC) said on Tuesday.
The ACC’s January Chemical Activity Barometer (CAB) on a three-month moving average (3MMA) basis fell month on month but rose year on year.January 2019CAB (3MMA)121.49MOM Change (%)-0.3YOY Change (%)0.8CAB (unadjusted)121.39MOM Change (%)0.0YOY Change (%)-0.3
“The CAB continues to signal gains in US commercial and industrial activity through mid-2019, but at a much slower pace as growth (as measured by year-earlier comparisons) has turned over,” said Kevin Swift, chief economist at the ACC.
“Despite three straight months of decline in the barometer, the cumulative decline is 1.0% – well below the 3.0% that would signal negative growth in the US economy.”
Major components of the barometer were mixed in January.
“Trends in construction-related resins, pigments and related performance chemistry were mixed, suggesting slow housing activity,” the ACC report said.
“Plastic resins used in packaging and in consumer and institutional applications turned positive, performance chemistry gained, and US exports were mixed.”
Equity prices and product and input prices fell, while inventory indicators were positive.
The CAB is a leading economic indicator derived from a composite index of chemical industry activity.
It has four primary components including production, equity prices, product prices, as well as inventories and other indicators.
https://www.icis.com/explore/resources/news/2019/01/22/10309590/us-january-chemical-activity-falls-as-economic-growth-slows/
-
(ACC Mentioned) ACC's CAB Falls in January, Suggesting Slowdown in US Economic Growth
Jan 28, 2019 | Chemical Week
By Jing Chen
Marks the third consecutive month-over-month drop...
Access to full text unavailable – subscription required.
Story can be found here:
https://chemweek.com/CW/Document/101041/ACCs-CAB-falls-in-January-suggesting-slowdown-in-US-economic-growth
-
(ACC Mentioned) $1.5 Trillion U.S. Tax Cut Has No Major Impact on Business Capex Plans - Survey
Jan 28, 2019 | Reuters (In The New York Times, CNBC, EuroNews, Independent Journal Review)
By Lucia Mutikani
The Trump administration's $1.5 trillion (£1.14 trillion) cut tax package appeared to have no major impact on businesses' capital investment or hiring plans, according to a survey released a year after the biggest overhaul of the U.S. tax code in more than 30 years.
The National Association of Business Economics' (NABE) quarterly business conditions poll published on Monday found that while some companies reported accelerating investments because of lower corporate taxes, 84 percent of respondents said they had not changed plans. That compares to 81 percent in the previous survey published in October.
The White House had predicted that the massive fiscal stimulus package, marked by the reduction in the corporate tax rate to 21 percent from 35 percent, would boost business spending and job growth. The tax cuts came into effect in January 2018.
"A large majority of respondents, 84 percent, indicate that one year after its passage, the corporate tax reform has not caused their firms to change hiring or investment plans," said
NABE President Kevin Swift.
The lower tax rates, however, had an impact in the goods producing sector, with 50 percent of respondents from that sector reporting increased investments at their companies, and 20 percent saying they redirected hiring and investments to the United States from abroad.
The NABE survey also suggested a further slowdown in business spending after moderating sharply in the third quarter of 2018. The survey's measure of capital spending fell in January to its lowest level since July 2017. Expectations for capital spending for the next three months also weakened.
"Fewer firms increased capital spending compared to the October survey responses, but the cutback appeared to be concentrated more in structures than in information and communication technology investments," said Swift, who is also chief economist at the American Chemistry Council.
According to the survey, employment growth improved modestly in the fourth quarter of 2018 compared to the third quarter. Just over a third of respondents reported rising employment at their firms over the past three months, up from 31 percent in the October survey. The survey's forward-looking measure of employment slipped to 25 in January from 29 in October.
https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2019/01/28/business/28reuters-usa-economy-investment.html
-
(ACC Mentioned) Lobbyist Blames Ocean State's Plastic Pollution on Asia (Including Video)
Jan 25, 2019 | ecoRI
By Frank Carini
The meeting’s first speaker, a representative of the plastics industry, knew exactly where to place the blame: on foreigners and on alternatives to petroleum products.
Citing a study published in Science and a story in The Wall Street Journal, Keith Christman, managing director of plastic markets for the American Chemistry Council’s Plastics Division, said the problem with marine debris and plastics in the ocean comes from a lack of waste management in "rapidly developing countries in Asia.” He specifically called out China, Vietnam, Indonesia, and the Philippines.
During his nearly 30-minute presentation, however, Christman never mentioned the fact that for decades many developed countries, including the United States, sent massive amounts of plastic waste to Asia instead of recycling it on their own.
For instance, about 106 million metric tons — nearly 45 percent — of the world’s plastics collected for recycling have been exported to China since reporting to the U.N. Comtrade Database began in 1992.
Christman left it to others at a Jan. 17 subcommittee meeting of the Task Force to Tackle Plastics, held at Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management (DEM) headquarters, to note this relevant piece of information. He also forgot to mention that during the past few years China and other Asian countries have begun banning plastic waste from being imported.
The Task Force to Tackle Plastics was created last year to reduce reliance on single-use plastics that often end up in Rhode Island’s waters and washed up along the Ocean State’s coastline.
The world’s plastic problem is immense, and Rhode Island alone won’t solve it. Our 21st-century society has become much too reliant on single-use plastics. Changes are needed.Keith Christman’s pro-plastics presentation featured this picture with the caption: ‘Bunches of identical bananas stored for 7 days loose and in a modified atmosphere bag.’
Keith Christman’s pro-plastics presentation featured this picture with the caption: ‘Bunches of identical bananas stored for 7 days loose and in a modified atmosphere bag.’
Selling hard-boiled eggs in plastic packaging perfectly exemplifies this over-reliance. One of the world’s largest organic consumer brands sells hard-boiled eggs swaddled in plastic, marketing this “convenient, grab-and-go organic snack option” as “one you can feel good about.” It probably takes as much time to open the plastic packaging as it does to peel off the eggs’ natural packaging.
Christman offered some other foods that benefit by being wrapped in plastic, to reduce food waste and effectively feed people around the globe, he said. He mentioned bananas, potatoes, grapes, and cucumbers. (Potatoes, for one, can last about 3-5 weeks in the pantry and 3-4 months in the refrigerator.)
He claimed grape waste is reduced by 20 percent by just putting them in packaging, as opposed to providing them loose. “Also you reduce the hazard of people slipping and falling on grapes,” he added. He claimed studies have shown that a cucumber will last three days on a grocery store shelf or in a refrigerator “before you have to throw it away, before it looks like it’s getting all shriveled up and you don’t want to eat it anymore.”
Wrapped in plastic, Christman said, that same cucumber will last 14 days.
The 27-year American Chemistry Council lobbyist also noted that alternatives to plastics come with higher costs, such as greater greenhouse-gas emissions and more replacement litter. He said reducing the use of plastics and switching to alternatives “is clearly not the best approach.” He noted that the trash coming down rivers and floating in the ocean isn’t all plastic.
“The reality is the alternatives have about four times more environmental costs as plastics does,” Christman said. “Plastics use about one-fourth of the material. You get about one-fourth of the environmental impacts. You need to be very careful about anything that would switch to alternatives.”
He also noted that expanded polystyrene foam (EPS) — commonly referred to as Styrofoam — is lightweight, contains very little plastic, is mostly air, and uses less energy and water than comparable paper-based alternatives.
He neglected to mention that plastics, including EPS, photodegrade, meaning they break down into smaller and smaller pieces and marine animals easily mistake these bits for food. Polystyrene residues have been found in samples of human fat tissue and plastics have been found in human stool samples. Styrene exposure increases the risk of leukemia and lymphoma and is a neurotoxin. The Food and Drug Administration has determined that the styrene concentration in bottled drinking water shouldn’t exceed 0.1 parts per million.
“There are challenges out there but of course we also need to think about what are the benefits and sustainability attributes of plastics to begin with,” Christman said. “That’s something that’s very important when you consider potential policies. There is great potential for unintended consequences if you aren’t careful with policy development.”
American Chemistry Council Plastic Division members include Chevron Phillips, ExxonMobil, Shell, DuPont, and Dow. The council’s corporate members have kicked in $1.5 billion over five years to the Alliance to End Plastic Waste, to help developing countries in Asia build better waste systems.
The global plastics market is expected to reach $654.4 billion by 2020, according to recent research by Grand View Research Inc. The industry’s global market size in 2017 was valued at $522.7 billion.
The recent meeting of the task force’s innovation subcommittee featured a second speaker, Victor Bell, who was introduced as “DEM’s recycling pioneer.” For the past 20 years, however, Bell has run Jamestown-based Environmental Packaging International, a consulting business that specializes in environmental compliance, product stewardship, and sustainability goals related to packaging.
While his half-hour presentation acknowledged the environmental, public health, and societal benefits of plastics, he didn’t spend the entire time defending its growing use or its omnipresence.
“Plastics are a good material. It’s very useful for what we do. It makes a lot of sense,” Bell said. “But somehow in the last 20 years they sort of lost their license, because they let pieces get out of control.”
Plastic production is increasing by some 9 percent annually, and this ever-growing heap of material is accumulating in the environment, most notably in the world’s oceans. It's degrading both human and environmental health.
More shoreline cleanups and better recycling won’t make a dent in reducing the estimated 5.25 trillion pieces of plastic debris in the ocean, from the 269,000 tons afloat on the surface to some 4 billion plastic microfibers per square kilometer in the deep sea.
The numbers associated with single-use plastics, which currently account for about 40 percent of all plastic use, are staggering: some 500 billion retail plastic bags are used annually worldwide; some 25 billion Styrofoam cups are thrown out annually in the United States alone; nearly 3 million plastic bottles, every hour of every day, are used in the United States; more than 300 million plastic straws are used daily in the United States.
Bell noted that the recycling material the United States had been shipping to Asia for more than 20 years wasn’t all repurposed — probably only 65 percent to 70 percent, he said.
“We have to come up with solutions in this country,” the longtime Rhode Islander said.
To better address the problem of plastic waste, Bell mentioned several solutions: more bottle bills (Rhode Island and New Hampshire are the only New England states without one); better regulations, such as the Microbead-Free Waters Act of 2015 and the Save Our Seas Act of 2017; a nationwide extended producer responsibility law; better enforcement of existing laws; design standards for packaging; waste-stream infrastructure improvements.
In Rhode Island, the state could also use the litter tax, which was once a restricted account used to fund clean-up work, as originally intended. Instead, that tax money was long ago rolled into the state’s general fund.
While there are 616 state and local laws nationwide — including 243 in California, 110 in Massachusetts, 10 in Rhode Island, and five in Connecticut — that place restrictions or fees on plastic items, a handful of states, including Arizona, Florida, Idaho, Iowa, Michigan, and Minnesota, have passed laws that ban local plastics bans.
But even in states with such laws, Bell said enforcement can be lax, or, like in Rhode Island with the litter tax, money earmarked for a specific purpose is used to fill budget holes.
Bell also said Rhode Island should get onboard with the The New Plastics Economy. He doesn’t recommend the use of biodegradable or oxo-degradable plastics. He and some task force members noted that, “We can’t recycle our way out of this problem.”
The American Chemistry Council’s Christman responded (video below) to Bell’s recommendations for how to reduce plastics consumption by diminishing the idea of extended producer responsibility and by telling task force members to be leery about driving up the use of paper bags by initiating a plastic bag ban. He didn’t say anything about reusable bags, or mention the fact paper bags are compostable.
The task force’s four working groups, including the innovation subcommittee, must complete their reports by Feb. 1. On Feb. 14, the main task force is scheduled hold a public discussion of a draft report that includes the findings. A final report is expected to be sent to Gov. Gina Raimondo by Feb. 18.
The next meeting of the entire task force is scheduled for Feb. 5 from 11 a.m.-12:30 p.m. at DEM headquarters, 235 Promenade St., Room 300.
https://www.ecori.org/composting/2019/1/24/plastics-over-reliance-suffocates-growing-waste-stream
-
(ACC Mentioned) Florida Launches New Plastics Recycling Program
Jan 25, 2019 | Recycling Today
By Megan Smalley
The Florida Recycling Partnership, Tallahassee, Florida, partnered with the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (FDEP), Keep Florida Beautiful, Tallahassee, and other recycling stakeholders in the state for Florida Recycles Day at the Capitol on Jan. 24 to remind legislators and the public about the importance of recycling.
“The Florida Recycling Partnership is pleased to partner with FDEP and other key stakeholders to promote recycling during our Florida Recycles Day at the Capitol,” said Dawn McCormick, board chair of the Florida Recycling Partnership, during the event. “To improve recycling throughout the state and recycle only the right materials in our curbside residential programs, takes the cooperation of many of us as we strive to educate our residents about proper recycling.”
During the event, the Florida Wrap Recycling Action Program (WRAP) launched. The program, which is sponsored by the American Chemistry Council, Washington, D.C., is designed to boost plastic bag and film recycling, increase demand for recycled plastics and provide education on how film recycling can benefit Florida’s communities. To date, Alachua, Indian River, Leon, Miami-Dade, Orange and Seminole counties have agreed to participate in the WRAP program, along with the Solid Waste Authority of Palm Beach, Emerald Coast Unities Authority, the city of Jacksonville and the city of Tampa.
“We are very pleased that Florida has become a WRAP partner,” said Shari Jackson, director of the Flexible Film Recycling Group, during the event. “WRAP will provide tools and best practices to support DEP’s community outreach and education efforts to increase the recycling of plastic film packaging.”
FDEP also presented a Recycling Recognition Award to Northrop Grumman, Falls Church, Virginia, for its recycling efforts during the event.
“DEP is pleased to recognize entities like Northrop Grumman that demonstrate their commitment to environmental protection by implementing environmentally friendly practices and identifying innovative ways to recycle,” said FDEP Secretary Noah Valenstein at the event. “We are also pleased to join our partners in launching the WRAP initiative, which aims to reduce curbside recycling contamination through education, and provides Florida’s residents with even more recycling opportunities. Through these efforts, and with the help of our partners, together we can ensure Florida’s natural resources are protected and continue achieving more now for Florida’s environment.”
Valenstein also accepted the 2018 Sustainability Game Changer Partnership Award at the event. The Florida Recycling Partnership, Waste Management Inc. of Florida, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and the Florida Beverage Association partnered to win the award from the National Waste & Recycling Association, Washington, D.C. According to a Florida Recycling Partnership news release, the award recognizes partnerships that include municipal and county governments, regulatory agencies, community organizations and private industry that have successfully implemented game-changing initiatives, policies or programs that advance sustainability in their community. For the 2018 award, these public and private organizations worked together on three recycling educational programs, including the “Rethink. Reset. Recycle.” Campaign at FloridaRecycles.org; the Capitol Complex Recycling Project and Florida Recycles Day at the Capitol.
“Florida Recycles Day at the Capitol is our signature event,” says Keyna Cory, executive director for the Florida Recycling Partnership. “This past year we were able to announce the new collaborative educational program, Rethink. Reset. Recycle. campaign and the Capitol Complex Recycling Project.”
https://www.recyclingtoday.com/article/florida-recycling-partnership-wrap-program-awards/
-
(ACC Mentioned) U.S. Growth Outlook Weakens in Survey of Business Economists
Jan 28, 2019 | Bloomberg
By Chibuike Oguh
Forecasters are less optimistic about U.S. expansion this year, though they’re nearly unanimous in their expectations that a recession can be kept at bay until at least 2020, a National Association for Business Economics survey showed Monday.
Two-thirds of respondents expect growth to exceed 2 percent this year, down from the 90 percent in the prior survey for the 12 months through the third quarter of 2019, according to the Dec. 17-Jan. 9 survey of 106 NABE members.
“After a year of robust capital spending, business investment has cooled a bit, and expectations for the next three months slackened similarly,” NABE President Kevin Swift, chief economist at the American Chemistry Council, said in a statement released along with the survey.
“Fewer firms increased capital spending compared to the October survey responses, but the cutback appeared to be concentrated more in structures than in information and communication technology investments,” Swift said.
The results follow reports showing that U.S. manufacturing slumped in December, while consumer sentiment has weakened as the U.S.-China trade war and record overnment shutdown fuel uncertainty. JPMorgan Chase & Co. and Barclays Plc both cut their first-quarter growth projections last week, citing the effects of the partial closure.
Other takeaways from the survey showed:84 percent of respondents said that the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act hasn’t spurred plans to change hiring or investment.77 percent said trade concerns haven’t caused their companies to change investment, hiring, or pricing, similar to the prior survey.53 percent report skilled labor shortages at their firms, the most since October 2000 and up from 47 percent in October.47 percent said sales at their firms rose in the final quarter of last year, down from 61 percent in the October survey.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-01-28/u-s-growth-outlook-weakens-in-survey-of-business-economists
-
(ACC Mentioned) Blacks Need to Challenge the Shutdown
Jan 25, 2019 | Chicago Crusader
When America gets a “cold” Blacks will come down with “pneumonia.” That is why we are going to suffer from the current federal shutdown more than any other segment of the United States population. Yet, Blacks in general look at this calamity like it isn’t any of our business. Our people, we better wake-up i.e. SNAP OUT OF IT! While our elected officials on Capitol Hill are playing games like it is fun, millions of families – particularly Black families are heading to financial disaster. A disproportionate number of federal employees are Black. A major portion of Blacks doing government business is the sector doing federal contracting and subcontracting. They are in the way of this “Economic Freight Train.”
So where are the Black organizations? The National Black Chamber of Commerce appears to be the only group seriously concerned about this growing Armageddon. The news and updates about the issue are everywhere but our Black organizations are silent. It is now a month and two paycheck periods and millions of our federal workers and contractors have received nothing. The only businesses prospering from this tragedy are pawn shops and check cashing rip-off joints. Rent payments, mortgages, medical bills, tuition payments and other serious financial obligations are in deep jeopardy.
What is the National Black Chamber of Commerce doing? We have joined forces with the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and 44 other national organizations. Also, nearly 300 local affiliated chambers belonging to the U.S. Chamber federation have joined in as co-signers of the letter. Together we have written a letter to the President and members of Congress.
Here is the letter:
January 18, 2019
“TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES AND MEMBERS OF CONGRESS:
On behalf of the American business community, we urge Congress and the administration to immediately take steps to restore the full operation of the federal government.
The current shutdown – now the longest in American history – is causing significant and in some cases lasting damage to families, businesses, and the economy. The harm is well documented and continues to compound with each passing day.
Since the shutdown began, various compromises have been floated by both Republicans and Democrats. There are numerous paths forward that would allow for the government to be reopened that should be acceptable to all parties. Failing to seize on one of those compromises that can pass Congress and be signed into law is unacceptable.
The time to act, the time to end this shutdown is now so that we can keep the economy moving forward.
Sincerely,
ACA International, Aeronautical Repair Station Association, Air-Conditioning, Heating, & Refrigeration Institute, Airlines for America, American Bankers Association, American Bus Association, American Chemistry Council, American Coatings Association, American Council of Engineering Companies, American Financial Services, Association American Public Transportation, Association America’s SBDCs, Asian American Hotel Owners Association, Association of Global Automakers, Association of Equipment Manufacturers, Associated General Contractors of America, Association of Oil Pipe Lines, National Investor Relations, Institute Council for Responsible Nutrition, CCIM Institute Energy Equipment and Infrastructure Alliance, Federation of American Hospitals, Household & Commercial Products, Association Independent Lubricant Manufacturers, Association International Franchise Association, National Apartment Association, National Association of Government Guaranteed Lenders, National Association of Surety Bond Producers, National Association for the Self-Employed, National Beer Wholesalers Association, National Black Chamber of Commerce, National Council of Agricultural Employers, National Electrical Contractors Association, National Grocers Association Arlington, National Council of Chain Restaurants, National Multifamily Housing Council, National Retail Federation, Security Industry Association, The Association for Advanced Life Underwriting (AALU), The Toy Association, U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
It is without a doubt that the above effort will have an impact in the decision making of this crucial controversy. It is too bad that other Black organizations feel or do not realize that they have “skin” in this game. The financial future of our constituents is on the line. Don’t they care? Does it matter that people who depend on them expect activities from them that benefit their vested interests?
Here are some of the actual cases of the several hundred thousand horror stories: federal employee living paycheck to paycheck with a car payment due and $11 to his name; federal workers with advanced degrees at the welfare office; new federal hires have not had their healthcare processed and they are literally splitting their prescription medicine pills in half to “stretch” the supply.
These are some of the stories that will multiply by the millions and cause very serious harm to our economic state. Please consider that the future and well-being of our nation is on the line. Let us all put the needed pressure on our President and elected officials in equal fashion and without hesitation until it is done.
Mr. Alford is the Co-Founder, President/CEO of the National Black Chamber of Commerce®. Ms. DeBow is the Co-Founder, Executive Vice President of the NBCC.
https://chicagocrusader.com/blacks-need-to-challenge-the-shutdown/
-
(ACC Mentioned) Chevron Phillips CEO Talks Leadership, Pollution and Trade War
Jan 25, 2019 | Houston Chronicle
By Marissa Luck
Two things happened just as Mark Lashier became CEO of Chevron Phillips Chemical Co.: his grandson was born and Hurricane Harvey hammered the Gulf Coast.
The flood burst through a Baytown chemical plant just as the company was about to complete a massive $6 billion capital expansion. Four feet of water filled the complex, destroying motors and electrical equipment that workers had only recently installed. Nearly half of Chevron Phillips employees had water in their homes or lost a car in the flood. The other half were trying to help family members, friends and strangers hit by the storm. Every Chevron Phillips plant shuttered and several were underwater.
Within days on the job, Lashier was faced with one of the most challenging moments of his career - overseeing an emergency response to a once-in-a lifetime storm all while being stuck miles away in Plano, where he was visiting his newborn grandson and family.Unlimited Digital Access as little as $0.99Read more articles like this by subscribing to the Houston Chronicle SUBSCRIBE
He turned his daughter’s dining room table into a makeshift headquarters with computers and a phone, teleconferencing to the company’s board room-turned-emergency operations center in The Woodlands.
“People say, ‘Well, that must have been terrible your first month.’ I said, ‘Well, it was a terrible event, but it was an incredible response,” Lashier recalled. “The whole Hurricane Harvey experience, what our employees did, that told us that our employees choose to care about each other, about their communities, about the facilities that they work in.”
Now after a little more than a year on the job, Lashier is trying to cultivate the comradery and caring culture he saw during the storm. His company, a joint venture of Phillips 66 and Chevron, is contemplating another big Gulf Coast capital project too.
The Iowa native started his career at what was then Phillips Petroleum as an associate chemical engineer in 1989 before rising up the ranks to oversee projects in Saudi Arabia and Asia. When Phillips spun off its chemical division with Chevron to form a joint venture in 2000, Lashier oversaw the startup of the new joint venture’s operations in Singapore and eventually moved back to The Woodlands to take on various vice president and leadership roles before he was made CEO in August 2017.
Texas Inc. recently sat down with Lashier to talk about challenges in the industry, Chevron Phillips’ opportunities in 2019, and what he’s learned about leadership in his first 18 months as chief executive.
Q: You’re considering a major new investment in the Gulf Coast not long after Chevron Phillips Baytown complex started up. The American Chemistry Council estimates some $202 billion worth of chemical projects have been announced in the U.S. since 2010. How long will this boom last and is there a risk of overbuilding?
A: Polyethylene and the demand for these products is growing such that the world needs about four or five of these big cracking complexes a year. … The world is not adding capacity fast enough to meet the growth requirements. To say we couldn't overbuild is a naive. There are a lot of big companies very interested in growing in this business because they see the same fundamentals we do. But it’s not easy to build these big, very complex facilities and they're not easy to operate. And it takes billions of dollars to build one. So that kind of narrows the playing field for who can participate.
Q: The petrochemical industry is one of several U.S. sectors caught in the crosshairs of the ongoing trade feud with China. How have you felt the impact of tariffs or count-tariffs?
A: Like most companies in the U.S., we believe in free and fair trade. … There are tariffs on materials that we would export from the U.S. to China … as a result of that is the trade flow has shifted. We produce similar materials in the Middle East that aren't subject to tariffs in China. We can redirect materials from the U.S. to other parts of the world where we don't incur tariffs. And so if you think about it, you've got this system that's consuming these materials. It's still the system, still consuming as much as it was before, but it's coming from different locations. So the economics redirect where the plastics flow.
Q: Are you seeing the impact of these counter-tariffs affect the return-on-investment from your recent major capital investment in Baytown or do you expect to start seeing that?
A: What's maybe impacted it more than the tariffs themselves is the uncertainty it's created. When there’s uncertainty in the world, people hesitate. And when that happens people aren't making decisions that impact things in the short run. We believe that the long-term fundamentals are good and that (the industry) will overcome the impact of these tariffs, but in the short term, it's created volatility. We had very strong margins in the first half of the year that we're actually better than we forecast when we when we approved the project. But then the second half of the year, the price of oil came down, (there was) tariff uncertainty, people kind of freeze and say, ‘Okay, I'm not going to buy. I'm not going to buy so much of this material because I don't know what I'll be able to sell my products for next year.” Those kind of things resolve themselves over a time frame of, I'll call it six months. We’re looking at what this business is going to look like for the next 30 years.
Q: The issue of plastic waste is a huge problem facing the plastics and petrochemical industry. What should petrochemical companies’ roles be in limiting plastic waste and what are you doing to address this?
A: I think petrochemical companies that produce these materials should take a strong role in identifying solutions that the world can use to address plastic waste getting into the environment where it doesn't belong. I think it's known that the world is facing a huge problem with waste in general. … What we're focusing on … across the whole value chain — from those that produced the chemicals that go into plastics, to those that make the containers out of our plastics, to those that put things into those containers and sell them to consumers, to the [nonprofits] that are rightfully concerned about waste getting in an environment — we're working on systems to collaborate across that value chain to make sure that we use is scientifically-validated means, measures and mechanisms to address plastic waste. (That could be) from designing materials that are more easily recycled, designing materials that are lighter weight so there’s not as much volume produced, looking at ways to recycle those materials … and finding viable ways to sort and separate all the plastic.
Q: LyondellBasell recently started up a joint venture plastic recycling company in The Netherlands. Would you ever consider something like that or new investments in the plastic recycling business? Can you give an example of what you’re doing to recycle?
A: The approach we're taking is to partner with existing recycling companies that already take materials from our plants and use it in their recycling streams. We’re cooperating companies like that to make sure that we're making the most of each other's capabilities. … We own 50 percent of American Styrenics. If you order something — like if you get a case of wine from Napa that shows up at my house regularly — there's a lot of Styrofoam with those things. And I've got a pile of Styrofoam chunks. There are places in The Woodlands where you can take these materials and it's actually pretty easy to take that material back to the original components that you can then re-polymerize. That’s what American Styrenics is doing. The company has that technology and then they can take that material and feed it back into the process and make new polystyrene. So that really is the, the clearest example of a circular process.RelatedTEXAS INC. - BUSINESSLetter from the business editor: Break it, fix itThe future of garbage
Q: You’ve been at this in this position for about a little over a year and a half. What have you learned so far about leadership in a top executive role?
A: I've learned that in a position like this, people do listen to you and respond, so you have to choose your words wisely. Every conversation matters. Every conversation in the elevator, every conversation in a plants, it matters because people want to be led. They want to have confidence in their leadership. They want to know that the company has got a vision, that we've got a mission, that we're going to make a difference out there. People really do care about what we're going to do to change the world, what we're going to do to change the community, the impact. They want to feel good about what they're doing. And this position has a major role in articulating what we're going to do, why are we going to do it, how we're going to do it, and to get people engaged in that.
Q: You lived in Singapore when you were working the chemicals division of what was then Phillips Petroleum and you oversaw its transition when Phillips spun off the company into a joint venture with Chevron. Can you tell me about that experience?
A: We moved here in 1998 and Chevron Phillips was formed in 2000, so my time in Singapore kind of bridged from Phillips 66 facilities to Chevron Phillips. It was an interesting time, combining the two companies to make one joint venture company, and it was also an interesting time in Asia because there's a lot of growth going on. Then a lot of changes going on. It's kind of when China was taking off and so a lot of things we're seeing now, we're just starting back in the late nineties.
Q: What was living in Singapore like?
Amazing. It’s an incredible city. Our kids basically grew up in Singapore. They were six, eight and 10 when we moved there and 12, 14 and 16 when they moved back. Moving a 16 year-old girl back to The Woodlands, America - It was culture shock because Singapore, it's fairly regimented, all the kids had to wear school uniforms every day; and you come back to The Woodlands where it's all about nice hair and makeup and everyone is just spot on. And so it was a big adjustment for our kids.
Q: Is there anything that has surprised you about being a CEO?
A: There three things I think are very important for leadership and that's trust, transparency and simplicity. You need to have a trust-based organization. Trust means that you're only going to trust me if I'm good at what I do and I do it when I say I'm going to do it - so it’s competency and character. And transparency - you need to understand what I'm thinking and where we want to take the company, and I need to hear from you the challenges that you face out in the workplace. Then simplicity - we tend to over-complicate things. There's so much information flowing at people each and every day from so many sources that we've got to create a systems that simplify things and allow people to filter out all the noise so they can focus on what's really important.
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/texas-inc/article/Chevron-Phillips-CEO-talks-leadership-pollution-13551919.php
-
Nearly $600M Petrochemical Project Proposed in Pasadena
Jan 25, 2019 | Houston Chronicle
By Marissa Luck
A Houston energy company is proposing to build a nearly $600 million petrochemical project in Pasadena, newly-released state documents show.
Next Wave Energy LP wants to build a manufacturing facility that would produce olefins, a key component of a variety of chemical and plastic products, and alkylate, a high-octane hydrocarbon used to produce motor and aviation gasoline. The project would be built on an undeveloped 53-acre tract off Pasadena Highway, according to documents filed with the Texas Comptroller's office.Recommended Video
Construction could start in the third quarter this year if Next Decade receives all the necessary permits and if its board approves a final investment decision in the second quarter of this year.
The petrochemical company didn't disclose how much olefins and alkylates it would produce but said it expects to start operating in the second quarter of 2021.Building the project would create about 400 construction jobs and 25 permanent jobs with a salary of $70,000 annually. It is started to hire this year.
The company wrote that it would invest close to $600 million to build the project, including construction costs, engineering services and equipment.
RELATED: Saudi Aramco’s Motiva eyes $6.6B petrochemical expansions
Next Wave said it already has a letter of intent signed with its feedstock supplier, but didn't provide further details on the supplier or type of feedstock.
Next Wave is seeking some $1.98 million of annual tax incentives from the City of Pasadena, according an application for the incentives filed in December but released last week by the comptroller's office. Another incentive from Deer Park ISD would limit the taxable value of the assets to $80 million for the 10-year life of the agreement. Next Wave filed for the incentives under the legal name of Pasadena Performance Products LP.
Launched in 2015, Next Wave described itself as an independent energy company "focused on the development, operation, acquisition and expansion of midstream and downstream petrochemical and fuels assets," particularly for natural gas liquids, petrochemicals and gasoline blending components.
ON HOUSTONCHRONICLE.COM: U.S. eyes energy independence as production seen overtaking Russia, Saudi Arabia
Next Wave is backed by $500 million an initial equity from the New Jersey-based private equity firm Energy Capital Partners.
Its four founders - Patrick Diamond, Michael Bloesch, Dan Fahey and Sean Diamond - collectively have nearly nine decades of energy industry experience with a focus on midstream, petrochemical and fuels, according to a 2015 press release from the company.
Next Wave couldn't immediately be reached for component Friday.
https://www.chron.com/business/energy/article/Nearly-600M-petrochemical-project-proposed-in-13561464.php
-
Jan 27, 2019 | Lexology
By Joseph J. Green
During confirmation hearings before Congress last week, Acting EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler indicated that a long-awaited EPA rule to restrict consumer and commercial uses of methylene chloride as a paint and coating remover has been delayed by the government shutdown, after being submitted to the Office of Management and Budget on December 21st. Meanwhile, on January 14th, environmental groups and the parents of two men killed after exposure to the solvent, filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Vermont seeking to compel EPA to finalize a January 2017 proposal to ban methylene chloride in most consumer and commercial paint and coating removal products.
The lawsuit is notable as the first challenge involving EPA’s new authority under 2016 amendments to the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) that directs EPA to ban or restrict chemicals that present an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment. A 2014 EPA risk assessment found that short-term exposures to high concentrations of methylene chloride-based paint and coating strippers can be fatal. On January 19, 2017, during the last days of the Obama Administration, EPA issued a preliminary determination that the use of methylene chloride in paint and coating removal poses an unreasonable risk of injury to health. EPA also proposed prohibitions and restrictions on the manufacture, processing, and distribution in commerce of methylene chloride for all consumer and most types of commercial paint and coating removal and on the use of methylene chloride in commercial paint and coating removal in specified sectors.
While EPA consistently has signaled its intent to finalize the rule, on the same day that the draft final rule was sent to OMB for review, the agency also sent for OMB review a preliminary draft rule entitled “Commercial Paint and Coating Removal Training, Certification and Limited Access Program.” While no details are available, issuance of the draft “training” rule signals that at least some of the more stringent provisions applicable to commercial uses of the solvent from the January 2017 proposal may have be relaxed in the pending final rule.
In particular, the lawsuit seeks a court order directing EPA to “perform their mandatory duty under sections 6(a) and 7 of [TSCA] to address the serious and imminent threat to human health presented by paint removal products containing methylene chloride.” Under TSCA section 6(a), EPA is directed to ban or restrict chemicals that it determines present an unreasonable risk to human health or the environment. The plaintiffs contend that EPA has “violated the explicit command in TSCA section 6(a) that it ‘shall’ by rule restrict a chemical determined to present an unreasonable risk of injury, applying such requirements that are ‘necessary so that the chemical substance no longer presents such risk.’” The plaintiffs also have alleged EPA failure to abide by TSCA section 7 requirements “to protect the public against ‘imminently hazardous’ chemical substances.”
The case is Vermont Public Interest Research Group et al v. Wheeler et al. (D. Vt., No. 19-00009, 1/14/19).
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=3c982f36-fab1-4c9b-964a-2092f783f82d
-
2019 Environmental, Health, and Safety Outlook For Manufacturers
Jan 25, 2019 | The National Law Review
By Megan Baroni
This is the last of our three-part series of predictions for 2019. First Matt provided our thoughts and predictions in the labor/employment arena. Last week, Jeff gave our outlook for corporate compliance and litigation. Last but not least, this week I am providing our predictions for hot topics in environmental, health, and safety compliance, enforcement, and litigation.
Emerging Contaminants
If you haven’t yet heard of PFAS—per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances—you will. This group of man-made chemicals has been used for decades in all kinds of products, from firefighting foam to aerospace products, from building materials to outdoor apparel. PFAS are persistent in the environment and the human body, and preliminary evidence suggests that PFAS can lead to a variety of adverse health effects.
While the EPA has established health advisories for certain PFAS compounds, these advisories are not enforceable. Instead, the states have been busy developing their own regulatory standards. Some states are also requiring that parties investigate for PFAS compounds at regulated sites, even if there is no evidence that PFAS compounds were used or released at the site. And, as most people will tell you, if you test for PFAS, you usually find it.
PFAS detections are already the subject of a number of lawsuits, and we expect more cases to be filed in 2019. So far, the primary targets of these suits have been PFAS manufacturers, but the cast of defendants could be expanded to manufacturers of products that contain PFAS, landfill operators, and property owners, among others. PFAS are also becoming a hot due diligence topic, with increased attention and investigation focused on them in corporate and real estate deals. In short, these emerging contaminants will really hit the scene in 2019.
Targeted OSHA Inspections
According to its Congressional Budget Justification, OSHA plans to conduct about 1,500 fewer investigations in fiscal year 2019, for a target of 30,840 workplace inspections. While the overall number of inspections might be down, OSHA will emphasize the need for detailed, in-depth inspections in 2019. OSHA intends to focus its inspection efforts on the highest risk workplaces, conducting complex inspections (using drones?) that will aim to have the highest safety impact. OSHA also plans to balance the use of compliance assistance programs with enforcement tools to ensure that “mission critical field activities are given equal measure when compared to enforcement activity.”
Redefining Waters of the United States
At the end of 2018, the Trump administration released its proposed rule to redefine “waters of the United States”, the term that determines the scope of the federal Clean Water Act. The scope of the Clean Water Act impacts a number of manufacturing activities, from process discharges to site development.
As expected, the proposed rule scales back what qualifies as a water of the United States. If the rule is finalized, Clean Water Act jurisdiction would not extend to most roadside ditches, ephemeral streams, or wetlands that do not have a surface water connection to another jurisdictional water. This definition would provide clarity for manufacturers grappling with the current reach of the Clean Water Act. However, it will no doubt be subject to intense public comment and litigation from environmental groups that are looking to avoid any actual or perceived jurisdictional roll back. This will certainly be an issue to follow in 2019.
Continued TSCA Reform
Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) reform is an EPA priority, and we can expect that to continue in 2019. With the appointment of Alexandra Dapolito Dunn as the Assistant Administrator of the Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention, EPA is poised to continue rolling out its draft risk evaluations for the 10 substances prioritized in July 2017 (well, that is, after the shutdown of course). These risk evaluations will likely be subject to scrutiny from the regulated and environmental communities for a number of reasons—the conditions of use evaluated by EPA, the thoroughness of the risks identified, and, potentially, the public nature of the scientific studies addressing potential risks. Manufacturers may want to keep an eye towards the TSCA reform process in 2019 to ensure that they have adequate input into this risk evaluation process.
https://www.natlawreview.com/article/2019-environmental-health-and-safety-outlook-manufacturers
-
The U.S. Military Plans to Keep Incinerating Toxic Firefighting Foam, Despite Health Risks
Jan 27, 2019 | The Intercept
By Sharon Lerner
The U.S. military plans to incinerate unused firefighting foam containing hazardous chemicals, even with the health and environmental risks this poses.
THE U.S. MILITARY is moving ahead with plans to collect and destroy unused firefighting foam that contains the hazardous chemicals PFOS and PFOA. But in trying to solve one environmental problem related to these persistent chemicals, which have caused massive drinking water contamination, the Defense Department may be creating another.
More than 3 million gallons of the foam and related waste have been retrieved from U.S. Navy, Marine Corps, National Guard, Army, and Air Force bases around the world. Now the question is what to do with them. Known as aqueous film-forming foam, or AFFF, it was originally created to put out jet fuel fires. AFFF is flame-resistant by design and contains PFASchemicals, such as PFOA and PFOS, which cause a wide range of health problems and last indefinitely in the environment.
For decades, the military has been using AFFF to put out fires and to train military firefighters; that training involved spraying the foam onto blazes that were purposefully set in pits, many of which were unlined. From there, PFOS, PFOA, and other chemicals in their class seeped into groundwater in and around U.S. military bases at home and abroad.
Because of environmental concerns about the chemicals, which are associated with kidney cancer, testicular cancer, immune dysfunction, and many other health problems, the Air Force decided in 2016 to stop using foam that contained PFOA and PFOS, and began replacing the foam at installations worldwide. Unfortunately, as The Intercept reported last year, the new foam contains only slightly tweaked versions of the same problematic compounds, so it is likely to present many of the same health and environmental risks.
For the Air Force, the question of how best to dispose of the old foam comes too late. In January 2017, a waste disposal company hired by the Defense Department began incinerating more than 1 million gallons of the foam and AFFF-contaminated water that had been collected from Air Force bases around the country. According to the contract, the incineration was to be complete by this month.
But that leaves more than 2 million gallons of foam and contaminated water from other branches of the military, as well as unknown quantities possessed by nonmilitary airports and firefighters, which some states have recently begun to collect.Dangerous Byproducts
Although incineration is the military’s chosen disposal method, there has been little research on the safety of burning the foam. Two studies concluded that the incineration of PFAS chemicals would not be a source of further contamination, but both were funded by companies with a vested interest in making the problem go away. The first study was funded by DuPont, which used PFOA in the production of Teflon. The second was funded by 3M, which developed AFFF in partnership with the Navy in the 1960s and was the military’s exclusive supplier of AFFF for decades.
But some of the scant research on the topic suggests that incineration may not fully destroy PFAS. After PCBs were found in chicken eggs laid near an incinerator, a 2018 study determined that PFOA was released into the air by a municipal incinerator in the Netherlands. The author concluded that “modern incinerators cannot fully destroy” PFOA, PCBs, and other persistent chemicals.
The Air Force itself acknowledged in a 2017 document that the foam, which was designed to resist extremely high temperatures, is hard to burn and that “the high-temperature chemistry of PFOS and PFOA has not been characterized, so there is no precedent to predict products of pyrolysis or combustion, temperatures at which these will occur, or the extent of destruction that will be realized.”
Even more concerning, “environmentally unsatisfactory” byproducts may be created by incinerating the foam. Among the highly toxic byproducts of PFAS incineration are hydrofluoric acid, which burns human skin on contact; perfluoroisobutylene, a chemical that so reliably kills people within hours of being inhaled that it’s been used as a warfare agent; as well as dioxins and furans, which cause cancer.
Unfortunately, by the time the Air Force acknowledged the serious potential dangers of incinerating the firefighting foam, it had already burned much of its AFFF stockpile.
In November 2018, the Defense Department entered into two contracts with Tradebe, an Indiana-based company, to incinerate more than 1 million gallons of stockpiled foam that had been collected from the Army, Navy, National Guard, and Marine installations in Italy, Spain, Bahrain, Greece, Romania, Japan, Korea, Cuba, Djibouti, and the U.S. But that foam has yet to be incinerated, according to Edith Terolli, a Tradebe spokesperson.
The Defense Department “has issued no service orders to Tradebe under either of the contracts,” Terolli wrote in a statement to The Intercept. “If DLA [the Defense Logistics Agency] issues a service order, Tradebe can ensure that all management practices will be conducted in full compliance with and on the basis of established regulations. Tradebe’s priority is safety and the protection of people and the environment.”
According to the Defense Department’s Logistics Agency, the AFFF will be sent to five or six hazardous waste incinerators.A History of Violations
The track record of the hazardous waste incinerator that burned the Air Force’s AFFF stockpiles adds to the environmental concerns about its destruction. Located on the Ohio River, the Heritage Thermal Services hazardous waste incinerator in East Liverpool, Ohio, has a history of violating environmental laws.
Alonzo Spencer, a lifelong East Liverpool resident, co-founded a community group to prevent the incinerator’s construction in 1982. “We never wanted it here,” said Spencer. “We were worried about the emissions from the stack.”
After more than 25 years in which the incinerator has released pollution into the air over East Liverpool, the community’s fears turned out to be well-founded. “The concerns that we raised from the health side have come to fruition,” Spencer said recently. Environmental Protection Agency records show that the Heritage facility has emitted dangerous chemicals — including cadmium, chromium, mercury, lead, and PCBs — above safety levels.
A 2017 study showed that children in East Liverpool who had elevated levels of one of the neurotoxic pollutants in their air, manganese, had lower IQ scores. The area had elevated numbers of children in special education classes — 19 percent as opposed to 13 percent statewide.
In 2013, the East Liverpool incinerator exploded, setting off multiple fires and spewing toxic ash into the neighborhood, which has twice the national poverty rate. Even after the EPA sent Heritage a letter in 2015 detailing 195 violations the company had committed, the dangerous emissions continued. The EPA’s website, which publishes the quarterly regulatory status of incinerators for the previous three years, classifies the East Liverpool plant as a “high priority violator” of the Clean Air Act for each of the 12 quarters listed, which means that the facility may pose a “severe level of environmental threat.”
And according to an October consent decree between Heritage and the EPA, the East Liverpool incinerator “violated, and continues to violate” various emissions limits set under the Clean Air Act. The consent decree, which settled a civil complaint that the EPA filed against Heritage in October, required the company to pay a fine and take numerous steps to limit its air pollution.
Two of the violations in the complaint raise particular concerns for the combustion of AFFF. The Heritage facility emitted chemicals known as dioxins and furans, which can be produced while burning PFAS. And, perhaps most concerning, the incinerator in East Liverpool failed to maintain minimum temperatures specified in the incinerator’s permit “on numerous days beginning on or before January 6, 2011 and continuing thereafter,” according to the EPA complaint. The failure to reach minimum temperatures can result in incomplete combustion and the production of dangerous byproducts.
Asked why it awarded a contract to a facility that was a high-priority violator of the Clean Air Act, the Defense Logistics Agency provided a written response stating that “as part of our due diligence facility vetting processes, we validate facility compliance with the regulatory authorities,” and that environmental authorities in Ohio “did not find any violation of … laws or rules and/or violations of Heritage’s permit conditions.”
Heritage did not respond to numerous emails and phone calls requesting comment for this story.No Guidelines
Two incineration experts contacted by The Intercept said that PFAS could be burned safely as long as the incinerator maintains the proper temperature for the correct amount of time. While both experts offer slightly different minimum temperatures, they agree that precise control of conditions is essential — and that the quality and past conduct of the company carrying out the work is important.
“I would want to know that the facility has a good track record of good solid operation,” said Marco Castaldi from the City College of New York. Giving a massive amount of AFFF to a company that has a history of serious environmental violations, Castaldi said, “is like taking your car to a mechanic that fails to tighten the bolts on the tire.”
According to Roland Weber, a German chemist and expert in the incineration of PFAS and related chemicals, if the incinerator isn’t sufficiently hot, highly toxic compounds could form and be released during the large-scale incineration of PFAS. “It’s a question about these smaller molecules, which are highly volatile and you cannot catch with filters,” he said.
Others feel that not enough is known about incinerating AFFF to do it on a large scale, regardless of the facility. “There are too many data gaps to argue that burning is safe,” said Jen Duggan, a lawyer at the Conservation Law Foundation in Vermont. Duggan notes that there is no official protocol laying out how to burn the chemicals — and no way of checking on the process after it’s complete.
“Even if we did know what conditions are required to destroy PFAS, we don’t have monitoring at the stacks to make sure it’s being done properly,” said Duggan.
Because PFAS have yet to be regulated, it’s especially difficult to ensure their safe destruction. “Usually, with incineration, you have the threat of liability to motivate some level of compliance,” said Sony Lunder, a senior toxics adviser for the Sierra Club.
With regulated chemicals, “you have protocols that require you to incinerate at certain temperatures. If you blow it, you violate your permit, which can result in EPA enforcement. And that can involve a fine,” said Lunder. “But PFAS are as regulated as Ivory soap.”
In November, concerns about a lack of protocols and the violations at Heritage’s East Liverpool incinerator helped stymie a plan to send firefighting foam collected in Vermont to the Ohio facility.
Vermont had collected some 2,500 gallons of AFFF from firehouses around the state that it was planning to send to the Heritage incinerator. The foam had already been loaded on a trailer when the state reversed its decision due to concerns about burning AFFF in general and at the Ohio facility in particular.
The unused foam has since been stored at a hazardous waste facility. According to Chuck Schwer, director of the Waste Management and Prevention Division at Vermont’s Department of Environmental Conservation, the AFFF will soon be shipped to a cement kiln incinerator that can burn it at a higher temperature.
Other states may soon start destroying their own foam too. Massachusettsbegan collecting unused AFFF in May. And in Ohio, the state fire marshal recently wrote to fire stations and encouraged them to collect their AFFF and send it to hazardous waste incinerators.
But environmental advocates are questioning what should happen with unused foam in states. “We don’t want it sent for incineration,” said Laurie Valeriano, executive director of Toxic-Free Future. The group is based in Washington state, where the Department of Ecology is seeking funding from the legislature to collect unused AFFF.Up in Smoke
Even as questions about incineration persist, both the military and some states are moving fairly quickly to destroy their unused AFFF. In New York, where collection of the foam is ongoing, the state’s Department of Environmental Conservation had already “properly disposed” of more than 25,000 gallons by last summer, according to the agency’s website. The department did not answer questions about exactly when, where, and how the AFFF was destroyed.
It’s understandable that people want to get rid of the toxic foam, but the sudden haste seems to be motivated by more than environmental concerns. Although PFAS chemicals are not currently regulated, this month three members of Congress from Michigan introduced the PFAS Action Act, a legislation that would classify the chemicals as hazardous substances and make polluters liable for their cleanup.
The Defense Department, which is responsible for hundreds of bases where AFFF has seeped into water, has been sued over the contamination and is engaged in a huge and costly effort to address the mess created by the foam. But because there are no binding safety levels for the chemicals, the Defense Department hasn’t had a clear legal obligation to clean up to any particular standard.
“We’re doing it because we’re good stewards and concerned citizens,” Maureen Sullivan, the Defense Department’s deputy assistant secretary for environment, told me about the U.S. military’s PFAS remediation work in a 2017 interview. “We have no requirement because it’s only an advisory.”
The PFAS Action Act, which would enable PFAS chemicals to be cleaned up through the Superfund program, would change that — and could potentially cost the military heavily.
“Everyone knows what’s coming and that DOD is trying to wiggle out of liability,” said Jane Williams, executive director of California Communities Against Toxics. “That’s why they want it burned. If you bury it, that does not erase the liability. But if you burn it, you burn the liabilities along with the chemicals.”
A bipartisan task force formed in the House of Representatives last week to address PFAS-related issues will likely tackle disposal issues as it pushes for accountability for polluters, including the Defense Department. Meanwhile, environmentalists are asking for careful scrutiny from them and other lawmakers before any more AFFF is burned.
“We need to pause and take a deep breath until we know that burning AFFF is safe and that we’re not putting others in harm’s way,” said Duggan of the Conservation Law Foundation. “If you ship foam to another community and incinerate it without complete destruction, you’ve just turned it into another public health risk.”
https://theintercept.com/2019/01/27/toxic-firefighting-foam-pfas-pfoa/
-
Newly Formed PFAS Task Force Calls for Action to Clean Up Toxic Chemicals
Jan 25, 2019 | Union of Concerned Scientists (Blog)
By Genna Reed
Earlier this week, members of Congress announced the creation of a bipartisan task force intended to shine a light on the dangers of nationwide PFAS contamination. The group plans to hold briefings to further educate members of Congress and to write and push for strong legislation and funding through the appropriations process.
This exciting news comes as the public continues to wait for answers from the Trump administration, which has largely been all talk and no action on this issue. The EPA’s anticipated PFAS management plan has been delayed and documents uncovered by Politico revealed that the Department of Defense (DoD) had recently been eyeing Michael Dourson to lead a study on the health risks of PFAS. You might remember Dourson as the toxicologist who withdrew his name from consideration as EPA chemicals head last year after his industry conflicts and record of weakened standards were exposed. DoD’s consideration of Dourson for this work is a slap in the face to the communities calling for science-based thresholds that are health-protective.
The establishment of this task force is a great opportunity for Congress to push for urgent, strong action and answer the calls of so many Americans for whom drinking their own water presents a public health risk. It is composed of representatives from some of the hardest hit states, including Michigan (Bergman, Dingell, Huizenga, Kildee, Lawrence, Levin, Slotkin, Stevens, Tlaib, Upton, Walberg), Pennsylvania (Boyle, Dean, Fitzpatrick), New Mexico (Lujan), and New York (Delgado). PFAS contamination is extremely pervasive and is a national problem, impacting military bases and sites near production facilities across the country, as we detailed in a recent fact sheet. The group would benefit from even more robust and diverse membership, which is why you should encourage your members of Congress to join this important collaboration that could prove to be critical in prompting science-based EPA and DOD action.
We at UCS look forward to working with members of this task force over the coming months to demand that PFAS contamination is swiftly cleaned up, enforceable standards are set, and more monitoring and research is done to better understand the scope of this toxic mess.
https://blog.ucsusa.org/genna-reed/newly-formed-pfas-task-force-calls-for-action-to-clean-up-toxic-chemicals
-
Chemours Shipped Toxic Waste From Netherlands to North Carolina
Jan 25, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Andrew M. Ballard
The Chemours Co. was shipping GenX chemical waste from its facility in the Netherlands to its plant in Fayetteville, N.C., where management of such material is under scrutiny.
In a recently uncovered letter, the Environmental Protection Agency reached out to a Dutch counterpart seeking information on the shipments and management of the waste in response to a re-importation notification Chemours sent. The EPA said it was temporarily objecting to the activity, pending the receipt of such details. It was not immediately clear when the shipments had started or when they would resume.
The Fayetteville facility has been the target of lawsuits and of investigations from the North Carolina departments of environmental quality and health and human services due to discharges of GenX and other compounds of concern.
The material at issue was originally created at the Fayetteville site for use in the production process at the Netherlands facility, Thom Sueta, a spokesman for Chemours, told Bloomberg Environment Jan. 25.
Re-importing this waste for “responsible recycle is not something new,” he said.
GenX and other per- and polyfluorinated compounds are considered toxic. They are used to make stain-resistant coatings for carpets, rain gear, fast food wrappers, and frying pans.
Previous ApprovalsThe EPA has approved such re-importation requests in the past, according to Sueta.
The pending request for re-importation “allows the transport of materials that had already reached our European contractor for recycle prior to their bankruptcy to our Fayetteville location for responsible recycling,” he said.
If the EPA does approve the shipment, emissions from the recycling activity would be subject to highly efficient controls, Sueta said.
“It’s also important to note that fewer emissions result from recycling material than from making new material,” he added.
EPA representatives weren’t available for information or comment due to the government shutdown.
Controlling ReleasesChemours stopped discharging GenX into the water at the Fayetteville facility after the EPA and state agencies launched investigations in 2017. The company and North Carolina’s Department of Environmental Quality recently reached a proposed deal to slash air emissions and take other control and reporting measures.
In its letter, the EPA said it was seeking information from Dutch regulators and the company on the nature and composition of the waste streams and what other locations they are being sent to in the U.S. before approving the activity.
Megan Thorpe, a spokeswoman for the state Department of Environmental Quality, told Bloomberg Environment that her agency also inquired about the shipments. The company responded in a Jan. 24 letter that it would provide both state and federal regulators with information by Feb. 5.
The EPA, not the state agency, has authority over the importation of waste into the U.S., Thorpe said. But the state does have the authority to regulate and monitor the discharge of contaminants into the air and water, regardless of the source, she said.
Last week, the North Carolina Department of Health and Human Services sent a survey to 15,398 households within a 10-mile radius of the Chemours Fayetteville Works Facility to assess their concerns about exposure to GenX and other potentially harmful chemicals. Surveys are due Feb. 15 and will be used to guide state agency responses.
https://bnanews.bna.com/environment-and-energy/chemours-shipped-toxic-waste-from-netherlands-to-north-carolina-1
-
New York Pushes Back Cleaning Products’ Disclosure Deadline
Jan 28, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto and John Herzfeld
Procter & Gamble Co., Unilever, and other makers of cleaning products will have three extra months to comply with New York state’s requirements to disclose their chemical ingredients.
New York’s Department of Environmental Conservation announced it won’t start enforcing its rule requiring manufacturers to post their products’ ingredients online until Oct. 1. The prior deadline was July 1.
“Seventh Generation hopes this delay will lead to revised regulations that fulfill a consumer’s right to know what is in the cleaning products they bring into their homes without imposing burdensome requirements on cleaning product manufacturers,” Martin Wolf, director of product sustainability and authenticity at Seventh Generation, told Bloomberg Environment.
Attorneys representing the Household & Commercial Products Association and American Cleaning Institute negotiated that delay with New York state’s attorney general’s office as part of the trade groups’ lawsuit challenging the state’s regulation, Owen Caine, executive vice president of government regulations and public policy at the association, told Bloomberg Environment July 25.
But this temporary reprieve, announced Jan. 9, doesn’t mean the state is backing off its goal of increasing consumers access to information about the chemicals in the products they buy.
Cuomo Pushes Chemical DisclosureNew York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) is pushing for chemical disclosure to be required not only for cleaning products but also for toys, personal care, and other consumer products.
“The more we know about chemicals in water and food the more frightening the situation is,” Cuomo said in video released Jan. 21. He called for a Consumer Right-to-Know Act that would mandate chemical carcinogens in products be identified on labels.
New York’s “overly complex and burdensome requirements” should not be expanded, said Brian Sansoni, a senior vice president at the American Cleaning Institute, which is suing the state to overturn its regulation.
Cleaning product manufacturers and their suppliers are hard put to comply with both New York’s and California’s ingredient disclosure requirements because they are dissimilar, said Lynn Bergeson, managing partner of Bergeson and Campbell, P.C., a Washington, D.C.-based firm specializing in chemical policies.
First in the NationNew York’s program set the first-in-the-nation deadline for disclosing chemical ingredients in cleaning products. California’s Cleaning Products Right-to-Know Act gave manufacturers until Jan. 1, 2020, to post their ingredients online and until Jan. 1, 2021, to include them on printed labels.
Guidance New York released in June 2018 to implement its regulation sets lower chemical thresholds than California for when disclosure requirements are triggered. Specifically, New York requires concentrations above 0.1 percent of intentionally added chemicals to be disclosed and concentrations above 0.5 percent percent of unintentional impurities or other chemicals.
California requires disclosure of up to 34 chemicals if they are present at a concentration of 100 parts per million or higher.
Of the two state programs, companies prefer California’s, which resulted from a legislative process involving consumer and environmental advocates as well as cleaning product manufacturers.
Earthjustice, however, supports New York’s regulation.
“DEC’s guidance is consistent with longstanding law and regulations, which clearly establish New Yorkers’ right to know of the ingredients in their cleaning products,” said Jonathan Kalmuss-Katz, an attorney with Earthjustice.“It is unfortunate that cleaning product manufacturers have chosen to sue DEC instead of complying with their disclosure obligations,” Kalmuss-Katz said by email.
Caine, from the Household and Commercial Products Association, said he hopes the judge will be persuaded to overturn New York’s rules.
Next StepsNeither New York’s attorney general nor its Department of Environmental Conservation would discuss the lawsuit or recent enforcement delay with Bloomberg Environment.
Caine, however, said the enforcement delay resulted from the state collaborating with industry. The state sought additional time to respond to the lawsuit, and its response is due Feb. 1, Caine said.
In exchange, New York agreed to hold off enforcing its regulation, he said.
The delay may give the state Supreme Court sufficient time to make a decision without industry needing to file an injunction, he said. An injunction asking the court to delay enforcement of the New York rule was more likely to be needed had the state kept its July 1 enforcement date, Caine said.The case is Household and Commercial Prod. Ass’n v New York State Dep’t of Envtl. Conservation, N.Y. Sup. Ct., No. 6216/2018, 10/5/18
https://bnanews.bna.com/environment-and-energy/new-york-pushes-back-cleaning-products-disclosure-deadline
-
Anxiety Spills Over as U.K. Chemical Companies Face Down Brexit
Jan 28, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ali Qassim
U.K. chemical companies are hoping for the best—but preparing for the worst—as Prime Minister Theresa May struggles to win parliamentary support for a Brexit divorce deal with the European Union.
“Whilst we hope there will be an agreement, companies across the chemical supply chain are preparing for a no-deal exit,” said Steve Elliott, chief executive of the Chemical Industries Association.
But preparing for the worst-case no-deal scenario is difficult for midsize firms that have no physical presence in Europe and that represent one-third of the U.K.’s chemical distributors, said Peter Newport, CEO of the Chemical Business Association, which represents chemical distributors traders and logistics services companies.
Large U.S. multinationals such as Univar Inc. and IMC Chemicals Inc., which already have establishments in the EU, are better prepared for a no-deal Brexit, Newport said.
Parliamentarians are set Jan. 29 to debate ways of tweaking May’s separation agreement ahead of a new vote on an amended version of the deal next month. The U.K.’s intended exit from the EU is the end of March.
May Plan FavoredLawmakers voted earlier this month 432-202 to reject May’s Brexit deal, the largest defeat ever for a sitting government. To pass any divorce agreement, May requires at least 320 votes.
Companies favor May’s EU Withdrawal Agreement because it guarantees their continued tariff-free access to the European Union until at least the end of 2020.
That is why “chemical businesses continue to present information to members of parliament showing the effects of no deal and the importance of the UK having an agreement with the EU,” Elliott said Jan. 25.
Conversely, they fear a potential no-deal alternative, or a Brexit with no single market-type arrangement and/or a transition period, in which U.K.-based companies will cease immediately to be part of the EU’s REACH legislation (Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 on the restriction, evaluation, and authorization of chemicals) that currently grants them free trade across the European Union.
“The concern is that on a no-deal Brexit, U.K.-based REACH registrations will be invalid from March 29, 2019, and action is needed to keep many supply chains compliant,” said Elizabeth Shepherd, a partner at law firm Eversheds Sutherland in Manchester.
“In our experience, the situation in terms of preparedness for a no-deal scenario is mixed,” she said in an interview. “Some larger companies with pan-European operations are advanced in their contingency planning [and] already have strategies in place which they are ready to implement depending on how the Brexit negotiations unfold.”
Transferring RegistrationsSome of these strategies include companies transferring U.K.-based REACH registrations to a different entity in the remaining 27 EU member states, or, in the case of a U.K. manufacturer, appointing an Only Representative based in the EU-27 or the use of an EU-27 branch office for ongoing REACH compliance post-Brexit, according to Shepherd.
Croda International Plc, a U.K. specialty chemicals company, has made Brexit-ready provisions such as holding sufficient inventory of U.K. manufactured goods on the continent and starting a REACH re-registration process for U.K. products sold in the EU, a company spokeswoman said.
But in addition to the difficulty facing mid-sized firms, preparing for the worst-case no-deal scenario is challenging for smaller U.K.-based companies, Shepherd said.
Those companies “may have been waiting until later in the day to review their options, may not be as closely engaged with their trade association, and may not have the budget to spend on detailed contingency planning,” Shepherd said.
REACH and ITThe government is “working to ensure any potential new burdens on UK companies are minimized,” Paola Salcedo, a spokeswoman for the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), told Bloomberg Environment.
For instance, “in the event of a no deal, Defra would establish a U.K.-specific chemicals regulations framework to replace the EU’s REACH regulation,” she said.
But a U.K. version of REACH would still impose new requirements on U.K.-based companies such as providing basic information about their chemicals products within 60 days of exit, the Chemical Business Association’s Newport said.
For some businesses, such as paint manufacturers, that process can include registering 20 to 30 ingredients per formulation “which is quite burdensome within 60 days,” he said.
The longer-term onus on companies to provide a full data set of their products within two years is even more problematic because many “don’t own the vast majority of data they used to register their substances,” he added.
Shepherd agreed with Newport.
“U.K. companies may have to buy access to data for the purpose of U.K. REACH, since existing data access agreements typically limit use to EU REACH,” Shepherd said.
Repeat TestingIf negotiations with data owners is unsuccessful, then repeat testing would be necessary, which could take more than two years, she said.
Although Defra said the U.K. REACH information technology system “will replicate critical functionality” of its EU counterpart, businesses question whether the U.K. REACH IT system will be ready in time for Brexit’s end of March deadline.
“Until the U.K. REACH IT system becomes available it is not possible to provide the initial information for existing registration,” the CIA’s Elliott said.
The industry group also is worried that deadline pressures have led to insufficient public and scientific participation in creating U.K. REACH.
“We are urging Government to maintain key concepts such as transparency, independency, and range of expertise—all of which all important in the process,” he said.
https://bnanews.bna.com/environment-and-energy/anxiety-spills-over-as-uk-chemical-companies-face-down-brexit
-
Drillers Are Easing Off the Gas
Jan 28, 2019 | Wall Street Journal
By Ryan Dezember and Stephanie Yang
Some of the companies responsible for flooding the U.S. with natural gas are dialing back on drilling amid worries that supplies of the fuel are outpacing demand and potentially sending already depressed prices into a tailspin.
Pittsburgh-based EQT Corp. EQT 5.72% on Tuesday became the latest big gas producer to say it will spend less on drilling this year than it did last year, and that it aims to maintain its present level of output rather than increase it. Gulfport Energy Corp. GPOR 0.80%outlined a similar strategy earlier in the month, saying it would use the cash that it saves from drilling less this year to buy back $400 million worth of its own shares.
Antero Resources Corp. AR 4.10% trimmed its 2019 drilling budget by more than 10% in response to languishing prices, a move that should translate to up to 40 fewer wells completed on its land in Ohio, Pennsylvania and West Virginia.
The announcements represent a major shift in an industry not known for tapping the brakes and follow a chorus of investors urging shale drillers to stop boosting production while prices are low.
“Growth is a disease that has plagued the space, and it needs to be cured before the sector can garner long-term investor interest,” said Matthew Portillo, director of exploration and production research at Tudor, Pickering, Holt & Co., a Houston investment bank. “The industry has been under significant shareholder pressure to change the way it allocates capital.”
Natural-gas prices have fallen by more than a third since heating-season highs reached in mid-November. A cold snap that left swaths of the country iced over and furnaces blasting during the recent holiday weekend did little to slow the decline. Gas futures for February delivery lost 8.8% last week, settling at $3.178 a million British thermal units on Friday.
Many analysts have forecast further declines barring an especially frigid February. It took a superlative year of demand growth, courtesy of exports and electricity generators, to absorb record U.S. gas production last year. There are doubts, though, that enough new demand will materialize this year, even with several liquefied-natural-gas export facilities slated to open over the next 12 months.
At the same time, a new pipeline scheduled to open across Texas in October will deliver much more of the gas being flared from oil wells in the Permian Basin to Gulf Coast markets. Since Permian gas is a byproduct of oil drilling, producers there are far less sensitive to the fuel’s price than rivals like EQT and Antero, which drill in Appalachia and must make their numbers work with gas sales.
The growth-at-all-costs mind-set has been a hard habit to break for shale producers, who are more than a decade into a rush to stake claim to emerging drilling fields. For years shares of shale explorers have been valued mostly for their future prospects. Year-over-year production growth has been a major component of the formulas that determine executive compensation. A lot of wells are drilled with little regard for commodity prices because leases can expire from lack of drilling.
Antero, Gulfport and EQT have been pestered by activist investors. Their stocks have badly underperformed the broader market in recent years. While the S&P 500 is up 16% over the last two years, each of those companies’ shares have lost at least 40% of their value.
The stocks have been particularly painful investments for those who bought new shares that the companies sold following 2015’s collapse in commodity prices to pay down debt and keep rigs running. Gulfport raised more than $2.1 billion selling new shares in four offerings in 2015 and 2016 at prices ranging from $21.50 to $47.75. Gulfport’s shares have since declined to $8.83, wiping out billions of dollars in market value.
“This is stockholder value destruction in the starkest possible terms,” Firefly Value Partners LP wrote in a note to Gulfport’s board suggesting a stock buyback and other changes hours before the company announced its plan on Jan. 17. The investment firm said it owns 8.1% of Gulfport’s shares.
A Gulfport spokeswoman declined to comment.
Antero and EQT each sold more than $1 billion of new stock during the slump, and those shares have lost more than half their value. They, like Gulfport, have been buying back their own stock.
Jay Rhame, chief executive of Reaves Asset Management, said he expects additional gas producers to announce their own drilling cutbacks and plans to return cash to shareholders. Yet, he hasn’t been convinced to buy stock in any.
“I’m a little concerned that companies are saying one thing but actually doing another,” he said, citing a December survey of energy executives by the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas in which 46% of respondents said their primary goal for 2019 is to increase production. “A lot of the incentive packages at these companies really favor production growth,” he said.
Other analysts contend that private investors who spent several billions of dollars last year on Appalachian drilling fields are unlikely to leave their investments idle and could offset output reductions by publicly traded rivals. New pipelines in the region have made it more attractive to drill in areas that were previously isolated from markets.
“Even if these public Northeast-focused operators scale back a little bit, we wouldn’t necessarily translate that into slower growth in the region as a whole,” said Jen Snyder, director at analytics firm RS Energy Group.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/drillers-are-easing-off-the-gas-11548597601
-
Trump Eyes Action to Limit States’ Powers to Block Pipelines
Jan 28, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ari Natter and Jennifer A. Dlouhy
The Trump administration is considering taking steps to limit the ability of states to block interstate gas pipelines and other energy projects, according to three people familiar with the deliberations.
The effort, possibly through an executive order, is aimed chiefly at states in the Northeast U.S., where opposition to pipeline projects has helped prevent abundant shale gas in Pennsylvania and Ohio from reaching consumers in New York and other cities.
New York used a Clean Water Act provision to effectively block the construction of a natural gas pipeline being developed by Williams Partners LP to carry Marcellus shale gas 124 miles to New England. The project got the green light from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission but then ran into obstacles in New York, where regulators denied a water quality permit.
While mostly targeted toward boosting limited pipeline capacity in the Northeast, the initiative could help drive permitting and construction of other energy projects, including coal export terminals. For instance, Lighthouse Resources’ proposed coal export terminal in Longview, Wash., was ensnared when the state’s Department of Ecology denied a critical Clean Water Act permit, citing concerns about air quality and increased railroad traffic to serve the site.
The new initiative dovetails with expectations that President Donald Trump would use his State of the Union address to tout efforts to accelerate permitting and construction of oil and gas pipelines, though he has postponed the speech and the exact timing of any announcement remains unclear.
The potential White House action was earlier reported by Politico.
Pipeline advocates who say states are abusing their authority under the Clean Water Act have advanced ideas for reining it in. But it’s not clear how much— if at all—an executive order could curtail states’ special powers under the statute.
Industry officials said real change may require legislation to alter the statute itself, such as a bill advanced by Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) last year.
A previous attempt to use executive power to help TransCanada Corp.’s Keystone XL pipeline and Energy Transfer Partners’ Dakota Access Pipeline didn’t jump-start their construction.
The issue, pipeline advocates say, is especially pronounced in the Northeast, where there isn’t enough capacity to send gas to New York City and other metropolitan areas in times of heavy demand. Energy Secretary Rick Perry has invoked the idea of using national security grounds to justify action on the issue.
“If a polar vortex comes into the Northeast part of the country, or a cyberattack, and people literally have to start making decisions on how to keep their family warm or keep the lights on, at that time, the leadership of that state will have a real reckoning. I wouldn’t want to be the governor of that state facing that situation,” Perry said last summer at the World Gas Conference in Washington. “We have to have a conversation as a country, is that a national security issue that outweighs the political concerns in Albany, N.Y.?”
https://bnanews.bna.com/environment-and-energy/trump-eyes-action-to-limit-states-powers-to-block-pipelines-1
-
EPA to Back Up Power Rule Rewrite with New Analysis, Air Chief Says
Jan 26, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Abby Smith
The EPA is working on analysis that shows greenhouse gas cuts from its rewrite of Obama-era power sector carbon controls wouldn’t be all that different from the limits under the rule it would replace, the agency’s top air official said.
The Environmental Protection Agency will include the additional analysis as part of its final rule replacing the Obama regulation, dubbed the Clean Power Plan, Bill Wehrum, the EPA’s air chief, said Jan. 25.
The Clean Power Plan set first-time greenhouse gas limits on existing power plants. Last year, the Trump EPA unveiled plans to replace those standards with less stringent controls.
The new number-crunching comes amid criticism that the EPA proposal, called the Affordable Clean Energy rule, doesn’t do enough to cut climate-warming emissions from the power sector and could also increase emissions of air pollutants such as fine particulate matter and nitrogen oxide.
“We’re working hard on formulating the final rule, and we’re doing additional analysis,” Wehrum said, speaking at an event hosted by the Society of Environmental Journalists. “What you’ll see in the final rule is analysis showing that when you do a head-to-head comparison, [Affordable Clean Energy] versus the [Clean Power Plan], they look a lot alike.”Higher Emissions
But the EPA’s replacement plan could increase greenhouse gas emissions from the power sector in 18 states and Washington, D.C. by up to 8.7 percent, said a Jan. 14 study conducted by researchers from Harvard University, Syracuse University, Boston University, and Resources for the Future.
Nationwide carbon emissions under the Affordable Clean Energy proposal would be 3.5 percent higher than under the Clean Power Plan, the research also found.
But the Clean Power Plan was never implemented because the Supreme Court in February 2016 paused the rule while it was under litigation. And Wehrum suggested comparing the Affordable Clean Energy proposal to the current state of policy.
“The real comparison is how does [Affordable Clean Energy] stack up against the world as it really is right now,” Wehrum said. “And against that, [Affordbale Clean Energy] makes real progress.”EPA Role
Wehrum cited the proposal as one area where the agency is addressing greenhouse gas emissions. He argued the EPA wasn’t deregulating with its actions on the Clean Power Plan or the automobile fuel economy standards, which the Trump administration has proposed to freeze at 2020 levels.
The EPA is putting “a lot of time and effort into addressing these rules, not for the purpose of not regulating but for the purpose of regulating correctly,” Wehrum said. “I think reducing carbon emissions is important and it’s a priority for us, but it’s one of many priorities for us.”
Wehrum said the EPA does have a role to regulate carbon emissions to some extent, though not to the level the Obama administration had encouraged.
“We’ve proposed [Affordable Clean Energy] because we think the government does have a role,” he said.
https://bnanews.bna.com/environment-and-energy/epa-to-back-up-power-rule-rewrite-with-new-analysis-air-chief-says
-
Colo. Bows out of Clean Power Plan Challenge
Jan 28, 2019 | E&E Climatewire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
Colorado's new Democratic attorney general is pulling the state out of a legal challenge to the Obama-era Clean Power Plan.
Phil Weiser asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on Saturday to withdraw the Centennial State from the case.
Under previous Attorney General Cynthia Coffman (R), Colorado joined more than two-dozen states in challenging the EPA rule, which sought to slash carbon emissions from the power sector.
The litigation is now on ice as the Trump administration works on a replacement rule, but it could someday be revived.
Weiser won the attorney general seat in a November upset and vowed to prioritize environmental protection and climate action.
Colorado is one of four states whose top legal positions switched from red to blue in the 2018 election (Greenwire, Nov. 7, 2018).
Michigan, another of those states, has also left the Clean Power Plan litigation. Newly seated Attorney General Dana Nessel (D) earlier this month withdrew the state from that case and two other challenges to Obama-era Clean Air Act regulations (E&E News PM, Jan. 22).
Wisconsin, another of the four states, has not moved to exit the litigation at this point.
The fourth state with an attorney general office that switched parties, Nevada, is not a main party to the Clean Power Plan case but filed an amicus brief in 2016 favoring the challengers to the regulation.
New Democratic Attorney General Aaron Ford, then a state senator, criticized the state's 2016 move at the time and expressed support for the EPA rule.
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2019/01/28/stories/1060118677
-
List of Regulation Rollbacks for Oil, Gas and Coal Industry
Jan 27, 2019 | AP (In The New York Times)
Under President Donald Trump, federal agencies have moved to roll back regulations for companies that extract, transport and burn oil, gas and coal. Government analyses show companies will save billions of dollars in compliance costs, but the trade-off often will be adverse impacts to public health and the environment.
The rule changes:
FUEL TRAIN BRAKES: Citing high costs, Trump's administration rescinded a 2015 Department of Transportation rule requiring railroads to begin installing more advanced electronic brakes on trains hauling hazardous fuels.
Industry savings: $375 million-$554 million (2018-2037)
Impact: Additional derailments of tank cars. AP found the government understated potential impacts by as much as $117 million.
Status: Final
METHANE EMISSIONS: Administration wants to eliminate 2016 Environmental Protection Agency rule requiring energy companies to reduce flaring of methane, a potent greenhouse gas.
Industry savings: $380 million-$484 million (2019-2025)
Impacts: Emission increases of 380,000 tons of methane, 100,000 tons of volatile organic compounds, 3,800 tons of hazardous air pollutants; adverse health effects including premature deaths, heart attacks, and respiratory problems; potential reductions in visibility.
Status: Pending
METHANE EMISSIONS: Administration largely eliminated Interior Department's 2016 "waste prevention rule" that required companies to reduce the flaring of methane on public and tribal lands.
Industry savings: $1.4 billion-$2.1 billion (2019-2028)
Impacts: Emission increases of 1.8 million tons of greenhouse gas methane; 800,000 tons of volatile organic compounds that can harm health; unspecified public health and welfare impacts.
Status: Final
CLEAN POWER PLAN: Administration is proposing replacement of EPA's 2015 rule that aimed to cut U.S. greenhouse gas emissions by focusing on carbon dioxide from coal-fired power plants. The changes are projected to increase annual coal production by 33 million-40 million tons by 2030.
Industry savings: $3.7 billion-$6.4 billion (2023-2037)
Impacts: Emissions increases of up to 61 million tons of carbon dioxide, 52,000 tons of sulfur oxides and 39,000 tons of nitrous oxides annually by 2030; health effects including up to 1,400 premature deaths, 750 non-fatal heart attacks in 2030; reductions in visibility; ecosystem effects.Editors’ PicksGumbo, the Classic New Orleans Dish, Is Dead. Long Live Gumbo.As the Trumps Dodged Taxes, Their Tenants Paid a PricePuritan Tiger Beetles, ‘Vicious Predators,’ May Soon Hunt Again
Status: Pending
COAL ASH DISPOSAL: Administration removed many mandates from 2015 EPA rule aimed at preventing hundreds of spills from toxic coal ash dumps over the next century.
Industry savings: $397 million-$605 million (100 years)
Impact: EPA says that, with other existing federal and state regulations, there will be no additional risks to human health and environment. Critics disagree.
Status: Final
FRACKING: Administration rescinded 2015 Interior Department rule that lowered the risk of water contamination from an oil and gas drilling technique called hydraulic fracturing, or "fracking."
Industry savings: $102 million-$339 million (2018-2027)
Impact: Increased risk to surface waters, groundwater supplies.
Status: Final
OFFSHORE DRILLING-SAFETY: Administration dropped requirements for third-party safety equipment inspections from a rule enacted after the Deepwater Horizon oil spill.
Industry savings: $92 million-$131 million (2019-2028)
Impacts: Administration says the changes will have a negligible impact on safety and environmental protection; critics say it raises the risk of accidents.
Status: Final
OFFSHORE DRILLING-BLOWOUTS: Administration wants more flexibility in how companies meet safety and equipment standards in 2016 Interior rule requiring more stringent inspections of devices designed to prevent offshore oil spills.Sign Up for On Politics With Lisa Lerer
A spotlight on the people reshaping our politics. A conversation with voters across the country. And a guiding hand through the endless news cycle, telling you what you really need to know.SIGN UP
Industry savings: $693 million-$946 million (2018-2027)
Impacts: Administration says the changes will not impact worker safety and environmental protection; critics say it raises the risk of accidents.
Status: Pending
REFINERY SECTOR: At request of oil industry, administration gave companies more flexibility in reporting air pollution releases under 2015 EPA rule restricting toxic air pollution from refineries.
Industry savings: $89 million-$110 million (2019-2026)
Impacts: Administration says no appreciable emission increases expected; critics say companies can now delay reports of toxic chemical releases into the air, putting communities at risk.
Status: Final
MERCURY POLLUTION: Administration wants to eliminate 2016 EPA rule that determined it was "appropriate and necessary" to reduce power plant emissions of mercury. It says EPA should not have considered up to $90 billion in secondary benefits in reaching its decision.
Industry savings: uncertain; utilities have spent estimated $18 billion to date on compliance
Impacts: Uncertain.
Status: Pending
VEHICLE FUEL EFFICIENCY: To limit a 2016 Department of Transportation proposal that called for more stringent fuel efficiency standards, the administration seeks to freeze them after 2020.
Industry savings: revenues on up to 79 billion gallons of additional fuel sales (for vehicles built through 2029)
Impacts: Emission increases of 961 million tons of carbon dioxide, 1.7 million tons of methane; administration says its proposal would prevent up to 1,000 highway deaths annually, a finding disputed by former EPA officials and outside experts.
Status: Pending
NOTE: All weights are in short tons, not metric tons
SOURCES: Department of Transportation, Department of Interior, Environmental Protection Agency
https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2019/01/27/us/ap-us-trump-rollbacks-industry-savings-glance.html
-
Trump Rollbacks for Fossil Fuel Industries Carry Steep Cost
Jan 27, 2019 | AP (In The New York Times)
As the Trump administration rolls back environmental and safety rules for the energy sector, government projections show billions of dollars in savings reaped by companies will come at a steep cost: more premature deaths and illnesses from air pollution, a jump in climate-warming emissions and more severe derailments of trains carrying explosive fuels.
The Associated Press analyzed 11 major rules targeted for repeal or relaxation under Trump, using the administration's own estimates to tally how its actions would boost businesses and harm society.
The AP identified up to $11.6 billion in potential future savings for companies that extract, burn and transport fossil fuels. Industry windfalls of billions of dollars more could come from a freeze in vehicle efficiency standards that will yield an estimated 79 billion-gallon (300 million-liter) increase in fuel consumption.
On the opposite side of the government's ledger, buried in thousands of pages of analyses, are the "social costs" of rolling back the regulations. Among them:
— Up to 1,400 additional premature deaths annually due to the pending repeal of a rule to cut coal plant pollution.
— An increase in greenhouse gas emissions by about 1 billion tons (907 million metric tons) from vehicles produced over the next decade — a figure equivalent to annual emissions of almost 200 million vehicles.
— Increased risk of water contamination from a drilling technique known as "fracking."
— Fewer safety checks to prevent offshore oil spills.
For the Trump administration and its supporters, the rule changes examined by AP mark a much-needed pivot away from heavy regulations that threatened to hold back the Republican president's goal of increasing U.S. energy production. But the AP's findings also underscore the administration's willingness to put company profits ahead of safety considerations and pollution effects.
SIDING WITH INDUSTRY
The AP found the administration has sought to bolster the changes by emphasizing, and sometimes exaggerating, economic gains while minimizing negative impacts.
For example, when calculating future damages from greenhouse gas emissions from coal plants, the Trump administration looked only at U.S. effects, instead of globally. That drastically reduced the benefits of emission restrictions and allowed the administration to conclude the Obama-era rule was no longer justified, given costs to the coal industry.
In another instance, the Environmental Protection Agency wants to stop considering secondary benefits of controlling mercury emissions — namely reductions in other pollutants projected to prevent up to 11,000 premature deaths.
Last month, the AP revealed that the administration understated the advantages of installing better brakes on trains carrying crude oil and ethanol. Transportation Department officials acknowledged they miscalculated potential benefits by up to $117 million because they failed to include some projected future derailments.Editors’ PicksAs the Trumps Dodged Taxes, Their Tenants Paid a PriceGlaciers Are Retreating. Millions Rely on Their Water.Gumbo, the Classic New Orleans Dish, Is Dead. Long Live Gumbo.
In explaining its actions, the Trump administration said in some cases that the previous administration understated the price tag on new industry restrictions. In others, it said President Barack Obama's administration had been overly expansive in how it defined benefits to society.
Michael Greenstone, a University of Chicago professor who served as chief economist for Obama's Council of Economic Advisers, said the Trump administration was downplaying the health and environmental impacts of its actions.
"When you start fudging the numbers, it's not that the costs just evaporate into thin air. We will pay," Greenstone said. "They are reducing the costs for industries where pollution is a byproduct."
The rules being targeted were largely crafted under Obama in response to climate change, the disastrous 2010 Gulf of Mexico oil spill, massive releases from coal ash dumps and fuel train explosions.
ADMNISTRATION: NEGLIGIBLE RISKS
Trump's administration has stressed that savings for companies were greater than any increased perils to safety or the environment.
"We fully recognize every significant policy decision has a consequence and that those consequences can differ," acting U.S. Interior Secretary David Bernhardt told the AP. "I think when you look at the track record, holistically, what you see is our deregulatory efforts are still pretty protective."
The AP's tally of savings was derived from government projections required under a 1993 executive order. Five of the rule changes are still pending.Sign Up for On Politics With Lisa Lerer
A spotlight on the people reshaping our politics. A conversation with voters across the country. And a guiding hand through the endless news cycle, telling you what you really need to know.SIGN UP
On rules for toxic coal ash, offshore safety and refinery pollution, the administration said companies would save hundreds of millions of dollars with little or no added risk — an assertion former federal officials and environmental groups have disputed.
The potential industry savings were projected largely over the next decade.
Sectors of the coal industry see lifting costly rules as a matter of survival because demand has plummeted as utilities switch to cleaner-burning fuels.
For the oil and gas industry, with hundreds of billions of dollars in annual revenue, the economic impact of the Obama-era rules was comparatively small. But they were vigorously opposed as restrictions on business.
"We need to make sure we're putting together rules that are flexible enough to apply the latest, greatest technologies," said Erik Milito, vice president for the American Petroleum institute. He said the group focused on whether rules make sense, rather than cost savings.
Critics say the impact on public health and the environment will be even worse than projected.
"I don't think it's well understood what the death toll of these policies will be for the American people," said Paul Billings, of the American Lung Association.
OBAMA CLIMATE AGENDA ASSAILED
Two sweeping changes under Trump — the rollback of the Clean Power Plan that threatened to close many coal power plants and a reversal of plans to increase vehicle fuel efficiency standards — were centerpieces of Obama's climate change actions.
Killing the power plan would save companies up to $6.4 billion, the EPA concluded.
The trade-off is almost 61 million tons (55 million metric tons) annually of additional carbon dioxide emissions by 2030. The administration calculated that those emissions carry a maximum of $3.2 billion in "social costs," such as flood damage and higher air conditioning costs.
Since company savings outweighed pollution costs, the administration said scrapping the power plan was justified. That conclusion was possible largely because the EPA limited social costs to effects in the U.S., instead of globally as under Obama.
EPA spokeswoman Enesta Jones said the analysis complied with a 2003 directive under President George W. Bush that said such reviews should focus on costs and benefits to people in the U.S.
Joe Goffman, a former EPA official who helped create the clean power plan and now at Harvard Law School, said the omission of international impacts "doesn't track with reality" given that climate change is a worldwide problem.
The Trump administration also limited pollution cost considerations in its proposal last month on mercury emitted by coal plants.
When the mercury rule was finalized in 2012, the EPA projected up to $90 billion in benefits, including avoidance of up to 11,000 premature deaths from other power plant pollutants.
Now, the EPA says those benefits could not be considered because they are not directly tied to mercury reductions. The only benefits that should be counted, the agency said, were improvements to IQ scores as a result of less mercury exposure, valued at up to $6 million annually.
The National Mining Association had urged the change. Spokesman Conor Bernstein said Obama's EPA misused the concept of secondary pollution benefits to justify its actions.
The rollback's impact is unclear since utilities already have spent an estimated $18 billion on new pollution controls.
FUEL STANDARDS AND DRILLING SAFETY
Some experts outside government take issue with the rationale for relaxing the fuel economy rule.
The Trump administration says reducing standards would save as many as 1,000 lives annually and spare consumers and car companies hundreds of billions of dollars on vehicles with higher gas mileage. To reach that conclusion, officials lowered estimates of how many vehicles people would buy.
But economists including from the nonpartisan National Bureau of Economic Research say that assumption was fundamentally flawed, since looser standards would make cars cheaper and therefore increase demand. The economists said the government used misleading findings to wipe out at least $112 billion in potential societal benefits while falsely claiming its change would save numerous lives.
"Every change they made was made in the direction to make the standards look more expensive and the rollback to look cheaper and better," said Jeff Alson, who worked 40 years at an EPA lab in Michigan.
Several rules reworked under Trump tie directly to worker and public safety.
The administration rescinded requirements for improved fuel train brakes after determining the costs to industry would be higher than previously calculated. It acknowledged more spills from derailments would likely occur.
After AP's story about the agency's $117 million benefits understatement, spokesman Bobby Fraser said the decision to rescind the Obama rule would stand because the costs were still greater.
Two safety rules for offshore oil and gas drilling were adopted following the Deepwater Horizon accident, which killed 11 people and spilled 134 million gallons (507 million liters) of oil.
The Interior Department now says less rigid inspection and equipment requirements would save drilling companies hundreds of millions of dollars with "negligible" safety and environmental risks.
Lynn Scarlett, acting Interior Secretary under George W. Bush, said the changes ignore a government commission's findings on the Gulf spill.
"You're removing a tool that was developed intentionally to help reduce the risks," Scarlett said. "The failure to have those protections raises the risk, such that actions can result in accidents like Deepwater Horizon."
https://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2019/01/27/us/ap-us-trump-rollbacks-industry-savings.html
-
Lawmakers Introduce Energy, Resource Bills
Jan 28, 2019 | E&E Daily
By Courtney Columbus
Lawmakers last week introduced a flurry of energy and natural resource bills as Congress begins to move away from the shutdown crisis and into legislative work.
Two proposals from Rep. Scott Tipton (R-Colo.) would amend the Mineral Leasing Act. H.R. 786would require that a portion of revenues from mineral and geothermal leases be given to states to supplement education funding. Tipton introduced similar legislation last year.
H.R. 785 would require the secretary of the Interior to publish a report every four years on an "all-of-the-above" federal energy production strategy.
A bill by House Natural Resources Committee ranking member Rob Bishop (R-Utah) would designate Jan. 31 as the close of hunting season for ducks, mergansers and coots.
The measure to amend the Migratory Bird Treaty Act would also create special duck hunting days for youth, veterans and active military personnel, allowing states to add up to four days to the duck hunting season.
H.R. 762, from Rep. Matt Cartwright (D-Pa.), would amend the Energy Policy and Conservation Act to provide for the dissemination of information regarding available federal programs relating to energy efficiency projects for schools, according to a description.
H.R. 788, by Rep. Daniel Webster (R-Fla.), would amend and enhance the High Seas Driftnet Fishing Moratorium Protection Act to improve the conservation of sharks. Webster also introduced the legislation last year.
Also last week, Senate Environment and Public Works Chairman John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) introduced S. 218 to allow states to manage oil and gas projects on federal lands (E&E Daily, Jan. 25).
https://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2019/01/28/stories/1060118669
-
Renewable Chief: 'I'm Not Concerned' About Pallone
Jan 28, 2019 | E&E Energywire
By David Ferris
Dan Simmons, the new head of the Department of Energy's renewables and efficiency office, says he doesn't have an opinion on the "Green New Deal." He's not worried about investigations by incoming House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Frank Pallone (D-N.J.). And "affordability" is his No. 1 priority.
Simmons sat down for his first interview with E&E News last week at DOE's Grid Modernization Summit in Seattle after being sworn in on Jan. 16.
He served as acting head of the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) from 2017 to mid-2018, and then worked in a different position in the department during a lengthy confirmation process. Previously he was the vice president for policy at the Institute for Energy Research (IER), a free-market group that has advocated against carbon cap-and-trade legislation and for offshore oil drilling. He held the same role for IER's advocacy arm, the American Energy Alliance, which in 2015 argued for abolishing EERE by zeroing out its funding.
Advocates for energy efficiency have criticized President Trump's EERE for dragging its feet on establishing new efficiency standards for a variety of appliances and suggesting it would roll back an Obama-era standard for energy-saving lightbulbs. There also have been criticisms of the pace and process of distributing renewable grants (Greenwire, Dec. 10). These issues might soon receive scrutiny from Pallone and other newly empowered House Democrats.
The following is edited for length and clarity.
Tell us about your goals for EERE.
My goals are pretty simple. The first one is energy affordability. We have to continue to drive down the cost of the source of generation in my portfolio. There has obviously been a lot of success on driving down the cost of wind, driving down the cost of solar, and we want to continue that, as well as for other technologies.
We have concentrated solar power; we have offshore wind — that's just two examples — geothermal, bioenergy obviously, and there are lots of opportunities for the future. So No. 1 is affordability, and especially wanting to see that affordability translate into lower rates for ratepayers.
No. 2 is energy integration. We have these wind generating assets, these solar generating assets, that are intermittent, that cause challenges for the grid. As we have higher penetrations, let's make sure we can integrate those into the grid. That's one-half of the integration. The second half of the integration is the other side, if we want to call them edge resources, or the consumption side.
The grid edge.
The grid edge stuff. And that is integrating buildings and the grid with better communication technologies, as well as EVs [electric vehicles], making sure we're thinking about the whole grid to add flexibility. I believe flexibility is incredibly important for the future.
No. 3 is energy storage — thinking about energy storage holistically. Obviously integration and storage go together, but with energy storage, obviously we want to keep on making progress on batteries. The Vehicle Technologies Office [a branch of EERE] tells me the model cost of battery packs for vehicles have fallen 60 percent in the last six, seven years. Don't know if we'll be able to continue that amount of decrease in the future, but there will continue to be decreases. Obviously not just lithium-ion, but other battery chemistries, as well. Those are the three main areas.
None of those goals would have been out of place under an Obama administration head of EERE. What is different about your approach versus the prior administration's approach?
I can't really speak to the Obama administration's approach. I'm just focused on this. These are the technologies that I think are most important. Plus, they could have very easily worked in the Obama administration. These are nonpartisan points. I was grateful I made it through the confirmation process, and one of the reasons for that, I believe, is because my leadership of EERE has not been particularly partisan.
For concentrated solar and wind, are we likely to see an increase in funding for research or commercialization?
Many of those funding issues are really dictated by appropriations of Congress. We try to do our best to follow report language that Congress has given us, which has some ebbs and flows. I don't know how it's all going to shake out.
When you were the vice president of policy for the American Energy Alliance, you called for the elimination of EERE through budget cuts. Do you think EERE's budget should be cut?
I reject your premise of your question, because you said I did that. That wasn't me.
You were an important person in that organization at the time.
I didn't do that ... that wasn't my doing.
Should EERE's budget be cut?
You know, the answer there is the same as always, right: I support the president's budget, and the president's budget is the result of many factors pushing and pulling among the administration so we achieve a budget that makes sense, and at the end of the day, Congress is going to have its say. And we've seen what has happened over the last few years, where the request has been lower and the Congress has given us a lot more money, and the important thing for me is to make sure that we work hard to execute on the budget that Congress gives us.
Will you be advocating for maintaining or increasing the budget as the president and DOE make their budget recommendations?
I mean, I'm a political appointee. My job is to follow the president; otherwise, I'm not going to have this job. I'm not sure what that question's asking, exactly.
Heads of departments have the ability to ask for more money.
I mean, we are well into the FY 20 [fiscal year 2020] budget planning, and I've been gone for the last seven months, so I haven't had anything to do with the budget. I gave people ideas when I was previously in the role, but ... I don't know what the secretary has ... I know there's been pushback from a number of things from the department with OMB [the Office of Management and Budget]. I was not involved in any of those discussions.
Are there any changes coming to efficiency standards?
We have the process rule, to streamline the process, to modernize the process, to take into account some overall changes that have occurred over time — and hope to get that out before too long.
Are there efficiency standards coming for any particular appliances or devices?
I don't know of any, off the top of my head. [Laughs] I've only been back for a week. What is important, and it's one of the few conversations I've had about appliance standards with staff, is that we need to make sure that our pipeline of work is full, and that we're moving along test procedures and we're moving along the appliance standards. There's a lot of work for us to do, so we need to be working diligently.
Are you concerned that Rep. Pallone, the new head of the House Energy [and Commerce] Committee, will push you to release efficiency standards on deadline?
I'm not concerned. I'm not sure what that would look like, so I can't necessarily speculate. I think there's going to be a lot of progress to be made in the short term.
Do you intend to rescind the rule on lightbulbs?
We have worked on it; we've worked on a rule. It's not out yet, so I can't comment that much.
Tell us what you think of the "Green New Deal" [the plan spearheaded by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.)].
I don't know enough about the "Green New Deal" to have an opinion.
The top-line goal is 100 percent renewable energy, within a hasty time frame by the standards of the energy system. What do you think of that goal?
You know, it's a challenge. At the Department of Energy, my portfolio is focused on driving down the cost, enabling, having more renewables on the system. I don't have necessarily projections on when the system might be 100 percent renewable. That's what we're focused on, not necessarily a numeric target. Let's work on these technologies, and then people will figure out adoption for themselves, what makes sense for their state or their company.
In your goals for EERE, you mentioned a lot of "RE" — renewable energy — but not a lot of the other "E," which is efficiency. Why wasn't that part of your original goals? What you think about efficiency?
The administration supports efficiency to encourage overall growth in the economy, to make people's lives better. And that feeds directly into the first of my goals, which is affordability. It isn't just the affordability of energy; it's also really the affordability of the things that use energy. It's the affordability of energy savings in appliances. So efficiency is very much part of my No. 1 goal.
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2019/01/28/stories/1060118709
-
Western States Fight Potential Trump Limits on CWA 401 Power
Jan 25, 2019 | Inside EPA
Western state governors are fighting a potential Trump administration effort to narrow states’ Clean Water Act (CWA) section 401 authority to review federally permitted pipelines and other projects, amid reports that the White House is considering revising current EPA draft guidance on implementing the CWA to boost energy production.
In a Jan. 25 statement to Inside EPA, the Western Governors’ Association (WGA) reiterates its recent opposition to any new limits on state authority and says that the White House should consult states prior to any changes.
“Western Governors have consistently expressed their concerns regarding any Congressional or federal agency action that may diminish, impair or subordinate states’ well-established sovereign and statutory authorities to protect water resources under Section 401 of the federal Clean Water Act,” the statement says. The section gives states the authority to block pipelines and other energy projects.
“To the degree that any executive order would impact state authority under CWA Section 401, federal officials should engage with governors through early, meaningful, substantive, and ongoing consultation to gather the unique perspectives, insights, and expertise of state officials -- who are largely responsible for the issuance of water quality certifications under Section 401,” says WGA.
CWA section 401 generally gives states authority to review and impose conditions on federal actions that may adversely impact water quality standards. But industry officials and some GOP lawmakers have suggested amending the program that governs state approval of federally permitted energy projects, charging that states have abused the authority to block construction of natural gas pipelines and other projects.
According to a Jan. 23 report in Politico, the White House is now weighing executive orders to spur energy development to counter Russian gains in the international market, including potential revisions to Obama-era draft guidance on CWA section 401 compliance to preclude mostly Democratic states from blocking energy projects. The report also says White House officials are calling Republican-led states and offering assurances that any order will not harm state sovereignty.
In the email to Inside EPA, WGA reiterates its recent objection to any narrowing of states’ CWA 401 authority to review pipeline projects and says that the White House has not consulted with the group on potential changes.
“At this time, WGA is unaware of any such outreach to Governors by the White House in the development of an executive order addressing water quality certification under CWA Section 401."
The email cites five of its prior letters, sent between May and December -- four to Congress and one to EPA -- opposing legal or regulatory changes to states’ section 401 authority as unnecessary and contrary to the Trump administration’s pledge to advance cooperative federalism in which states take the lead in environmental oversight.
“To implement the CWA, Congress designated states as co-regulators under a system of cooperative federalism which rejects a one-size-fits-all approach to water management and protection by enabling states to implement the CWA with flexibility,” WGA said in a July 16 letter to Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-TN), chairman of the Appropriations Committee’s panel on energy and water development.
And in a June 4 letter to House and Senate leaders, WGA said conditions in the West back the need for state regulation of energy projects’ harms to water resources. “States have primary legal authority over the allocation, administration, protection and development of water resources within their boundaries,” they said. “In the West, water is a scarce resource that must be managed with sensitivity to social, environmental, and economic values and needs."
Most recently WGA joined nine other state groups, including the Association of Clean Water Administrators, and the Council of State Governments -- West, in a Dec. 3 letter to David Ross, assistant administrator for EPA's Office of Water, questioning the need for any revisions to states’ authority to review and impose restrictions on pipeline projects under CWA section 401.
The letter followed Ross’s statement to an Aug. 29 meeting of the Environmental Council of the States that EPA is considering revising the 401 process, including clarifying the timeliness and scope of state reviews, and raising the possibility of new guidance or rulemaking.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/western-states-fight-potential-trump-limits-cwa-401-power
-
US LNG Export Project Timelines Face Uncertainty in Market Amid Regulatory Questions
Jan 25, 2019 | Platts
By Harry Weber and Maya Weber
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's inaction on Venture Global LNG's permit application for its Calcasieu Pass export terminal in Louisiana is raising concerns in the market about a broader impact on approval schedules set for other projects.
The stakes are high: US developers are already facing significant headwinds on the commercial side from trade tensions between Washington and Beijing. Also, the partial government shutdown that lasted for more than a month before an apparent breakthrough Friday -- albeit one that may only be temporary -- impacted several agencies that are involved in the project review process.
New regulatory hurdles could further complicate developers' efforts at a time when they are racing to make final investment decisions so they can start up the second wave of US liquefaction facilities by the early- to mid-2020s to meet expected global LNG demand. Venture Global LNG acknowledged the urgency when it requested earlier this month that FERC keep to its previously stated schedule, which called for a decision on certification by January 22. That date passed without a decision, and as of press time Friday afternoon the commission still had not acted.
"We believe the timing of the approval is particularly important for VG as it had made plans to begin site construction in early 2019 upon FERC approval, but prior to formal FID," Wells Fargo Securities analyst Michael Webber said in a note to clients Wednesday. "Beyond VG, we think the idea of modest regulatory delays seems at least somewhat likely, at least in terms of final project approval -- however, it's unclear how evenly distributed any delays will be, if at all."PATH FORWARD
In an email Friday responding to questions, FERC Commissioner Cheryl LaFleur said she believes there is a path forward on the dockets for the pending LNG export projects. "I hope that through constructive engagement by the commissioners we can work toward that goal," she said.
A Venture Global LNG spokeswoman did not respond to a request for comment.
Eagerly watching are developers of the dozen projects that in August 2018 received environmental review schedules and expected final authorization timelines that allowed for the possibility that permit certificates would be issued for most of them this year.
In addition to Calcasieu Pass, projects that received environmental review and/or final permit schedules with decisions expected within the next six months include Tellurian's Driftwood LNG in Louisiana and Sempra Energy's Port Arthur LNG in Texas. Tellurian spokeswoman Joi Lecznar said Friday that company officials have "no concerns and remain on schedule to begin construction mid-2019." That would be subject to FERC approval, and a final investment decision. Sempra still believes it will receive its final environmental impact statement by January 31 for Port Arthur LNG, spokeswoman Paty Ortega Mitchell said.
Charles Riedl, executive director of the Center for Liquefied Natural Gas, said there is some concern in the industry about whether it will take seating a fifth commissioner at FERC to move the second wave of LNG projects that are now nearing decision points. "There absolutely is a scenario where you could see project timelines start to slide as a result of the fact that there isn't agreement" at the commission, he said.COMMISSION AGENDA
The last FERC meeting marked the second straight month in which a natural gas infrastructure project was removed from the meeting agenda, he noted.
Rick Smead, RBN Energy managing director of advisory services, agreed that missing the target date for Venture Global LNG's project is of concern.
"What we've got is basically a 2-2 commission, and if they don't resolve how they're going to deal with GHG issues, stuff is just getting held up, and it's just very unpredictable to see how it's going to come out," he said.
COMMERCIAL EFFORTS
It is relatively new for there to be transparency about FERC's specific target date for reaching a decision on natural gas projects. FERC last year came under pressure from Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee members to disclose such dates.
Even if the regulatory questions are resolved, projects still must secure sufficient commercial contracts to finance construction. That makes the US-China trade tension perhaps the biggest wildcard, including for projects that have already received FERC permits but have not yet reached an FID.
"Trade is a major issue," said a person familiar with one of those projects' commercial efforts.
https://www.spglobal.com/platts/en/market-insights/latest-news/natural-gas/012519-us-lng-export-project-timelines-face-uncertainty-in-market-amid-regulatory-questions
-
Shutdown Stalls Cybersecurity Work on Gas Pipelines, Group Says
Jan 25, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Naureen S. Malik
The shutdown of the U.S. government has halted work by a federal agency on cybersecurity risks faced by the nation’s 2.5 million miles of natural gas pipelines, according to an industry group.
The Transportation Security Administration, a division of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, has no ongoing corporate security reviews since the shutdown, said Dave McCurdy, chief executive officer of the American Gas Association, citing a conversation with the TSA. An agency spokeswoman deferred comments to Homeland Security, which didn’t respond to requests for comment.
Homeland Security warned last year about the rising number of cyberattacks on America’s energy infrastructure. Russian government hackers compromised dozens of U.S energy companies in 2017, while other attacks came from Iran and China, the U.S. Director of National Intelligence said in a July report. The AGA is tracking ongoing safety efforts on behalf of its gas utility members, such as the development of standards in the wake of the deadly explosions in Merrimack Valley in Massachusetts last year.
“Fortunately we’ve not had to call on PHMSA or NTSB or others from a federal government standpoint,” McCurdy said in a Jan. 23 interview in New York. Both agencies have canceled meetings, he said.
PHMSA is the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, while the NTSB is the National Transportation Safety Board, which investigates pipeline accidents such as the Massachusetts blasts. The NTSB didn’t respond to requests seeking comment because its media staff is furloughed due to the lapse in appropriations, according to automated email messages.
“I am very concerned that the federal shutdown is making it harder for pipeline safety inspectors to conduct critical reviews, and that the NTSB is being prevented from completing its investigation into the Merrimack Valley gas explosions,” Sen. Elizabeth Warren, a Democrat from Massachusetts, said in an emailed statement.
PHMSA is the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration. PHMSA said in a statement its field inspectors and investigations are continuing to work despite the shutdown and it’s still monitoring the needs of state pipeline agencies.
However, PHMSA has suspended a range of other activities including emergency response planning and hazardous materials standards and rule-making, according to its revised budget released earlier this month. Gas utilities are trying to anticipate new rules by making changes to boost safety, but certainty helps, Lori Traweek, the AGA’s chief operating officer, said in the interview.
https://bnanews.bna.com/environment-and-energy/shutdown-stalls-cybersecurity-work-on-gas-pipelines-group-says
-
A Greener New Deal, CO2eight: Cutting Carbon, Income Taxes, and Poverty
Jan 25, 2019 | Real Clear Energy
By Mark Mackie
Not a new chemical element, CO2eight is a call to cut CO2 emissions and modernize taxes with enactment of the 28th Amendment to the US Constitution. This proposal would (a) slash American carbon output and cut plastic and other solid waste generation, (b) replace an antiquated and corrupt income tax scam with a modern consumption/carbon tax system, and, bonus, (c) reduce poverty by providing cash payments directly to low-income citizens.
Here’s How it Works. Economists on both left and right endorse a switch from income to consumption taxation. This old idea has gone nowhere because of fears that the nation would end up with both federal income and consumption taxation al la Europe. But an old idea can get a new life with CO2eight that features a constitutional mechanism to ensure that virtually all personal and corporate income taxes are entombed in exchange for a modern federal consumption/carbon tax system. And the new consumption/carbon tax order will cost the country no more money than the current income tax regimes.
A Most Unusual Effective Date. The new consumption/carbon tax system would originate as a Congressional proposal, which, if signed by the President, would become law only upon the world’s most unusual effective date: the date enough states ratify a constitutional amendment to repeal the Sixteenth (income tax) Amendment. Why repeal Congress’ income tax authority with an Amendment: Because the country won’t stomach piling a federal consumption/carbon tax system onto two existing income tax systems. Ask President Macron about the wisdom of foisting fuel/carbon taxes on top of other taxes without offsets. The Macron miscalculation was anticipated just last November by a soundly rejected carbon tax ballot initiative in left-leaning Washington state.
On its own, an efficient carbon and consumption tax regime would likely raise less revenue than our current income tax systems. To make up the difference, the amendment would also authorize a flat tax of an additional tax on higher-income individuals of 4% to 10%. For scale, President Clinton proposed a flat tax of 30% on incomes above $100,000 to replace all personal income taxes. The flat tax would be a revenue shock-absorber dropping in years consumption tax revenues rise. The flat tax rate can increase in emergencies, e.g., during time of war, with supermajority Congressional votes that lapse unless extended. Consumption taxes would be limited by the Amendment to a historic percentage of GDP.
Here’s Who Wins. First, the left: Progressivity is built in by granting lower-income taxpayers advanced rebates (i.e., prebates) on necessities including food and gas. Direct cash payments akin to a negative income tax would be authorized. An odd mix endorses the latter idea: Milton Friedman, Richard Nixon, and, wait for it, the Green Party. Senators Booker and Harris push versions of anti-poverty payments. Direct cash payments would be partially funded by reductions in non-cash federal poverty programs.
Swapping income taxes for carbon taxes will very nearly buggy-whip the internal combustion engine and other CO2 emitters. Carbon reductions would surpass Mr. Obama’s deep decarbonization aspirations and blow away Paris Accord goals. Solid waste generation plummets slowing the throwaway society as the left can insist on national consumption taxes on single-use plastics, like bottled water, excessive packaging, and if it continues to strike their fancy, even Happy Meals.
The Right Shouldn’t Care. The left’s Pigovian (i.e., behavior-altering) taxes should not deter the right because, finally, the income tax incubus is caged; tax-paying accountancy is performed by companies, not individuals facing IRS scrutiny. Liberty grows with distance between citizen and government. Income tax leakage, that is, cheating, is reduced and revenues rise as corporate professionals report and collect taxes mostly at the point of production or sale, not citizens fighting to stay one step ahead of the IRS. Underground bad guys surface to pay federal taxes on everything they buy, reducing tax burdens on the lawful.
The right should not fear a carbon/consumption tax shift for one need not accept a single conclusion of the UN’s IPCC for this Amendment to make sense: limited consumption taxes beat untethered income taxes on every front including spurring savings, investment, and growth; such taxes have a conservative pedigree (e.g., President Reagan favored use taxes); the right also gives revenue-neutral carbon taxes good reviews (see A. Laffer and G. Mankiw).
Goodies for All. The deeper the dive into CO2eight, the better it gets: US corporations still harbor gargantuan profits off-shore because domestic corporate taxes starve our economy of a huge capital resource. The recent tax bill lowered the corporate rate from 35 to 21 percent resulting in $450 billion returned this year. Well done, golf clap, but $2.5 trillion in US money is still parked overseas. Under CO2eight there would be no barrier for the rest to come home, which could spark gold rush GDP numbers for the US economy. Consider: $2.5 trillion coming home would exceed total foreign investment in the US at $2.4 trillion and is more than 60% of all US trade in 2017 at $3.9 trillion.
US exports get goosed too. Europe and other VAT nations kill American exports by charging VAT taxes on products we sell there and rebate VAT taxes to its companies shipping here. When corporate taxes go away and we charge consumption taxes on imports, our shipments overseas will nearly be on the same pitch with Europe and other VAT nations.
The World Wins Too. CO2eight success at home can breed carbon reductions abroad as the other world champion carbon emitters, China and India, eye the results. They may conclude such an audacious launch of an American idea that helps both environment and economy is worth a go. If they do, decarbonize and solid waste reductions would multiply on massive scales as would economic growth. Europe may reach the same conclusion, perhaps prompting reform of its oppressive system of income and VAT tax regimes that have gained it nothing but decades of economic sclerosis.
Congress May Suck; States Don’t Have To. Even though CO2eight requires an Amendment, I think it has a better chance of being enacted than a Green New Deal, which has a target of 2030. CO2eight can beat that by years. If our dysfunctional Congress can’t get the CO2eight ball rolling, states can: Two-thirds of our state legislatures can advance the proposal without Congressional action. CO2eight can launch an anti-carbon, anti-income tax, anti-plastic, and anti-poverty revolution, setting in motion environmental and economic changes on Trumpian scales.
Where might the House Problem Solvers Caucus and the President be on CO2eight?
Mark Mackie, MA, JD, is former Chief Counsel for the US Senate Committee on Rules and practices law in the Dallas/Fort Worth area.
https://www.realclearenergy.org/articles/2019/01/25/a_greener_new_deal_co2eight_cutting_carbon_income_taxes_and_poverty.html
-
Trump EPA Official: Addressing Climate Change 'One of Many Priorities'
Jan 25, 2019 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
A Trump administration official said Friday that addressing climate change is a “priority” for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), but said it can rank behind other issues.
“I think reducing carbon emissions is important, and it’s a priority for us. It’s one of many priorities for us,” Bill Wehrum, the EPA’s assistant administrator for air, told The Guardian’s Emily Holden at a Society of Environmental Journalists event.ADVERTISEMENT
Asked directly if the administration sees addressing climate change as a priority, Wehrum said, “You bet it’s a priority for us.”
But Wehrum also said that he and other administration officials weigh climate against other issues.
“Part of my job as a regulator is to be as smart as I possibly can in how we allocate resources, how we set our standards and how we require society more broadly to expend resources,” he said.
Wehrum’s boss, acting EPA chief Andrew Wheeler, gained attention last week when he said at a Senate hearing that climate change is “a huge issue” but not “the greatest crisis.”
On Friday, Wehrum said that he has “spent a good amount” of time reading the National Climate Assessment, the major federal report released last year that warned of dire consequences from climate change in the United States.
He added that the EPA is still trying to figure out climate change science and whether it is a “crisis,” among other scientific questions.
“I’m trying to figure that out,” he said when asked if climate change is a crisis. “Everyone is still exploring the science behind climate change.”
Wehrum, a former attorney for businesses and associations that opposed a number of environmental regulations, has overseen wide-ranging work to overturn or roll back numerous major climate policies, including the Clean Power Plan (CPP), greenhouse gas rules for cars and methane emissions rules for oil and natural gas drilling.
At Friday’s event, he specifically defended the Affordable Clean Energy rule, the EPA’s proposal to replace the Clean Power Plan with much weaker standards for greenhouse gas emissions from power plants.
He said analyses that show smaller emissions reductions than the Clean Power Plan are unfair.
“The reality is the CPP has not been implemented, it is not effective at all,” he said.
“And because of the Supreme Court’s stay, has not been implemented at all pending litigation … there is no basis for comparison to CPP.”
Even so, Wehrum said he is confident that the final version of the replacement rule will result in emissions reductions similar to the CPP. “They’re going to look a lot alike,” he said.
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/427036-trump-epa-official-climate-is-a-priority
-
Democrats Eye Early Deals On Modest Climate Policies Before Bigger Bills
Jan 25, 2019 | Inside EPA
By Doug Obey
House Democrats are contemplating bipartisan deals on power grid modernization, fixing pipeline leaks and energy efficiency as initial steps to address climate change, according to a top staffer on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, who adds such efforts would come before more ambitious steps to tackle the growing threat.
The staffer's remarks came during a Jan. 24 meeting of the U.S. Conference of Mayors, where local leaders said they are crafting calls for federal officials to enact bold climate policy, including an “aggressive national renewable portfolio standard” that would encourage “clean and renewable energy.”
The local officials are also urging Congress to revive funding for energy and environment community block grants last funded by the stimulus law during the Obama administration, to help cities to address a range of energy and environmental needs.
“There are things we can definitely work on that can be helpful to you and to help the nation,” said Rick Kessler, Energy & Commerce's staff director for energy and environment, during a climate change session at the mayors' winter meeting in Washington, D.C.
Kessler cited work on “infrastructure” that helps facilitate new jobs and boost the economy, a broad term that he said includes not just roads and bridges but also grid modernization and “fixing leaking pipelines.” He also cited the potential for Congress to embrace new energy efficiency policy, which saves money and “helps save the planet.”
He framed such initial steps as separate from fights over GHG regulation that have -- and still threaten to -- split the two parties.
“They may not come across as climate change [policy] in a way that is regulatory. Hopefully at some point we will get to that,” he said.
“But in the meantime I think we can take these steps. The chairman and others are looking to find ways to work together,” he added, noting that President Donald Trump has also cited infrastructure as a priority.
Kessler's comments come as many freshman House Democrats, local officials -- and even some Republicans -- are ramping up calls for far more aggressive action on climate, a dynamic which he himself cited as a reason for hopefulness.
There is “growing urgency on both the left and right,” Kessler said, citing a crop of freshman Democrats “eager to move quickly” as well as recent calls for action by Republicans including former Cabinet officials from Republican administrations, George Shultz and James Baker.
Underscoring this dynamic, former Obama White House environment official Christy Goldfuss said that recent debate over a “Green New Deal” proposal has people asking “how are we going to address climate change at scale, not what's our building-block approach.”
That is a “huge, huge shift, and it would not have happened if the Green New Deal had not come along,” she added.
Shutdown Consequences
But the mayors' event also comes as the ongoing government shutdown is complicating even a short-term effort by committee Democrats to focus early on climate change. Instead of making the topic the subject of their first hearing in the new Congress, the Energy & Commerce Committee is now planning a Jan. 31 hearing on the consequences of the ongoing partial shutdown of the federal government -- the longest in history.
The shutdown's effects also surfaced at the mayors' meeting when plans for a National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) briefing on two recent reports outlining climate risks fell through because much of NOAA's staff was furloughed. This caused former Obama EPA official Bob Perciasepe, now president of the Center for Energy and Climate Solutions, to step in to fill the gap.
“It is an honor to pinch hit, I like baseball,” Perciasepe said before delivering a straightforward summary of key highlights from the reports from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and a multi-agency effort known as the fourth National Climate Assessment. The twin studies show mounting climate change risks and the need to act quickly if they are to be minimized.
A Democratic aide confirms that the shutdown has put the panel “behind where we should be at this point” on its agenda, but nevertheless calls infrastructure a viable early focus.
The source suggests reviving legislation from the 114th Congress that included grid modernization grants and funding to address methane leaks from aging pipelines, legislation on which Democrats and then-Chairman Fred Upton (R-MI) were near a deal at the time.
Regarding ongoing talk of the more ambitious Green New Deal, the source says such a plan “is really big, way beyond the environment,” in apparent reference to how early outlines of the idea broadly seek to boost the economy through major government investments. “We are going to try to move forward,” the source says, while also suggesting it is a longer-term issue.
During the meeting, however, mayors made clear that they would like to see an array of policies -- both modest and ambitious -- put on the table in Congress and elsewhere.
The group circulated a draft call for climate action during the forum, which seeks actions by all levels of government and business. It broadly embraces returning the United States to a position of “global leadership” to limit climate change to 1.5 degrees Celsius -- an ambitious target that the IPCC report said would require “rapid and far-reaching” overhaul in energy, transportation and other systems but could mitigate major climate-related damages.
The draft document also includes the revival of energy efficiency and conservation block grants (EECBG) that once helped communities fund a range of projects including replacement of old street lamps with more efficient alternatives. Such grants have not been funded since the stimulus law implemented in response to the 2008 financial crisis.
Other federal priorities include an “aggressive national renewable portfolio standard” and “incentives for clean and renewable energy”; prioritizing Department of Transportation funding to invest in low-carbon transportation options including a national electric vehicle charging network; offering energy sector incentives to ramp up research on renewables and carbon capture; and modernizing the power grid.
Another draft document, which is likely to come up at the mayors' next meeting in June, is a resolution supporting a “national price on carbon emissions.” The draft states that the U.S. Conference of Mayors “strongly urges” Congress to pass legislation that imposes a price on carbon emissions sufficiently high enough to reduce emissions “in line with ambitions detailed in the Paris Agreement on climate change.”
The draft cites the need complement local carbon reduction goals with national polices, a point that Salt Lake City Mayor Jackie Biskupski (D) also highlighted in a press availability alongside the event.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/democrats-eye-early-deals-modest-climate-policies-bigger-bills
-
Nations Recognize Warming as Threat to Peace and Security
Jan 28, 2019 | E&E Climatewire
By Jean Chemnick
There's a growing global consensus that climate change is a threat to peace and security that deserves the same kind of attention afforded to terrorism and other risks.
Eighty-three countries chose to participate in a daylong U.N. Security Council meeting Friday on climate change — an unusually high turnout for an open debate. The overwhelming majority spoke in favor of elevating climate change to a list of pervasive risk factors that the council considers and is briefed on whenever and wherever it engages.
That's an about-face from 2007, when the United Kingdom first used its turn in the council's chair to highlight the role climate change could play as a multiplier for other risks. Observers say most participants then were dismissive.
"Back then, if you talked about climate change as a security risk, you'd be laughed out of the room," said Oli Brown, an associate fellow with the Energy, Environment and Resources Department at Britain's Chatham House and a former U.N. official.
That seems to be changing. In just the past year, three Security Council resolutions have highlighted climate change as a factor in security crises in Africa, specifically in the Lake Chad region, the Sahel and Somalia. That shows a new willingness among even members who have been reluctant to let the Security Council expand into the environmental realm to at least entertain that those issues intersect with the body's mandate of preserving peace and stability. Russia, China and the United States have been the most reticent.
The next step would be to more fully integrate climate change into the council's work.
"I think there's a new political space for talking about climate change as a security issue, but there's still a degree of concern among countries and some members of the Security Council about how far that goes," Brown said.
That's what the 15 permanent and nonpermanent members of the Security Council and their guests from the United Nations' 178 other member states grappled with Friday.
Countries ranging from the Maldives and Tuvalu to Guatemala and Morocco gave full-throated statements in favor of the most influential U.N. body doing more to arm itself with knowledge of climate-related risks to help it respond to 21st-century crises, like displacement, food and water scarcity, and mass migration.
They proposed that it seek regular help and advice on the subject from agencies like the U.N. Environment Programme and U.N. Development Programme, both of which have long worked in that space.
"It is very pertinent for the council to have information that allows it to make decisions strategically, taking into account the impact of natural phenomena of unusual ferocity on the goals of sustainable development," said Miguel Vargas Maldonado, foreign affairs minister of the Dominican Republic and the chairman of the debate. The Caribbean nation, which is taking its turn leading the Security Council this month, has made climate change its priority.
The Philippines' foreign minister, Teodoro Locsin, painted an almost Hobbesian picture of Earth in the era of climate change, seeming to take a dig at President Trump in the process.
"A new Dark Age will descend on most of the planet as never before," he said in his statement before the council. "And unlike in the past, the darkness will never be lifted. No age of enlightenment will follow. Human life won't be worth living except for brutes. And there are quite a few of those already in countries denying climate change and refusing its challenges."
And although there is a perceived closeness between Philippine strongman President Rodrigo Duterte and Trump, disbelief in climate change has never been a part of that.
Locsin showed little patience for climate skepticism.
"Science proves it. Experience shows it. The increasing ferocity of storms demonstrates its certain advent," he said. "Only mumbo-jumbo disputes it."
The United States is currently between U.N. ambassadors, as nominee Heather Nauert has yet to clear the Senate. Jonathan Cohen, the acting ambassador, didn't include any "mumbo-jumbo" in his remarks to the Security Council. He also, though, didn't include the words "climate" or "security," recounting instead all the times the United States has helped its "neighbors and friends" after natural disasters.
But Cohen, a career diplomat, seemed to voice support for the underlying question facing the Security Council — that is, whether it should be briefed more comprehensively by other U.N. bodies to help it respond to weather events.
Russian Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia was the only representative to demand that the Security Council leave climate change out of its work, except when circumstances undisputedly call for it.
Including climate change in analyses of security risks as a matter of course, he said, would be "excessive and even counterproductive" because "climate change is not a universal challenge in the context of international security."
As proof, he pointed to conflicts over the last decade that erupted in Libya and Syria, both of which researchers have linked to warming-related droughts but which Nebenzia said were more a product of fumbled actions by NATO, including airstrikes.
Mainstreaming climate change into security planning "leads to the forced assumption that the problems of the environmental are unavoidable and will always lead to conflict," he said.
Brown and other experts say Russia is resistant to expand the Security Council's role because it fears that would lead the United Nations to exert more pressure on national sovereignty, which the federation has long opposed. In contrast to the United States, Nebenzia did affirm the science of climate change — something that appeared in the testimony of all participants Friday except Cohen — but argued that the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change and the Paris Agreement were the proper venues to discuss the issue.
But small islands that see themselves as uniquely vulnerable to climate-related displacement and hardship in the next century disagreed. Barbados' U.N. ambassador, Elizabeth Thompson, told E&E News that the Security Council's recognition of terrorism as a pervasive threat has had wide-reaching implications for the way the world has responded.
"Resources are found to address issues related to terrorism," she said. "And equally, we believe that if climate change is recognized as the security threat that it is, that that kind of level of importance will be attached to it, and similarly we will see broader policy initiatives relating to it, allocation of discrete, identifiable, predictable resources to address climate change impacts."
Thompson, who represented Caribbean nations regionally at the debate, said climate change will create 25 million refugees globally this century.
"So it is a security threat, however you frame it and to whatever you link it to," she said. "And recognizing it in that context will therefore elevate it to a greater level of consideration and seriousness and multilateral engagement. That isn't necessarily coming out of the UNFCCC and Paris."
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2019/01/28/stories/1060118687
-
Samsung Is Getting Rid of Plastic Packaging for Phones, Tablets and TVs
Jan 28, 2019 | CNN
By Sherisse Pham
Samsung is joining a growing number of international companies that are pledging to reduce the amount of plastic waste from their businesses.
The world's largest smartphone maker is starting to ditch the plastic packaging typically used to wrap and protect electronic devices and appliances.
Starting in the first half of this year, Samsung phones, tablets and wearable devices will be packaged in paper, pulp molds and bio-based or recycled plastics, the company said in a statement Sunday. It will also alter the design of its phone charger, replacing the glossy exterior with a matte finish and ditching plastic protection films.
A company spokeswoman said the reduction of single-use plastics in Samsung's packaging will progress "gradually," adding that there is no timetable for when they will be phased out completely.
As the world struggles to deal with vast amounts plastic waste — plastics are expected to outweigh fish in the ocean by 2050 — more and more companies are trying to tackle the problem.
Samsung sold about 291 million smartphones last year, according to data from market research firm IDC. It also sold millions of other consumer products.
The plastic bags used to protect the surface of Samsung's large home appliances — washing machines, refrigerators, TVs and air conditioners — will be swapped out for bags made of recycled materials and bioplastics, which are made from non-fossil fuel materials like starch or sugar cane.
Samsung still uses a lot of plastic material to make the electronic devices and appliances it sells.
The company consumed nearly 590,000 tons of plastic in 2017, according to its latest sustainability report. Recycled plastics accounted for just over 6% of Samsung's total plastic consumption.
Some top brands are experimenting with a different approach to the plastic packaging problem.
Consumer giants including Procter & Gamble (PG) and Nestlé (NSRGY) are backing a project known as Loop, which aims to reuse containers for popular products like Tide detergent and Häagen-Dazs ice cream as an alternative to recycling.
The project, which will be rolled out in an experimental phase to several thousand consumers in New York and Paris this May, was announced last week at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/01/28/business/samsung-plastic-packaging/index.html
Congressional Hearings
Industry and Association News
TSCA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested