Preview Newsletter
AM ACC 2/7/2019
-
(ACC Mentioned) Reporter’s Notebook: For Lyondellbasell CEO, Pollution Is Personal
Feb 7, 2019 | Houston Chronicle
By Marissa Luck
The Ganges River is one of the holiest sites in the world, where millions of devout worshipers visit to wash away their sins every year. But the sacred site is also one of the most polluted. -
(ACC Mentioned) Biesterfeld Plastic Supports the Global Operation Clean Sweep Initiative
Feb 7, 2019 | British Plastics and Rubber
By Tom Walker
Biesterfeld Plastic has announced it is supporting the world-wide Operation Clean Sweep initiative, signing up to the initiative on behalf of all its subsidiaries at the end of January. -
(ACC Mentioned) Economic Indicator Shows Signs Of Slower Growth
Feb 6, 2019 | Insurance News Net
The United States’ economy is continuing to grow but at a much slower pace than last year, according to a leading economic indicator published each month by the American Chemistry Council. -
Small Firms Take Stock of the President at Midterm
Feb 6, 2019 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Rick Mullin
It’s the two-year anniversary of the Donald J. Trump administration, and the past two months have witnessed an erratic stock market, the return of the House of Representatives to Democratic control, the sentencing of Trump’s former attorney Michael Cohen stemming... -
Chemical Policy Crunch: EPA’s Deadlines Remain Despite Shutdown (1)
Feb 6, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
The EPA will soon release a list of chemicals allowed in commerce and next month will publish a separate list of chemicals it will sort through. -
(ACC Mentioned) State Legislatures Sharpen Focus on Chemical Contaminants (1)
Feb 6, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
State legislatures and regulatory agencies are boosting their efforts to cut the use of emerging contaminants and flame retardants, and learn what chemicals are in products that people buy, a nonprofit group announced Feb. 6. -
State Legislatures Take on PFAS as Trump EPA Lags
Feb 6, 2019 | Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families
In an effort to fill regulatory gaps left by the federal government, states are stepping up to protect public health from harmful chemicals, according to an analysis by Safer States. -
Neurotoxic Pesticide Ban Case to Get Heard by Full Ninth Circuit
Feb 7, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tiffany Stecker
A federal appeals court will review a decision to ban chlorpyrifos, an insecticide linked to intellectual delays in children, in a win for the agriculture industry. -
San Francisco Tap Water Tests: Pesticides Not Detected
Feb 6, 2019 | Environmental Working Group
By Tasha Stoiber
Much of EWG’s work means warning you about potentially harmful chemicals in your water, food or consumer products. -
Key West Bans Sunscreen Containing Chemicals Believed to Harm Coral Reefs
Feb 7, 2019 | New York Times
By Karen Zraick
Key West, the sunny city at the southernmost tip of Florida, voted this week to ban the sale of sunscreen containing chemicals believed to harm coral reefs. -
Industry Criticises Draft UK REACH Statutory Instrument
Feb 7, 2019 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
The UK government’s draft statutory instrument for REACH leaves a number of issues "unresolved", the head of the country’s Chemical Industries Association (CIA) said. -
UN Invites Cleaning Products Firms to Join Global Chemical Talks
Feb 7, 2019 | Chemical Watch
By Leigh Stringer
UN Environment is inviting organisations working in the cleaning products sector to join international discussions on how to manage chemicals globally. -
Cameron LNG Export Terminal 'Very Close' to Startup: Project Officials
Feb 6, 2019 | Platts
By Harry Weber
Sempra Energy's Cameron LNG export terminal is "very close" to startup and could be ready to begin producing LNG in the next few weeks, project officials said Wednesday. -
Atlantic Coast Permit Pileup: Where Things Stand
Feb 6, 2019 | E&E Daily
By Pamela King
Though the Atlantic Coast pipeline's path winds through mountainous Appalachia, the contentious gas project may face its biggest uphill battle in court. -
Court Orders Chemical Safety Board to Get Cracking on Reporting Rules
Feb 7, 2019 | Reuters
By Jill Priluck
A federal judge in Washington D.C. has ordered a federal agency to issue rules in the next 12 months for reporting accidental chemical releases, handing environmental groups a victory. -
EPA Cautions EtO Air Monitoring Data Indicates 'Background' Sources
Feb 6, 2019 | Inside EPA
By Maria Hegstad
EPA officials are cautioning that air monitoring near a high-profile Illinois sterilizing facility that uses ethylene oxide (EtO) -- where agency modeling data have indicated the chemical may pose a higher potential cancer risk to residents -- has detected background levels of EtO... -
Congress on Trump Infrastructure Call: ‘We Didn’t See Any Money’
Feb 6, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Dean Scott and Tiffany Stecker
Members of Congress have a message for President Donald Trump after he called for enhancing infrastructure: Show us the money. -
Union Pacific Reports Positive Train Control Progress
Feb 7, 2019 | Global Railway Review
Union Pacific has installed Positive Train Control (PTC) equipment on 100 per cent of required route miles and has successfully implemented it on all required passenger train routes. -
Deadly SC Train Crash Anniversary Highlights Safety Changes
Feb 6, 2019 | WSPA
By Diana Lee
A year ago a train crash near Columbia killed killed two people and injured more than 100. -
Ocasio-Cortez Releases Details of ‘Green New Deal’
Feb 7, 2019 | Bloomberg
By Ari Natter
Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez released a sweeping package of environmental measures Thursday that has pitted progressives in the House Democratic caucus against moderates over how far to go in pursuit of resetting the climate change debate. -
Next Step for House Dems: 'Low-Hanging Fruit'
Feb 7, 2019 | E&E Daily
By Nick Sobczyk and George Cahlink
Democrats are looking to hit the ground running after their first climate change hearings yesterday, tackling potentially bipartisan efforts to promote weatherization and energy efficiency as they write a larger bill to reduce emissions. -
Republicans Reach Across Aisle on Climate, But Not Too Far
Feb 6, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Abby Smith
Republicans on the House energy committee said they can work with Democrats on bipartisan policies to address climate change—but they draw the line at the rapid transition to all renewable energy outlined by the Green New Deal. -
Republicans Push Back at First Climate Hearings
Feb 6, 2019 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Miranda Green
Democratic leaders asserted their newfound control of the House on Wednesday by convening two key committee hearings on climate change that each emphasized the need for swift action on curbing greenhouse gas emissions... -
New House Democrats Use Climate Hearing as Issue Megaphone
Feb 6, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tiffany Stecker
The House Natural Resources Committee’s first climate change hearing of the new Congress offered few details on strategies, but allowed a handful of new Democrats to vocalize on the issue’s importance. -
Compliance Plan Would Downgrade Air, Water Initiatives
Feb 6, 2019 | E&E News PM
By Sean Reilly and Ariel Wittenberg
EPA, as part of a broader reshuffling of its enforcement agenda, is proposing to deprioritize initiatives to stop raw sewage from flowing into the nation's waterways and limit air pollution from power plants and other large industrial facilities. -
EPA Poised to Publish MATS Rollback Proposal
Feb 7, 2019 | Inside EPA
EPA is poised to publish in the Feb. 7 Federal Register its proposal to eliminate the legal underpinning of its mercury and air toxics standards (MATS) rule for power plants, starting a 60-day public comment process on the controversial measure after it was delayed by the recent government shutdown. -
Michigan Governor, Legislature Spar Over Environmental Reviews
Feb 7, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Alex Ebert
The GOP-controlled Michigan Legislature is moving to rescind a Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D) executive order that dissolves industry-favored environmental regulatory review panels. -
Trump Administration Proposes Exempting Some Light Bulbs From Green Standards
Feb 6, 2019 | Reuters (In The New York Times)
By Timothy Gardner
The U.S. Department of Energy on Wednesday proposed exempting some light bulbs from federal efficiency standards that take effect next year, a move environmentalists said would boost pollution and power bills for consumers. -
Not All Energy Storage Is Clean – It Might Even Increase Emissions
Feb 6, 2019 | Environmental Defense Fund
By Andy Bilich
Falling capital costs for energy storage coupled with a major push by grid operators to deploy energy storage technologies has the market ready for take-off.
Industry and Association News
TSCA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) Reporter’s Notebook: For Lyondellbasell CEO, Pollution Is Personal
Feb 7, 2019 | Houston Chronicle
By Marissa Luck
The Ganges River is one of the holiest sites in the world, where millions of devout worshipers visit to wash away their sins every year. But the sacred site is also one of the most polluted.
About 1.2 billion pounds of plastics are dumped into its waters every year, and it’s one of 10 major rivers responsible for the lion’s share of plastics funneling into the world’s oceans.
Bob Patel, CEO of Houston’s LyondellBasell, knows this all too well. He spent the first decade of his life in India, so he has seen firsthand how the country’s rivers are riddled with refuse.
Now, the Houston executive who built a career making plastic is fighting to keep industry’s products from piling into the waterways of his native country. Like many in the petrochemical industry, Patel is reconciling how to continue supplying the world with the modern conveniences of plastics while preventing it from ruining the very places he holds dear.
For Patel, the solution goes beyond recycling and waste cleanup. And it’s going to require a tectonic shift in how plastics are made and what happens from the moment hydrocarbon molecules are turned into resin pellets to be converted into plastics.
Patel is the driving force behind an industry effort to keep plastic waste from clogging the world’s oceans and rivers. When he was chair of the industry trade group American Chemistry Council last year, he helped bring together chief executives from the biggest plastics manufacturers to start an initiative and nonprofit called the Alliance to End Plastic Waste. The nonprofit launched in January.
Patel thought it was vital to look across the entire life cycle of a plastic product — from resins to consumer products and packaging to waste.
“We all agreed was that this needed to be a cross-value chain effort and not just a chemical industry effort,” Patel said in an interview. “In order for it to have the kind of impact that we had ambition for, it would require the expertise of not only what we know about the chemistry of the plastics, but also how brand owners think about positioning plastics in their packaging.”
That sparked further conversations. Eventually waste management companies like Veolia of France and consumer products companies such as Procter & Gamble of Cincinnati joined the effort. The initiative is backed by nearly 30 global companies that have committed more than $1 billion to developing programs and technologies to minimize, manage and prevent plastic waste.
The Alliance is investing in an incubator geared toward developing better plastic recycling technologies; collaborating with the United Nations to train community leaders on waste management; and supporting the work of the Salt Lake City company, Renewlogy, to capture plastics entering the oceans from the 10 most polluted rivers, including the Ganges.
The Alliance isn’t without its critics. Environmentalists argue that recycling and clean up won’t end pollution as long as companies continue to rely on single-use plastics for packaging.
But Patel said that’s why companies in the Alliance have pledged to put resources toward developing new technologies to prevent plastic waste, too — whether through better chemistry to make recycling more economical or through finding ways to use less plastic material in packaging. LyondellBasell already had plans this year to open a $725 million plant in La Porte dedicated to producing lighter weight plastics. It’s also formed a recycling joint venture in The Netherlands with a French waste management company, Suez.
“This will all take time,” Patel said, “but when we bring the know-how and the capability of global, very large companies that are innovative across the value chain, we think this can be very powerful.”
Eventually, he hopes the river where worshipers go to cleanse their sins will be clean itself one day.
https://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/energy/article/Reporter-s-Notebook-For-LyondellBasell-CEO-13596971.php
-
(ACC Mentioned) Biesterfeld Plastic Supports the Global Operation Clean Sweep Initiative
Feb 7, 2019 | British Plastics and Rubber
By Tom Walker
Biesterfeld Plastic has announced it is supporting the world-wide Operation Clean Sweep initiative, signing up to the initiative on behalf of all its subsidiaries at the end of January.
Carsten Harms, Member of the Executive Board at Biesterfeld said: “Our ethos as a company is to take on our fair share of responsibility for people and environment by operating fairly and sustainably.”
“We can protect our environment by using resources in a careful and conscientious manner. That is why we are happy to give our whole-hearted support to Operation Clean Sweep, because we believe this imitative will lead to a more responsible attitude in our sector.”
The international Operation Clean Sweep initiative was set up by the American Chemistry Council in the USA, before PlasticsEurope extended the license to the programme in Europe, with the aim of preventing granules, flakes and powders from entering the marine environment.
Jens Imbeck, Head of Logistics at Biesterfeld Plastic, said: “We are asking our international logistics partners to follow our example and to support this initiative. Operation Clean Sweep is a sensible strategy, which we are happy to support, in the hope that as many companies as possible in the plastics sector will join us and take their share of responsibility.”
https://www.britishplastics.co.uk/Environment/biesterfeld-plastic-supports-the-global-operation-clean-swee/
-
(ACC Mentioned) Economic Indicator Shows Signs Of Slower Growth
Feb 6, 2019 | Insurance News Net
The United States’ economy is continuing to grow but at a much slower pace than last year, according to a leading economic indicator published each month by the American Chemistry Council. “The CAB continues to signal gains in U.S. commercial and industrial activity through mid-2019, but at a much slower pace as growth has turned over,” observes Kevin Swift, chief…
... to grow but at a much slower pace than last year, according to a leading economic indicator published each month by the American Chemistry Council...
§ Access to full text unavailable – subscription required.
Story can be found here: https://insurancenewsnet.com/oarticle/economic-indicator-shows-signs-of-slower-growth#.XFvKxVwzZ3g
-
Small Firms Take Stock of the President at Midterm
Feb 6, 2019 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Rick Mullin
It’s the two-year anniversary of the Donald J. Trump administration, and the past two months have witnessed an erratic stock market, the return of the House of Representatives to Democratic control, the sentencing of Trump’s former attorney Michael Cohen stemming from special counsel Robert Mueller’s ongoing investigation of the president, and a standoff over the proposed border wall between the US and Mexico, resulting in a record-setting partial government shutdown.
Still, as has been the case through several chaotic episodes over the past two years, the president’s approval rating among likely or registered voters continues to hover around 40%, buoyed by an extremely loyal base.
One constituency that remains fairly solidly in the president’s camp is the managers of small to midsize specialty and fine chemical companies. They head companies that range from family-owned enterprises to specialized divisions of large corporations. A swath of US industry whose voices do not appear prominently in the general press, these executives typically align with the Republican party’s pro-business politics, voting for any candidate who is not a pro-tax, pro-regulation Democrat. Nevertheless, issues such as trade policy and chaos in the distinctly nontraditional Trump administration are causing some of them to rethink their support.
To judge only from December’s annual dinner of the Society of Chemical Manufacturers and Affiliates (SOCMA), a trade association for such firms, all is well for Trump in this sector. A well-attended “fireside chat” before the dinner featured Peter J. Tanous, chairman of Lynx Investment Advisory, and Stephen Moore, founder of the conservative Club for Growth and former chief economist at the Heritage Foundation, both of whom gave the administration high marks. Moore’s laudatory book, Trumponomics, coauthored by economist Arthur Laffer, was handed out and eagerly received at the cocktail reception that followed. And when speaking with C&EN, many executives say they feel something akin to relief with Trump after what they viewed as a period of high taxes and runaway regulation under former president Barack Obama.
“From my perspective, I think Trump’s doing a good job because he’s very matter of fact,” says Michael Kucharski, CEO of the phosgene chemistry specialist VanDeMark. “I think he knows exactly where to draw the line on things, and he knows what his objectives are.”
And those objectives align with Kucharski’s business. He points, for example, to tariffs that he believes are easing competition from Chinese firms. He admits to uneasiness in supporting a president whose lapses of character include highly offensive comments about women and, in the weeks leading up to his election, paying to silence two with whom he allegedly had affairs. “But, frankly, what president hasn’t had conflict?” he asks. “I mean, look at Bill Clinton.”
Related: Drug chemical makers brace as China cracks down on pollution
Others are making an effort to look beyond the mayhem that surrounds Trump’s presidency. “If you watch what he does rather than what he says, he’s working in the best interest of US manufacturers and the US economy,” says Jim DeLisi, CEO of Fanwood Chemical, a marketing services firm. Like Kucharski, DeLisi highlights the topic of China, claiming that Trump’s brinkmanship on trade helps small businesses.
“China has promised to revise and update its trade policies for the last 25 or 30 years, and repeatedly they’ve done nothing,” he says. Conceding that Trump’s approach of imposing trade sanctions lacks finesse, DeLisi applauds a tough stance.
“Something needed to be done,” DeLisi says. “Whether this is the right way to do it or not, I don’t know, but somebody had to draw some lines in the sand.” The trade imbalance, intellectual property theft, and ostensible formation of huge monopolies in industries including petrochemicals and agricultural chemicals in China requires the kind of zero-tolerance response from the West that Trump alone presents, DeLisi argues.
However, some executives question the effectiveness of Trump’s stance on trade and fault the president for erratic decision-making and poor management, contending that chaos in the White House creates an intolerable level of uncertainty for business managers.
“If I strictly put my business hat on, which is in opposition to my personal feelings, I think the administration has been both good and bad,” says Kate Hampford Donahue, CEO of the specialty chemical maker Hampford Research.
Donahue says she likes the course Trump set on trade and regulatory policy after the Obama administration. But “the tariffs have not helped at all,” she says. Trump’s trade war has combined with the closure of chemical plants in China during a continuing environmental crackdown to create dislocation in raw material supply for companies like Hampford, she says.
Donahue, a member of SOCMA’s Board of Governors, adds that the negative impact of the administration’s trade policy extends beyond China. “The tone of dealing with our overseas customers has definitely shifted,” she says. “There is wariness and aggravation, in some cases anger. There is a sense that the US isn’t playing by the same rules it used to play by.”
Several executives even express disappointment with how things have gone in areas such as deregulation since the election. Mara Gliozzi, vice president and business manager at McGean, a manufacturer of aviation maintenance chemicals and other specialty chemicals, says she was optimistic about prospects for business two years ago.
“I was hoping we would see some change in the government, where it’s run closer to how a business would operate,” says Gliozzi, who is also on SOCMA’s board. “Where decisions would be made and we would be able to move on to the next decision. This is the Art of the Deal man, right? Well, we don’t see a lot of things getting done.”
Staffing at agencies such as the US Environmental Protection Agency has been a problem, she says. “At EPA, Trump said that for every regulation put in place, two had to be taken out,” Gliozzi says. “I don’t know that any new regulations have been added, and he certainly hasn’t taken any out because there is not enough staffing to make anything happen.”
Aslam Malik, CEO of Ampac Fine Chemicals and initially a strong supporter of Trump, says he feels similarly let down. “Trump has some very good ideas about things that need to be done, but his approach is not what works in Washington, DC,” he says. Malik agrees with Gliozzi that government staffing is a problem. “For some reason he is very hesitant to appoint people. A lot of his appointments are temporary or interim.”
In fact, Malik finds the current level of chaos in the government debilitating. “Some people think chaos is good,” he says. “There is a notion that leaving things the way they are is bad and that you need change. But in my mind chaos makes people very uncomfortable and insecure. You have people at each other’s throats. Nothing gets done.”
Trump’s “one-man show” management style is particularly destructive, Malik says. “I think people like Rex Tillerson were great choices,” he says, referring to Trump’s former secretary of state. “But Trump never listened to them. Beyond appointing people, you have to give them authority.”
Indeed, even the president’s most ardent supporters have had to come to terms with misgivings.
“Cutting back taxes, cutting regulations, and putting good people on the [Supreme Court]. That is what I’m for,” says Louis Glunz, CEO of Regis Technologies, a family-owned maker of pharmaceutical chemicals. Glunz still thinks Trump is headed in a pro-business direction, although he has long worried whether mercurial Trump is “mature enough” to be president.
DeLisi likewise remains enthusiastic about the trajectory for small business under the current administration. He admits, however, to a high level of personal distaste for the Twitter-happy president. “If I were the king of the world,” DeLisi says, “I’d break his thumbs. But I’m not.”
A previous version of this story appeared on Jan. 15, 2019.
https://cen.acs.org/policy/trade/Small-firms-take-stock-president/97/i6
-
Chemical Policy Crunch: EPA’s Deadlines Remain Despite Shutdown (1)
Feb 6, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
The EPA will soon release a list of chemicals allowed in commerce and next month will publish a separate list of chemicals it will sort through.
Those actions illustrate just some of the Environmental Protection Agency’s near-term efforts, despite the recent shutdown, to meet statutory deadlines set by the 2016 Toxic Substances Control Act amendments, the agency said in emailed responses to questions Feb. 6.
Manufacturers and environmental groups, however, may be hard pressed to respond to the Environmental Protection Agency’s chemical proposals as quickly as needed following the recent partial government shutdown that lopped a month off the agency’s already tight 2019 deadline schedule.
The lost time could affect the comments that outside groups of all stripes can provide EPA to help shape sound chemical policies, attorneys and advocates say. Certain industry use, health effects, and worker safety information may never make it to EPA under the compressed schedule, they add.
“It’s not fair to anybody to subject all stakeholders to the time crunches and deadlines facing us,” said Martha E. Marrapese, a partner in the Washington of Wiley Rein LLP, said in a recent interview.
Near-Term EPA Actions
The EPA expects to release in the next few weeks an updated TSCA inventory that, for the first time, will distinguish between chemicals that are in commerce and ones that used to be, but no longer are, the agency told Bloomberg Environment.
It will be illegal for companies to manufacture, import, or mix chemicals not on the “active in commerce” list 90 days after the Environmental Protection Agency publishes that list, according to the regulation (RIN: 2070-AK24) the agency published in August 2017.
“EPA plans to release the names of the 40 chemicals for prioritization in spring 2019,” the agency said.
It referred to 40 chemicals it must sort through by Dec. 22 and bin into two categories. Twenty chemicals must be classified as high priorities, which means the agency must immediately begin to assess their health and environmental risks.
Another 20 chemicals must be classified as low priorities, meaning they would be set aside unless new science suggests they pose a previously unrecognized, unreasonable potential of injuring people or the environment.
The agency is working on a proposed rule describing how it would oversee chemical manufacturers’ claims that it must keep a chemical’s specific identity confidential. The agency expects to submit that proposal to the White House Office of Management and Budget by spring, EPA said.
Other tasks the EPA must or aims to complete this year to comply with TSCA’s mandates include reaching final conclusions about whether any of 10 chemicals pose unreasonable risks, a finding that triggers regulations; and deciding how to manage five chemicals that persist in the environment, build up in the food chain, and are toxic.
The Environmental Protection Agency faces a mountain of deadlines on chemicals this year, Liz Hitchcock, director of the Safer Chemicals Healthy Families coalition, told Bloomberg Environment on Feb. 5.
The shutdown truncated the time available to make those decisions and for interested parties to weigh in on them, she said.
Breadth of Sectors Affected Unclear
Marrapese pointed to EPA’s review of 40 chemicals to illustrate the time pressures facing the agency and interested parties.
March 22 is the latest the EPA could release the names of the 40 chemicals in order to complete its reviews by TSCA’s deadline of Dec. 22, 2019, she said.The 2016 amendments require the agency to complete its review during a nine- to 12-month window, and an agency regulation gives the public two 90-day comment periods that must be granted during that time.
The shutdown compressed the schedule and prevented the agency from having 12 months to propose policies and incorporate feedback.
Critical types of information that could affect the agency’s choice on whether or not a chemical needs to be closely examined is its use in making cars, coatings, cleaners, semiconductors, and lubricants that keep a broad swath of industry humming.
Depending on how many different industries use the 40 chemicals, it could be hard for manufacturers to gather as much information as would be useful to the agency, Marrapese said.
“EPA is trying to do something it’s never attempted before,” she said. “It will be very complicated.”
Oversight Hearings?
Many Democrats and some Republican lawmakers have voiced interest in holding TSCA oversight hearings.
One issue such hearings could raise is whether the EPA needs more time to comply with the law’s mandates, Marrapese said.
The partial shutdown that ended Jan. 25, also will increase the challenges faced by the environmental, health, labor, and consumer groups that Safer Chemicals represents. Those groups face delving into the details of EPA’s 10 chemical risk evaluations and providing thoughtful comments about them in less time, Hitchcock said.
Safer Chemicals asked the EPA to extend its comment period on the first draft risk evaluation assessing Pigment Violet 29 the agency released, but the EPA has not replied to that request, she said.
“I would not count on getting time extensions,” Hitchcock said.
“EPA will evaluate all comment extension requests as they are received,” the agency told Bloomberg Environment.
(Updated with EPA's comments and additional reporting throughout.)
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/chemical-policy-crunch-epas-deadlines-remain-despite-shutdown-1
-
(ACC Mentioned) State Legislatures Sharpen Focus on Chemical Contaminants (1)
Feb 6, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
State legislatures and regulatory agencies are boosting their efforts to cut the use of emerging contaminants and flame retardants, and learn what chemicals are in products that people buy, a nonprofit group announced Feb. 6.
At least 29 states will consider more than 100 policies to ban per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) in food packaging and firefighting foam, bar certain flame retardants from being used in products sold in their states, and require manufacturers to disclose the chemicals in a wide range of consumer products, Sarah Doll, Safer States’ national director, told Bloomberg Environment.
The Kentucky Legislature Senate introduced Senate Bill 104 to ban firefighting foams containing PFAS on Jan. 5, making the number of states already considering chemicals legislation or planning to higher than what Safer States originally announced, she said.
Doll mentioned activities on this front in a number of states.
Firefighters in Minnesota are urging legislators to take action against PFAS in firefighting foam and flame retardants, she said, while in New York, Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) wants manufacturers of toys, personal care products, and other consumer items to disclose chemicals in their goods.
Rhode Island, she said, aims to develop a plan that would limit or ban PFAS in compostable food packaging without pushing consumers to substitute foods packaged in plastic.
Flurry or Trend?“Many state legislatures have recently begun their new congressional sessions, which means there is a flurry of activity to introduce new legislation, including those that deal specifically with chemicals,” Andrew Fasoli, director of regional communications at the American Chemistry Council, told Bloomberg Environment by email.
“ACC, our member companies, and other trade associations are working constructively with legislators to help ensure those bills are risk based and are grounded in the best available science,” he said.
Safer States, a coalition of environmental health groups, sees the legislative efforts as part of a trend that also includes lawsuits state agencies are filing to hold polluters more accountable, Doll said.
The legal part of that trend is illustrated by 3M’s recent settlement with Minnesota, she said. The company agreed to pay $850 million to settle eight years of litigation over chemicals it had used in its Scotchgard product line that got into the state’s drinking water.
States want to turn the tap off and prevent persistent chemicals, such as PFAS and many flame retardants, from building up in the environment leaving them with the clean up tab, Doll said. For example, some states have spent millions of dollars reducing PFAS in drinking water, she said.
States want to deal with classes of chemicals where there’s sufficient information to suggest the compounds won’t break down in the environment, they will build up in the food chain, and they can be toxic, she said.
(Updated with additional reporting throughout.)
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/state-legislatures-sharpen-focus-on-chemical-contaminants-1
-
State Legislatures Take on PFAS as Trump EPA Lags
Feb 6, 2019 | Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families
In an effort to fill regulatory gaps left by the federal government, states are stepping up to protect public health from harmful chemicals, according to an analysis by Safer States. The analysis found that at least 28 states will consider more than 100 policies to require companies to disclose what is in their products as well as limit exposures to toxic chemicals, including bans on PFAS in food packaging and firefighting foam as well as bans on toxic flame retardants. The analysis, including a searchable database, is available online at saferstates.com/bill-tracker.
With the Trump EPA rolling back environmental protections, states are taking the lead to protect their residents from harmful chemicals, particularly PFAS chemicals. Last year, the state of Washington passed restrictions on PFAS in food packaging and firefighting foam and this year, at least 13 states are considering similar legislation. These actions come in the wake of serious failures by the EPA to protect drinking water or provide meaningful action that would warn communities about exposure or provide adequate funding for cleanup.
“As the Federal EPA falters and drags its feet, states are on the front line of protecting citizens from toxic chemicals by enacting strong policies” said Sarah Doll, National Director of Safer States. “Year after year, state policies grounded in cutting-edge science push the regulatory bar higher and create lasting, life-improving changes to the lives of people across the United States.”
The trend to eliminate flame retardants continues in this session with several states introducing measures to eliminate these harmful chemicals from furniture, children’s products, and mattresses, harmonizing with policy recently adopted in California. Others are focusing their attention on eliminating toxic flame retardants from electronics a year after the Consumer Product Safety Commission recommended a similar ban and advised manufacturers find safer alternatives.
“Over half of firefighter line-of-duty deaths come from job-related cancers – not burns, smoke inhalation, or heart attacks. These high cancer rates are likely linked to firefighter exposure to ineffective, but highly toxic flame retardant chemicals,” according to Senator John Marty (MN). “Consequently Minnesota banned several of these dangerous chemicals and we are now moving to ban the use of any of these toxic chemicals in upholstered furniture, in carpeting and textiles, and in children’s products.”
“I’m proud that we began eliminating these toxic chemicals several years ago, and hope that Minnesota and other states can finish the job now,” Sen. Marty said.
“People in the states are tired of waiting for the federal government to do the right thing. There are toxic chemicals in our water, in our air and in our homes and we need solutions now.” Said Kathy Curtis, Executive Director of Clean and Healthy New York. “Here in New York, we are grateful that our representatives are taking the lead to both require companies tell us what is in products and limit exposure to chemicals that are making communities sick.”
According to Safer State’s analysis, here are some of the policies states will consider in 2019:
· Banning PFAS in food packaging: At least 8 states will consider policy to eliminate or reduce PFASs in food packaging. PFASs are industrial chemicals used in nonstick coatings on food packaging like microwave popcorn bags and fast food wrappers. They have been shown to cause cancer and organ damage as well as interfere with normal development and limit the efficacy of vaccines. The chemicals don’t stay in the food packaging, but instead move into the food where we are exposed when we eat. Studies also show that when PFAS-coated food packaging is composted or landfilled, the chemicals get into the environment. States considering bans include: CT, MA, ME, MN, NJ, NY, RI, VT.
· Banning PFAS in firefighting foam: At least 9 states will consider policy to ban the use of PFAS in firefighting foam. Washington State passed a ban on PFAS in foam last year and the Federal Aviation Administration has been directed to rewrite regulations to allow for PFAS-free foams at airports. Firefighters have been calling on states and regulators to eliminate all PFAS from foams and are working hand-in-hand with environmental advocates on this issue. States considering bans are AK, CT, MI, MN, NH, NY, RI, VA, VT.
· Addressing PFAS in drinking water: Beyond regulating PFAS in firefighting foam at least 7 states will consider policy to limit levels of PFAS in drinking water, as well as fund cleanup of contaminated drinking water, including medical monitoring and testing. Millions of Americans are dealing with drinking water contaminated with PFAS chemicals. States considering actions include AK, MI, NH, NJ, NY, VT, WA.
· Banning flame retardants from furniture, kids products, mattresses and electronics: At least 16 states will consider policy to eliminate toxic flame retardants from residential furniture, children’s products, and mattresses. A few states will move to regulate these harmful chemicals in electronics. States considering restrictions include: AK, AZ, CT, DE, IN, MA, MD, MN, MS, NH, NJ, NY, TN, VA, WA, WV.
· Identification and disclosure of toxic chemicals: At least 11 states will consider policy to identify chemicals of concern and/or require makers of consumer products to disclose their use of these chemicals. State disclosure laws help provide policymakers with an understanding of how people are exposed to chemicals from products, with particular recognition of greater exposures among low-income communities and communities of color. These laws also inform consumers about their buying choices and help manufacturers identify chemicals to eliminate in their products. Disclosure bills being considered will address various product sectors including personal care products and fragrances, electronics, and disclosure of toxics in products designed for pregnant women and/or children. States considering actions include: AK, CA, CT, MA, MS, NY, OR, RI, VA, VT, WA.
Since 2003, more than 35 states have adopted 182 policies that establish state chemicals programs, identify, limit or ban the use of harmful chemicals in products including baby bottles, furniture, electronics, toys, cosmetics and cleaning products.
The complete analysis is available online at saferstates.org/bill-tracker.
https://saferchemicals.org/newsroom/state-legislatures-take-on-pfas-as-trump-epa-lags/
-
Neurotoxic Pesticide Ban Case to Get Heard by Full Ninth Circuit
Feb 7, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tiffany Stecker
A federal appeals court will review a decision to ban chlorpyrifos, an insecticide linked to intellectual delays in children, in a win for the agriculture industry.
The chemical is the most common of a class of pesticides called organophosphates, and is produced by DowDupont Co., Cheminova, and other manufacturers.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit granted Feb. 6 the Environmental Protection Agency’s bid to have a full slate of judges review a decision that would have canceled all approved uses of chlorpyrifos in the U.S.
The EPA asked the full Ninth Circuit Sept. 24 to reconsider the three-judge panel’s 2-1 decision in League of United Latin American Citizens v. Wheeler on Aug. 9. Trade associations for commodity crops and pesticides joined the EPA in asking for a full-court review, known as en banc.
The EPA prohibited uses of chlorpyrifos in household insecticides in 2000 but continued to approve the bug-killer on crops, golf courses, and other outdoor use. Nearly 5 million pounds of the pesticides were used on corn, soybeans, fruits, nuts, and other foods in 2016, according to the U.S. Geological Survey. Use of the pesticide has dropped by half in the past two decades.
Organophosphate pesticides work by inhibiting an enzyme essential for nerve function. In the short term, exposure can cause nausea, dizziness, and in some cases at sufficient exposure levels, convulsions or even death.
Population studies performed in the past 20 years have shown that long-term exposure in pregnant women and children can lead to autism, low IQ, and other setbacks. These findings are disputed by the original manufacturer of chlorpyrifos, Dow AgroSciences LLC, which now operates under the name Corteva Agriscience.
Former EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt in 2017 denied a petition from environmental groups to cancel the remaining uses of chlorpyrifos, reversing the Obama administration’s work toward banning the chemical.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/neurotoxic-pesticide-ban-case-to-get-heard-by-full-ninth-circuit
-
San Francisco Tap Water Tests: Pesticides Not Detected
Feb 6, 2019 | Environmental Working Group
By Tasha Stoiber
Much of EWG’s work means warning you about potentially harmful chemicals in your water, food or consumer products. So we’re glad to report some good news: Recent tests of San Francisco tap water detected no harmful pesticides in any of the locations sampled.
In October, a resident of the Sunset District reported that a home test kit detected pesticides in her tap water. The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, or PUC, said that could have been a mistake but ordered additional city-wide testing to make sure. EWG decided to commission our own tests, so we distributed sample kits to eight households and one office location. After the sample collection, the kits were sent to SimpleWater, in Berkeley, for analysis.
No pesticides were detected in any of the samples. The results were in accordance with the PUC’s tests, which did not detect any pesticides in the more than 21 drinking water samples collected from around the city.Table 1. Chemicals tested in tap water from nine locations in San Francisco sampled in November and December 2018.
Chemical
Result
Acetochlor
Tested, not detected
Adipate
Tested, not detected
Alachlor
Tested, not detected
Atrazine
Tested, not detected
Benzo(a)pyrene
Tested, not detected
Bifenthrin
Tested, not detected
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl) adipate
Tested, not detected
Bis(2-Ethylhexyl) phthalate
Tested, detected in one sample
Chloroneb
Tested, not detected
Chlorothalonil
Tested, not detected
Dacthal
Tested, not detected
Hexachlorobenzene
Tested, not detected
Hexachlorocyclopentadiene
Tested, not detected
Methoxychlor
Tested, not detected
Metolachlor
Tested, not detected
Permethrin (total)
Tested, not detected
Simazine
Tested, not detected
One of EWG’s samples did contain about three parts per billion of the chemical bis(2-ethylhexyl) phthlate,[1] a member of the class of chemicals known as phthalates. Phthalates can be used as ingredients in pesticides but are mostly used in the production of plastics like PVC piping. The level detected was at EWG’s drinking water health guideline of three parts per billion, which means a one-in-a-million risk of cancer for someone who drank the water every day for a lifetime.
This does not mean that the city’s residents can take their water quality for granted. As with the water in other major cities, San Francisco’s water contains disinfection byproducts. Water disinfection is essential and saves lives, but disinfection byproducts can also increase the risk of cancer. Families and individuals can easily remove disinfection byproducts from their tap water with a simple counter-top carbon filter.
Most of San Francisco’s tap water comes from the Hetch Hetchy Reservoir, with supplements from surface reservoirs in San Mateo and Alameda counties. As a backup water source, the city has been exploring a groundwater supply project, tapping into the Westside Basin aquifer.
The blending of groundwater from local wells with water flowing from the Hetch Hetchy reservoir started in April 2017, immediately prompting a flood of concerns from city residents about water quality. With state-wide droughts, regulatory changes regarding water use, and growing demands on the water supply, greater use of groundwater may become a necessity for the city.
As reported by the U.S. Geological Survey and the PUC, other contaminants may be present in the aquifer underlying the city, such as nitrate and perchlorate. Groundwater is treated and blended to meet state and federal drinking water standards. However, water customers should remain vigilant about contaminants in their drinking water that may pose health risks below legal limits.
To find out more about your local drinking water quality, you can look up testing results from your water utility using EWG’s Tap Water Database.
[1] Also known as di-2ethylhexyl phthalate, or DEHP.
https://www.ewg.org/news-and-analysis/2019/02/san-francisco-tap-water-tests-pesticides-not-detected
-
Key West Bans Sunscreen Containing Chemicals Believed to Harm Coral Reefs
Feb 7, 2019 | New York Times
By Karen Zraick
Key West, the sunny city at the southernmost tip of Florida, voted this week to ban the sale of sunscreen containing chemicals believed to harm coral reefs.
The law’s supporters see it as a crucial step toward protecting the great treasure of the Florida Keys: the world’s third-largest barrier reef ecosystem, which runs nearly 150 miles, hosts thousands of species of marine life, and attracts divers and snorkelers from around the globe.
The measure, which the City Commission approved Tuesday in a 6-to-1 vote, will ban sales of sunscreens containing the chemicals oxybenzone and octinoxate. The legislation will go into effect on Jan. 1, 2021.
“Our coral has been under attack by a number of stressors,” Mayor Teri Johnston said. “We just thought if there was one thing we could do, to take one of the stressors away, it was our responsibility to do so.”
Over the last year, the state of Hawaii and the Western Pacific nation of Palau have also restricted sunscreen sales to protect the otherworldly coral reefs. (Parts of Mexico also ban non-biodegradable sunscreen.) Hawaii’s law bans the same chemicals as Key West’s, and takes effect on the same date. In Palau, 10 chemicals are prohibited, a list that could grow.
Ms. Johnston said that people with medical prescriptions would be exempt from the ban, and the first offense would be met with a warning. The second offense would incur fines that are still to be determined.
She added that the reef was crucial to both the environment and the tourism-driven local economy.
The National Park Service says that between 4,000 and 6,000 tons of sunscreen enters reef areas each year, and studies have found that the chemicals they contain can damage coral reefs, contributing to “bleaching” and death.
Coral reefs also face grave danger from global warming, but the bill’s supporters argue that sunscreen is easily controlled by individuals. The park service and environmental groups recommend wearing protective clothing and opting for sunscreens that are labeled eco-friendly. Hawaii published a list of sunscreens considered to be “reef safe.”
But some dermatologists and trade groups have opposed the bans, arguing that more research is necessary and that banning sunscreen could lead to higher skin cancer rates. Sunscreen manufacturers have also disputed the claims about the dangers to coral reefs.
In July, an article in the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology reviewed the available research and concluded that further investigation was needed. In a news release about the paper, the American Academy of Dermatology reiterated that skin cancer was the most common cancer in the United States, and that people should protect themselves with sunscreen and protective clothing, and by staying out of the sun.
Ms. Johnston said there were many sunscreens available without those two ingredients. She said she hoped that the ban would push bigger manufacturers to make and market more eco-friendly sunscreens.
She added that the local government, in coordination with local nonprofits like Reef Relief, would embark on a public education campaign before the law took effect.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/07/us/sunscreen-coral-reef-key-west.html
-
Industry Criticises Draft UK REACH Statutory Instrument
Feb 7, 2019 | Chemical Watch
By Luke Buxton
The UK government’s draft statutory instrument for REACH leaves a number of issues "unresolved", the head of the country’s Chemical Industries Association (CIA) said.
The draft instrument creates a UK version of REACH if the country leaving the EU without a deal on 29 March. It is one of several hundred that still need to be passed by departure day.
It was laid before the House of Commons and the House of Lords on 5 February and is expected to be scheduled for debate this month.
However at a Brexit event in London this week, CIA chief executive Steve Elliott said the draft instrument "seems to make no provisions" to allow for UK only representatives (ORs) registrations to be grandfatheredinto UK REACH. Grandfathering is the act of exempting something from new legislation or requirements.
"That’s a major problem for our members – many of whom are acting in the UK as ORs for their non-EU sites," he told the conference, organised by the Westminster Energy, Environment and Transport Forum.
There is also no provision, he said, that allows new UK ORs to make a notification on behalf of importers. "This is inadvertently putting UK importers at a competitive disadvantage if they are unable to obtain information directly from the suppliers because it’s commercially sensitive."
James Dancy head of EU exit – chemicals at the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) acknowledged that the draft instrument is not explicit on whether ORs will be allowed to do notifications on behalf of importers. "That issue is still live with us and we are still talking to lawyers about what we can do in that situation."
The draft instrument "seems to have done away with" substance information exchange forums (Siefs), Mr Elliott added. These are critical to avoid duplicating tests, he said. "It’s ironic that the UK was the originator of the one substance one registration [principle] and its adoption within REACH."
The government, Mr Dancy responded, does not want to "do away with the concept of Siefs or joint registrations in the UK market". Instead it wants to hear from industry about its experience in using them. The government "can then see what it can apply", he said, but it needs to be a "joint conversation".
IT database
Mr Elliott took further aim at the government’s much maligned plans for a UK REACH IT database for the registration of chemicals.
There is "no sight yet" of the system and its capabilities, he told delegates. "Companies will need to have sight of the system in advance and also let’s bear in mind the extremely tight deadlines we have to submit what is not basic information."
Mr Dancy said that while testing of the system "comes kind of late in the day", Defra is still aiming for it to be ready for day one. The department is running more detailed testing with stakeholders in February to see if they can "break the system", he said. And, he added, Defra will "try and get some more guidance out as soon as possible" to help industry become aware of what it needs to do. He confirmed that the system will have the same Iuclid format the EU is using at the moment.
Mr Dancy also said that the deadline for companies to provide basic information on their REACH registrations will be extended from 60 days to 120 days. "We’re keen to put some more contingency time in place in case the IT isn’t ready for day one," he said. Much to the alarm of industry, companies have already been told they must provide the full data package within two years of the EU exit.
Prime minister Theresa May is currently continuing her attempts to renegotiate the withdrawal agreementwith Brussels following a defeat in UK parliament. MPs are expected to vote on the deal on 14 February.
https://chemicalwatch.com/74141/industry-criticises-draft-uk-reach-statutory-instrument
-
UN Invites Cleaning Products Firms to Join Global Chemical Talks
Feb 7, 2019 | Chemical Watch
By Leigh Stringer
UN Environment is inviting organisations working in the cleaning products sector to join international discussions on how to manage chemicals globally.
Brenda Koekkoek, programme manager for the UN’s global voluntary chemicals programme, Saicm, made the pitch this week at the second cleaning products sustainability conference in Milan.
In April, the Open Ended Working Group (OEWG) of the Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management's (Saicm) will meet to discuss a future global policy approach to chemicals and waste.
Saicm's mandate comes to an end next year and the UN says broader industry engagement is needed to achieve its goal of sound chemicals management globally.
She said the Saicm programme offers a "unique opportunity" to work on common issues across sectors, as well as to collaborate with the chemicals industry and downstream users on solutions.
In addition to Saicm, she also stressed how important the UN’s 2030 sustainable development goals (SDGs) were and how they could "create 380 million jobs and help unlock at least $12 trillion in opportunities for business by 2030".
She said cleaning products are essential to achieving SDG 3 – good health and wellbeing – by combating the spread of germs. SDG 12 – sustainable production and consumption – is also relevant to cleaning products supply chains.
"Communicating and working with product sectors can help promote coherence and catalyse actions in downstream industries," she said.
‘Sceptical’
Andre Chieffi, an R&D manager at multinational consumer goods company Procter & Gamble, responded to Ms Koekkoek, saying he is "sceptical" of the progress towards the UN’s goals in the current economic and political climate.
"It is important for global institutions, like the UN, to bring worldwide consensus but I’m sceptical because countries and regions often disagree and take different approaches. Some leaders, for example, do not agree that more regulation is good for society."
"To achieve these global goals we need to change our views on economics and consumption," he added.
Kevin Green, chief marketing officer at service provider Practical Sustainability Solutions, said that to achieve Saicm’s goal of sound chemicals management globally, and the UN’s SDGs, a combination of regulation and economic drivers are needed.
"The UN is going to have to play a role in this if this is going to be a global effort," he added.
Nicole Graf, BASF senior marketing manager, said global collaboration on regulation and cross-sector discussion is important to improve chemicals management. "Having different chemicals regulations around the world does not make sense – it means multiple testing, registrations, certifications, for example.
"It would be great to have one global recommendation that countries can adopt," she said.
International relevance
Andre Chieffi, an R&D manager at multinational consumer goods company Procter & Gamble, responded to Ms Koekkoek, saying he is "sceptical" of the progress towards the UN’s goals in the current economic and political climate.
"It is important for global institutions, like the UN, to bring worldwide consensus but I’m sceptical because countries and regions often disagree and take different approaches. Some leaders, for example, do not agree that more regulation is good for society."
"To achieve these global goals we need to change our views on economics and consumption," he added.
Kevin Green, chief marketing officer at service provider Practical Sustainability Solutions, said that to achieve Saicm’s goal of sound chemicals management globally, and the UN’s SDGs, a combination of regulation and economic drivers are needed.
"The UN is going to have to play a role in this if this is going to be a global effort," he added.
Nicole Graf, BASF senior marketing manager, said global collaboration on regulation and cross-sector discussion is important to improve chemicals management. "Having different chemicals regulations around the world does not make sense – it means multiple testing, registrations, certifications, for example.
"It would be great to have one global recommendation that countries can adopt," she said. International relevance
Ms Koekkoek highlighted some examples of why the cleaning sector could benefit from, and help inform, international talks to better manage chemicals globally.
Anti-microbial resistance is an example of a "global crisis" that the UN has come together to address through its General Assembly. The use of antibacterial and antimicrobial cleaning products – combined with over-prescription of antibiotics – "may produce strains of bacteria that are resistant to disinfectants and antibiotics".
Ms Koekkoek also raised the issue of volatile organic compounds (VOCs). "Concentrations of VOCs are consistently higher indoors, up to ten times higher than outdoors, and can be released from many cleaning products."
"It shows that we need to be cautious in the management of our products and the substances and materials that go into them," she added. These issues are "ultimately a business risk whether you’re a small or large company".
UN Environment is set to release its second Global Chemicals Outlook II (GCOII) next month. One of the key findings of the report is that more ambitious worldwide action by all stakeholders is urgently required.
https://chemicalwatch.com/74107/un-invites-cleaning-products-firms-to-join-global-chemical-talks
-
Cameron LNG Export Terminal 'Very Close' to Startup: Project Officials
Feb 6, 2019 | Platts
By Harry Weber
Sempra Energy's Cameron LNG export terminal is "very close" to startup and could be ready to begin producing LNG in the next few weeks, project officials said Wednesday.
The US is on the verge of becoming a much bigger global player in the supply of LNG produced from shale gas, with as many as three terminals expected to start up this year in addition to the three currently operating. Total US feedgas demand is expected to rise to nearly 6.1 Bcf/d in 2019, an 80% build compared with 2018, S&P Global Platts Analytics data show.
At the Cameron LNG facility in Hackberry, south of Lake Charles, Train 1 is 99% complete, officials said. While the exact timing for first LNG production and first export is unclear and could be pushed into the second quarter that begins in April, as the operator continues to test equipment, Cameron LNG will be able to move somewhat quicker than some of its peers.
That's because its storage tanks already have a sizable amount of LNG in them that was left over from when the facility was an active receiving terminal a decade ago. The tanks are cooled down, making it unnecessary for Cameron LNG to bring in an import cargo for that purpose, as Cheniere Energy did when it started up Sabine Pass and Dominion Energy did when it started up Cove Point.
"We feel like we're very close," Project Director Jamie Gray said during a briefing and tour of the Louisiana facility.
The current posture is a positive sign for Cameron LNG. The $10 billion project -- a joint venture of affiliates of San Diego-based Sempra, France's Total, Japan's Mitsui and a company jointly owned by Japan's Mitsubishi and NYK -- faced delays in late 2017 and early 2018. As many as 11,000 workers were on site last summer as contractors McDermott International and Chiyoda pushed to get the project back on track. Sempra's goal is to have trains 2 and 3 producing LNG by the end of the 2019.
In an interview, Cameron LNG CEO Farhad Ahrabi, a former BG executive with more than three decades of commercial experience, said the company met with customers last month to set an operating schedule for the facility for the rest of the year. Ahrabi said the number of commissioning cargoes that are shipped before commercial service begins could range from one to six or seven, depending on customer needs. Tenaska is arranging the feedgas supply needed for commissioning, he said. The destination of the first cargo has not been decided. Cameron LNG operates a tolling model under which the buyer of the LNG is responsible for securing its own feedgas and deciding where the cargoes are delivered.
"At this stage, sitting here today, we don't know," Ahrabi said. "In terms of the market, China is taking a lot of volumes. What happens in the nuclear industry in Japan is anyone's guess. I wish I had a crystal ball."
EXPORT COMPETITION
With the startup of Cameron LNG, Sempra, a major player in the regulated electricity and natural gas markets, will be making a major push into LNG, with an ultimate goal of supplying up to 45 million mt/year to global destinations from the Louisiana facility and two other export facilities it is developing -- Port Arthur LNG in Texas and Energia Costa Azul, which was originally designed as a receiving terminal, in Baja California, Mexico.
Sempra is targeting a late 2019 final investment decision for the Mexico project and a late 2019 or early 2020 FID for Port Arthur LNG, officials said. For now, the focus is on getting Cameron LNG online, as US export competition builds with Kinder Morgan's Elba Island LNG export terminal in Georgia expected to start up by the end of March.
"In the next few weeks, we will be seeing the first ships arriving to load up the cargoes and really connect this community we call Hackberry to the four corners of the world," Ahrabi said during the briefing.
A company spokeswoman later backtracked slightly on Ahrabi's remarks about the timing of the first vessels arriving, saying in an email that what Sempra anticipates is that it will be commencing startup activities in the next few weeks.
https://www.spglobal.com/platts/en/market-insights/latest-news/natural-gas/020619-cameron-lng-export-terminal-very-close-to-startup-project-officials
-
Atlantic Coast Permit Pileup: Where Things Stand
Feb 6, 2019 | E&E Daily
By Pamela King
Though the Atlantic Coast pipeline's path winds through mountainous Appalachia, the contentious gas project may face its biggest uphill battle in court.
Over the last two months, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has instructed or allowed federal agencies to revisit a slate of critical approvals for the gas pipeline. The court's Dec. 7 delay of a key Fish and Wildlife Service Endangered Species Act review, which the 4th Circuit has now twice rejected, led developers to halt construction.
Since that time, the court has returned several other key federal permits and approvals — sometimes at regulators' request. In the meantime, the project's costs and schedule have become moving targets.
The delays are notable, especially in light of President Trump's reported plans to further smooth the path for energy infrastructure build-outs across the country (Greenwire, Jan. 24).
"Trump's deregulatory agenda and efforts to streamline the pipeline permitting process is bumping up against the law," said Josh Price, energy and utilities analyst at Height Capital Markets. "Just because he wants to speed infrastructure doesn't mean the laws have changed."
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission issued its certificate of public convenience and necessity for the Atlantic Coast pipeline in October 2017, launching construction of the project, which extends more than 600 miles from West Virginia to North Carolina. FERC's authorization was a rare split decision, featuring a dissent from departing Democratic Commissioner Cheryl LaFleur, who said the proposal was too similar to the nearby Mountain Valley pipeline.
An alternative plan to merge the two routes, she wrote, would result in fewer impacts to the George Washington and Monongahela national forests, the Appalachian Trail, and the Blue Ridge Parkway (Energywire, Oct. 16, 2017).
Federal permits for Atlantic Coast to cross through each of those places are currently in legal gridlock.
"For the most part, there tends to be a lot of deference by the federal courts to agencies," said Jim McElfish, a senior attorney at the Environmental Law Institute. "The 4th Circuit seems to be taking a hard look at these permits and rights of way, rather than saying they will assume the expert federal agencies got it right.
"It's not typical."
Various pipeline challengers last year asked the courts to examine the FERC certificate itself, but the 4th Circuit dismissed that request as premature. A consolidated lawsuit to fight the FERC certificate is currently before the D.C. Circuit.
The barrage of legal challenges will almost certainly delay Atlantic Coast's timeline, which will likely come at a price. Estimated costs for the pipeline are now as high as $7.5 billion, up from $7 billion, developer Dominion Energy Inc. said in an earnings announcement Friday. The project is expected to be in full service in early 2021.
"We remain highly confident in the successful and timely resolution of all outstanding permit issues as well as the ultimate completion of the entire project," Dominion Chairman, President and CEO Tom Farrell said in a statement last week. "We are actively pursuing multiple paths to resolve all outstanding permit issues including judicial, legislative, and administrative avenues."
Virginia lawmakers are currently pushing a bill that would, among other things, block Dominion from passing the cost of the pipeline to ratepayers (Energywire, Jan. 31).
"Anytime there are multiple lawsuits, there's always the risk that one or more permits won't be issued or won't be issued in time," McElfish said. "In the case of [Atlantic Coast and Mountain Valley], the pockets might be deep enough to sustain them, but in some cases, the projects begin to not make economic sense."
The delays are accumulating, especially as the 4th Circuit has apparently tabled oral arguments on the FWS review until at least May.
"Atlantic is lacking many of the permits it needs to continue construction," Southern Environmental Law Center attorney Patrick Hunter said. "This leaves us with a serious question as to whether this thing will ever be built.
"It's certainly not going to be built anytime soon."
Here's what E&E News readers need to know about the recent frenzy of permit delays in the 4th Circuit:
FWS biological opinion and incidental take statement
Last spring, a panel of 4th Circuit judges determined that FWS had been too vague in its assessment of how many local bats, bumblebees and other species would be affected by the Atlantic Coast pipeline.
Later that summer, the same judges — Chief Judge Roger Gregory and Judges Stephanie Thacker and James Wynn Jr. — suspended the FWS incidental take statement and sent it back to the agency. That ruling, which also struck a National Park Service right of way, prompted FERC to stop construction on the pipeline.
FWS and NPS quickly reissued their authorizations, and construction was back on track by September.
Environmental challengers returned to the courts, and by December, the 4th Circuit had frozen not just the incidental take statement but also the overarching FWS biological opinion.
The court's much broader stay this time led Dominion and other Atlantic Coast developers to stop the project. The Southern Environmental Law Center this week called on FERC to issue its own stop-work order.
Oral arguments in the case had been tentatively scheduled for March, but delays appear to have pushed the hearing to the 4th Circuit's next session, which falls in May. The judges rejected requests by Dominion to shrink the scope of its December ruling or to accelerate proceedings in the case.Forest-crossing permits
Just one week after Gregory, Wynn and Thacker halted the FWS take statement and biological opinion, the same three judges struck down key Forest Service permits for Atlantic Coast.
In an opinion led by Thacker, an Obama appointee, the 4th Circuit ruled that the agency improperly allowed the pipeline to cross the George Washington and Monongahela national forests, as well as the Appalachian Trail.
Those decisions violated both the National Forest Management Act and the National Environmental Policy Act, the court found. Furthermore, the judges said, the agency lacked statutory authority to allow the project to cross the Appalachian Trail.
Gregory, a Clinton and George W. Bush appointee, and Wynn, an Obama appointee, joined the opinion.
Atlantic Coast this month petitioned for a rehearing en banc, which would put the question before the full court. The 4th Circuit froze its stay while those proceedings move forward.
Price of Height Capital Markets questioned whether Atlantic Coast's request would bring a different result — especially because Gregory, the court's chief judge, was party to the earlier orders striking the permits.NPS right of way
Following the 4th Circuit's December rulings on the FWS and Forest Service permits, NPS asked to reevaluate its own permit for Atlantic Coast to cross a national parkway.
The agency said it had based its decision in part on the Forest Service authorization for the project to intersect the George Washington National Forest.
NPS's initial Blue Ridge Parkway right of way was scrapped by the 4th Circuit last summer, but, like FWS, the agency quickly reissued its approval, paving the way for Atlantic Coast to resume construction last September.
Neither Atlantic Coast nor environmental litigants opposed NPS's request to revisit the right of way. The court remanded the permit last month.
Army Corps verifications
Just two days after the NPS permit remand, the 4th Circuit allowed the Army Corps of Engineers' Huntington District to rethink another important approval.
Last fall, the 4th Circuit vacated Mountain Valley's Clean Water Act Nationwide Permit 12, a broad authorization for certain utility projects to pass through waterways and wetlands. The court sided with challengers who contended that the project's water crossings required more in-depth examination.
The judges found that because West Virginia environmental regulators had improperly waived state certification, which is required for a project to move forward under the nationwide permit, the Huntington District office's assurances that the project met the terms of the permit were therefore arbitrary and capricious.
The ruling threw into question similar verifications that the same corps district had issued for Atlantic Coast.
The court agreed last month to send the certifications back to the district office. Again, the government's request went unopposed by Atlantic Coast and project critics.
Hunter of the Southern Environmental Law Center said Atlantic Coast's critics will closely scrutinize any authorizations or permits the agencies hand back.
"The ball is back in those agencies' courts in terms of next steps," he said. "We'll be watching to see what they do there."
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2019/02/07/stories/1060119601
-
Court Orders Chemical Safety Board to Get Cracking on Reporting Rules
Feb 7, 2019 | Reuters
By Jill Priluck
A federal judge in Washington D.C. has ordered a federal agency to issue rules in the next 12 months for reporting accidental chemical releases, handing environmental groups a victory.
U.S. District Judge Amit Mehta on Monday granted summary judgment to a coalition of environmental groups that had sued to force the U.S. Chemical and Safety Hazard Investigation Board (CSB) to end a decades-long delay in issuing rules for reporting accidents involving toxic releases that cause air pollution, rejecting the board’s argument that the groups had no standing to sue.
To read the full story on WestlawNext Practitioner Insights, click here: bit.ly/2HXuTV8
https://www.reuters.com/article/toxic-air-regulations/court-orders-chemical-safety-board-to-get-cracking-on-reporting-rules-idUSL1N2011W2
-
EPA Cautions EtO Air Monitoring Data Indicates 'Background' Sources
Feb 6, 2019 | Inside EPA
By Maria Hegstad
EPA officials are cautioning that air monitoring near a high-profile Illinois sterilizing facility that uses ethylene oxide (EtO) -- where agency modeling data have indicated the chemical may pose a higher potential cancer risk to residents -- has detected background levels of EtO that appears to be coming from sources other than the facility.
With “ambient monitoring it is important to take enough samples that we are able to discern what the levels look like and what they are attributable to. . . . Now we believe we're seeing levels above the detection limit, a lot of these from locations that could not be affected by the facility. So that leaves us to believe that there [are] background levels that are not affected by this facility,” EPA air chief Bill Wehrum said during a Feb. 5 webinar announcing the data's release.
Wehrum said it is important to gather enough information to “make valid and supportable decisions” in a site-specific risk assessment the agency plans to do this year and “any follow up actions."
And he asked for patience from residents near the Willowbrook, IL, Sterigenics facility for patience. “I know many of you are frustrated at how long this is taking,” Wehrum said. “But we are moving as quickly as we can” and still “do this right.”
While the agency is gathering more information about background levels and other sources of EtO and is waiting to draw any conclusions, that “doesn't mean Sterigenics is off the hook,” he said.
A local group, StopSterigenics, issued a Feb. 5 statement calling on EPA and the state of Illinois to shut down the plant.
EPA has been under increasing pressure from the Chicago area's congressional delegation to get answers and take action regarding the Willowbrook Sterigenics plant, as well as other EtO emitting facilities in the Chicago area. Most recently, Sens. Tammy Duckworth (D-IL), Dick Durbin (D-IL) and Tom Carper (D-DE) called on EPA's Inspector General to investigate allegations that EPA failed to inspect facilities emitting EtO, an allegation that Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler said he was unaware of when questioned during his Jan. 16 confirmation hearing.
Duckworth and Durbin have been pressing Wheeler for action on EtO-emitting facilities for months after the agency released updated National Air Toxics Assessment (NATA) modeled data indicating an increased cancer risk from EtO near the Willowbrook sterilizing plant.
EtO is commonly used as an intermediate to make other chemical products like detergent, antifreeze and polyester, and to sterilize medical equipment and foods, though the chemical has long been suspected of causing breast and lymph cancers.
EPA in 2016 updated its analysis of EtO's human health risks, affirming those links. The assessment recommends conservative risk values that when combined with the NATA data show increased risk, and are expected to drive stricter regulatory standards. But industry representatives say that regulators should not impose overly stringent requirements. They argue EtO's use as a sterilizer is critical because it is the only way to sterilize some medical devices.
Air Monitoring Data
EPA has now released the results of 12 days of air quality monitoring at a handful of sites in Willowbrook in late November and December that the agency will use in its risk assessment expected to be complete by spring 2019, the agency's website says.
The data shows the “two sites located closest to the two Sterigenics buildings are seeing the highest [EtO] concentrations. Average readings are a little over 2 micrograms per cubic meter [ug/m^3]; however, there have been readings as high as 10 and 11 [ug/m^3]. Monitors at the six community-oriented sites are seeing [EtO] concentrations that are consistently on the order of a few tenths of a [ug/m^3],” the website states.
EPA provides wind roses, indicating the wind direction and speed during the days that it collected the 24-hour average concentrations at the handful of sites in the town. The site notes that at EPA's “community-oriented monitors upwind of the Sterigenics buildings, [EtO] concentrations generally have ranged from 0.1 to 0.5 micrograms per cubic meter” while concentrations are higher at the “monitors downwind of the Sterigenics buildings, [where EtO] concentrations have occasionally been as high as 1.7 micrograms per cubic meter.”
EPA's site adds that the monitoring information “remains limited. It remains premature to draw conclusions about long-term health risks from the data.”
One reason for the caution about drawing conclusions is that the source of ambient levels of EtO remains unknown, Wehrum and other EPA officials said during the webinar.
One EPA official said the data “do represent impacts from the facility, but they do also represent a background. There are other sources of EtO in the area besides Sterigenics. We don't know what they are.”
Asked for more detail on background levels of EtO, the official said that agency staff are trying to address information gaps in Willowbrook and nationally. “Work is twofold. We need to look at our inventories to see are there emissions that we are missing . . . We also need to put this data in context.” He said that Colorado and Michigan state agencies have performed EtO monitoring in those states, and EPA is looking to that information to better understand EtO background.
Wehrum, however, added that background EtO sources could be things that EPA does not permit, such as household natural gas furnaces. “We don't know, but that's a possibility,” he said.
Wehrum said that while some have questions whether EPA is “trying to exonerate Sterigenics. The answer is no. We are gathering information because we need information to make informed decisions. If there's an ambient level, there's an ambient level. It may mean they are contributing and that wouldn't be a surprise.”
During the webinar, EPA officials assured attendees that EPA continued to conduct ambient monitoring in Willowbrook during the recent government shutdown, and that the risk assessment remains on schedule, promising that it will be released in the spring.
“You know the federal government was shut down for a lengthy period . . . we were highly limited in the work that we could do,” Wehrum said. “The ambient monitoring was considered necessary work. There were only a couple of things within the air office that fit this category, this is one of them.”
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/epa-cautions-eto-air-monitoring-data-indicates-background-sources
-
Congress on Trump Infrastructure Call: ‘We Didn’t See Any Money’
Feb 6, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Dean Scott and Tiffany Stecker
Members of Congress have a message for President Donald Trump after he called for enhancing infrastructure: Show us the money.
Trump’s remarks in his State of the Union address appeared to signal that Congress should take more of a lead role in crafting a package. The president said he is “eager to pass an infrastructure bill, and I am eager to work with you on legislation to deliver new and important” investment in pipelines, roads, bridges, and other projects.
The endorsement offered fewer policy details than in his January 2018 address, when Trump stated that every federal dollar “should be leveraged by partnering with state and local governments and, where appropriate, tapping into private sector investment,” in seeking to “permanently fix the infrastructure deficit.”
But figuring out how to pay for those projects continues to vex Democrats and Republicans alike. As a result, the issue has gained little traction since Trump made a $1 trillion-plus investment a key platform in his 2016 campaign.
“We didn’t see any money,” Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee’s top Democrat, said after Trump’s Feb. 5 speech.
Trump’s comment “indicates to me that there’s a recognition that everyone wants infrastructure, and we badly need it,” Sen. Doug Jones (D-Ala.) told Bloomberg Environment. “But it’s a difficult push to try to pay for it.”
Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.), chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee, agreed.
“When you’re talking about infrastructure, you’re talking about more money,” Shelby said. “You’re talking about gasoline taxes, diesel fuel taxes.”
Clean Energy
But Tennessee Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R) said Trump’s take on infrastructure, though slight, did the job. Blackburn also commended Trump for saying his administration “unleashed a revolution in American energy.”
“I was pleased to see that he talked about energy, that he talked about the progress we’ve made in the last couple of years” advancing oil and gas exports, Blackburn said after the speech.
But Alabama Democrat Jones said: “There’s got to be a conversation” on clean energy.
And Rep. Suzanne Bonamici (D-Ore.) said in a Feb. 6 tweet: “The President failed to mention #climatechange in his #SOTU last night, but @HouseDemocrats are ready to get to work and take meaningful action to address climate change by curbing greenhouse gas emissions and investing in clean energy.”
Silence on Climate
Democrats now in control of the House said Trump’s silence on climate in his State of the Union address won’t deter their efforts to make the issue a top priority over the next two years. House Democrats held two hearings on the subject Feb. 6.
Trump’s failure to discuss climate change “was ignoring such an important issue for the well-being of this nation,” House Science Committee Chairman Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-Texas) said Feb. 6. “I can tell you this, this committee will have have oversight, and all our committees will be moving legislation.”
Even Manchin, a staunch supporter of coal, said: “Everything we do has got to be with the climate in mind and how we can leave a better climate and a better world for our children and grandchildren.”
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/congress-on-trump-infrastructure-call-we-didnt-see-any-money
-
Union Pacific Reports Positive Train Control Progress
Feb 7, 2019 | Global Railway Review
Union Pacific has installed Positive Train Control (PTC) equipment on 100 per cent of required route miles and has successfully implemented it on all required passenger train routes.
Implementation efforts continue to ensure PTC interoperability with other freight and passenger railroads operating on Union Pacific tracks by 2020, as allowed by federal law.
One of the challenging aspects of PTC implementation is ensuring system interoperability among all U.S. rail lines and locomotives. Given the various readiness levels of North American freight and passenger railroads, including publicly-funded commuter lines and short lines, it is important that all railroads continue working together to maintain the health, safety, resiliency and fluidity of the rail network during PTC implementation.
Union Pacific’s fourth quarter 2018 accomplishments included educating 606 employees on PTC operations, bringing the total number of employees trained to 26,610 (100 per cent); and increasing by 1,095 the number of implemented PTC route miles, bringing the total number of route miles in PTC operations to 13,015 (76 per cent).
PTC education is ongoing as Union Pacific retrains employees and introduces the system to new staff members. Training materials are tailored to a variety of employee roles, including engineer, conductor, dispatcher, maintenance of way/engineering, mechanical, signal, telecom and information technologies.
Four out of five passenger rail carriers are currently operating PTC-equipped trains over Union Pacific lines.
With the FRA’s conditional approval of Union Pacific’s PTC safety plan, Union Pacific is running PTC operations on more than 13,000 miles in Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Idaho, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Louisiana, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Washington, Wisconsin and Wyoming.
https://www.globalrailwayreview.com/news/77476/route-miles-positive-train-control/
-
Deadly SC Train Crash Anniversary Highlights Safety Changes
Feb 6, 2019 | WSPA
By Diana Lee
A year ago a train crash near Columbia killed killed two people and injured more than 100.
Now new safety measures may keep a similar crash from happening again.
Railroad experts say it’s not a perfect fix.
Since the crash railroad companies have ramped up efforts to install what’s known as Positive Train Control or PTC, which, in essence, allows a computer to stop a train in trouble.
And while it was mandated by the Federal Government well before the crash in Cayce, that crash, in particular, showed the industry just how much the new system was needed.
On February 4th 2018, an Amtrack train carrying passengers from the north crashed into a sitting CSX train in Cayce, SC near Columbia killing two train workers and injuring 116 people.
Tom Howie, the General Manager of Rail Training Consulting, followed the NTSB investigaiton closely.
The main finding was to mandate new safety measures during upgrades.
Here's why: The report found the CSX train crew had left a switch in reverse position, which was a human error that would have easily been prevented by a backup signal protection that existed but that happened to be out of operation that day.
”That’s the huge irony, they had suspended the protection they had, so they could accommodate and go to a higher level of protection, and during the suspension there was a human error that caused the accident,” said Howie.
The higher level of protection they were installing was Positive Train Control which was mandated by the Federal government to be completed first by 2015, and then after a delay, by 2020.
PTC will eventually cover 65,000 miles of route track (out of 140,000 in the nation) that includes all passenger lines as well as tracks with trains that carry hazardous material. So far about 80% of the required track now has PTC.
”What it does is it connects the train with a GPS System and a computer and it also connects the train with a track signal system. And if the train is not compliant with speed restrictions, if the train is about to enter a territory for which it’s not authorized, if the train is speeding it will stop the train,” said Howie.
Despite the safety improvements, Howie notes, PTC is not a perfect fix. It provides no protection against crossing accidents, trespassers or most track or equipment failure.
“It doesn’t eliminate the danger everywhere, that’s all I’m saying,” said Howie.
https://www.wspa.com/news/deadly-sc-train-crash-anniversary-highlights-safety-changes/1760516502
-
Ocasio-Cortez Releases Details of ‘Green New Deal’
Feb 7, 2019 | Bloomberg
By Ari Natter
Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez released a sweeping package of environmental measures Thursday that has pitted progressives in the House Democratic caucus against moderates over how far to go in pursuit of resetting the climate change debate.
The proposals, which have come to be known as the Green New Deal, were crafted in conjunction with Senator Ed Markey of Massachusetts. Their plan envisions shifting away from fossil fuels and other sources of global warming causing emissions within 10 years.
“Even the solutions that we have considered big and bold are nowhere near the scale of the actual problem that climate change presents to us, our country, our world,” Ocasio-Cortez said on NPR’s Morning Edition, which posted a link to the resolution on its website. “No one has actually scoped out what that larger solution would entail. And so that’s really what we’re trying to accomplish with the Green New Deal.”
It has already prompted strong opposition from Republicans and industry leaders who say it’s technologically impossible and will costs tens of trillions of dollars.
Advocacy of stronger environmental laws has been an important part of the agenda of Ocasio-Cortez, a New York Democrat, and other progressives in the new Congress.
The legislation has been the subject of intense speculation and interest for weeks even as it has no chance of gaining support in the Republican-controlled Senate, let along being signed into law by President Donald Trump.
Earlier: Democrats Put GOP in Hot Seat With a Month of Climate Hearings
Still, the next steps remain important, as the reception among moderate Democrats and House leaders could act as a bellwether for its future in the 2020 elections, and beyond.
The plan, in the form of a non-binding resolution, weaves together what had been a hodgepodge of progressive proposals and aspirations into a single initiative. It sets a goal of shifting the nation to 100 percent “clean, renewable, and zero-emission energy sources,” within 10 years “to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions through a fair and just transition for all communities and workers.”
No Nuclear Power, Ocasio-Cortez Says in Green New Deal
While the plan doesn’t explicitly call for a ban on fossil fuels, as some early backers had hoped, Ocasio-Cortez’s office has made it clear that the plan doesn’t leave a path forward for the fuel source, which a fact sheet on the plan said would make “new fossil fuel infrastructure or industries obsolete.”
The fact sheet also makes explicitly clear there is “no space” for nuclear power in the plan amid a goal of eventually achieving 100 percent renewable energy.
“This means that the Green New Deal will not include investing in new nuclear power plants and will transition away from nuclear to renewable power sources only,” according to the document, which also raised the prospect of decommissioning existing nuclear plants in favor of renewable energy sources.
Supporters say the resolution’s measures are needed to avert a coming climate catastrophe already being presaged by devastating storms, raging wildfires and intense heat waves.
Among its provisions:
· A dramatic expansion of renewable energy, and energy and water efficiency upgrades for all existing U.S. buildings
· An overhaul of the country’s transportation system to eliminate pollution and emissions from the sector “as much as technologically feasible,” with a nod to investment in zero-emission vehicles, public transit, and high-speed rail.
· Efforts to promote clean manufacturing free of pollution byproducts and greenhouse gas emissions “as much as technologically feasible.”
· Steps to lessen the effects of climate change, build a smart grid, clean up hazardous waste sites and restore threatened lands
· A goal of health care and guaranteed jobs for all.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-02-07/ocasio-cortez-aims-to-reset-climate-policy-with-green-new-deal
-
Next Step for House Dems: 'Low-Hanging Fruit'
Feb 7, 2019 | E&E Daily
By Nick Sobczyk and George Cahlink
Democrats are looking to hit the ground running after their first climate change hearings yesterday, tackling potentially bipartisan efforts to promote weatherization and energy efficiency as they write a larger bill to reduce emissions.
Rep. Paul Tonko (D-N.Y.), chairman of the Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Environment and Climate Change, said "it'll be awhile" before his panel produces legislation, but there are already talks about how to move forward.
"What we'll do is most likely approach the issue on a two-track system, one that harvests low-hanging fruit," Tonko told reporters after his subcommittee's climate hearing yesterday. "That includes energy efficiency, conservation, weatherization research, grid modernization, recharging stations that are made more accessible and more effective."
In the long term, Tonko said, the goal is to work on a "carbon price solution," though it's not clear yet whether that would take the shape of a cap-and-trade or fee-and-dividend plan, or some other type of proposal.
Democrats will spend "the better part of a year" simply gathering information, Tonko said, but the eventual outcome is likely to be a "hybrid," with elements from a variety of existing proposals.
Tonko may have good reason to be optimistic. At his panel's hearing, Republicans almost unanimously acknowledged man-made climate change, reneging on the skeptical position most have espoused for years (Greenwire, Feb. 6).
"I think what you are seeing is that the world we lived in eight years ago is not the world we live in today," said subcommittee ranking member John Shimkus (R-Ill.), adding that both GOP witnesses at the hearing talked up ways to reduce emissions.
Shimkus said there are "some things we can do together," including climate resilience and energy efficiency measures, but Republicans are still widely opposed to broader efforts to address emissions, especially if they fear it would raise energy prices or move the economy too quickly away from fossil fuels.
Still, that shift in tone is a reflection of what Republicans have long been saying behind closed doors, said Alex Flint, a former Senate staffer who now directs Alliance for Market Solutions, a conservative carbon tax group.
"We spoke with over 80 Republican members of Congress and their staffs in the last year, and only one denied the existence of climate change,” Flint said in an email.
Public recognition is one thing, but Republicans, by and large, still don’t have climate policies they support.
“That’s why you are seeing them discuss innovation," Flint said. “They realize we have to change the energy sector. When the conversation gets to how to induce innovation it will get difficult again.”
'Green New Deal'
For now, Republicans are going hard after the "Green New Deal," even though not even all Democrats support the ambitious progressive policy platform. The plan, which calls for a massive federal jobs program and decarbonization in just a decade, was in many ways their messaging tool of choice yesterday.
Shimkus said the "Green New Deal" would move in a direction Republicans "fear will hurt the economy and the country."
"The acceptance that there is some human activity that affects the climate is probably a good place to start," he said. "Now it really is a focus on what's really realistic. Decarbonizing in 10 years — that's not realistic."
Some Democrats agree on that point, but even still, they're skeptical of the GOP rhetoric. For one thing, the atmosphere at yesterday's House Natural Resources Committee climate hearing was decidedly more partisan, with ranking member Rob Bishop (R-Utah) questioning whether the issue is even in the committee's jurisdiction.
And simply acknowledging climate change does not mean Republicans will support solutions, said Natural Resources Chairman Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.), who called it "climate avoidance."
"It's ignoring the issue as opposed to saying it doesn't exist," he told reporters.
Rep. Kathy Castor (D-Fla.), chairwoman of the Select Committee on the Climate Crisis, added that the real metric of GOP climate belief is yet to come.
"I'm going to be hopeful today," she said after the E&C subcommittee hearing. "The test will come when we craft legislation to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and see where they are."
Tonko also noted there were still skeptical Republicans at the hearing using the longtime GOP talking point that U.S. emissions reductions won't do much given spiking emissions in developing countries.
"There was still that bit of denial and this fact that we can't go it alone," he said.
"We pulled out of the Paris accord, not the rest of the world," Tonko added. "They're committed, they're at the table."
Still, Rep. Don McEachin (D-Va.), who sat in on both hearings yesterday, said Republicans seemed willing to play ball on smaller stuff.
"One of the things I found interesting was that there certainly seems to be unanimity of opinion on R&D," McEachin told E&E News.
'Build a sound consensus'
Research and development will indeed be the starting point for Democrats in their two-pronged approach.
Full Energy and Commerce Chairman Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) said Republicans also seemed interested in working together on climate in a big infrastructure bill, a high priority for Democratic leadership.
"I think Shimkus in particular seemed to be willing to reach out and work on some climate issues, so that was positive I thought," Pallone told reporters.
Longer term, Democrats are still figuring out what they want to do. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) are moving forward with legislative language for the "Green New Deal," but Energy and Commerce members want most of that work to be done in committee.
"There isn't a specific plan for the Green New Deal," Rep. Darren Soto (D-Fla.) told E&E News. "You could have members file different things that they call the Green New Deal, but these committees are here to determine what it should be."
Soto added that most lawmakers will look to gather more information at hearings before introducing both "aspirational" bills and legislation seeking "to move the bar along in the current climate."
The current climate includes the Republican Senate and President Trump, both of whom have shown little desire to do anything about climate change.
But one potential partner for House Democrats is Senate Energy and Natural Resources Chairwoman Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), who has long been interested in energy efficiency and weatherization efforts, particularly as they relate to her home state, which is feeling the effects of increasing global temperatures.
Like Tonko, she's even referred to energy efficiency as "low-hanging fruit" (E&E Daily, Nov. 1, 2017).
Tonko said he hasn't reached out to her yet, but he said he eventually wants to have discussions with the Senate side to "build a sound consensus that will get us on track."
Things could get easier once Democrats fully flesh out the "Green New Deal," especially because Republicans won't be able to define it on their own terms, Tonko said.
For now, Democrats are already looking at the "low-hanging fruit," but centrists are hoping the bigger solution will be bipartisan.
"This is a crisis. The only thing that will pass has got to be bipartisan," Rep. Scott Peters (D-Calif.), another member of the Environment and Climate Change Subcommittee, told reporters. "The only thing that will last has got to be bipartisan."
https://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2019/02/07/stories/1060119897
-
Republicans Reach Across Aisle on Climate, But Not Too Far
Feb 6, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Abby Smith
Republicans on the House energy committee said they can work with Democrats on bipartisan policies to address climate change—but they draw the line at the rapid transition to all renewable energy outlined by the Green New Deal.
The position—echoed by the majority of the Republicans on the House Energy and Commerce Committee during a Feb. 6 hearing on climate change—suggests at least some Republican lawmakers want to ensure they have a voice in the growing conversation on climate policy enveloping the Democratic-led House. And it represents a potential shift in how much Republican lawmakers are willing to talk about climate change, an issue they’ve previously avoided or cast doubt on.
Climate change is a challenging issue but not impossible to work through in a bipartisan manner, said Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill.), the top Republican on the committee’s subpanel on the environment and climate change, which hosted the hearing.
“We may disagree about what to do. If we are to reach an agreement on this issue, we must look openly and broadly at potential solutions,” he added.
But in the same breath, Shimkus criticized the Green New Deal championed by progressive Democrats such as Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y). Government mandates to rapidly decarbonize the country aren’t realistic, he said.
“If they go their highway and just push this Green New Deal, it’s unrealistic and the cost would be too great,” Shimkus told Bloomberg Environment after the hearing. “We’re willing to be helpful, but we can’t get there with that plan.”
Low-Hanging Fruit
Nonetheless, the shift in tone of many of the Republicans on the committee was significant enough to catch the attention of their Democratic colleagues, including full committee chairman, Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.), and Rep. Jerry McNerney (D-Calif.).
“There must have been a conversion on the road to Damascus recently,” McNerney said, a reference to a sudden turning point coined after the biblical story of the apostle Paul’s conversion to Christianity.
The openness to bipartisan solutions is welcome to Rep. Paul Tonko (D-N.Y.), chairman of the environment and climate change subpanel. Tonko during the hearing outlined a two-track path to climate policy that includes, first, low-hanging fruit such as ramping up energy efficiency and clean energy research investment that could earn bipartisan backing.
For example, several Republican members—including the top Republican on the full committee Rep. Greg Walden (R-Ore.), Rep. Bill Flores (R-Texas), and Rep. Earl L. “Buddy” Carter (R-Ga.)—encouraged development of nuclear energy, questioning witnesses such Rich Powell, executive director of the clean energy innovation group ClearPath, about nuclear’s role as a climate solution.
Track Two
Track two of Tonko’s vision, however—to develop a comprehensive policy putting a price on carbon—may require more convincing to get House Energy and Commerce Republicans on board.
Shimkus, Walden, and other Republicans on the committee raised significant concerns about the Green New Deal or, more broadly, policies that would regulate industry’s greenhouse gas emissions or tax carbon.
“Republicans are focused on solutions that prioritize adaptation, innovation, and conservation,” Walden said in opening remarks.
“What we are deeply concerned about are the Democratic plans we believe will harm American consumers and American jobs by driving up costs and pushing jobs overseas where environmental laws are far more lax,” Walden added.
Green New Deal
Chief among Republicans’ concerns is the Green New Deal. The broad sketch of it floated so far calls for a transition to 100 percent renewable energy within 10 years. Walden cited analysis in his remarks that said transitioning to 100 percent renewables in the U.S. could cost at least $5.7 trillion.
Democrats and several witnesses on the panel, though, pointed to high costs of failing to take action on climate change.
And Tonko said at least the principles behind the Green New Deal, to advance aggressive action on climate change, are something both parties should be able to support.
“The devil is in the details,” Tonko told Bloomberg Environment. “We’ll push very hard for aggressive response to carbon pollution. We need to get something done for the sake of our stewardship, and we’re encouraged by the tone that was set today.”
Tonko also said public opinion on climate change is changing.
“I think the general public is pulling people who were for delay or denial into a new area of thinking, into a new zone of thinking,” he said. For example, recent polls from the Yale University Center on Climate Communication and from The Associated Press and the University of Chicago found a majority of Americans in both parties accept mainstream climate science.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/republicans-reach-across-aisle-on-climate-but-not-too-far
-
Republicans Push Back at First Climate Hearings
Feb 6, 2019 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Miranda Green
Democratic leaders asserted their newfound control of the House on Wednesday by convening two key committee hearings on climate change that each emphasized the need for swift action on curbing greenhouse gas emissions after years of inaction under former Republican leadership.
The two simultaneous hearings held by the House Natural Resources and Energy and Commerce committees Wednesday were the first in nine and six years respectively to focus on fixing climate change.
They both came the day after President Trump hailed oil and gas production as part of the United States's “energy revolution” at the State of the Union, throwing a spotlight on the current state of disconnect between Democrats and Republicans on the issue of climate policy.
“Today we turn the page on this committee from climate change denial to climate action,” said Natural Resources Committee Chairman Raúl Grijalva (D-Ariz.) in his opening statement. “The Democratic majority is here to listen to people — to work for people, to hear from Americans across the country, from all walks of life whose experiences emphasize the need to address this crisis.”
Grijalva, whose committee oversees the Interior Department, said he hopes to focus on the impacts of oil and gas drilling on public lands, explore the implications of climate change on heat waves, forest fires and flooding and bring science back to agency decisionmaking.
“The Trump administration chooses to mock science and mislead the public on what our country will look like if we do nothing,” he said.
“Climate change is an urgent problem it demands urgent action and a sense of purpose from congress, this committee will offer both.”
Rep. Paul Tonko (D-N.Y.), chairman of the Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Environment and Climate Change, said his committee, which oversees the Environmental Protection Agency, will focus on finding climate solutions.
“With climate change, the cost of failure is existential. Failure to launch this next moonshot will result in deaths, devastation and irreversible damage to our communities, our economy and our environment,” he said in his opening statement.
“Time is running out but it is not gone.”
Tonko said he knew finding a solution to the pressing issue would involve bipartisan solutions. That would be especially true for any legislation passed through the House, as the Senate is still led by Republicans.
“We have proven we can find common ground and we can get things done. We want to find solutions that’ll work for all communities and all Americans and we will not be deterred.”
While the witnesses at each hearing, which included the governors of North Carolina and Massachusetts and a number of scientists and climate activists, agreed largely with the chairman’s sentiments, Republican colleagues on both sides of the aisle seemed less convinced.
Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill.), top Republican on the subcommittee, said he agreed with Tonko that the two political sides could often find compromise, but it wouldn’t be easy when it comes to climate change.
“Today’s hearing kicks off a topic that will be challenging but not impossible to work through in a bipartisan manner,” Shimkus said.
“While we agree these issues must be addressed we might disagree about what to do.”
Shimkus warned against bowing down to scientists and “amped up partisan rhetoric” that suggest the first actions that must be taken to fix climate change must also be the most costly, saying, “That is a false choice.”
He also warned about drafting new policies that focus entirely on more federal government oversight and control.
“We could have a fuller conversation about accelerating the transformation to cleaner technologies if we accept that proposing top-down government requirements to rapidly decarbonize the U.S. and global economies may not be the most realistic way to address the climate change problem,” he said.
He also warned specifically against progressives’ push for a Green New Deal.
“We should be open to the fact that wealth transfer schemes suggested in the radical policies like the Green New Deal may not be the best path to community prosperity and preparedness.”
Rep. Rob Bishop (R-Utah), ranking member on the House Natural Resources Committee, largely pushed back on the need for Wednesday’s climate change hearing, insinuating at points that it was beyond the scope of the committee and that its purpose was unclear.
“I have to mention, I’m at a loss. I don’t know where this committee is going or the other hearings because you haven’t told us what the goal is. At some point we may be asking, ‘Where are we going? What is the real legislation to help people that is supposed to come out of these hearings?’ ” Bishop said.
“Are these hearings simply for those of us around the horseshoe who are going to be making legislation or are these hearings simply for those who sit around that table in the corner so they can write cute stories,” he asked, pointing at reporters in the room.
Bishop added that he looked forward to climate change being the main emphasis for every Natural Resource subcommittee hearing in February.
“I appreciate the fact that you picked the shortest month of the year to do that,” he said.
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/428836-republicans-push-back-at-first-climate-hearings
-
New House Democrats Use Climate Hearing as Issue Megaphone
Feb 6, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tiffany Stecker
The House Natural Resources Committee’s first climate change hearing of the new Congress offered few details on strategies, but allowed a handful of new Democrats to vocalize on the issue’s importance.
The Feb. 6 hearing set the tone for a committee that, under Republicans, promoted the benefits of fossil fuel development over the risks.
The Democratic members recounted the effects of climate change on their regions, including wildfires in New Mexico and rapid snowmelt in Colorado’s national parks, at the first of a series of hearings on the subject in the committee this month.
Almost one-third of the committee’s 23 Democrats are serving in Congress for the first time. To compare, the Energy and Commerce Committee, which held a concurrent hearing on climate change, has no new members on its roster.
The freshman class of Democrats brought a new wave of progressives with ambitious ideals such as the Green New Deal, a to-be-released plan designed wean the U.S. off fossil fuels while creating jobs.
“It is a breath of fresh air, particularly for us new members who have just joined the Congress, that the Natural Resources Committee is undertaking this important work and that its first hearing is on such an important topic,” Rep. Joe Neguse (D-Colo.) said on the panel.
Neguse was elected to his Denver-area district last year when Democrat Jared Polis ran for, and won, the governor’s election.
Tension Between PartiesThe majority and minority on the Natural Resources Committee have historically had a fraught relationship. With Republicans now in the minority, Utah Rep. Rob Bishop, the committee’s ranking Republican, made it clear he disagreed with the focus on climate change.
“I’m kind of at a loss,” Bishop said at the beginning of the hearing. “I do not know where this hearing is going or the other six hearings you planned because you simply haven’t told us what the goal is.”
Bishop added that the Republicans were unaware that Chairman Raul Grijalva (D-Ariz.) would invite two governors, Democrat Roy Cooper of North Carolina and Republican Charlie Baker of Massachusetts, to the hearing. Bishop said he would have liked to bring in a governor from a Western state.
The hearing came as a new National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration reportlisted 2018 as the fourth-hottest year on record. Last year, 14 natural disasters exceeded $1 billion in damage costs, the fourth most expensive year for disasters since 1980.
“Now must be the time to accept reality, and this is reality,” Rep. Mike Levin (D-Calif.), who replaced Rep. Darrell Issa (R) in his Southern California district this year.
Rep. Deb Haaland (D-N.M.), the vice chair of the committee who also arrived in Washington this year, was near tears as she addressed one of the witnesses, 16-year-old climate activist Nadia Nazar.
“I almost want to apologize to you and the youth of this world who go to bed every night worrying about what will happen to our communities
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/new-house-democrats-use-climate-hearing-as-issue-megaphone
-
Compliance Plan Would Downgrade Air, Water Initiatives
Feb 6, 2019 | E&E News PM
By Sean Reilly and Ariel Wittenberg
EPA, as part of a broader reshuffling of its enforcement agenda, is proposing to deprioritize initiatives to stop raw sewage from flowing into the nation's waterways and limit air pollution from power plants and other large industrial facilities.
Under what are now dubbed "national compliance initiatives," the agency is also seeking to rework the scope of a long-running program that targets energy industry emissions, under a recently posted draft blueprint that would run from fiscal 2020 through 2023 and is awaiting publication in the Federal Register.
Previously known as "national enforcement initiatives," the listings serve as a means of focusing "enforcement and compliance resources on the most serious environmental violations," according to the notice from Susan Bodine, head of EPA's Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance.
It also proposes two new initiatives: the first intended to increase compliance with drinking water standards, the other to reduce children's exposure to lead.
The draft's release was previously reported by Inside EPA. Once it's published, the public will have 30 days to comment.
The last update, undertaken under the Obama administration, covers eight priorities.
Since 2000, for example, EPA has had an initiative to work with state agencies to take enforcement actions against municipal sewage systems with Clean Water Act violations to reduce pollution.
Under the initiative, the agency has gotten cities across the country to update their outdated "combined sewage overflow" systems.
Such systems are common in America's older cities where stormwater and wastewater are collected into one pipe that leads to a treatment plant. Those systems can easily become overwhelmed when it rains, however, and discharge untreated stormwater and sewage directly into nearby rivers and streams.
Enforcement actions against municipalities with those systems have resulted in major infrastructure projects across the country.
For example, under a consent decree with EPA, the Northeast Ohio Regional Sewer District, which includes Cleveland, is working on a $3 billion project to build seven underground holding tanks to keep stormwater and sewage during heavy rains until the treatment plant can process the water.
EPA's notice says the compliance initiative has been so successful that 97 percent of large combined sewer systems and 92 percent of large sanitary sewer systems are now either in compliance or working toward compliance.
"Accordingly, the agency believes that this [national compliance initiative] no longer presents a significant opportunity to correct water quality impairment nationwide," the notice says.
The agency will "return work in this area to the core program" beginning in fiscal 2020 and will continue to monitor implementation of pre-existing agreements.
Activist pushback
That news is sure to anger environmental groups like Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility. Just two days ago, PEER sent a letter to EPA acting Region 4 Administrator Mary Walker complaining that the agency hasn't taken action against the city of Tampa, Fla.'s wastewater treatment plant.
According to PEER, the plant regularly exceeds its permits to discharge 96 million gallons of effluent into Hillsborough Bay.
EPA could also face pushback on its plans to similarly downgrade enforcement of the New Source Review pre-construction permitting program.
That program requires power plants and other large industrial polluters to install state-of-the-art emission controls when they undertake expansions or other major modifications to existing facilities. The NSR initiative began with the power sector in the late 1990s, according to the notice.
Regulatory efforts by EPA and the states have since led to a 90 percent reduction in sulfur dioxide releases and an 83 percent cut in emissions of nitrogen oxides, even as gross power generation rose by 10 percent.
Most glass, cement and acid manufacturing facilities have also faced investigations or new pollution control requirements, the notice says.
"Accordingly, the agency believes that this NCI no longer presents a significant opportunity to affect nonattainment areas or vulnerable populations nationwide," it added in proposing to return enforcement work to the core program.
'Significant sources'
If made final, the proposal would be one in a series of steps taken by EPA since 2017 to loosen application of New Source Review requirements.
In 2017, for example, then-Administrator Scott Pruitt announced that federal regulators would no longer challenge companies' pre-construction forecasts of the emission increases expected to result from particular plant projects.
Several of those changes are facing lawsuits from environmental groups. While they say that upshot could be more pollution, business groups have previously argued that the New Source Review program generates red tape that sometimes interferes with planned efficiency upgrades (Greenwire, Dec. 8, 2017).
Under the draft blueprint, Bodine's office would also revamp an existing initiative titled "Ensuring Energy Extraction Activities Comply with Environmental Laws."
Under the Obama administration, the initiative had been the target of oil and gas industry complaints of overly aggressive enforcement (Energywire, June 11, 2018).
Rather than focus on any one sector, EPA now wants to target "significant sources" of volatile organic compounds that may harm vulnerable populations or affect an area's ability to meet air quality standards, the proposal indicates. Volatile organic compounds contribute to the formation of ozone, a lung irritant that is the main ingredient in smog.
EPA is also looking at merging its work in that sphere with another existing initiative titled "Cutting Hazardous Air Pollutants."
Under a timetable issued by Bodine last year that may have since been slowed by the partial government shutdown, she plans to make final decisions on the roster of 2020-2023 national compliance initiatives by early April.
https://www.eenews.net/eenewspm/2019/02/06/stories/1060119845
-
EPA Poised to Publish MATS Rollback Proposal
Feb 7, 2019 | Inside EPA
EPA is poised to publish in the Feb. 7 Federal Register its proposal to eliminate the legal underpinning of its mercury and air toxics standards (MATS) rule for power plants, starting a 60-day public comment process on the controversial measure after it was delayed by the recent government shutdown.
In its proposal, originally released as a signed pre-publication notice Dec. 28, EPA says it will scrap the Obama EPA’s finding that it is “appropriate and necessary” to regulate power plants’ air toxics. The finding is a legal prerequisite to the MATS rule, and the rule’s supporters fear its critics could make a successful legal challenge to the entire regulation if the agency finalizes its plan to undo the finding on which it is based.
However, EPA insists that legal precedent will protect MATS from being scrapped, because eliminating the rule requires de-listing of power plants as a source of air toxics under the Clean Air Act. The air law sets a high bar for doing so, following a failed attempt at de-listing by the George W. Bush administration that fell afoul of the courts, EPA argues. This stance, as detailed in the Register notice, reflects the agency’s need to address concerns from utility industry groups that want to see MATS retained to minimize market disruption.
EPA further proposes to ease compliance by some coal waste-burning power plants with acid gas limits.
Supporters and detractors will have the chance to weigh in with public comments for 60 days, or until April 7.
EPA also says it intends to hold at least one public hearing on the proposal, with the time and venue to be announced in a second Federal Register notice.
Senate Environment & Public Works Committee Ranking Member Tom Carper (D-DE) will submit comments critical of the proposal, as will the Edison Electric Institute representing investor-owned utilities, sources say.
However, a second government shutdown, possible after Feb. 15 if President Donald Trump and Democrats do not resolve differences over border security, might again interfere with the public comment process and further delay EPA’s issuance of a final rule.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/epa-poised-publish-mats-rollback-proposal
-
Michigan Governor, Legislature Spar Over Environmental Reviews
Feb 7, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Alex Ebert
The GOP-controlled Michigan Legislature is moving to rescind a Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D) executive order that dissolves industry-favored environmental regulatory review panels.
On Feb. 6, the Michigan House passed a resolution that would block Whitmer’s overhaul of the Department of Environmental Quality. Her Feb. 4 executive order eliminated an environmental permit appeal process and a regulatory review commission created in bills (S.B. 652, 653) enacted last June.
A spokesperson for state Senate Majority Leader Mike Shirkey (R) told Bloomberg Environment in a Feb. 6 email that the chamber would hold hearings, which could lead to reversing the governor. Under Michigan’s state constitution, the executive order can be repealed if both chambers disapprove of it on simple majority votes.
Whitmer fired a return shot Feb. 6 by requesting a formal opinion from Attorney General Dana Nessel (D) on the legality of these commissions. The new panels were enacted to give industry more sway in state environmental policy and a cheaper way to appeal permit denials administratively instead of through the courts.
“These commissions create unnecessary bureaucratic hurdles that get in the way of our state government responding to problems with drinking water quickly, and their creation may violate federal requirements under the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act,” Whitmer said in a Feb. 6 statement.
In her speech announcing the executive order Feb. 4, she said the reorganization would help prevent incidents such as excessive lead in drinking water that happened in Flint and times when fluorinated chemicals went undetected in drinking water across the state.
Business, Science and PolicyPrior to the House vote, Republicans stressed their concern that Whitmer’s order was executive overreach. Although the governor has authority to reorganize or dissolve commissions created by the state legislature, these were recently enacted, not defunct groups that outlived their purpose.
“It is my personal opinion than any legislatively created entity ought not to be abolished by executive fiat,” Speaker Lee Chatfield (R) said in floor testimony before the vote. “We are simply, with the passage of this resolution, trying to uphold the input of this public body.”
On Feb. 4, the Michigan Chamber of Commerce decried the executive order, saying that the rules commission and permit review process just gave industry a “seat at the table,” not a way to override the governor. But Democrats said industry concerns should hold less sway than those of constituents.
“These three different bodies were created for the sole purpose of allowing industry to dictate environmental policy,” Rep. Julie Brixie (D) said during floor debate. “Science, not industry, should dictate protections.”
Republicans said the rules commission’s findings weren’t binding on the administration, but merely a way to better communicate concerns from businesses and farmers who are impacted by state regulations.
“These commissions protect our natural resources while also protecting those whose muck-boots are on the ground protecting our natural resources—our farmers,” Rep. Julie Alexander (R) said in floor debate.
Nessel issued a Feb. 6 statement saying her office would “carefully evaluate” Whitmer’s request.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/michigan-governor-legislature-spar-over-environmental-reviews
-
Trump Administration Proposes Exempting Some Light Bulbs From Green Standards
Feb 6, 2019 | Reuters (In The New York Times)
By Timothy Gardner
The U.S. Department of Energy on Wednesday proposed exempting some light bulbs from federal efficiency standards that take effect next year, a move environmentalists said would boost pollution and power bills for consumers.
The department said in a notice that revisions in two rules published by the Obama administration in January 2017, days before President Donald Trump was inaugurated, misconstrued existing law and that it was proposing to scrap the changes.
The proposal was part of a push by the administration to ease regulations. An executive order Trump signed the month he became president called for agencies to ditch two old regulations for each one they propose. The administration has also rolled back Obama-era regulations on pollution and emissions as it seeks to boost oil, gas and coal output.
The proposal would remove three-way bulbs, candle-shaped bulbs used in chandeliers, reflector bulbs used in recessed lighting, and others from having to comply with the new efficiency standards.
Advanced technologies, including light-emitting diode or LED light bulbs, use far less electricity than incandescent light bulbs, which produce far more wasted heat.
The changes would result in $12 billion in extra power bill costs for consumers, said the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental group. "This is another senseless and illegal Trump administration rollback that will needlessly hike our energy bills and spew tons more pollution into the air, harming the health of our children and the environment," said Noah Horowitz, director of NRDC's center for energy efficiency standards.
The Department of Energy did not immediately respond to a request for comment on criticism of its proposal. The department will hold a public meeting on the proposal in Washington on Feb. 28.
The Alliance to Save Energy, a nonprofit alliance of business, government, environmental and consumer interests, said the proposal would give a lifeline to makers of inefficient incandescent and halogen bulbs.
The Obama-era rules stemmed from bipartisan energy legislation passed in 2007 and signed by Trump's fellow Republican, George W. Bush, that called for phasing in lighting efficiency standards, the alliance said.
https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2019/02/06/us/politics/06reuters-usa-energy-lightbulbs.html
-
Not All Energy Storage Is Clean – It Might Even Increase Emissions
Feb 6, 2019 | Environmental Defense Fund
By Andy Bilich
Falling capital costs for energy storage coupled with a major push by grid operators to deploy energy storage technologies has the market ready for take-off.
Over the next two decades, investments in utility-scale and behind-the meter power storage technology is projected to soar by $620 billion with China, the United States and seven other nations leading the race.
Here's the problem: Not all energy storage is clean. In fact, a growing body of research [PDF] suggests the battery boom could actually increase greenhouse emissions if not done carefully – undermining the very promise of this new technology.Clean storage a matter of "how" and "when"
Electricity rates, wholesale energy markets and the physical constraints of the electricity grid itself determine when owners of energy storage charge and discharge their systems. This is the "how" and "when" of storage utilization that determine whether or not it contributes to higher emissions.
For example, in some wholesale markets where fossil fuels are prevalent during off-peak times, when energy prices are low, storage operators will charge their devices from dirtier power plants and then discharge during high price times when cleaner energy is online – causing a net increase in emissions.
Energy storage has the added challenge of a misalignment between power production on the wholesale side and incentives on the retail side.
First, many electricity rates across the country have constant prices over time that don't signal storage technology when to align its operations with clean energy production. Second, for some of those rates that are time-variant, prices are highest in the afternoon when solar is on line, and lowest when fossil fuel plants may provide the bulk of the power.
This gives storage operators financial reasons to – again – charge from fossil-fueled plants and discharge later, which means they displace clean energy and increase emissions.
All-green energy storage is, unfortunately, no panacea, either.
Any time storage charges with renewable power it takes potential megawatts away from other end uses on the grid. For that reason, energy storage that relies on clean power will only reduce emissions if it causes additional investment in renewables, if it prevents an oversupply and potential curtailment of renewable sources, or if it increases the capacity of existing renewables.Market incentives can fix the problem
By facing these challenges now, we can take proactive and concrete steps to make sure energy storage meets the clean energy goals that grid operators and the broader industry seek. While much of that work will fall on policymakers, investors and developers of storage technology will play a key part in steering the conversation.
Here are four key things to keep in mind as we strategize our energy storage build-out.
Industry needs a real-time greenhouse gas signal. By providing storage operators and regulators with a real-time and forecasted signal for greenhouse gas conditions, we can help them balance costs and improve the emission performance of their storage. Such a signal has already helped to reduce emissions from storage systems that participate in California's state incentive program.
Carbon pricing programs can reduce storage emissions. An electric-sector carbon pricing program such as the Mid-Atlantic Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative or the program proposed by the New York grid operator, NYISO, could help reverse the trend of greenhouse gas emissions from storage. By incentivizing storage operators to prioritize clean energy over fossil-fueled sources, such programs affect how and when energy storage is used.
States should focus on rate design and incentive programs. States can require utilities to develop dynamic electricity rates that reflect actual grid conditions, and incorporate emissions into grid planning and procurement to better signal where and when investment in storage is needed. This will create an environment where storage operators have more incentive to support clean energy goals.
Energy storage owners can be rewarded for using clean power. The wholesale market can design products and services that reward owners and operators for integrating more renewables, and for helping to reduce the risk of clean energy getting wasted. California is exploring such a program for its storage.
We know that energy storage will play a critical role going forward, but it's becoming clear that the environmental benefits of this rapidly advancing technology are anything but guaranteed. Only with the right economic signals and market conditions will energy storage drive the decarbonization of our power sector – and allow the industry to live up to its true potential.
https://www.edf.org/blog/2019/02/06/not-all-energy-storage-clean-it-might-even-increase-emissions
Industry and Association News
TSCA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested