Preview Newsletter
AM ACC 2/20/2019
-
(ACC Mentioned) Nova Chemicals’ Take on the Alliance to End Plastic Waste
Feb 19, 2019 | Plastics Today
By Rick Lingle
The plastics industry is mobilizing quickly on multiple fronts putting out raging firestorms of anti-plastics opinion and activities including bans and other proposed regulations that target plastic pollution and waste. -
Trump Eases Off Hard Deadline for China Tariffs
Feb 19, 2019 | Wall Street Journal
By Bob Davis and Alex Leary
President Trump gave his firmest indication yet that the U.S. may not increase tariffs on Chinese goods on March 1, as scheduled, despite statements by his top trade official that the U.S. should stick to a firm deadline. -
House Democrats to Probe EPA Enforcement
Feb 19, 2019 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Alex Guillén
The House Energy and Commerce Committee's oversight panel will hold a hearing next week on EPA's enforcement efforts, with Democrats calling the Trump administration's record "troubling." -
Berkeley Sets Fees, Limits on Single-Use Food Containers
Feb 20, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Joyce E. Cutler
Latte-sipping Starbucks and McDonald’s customers in Berkeley, Calif., will pay a quarter more for single-use cups under an ordinance mandating that take-away containers be reusable or compostable. -
US Science Funding Inches up
Feb 19, 2019 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Britt Erickson
After months of uncertainty and a 35–day partial government shutdown, science R&D ended up with a small boost at many US government agencies for fiscal 2019. -
Compostable ‘Bioplastics’ Make Inroads with Consumers
Feb 19, 2019 | AP (In The Washington Post)
By Katherine Roth
Looking for an eco-friendly alternative to traditional plastics — especially single-use items like bags, straws and picnic tableware — many supermarkets and vendors are offering an array of compostable alternatives made from plant fibers or starches. -
(ACC Mentioned) Chemicals List Gets 1st Major Update in 40 Years
Feb 19, 2019 | E&E News PM
By Cecelia Smith-Schoenwalder
For the first time in 40 years, EPA has significantly altered the list of chemicals that are being actively manufactured, processed and imported in the United States. -
(ACC Mentioned) EPA Releases Updated TSCA Inventory
Feb 20, 2019 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
The EPA has released an updated TSCA inventory, which indicates that just over 40,000 substances are currently active in US commerce. -
US NGOs File Suit over EPA Asbestos Petition Denial
Feb 20, 2019 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
A group of public health groups has filed a lawsuit in an effort to overturn the US EPA’s denial of its petition to require expanded reporting on asbestos. -
More Groups Sue EPA over Paint-Stripping Toxin
Feb 19, 2019 | E&E News PM
By Cecelia Smith-Schoenwalder
Latino workers and environmental groups sued EPA today regarding its failure to ban a chemical that has killed more than 50 people. -
Group Sues to Make EPA Immediately Ban Paint Remover Chemical
Feb 19, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Blake Brittain
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency must implement immediately a ban on a deadly chemical found in commercial paint strippers, a Feb. 19 complaint in the Southern District of New York asserts. -
Carper Drops Objection on Wheeler's Nomination After EPA's Pledge on PFAS MCL
Feb 19, 2019 | Inside EPA
By Suzanne Yohannan
A top Senate Democrat is dropping one of several objections he had threatened to raise when the upper chamber considers Andrew Wheeler's nomination to be EPA chief later this month after the agency renewed its pledge that it “intends”... -
PFAS in Drinking Water: Hazardous at Ever-Lower Levels
Feb 19, 2019 | Environmental Working Group
By Olga Naidenko and Dave Andrews
Last week, as he unveiled the Environmental Protection Agency’s toothless “action plan” on fluorinated chemicals, acting EPA chief Andrew Wheeler maintained that the current guideline of 70 parts per trillion, or ppt, for the compound PFOA is a safe level in drinking water. -
Guest Column: The 2019 Chemical Conundrum
Feb 20, 2019 | Chemical Watch
By Jacob Duer
Whether you know it or not, everything we touch is chemical. The food we eat, the dishes we use, our clothes, medicines, computers, cars, shampoo, door handles, pillows, combs – everything. -
Baltimore Sues Monsanto Over PCB Pollution (1)
Feb 20, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Leslie A. Pappas
Monsanto Co., Solutia, Inc., and Pharmacia LLC should pay for damaging Baltimore’s environment with toxic chemicals made decades ago, the city of Baltimore said in a lawsuit filed Feb. 19 that follows similar suits from other cities and states. -
Big Seven in Lower 48 to Near 78 Bcf/d Next Month, EIA Says
Feb 20, 2019 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By David Bradley
Production from the seven most prolific U.S. onshore unconventional plays in March will continue its seemingly endless upward swing, with natural gas output forecast to reach 77.97 Bcf/d and oil an estimated 8.40 million b/d, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA). -
North Dakota Bakken Said Likely to Set More Records in 2019
Feb 19, 2019 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Richard Nemec
Oil and natural gas production in the Bakken Shale in North Dakota continued to shatter records at the end of last year, according to the monthly report issued last week by the Department of Mineral Resources (DMR). -
U.S. LNG Awaits Fate of Japan Nuclear Revival
Feb 20, 2019 | E&E Energywire
By Nathanial Gronewold
Japan's indecision over nuclear power's future is stymieing U.S. efforts to boost liquefied natural gas exports in the world's largest LNG market. -
Commonwealth Lng Finds European Demand for Gas from Louisiana Terminal -CEO
Feb 20, 2019 | Reuters
By Jessica Resnick-Ault and Ron Bousso
Commonwealth LNG has received commitments from European buyers to take almost half of the liquefied natural gas (LNG) from its planned 8.4-million-tonnes-per-year export terminal in Louisiana, Chief Executive Officer Paul Varello said on Wednesday. -
Environmental Groups Lose Bid to Halt Mountain Valley Pipeline
Feb 19, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Peter Hayes
The Sierra Club and several other environmental groups failed to get a federal court to put the brakes on a 300-mile natural gas pipeline that will run from West Virginia to Virginia. -
(ACC Mentioned) Lake County Residents Push Trump, Pritzker EPAs for Protection from Same Cancer-Causing Gas That Shut down Sterigenics
Feb 19, 2019 | Chicago Tribune
By Michael Hawthorne
Months of community organizing, pleading and haranguing paid off last week when Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s administration banned Sterigenics from using cancer-causing ethylene oxide gas at its sterilization plant in west suburban Willowbrook. -
Sterigenics Sues Illinois Over Shutdown Order
Feb 19, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Stephen Joyce
Sterigenics U.S. LLC sued the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency for effectively shutting down the company’s facility over toxic air pollution. -
CSB Says Equipment Failure Caused Mississippi Gas Plant Blast
Feb 19, 2019 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Ben LeFebvre
An equipment leak caused the explosion and fire at a natural gas processing plant in Mississippi that kept the facility shuttered for six months, the Chemical Safety Board said in a report released Tuesday. -
Chinese Threat to Gas Pipelines Not Imminent — Sources
Feb 20, 2019 | E&E Energywire
By Peter Behr
U.S. intelligence officials have no direct evidence that China has planted cyber weapons inside any of the nation's natural gas pipelines, according to gas industry representatives briefed Friday about the China threat. -
Ore. Petroleum Terminal Expands to Allow More Trains
Feb 20, 2019 | AP (In E&E Energywire)
By Tony Schick
A Portland petroleum terminal is significantly expanding its capacity to unload rail cars, a move that sets the stage to more than double the number of oil trains along the Columbia and Willamette rivers into Oregon's biggest city, Oregon Public Broadcasting has learned. -
White House Readies Panel to Assess If Climate Change Poses a National Security Threat
Feb 20, 2019 | Washington Post
By Juliet Eilperin and Missy Ryan
The White House is working to assemble a panel to assess whether climate change poses a national security threat, according to documents obtained by The Washington Post, a conclusion that federal intelligence agencies have affirmed several times since President Trump took office. -
EPA Extends Deadline for Deciding on SO2 NAAQS Revision
Feb 19, 2019 | Inside EPA
EPA is delaying until Feb. 25 its already-missed Jan. 28 deadline for a final decision on whether to revise or retain its sulfur dioxide (SO2) national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS), resuming work on the rule that was delayed due to the lengthy government shutdown. -
Amazon Aims to Cut Shipment Carbon Footprint in Half by 2030
Feb 19, 2019 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Miranda Green
Major online retailer Amazon is making a push to halve the carbon footprint of its shipments by 2030. -
Judge Tosses Pa. Climate Case
Feb 20, 2019 | E&E Climatewire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
A federal judge in Pennsylvania threw out a lawsuit from environmentalists and two children concerned about the effect of regulatory rollbacks on climate change.
Industry and Association News
TSCA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) Nova Chemicals’ Take on the Alliance to End Plastic Waste
Feb 19, 2019 | Plastics Today
By Rick Lingle
The plastics industry is mobilizing quickly on multiple fronts putting out raging firestorms of anti-plastics opinion and activities including bans and other proposed regulations that target plastic pollution and waste. One of the latest and most ambitious of the broad-based countermeasures is the Alliance to End Plastic Waste (AEPW), which was announced last month (see CEOs tout ambitions of Alliance to End Plastic Waste during live media presentation, published January 2019) and has a specific focus on ocean pollution.
The AEPW is comprised of nearly 30 companies that are making a combined initial commitment of $1 billion (USD) with a goal of $1.5 billion over five years to make progress on these four areas:
• Infrastructure development to manage waste and increase recycling;
• Innovation to develop and bring to scale new materials and product designs that minimize waste and new recycling technologies that create value from all post-use plastics;
• Education and engagement of governments at all levels, communities, businesses and even individuals; and
• Clean-up of concentrated areas of waste in the environment, particularly the major conduits of waste that carry land-based waste to waterways.
One of the Alliance’s founding members is Nova Chemicals (Calgary, Canada).
“This investment demonstrates our commitment to helping to shape a world that is better tomorrow than it is today,” said Todd Karran, President and CEO, Nova Chemicals. “Plastics in our environment is a growing challenge, but a solvable one with strong leadership and collaboration.”
“Plastics are valuable materials that make our modern lives healthier, easier and safer,” said John Thayer, Senior Vice President, Polyethylene Business at Nova Chemicals. “We also recognize the need to work toward the creation of a circular plastics economy that reduces waste and encourages reuse, recycling and regeneration.”
PlasticsToday interviewed Thayer for further details on what the company and other members plan to achieve within the scope of the AEPW.
How much of a difference can Nova Chemcials and the Alliance make?
Thayer: The Alliance offers a tremendous opportunity for a range of key members in the value chain to bring their collective resources and expertise to bear on an enormously complex issue. We believe the Alliance and Project STOP (STop Ocean Plastics), which we joined in 2018, are two of the best initiatives globally that are positioned to bring about meaningful, systemic and permanent solutions to get and keep plastics out of our oceans and the natural environment.
We are incredibly proud to join the Alliance as a founding member and look forward to working with the other members along with governments, institutions, outside companies, NGOs and communities to solve the issues.
Our work will help in the creation of a circular plastics economy that reduces waste and encourages reuse, recycling and regeneration.
What are the company’s plans to align with AEPW? What’s the feedback from the industry?
Thayer: As founding members, we fully support the work of the Alliance. In addition to our monetary investment, we will contribute full participation and expertise as projects are implemented. Where possible, we will take learnings from the work of the Alliance and its members and apply them to our operations, our business, and how we help our customers.
Our customers and others in the value chain have expressed a tremendous amount of excitement that we’ve joined the Alliance, as well as Project STOP. Some have expressed interest in joining one or the other, and we look forward to welcoming them as new members or partners.
What’s the biggest change for the company now?
Thayer: We have long been champions of product sustainability, and sustainability in our operations, our workforce, and the communities in which we operate. This is our Taking Care model. Joining the Alliance both aligns to our existing commitment and expands upon it to include taking action on a global level. We are very proud to be investing in the Alliance and Project STOP, global initiatives that we think will have meaningful, lasting impact.
What’s the biggest challenge to reducing plastic waste?
Thayer: The complexity of the issues. Plastic waste overall and in our oceans, waterways, and natural environment can be drastically reduced with a multifaceted approach. We must work collectively and draw on the expertise and resources of all players, from governments, private industry, NGOs, and all members of society. We also must implement a range of solutions that work best for a given geography, population, etc. One size does not fit all.
What role can reusable packaging and containers play in reducing plastic waste?
Thayer: There are a lot of solutions that can meaningfully reduce plastic waste, including reusable packaging and containers. Lifecycle analysis is critical to ensure that any given solution offers a smaller total lifecycle footprint than its alternatives. For more, read the American Chemistry Council’s Trucost study on this topic.
Regardless of the success of reusables, there will continue to be a very large volume of recyclate globally for which we need to have valuable end markets.
What role can and should consumers play?
Thayer: Consumers of course play a large and critical role in both source reduction and increasing recycling rates. Their buying decisions affect how much material is consumed that can later end up in the recycle streams, and the conscientious binning of recyclables is crucial to ensuring materials ever have the opportunity for a second life as recyclate.
The plastics industry, government, and others have a responsibility to educate consumers about the value of plastics, their carbon footprint in relation to alternative materials, and how we’re working to get and keep plastics out of the natural environment.
How successful will this be against the rising tide of the anti-plastic movement that claims a growing number of brands and restaurant chains as participants?
Thayer: We realize that eliminating plastic for other materials seems more rash than strategic, but such is the state of things today. For example, KFC is a recent example with the news that it pledges to eliminate non-reusable plastic containers by 2025 (see also KFC drinks the Kool-Aid, published January 2019).
Ordinary citizens are expressing a real frustration with the end results of the make-take-dispose consumption model—plastics in the environment, and especially in our waterways and oceans, where they are adversely affecting ocean health and animal populations. They’re looking for action, now, and brands (and governments) are responding with a range of initiatives, often around eliminating single-use plastics, that they hope will be perceived as meaningfully addressing these consumers’ concerns. The Ellen MacArthur New Plastics Economy and the newly announced reusable products initiative LOOP are also aligned to source reduction as a key solution.
Experts know that global actions around infrastructure development and citizen education, especially in Southeast Asia and other rapidly developing countries and regions, as well as recycling and chemical recovery innovations, will have a vast impact in addressing end-of-life plastics issues. The Alliance is one important initiative working in these areas, along with Project STOP, Circulate Capital, and many more. However, the work of these initiatives towards a global circular economy is not enough.
Today, there is more work to do to win hearts and minds. It’s essential to understand the impacts to water, air, energy and human health involved in the total lifecycle of a given material, from sourcing and manufacturing to transportation and end-of-life processing, whether to landfill or into recyclate. A well-thought out, extensive, and sincere public education communications campaign is critical for people to understand these issues better and enable them to make conscientious, well-informed decisions that they feel good about.
https://www.plasticstoday.com/packaging/nova-chemicals-take-on-alliance-end-plastic-waste/93397636260284
-
Trump Eases Off Hard Deadline for China Tariffs
Feb 19, 2019 | Wall Street Journal
By Bob Davis and Alex Leary
President Trump gave his firmest indication yet that the U.S. may not increase tariffs on Chinese goods on March 1, as scheduled, despite statements by his top trade official that the U.S. should stick to a firm deadline.
That deadline to complete talks with Beijing is “not a magical date,” he told reporters Tuesday, as midlevel U.S. and Chinese negotiators started this week’s trade meetings. Cabinet-level officials will join the discussions Thursday.
Mr. Trump and his advisers have said they are considering a meeting with President Xi sometime in the coming weeks. Under that scenario, the Trump-Xi meeting would effectively act as the deadline for a deal. American officials want that session to take place in the U.S.
Since mid-January, the two sides have met either in Washington or Beijing to carve out a deal to end a yearlong trade dispute that has rocked global markets and upended corporate investment plans. Mr. Trump has issued a series of contradictory statements about a deadline for talks, his plans to meet Mr. Xi, and whether he will increase tariffs at some point.
“The real question will be: will we raise the tariffs?” Mr. Trump said Tuesday. “I know that China would like not for that to happen. So I think they are trying to move fast so that doesn’t happen. But we’ll see what happens.”
He said, “I can’t tell you exactly about timing, but the date is not a magical date. A lot of things can happen.”
At times, Mr. Trump’s remarks have put him at odds with his top China negotiator, U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer. Absent a deal, he has repeatedly set a firm deadline for tariffs on $200 billion of Chinese goods to increase to 25% from 10%.
“The deadline is March 1. That is the deadline,” he said in late January, adding he wasn’t contemplating an extension. A month earlier, he characterized it as a “hard deadline.”
The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.
The White House referred to remarks Mr. Trump made last week that the tariffs are hurting China.
For the Chinese, the conflicting statements present a quandary, said Cornell University China scholar Eswar Prasad. “They aren’t sure which approach to take more seriously—Lighthizer’s or Trump’s,” he said. While China would welcome the continuation of a trade truce for another month or two, he said, they fear that the U.S. demands would increase over such a period. “If the deadline is extended, they could be asked for a great deal more in exchange for a little time,” Mr. Prasad said.
For now, he said, Beijing is looking to make enough trade concessions, including additional purchases of soybeans, natural gas and other goods, to keep the U.S. from increasing tariffs, scheduled to start at 12:01 a.m. on March 2, said people involved in the talks.
Mr. Lighthizer’s colleagues describe him as frustrated with the changing direction from the White House.
In late January, Chinese negotiators invited Mr. Trump to visit Mr. Xi at the tropical island of Hainan and work out a deal. Meeting in the Oval Office with the top Chinese official, Liu He on Jan. 31, the president said he may meet the Chinese leader twice. Mr. Trump’s aides, though, convinced him—for that moment at least—that it was too early for a meeting and that traveling to China for a deal would put great pressure on him to agree to China’s terms.
Mr. Lighthizer and other aides also have pressed for a firm deadline to increase leverage on Beijing—an issue on which Mr. Trump made conflicting statements during two meetings on Jan. 31.
After the two presidents met in Buenos Aires on Dec. 1, when they decided to push the deadline for a tariff increase to March 1 from Jan. 1, there was a dispute over the deadline among Trump aides on the flight back on Air Force One, said people briefed on the negotiations.
Initially, the White House statement didn’t include firm language on the deadline. After objections by hawkish trade adviser Peter Navarro, the people said, the statement was rewritten to say, unambiguously, that if by March 1, “the parties are unable to reach an agreement, the 10% tariffs will be raised to 25%.”
https://www.wsj.com/articles/trump-eases-off-hard-deadline-for-china-tariffs-11550621471
-
House Democrats to Probe EPA Enforcement
Feb 19, 2019 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Alex Guillén
The House Energy and Commerce Committee's oversight panel will hold a hearing next week on EPA's enforcement efforts, with Democrats calling the Trump administration's record "troubling."
EPA's recent enforcement report touted gains in areas such as newly opened criminal cases, but critics note that important metrics such as civil penalties, injunctive relief and federal inspections fell from previous years, even discounting blockbuster enforcement cases such as the Volkswagen emissions cheating scandal.
“Essentially what the EPA has done is take the cop off the beat and protect polluters rather than the average American, and we're going to change that,” said E&C Chairman Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) in a video.
The committee did not say whether EPA enforcement chief Susan Bodine would testify. EPA did not immediately respond this afternoon to questions about the hearing.
WHAT’S NEXT: The hearing will take place on Feb. 26 at 10:30 a.m. in 2322 Rayburn.
https://subscriber.politicopro.com/energy/whiteboard
-
Berkeley Sets Fees, Limits on Single-Use Food Containers
Feb 20, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Joyce E. Cutler
Latte-sipping Starbucks and McDonald’s customers in Berkeley, Calif., will pay a quarter more for single-use cups under an ordinance mandating that take-away containers be reusable or compostable.
The City Council, after two years of work with merchants and environmental groups, unanimously gave final approval Feb. 19 to the disposable-free dining law to require that vendors and restaurants use compostable and reusable foodware.
Unrecyclable plastics are banned and containers must be free of bisphenol-A, a chemical used to soften plastics.
Food and beverage packages constitute the majority of street litter found in the San Francisco Bay Area, Clean Water Action found.
Compliance
Merchants have until Jan. 1, 2020, to comply. Berkeley’s offering a small-grant program to help prepared-food vendors with one-time costs associated with converting to reusable foodware.
“It does seem that many jurisdictions have been moving in the direction of eliminating non-reusable plastics and for our members who have locations in a variety of jurisdictions, they are having to work through a patchwork of compliance laws,” Golden Gate Restaurant Association Executive Director Gwyneth Borden said.
The trade group represents more than 4,000 restaurants.
Restaurants may be constrained by supply-chain limitations in their efforts to meet the standards, with a particular backlog on paper straws, Borden told Bloomberg Environment.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/berkeley-sets-fees-limits-on-single-use-food-containers
-
Feb 19, 2019 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Britt Erickson
After months of uncertainty and a 35–day partial government shutdown, science R&D ended up with a small boost at many US government agencies for fiscal 2019.
The final appropriations package, signed by President Donald J. Trump on Feb. 15, funds several major US science agencies through Sept. 30. Those agencies include the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), National Science Foundation (NSF), and Departments of Agriculture (USDA), Commerce, and Interior. The president signed bills funding other agencies important for science, including the National Institutes of Health (NIH) and the Departments of Defense (DOD) and Energy (DOE), in September.
Overall, R&D funding for 2019 increased 6% compared with 2018, according to analysis by the American Association for the Advancement of Science.
The biggest winner was USDA, which saw its R&D budget increase by nearly 12%. Much of that increase will go to fund intramural research and modernization of research facilities at the Agricultural Research Service. USDA’s extramural research program received a 4.5% increase.
The NIH got a 5.4% hike, while DOE, NASA, and NSF saw more modest increases of about 4%. The Trump administration had requested major cuts to energy and environmental programs. Congress did not oblige and maintained funding for such programs at EPA, Commerce, and Interior.
Scientific organizations and advocacy groups welcomed the end to the uncertainty over 2019 funding. They also urged lawmakers to shift attention to lifting budget caps on fiscal 2020 spending that would restrict future funding for science and research. “We know that major competitors such as China are rapidly increasing their investments in research, which is why the US needs to be relentless in its promotion and funding of scientific research,” Peter McPherson, president of the Association of Public and Land-grant Universities, said in a statement.
The American Chemical Society, which publishes C&EN, raised similar concerns. “ACS is thankful that a budget agreement was reached and another disruptive shutdown avoided, but we remain concerned about the constrained levels of funding not keeping pace with that of other nations as it threatens US global competitiveness,” says Glenn Ruskin, vice president of external affairs and communications at ACS.
https://cen.acs.org/policy/research-funding/US-science-funding-inches/97/i8
-
Compostable ‘Bioplastics’ Make Inroads with Consumers
Feb 19, 2019 | AP (In The Washington Post)
By Katherine Roth
Looking for an eco-friendly alternative to traditional plastics — especially single-use items like bags, straws and picnic tableware — many supermarkets and vendors are offering an array of compostable alternatives made from plant fibers or starches.
“The market for compostable products is growing at an incredible pace,” says Olga Kachook, sustainability manager for Petaluma, California-based World Centric, which makes ones geared mostly toward food services in stadiums, school cafeterias, hotels, restaurants and convention centers. Those facilities work with industrial composting facilities, which can cut their waste exponentially.
Bioplastics, as the rapidly evolving products are also known, can be made from corn, potatoes, rice, tapioca, palm fiber, wood cellulose, wheat fiber, sugar, or sometimes even shrimp shells, seaweed or algae. Not all bioplastics are compostable, but those that are can go right into one big industrial-composting bin along with food waste.
“Ultimately, all households will need to have a three-bin system, for industrial compost, recycling and waste. Consumers and companies are trying hard to identify more sustainable ways of doing things, and compostable products are an important part of the picture,” says Rhodes Yepsen, executive director of the New York-based Biodegradable Products Institute, which offers a certification ensuring that products claiming to be compostable actually are.
Items must be thin enough to be compostable. Products that are certified compostable either carry BPI’s seal of approval or are listed on the organization’s website.
The number of certified compostable products has increased by 80 percent in the past few years, according to BPI. Many of these products, like bags, cups and dishes, are increasingly available in grocery stores.
But compostable technology is still new, and whether or not products are certified, it’s best to check with your local composting facility before adding them to the rest of your organic waste, experts agree.
Melissa Ozawa, gardening and features editor at Martha Stewart Living magazine, says, “The best thing you can do is to use reusables. Keep your own utensils at work, your own tote bag for the grocery store, glass containers for home storage. And if you decide to use bioplastics and don’t have access to a composting facility, consider joining with others in your community to try to get one. They won’t biodegrade in your home garden or in a landfill.”
Yepsen says over 5 million households already have three-bin systems.
“We have a long way to go, but it’s encouraging to think about where recycling was in the ‘80s and where it is now,” he says. “That’s what’s happening now with compostables. It will take some time, but I fully expect in the next 10 to 20 years, most communities will have curbside compost pickup.”
But critics say bioplastics are no silver bullet.
“They’re not as great as they seem at first glance,” says Brett Stevens, global vice president of material sales and procurement at the recycling company TerraCycle, based in Trenton, New Jersey.
Most households have no access to the industrial composting facilities needed to quickly break down these products, he notes. If they are tossed in with other plastics for recycling, they pollute the recycling stream, and if tossed in the trash, they aren’t much better than traditional plastic.
Compostable products “are renewable in the sense that they can be grown and regenerated again and again,” writes Tom Szaky, TerraCycle’s CEO, in his book “From Linear to Circular: The Future of Packaging” (2019, Berrett-Koehler Publishers).
“What most consumers don’t realize is that biodegradable bioplastics will break down only under the right conditions — those of an industrial composting facility. And even if that happens, they won’t contribute value to the compost, unlike coffee grounds or leaves, which have a wide range of micro- and macronutrients as well as a living ecosystem of bacteria and other microbes,” Szaky says.
If sent to an industrial-scale composting facility “with actively managed piles of compost under controlled conditions, and fed a diet of digest microbes,” compostable products will break down in less than two months, says Jeremy Kranowitz, a board member of the non-profit group Sustainable America. “ In someone’s backyard compost heap, it could easily take more than a year. If they are accidentally sent to a landfill and buried, it could take over a century. And if they go into a plastics recycling bin, they will contaminate the recycling process.”
Those promoting compostable plastics counter that plastic recycling is already problematic, since only a small fraction of plastic products make it into the recycling stream, and the market for recycled plastics is limited.
They also say that no matter where bioplastics end up, they are more sustainable to produce than traditional plastics, made from fossil fuels. And even detractors admit that if compostable products do end up in oceans, they break down more quickly than traditional plastics.
“It’s complicated,” says Yepsen. “But the composting infrastructure is slowly being built up across the country, and there’s huge potential in this.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/home/compostable-bioplastics-make-inroads-with-consumers/2019/02/19/87f9f1a4-3455-11e9-8375-e3dcf6b68558_story.html?utm_term=.1b5f0658b5a9
-
(ACC Mentioned) Chemicals List Gets 1st Major Update in 40 Years
Feb 19, 2019 | E&E News PM
By Cecelia Smith-Schoenwalder
For the first time in 40 years, EPA has significantly altered the list of chemicals that are being actively manufactured, processed and imported in the United States.
During its effort to update the list, EPA determined that less than half of the total number of chemicals are still on the market.
"It's important for us to know which chemicals are actually in use today," said Alexandra Dunn, the head of EPA's chemicals office. "This will help us with our work prioritizing chemicals, evaluating and addressing risks. This information also increases transparency to the public."
EPA uses the Toxic Substances Control Act Chemical Substance Inventory to inform industrial chemical regulations.
In 2018, the compilation had more than 86,000 chemicals on it. The updated TSCA required the agency to modernize the list and determine which chemicals are active in U.S. commerce.
To gather data for the update, EPA looked at more than 90,000 responses from chemical manufacturers and processors between August 2017 and October 2018.
Roughly 20 percent of the chemicals on the market were submitted as confidential business information, which means EPA does not need to release all of their information to the public.
The agency said it is developing a rule to outline how it will review and substantiate the claims of confidential business information.
This designation has proved controversial in the past, specifically with EPA's draft risk evaluation of pigment violet 29.
The agency determined that the chemical, which is primarily used as a colorant, does not pose an unreasonable risk to human health, but it withheld several studies on which it based the conclusion due to "a claim of business confidentiality by the data owners."
Lawmakers and environmental groups have urged EPA to release the studies to the public (Greenwire, Jan. 31).
The American Chemistry Council, a large industry trade group, said there is "still important work to do" related to confidential business claims.
"The more than 90,000 responses submitted to the agency by manufacturers, importers and processors are indicative of the complexity of the task and the continued need to get the inventory right as a key step in full implementation of TSCA," ACC said in a statement.
It also noted EPA should take action to address possible redundant reporting issues.
https://www.eenews.net/eenewspm/2019/02/19/stories/1060121497
-
(ACC Mentioned) EPA Releases Updated TSCA Inventory
Feb 20, 2019 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
The EPA has released an updated TSCA inventory, which indicates that just over 40,000 substances are currently active in US commerce.
The update follows the ‘inventory reset’ reporting exercise, put in place by the 2016 amendments to TSCA. This required manufacturers and importers to provide retrospective notification of substances that had been manufactured, imported or used during a ten year ‘lookback period’, ending 21 June 2016, with an optional notification period for processors.
Following the EPA’s review of the more than 90,000 responses, the updated inventory shows as active 40,655 (47%) of the 86,228 chemicals on the inventory. This includes 7,757 substances with identities withheld as confidential (19% of the total active substances).
Alexandra Dunn, assistant administrator of the EPA’s Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP), said the information will help the agency prioritise chemicals for risk evaluation and increase transparency for the public.
But the updated inventory will also add a new compliance wrinkle for US chemical users throughout the supply chain, as they will need to ensure that a substance has been listed as ‘active’ prior to manufacturing, importing or processing it for non-exempt purposes.
‘Forward-looking’ notification will need to be submitted before using any of the 45,573 substances slated to be designated as ‘inactive’. This obligation will take effect after a 90-day transition period (see box).
There are implications, as well, for the treatment of substances with identities withheld as confidential.
The EPA must move any confidential substances for which it did not receive a request to maintain CBI protection to the public portion of the inventory. And it is currently developing a rule outlining how it will review and substantiate confidentiality claims.
The American Chemistry Council welcomed the release of the finalised inventory, calling it "another important milestone in EPA’s effective implementation of the 2016 TSCA amendments."
But the group said there was "important work to do" on the review of confidential business claims and has called on the agency to consider further refining the inventory by addressing redundant reporting issues.
It also echoed a statement that it has made previously, that the 8,700 chemicals with "meaningful production volumes" reported under the TSCA Chemical Data Reporting (CDR) rule serve as a better representation of the chemicals that are active in commerce.
"On the basis of the 2016 CDR, about 99.8% of chemical production volume in the United States can be attributed to approximately 4,000 chemicals," it said.
Box: Transition period
Release of the updated inventory starts the clock on a 90-day transition period before inactive substance designations are finalised. Once those are set, companies will need to submit a forward-looking (Form B) notification to move a substance from the inactive to the active portion of the inventory before they can use it.
The EPA said in its final inventory notification rule that a grace period was necessary to address those cases where a substance was not used during the 10-year lookback period – and which therefore was not eligible to be reported as active – but where use had since resumed.
Without such a transition, publication of the updated inventory would have resulted in some companies needing to immediately cease use of a substance and file a Form B notice before resuming.
However, the period is likely also to highlight chemicals that were mistakenly missed during the mandatory reporting process.
Speaking on a recent Keller & Heckman webinar, firm partner Tom Berger said that "many companies" failed to submit a Form A notification as required during the notification period.
In such cases, he said companies may consider:
· submitting a late Form A notice, and presumably self-disclosing non-compliance under the EPA’s audit policy; or
· submitting a Form B notice after the inactive substance designations are final but before resuming use of the substance. He noted, however, that this "does not mean you’re not subject to liability for your failure to report" a Form A previously.
"You want to act very carefully and certainly consult with internal or external counsel", he added.
Mr Berger also pointed out that processors will be strictly liable for ensuring they are not handling inactive substances. He said that some may wish to request assurance from their suppliers that they are only selling an active substance or to seek indemnification from them if they inadvertently provide an inactive substance.
https://chemicalwatch.com/74480/epa-releases-updated-tsca-inventory
-
US NGOs File Suit over EPA Asbestos Petition Denial
Feb 20, 2019 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
A group of public health groups has filed a lawsuit in an effort to overturn the US EPA’s denial of its petition to require expanded reporting on asbestos.
Filed in the US District Court for the Northern District of California, the lawsuit centres around a petition submitted under section 21 of TSCA in September 2018. This had sought for the EPA to amend its TSCA Chemical Data Reporting (CDR) rule in order to eliminate exemptions and expand reporting of asbestos.
The EPA, however, denied the petition in December 2018. In its response, the agency claimed it was aware of all ongoing uses of asbestos and said that making the proposed changes would not result in generating any new information prior to the deadline later this year for finalising its risk evaluation of asbestos.
But the NGOs argue in their complaint that the EPA’s denial of the petition was "arbitrary and capricious and contrary to law".
Bob Sussman, a counsel for the organisations, added: "The petition denial is a weak and irresponsible response to the compelling case we made for the need for comprehensive and current information about asbestos to meet the requirements of the law and fully inform the public."
The groups are seeking for the court to compel the agency to begin a rulemaking under section 8 of TSCA to require importers, manufacturers and processors of asbestos and asbestos-containing articles to report on those uses.Rebuttal
The NGOs’ complaint reiterates several points made in a 31 January rebuttal and request for reconsideration sent to EPA acting administrator Andrew Wheeler.
The letter – signed by the Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization (ADAO) and submitted alongside a separate asbestos petition filed by more than a dozen US state attorneys general – claimed EPA has overstated its knowledge of asbestos use and exposure.
And it countered that, even if information under an amended CDR rule was not collected until after the risk evaluation was complete, such data could inform a future rulemaking to restrict asbestos use and provide information about possible exposures.
The letter asks the EPA to reconsider its position on the NGOs’ original request alongside its consideration of the states’ petition.
An EPA response to the state AGs’ petition is due by 1 May.
https://chemicalwatch.com/74478/us-ngos-file-suit-over-epa-asbestos-petition-denial
-
More Groups Sue EPA over Paint-Stripping Toxin
Feb 19, 2019 | E&E News PM
By Cecelia Smith-Schoenwalder
Latino workers and environmental groups sued EPA today regarding its failure to ban a chemical that has killed more than 50 people.
Methylene chloride is used in paint strippers and can cause heart failure and sudden death if used without proper ventilation.
"If more than 50 coroner's reports are not enough to get EPA to ban one of the most dangerous chemicals on the market, what is?" asked Earthjustice attorney Jonathan Kalmuss-Katz.
Earthjustice and the Natural Resources Defense Council filed the lawsuit on behalf of the Labor Council for Latin American Advancement.
"Latino and immigrant workers are more likely to perform jobs that use deadly paint strippers. It's a fact, that their health is at risk due to exposure to methylene chloride," said Hector Sanchez Barba, LCLAA's executive director.
"EPA's failure to fully regulate this toxic chemical is simply unconscionable. We will not stand by while Latino and immigrant workers' lives are being put in danger," he continued.
The groups argue EPA has not fulfilled its duty under the Toxic Substances Control Act to protect against "imminently hazardous chemical substance[s]."
Last month, other environmental advocates and two mothers whose sons died from methylene chloride exposure also filed a lawsuit against EPA over the chemical (E&E News PM, Jan. 14).
EPA had planned to finalize restrictions on the chemical by the end of last year, but it missed its self-imposed deadline.
Some retailers have taken matters into their own hands by pulling products containing the chemical from their shelves. Others have pledged to do so, but as yet have not followed through with their plans (Greenwire, Jan. 25).
EPA does not comment on pending litigation.
https://www.eenews.net/eenewspm/2019/02/19/stories/1060121449
-
Group Sues to Make EPA Immediately Ban Paint Remover Chemical
Feb 19, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Blake Brittain
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency must implement immediately a ban on a deadly chemical found in commercial paint strippers, a Feb. 19 complaint in the Southern District of New York asserts.
Methylene chloride has already killed more than 50 people since 1980, the Labor Council for Latin American Advancement says. According to the complaint, at least four people have died from exposure since the EPA proposed a ban in January 2017.
The EPA proposed to ban methylene chloride under the Toxic Substances Control Act, but hasn’t finalized the ban.
The agency found that the chemical creates “an unreasonable risk of injury to health or the environment.” Risks include death, coma, loss of consciousness, dizziness, and liver problems in the short-term, and an increased risk of cancer and liver damage in the long-term. The agency reiterated the unreasonable risk determination in May 2018 after meeting with victims’ families, and said it would finalize the ban “shortly.”
The LCLAA said that the EPA has a non-discretionary duty to ban the chemical immediately, and requested that the court force the EPA to implement the ban under the TSCA.
The EPA’s inaction in finalizing the ban also violates the Administrative Procedure Act’s provision against unreasonably delaying required agency actions, the LCLAA asserts.
The EPA didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.
Earthjustice and the Natural Resources Defense Council represent LCLAA.
The case is Labor Council for Latin Am. Advancement v. U.S. Envtl. Prot. Agency, S.D.N.Y., No. 1:19-cv-01538, complaint filed 2/19/19.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/group-sues-to-make-epa-immediately-ban-paint-remover-chemical
-
Carper Drops Objection on Wheeler's Nomination After EPA's Pledge on PFAS MCL
Feb 19, 2019 | Inside EPA
By Suzanne Yohannan
A top Senate Democrat is dropping one of several objections he had threatened to raise when the upper chamber considers Andrew Wheeler's nomination to be EPA chief later this month after the agency renewed its pledge that it “intends” to develop an enforceable drinking water standard for two of the most common perfluorinated substances.
“I ask my Republican colleagues to believe me when I say that I’m not interested in slowing down Mr. Wheeler’s nomination process for the sake of making a political statement or sticking it to the Administration,” Sen. Tom Carper (D-DE), the top Democrat on the Senate environment committee, said in a Feb. 19 statement.
“I’m not interested in a delay for delay’s sake. With Mr. Wheeler’s nomination, we have a rare opportunity to extract meaningful policy concessions from EPA. This new commitment is proof of that winning strategy,” Carper said.
While Carper's statement suggests he will not raise objections on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) issues when Wheeler's nomination comes to the floor later this month for a procedural vote, he continues to raise concerns on several other issues that he had previously urged EPA to address.
As Wheeler's nomination “heads to the Senate floor for a cloture vote, Senator Carper will continue to urge EPA to reverse course and seize four additional bipartisan 'win-win' policy opportunities,” he said, including his past calls for EPA to withdraw its plan to kill the threshold finding for the Mercury and Air Toxics (MATS) rule, support Senate ratification of the Kigali amendment on high-carbon refrigerants, cut a deal between automakers and California on fuel economy and greenhouse gas standards and finalize a ban on methylene chloride, a paint-stripping chemical.
While Carper and other Democrats lack the votes to block any nomination from proceeding, as many as five GOP senators are voicing “serious concerns” over reforms EPA is planning to make to the renewable fuel standard (RFS).
Carper's comments come in response to a Feb. 15 letter from EPA water chief Andrew Ross assuring the senator the agency “intends to establish a maximum contaminant level (MCL)” for perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) -- two of the most prevalent PFAS -- under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA).
“To do so, the EPA is committed to following the MCL rulemaking process as established by [SDWA] -- a process that is designed to ensure public participation, transparencey, and the use of the best available science and other technical information,” Ross continues.
“By the end of this year, the EPA will propose a regulatory determination, which is the next step in the Safe Drinking Water Act process for establishing an MCL.”
The pledge reiterates remarks both Wheeler and Ross made on Feb. 14 when they unveiled the agency's action plan to address PFAS, with Wheeler telling reporters at a Philadelphia press conference that he has “every intention of setting” enforceable MCLs for PFOA and PFOS.
But the acting EPA chief did not rule out the possibility that EPA could elect not to set such a limit given the high legal bar the agency faces as it weighs whether to make an affirmative determination that such a standard is necessary.
Asked whether EPA could potentially choose not to set an MCL upon making the regulatory determination, Wheeler said the agency is “going through the regulatory process,” but that “we can't predetermine what the outcome will be.”
'Clear And Firm Commitment'
Carper initially criticized the Feb. 14 plan on the MCL issue, saying EPA took nearly a year “just to kick the can even further down the road.”
But the new assurances in Ross' letter were enough for Carper to see a “clear and firm commitment” from the agency that it will set enforceable drinking water standards for the two chemicals, Carper says in a Feb. 19 press release.
“This is long-awaited but welcome news by EPA,” he says in the release. “Again and again, I've asked Acting Administrator Wheeler to make a clear and firm commitment that EPA will set a drinking water standard, and it's about time he showed some urgency on this important issue. I look forward to working with my colleagues to ensure that EPA lives up to its commitment.”
Ross' letter responds to a Feb. 1 letter from a bipartisan group of 20 senators, including Carper, that urged Wheeler to develop enforceable MCLs for PFOA and PFOS and to take “immediate actions to protect the public from contamination from additional” PFAS, responding to media reports that EPA would not move forward with setting the standards after months of weighing the possibility.
In his press release, Carper adds that he will continue to press EPA to speed up other measures in its action plan to address the widespread contamination of this class of chemicals. The chemicals, which number in the thousands, have been linked to adverse health effects including certain cancers and ulcerative colitis and other conditions, sparking concern among communities as their discovery in community drinking water supplies has grown.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/carper-drops-objection-wheelers-nomination-after-epas-pledge-pfas-mcl
-
PFAS in Drinking Water: Hazardous at Ever-Lower Levels
Feb 19, 2019 | Environmental Working Group
By Olga Naidenko and Dave Andrews
Last week, as he unveiled the Environmental Protection Agency’s toothless “action plan” on fluorinated chemicals, acting EPA chief Andrew Wheeler maintained that the current guideline of 70 parts per trillion, or ppt, for the compound PFOA is a safe level in drinking water.
Says who?
Independent scientists and other federal and state regulatory agencies have recommended or established safe levels for PFOA in drinking water that range to more than 200 times below the EPA’s guideline – a health advisory that is not legally enforceable.
PFOA, formerly used to make DuPont’s Teflon, is the most notorious member of the PFAS family of fluorinated chemicals. An estimated 110 million Americans’ water may be contaminated with PFAS compounds, which have been linked to cancer, thyroid disease and weakened childhood immunity. The more than 4,700 different synthetic PFAS chemicals manufactured worldwide have become global pollutants that contaminate food, water and the bodies of people.
In the almost two decades since the EPA was alerted to PFOA contamination of drinking water near a Teflon plant in Parkersburg, W.Va., a wide range of safe levels have been proposed or adopted. But there’s a clear trend: The levels deemed safe keep going down, and since 2007, all are well below the EPA’s guidelines.
Here’s a timeline, with further explanation below.
· 1991: Internal DuPont memos set a guideline for PFOA in surrounding communities’ drinking water of 1,000 ppt.
· 2002: The EPA and DuPont agree on an interim action level in West Virginia of 14,000 ppt.
· 2007: New Jersey sets a health-based guidance of 40 ppt.
· 2009: EPA sets a provisional health advisory, based on liver effects, of 400 ppt.
· 2013: Study by scientists Dr. Phillipe Grandjean and Esben Budtz-Jórgensen, Ph.D., based on decreased vaccine response in children, recommends 0.3 ppt.
· 2016: The EPA sets the current Health Advisory for combined PFOA and the closely related compound PFOS, formerly an ingredient in 3M’s Scotchgard, of 70 ppt.
· 2017: New Jersey proposes a legal limit of 14 ppt.
· 2017: EWG scientists set a health guideline, based on the reduced effectiveness of vaccines and impact on mammary gland development, of 1 ppt.
· 2018: The federal Agency for Toxic Substances Control proposes a so-called Minimal Risk Level that, converted to a drinking water limit using EPA calculation methods, equals 11 ppt.
· 2018: The European Food Safety Authority sets a so-called tolerable intakevalue that, translated to a drinking water limit, equals 6.5 ppt.
In 2005 and 2009, laboratory tests commissioned by Environmental Working Group found PFOA, PFOS and other PFAS chemicals in umbilical cord samples from 20 babies born in the U.S. These tests exposed the shocking truth that American babies are born pre-polluted with PFAS and other toxic chemicals, which can pass from mothers to fetuses through the umbilical cord.
The 2013 study by Dr. Phillipe Grandjean, of the Harvard School of Public Health, and Esben Budtz-Jórgensen, Ph.D., of the University of Copenhagen, made the lowest recommendation to date for PFOA and PFOS in drinking water – 0.3 ppt. Grandjean recently published a case study on how regulatory guidelines and legal limits for the most-studied PFAS chemicals have decreased substantially since they first were proposed a decade ago.
He said those limits “remain too high” to protect health and warned against allowing widespread use of the new generation of PFAS chemicals before they are thoroughly studied for toxicity, environmental persistence and their public health impacts. PFOA and PFOS are now banned in the U.S., but the EPA has allowed many of their replacements without adequate study.
The EPA’s PFAS action plan may only make the nationwide crisis of PFAS pollution worse by fundamentally failing to take the urgent action necessary to protect the communities polluted with these persistent chemicals. EPA is leaving the responsibility of meaningful action to states and local jurisdictions without the aid of federal leadership. Since the EPA continues to drag its feet on establishing a legal limit for PFAS contaminants in water, state action is essential and urgent.
https://www.ewg.org/news-and-analysis/2019/02/pfas-drinking-water-hazardous-ever-lower-levels
-
Guest Column: The 2019 Chemical Conundrum
Feb 20, 2019 | Chemical Watch
By Jacob Duer
Whether you know it or not, everything we touch is chemical. The food we eat, the dishes we use, our clothes, medicines, computers, cars, shampoo, door handles, pillows, combs – everything.
The Global Chemicals Outlook (GCO II) makes it clear that chemicals are a necessity for development – but it is the possible unsound management of them that calls for ambitious, urgent and worldwide action from governments, policy makers, the private sector, intergovernmental organisations, civil society, industry and the general public.
Trend studies suggest that the release of large amounts of hazardous chemicals into the environment from production processes and products continues to rise. However, many governments, organisations, industries and civil society organisations are starting to take notice that innovations in chemistry and technology are essential for sustainable development and our future.
It is true that when not managed properly, chemicals and waste can have a negative impact on human health and cause detrimental degradation of the environment. This includes disrupting fragile ecosystems through contamination of the soil, water, air, flora and fauna.
Toxic pollution from contaminated areas negatively affects over 200 million people worldwide, with tens of thousands suffering from poisoning each year. Waste generation is estimated to increase from 1.3bn tons per year to 2.2bn tons per year by 2025, with middle-income and developing countries being the most affected.
Yet, instead of looking only at the industry as the problem – industry may in fact be an important part of the solution. We need chemicals – they are the bedrock of our everyday lives. And it is through active participation by the industry that we can achieve technological solutions that can lead the world to a cleaner and safer future.
In 2020, a new global approach for the sound management of chemicals and waste is expected to be adopted based on the outcomes of the ‘Beyond 2020’ process, spearheaded by the stakeholders of the Strategic Approach to International Chemicals Management (SAICM). Therefore, our actions towards ensuring the safe management of chemicals and waste in 2019 is paramount in how the world moves forward in advancing and strengthening global efforts to act on chemicals and waste at all levels.
The plastic opportunity
When it comes to chemicals and waste today, the word on everyone’s lips is: plastic. It is integrated within almost every facet of our lives.
Plastic waste is emerging as one of our greatest environmental challenges. Today, most plastics are non-biodegradable, slowly breaking down into smaller fragments called microplastics, which can take decades, centuries or more to decompose. UN research revealed that nearly 800 species are affected by marine litter – and the finger is often pointed at the plastics industry. Yet, did you know that we release half a million tonnes of plastic microfibres (released as primary microplastics) into the ocean every year by washing textiles?
If the textile industry continues to grow at the current rate, the amount of plastic microfibres being released into the ocean between now until 2050 could exceed 22 million tons. Considering this, it is important to ask ourselves if we are having the right conversation in general about plastics.
In our existing world of high tech and instant media alerts, the general population is rapidly becoming aware of environmental threats and trends.
In 2015, a video of a turtle with a plastic straw lodged into its nose gained global attention as researchers attempted to remove the object. Many movements stated the solution was that plastics should be eliminated altogether – but is that the real answer?
We are all aware that plastic provides life-saving capabilities that we don’t even think about on a daily basis. Essential medical tools and everyday pharmaceuticals are all made possible through plastic. Even the everyday bicycle helmet uses plastic foams to provide the needed shock absorbency to save lives.
While there may still be many views on plastics, one change that we must make happen is for the industry, as well as all industries along the value chain, to fully embrace the circular economy. Materials must be designed that are safe for human and environmental health. Developing and executing processes to gradually reduce single-use plastics, increasing understanding of chemical additives and implementing innovative designs that have less adverse effects on the environment, are the right steps towards a healthier environment and future.
There is no better time than the present for us to take action. And this is already happening with multiple initiatives being launched by a range of stakeholders.A cleaner and safer future
UNEP is implementing a plan to support the transition towards a pollution-free planet by encouraging global collective responsibility. In addition to this, The Assembly of UNEP (UNEA) will host high-level talks this March to develop new solutions to address the world’s most pressing environmental issues – including the management of chemicals and waste.
Some initiatives, such as the High Ambition Alliance on Chemicals and Waste, focus on tackling the problem of chemicals and waste at a national level. Awareness-raising campaigns and the mainstreaming of chemical and waste management policies and protocols are just some of the actions that are vital if we want to see true change in the near future.
The global community has made significant progress towards the goals of effective sound management of chemicals and waste by 2020 – unfortunately the global community will not be able to achieve these goals by next year. This means we must step up our progress in order to achieve sound management and combat adverse impact as soon as possible. As the chemicals industry is projected to almost double in size by 2030 compared to 2016, this is more important than ever.
We must work towards filling the global knowledge gaps about chemicals and waste. This can be achieved by taking action to harmonise research protocols and integrate health and environmental impact information in terms of harm, while also strengthening the science policy agenda on a global level through enhanced cooperation between scientists and decision-makers.
As we move towards our 2020 target and beyond, we must seek effective approaches to inform all audiences of the problems and create spaces to promote collaboration and solutions, so that together we take the necessary action to address and solve our current environmental challenges.
The development of an international policy approach on chemicals and waste beyond 2020 provides an opportunity to achieve the required expanded collaborative action under the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Targeted and focused high-level engagement from all sectors and stakeholders is a must in order to enhance sustainable development and the circular economy.
The views expressed are those of the author and do not represent the views of the United Nations Environment Programme or Chemical Watch.
https://chemicalwatch.com/74487/guest-column-the-2019-chemical-conundrum
-
Baltimore Sues Monsanto Over PCB Pollution (1)
Feb 20, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Leslie A. Pappas
Monsanto Co., Solutia, Inc., and Pharmacia LLC should pay for damaging Baltimore’s environment with toxic chemicals made decades ago, the city of Baltimore said in a lawsuit filed Feb. 19 that follows similar suits from other cities and states.
The lawsuit is the first of its kind on the East Coast, and resembles cases in San Diego, Portland, Seattle, Oregon, and Ohio, according to a statement on the Baltimore City Law Department’s website.
In a complaint filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, City Solicitor Andre M. Davis said Monsanto, the sole manufacturer of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in the country from 1935 to 1977, knew its trademarked “Aroclor” compounds were toxic yet continued to produce them.
The lawsuit also names Solutia, a St. Louis-based manufacturer of performance materials and specialty chemicals, and Pharmacia, a subsidiary of Pfizer Inc. that is a successor to Monsanto.
PCBs were used in paint, caulk, lubricants, coolants, and a range of other products until the Toxic Substances Control Act banned their manufacture in 1979.
‘Contaminate the Streets’
“PCBs regularly leach, leak, off-gas, and escape their intended applications, contaminating runoff during naturally occurring storms and other rain events,” the lawsuit says. “As a result, PCBs contaminate the streets, the drainage systems, stormwater, and water bodies within the boundaries of Baltimore.”
Water quality data from 2016 show that about 921 square miles of Maryland’s bays, 223 miles of rivers, and 3,150 acres of Maryland’s lakes and reservoirs are impaired by PCB contamination, the lawsuit says.
Although the lawsuit doesn’t clearly specify damages, Davis said in a statement that Monsanto has cause damages in the “tens of millions of dollars.”
Monsanto is still reviewing the lawsuit, believes the complaint to be without merit, “and we will defend ourselves aggressively,” Charla Lord, a company spokeswoman, told Bloomberg Environment in an email. The company voluntarily stopped producing PCBs more than 40 years ago, she added.
The case is Baltimore v. Monsanto Co., D. Md., No. 1:19-cv-483, 2/19/19.
(Adds Monsanto comment in the penultimate paragraph.)
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/baltimore-sues-monsanto-over-pcb-pollution-1
-
Big Seven in Lower 48 to Near 78 Bcf/d Next Month, EIA Says
Feb 20, 2019 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By David Bradley
Production from the seven most prolific U.S. onshore unconventional plays in March will continue its seemingly endless upward swing, with natural gas output forecast to reach 77.97 Bcf/d and oil an estimated 8.40 million b/d, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA).
That would be an increase compared with February production out of the Anadarko, Appalachian and Permian basins, and the Bakken, Eagle Ford, Haynesville and Niobrara formations, which is estimated to be 77.11 Bcf/d of gas and 8.31 million b/d of oil, EIA said in its latest Drilling Productivity Report (DPR), which was released Tuesday.
EIA expects month-to-month gas production increases in all seven regions, led as usual by the Appalachian Basin, which is expected to reach 31.60 Bcf/d, up from 31.29 Bcf/d this month, according to the DPR.
Gas production increases also are expected in the Anadarko (7.71 Bcf/d, from 7.67 Bcf/d), Bakken (2.74 Bcf/d, from 2.73 Bcf/d), Eagle Ford (6.94 Bcf/d, from 6.89 Bcf/d), Haynesville (10.27 Bcf/d, from 10.11 Bcf/d), Niobrara (5.32 Bcf/d, from 5.26 Bcf/d) and Permian (13.40 Bcf/d from 13.18 Bcf/d).
Oil production is expected to increase in five of the seven regions. EIA expects production in Appalachia next month to be 141,000 b/d (compared with 138,000 this month), Bakken 1.45 million b/d (compared with 1.44 million b/d), Eagle Ford 1.44 million b/d (compared with 1.43 million b/d), Niobrara 713,000 b/d (compared with 687,000 b/d), and Permian 4.02 million b/d (compared with 3.98 million b/d). The Anadarko (587,000 b/d) and Haynesville (43,000 b/d) are forecast to see oil production remain unchanged month/month.
EIA has been reporting consecutive month-to-month increases out of the plays since January 2017, when their total gas production was estimated at 47.51 Bcf/d, and total oil production was an estimated 4.54 million b/d.
Drilled but uncompleted (DUC) well counts across the Big Seven ended January at 8,798, an increase of 207 from December, EIA said.
The bulk of the DUCs continue to be found in the Permian, which jumped 205 in January to 4,170, and in the Eagle Ford, which increased 29 to 1,597. Two Big Seven plays saw their DUC numbers decrease from December: Appalachia (minus 22) and the Bakken (minus 15).
The productivity of new oil wells in the Big Seven plays is expected to increase marginally in March to 661 b/d, according to the DPR. New-well gas production per rig is also expected to increase during the month to 3.69 MMcf/d.
EIA compiles the DPR using recent U.S. data on the total number of drilling rigs in operation along with estimates of drilling productivity and estimated changes in output from existing wells to provide estimated changes in production.
https://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/117455-big-seven-in-lower-48-to-near-78-bcfd-next-month-eia-says
-
North Dakota Bakken Said Likely to Set More Records in 2019
Feb 19, 2019 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Richard Nemec
Oil and natural gas production in the Bakken Shale in North Dakota continued to shatter records at the end of last year, according to the monthly report issued last week by the Department of Mineral Resources (DMR).
Crude oil output rose 2% month/month to 43.4 million bbl (1.4 million b/d), while natural gas production was up 5% to 82.1 Bcf (2.65 Bcf/d), said DMR Director Lynn Helms in his monthly webinar. He called it a "great way to end the year," and after the usual winter downturn this year he predicted more records would be set from May forward.
Prices for Bakken sweet crude increased about 100% year/year to $45.75/bbl from $22.53.
"Virtually any county that you drill in now is economic at today's oil prices," said Helms, noting that breakeven prices in many counties have dropped by $3/bbl to $8/bbl. "So as we move forward and get some warm weather, we are going to get more production growth.” However, from January through April “production will be flat or decreased."
Month/month output could have been higher if not for a certain amount of self-restraint among producers, said Helms. DMR staff uses anecdotal information to calculate volumes of production voluntarily cut back.
"Our estimates are that this amounted to about 35,000 b/d in December, so it could have been 35,000 b/d more if we had adequate gas capture capacity," he said.
December also had one shy of the all-time record number of producing wells at 15,351, with the record set in October. Since 2006, there have been $109 billion invested in the state in drilling and completing oil wells, according to Helms. DMR is still calculating the midstream investment over the same period.
The rig count in the Bakken is steady in the 60s, with 64 in December, 67 in January and 65 operating as of last Friday (Feb. 15).
"The modern drilling rigs are just not that sensitive to weather conditions; they are on mobile pads, drilling wells in four to six batches, they're winterized, so they're just not that reactionary to weather conditions," he said.
For completions, weather is more of a factor, which is why they are expected to fall off significantly this month.
December showed some improvements in gas capture, and Helms is optimistic that operators by the end of this year will be back on track with state goals. Overall in December, 81% of the gas production was captured, but the current state-mandated goal is 88% where it will stay until Nov. 1, 2020 when it moves to 91%.
North Dakota Petroleum Council President Ron Ness hailed the record-setting production as an outgrowth of operators using new technology allowing them to recover more from each new Bakken well.
https://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/117448-north-dakota-bakken-said-likely-to-set-more-records-in-2019
-
U.S. LNG Awaits Fate of Japan Nuclear Revival
Feb 20, 2019 | E&E Energywire
By Nathanial Gronewold
Japan's indecision over nuclear power's future is stymieing U.S. efforts to boost liquefied natural gas exports in the world's largest LNG market.
While the government here is committed to restarting most of the reactors shuttered since the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear accident in 2011, analysts are expressing doubts that Prime Minister Shinzo Abe can overcome stiff domestic opposition to nuclear energy.
The uncertainty over the nation's energy future has Japanese LNG buyers reluctant to enter long-term LNG import contracts and other deals that could see the United States sell far more LNG to Japan, according to market insiders at a conference here this week.
"The nuclear situation is one big uncertainty," said Stephen Del Regno, vice president for marketing at Venture Global LNG, which aims to launch two Louisiana LNG export projects.
While Japan is the world's largest LNG importer, American gas bound for Asia was more likely to land in South Korea or China prior to the U.S.-China trade dispute. Qatar and Australia continue to dominate the Japanese market.
Japan's Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) has set out an energy vision that sees nuclear power accounting for 20 percent to 22 percent of the nation's energy mix by 2030, with renewable energy sources making up a similar portion. The vision sees LNG's share at 27 percent.
METI Oil and Gas Director Masato Sasaki reiterated Tokyo's commitment to restarting shuttered nuclear plants at the annual CWC Japan LNG and Gas Summit here.
But experts taking into account opposition to nuclear energy by local politicians and the nation's powerful anti-nuclear lobby believe a mix with 11 percent nuclear energy is a far more realistic goal. To achieve 22 percent, the country would have to see at least 36 nuclear power units running, yet only nine are operational today, noted Katsumi Kuroda, a senior adviser here for Cheniere Marketing Ltd.
Kuroda described landing longer-term LNG contracts in Japan as "my biggest agenda" but echoed Del Regno's point about Japanese buyers' unwillingness to take on the risk should the nuclear fleet return to service.
"LNG will be able to fill the gap if needed," Kuroda added.
Nobuo Tanaka, the former head of the International Energy Agency, who is now with the Sasakawa Peace Foundation, dismissed METI's vision of a revitalized nuclear sector, arguing that achieving a 22 percent share for nuclear power is "probably an impossible job."
The challenge goes beyond public and political opposition, he said. Tanaka said nuclear energy faces a difficult future nearly everywhere due to cost overruns and the rising prominence of natural gas and LNG.
If large-scale reactors struggle to be viable in the United States and Europe, it should be no surprise the technology faces challenges in Japan, Tanaka said.
"The only chance is small modular nuclear reactors," he said.
Tanaka said Japanese dithering doesn't only affect the LNG market in Japan. Renewable energy investors are also uncertain over how much to build given the lingering nuclear power question.
Japan's renewable energy drive has slowed since the Fukushima accident, though there are signs of an offshore wind sector ramping up in the next few years.
LNG industry officials agree they are in a waiting game.
Although the market is large today, they say, there's little room for LNG to grow its share of Japan's energy mix as overall power demand flattens due to rising energy efficiency and a gradually shrinking population. The nuclear question leaves another cloud hanging over the market, one that won't be settled until the government either abandons its ambitious nuclear goals or forces plant restarts over opposition protests.
No matter how the debate is settled, the increased flexibility in LNG trading means the market can adjust quickly to meet Japan's needs, said Ajay Singh, special adviser to Japan Petroleum Exploration Co. Ltd.
"LNG can be switched to Japan relatively easily if the nuclear situation doesn't pan out as expected," he said.
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2019/02/20/stories/1060121531
-
Commonwealth Lng Finds European Demand for Gas from Louisiana Terminal -CEO
Feb 20, 2019 | Reuters
By Jessica Resnick-Ault and Ron Bousso
Commonwealth LNG has received commitments from European buyers to take almost half of the liquefied natural gas (LNG) from its planned 8.4-million-tonnes-per-year export terminal in Louisiana, Chief Executive Officer Paul Varello said on Wednesday.
The Commonwealth project is one of more than 10 LNG export terminals under development or construction in the United States along the coast of the Gulf of Mexico to take advantage of soaring demand for the supercooled fuel amid booming gas production.
“We are exchanging documents with counterparties that will represent three to four million tonnes” of capacity, Varello told Reuters in an interview, adding he expects to sign so-called heads of agreements (HoA) shortly.
“We have to work hard to get closer to the full 8 million tonnes in heads of agreements to allow us to feel good about getting 6 million tonnes in final agreements,” he said, because prospective buyers are overcommitting to projects.
“Our bankers say that if we can decent pricing with 6 million tonnes that will give us enough debt coverage to make it work,” Varello said.
The prospective buyers are European end-users with their own importing terminals, he said.
Varello said the company will process natural gas into LNG at the terminal at “well below” $2.50 per million British thermal units for buyers signing 20-year supply contracts.
ADVERTISEMENT
The company expects to make a final investment decision by the third or fourth quarter of next year after getting final environmental approvals and aims to begin shipping LNG in 2024.
Varello, who is in Tokyo pitching LNG to importers in the country while attending an industry conference, said Japanese buyers were reluctant to sign off-take agreements.
The resistance to signing long-term contracts is coming because electric utilities are getting nuclear reactors back online after prolonged shutdowns following the 2011 Fukushima disaster and the rising use of renewables, Varello said.
The Commonwealth project is one of many that could be approved this year and next, as worldwide consumption of LNG is expected to more than double to 550 million tonnes a year by 2030.
U.S. gas production has soared to new records, bolstered by shale production, increasing the need for export capacity to absorb the supply.
Energy companies are expected to make final decisions on projects that could add more than 60 million tonnes per year of LNG capacity this year, a record.
Qatar Petroleum and Exxon Mobil Corp said earlier this month they will proceed with a $10 billion project that will expand a LNG export plant in Texas.
https://www.reuters.com/article/global-lng-commonwealth/commonwealth-lng-finds-european-demand-for-gas-from-louisiana-terminal-ceo-idUSL3N20F1PU
-
Environmental Groups Lose Bid to Halt Mountain Valley Pipeline
Feb 19, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Peter Hayes
The Sierra Club and several other environmental groups failed to get a federal court to put the brakes on a 300-mile natural gas pipeline that will run from West Virginia to Virginia.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s approval of the Mountain Valley Pipeline project under the Natural Gas Act will stand, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit said Feb. 19 in an unpublished opinion.
Mountain Valley’s exercise of eminent domain authority for the project poses no takings clause problems, the court said.
FERC’s issuance of a “certificate of public convenience and necessity,” which is required to commence construction of the pipeline, satisfies the Fifth Amendment’s “public use” requirement, the court said.
And the eminent domain power conferred to Mountain Valley under the Natural Gas Act will require the company to go through the usual condemnation process, which calls for an order of condemnation and a trial determining just compensation prior to the taking of private property, the court said.
When Mountain Valley acquires a right of way, any impacted property owner will also be entitled to just compensation, determined in a hearing that affords due process, the court said.
The court also rejected the groups’ argument that FERC failed to adequately consider climate change by refusing to use the Social Cost of Carbon tool, which the EPA and other agencies use to measure in dollars the long-term damage done by a ton of carbon dioxide emissions in a given year.
FERC provided an estimate of the upper bound of emissions resulting from end-use combustion, and gave several reasons why it believed the Social Cost of Carbon tool isn’t an appropriate measure of project-level climate change impacts, the court said.
That is all that is required under National Environmental Policy Act, the court said.
The Sierra Club has received funding from Bloomberg Philanthropies, the charitable organization founded by Michael Bloomberg. Bloomberg Law is operated by entities controlled by Michael Bloomberg.
Appalachian Voices, Chesapeake Climate Action Network, West Virginia Rivers Coalition, and Wild Virginia were also named plaintiffs.
Judges David S. Tatel, Gregory G. Katsas, and David B. Sentelle issued the ruling.
Attorneys for Sierra Club and Appalachian Mountain Advocates represented the plaintiffs.
The case is Appalachian Voices v. FERC, D.C. Cir., No. 17-01271, unpublished 2/19/19.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/environmental-groups-lose-bid-to-halt-mountain-valley-pipeline
-
Feb 19, 2019 | Chicago Tribune
By Michael Hawthorne
Months of community organizing, pleading and haranguing paid off last week when Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s administration banned Sterigenics from using cancer-causing ethylene oxide gas at its sterilization plant in west suburban Willowbrook.
About 40 miles away, residents of Lake County feel forgotten and left behind.
Two other companies — Vantage Specialty Chemicals in Gurnee and Medline Industries in Waukegan — continue to release the same toxic gas into neighborhoods where nearly 42,000 people live. Yet the Trump administration has brushed aside petitions from members of the Illinois congressional delegation to monitor air quality near the Lake County facilities, even though federal scientists estimate that, like in Willowbrook, surrounding areas face some of the highest long-term cancer risks in the nation from toxic air pollution.
The administration also has done nothing to inform Lake County residents about the hazards beyond creating a web page that hasn’t been updated since November.
Alarming concentrations of ethylene oxide detected near Sterigenics during two months of testing played a key role in Pritzker’s decision to order the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency to shut down the Willowbrook sterilization plant, at least temporarily. The results provided residents and elected officials with powerful evidence challenging the company’s attempts to downplay potential health risks and make its political problems go away.
“In Lake County, at least, the state and federal government has dropped the ball time and time again,” said Tea Tanaka, a Grayslake resident who co-founded a newly formed group called Stop EtO in Lake County, which is attempting to harness the same energy and tenacity the Stop Sterigenics community group in Willowbrook relied on to spur regulators and politicians into action.
Tanaka’s husband, Soh, joined members of the Willowbrook group on a Tuesday bus trip to Springfield, where they met with state legislators who are pushing measures that would outlaw leaks of ethylene oxide from Sterigenics, Vantage, Medline and other facilities in Illinois. Another bill would force a review of state permits that haven’t been updated to reflect scientific research showing the chemical is far more dangerous than previously thought, and lawmakers are mulling a statewide ban on ethylene oxide sterilization.
“We deserve to know if the air we are breathing is safe,” said state Sen. Melinda Bush, a Grayslake Democrat who chairs the Environment and Conservation Committee and is co-sponsoring the bipartisan legislation with Sen. John Curran, R-Downers Grove.
The Chicago Tribune first reported in November that residents living near Medline face long-term cancer risks from toxic air pollution that are similar to U.S. EPA estimates for communities surrounding Sterigenics. In one census tract near the Waukegan facility, the risks are nearly five times higher than the national average.
Vantage could pose even greater risks. Officials blamed a clerical error for their failure to include the facility’s ethylene oxide emissions in the latest National Air Toxics Assessment, an occasional report compiled by the EPA to identify high-risk neighborhoods across the country where more thorough investigation is needed.
Agency scientists calculated local cancer risks based on 5,566 pounds of ethylene oxide emitted by Sterigenics and 3,058 pounds released by Medline during 2014. Vantage told another office at the EPA that it released 6,412 pounds of the toxic gas during the same period.
Federal and state regulators have repeatedly declined to answer why they haven’t responded as urgently as officials did last year in communities near Sterigenics, despite the fact there are more than twice as many people in Lake County breathing pollution that increases the long-term risks of breast cancer, leukemia and lymphomas at extremely low levels.
Kim Biggs, an Illinois EPA spokeswoman, would not say if the Pritzker administration is preparing to crack down on Vantage or Medline, citing the agency’s longtime policy of not commenting on potential legal action. Asked about air quality monitoring, she deferred to federal officials who are collecting samples near Sterigenics.
The U.S. EPA released its own statement, repeating earlier statements from its website while failing to address questions about the lack of air quality monitoring in Lake County.
Since the Tribune’s first story on the Lake County emissions, Vantage and Medline have applied for permits to install additional pollution-control equipment. Vantage — which reported its emissions of ethylene oxide dropped significantly in 2017, the last year for which data are available — has promised to measure concentrations at the edges of its property after the new controls are in place.
Medline, the nation’s largest privately held manufacturer and distributor of medical supplies, has joined chemical industry lobbyists who contend ethylene oxide poses few, if any, health risks to ordinary Americans.
Under pressure from politicians and the public, the company hired Jane Teta, a former Union Carbide toxicologist who co-authored several industry-funded studies rejected by the EPA and independent scientific reviewers. Teta, who has worked as a consultant for the American Chemistry Council, the industry’s chief trade group, is now a scientist at Exponent, a California-based firm with a long history of questioning the health risks of widely used chemicals.
The company also has called for another analysis of the chemical, part of a concerted effort by makers and users of ethylene oxide to overturn a stringent safety limit established by the EPA in 2016 after a decadelong evaluation and two rounds of independent review delayed several times by industry opposition.
“Any disruption of EO sterilization facilities would cause a near-immediate public health crisis,” the company says on its website, using an abbreviation for the chemical. “The enormous disruption in the supply chain would put catastrophic impact on Illinois’ hospital system.”
During a hearing Tuesday in Springfield, John Bomher, a lobbyist for the Illinois Health and Hospital Association, said it is unclear if the shutdown of Sterigenics will have any effect on surgeries and other medical procedures. Hospitals tend to keep small inventories of equipment on hand, Bomher said, but are unaware where the products are sterilized before shipment.
Sterigenics is urging a federal judge to block the Pritzker administration from using authority in state law that allows the Illinois EPA to force the closure of any polluter that poses an “imminent and substantial endangerment” to public health. The company’s legal arguments echo its filings in a separate, bipartisan legal action by lawyers for Illinois Attorney General Kwame Raoul and Robert Berlin, the DuPage County state’s attorney.
The company contends it has done nothing to violate its air pollution permit from the state agency. But critics note it can take years or decades for laws and regulations to address health dangers posed by toxic substances.
Federal officials still haven’t banned asbestos, a well-documented carcinogen that has killed thousands of people who suffered devastating lung diseases. There is no safe level of exposure to brain-damaging lead, though as recently as 1990 federal regulatory agencies wouldn’t take action to protect children unless concentrations in their blood exceeded 30 parts per billion.
Likewise, while the Trump administration has promised to introduce new regulations for sterilization plants using ethylene oxide, it appears unlikely industry groups will back down soon.
“There was so much hope and optimism when this process began six months ago,” Curran, the Republican state senator from Downers Grove, said of the intense debate prompted by the latest federal estimates of cancer risks. “Since then it’s been nothing but missed deadlines ... and repeated failures on the part of the federal EPA. We, as the state of Illinois, have an obligation to protect our residents. That comes first and foremost.”
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-met-ethylene-oxide-cancer-waukegan-gurnee-20190218-story.html
-
Sterigenics Sues Illinois Over Shutdown Order
Feb 19, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Stephen Joyce
Sterigenics U.S. LLC sued the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency for effectively shutting down the company’s facility over toxic air pollution.
In a complaint filed Feb. 18, Sterigenics called it an “extra-legal” maneuver that on Feb. 15 the state effectively halted operations at its facility in Willowbrook, Ill. for allegedly releasing too much ethylene oxide, a potential carcinogen.
The lawsuit comes after a push by residents, state officials, and congressional Democrats to shut down the plant because of what they claim is a public health and environmental danger.
By law, the Illinois EPA can step in if there is an emergency or imminent and substantial danger to public health or the environment.
“Neither of those conditions exists at the Willowbrook facility,” according to the Sterigenics complaint, filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.
The facility emits ethylene oxide, a flammable, colorless gas used to sterilize medical equipment and make products such as antifreeze.
According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, breathing air containing elevated levels of the chemical over many years increases the risk of some types of cancers, including non-Hodgkin lymphoma, and breast cancer.
The company has said its facility complies with all state and federal permitting requirements and emits less than 0.1 percent of the ethylene oxide used during its process of sterilizing medical equipment.
Circumventing Legal Process
The Illinois EPA cannot dispute the Willowbrook facility is complying with its state air pollution permits, and is trying to circumvent both regulatory and judicial processes to shut it down, according to the complaint.
In addition to Illinois EPA’s move, the state’s attorney general sued in October, asking the DuPage County Circuit Court to ban all emissions of ethylene oxide if it concludes no amount of the contaminant in the air is safe.
Data from the U.S. EPA showed a spike in ethylene oxide emissions from the plant several times last year, but Sterigenics has criticized these results as inconsistent and inconclusive.
Illinois EPA spokeswoman Kim Biggs did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the Feb. 18 lawsuit.
Shutdown Subject to Review
Because he is “not confident” the sealed order will be upheld upon judicial review, U.S. Rep. Dan Lipinski (D-Ill.) told Bloomberg Environment he will continue pressing the federal EPA to shutter the facility—something it can do under the Clean Air Act.
Lipinski also said members of Congress could use their EPA oversight authority to force the change. Sens. Tammy Duckworth (D-Ill.) and Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) introduced bills (S. 458) Feb. 12 that would force the EPA to update its emissions limits on ethylene oxide and disclose when it finds elevated health risks from the substance.
Another bill (S. 451) would provide $20 million for the EPA to update its National Air Toxics Assessment at least every two years. These analyses are conducted every three years to help the EPA identify air pollutants and locations of concern due to emissions.
The case is Sterigenics U.S. LLC v. Kim, N.D. Ill., 2/18/19
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/sterigenics-sues-illinois-over-shutdown-order
-
CSB Says Equipment Failure Caused Mississippi Gas Plant Blast
Feb 19, 2019 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Ben LeFebvre
An equipment leak caused the explosion and fire at a natural gas processing plant in Mississippi that kept the facility shuttered for six months, the Chemical Safety Board said in a report released Tuesday.
The CSB attributed the June 2016 accident at the Enterprise Products Pascagoula Gas Plant to "thermal fatigue" of the heat exchanger, a piece of equipment that regulates temperatures of different streams of liquids. The exchanger developed cracks that caused the fluid inside to leak out and ignite, the report stated.
“More than 500 gas processing facilities operate across the country and the use of similar heat exchangers is common,” CSB Interim Executive Kristen Kulinowski said in a press release. “Extending the life cycle of equipment at these facilities requires more robust inspection protocols.”
https://subscriber.politicopro.com/energy/whiteboard
-
Chinese Threat to Gas Pipelines Not Imminent — Sources
Feb 20, 2019 | E&E Energywire
By Peter Behr
U.S. intelligence officials have no direct evidence that China has planted cyber weapons inside any of the nation's natural gas pipelines, according to gas industry representatives briefed Friday about the China threat.
The briefing by officials of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence, Transportation Security Administration and Department of Energy was called to clarify the warning issued Jan. 29 by Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats in his Worldwide Threat Assessment report to Congress, the industry sources said.
After generally describing increased cyber offensives by Russia and China, Coats told members of the Senate Intelligence Committee that China "has the ability to launch cyber attacks that cause localized, temporary disruptive effects on critical infrastructure — such as disruption of a natural gas pipeline for days to weeks — in the United States."
Asked to comment, the Interstate Natural Gas Association of America said that "if the intelligence community has information about specific threats, we would strongly encourage them to share that information with industry."
"We're still trying to get a briefing on that," said Suzanne Lemieux, the American Petroleum Institute's manager for midstream and industry operations. "It's their duty to inform us," Lemieux said a week ago (Energywire, Feb. 14).
"We reached out" to the intelligence agencies, a gas industry representative said, who would not comment on the record.
"Are there specific threats that we have not been made aware of? The answer is no," the source said. "There is no new threat information" not previously known to the industry.
The implication is that Coats' warning was based on intelligence information, not on the detection of Chinese cyber weapons inside pipeline control systems. Coats' staff did not respond to requests for comment.
Other government threat warnings about state-backed cyberthreats have detailed specifics about malware and tactics to guide infrastructure operators on finding and removing the threats (Energywire, March 16, 2018). One industry source said that malware has been found inside the business systems of some gas sector operators, but no known cases of penetration of pipeline control systems have been found.
Coats' testimony outlined a growing cyber conflict with Russia, China, Iran and North Korea.
"China remains the most active strategic competitor responsible for cyber espionage against the U.S. Government, corporations, and allies. It is improving its cyber attack capabilities and altering information online, shaping Chinese views and potentially the views of U.S. citizens," he said.
"Russia has the ability to execute cyber attacks in the United States that generate localized, temporary disruptive effects on critical infrastructure — such as disrupting an electrical distribution network for at least a few hours — similar to those demonstrated in Ukraine in 2015 and 2016. Moscow is mapping our critical infrastructure with the long-term goal of being able to cause substantial damage," Coats said.
He added that "Iran continues to present a cyber espionage and attack threat. Iran uses increasingly sophisticated cyber techniques to conduct espionage; it is also attempting to deploy cyber attack capabilities that would enable attacks against critical infrastructure in the United States and allied countries. ... North Korea poses a significant cyber threat to financial institutions, remains a cyber espionage threat, and retains the ability to conduct disruptive cyber attacks."
The increase in cyberthreats to critical U.S. infrastructure led to a new policy, outlined last fall, authorizing the U.S. Cyber Command to take offensive cyber action against adversaries to deter attacks by state-backed cyber units.
That includes a pledge of increased sharing of threat information from Cyber Command, its commander, Gen. Paul Nakasone, told senators last week.
"We [are] providing enabling support to the Department of Energy and the Department of Homeland Security, if requested. Right now we ... are sharing information very clearly about what we know about foreign adversaries," Nakasone said.
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2019/02/20/stories/1060121533
-
Ore. Petroleum Terminal Expands to Allow More Trains
Feb 20, 2019 | AP (In E&E Energywire)
By Tony Schick
A Portland petroleum terminal is significantly expanding its capacity to unload rail cars, a move that sets the stage to more than double the number of oil trains along the Columbia and Willamette rivers into Oregon's biggest city, Oregon Public Broadcasting has learned.
Zenith Energy, sandwiched between the river and Forest Park in the city's northwest industrial district, began receiving train shipments of crude from Canada's oil sands last year, records show, which it stored in tanks and later pumped onto oceangoing vessels.
Zenith's outpost in Portland now has visible construction underway on a project to build three new rail platforms that will nearly quadruple the site's previous capacity for offloading oil from tank cars, according to building plans filed with the city of Portland in 2014, which the city's Bureau of Development Services confirmed last week.
When operational, a terminal with such a capacity could handle multiple oil trains per week — a sizable increase over Zenith's 2018 operations. According to Oregon Department of Environmental Quality estimates, the site handled fewer than 30 full oil trains throughout last year.
The site's expansion of crude-by-rail infrastructure comes despite much public resistance in the Northwest for new oil projects. That includes a vote by Portland's City Council in 2016 to oppose any new fossil fuel infrastructure.
Public records and interviews with state officials indicate the trains would carry a kind of heavy oil that presents a new risk for Northwest communities and rivers, and one the state's emergency spill responders say they are ill-equipped to contain if it spills.
"It greatly complicates the spill. It's going to take a lot more money and time and cause a lot more harm to the environment, probably," said Scott Smith, who regulates the Zenith terminal's oil spill preparedness as part of the Oregon DEQ emergency response program.
He said the increased oil-by-rail traffic creates a risk in Portland of an environmental disaster like the one in Michigan in 2010, when heavy Canadian oil spilled from a pipeline into the Kalamazoo River. It took more than five years and $1 billion to clean up.
Zenith declined to comment on how the project would affect its ability to unload more crude oil, saying only that the project would allow it to fit additional rail cars on site and minimize the need to shuffle cars around.
"The multi-million-dollar project will provide an even safer and more efficient operation," Megan Mastal, a public relations representative for Zenith Energy, said in an emailed statement.
The company also declined to say what products it would handle. Mastal disputed that Zenith would be handling what's known as bitumen, which is a type of petroleum extracted from Canada's oil sands. It is thick like peanut butter and often diluted with other petroleum products before it is transported.
"We are not handling bitumen crude through our terminal," Mastal said.
Records show the facility did handle diluted bitumen in 2018, and the Oregon DEQ said it anticipates the facility will be handling heavy crude from Canada's oil sands.
Five years ago, the site was an asphalt plant in limited operation when a company called Arc Logistics Partners LP, later acquired by Zenith Energy, purchased it and shifted operations to crude.
The Zenith site spans 39 acres with a storage capacity of nearly 1.5 million barrels and access to a nearby dock. Trains can reach it crossing the Willamette over the BNSF Railway bridge south of St. Johns or on Union Pacific tracks across the Steel Bridge.
Its main constraint has been rail capacity. When construction began, the terminal had space to unload 12 cars at a time, records show.
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2019/02/20/stories/1060121529
-
White House Readies Panel to Assess If Climate Change Poses a National Security Threat
Feb 20, 2019 | Washington Post
By Juliet Eilperin and Missy Ryan
The White House is working to assemble a panel to assess whether climate change poses a national security threat, according to documents obtained by The Washington Post, a conclusion that federal intelligence agencies have affirmed several times since President Trump took office.
The proposed Presidential Committee on Climate Security, which would be established by executive order, is being spearheaded by William Happer, a National Security Council senior director. Happer, an emeritus professor of physics at Princeton University, has said that carbon emissions linked to climate change should be viewed as an asset rather than a pollutant.
The initiative represents the Trump administration’s most recent attempt to question the findings of federal scientists and experts on climate change and comes less than three weeks after Director of National Intelligence Daniel Coats delivered a worldwide threat assessment that identified it as a significant security risk.
In late November, Trump dismissed a government report finding that global warming is intensifying and poses a major threat the U.S. economy, saying, “I don’t see it.” Last month, his nominee to head the Environmental Protection Agency, acting administrator Andrew Wheeler, testified that he did not see climate change as one of the world’s pressing challenges.
According to the NSC discussion paper, the order would create a federal advisory committee “to advise the President on scientific understanding of today’s climate, how the climate might change in the future under natural and human influences, and how a changing climate could affect the security of the United States.”
Francesco Femia, chief executive of the Council on Strategic Risks and co-founder of the Center for Climate and Security, said in an interview that the plan appeared to be an effort to undermine the existing consensus within the national intelligence community that climate change needs to be addressed to avert serious consequences in the future.
“This is the equivalent of setting up a committee on nuclear weapons proliferation and having someone lead it who doesn’t think nuclear weapons exist,” he said. “It’s honestly a blunt force political tool designed to shut the national security community up on climate change.”
It is unclear how much support Happer’s initiative has inside the administration: Deputies from more than a dozen agencies have been invited to attend a meeting on the topic on Friday in the White House Situation Room.
Several agencies declined to comment on the matter this week, including the NSC, the Pentagon, White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, and Office of the Director of National Intelligence.
Happer, who worked at the Energy Department under George H.W. Bush and joined the White House in September to work on “emerging technologies,” is not formally trained as a climate scientist. He developed a national reputation for his work on laser technology used in missile defense and on the interactions between light and atoms.
He has sat on the boards of two advocacy groups that have questioned whether global warming poses a serious risk, the CO2 Coalition and the George C. Marshall Institute. Last March, when asked in connection with court proceedings whether he had received money from the fossil fuel industry, Happer said he had been given somewhere between $10,000 and $15,000 from Peabody Coal to testify before a Minnesota Public Utilities Commission hearing.
During a December 2016 energy and climate policy summit sponsored by the conservative Heritage Foundation, Happer explained that the CO2 Coalition aimed to counter the idea that carbon dioxide is a pollutant because it is the primary driver of recent climate change.
“I like to call this the CO2 anti-defamation league,” he said, gesturing to a slide, “because there is the CO2 molecule, and it has undergone decade after decade of abuse, for no reason.
“We’re doing our best to try and counter this myth that CO2 is a dangerous pollutant,” he said. “It’s not a pollutant at all. . . . We should be telling the scientific truth, that more CO2 is actually a benefit to the earth.”
Most scientists have taken a different view, concluding that the world must curb its carbon output in the next few decades or risk dire consequences. Global temperatures have risen roughly 1 degree Celsius, or 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit, compared to preindustrial levels. A U.N. report issued in October said the world has to cut its emissions by more than 1 billion tons each year over the next decade to keep the rise from exceeding 1.5 degrees Celsius.
The Trump administration, however, has accelerated domestic fossil fuel production and sought to reverse most of the curbs on greenhouse gas emissions adopted under President Barack Obama. Last year the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration published an analysis predicting that global temperature rise could reach 4 degrees Celsius, or 7 degrees Fahrenheit, under the government’s current trajectory.
While several Trump appointees have argued that climate change does not pose a significant risk to the nation’s defense capabilities, the Pentagon and intelligence agencies have reached the opposite conclusion.
The assessment Coats submitted on Jan. 29 to the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, for example, states, “Global environmental and ecological degradation, as well as climate change, are likely to fuel competition for resources, economic distress, and social discontent through 2019 and beyond.
The Defense Department said in a report submitted to Congress in mid-January that several dozen military installations around the nation are experiencing climate impacts. The assessment, which called climate change “a national security issue,” said rising seas, wildfires and other such disasters are likely to create more severe problems for the military in the coming years.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/white-house-readies-panel-to-assess-if-climate-change-poses-a-national-security-threat/2019/02/19/ccc8b29e-3396-11e9-af5b-b51b7ff322e9_story.html?utm_term=.00b145237092
-
EPA Extends Deadline for Deciding on SO2 NAAQS Revision
Feb 19, 2019 | Inside EPA
EPA is delaying until Feb. 25 its already-missed Jan. 28 deadline for a final decision on whether to revise or retain its sulfur dioxide (SO2) national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS), resuming work on the rule that was delayed due to the lengthy government shutdown.
EPA must review its six NAAQS every five years under the Clean Air Act, but routinely misses these deadlines. A review of the existing SO2 NAAQS, set in 2010, was therefore due in 2015. Environmentalists sued to force a review, leading to a consent decree setting deadlines for the rulemaking process.
Under the decree, EPA originally had until Jan. 28 to issue a final rule either revising the standard or leaving it unchanged. EPA proposed May 25 to leave the existing primary, or health-based NAAQS unchanged at 75 parts per billion (ppb) averaged over one hour, the level set in 2010 by the Obama administration. EPA says it found no evidence of additional harm to public health that would warrant a tougher standard.
But due to the lapse in EPA funding, the agency and environmentalists jointly invoked a condition in the consent decree that automatically extends issuance of the final rule for the same duration as an EPA shutdown.
EPA and environmentalists advise the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California of the delay in a Feb. 15 filing in Center for Biological Diversity, et al. v. Andrew Wheeler, setting Feb. 25 as the revised deadline for a final rule.
Environmentalists want EPA to tighten the limit to as low as 50 ppb in order to better protect public health, while a major oil industry group is pushing for a weaker standard of 150 ppb, and other industry groups are advocating for leaving the current 75 ppb limit in place.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/epa-extends-deadline-deciding-so2-naaqs-revision
-
Amazon Aims to Cut Shipment Carbon Footprint in Half by 2030
Feb 19, 2019 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Miranda Green
Major online retailer Amazon is making a push to halve the carbon footprint of its shipments by 2030.
The company, which relies largely on shipping packages across the globe, said Monday it ultimately aims to make all its shipments carbon neutral.
The new push, titled “Shipment Zero,” ultimately aims to make all of the retailer's shipments have a carbon footprint of zero. The company says it plans to meet its 2030 goal by utilizing electric vans, using renewable energy sources such as solar power and pushing more retailers to reuse packaging. It also hopes the rise of aircraft biofuels will aid in its plan.
“It won’t be easy to achieve this goal, but it’s worth being focused and stubborn on this vision and we’re committed to seeing it through,” Amazon said in a statement.
The company plans to start with transparency by publishing its overall carbon footprint later in the year. The data release will follow a two-year project by the company to better understand its own source of carbon use.
“We believe that lower costs include lowering the costs to the environment we all live and work in every day. We’ll keep you posted as we work towards achieving Shipment Zero,” Amazon said.
Amazon is joining a number of national retailers like McDonalds, Coca-Cola and Starbucks that are aiming to cut down on their impact to the globe through recycling, ditching plastics, using renewable energy and cutting back on emissions.
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/430474-amazon-aims-to-halve-carbon-footprint-by-2030
-
Feb 20, 2019 | E&E Climatewire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
A federal judge in Pennsylvania threw out a lawsuit from environmentalists and two children concerned about the effect of regulatory rollbacks on climate change.
Judge Paul Diamond of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania yesterday dismissed the complaint from the Clean Air Council and two children from the Philadelphia area, saying he had "neither the authority nor the inclination" to force the federal government's hand on the issue.
The plaintiffs had asked the court to block the Trump administration from weakening environmental rules designed to curb climate change or from adopting policies that could worsen the problem.
The broad lawsuit targeted everything from high-profile regulatory rollbacks to behind-the-scenes agency decisions to remove climate information from websites. The litigants also sought to depose former Cabinet members, including former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, in connection with the case (Climatewire, Jan. 9).
Diamond found the litigants lacked legal standing to bring the case because they hadn't demonstrated that the federal government actually caused them direct harm or that a court could do anything to correct alleged injuries.
He also said he lacked jurisdiction to hear their claims because it could violate the Constitution's separation of powers by putting the court in charge of executive branch policy. And he rejected their claims that they had a fundamental right to a "life-sustaining climate system."
Many of the same issues have arisen in the higher-profile "kids' climate case" in Oregon, where 21 young plaintiffs have accused the government of enabling and sometimes fueling climate change. Diamond, a George W. Bush appointee, was dismissive of the Oregon case, Juliana v. United States, which the government is challenging at the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
"As of this writing, a single court has recognized a substantive due process right analogous to what Plaintiffs urge here," Diamond wrote. "Yet, the Juliana Court certainly contravened or ignored longstanding authority."
He criticized the plaintiffs in the Clean Air Council case for attempting to assert a right with no clear limits.
"Given the actions they ask me to address — including altering agency web pages, approving hiring decisions, and ratifying the President's cabinet appointments — it appears that the scope of the 'fundamental' right Plaintiffs invoke has no clear limit," he wrote yesterday. "This, as much as anything, underscores that Plaintiffs do not seek the Court's assistance in adjudicating a legal dispute. Rather, Plaintiffs disagreement with Defendants is a policy debate best left to the political process."
The Clean Air Council did not respond to a request for comment last night. A challenge to the ruling, if pursued, would go to the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2019/02/20/stories/1060121553
Industry and Association News
TSCA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested