Preview Newsletter
PM ACC Clips Report - February 26, 2018
-
(ACC Mentioned) World Economists Predict Another Great Recession by 2021
Feb 26, 2019 | Consumer Affairs
By Gary Guthrie
The U.S. has been out of the recession woods for more than a decade, but economists are predicting that the country will be back there again soon. In a just-published study by the National Association for Business Economics, 77... -
(ACC Mentioned) Most Business Economists Now Predict a Full-Blown Recession by 2021
Feb 26, 2019 | Housing Wire
By Jacob Gaffney
The sky will fall, economically speaking, on that most economists agree. Where they do differ, is when exactly they expect America’s economy to suffer two straight quarters of negative economic activity and what factors may lead up... -
Democrats Drill EPA Official over Decrease in Polluter Settlements under Trump
Feb 26, 2019 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Miranda Green
House lawmakers at a Tuesday hearing sharply questioned a dramatic drop in environmental law enforcement under the Trump administration, hammering the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) head of regulations over the trend. -
House Democrats Examining EPA Enforcement Dropoff
Feb 26, 2019 | Houston Chronicle
By James Osborne
House Democrats are scrutinizing a dramatic drop off in enforcement action at the EPA under the Trump administration, as it seeks to reduce regulations and build up American industry. Last year the agency collected less... -
RFA, Transcaer to Host Ethanol Safety Seminars in West Virginia
Feb 26, 2019 | Ethanol Producer Magazine
The Renewable Fuels Association, in partnership with Transcaer, will host ethanol safety seminars in West Virginia next month. All of the seminars are free to attend, but registration is limited. Lunch will be provided. Certificates of... -
(ACC Mentioned) What Are Parabens?
Feb 26, 2019 | Live Science
By Rachel Ross
Parabens are synthetic chemicals that are used as preservatives in a variety of products, including cosmetics, pharmaceuticals and food. As preservatives, parabens give products a longer shelf-life and prevent harmful bacteria... -
Mich. Finds PFAs in Drinking Water Systems
Feb 26, 2019 | AP (In E&E - Greenwire)
By John Flesher
More than 60 drinking water systems in Michigan sampled last year had measurable levels of a class of long-lasting and highly toxic chemicals linked to cancer and a variety of other illnesses, state officials said yesterday. The... -
Michigan Releases Results of Water Tests for PFAs Chemicals
Feb 26, 2019 | AP (In WNMU-FM)
Officials say samples taken at 64 water systems around Michigan last year had measurable levels of a class of long-lasting toxic chemicals. The Department of Environmental Quality released findings Monday from a 2018 initiative to... -
US FDA Sunscreen Regulations Update Questions Ingredient Safety
Feb 26, 2019 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
As part of a major proposed update to its sunscreen product regulations, the US Food and Drug Administration is seeking additional data on the majority of currently marketed active ingredients before allowing their continued use. -
Plastic Is Toxic at Every Stage of Its Life Cycle
Feb 26, 2019 | Care2
By Katherine Martinko
At no point does plastic ever stop harming us. In case you had any doubts about how bad plastic really is, a new study out of the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) has just revealed that plastic is toxic at every stage of its... -
Water Sampling Shows Low Levels Of Petroleum, Firefighting Foam In And Around Superior Refinery
Feb 26, 2019 | Wisconsin Public Radio
By Danielle Kaeding
Levels of petroleum and firefighting foam compounds have declined in a creek downstream from the Husky Energy oil refinery in Superior. The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources continues to monitor water quality with the... -
EFSA Opens Consultation on Draft Assessment of FCM Phthalates
Feb 26, 2019 | Chemical Watch
Efsa has launched a public consultation on its draft update of the agency's 2005 risk assessments of five phthalates, which are authorised for use in plastic food contact materials. For the updated draft opinion, the authority's Panel on... -
America’s Spat with China Is Harming Its Quest for “Energy Dominance”
Feb 26, 2019 | The Economist
Trade talks between America and China finally yielded some results. Mr Trump had been scheduled to raise tariffs on Chinese goods on March 2nd, but on Sunday he announced that he would be delaying the increase because talks... -
Oil Industry Counters EPA Renewable Fuel Reform Plan
Feb 26, 2019 | E&E - Greenwire
By Marc Heller
Changes EPA is considering for renewable fuel credits could only worsen flaws in the nation's biofuel mandate, a lobbying group for the petroleum industry said today. The American Petroleum Institute said a study it commissioned... -
Trump’s EPA May Weaken Restrictions on Disposal of Oilfield Wastewater — Here’s What You Need to Know
Feb 26, 2019 | Environmental Defense Fund
By Nichole Saunders
Many Americans are aware that we are experiencing a major energy boom. But what many folks may not realize is that with this increase in oil and gas, also comes an increase in waste – specifically wastewater. In fact, for every barrel of... -
Petrochemicals to Drive Global Oil Demand Growth, despite Anti-Plastics Push: IEA
Feb 26, 2019 | S&P Global Platts
By Maria Tsay
Growing demand for plastics in developing countries means the petrochemicals sector will still be among the key drivers of oil demand in the next few years despite a global anti-plastic and circular economy push, International Energy... -
Dominion to Take Atlantic Coast Pipeline Case to Supreme Court
Feb 26, 2019 | Politico Pro - Energy Whiteboard
By Ben Lefebvre
Dominion Energy expects to appeal to the Supreme Court a lower court decision halting construction of its Atlantic Coast pipeline, the company said today. Dominion’s announcement comes after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the... -
Joint Venture to Add Crude Oil, Natural Gas & Saltwater Pipelines in Permian Basin
Feb 26, 2019 | Houston Chronicle
By Sergio Chapa
A new joint venture between two pipeline companies will allow their customers to move more crude oil, natural gas and produced water on the New Mexico side of the Permian Basin. Five Point Energy of Houston and Matador... -
The Energy Burden: How Bad is it and How to Make it Less Bad.
Feb 26, 2019 | Union of Concerned Scientists
By Joseph Daniel
Everybody wants affordable energy. Energy consumers want to be able to pay their bills and energy providers also want customers to be able to pay their energy bills. What we can’t seem to agree on is how to best measure energy... -
Climate Panel Will Tap Former House Aides to Top Staff Positions
Feb 26, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Dean Scott
A one-time senior aide to the previous House select climate committee, Ana Unruh Cohen, will be named as staff director of the new select climate committee, congressional aides told Bloomberg Environment Feb. 26. -
Castor Announces Top Staff Picks for Climate Select Panel
Feb 26, 2019 | Politico Pro - Energy Whiteboard
By Anthony Adragna
House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis Chairwoman Kathy Castor (D-Fla.) today announced the hires of two experienced former congressional aides who previously helped craft cap and trade legislation as staff director and... -
Schumer: Dems Will Try to Defund Trump Panel Reassessing Climate Change
Feb 26, 2019 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Jordain Carney
Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) said on Tuesday that if the Trump administration moves forward with a panel reportedly intended to counter scientific consensus on climate change, Democrats will try to defund the group. -
Kasich to Push Republicans for Policies to Address Climate Change
Feb 26, 2019 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Avery Anapol
Former Ohio Gov. John Kasich (R) is reportedly planning to urge Republicans to stop denying climate change and take action on the environment. The former Republican presidential candidate will call on conservatives to address global... -
Governor Disbands State Climate Change Strategy Team
Feb 26, 2019 | Anchorage Daily News (In E&E - Greenwire)
By James Brooks
Alaska Gov. Mike Dunleavy (R) issued an order last week that ends the state's climate change strategy commission. The Climate Action for Alaska Leadership Team had come up with a draft policy for dealing with climate change, but... -
RGGI States Applaud Virginia's Proposed Utility GHG Cap
Feb 26, 2019 | Inside EPA
The nine Northeast and Mid-Atlantic states that participate in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) power sector cap-and-trade program are applauding Virginia's revised emissions cap for its power plants as offering... -
Public Opinion Shifts Some GOP Views on Climate Change
Feb 26, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tiffany Stecker and Abby Smith
Some congressional Republicans are singing a different tune on climate change. A decade ago, most GOP lawmakers responded to efforts to cap greenhouse gas emissions with skepticism. Carbon dioxide was innocuous, even helpful... -
Why Not an 'Organic' Green New Deal?
Feb 26, 2019 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Grady Means
The Green New Deal will fail. At the same time, Sen Cory Booker (D-N.J.) has advocated a vegan diet for Americans and, though widely lampooned, that represents a far more practical way to address the climate crisis.
Industry and Association News
TSCA News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation and Infrastructure News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) World Economists Predict Another Great Recession by 2021
Feb 26, 2019 | Consumer Affairs
By Gary Guthrie
The U.S. has been out of the recession woods for more than a decade, but economists are predicting that the country will be back there again soon.
In a just-published study by the National Association for Business Economics, 77 percent of the panelists surveyed expect another financial crisis no later than 2021.
“While only 10% of panelists expect a recession in 2019, 42% say a recession will happen in 2020, and 25% expect one in 2021,” said NABE President Kevin Swift, CBE, chief economist at the American Chemistry Council.
“A majority of panelists also indicate they would be worried about a budget deficit in the U.S. that equaled up to 4% of gross domestic product (GPD).* This is an outcome which will likely occur in 2019 given the deficit for fiscal year 2018 was 3.85%, and respondents expect spending policies to increase the deficit compared with the Congressional Budget Office’s current 10-year baseline estimate.” *The current GDP is 3.4 percent, according to The Balance.
Living in the now
For the moment, the U.S. is still showing signs of economic expansion. If the expansion makes it past May, it would qualify as the nation’s longest ever. Consumer spending -- the largest component of the GDP, contributing 70 percent to the economy -- is in a good place, and cash registers rang louder this past holiday season than they have in six years.
However, there are signs of an economic slowdown peeking out from behind the curtain. Those signs run the gamut -- from gas prices to the U.S.’ trade war with China and also to interest rates.
Unemployment is also at its lowest point in a long time, and while that sounds like a good thing, many college grads are out of work and other Americans are juggling multiple jobs to keep their personal lives afloat.
A cloudy crystal ball
Helen Thompson, professor of political economy at the University of Cambridge, proffers that the curtain needs to be pulled back further, especially on metrics that seem positive like those low unemployment rates.
“The official US unemployment rate stands at 3.7 percent, the lowest since 1969. But this masks a notably low participation rate (62.9 percent), as significant numbers of people have withdrawn from the labour market. Ever-fewer jobs sustain middle-class lifestyles, especially in cities where housing costs have risen over the past decade,” Thompson wrote in the New Statesman.
“A recession always comes in the end, but the matter of foretelling when is a hazardous exercise at best. Indeed, recessions can remain out of sight to policymakers even when they have begun,” Thompson said.
Those policymakers behind the country’s financial wheel seem to be doing what they can to keep the economy from stalling. However, they also have their push-comes-to-shove days with the White House.
President Trump has not let up in his criticism of the Federal Reserve for its policy of raising the federal funds rate -- famously calling the Fed's actions "crazy," and claiming that the higher interest rates will slow the economy. That, of course, is the Fed's objective -- at least, preventing the economy from growing so fast that it unleashes inflation. The Fed has a powerful team championing its cause.
“Business economists continue to approve of current monetary policy,” Swift said in a summary. “Nearly three-quarters of panelists believe that the Federal Reserve’s policy is ‘about right.'"
Outside America, fears of an even greater global slowdown are growing. The Washington Post reported on Monday that a survey of nearly 800 top business leaders from around the world listed global recession as their number one concern for 2019. Last month, the International Monetary Fund ratcheted down its global growth predictions through 2020, saying "the balance of risks remains skewed to the downside” and momentum is “past its peak.”
https://www.consumeraffairs.com/news/world-economists-predict-another-great-recession-by-2021-022619.html
-
(ACC Mentioned) Most Business Economists Now Predict a Full-Blown Recession by 2021
Feb 26, 2019 | Housing Wire
By Jacob Gaffney
The sky will fall, economically speaking, on that most economists agree.
Where they do differ, is when exactly they expect America’s economy to suffer two straight quarters of negative economic activity and what factors may lead up to a future recession.
In the latest survey from the National Association for Business Economics, 281 members reported their economic predictions.
“Three-fourths of the NABE Policy Survey panelists expect an economic recession by the end of 2021,” said NABE President Kevin Swift, CBE, chief economist at the American Chemistry Council. “While only 10% of panelists expect a recession in 2019, 42% say a recession will happen in 2020, and 25% expect one in 2021.”
The results of the survey cloud up the crystal ball even further, as most experts disagree on recession calls. First American Chief Economist Mark Fleming recently predicted a recession in this short video interview — but that’s not what Goldman Sachs is predicting. Furthermore, there’s a 25% chance of a recession in the next 12 months, according to a new Reuters poll of economists.
The NABE survey adds that business economists still generally approve of current monetary policy. Moreover, they say that the current deregulatory environment and tax policies from the Trump administration are providing an economic boost, but expect that influence to wane going into the second half of the president’s first term. The economists are in opposition to the Federal Open Market Committee’s stand on interest rate hikes.
“There is a schism between what the NABE panel and the markets think about the Fed’s rate path and the shrinking of its balance sheet,” said Survey Chair Megan Greene, global chief economist at Manulife Asset Management. “The markets are pricing in no more interest-rate hikes in 2019, whereas a majority of the NABE panel expects one or two rate hikes this year. Survey results also reveal that, while investors have frequently blamed higher borrowing costs on the Fed’s quantitative tightening, the panel is inconclusive regarding the impact of shrinking the Fed’s balance sheet on short- and long-term rates."
65% of respondents expect the upper end of the federal funds target range at year-end 2019 will be 2.75% (39% of respondents) or 3% (26% of respondents), compared to the current level of 2.5%.
However, panelists are in far less agreement about the outlook for rate hikes in 2020.
Expectations for the upper end of the federal funds target rate range from the current 2.5% (17% of respondents) to 2.75% (11%), 3% (23%), and 3.25% (17%). Another 15% of respondents expect the target rate will be below the current rate at the end of 2020.
https://www.housingwire.com/articles/48272-most-business-economists-now-predict-a-full-blown-recession-by-2021
-
Democrats Drill EPA Official over Decrease in Polluter Settlements under Trump
Feb 26, 2019 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Miranda Green
House lawmakers at a Tuesday hearing sharply questioned a dramatic drop in environmental law enforcement under the Trump administration, hammering the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) head of regulations over the trend.
“What I see when I look at this report is an agency that is simply sitting on its hands, an agency that is giving polluters a free pass, and it’s putting our communities at risk,” said Rep. Diana DeGette (D-Colo.) at the House Energy and Commerce subcommittee on Oversight and Investigation’s hearing on EPA enforcement.
EPA’s head of compliance Susan Bodine defended the agency’s historically low enforcement numbers under Trump, focusing her comments on highlighting polluter compliance over polluter legal charges.
“This narrative which appeared in the press since the beginning of the administration, discredits the tremendous work of the compliance and assurance staff,” Bodine told lawmakers. “Enforcement is critical tool but it’s not an end to itself.”
Since Trump took office, the EPA has witnessed dramatic policy changes, ranging from its use of science advisory boards to rollbacks of a number of Obama-era environmental regulations.
But the enforcement numbers released annually by the agency, which show how many cases were referred to the Department of Justice for prosecution against polluters, how much money was settled with polluters, and how inspections were made at facilities, have shown some of the most clear reductions under the current administration.
EPA’s most recent annual report released in early February found that in 2018, the penalties handed down to corporate polluters by the Trump administration’s EPA were the lowest in over a decade. By two key measures, the agency assessed lower penalties for breaking pollution laws on an inflation-adjusted basis than any year in at least 15 years, according to the official figures.
The dipped fines include a significant drop in injunctive relief — the monetary commitments polluters pledge to spend in order to remediate their pollution and keep it from recurring — and the civil penalties the EPA charged to companies. Civil penalties in 2018 were the lowest amount on record since the EPA’s enforcement office was established in its current form in 1994.
Last year’s numbers were also significantly down from the previous year’s alarming number under Trump. Injunctive relief in 2018 was an 80 percent decrease from the EPA’s 2017 numbers of $20 billion. Civil penalties in 2018 dropped nearly 96 percent from the agency’s 2017 numbers of $1.6 billion.
The Hill reported in January that both Interior’s Office of the Inspector General and the Government Accountability Office are investigating2017’s decreased enforcement.
Bodine, who was confirmed as the Assistant Administrator to the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA) since December 2017, said the administration has chosen to emphasize promoting polluters to meet EPA standards rather than focus on prosecuting them if they breach the law. She said the shift didn’t mean employees in the office weren’t focused on enforcing EPA laws.
“Compliance with those laws is what allows our country to make further environmental progress and maintain the great progress we have already achieved.” she said.
“Under the Trump Administration, EPA’s enforcement program is focused on achieving compliance with environmental laws using all tools available to achieve compliance. Our goal is to eliminate inefficient duplication with state programs, and to direct federal resources to help achieve the Agency’s Strategic Plan Goals.”
But Democratic lawmakers challenged Bodine on how EPA could prove it was doing its job to keep polluters in line if the numbers told another story.
“What is your explanation that EPA is at lowest level of civil case initiations since 1986?” asked Rep. Kathy Castor (D-Fla.), head of the Houses’ new Select Committee on Climate Crisis.
“How can you claim EPA is going after polluters?”
Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) likened the lowered enforcement to the Trump administration's overall heel-dragging on enforcing current EPA laws.
“We talk a lot in this place about the Constitution and the separation of powers. Congress enacts laws and provides funding. The executive is supposed to enforce the law. I just wish the Trump administration would follow the constitution,” Pallone said.
“Do your job. Enforce the law. That is what the executive branch is supposed to do.”
Bodine admitted that it was “very hard” to measure compliance progress.
“We don’t have a good measure of compliance,” she said, though she said the agency was doing a “better job” at targeting non-compliance.
She pushed back on looking at civil penalty numbers to measure enforcement, saying they in themselves were not a good measure of compliance because of a number of landmark settlements that occur every so often that throw averages way off.
“That’s a narrow slice of the work that we do,” Bodine said. “I would not say that the number of cases is not reflective of that.”
In her testimony Bodine did highlight a number of settlements EPA entered into under Trump, including December’s $500 settlement with Fiat Chrysler over emissions cheating. The administration has hailed Thursday's announcement as proof that the federal government will go after bad actors who aim to get a leg-up in the market by cheating on emissions standards.
However, critics have pointed to the settlement, which was referred to DOJ under the Obama administration, and others one as outliers. Additionally, they say it remains concerning that the EPA continues to favor self-auditing policies, state focused enforcement, and corporate compliance over legal challenges to companies and the fossil fuel industries that break EPA regulations.
“Most regulated sources make good faith attempts to comply with the rules, and we would be lost without those efforts. But voluntary compliance will never be enough to prevent the serious violations that result from backsliding, carelessness, or the temptation to cut corners to save money,” said Eric Schaeffer, executive director of Environmental Integrity Project (EIP), in his testimony before the committee Tuesday.
“Without stronger enforcement programs at both the federal and state level, we leave law abiding companies at the mercy of unscrupulous competitors and too many communities exposed to pollution that is illegal, noxious, and in some cases downright dangerous.”
EIP released its own report timed with the hearing Tuesday that found that EPA completed less than 60 percent of its annual average facility inspections since 2001.
A handful of Republican lawmakers on the committee however did try to point out that the EPA enforcement numbers under Trump were only a trend of two years, telling members to not jump to conclusions.
“Considering the ebb and flows of enforcement fines and penalties within administration...I hope we don’t get ahead of ourselves that one year’s slightly lower enforcement numbers means the the EPA isn’t doing its job,” said Rep. Brett Guthrie (R-Ky.), subcommittee ranking member.
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/431611-democrats-drill-epa-enforcement-head-over-decrease-in-polluter
-
House Democrats Examining EPA Enforcement Dropoff
Feb 26, 2019 | Houston Chronicle
By James Osborne
House Democrats are scrutinizing a dramatic drop off in enforcement action at the EPA under the Trump administration, as it seeks to reduce regulations and build up American industry.
Last year the agency collected less than $4 billion through enforcement actions, two thirds of what it collected in 2009 - the next lowest year in collections over the past decade - according to a memo from House Energy and Commerce Chairman Frank Pallone, D-N.J.
"Although there is no single indicator for overall enforcement levels, according to EPA data, enforcement and compliance results have recently declined across a broad variety of key measures," Pallone wrote.
The Environmental Protection Agency's top enforcement official is scheduled to appear before the House Energy committee Tuesday morning. Among the non-actions expected to be examined is a close to 500,000 gallon gasoline spill at Magellan Midstream Partners' terminal on the Houston Ship Channel during Hurricane Harvey.
Under former EPA administrator Scott Pruitt and Acting Administrator Andrew Wheeler, officials have adopted a more cooperative approach to correcting the polluting activity of industrial and mining activity.
In a press release last year, the agency described how the agency had in the past encroached into the jurisdiction of states and tribes and was now decreasing the number of federal inspections.
"Looking forward, EPA is developing new measures to help focus the enforcement program on returning facilities to compliance by setting goals," the press release read.
The spill on the Houston Ship Channel was one of 10 cases highlighted in a report Tuesday by the Environmental Integrity Project, which is headed by Eric Schaeffer, who ran the EPA's civil enforcement arm in the Clinton and George W. Bush administrations.
"Although it is expected that storms will produce some uncontrolled pollution, the Houston area petrochemical industry had been warned for years before Harvey that its tanks and other facilities – built in low-lying and flood-prone areas – were poorly designed and ill prepared for the rain storms and flooding happening with increased intensity due to climate change," the report read. "By imposing penalties on incidents like Magellan's during Hurricane Harvey, EPA would send a message that these companies need to invest in more robust systems that can handle future storms."
https://www.chron.com/business/energy/article/House-Democrats-examining-EPA-enforcement-dropoff-13643569.php
-
RFA, Transcaer to Host Ethanol Safety Seminars in West Virginia
Feb 26, 2019 | Ethanol Producer Magazine
The Renewable Fuels Association, in partnership with Transcaer, will host ethanol safety seminars in West Virginia next month.
All of the seminars are free to attend, but registration is limited. Lunch will be provided. Certificates of attendance will be awarded to attendees at the completion of the course. The ethanol safety seminars are funded through a Federal Railroad Administration/ Transcaer grant.
The seminars are designed for individuals who respond to ethanol-related emergencies, as well as those who work at fixed-facilities and transport fuel. They focus on numerous important areas of ethanol safety, including an introduction to ethanol and ethanol-blended fuels, chemical and physical characteristics of ethanol and hydrocarbon fuels, transportation and transfer, storage and dispensing locations, firefighting foam principles, general health and safety considerations and storage and pre-planning considerations.
The seminars will be held on the following dates and locations:
March 7-9
Charleston Professional Fire Fighters, IAFF Local 317
205A Tennessee Ave.
Charleston, WV 25302
Time: 9:00am-2:00pm ETMarch 11-13
Tri-State Fire Academy
Auditorium
4200 Ohio River Rd.
Huntington, WV 25702
Time: 9:00am-2:00pm ETFor more information or to register, visit www.rfa.traincaster.com.
http://ethanolproducer.com/articles/16000/rfa-transcaer-to-host-ethanol-safety-seminars-in-west-virginia
-
(ACC Mentioned) What Are Parabens?
Feb 26, 2019 | Live Science
By Rachel Ross
Parabens are synthetic chemicals that are used as preservatives in a variety of products, including cosmetics, pharmaceuticals and food. As preservatives, parabens give products a longer shelf-life and prevent harmful bacteria and mold from growing in the products, according to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
"Parabens are derived from a chemical known as para-hydroxybenzoic acid (PHBA) that occurs naturally in many fruits and vegetables, like blueberries and carrots," said Kathryn St. John, the communications director at the American Chemistry Council. "PHBA is also naturally formed in the human body by the breakdown of some amino acids."
The parabens that are manufactured for consumables and personal care products are identical to those found in nature. The most common types of parabens are methylparaben, ethylparaben, propylparaben, butylparaben, isopropylparaben and isobutylparaben.
Paraben exposure
"Parabens are widely used because they are extremely effective [and] hypoallergenic and cost very little to produce," said Sandra Arévalo, director of nutrition services and community outreach at Community Pediatrics at Montefiore Medical Center in New York.
Because the preservative is found in a wide variety of foods, beverages, pharmaceuticals, cosmetics and other personal care products, paraben exposure occurs when these products are swallowed or absorbed through the skin, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).
The FDA requires all personal care products to be labeled with a list of ingredients so consumers can see what's in the product and decide if they wish to use it. Cosmetic manufacturers aren't required to obtain FDA approval for developing, marketing or selling products to consumers. However, if a cosmetic or personal care product is found to be dangerous when used according to the product's directions, the FDA will take action and could remove the product from the market.
Parabens: Dangerous or not?
"Since 90 percent of common items found in grocery stores contain parabens, the concentration in our bloodstream adds up," said Dr. Chesahna Kindred, a dermatologist at Howard University in Washington, D.C. And because most people regularly come into contact with parabens, consumers want to know if there are any health risks involved with using products that contain these chemicals.
But the answer is unclear and contentious, Kindred said. "Herein lies the controversy — do parabens cause cancer or not? If so, what amounts of parabens lead to cancer?"
Parabens are thought to be endocrine-disrupting chemicals, also known as hormone-mimicking chemicals, said Kindred. That means the body may treat the paraben like a hormone. For example, parabens have been found in breast cancer cells, which indicates that parabens may act like estrogen, said Arévalo.
With the rates of some types of cancer increasing, additives in food and personal products are increasingly under scrutiny. A scientific review of cosmetics and their cancer risks published in 2018 in the JNCI Cancer Spectrum journal concluded that there is no evidence to suggest that using paraben-containing products leads to an increased risk of cancer. The authors noted that a large number of untested chemicals are available in a variety of products in the U.S. and that more cost-effective and high-throughput screening methods are needed for testing potentially carcinogenic ingredients, such as parabens.
Studies with rats have demonstrated that parabens are endocrine-disrupting chemicals, which means parabens could cause breast cancer. However, the endocrine disruption seen in rats occurred only after the animals were dosed with much higher levels of parabens than what humans typically encounter, said St. John. And so far, human clinical trials have failed to show a connection between parabens and increased cancer risk.
Nonetheless, some experts are concerned about the potential cumulative effects of using paraben-containing products, said Kindred. While more research is needed in this area, the CDC reports that there is not a strong indication that higher levels of parabens in the body cause adverse health effects.
However, some individuals may be more sensitive to parabens than others. "As with many potentially hazardous chemicals, different people will have different susceptibilities and sensitivities based on their own genetic backgrounds," said Gretchen Edwalds-Gilbert, a professor of biology at Scripps College in California.
If consumers are worried about using paraben-containing products, Edwalds-Gilbert recommended following the Latin phrase "ne quid nimis," which means "nothing in excess." Perhaps using paraben-containing products in moderation is the key to avoiding unforeseeable health issues, she said.
https://www.livescience.com/64862-what-are-parabens.html
-
Mich. Finds PFAs in Drinking Water Systems
Feb 26, 2019 | AP (In E&E - Greenwire)
By John Flesher
More than 60 drinking water systems in Michigan sampled last year had measurable levels of a class of long-lasting and highly toxic chemicals linked to cancer and a variety of other illnesses, state officials said yesterday.
The Department of Environmental Quality released data from a statewide effort to determine the extent of drinking water contamination from perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, known collectively as PFAS, which increasingly have turned up in public water supplies and private wells around the U.S. They are used in firefighting foam, nonstick pots and pans, water-repellent clothing and many other household and personal items.
The Michigan agency said it oversaw sampling of 1,114 public water systems and 17 operated by tribes. Also tested were supplies at 461 schools and 168 child care and Head Start providers that operate their own wells.
Only two — the city of Parchment and Robinson Elementary School near Grand Haven — had PFAS levels above 70 parts per trillion (ppt), that point at which the state requires cleanups of groundwater used for drinking. The threshold is based on a nonbinding EPA health advisory that critics, including environmental advocates and some members of Congress, consider weak.
Parchment was connected to Kalamazoo's municipal water system last August, while the Robinson school has been provided bottled water and is planning to install a carbon filtration mechanism this year.
An additional 62 systems had PFAS levels of 10 to 70 ppt, according to the DEQ. Director Liesl Clark said the Michigan PFAS Action Response Team, a multiagency group, would continue quarterly monitoring of systems with levels of 10 ppt or higher.
"Protecting the public remains our top priority," Clark said, adding that the team "will continue to work with communities with detections of PFAS in their water to help them investigate and take action to drive down exposure levels."
The 2018 testing found an additional 115 water systems with trace levels of the chemicals.
About 75 percent of Michigan's drinking water comes from public systems. The DEQ testing did not include private residential wells.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2019/02/26/stories/1060122423
-
Michigan Releases Results of Water Tests for PFAs Chemicals
Feb 26, 2019 | AP (In WNMU-FM)
Officials say samples taken at 64 water systems around Michigan last year had measurable levels of a class of long-lasting toxic chemicals.
The Department of Environmental Quality released findings Monday from a 2018 initiative to test Michigan's public water sources for the substances known as perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl compounds, or PFAS.
The compounds are used in a wide variety of consumer products including non-stick cookware and water-resistant fabrics.
The DEQ sampled 1,114 municipal water systems, along with hundreds of schools, child-care facilities and tribal systems.
Michigan requires cleanups if PFAS levels exceed 70 parts per trillion. The only systems that did so were the city of Parchment and Robinson Elementary School near Grand Haven.
An additional 62 systems had levels of 10 to 70 parts per trillion.
https://www.wnmufm.org/post/michigan-releases-results-water-tests-pfas-chemicals#stream/0
-
US FDA Sunscreen Regulations Update Questions Ingredient Safety
Feb 26, 2019 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
As part of a major proposed update to its sunscreen product regulations, the US Food and Drug Administration is seeking additional data on the majority of currently marketed active ingredients before allowing their continued use.
The proposed rule comes as part of the FDA’s effort to put into effect a final monograph for over-the-counter (OTC) sunscreens, as required by the 2014 Sunscreen Innovation Act. These lay out the conditions under which a product is designated as ‘generally recognised as safe and effective’ (GRASE) and can therefore be brought to market without undergoing the new drug application process.
The move is intended to bring non-prescription sunscreens up to date with the latest science and to better ensure consumers have access to safe and effective preventative sun care options, according to the FDA.
Of the 16 currently marketed active ingredients, the agency is proposing that only two – zinc oxide and titanium dioxide – are GRASE for use in sunscreens, at concentrations of up to 25%.
Meanwhile, it has proposed that two others – aminobenzoic acid (PABA) and trolamine salicylate – are not GRASE, because a review of evidence "has caused [the agency] to conclude that the risks associated with use of these active ingredients in sunscreen products outweigh their benefits".
For PABA, identified risks include "significant rates" of allergic and photoallergic skin reactions. Trolamine salicylate has the potential for "serious detrimental health effects, including bleeding", when used in sunscreen, according to the proposed rule. Neither ingredient appears to be currently marketed in sunscreens sold in the US.
With regard to the final 12 ingredients, the FDA says it has "insufficient safety data to make a positive GRASE determination". It is therefore asking industry and other interested parties to fill identified data gaps.
These are: cinoxate, dioxybenzone, ensulizole, homosalate, meradimate, octinoxate, octisalate, octocrylene, padimate O, sulisobenzone, oxybenzone and avobenzone.
In a preamble to the rule, the agency said that its proposal "does not represent a conclusion by FDA that the sunscreen active ingredients … are unsafe for use in sunscreens."
Rather, it says it is requesting additional information so it can evaluate the substances’ GRASE status "in light of changed conditions, including substantially increased sunscreen usage and exposure and evolving information about the potential risks associated with these products since they were originally evaluated".
The FDA’s move, however, sheds doubt on the future availability of all but two active ingredients – even while industry contends with a backlog of new substance approvals that has dragged on for more than a decade. The proposed rule does not address these eight active ingredients originally submitted under the FDA’s ‘time and extent application’ (TEA) regulations, many of which have been used elsewhere in the world for years.
Other changes put forth in the FDA’s proposed rule include: labelling amendments, including a requirement to list active ingredients on the front display panel of a product; removing the GRASE designation for sunscreen-insect repellent combination products; revisions to final formulation testing and record keeping requirements; and categorisation of sunscreen dosage forms that were not on the market prior to 1972 – including wipes, towelettes, body washes and shampoos – as ‘new drugs’.
Next steps
The Environmental Working Group welcomed the proposal. Senior scientist David Andrews particularly lauded the FDA’s call for more data on oxybenzone – an ingredient which, along with octinoxate, has been the subject of local bans in Hawaii and Key West, Florida.
The Consumer Healthcare Products Association (CHPA) and the Personal Care Products Council (PCPC), meanwhile, both said they will be providing feedback to the FDA on its proposal.
The CHPA said: "FDA is clear that sunscreens contribute substantial public health benefits and that Americans should continue to use currently marketed sunscreens confidently while this important rulemaking effort moves forward."
Comments on the proposal will be accepted through 28 May.
The Sunscreen Improvement Act calls for the final OTC sunscreen monograph to be effective within five years of its enactment, or by 26 November.
https://chemicalwatch.com/74647/us-fda-sunscreen-regulations-update-questions-ingredient-safety
-
Plastic Is Toxic at Every Stage of Its Life Cycle
Feb 26, 2019 | Care2
By Katherine Martinko
At no point does plastic ever stop harming us.
In case you had any doubts about how bad plastic really is, a new study out of the Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL) has just revealed that plastic is toxic at every stage of its life cycle.
The 75-page document is a sobering read. It points out the shortsightedness of focusing on specific moments in the plastic life cycle, rather than the entire picture. We know that oil refining, microplastics, plastic packaging, and recycling are huge problems on their own, but put them all together and you have an even more dire situation on your hands.
The report reveals “numerous exposure routes through which human health is impacted at each stage”. In other words, quitting single-use disposables and living zero-waste doesn’t mean you’re safe. Your health – and that of your family – continues to be affected by plastic in ways you might not even realize. These include:
-Extraction and Transportation of fossil feedstocks for plastic, which releases toxic chemicals like benzene, VOCs, and 170+ fracking fluid chemicals into the air. These are inhaled or ingested, leading to immune dysfunction, cancer, and neuro-, reproductive, and developmental toxicity, among other things.
-Refining and Manufacturing of plastic resins and feedstocks is linked to “impairment of the nervous system, reproductive and developmental problems, cancer, leukemia, and genetic impacts like low birth weight.”
-Consumer use of plastic products exposes users to countless unnamed chemicals (which are not listed as ingredients), heavy metals, carcinogens, and microplastics. People ingest, inhale, and touch these to their skin.
-Plastic waste management, especially “waste to energy” incineration, releases toxic chemicals into the air, which are absorbed by soil, air, and water, causing indirect harm to people and communities nearby (and sometimes far away).
-Fragmenting of plastic results in microplastic pieces entering the environment and human body, leading to “an array of health impacts, including inflammation, genotoxicity, oxidative stress, apoptosis, and necrosis.”
-Degradation of plastic results in more chemical leaching. “As plastic particles degrade, new surface areas are exposed, allowing continued leaching of additives from the core to the surface of the particle in the environment and the human body.”
WHERE DOES ONE EVEN BEGIN WITH THIS INFORMATION?
In a way, it shouldn’t come as a surprise. We know plastic is an environmental scourge with real health implications, but to see it analyzed so comprehensively makes the issue more urgent than ever.
The study authors call for plastic exposure to be treated as a human rights issue, saying we need laws that require accurate information about what goes into plastic products at all stages of manufacture and transparency in the development of solutions.
Von Hernandez, global coordinator for the Break Free From Plastic movement, is quoted in the report’s executive summary:
It is shocking how the existing regulatory regime continues to give the whole plastic industrial complex the license to play Russian roulette with our lives and our health. Plastic is lethal, and this report shows us why.
Dire as it may be, we cannot let it overwhelm or discourage us. Knowledge is power, as the saying goes, and this report offers precisely that. Individuals, communities, health care providers, and policy makers can use it as an effective negotiating tool when it comes to confronting the companies and corporations that continue to churn out plastic at high rates. And confront them we must – especially now that we know what’s at stake.
https://www.care2.com/causes/plastic-is-toxic-at-every-stage-of-its-life-cycle.html
-
Water Sampling Shows Low Levels Of Petroleum, Firefighting Foam In And Around Superior Refinery
Feb 26, 2019 | Wisconsin Public Radio
By Danielle Kaeding
Levels of petroleum and firefighting foam compounds have declined in a creek downstream from the Husky Energy oil refinery in Superior. The Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources continues to monitor water quality with the company.
An explosion at the refinery in April 2018 punctured a tank that spilled around 17,000 barrels of asphalt and set off a series of fires that took hours to put out. Levels of petroleum compounds have dropped to the point where the refinery is no longer testing for them.
Connie Antonuk, field integration leader with the DNR, said they're still sampling for firefighting foam, which contains per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances known as PFAS.
"The levels have dropped off significantly, but they’re still there at very low levels," she said.
Antonuk said the chemicals repel both oil and water and don't break down easily in the environment. The chemicals have been used by the industry in everyday products, including cookware, water-resistant fabrics and firefighting foam.
The Environmental Protection Agency is under pressure to set safe drinking water standards for the chemicals after studies have found links between PFAS, cancer and other health issues. The federal agency plans to propose a maximum level for the two most common PFAS chemicals — PFOS and PFOA — by the end of this year. Perfluorooctanesulfonate acid (PFOS) and perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) are among the most widely studied PFAS chemicals.
Water sampling at the mouth of Newton Creek, which spills into an inlet of a Lake Superior bay, found levels of PFOS at 220 parts per trillion and PFOA at 230 parts per trillion several days after the refinery explosion. However, most recent sampling results show less than 10 parts per trillion of both chemicals.
Antonuk said the levels present are no cause for concern.
"The levels are extremely low," she said.
In 2016, the EPA established health advisory levels of 70 parts per trillion for lifetime exposure of the two chemicals in drinking water. Newton Creek isn't a source of drinking water as the city of Superior gets its drinking water from Lake Superior. The water is sourced from an intake structure that is about 300 feet off of Minnesota Point and 10 to 12 feet beneath the lake floor, according to Superior Water, Light & Power.
In 2014, the city of Superior tested the surface water intake for PFOA and PFOS, according to the DNR. The two compounds weren't detected at that time.
The refinery has collected around 21 million gallons of firefighting water used on April 26, the day of the explosion, and treating it to remove PFAS, according to the DNR and Husky Energy.
"It was necessary to use water and firefighting foam last April to extinguish the fire, and water containing firefighting foam was contained on-site as soon as was practicable," said Husky spokeswoman Kim Guttormson in an email Monday. "Working with the WDNR, we installed a system designed to treat PFAS, consisting of specialized granular activated carbon followed by a resin designed to further target the removal of PFAS compounds if needed. It has worked as designed."
The DNR is currently working to develop its own state water quality standard for PFAS. The agency is also looking at requiring wastewater treatment plant permits to have a standard for PFAS as well, Antonuk said.
Husky Energy has been working closely with the DNR to collect surface water samples at the refinery and along the creek as winter conditions allow.
"The samples from Newton Creek since last April are comparable to baseline samples collected before the incident under normal refinery operating conditions, with the exception of trace amounts of PFAS-related compounds," said Guttormson.
Newton Creek has long been listed as an impaired water in the state because of the presence of pollutants and its limited fish community. The creek and the Hog Island Inlet of the Superior Bay have been the subject of restoration efforts in the last decade. Wetlands were constructed at the headwaters of Newton Creek and improvements were made to the refinery's wastewater treatment facility to control industrial sources of contamination, according to a 2014 DNR report.
Antonuk said the DNR conducted four surveys last year to monitor biological activity in the creek, which have yielded positive results.
"The fish surveys have shown that in the last survey there has been an excellent recovery over the season and an exceptionally good fish population in October," said Antonuk.
In April, she said staff found 18 fish and three different species. The October survey found 79 fish and 15 different species, which is the most fish that has been observed at the Third Street area of Newton Creek. Antonuk said impacts to aquatic life appear to be minimal. The DNR plans to conduct another survey this year.
At the refinery, efforts remain ongoing to clean up asphalt that was spilled as a result of the explosion. Antonuk said a hydrogeologist has been assigned to work with company. The company will be required to do a thorough site investigation of that area and remedial action plan. Husky has been removing piping near the damaged asphalt tanks so additional asphalt can be removed. More than 5,000 tons of asphalt has been removed from the site.
https://www.wpr.org/water-sampling-shows-low-levels-petroleum-firefighting-foam-and-around-superior-refinery
-
EFSA Opens Consultation on Draft Assessment of FCM Phthalates
Feb 26, 2019 | Chemical Watch
Efsa has launched a public consultation on its draft update of the agency's 2005 risk assessments of five phthalates, which are authorised for use in plastic food contact materials.
For the updated draft opinion, the authority's Panel on Food Contact Materials, Enzymes and Processing Aids (CEP Panel) has established a group tolerable daily intake (TDI) of 50 µg/kg bw per day for four of the substances:di-butylphthalate (DBP); butylbenzylphthalate (BBP);bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate (DEHP); anddi-isononylphthalate (DINP).
For di-isodecylphthalate (DIDP), the agency proposed an individual TDI of 150 µg/kg bw per day based on liver toxicity.
Interested parties can submit comments via the consultation page by the 14 April deadline.
Meanwhile, the agency is holding a webinar on 15 March, timed for the beginning of the consultation phase, to explain its draft assessment and the CEF Panel's approach.
This focuses on potential health risks resulting from the combined exposure of consumers to all five phthalates.
A recording will be published afterwards on Efsa's website.
https://chemicalwatch.com/74651/efsa-opens-consultation-on-draft-assessment-of-fcm-phthalates
-
America’s Spat with China Is Harming Its Quest for “Energy Dominance”
Feb 26, 2019 | The Economist
Trade talks between America and China finally yielded some results. Mr Trump had been scheduled to raise tariffs on Chinese goods on March 2nd, but on Sunday he announced that he would be delaying the increase because talks between the two sides had been “productive”. He announced that a summit with Xi Jinping, China’s president, was in the works if “both sides make additional progress”.
The talks are being watched closely by American energy firms. America’s energy exports are a priority for Mr Trump, who is set on the United States transforming itself from a net importer to a net exporter of energy products, and “achieving energy dominance”.
Cracking the Chinese market is a large part of this: China is the world’s largest importer of oil and second-biggest of natural gas. American investment in liquefied natural gas (LNG) is underpinned in part by the assumption that demand from China will continue to rise.
In 2017 Mr Trump’s hope of turning America into an energy-exporting superpower seemed on track, at least by one measure. The value of American oil and gas exports to China rose almost five-fold year-on-year. Today, that looks more like a short-term spike. No sooner did China increase its purchases of American energy than Mr Trump declared a trade war, levying tariffs on a wide range of Chinese goods. China’s formal retaliation includes tariffs on LNG, although not crude.Nonetheless, its imports of both fuels from America have dried up. From July to November last year the value of American oil and gas exports to China plunged from $1bn to $100m. Last autumn an Australian company delayed its decision to invest in a Louisiana gas-export terminal, citing problems securing Chinese buyers.
China has used imports of oil and gas as a bargaining tool, offering to increase purchases as part of any deal with America. If a trade war is averted, energy exporters will rejoice. The damage that they face is apparent from a report by BP, an oil company. It compared the impact of a future with “less globalisation” with a base scenario (using pre-2017 trends, without trade disputes). Continuing trade wars could cause the growth in global GDP and energy demand to slow somewhat, resulting in a cumulative loss of 6% and 4.5% respectively by 2040, relative to the base scenario. More worrying for energy firms, BP reckons that concerns about energy security means countries would attach a 10% risk premium to imported energy, encouraging them to switch to domestic sources. If global trade disputes intensify, BP thinks, America’s exports of oil and gas would grow much more slowly: by 2040 it would export a net 80 million tonnes of oil equivalent (MTOE) instead of 243 MTOE, up from net imports of 294 MTOE in 2017. In other words, the longer a trade war drags on, the dimmer the prospects for American energy dominance.
https://www.economist.com/graphic-detail/2019/02/26/americas-spat-with-china-is-harming-its-quest-for-energy-dominance
-
Oil Industry Counters EPA Renewable Fuel Reform Plan
Feb 26, 2019 | E&E - Greenwire
By Marc Heller
Changes EPA is considering for renewable fuel credits could only worsen flaws in the nation's biofuel mandate, a lobbying group for the petroleum industry said today.
The American Petroleum Institute said a study it commissioned suggests that tinkering with the system of Renewable Identification Numbers, or RINs, isn't necessary and could increase fuel costs.
"RIN reform does nothing to solve the fundamental problem," said Frank Macchiarola, vice president of downstream and industry operations for the API, on a conference call with reporters.
To API, the fatal flaw in the renewable fuel standard is the rising volumes of ethanol the government requires to be added to the nation's fuel supply. The requirement compels refiners to either blend biofuel or buy the credits to show compliance, sometimes at costs they say are exorbitant.
API said its analysis shows that refined product prices already reflect the cost of renewable fuel credits, reinforcing an earlier finding by EPA.
The agency, however, is crafting regulations that could pave the way to changes in the RIN system, as well as expanding availability of fuel that contains 15 percent ethanol. The RIN changes under consideration include limiting participation in the RIN market to companies that actually have to meet the RFS requirements and requiring public disclosure when an individual holds a number of RINs above a certain limit.
Macchiarola said EPA's direction is misguided.
"In fact, reforming the RINs market will exacerbate the already broken fuels mandate — the Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS) — which is costly and unnecessary for U.S. consumers," Macchiarola said in a news release.
In proposing changes to RINs, EPA has said it's responding to industry complaints about lack of transparency. That's also been a complaint from the ethanol industry, but API said EPA has already taken good steps toward addressing that issue by establishing an online database of RIN prices, for instance, and by stepping up the fight against RIN fraud.
EPA has said it will propose both the RIN changes and the E15 regulations together, in time for E15 sales this summer. The API opposes both elements, while ethanol groups have urged the agency to concentrate on E15 and leave RIN reform for a separate measure.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2019/02/26/stories/1060122447
-
Feb 26, 2019 | Environmental Defense Fund
By Nichole Saunders
Many Americans are aware that we are experiencing a major energy boom. But what many folks may not realize is that with this increase in oil and gas, also comes an increase in waste – specifically wastewater. In fact, for every barrel of oil produced wells can generate 10 times as much chemical-laden wastewater. All told, the industry produces over 900 billion gallons of wastewater a year, and we know very little about the chemicals in it.
Traditionally, companies have pumped this wastewater deep underground, but the growing volume is creating new challenges– leading many to wonder whether there may be different options for managing or reusing it. One of those options is treatment and discharge to rivers or streams.
Expanding discharge options would be risky though, given all we are still learning about the chemicals in wastewater, potential toxicity, treatability and potential health risks.
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will soon release a study of discharge practices, including the pros and cons of current regulations. States like New Mexico and Oklahoma are also working with EPA to better define their own authorities and options.
As states and EPA consider what a future for produced water discharge might look like– it’s important to know what the standards are today.
What do the current rules say?
The Clean Water Act requires a permit to discharge pollutants into waterways. The key permitting program — the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) — looks at both the capabilities of treatment technologies as well as water quality objectives in order to determine what kind of permit is appropriate.
Existing options for wastewater discharge
The technology aspect, also known as “effluent limitation guidelines” (ELGs) can vary from industry to industry based on the ability of treatment technologies to remove constituents of concern to acceptable levels. EPA’s study of the technologies and pollutants for an industry results in an ELG that sets the national baseline for discharge permits.
The main ELG for oil and gas facilities sets a baseline of “no discharge” of pollutants into navigable waters of the United States. In 2016, the EPA went further, and prohibited companies who operate “unconventional wells” from disposing of their wastewater into municipal treatment systems, known as Publicly Owned Treatment Works (POTW), since these city-owned facilities are not designed to handle this type of industrial waste.
However, there are some noteworthy exceptions to this rule: Any facility in the historically arid west (essentially anything west of Dallas, specifically the 98th meridian line) may discharge wastewater if oil and grease levels are reduced and it is of “good enough quality” for agriculture or wildlife. (Of course, what “good enough quality” really means is up for debate.) A well that produces less than 10 barrels of oil a day (also known as a stripper well) also doesn’t have to follow these guidelines.
Outside of this baseline rule for discharges directly from an oil and gas wellsite, there is a second optional route. Operators may also transport their wastewater to what EPA calls a Centralized Waste Treatment Facility (CWT). These facilities can accept and treat industrial wastes that include metals, oil, organics and blended waste streams. However, while the guidelines for these facilities may be more robust than municipal treatment plants, they still weren’t created with the oil and gas industry’s wastewater in mind, meaning that the baseline rules may not currently offer the protections needed to ensure pollutants of concern from oil and gas wastewater don’t reach rivers and streams. (You can learn more about CWTs and the oil and gas industry from EPA’s detailed 2018 study of CWT’s accepting this type of waste, including their own concerns.)
How to define “clean”
The ELG’s are not the final word, though. As a complement to the technology standards, states also have the power to determine how clean they want their water to be by setting their own water quality based guidelines. This allows states to monitor and limit particular pollutants of concern to protect certain qualities or uses of their water bodies. When permit writers are developing a final NPDES permit, they will consider both the baseline technology standard and the water quality standard that applies to the receiving water body and develop requirements based on both standards.
This is important to keep in mind. Even if EPA were to modify the technology standards, states have an opportunity to chime in to address any risks they may see for their water bodies with modifications to their water quality standards.
What might change?
Clean water protections are extremely complicated. And as we learn more about the chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing, as well as the pollutants that may naturally come up from underground, we are also learning our existing standards may be ill suited for the massive volume of chemical-laden wastewater generated in the oilfields.
That’s why it’s so important to keep an eye on what EPA might do to either strengthen or weaken standards for industry’s wastewater. It’s hard to predict what EPA might do, they may: rollback the baseline prohibition on discharges from oil and gas well sites, allow municipal treatment facilities to handle oilfield wastewater extend the vague “good enough quality” standard nationwide, or reconsider the standards for CWTs.
What we do know is that there is a lot to be concerned about given limitations in our understanding of the complete range of pollutants that might be in this wastewater – a challenge EPA’s own experts have acknowledged. Permits that allow for the discharge of this wastewater must – definitively – be written to ensure that human health, water resources and ecosystems are protected, and that is going to require work. If anything, these historic rules need to be strengthened, not made weaker.
http://blogs.edf.org/energyexchange/2019/02/26/trumps-epa-may-weaken-restrictions-on-disposal-of-oilfield-wastewater-heres-what-you-need-to-know/
-
Petrochemicals to Drive Global Oil Demand Growth, despite Anti-Plastics Push: IEA
Feb 26, 2019 | S&P Global Platts
By Maria Tsay
Growing demand for plastics in developing countries means the petrochemicals sector will still be among the key drivers of oil demand in the next few years despite a global anti-plastic and circular economy push, International Energy Agency senior oil market analyst Peg Mackey said Tuesday at the International Petroleum Week conference.
IEA said in Energy Outlook report last year that petrochemicals will account for more than a third of global oil demand growth by 2030 and nearly half of demand growth by 2050, adding nearly 7 million b/d by the middle of the century.
Since the beginning of last year, European brand-owners, governments and petrochemical producers have renewed their recycling efforts, setting targets and taking voluntary commitments to increase recycling of plastics, including banning of single-use plastics and improving packaging designs.
https://www.spglobal.com/platts/en/market-insights/latest-news/petrochemicals/022619-petrochemicals-to-drive-global-oil-demand-growth-despite-anti-plastics-push-iea
-
Dominion to Take Atlantic Coast Pipeline Case to Supreme Court
Feb 26, 2019 | Politico Pro - Energy Whiteboard
By Ben Lefebvre
Dominion Energy expects to appeal to the Supreme Court a lower court decision halting construction of its Atlantic Coast pipeline, the company said today.
Dominion’s announcement comes after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit declined Monday to rehear a case over whether the Interior and Agriculture departments correctly processed the permits relating to Atlantic Coast’s planned route across the Appalachian Trail. A district court in December ruledthe permits were issued incorrectly and blocked further construction of the pipeline that would carry natural gas from West Virginia to Virginia and North Carolina.
“We are confident that the U.S. Departments of Interior and Agriculture have the authority to resolve the Appalachian Trail crossing issue administratively in a manner that satisfies the Court's stated objection and in a timeframe consistent with a restart of at least partial construction during the third quarter,” Dominion said in a statement.
Dominion said it expects to restart construction in the third quarter of this year.
WHAT'S NEXT: Dominion said it expects to file the appeal with the Supreme Court within the next 90 days.
https://subscriber.politicopro.com/energy/whiteboard/2019/02/dominion-to-take-atlantic-coast-pipeline-case-to-supreme-court-2743689
-
Joint Venture to Add Crude Oil, Natural Gas & Saltwater Pipelines in Permian Basin
Feb 26, 2019 | Houston Chronicle
By Sergio Chapa
A new joint venture between two pipeline companies will allow their customers to move more crude oil, natural gas and produced water on the New Mexico side of the Permian Basin.
Five Point Energy of Houston and Matador Resources of Houston announced the formation of San Mateo Midstream II LLC on Monday. The joint venture will provide services ranging from natural gas gathering and processing to crude oil gathering, produced water gathering and saltwater disposal in southeastern New Mexico.
The region is part of the Delaware Basin, the western lobe of the larger Permian Basin — the most active shale play in the United States.
"The Delaware remains one of the most promising producing basins in North America, yet it lacks sufficient permanent 'in-basin' midstream infrastructure," Five Point Energy CEO David Capobianco said in a statement.
Matador Resources will own 51 percent of San Mateo Midstream II and Five Point will own 49 percent.
The joint venture plans to build a cryogenic natural gas plant near Carlsbad, N.M. that can process 200 million cubic feet of natural gas per day, two saltwater disposal wells and pipelines to move crude oil, natural gas and produced water from remote wells to nearby storage tanks.
Produced water is an industry term used to describe water that comes to the surface as a byproduct of oil and natural gas production. Water is often found with crude oil and natural gas in geological formations but because it is mixed with salts, metals, hydrocarbons and other compounds, it must either be cleaned or disposed.
San Mateo Midstream II is the second joint venture between Five Point Energy and Matador Resources. The companies launched San Mateo Midstream I LLC in Feb. 2017 to build pipelines and other infrastructure in Eddy County, New Mexico and Loving County, Texas.
https://www.chron.com/business/energy/article/Joint-venture-to-add-crude-oil-natural-gas-13643535.php
-
The Energy Burden: How Bad is it and How to Make it Less Bad.
Feb 26, 2019 | Union of Concerned Scientists
By Joseph Daniel
Everybody wants affordable energy. Energy consumers want to be able to pay their bills and energy providers also want customers to be able to pay their energy bills. What we can’t seem to agree on is how to best measure energy affordability.
Energy burden, the percent of a person’s income spent on energy (electricity, home heating, and transportation), is one of the better metrics we have to measure affordability.
In an earlier blog, I took a look at electricity affordability, looking only at electricity bills, leaving out other energy costs like those to heat a home with a gas or oil furnace. The data was also limited to looking at averages, which can obscure the burden energy costs place on low and moderate-income (LMI) folks. While those households tend to use less energy than the average household, LMI households also make less, so the energy burden for LMI folks tends to be above average.
In this blog, I’m able to expand the scope of my analysis thanks to data from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, or NREL.
Illuminating the national energy burden
My original post only looked only at electricity. Similarly, the map on the right is the estimated electricity bill of LMI households by county. On the left, is the estimated home heating fuel bill of LMI households by county. LMI is defined here as 0% to 80% of area median income.
Looking at these maps side by side, you might be tricked to thinking the energy burden is distributed evenly across the United States: with a higher electricity burden in the Southeast and a higher home heating burden in the rest of the US, it all balances out. Right?
Wrong.
Energy burden isn’t distributed equally across the US, as the map below shows.
Appalachia lights up on the orange-colored map, with parts of Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Virginia, Kentucky and Tennessee all experiencing high energy burden. Why?
The energy burden issue is complicated.
The data shows significant energy burdens felt by communities in the Gulf Coast and Southeast, with clusters spanning Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, and north Florida, up through the Carolinas. These areas experience high energy burden driven mostly by electric bills.
The Northeast area also sees hot spots of decreased energy affordability, which is mostly driven by home heating expenses.
Sometimes it is electric bills, sometimes it is home heating (gas and oil) bills, and sometimes it is both.
Bright ideas on what reduces bills
Okay, so energy burden is a problem; what’s a policymaker to do?
The good news is we have two resources that are well equipped to help reduce customers’ bills.
Both these solutions I noted in the original blog and just so happen to have been evaluated by NREL.
Energy efficiency potential
Energy efficiency can take many forms, from replacing incandescent bulbs with LEDs to in installing home insulation. Efficiency reduces home energy consumption and, as a direct result, reduces monthly bills.
In this green-colored map, the darker the green represents greater potential savings for LMI households.
Note the tremendous amount of efficiency potential in states like California, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, Colorado, Nebraska, Kansas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Tennessee, Georgia, Florida, Massachusetts, Maryland, New York, and really… everywhere.
The potential for LMI households to save some green by investing in energy efficiency is widespread, with cost-effective savings in nearly every county where there is available data.
Solar potential
Solar panels can be installed on or near LMI households and with the right policies can be used to reduce the bills of LMI households. One great example of such a policy is DC’s Solar For Allprogram, which helps improve LMI households’ access to solar.
Some of the areas with the greatest potential for bill reductions (darker teal) are in places you’d expect, like California, Texas, Arizona, and New Mexico. These are all states where the sun is shining and where households often see higher electricity bills.
Kansas, a state I spent many formative years, lit up, much to my surprise. Also surprising: Michigan’s Upper Peninsula.
The high potential for consumer savings isn’t just a function of the number of sunny days a state has, but also the building stock and energy consumption patterns.
Parts of Maryland, New Jersey, New York (notably Long Island), Connecticut, Massachusetts, Vermont, and New Hampshire also showed up as places where LMI households could reduce home energy bills by hundreds of dollars a month with judicious applications of solar.
Even the places that don’t show up on the map as the hottest of hot spots were still significant. Florida doesn’t look that great when compared to say, California, but, most of Florida’s LMI customers could see savings in the $800-$1,400 per year range. That’s a lot of money
.How will this change with climate change?
One more angle on this to consider is the impact of climate change. A recent analysis (and accompanying graphic) released by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and based on data from the Climate Impact Lab, showed how the US energy burden will worsen over time, in many states, if we don’t rapidly reduce carbon emissions. The southern parts of the United States, already burned by energy bills, will be hit very hard. Communities in these states will have higher energy costs. This analysis suggests that climate change will exacerbate the existing energy burden.
Interestingly, renewable energy and energy efficiency can play a role in staving off both climate change and the energy burden.
“Make things less bad.”
A policy professor of mine was fond of asserting that the objective of most public policy should be to “make things less bad.”
NREL’s latest data confirms what utility practitioners have known for a while: LMI households in most parts of the US are well positioned to reduce their energy bills with energy efficiency and solar. Energy efficiency and solar policy alone won’t solve the issue of energy burden for LMI households, but it will make their energy burden less bad.
—
Fresh Charts and lots of data
In this blog, I expanded the scope of my original analysis by digging in on some new (to me) data.
I want to thank the great staff of DOE’s office of renewable energy and energy efficiency for pointing me in the data’s direction. Maybe I’ll get my hand on some good transportation cost data, and if you know where I can find some, hit me up on twitter?
The latest data comes from one of the US Department of Energy’s fine national labs (the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, or NREL) and it is all assembled in a great interactive map. A big thanks to the find staff of NREL. NREL’s latest data is aggregated at the county level which made it difficult to turn into a table or provide clear data labels on the maps above. If you’d like to know more or zoom in on the data, you can find the map and the underlining data: here. Have fun digging in.
https://blog.ucsusa.org/joseph-daniel/how-to-make-energy-burden-less-bad
-
Climate Panel Will Tap Former House Aides to Top Staff Positions
Feb 26, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Dean Scott
A one-time senior aide to the previous House select climate committee, Ana Unruh Cohen, will be named as staff director of the new select climate committee, congressional aides told Bloomberg Environment Feb. 26.
Alison Cassady, once aide to the architect of cap-and-trade legislation in the House, former House Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.), will be named deputy staff director, the aides confirmed.The new House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis is chaired by Rep. Kathy Castor (D-Fla.), who also sits on the House Energy and Commerce Committee.
Unruh Cohen has worked as managing director of government affairs for the Natural Resources Defense Council since 2017 and previously worked for more than 13 years on Capitol Hill, focusing on energy and environmental policy.
She previously served the director of energy, climate, and natural resources for Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) and was deputy staff director and chief scientist of the Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming, a panel Markey chaired before Republicans killed it off when they took control of the House in 2011.
Cassady since 2014 has been managing director of energy and environment policy for the Center for American Progress.
The climate committee, launched by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) to highlight the need for climate action in the 116th Congress, is to gather policy recommendations for other standing committees over the next two years but has no authority to draft legislation or issue subpoenas on its own.
Cassady worked as a House aide from 2007 to 2014, rising to a senior Democratic aide in the House Energy and Commerce Committee, which moved cap-and-trade legislation to the floor under Waxman in 2009, his first year as chairman.
Waxman chaired the committee from 2009 until the House Republican takeover in 2011, and didn’t run for re-election in 2014.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/climate-panel-will-tap-former-house-aides-to-top-staff-positions
-
Castor Announces Top Staff Picks for Climate Select Panel
Feb 26, 2019 | Politico Pro - Energy Whiteboard
By Anthony Adragna
House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis Chairwoman Kathy Castor (D-Fla.) today announced the hires of two experienced former congressional aides who previously helped craft cap and trade legislation as staff director and deputy staff director of the panel.
Ana Unruh Cohen returns to Capitol Hill as staff director of the panel from the Natural Resources Defense Council, where she was managing director of government affairs. She was a top staffer on then-Rep. Ed Markey's previous iteration of the climate panel.
Alison Cassady was hired as deputy staff director from her current role as managing director of the energy and environment group at the Center for American Progress. She's a veteran of former House Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman's staff.
"Ana Unruh Cohen and Alison Cassady are experienced climate professionals who will launch the Select Committee’s work and build a dynamic staff to work with me and my colleagues to press for urgent action to dramatically reduce greenhouse gas emissions and build an equitable clean energy economy with a qualified workforce and a just transition," Castor said in a statement.
https://subscriber.politicopro.com/energy/whiteboard/2019/02/castor-announces-top-staff-picks-for-climate-select-panel-2744578
-
Schumer: Dems Will Try to Defund Trump Panel Reassessing Climate Change
Feb 26, 2019 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Jordain Carney
Senate Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) said on Tuesday that if the Trump administration moves forward with a panel reportedly intended to counter scientific consensus on climate change, Democrats will try to defund the group.
"I'm announcing that if the Trump administration moves forward with this fake climate panel, we'll be introducing legislation to defund it. …It is long past time for President Trump and Republican leaders to admit that climate change is real, that human activity contributes to it and Congress must take action," Schumer said from the Senate floor.
The Washington Post reported over the weekend that the Trump administration is planning to create an ad hoc group of federal scientists to reassess and counter the government's conclusions on climate change.
The initiative, which would be lead by the National Security Council, would feature scientists who challenge the seriousness of climate change and the degree to which humans are the cause, three administration officials told the Post.
Democrats have blistered GOP senators and the Trump administration over climate change in recent weeks, and Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) is pledging to give the progressive Green New Deal a vote in the Senate as Republicans hunt for 2020 election fodder.
Schumer on Tuesday said that climate change is an "existential threat" and accused Republicans and the president of "ostrich like" behavior.
"This may be the most conspicuous symptom of the disease of climate denialism that has infected the Republican Party and the hard right. This is beyond willful ignorance. This is intentional deliberate sowing of disinformation about climate change policy by our own government," Schumer said.
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/431579-schumer-dems-will-try-to-defund-trump-panel-reassessing-climate-change
-
Kasich to Push Republicans for Policies to Address Climate Change
Feb 26, 2019 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Avery Anapol
Former Ohio Gov. John Kasich (R) is reportedly planning to urge Republicans to stop denying climate change and take action on the environment.
The former Republican presidential candidate will call on conservatives to address global warming in a speech on Tuesday night, according to Axios.
“This is like a call to arms. Let’s have conservatives have a discussion instead of being in denial that this is a problem,” Kasich told news outlet in an interview. “You can’t just be a science denier.”
In his speech at the University of British Columbia, Kasich plans to introduce proposals for a “centrist” climate policy.
He told Axios that he opposes the Green New Deal, a climate change policy backed by progressives, but said that it’s “not enough” to oppose it without introducing a counter-plan.
His proposals include subsidies for electric vehicles and other eco-friendly technology and a price for carbon dioxide emissions, according to the news outlet.
Kasich, who has not yet announced whether he will challenge President Trump in 2020, told Axios that his views on humans’ impact on the environment have “evolved” since the 2016 campaign, when he said: “We don’t want to destroy people’s job, based on some theory that is not proven.”
“As I see more and more evidence, especially from our government and scientists, you learn more,” he told Axios. “Let’s step it up.”
Kasich has been at the forefront of urging change in the Republican Party. Last month, he criticized the GOP in an op-ed, saying that it "seems stuck in the 1950s."
https://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/431541-kasich-to-push-republicans-for-policies-to-address-climate-change
-
Governor Disbands State Climate Change Strategy Team
Feb 26, 2019 | Anchorage Daily News (In E&E - Greenwire)
By James Brooks
Alaska Gov. Mike Dunleavy (R) issued an order last week that ends the state's climate change strategy commission.
The Climate Action for Alaska Leadership Team had come up with a draft policy for dealing with climate change, but it had not yet been implemented.
Dunleavy's administrative order rescinds seven orders issued by former Alaska Gov. Bill Walker (I), including those that created the team and Alaska's climate change strategy.
Dunleavy's office notified the team last week that its work "has ended." Its website, including the draft climate change strategy, has been taken down.
Alaska Public Media first reported the developments.
"I was kind of surprised to get the letter because we had hoped that he would continue the work of this group," said Alaska Ocean Observing System Executive Director Molly McCammon, who is a member of the team.
The team hasn't met since submitting its report in September, she said, although group members are working to address climate change in other ways.
"Alaska's footprint in terms of being a contributor to pollution or however you want to word it is pretty small compared to other states in the U.S. So my focus has been trying to create jobs for our kids and grandkids so they don't have to leave the state," Dunleavy told the Anchorage Daily News in December.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2019/02/26/stories/1060122439
-
RGGI States Applaud Virginia's Proposed Utility GHG Cap
Feb 26, 2019 | Inside EPA
The nine Northeast and Mid-Atlantic states that participate in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) power sector cap-and-trade program are applauding Virginia's revised emissions cap for its power plants as offering “comparable stringency” with the current program.
The states' Feb. 21 comments to the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) suggest that the state remains on track toward “linking” with the RGGI market starting in 2020.
However, the RGGI states are still floating some concerns with the Virginia plan. Specifically, they argue its “base budget reductions between 2030 and 2040 [are] inconsistent with the RGGI 2017 Model Rule.”
They add: “Accordingly, the RGGI states strongly urge Virginia to adopt a consistent budget trajectory to the other participating states.”
The comments respond to DEQ's revised proposal, issued in September, outlining a “base budget” of 28 million tons of carbon dioxide for the state's power sector when it begins trading with RGGI in 2020. The budget would decline by 3 percent annually over 10 years.
DEQ's original proposal would have set the initial cap between 33-34 million tons, with the same rate of decline. The new cap would be 15 percent below the prior proposed limit. RGGI states in comments on that plan said they were “encouraging” Virginia to set a lower initial GHG cap.
Current participants in RGGI are Connecticut, Delaware, Maine, Massachusetts, Maryland, New Hampshire, New York, Rhode Island and Vermont.
In their new comments, these states say Virginia's new proposed GHG cap shows “comparable stringency” with the rest of the market -- a key criterion to allow the state to begin trading with the rest of the program.
But the states say the Virginia plan's discussion of cap reductions from 2030 to 2040 is not consistent with the RGGI model rule, which sets a regional cap only through 2030.
“In the event that Virginia, or any participating state, wishes to effect changes in the region’s long-term cap trajectory, the appropriate vehicle is the periodic RGGI program review process,” the comments state, noting that the next scheduled review will begin by 2021.
New Jersey regulators are separately proposing rules that would allow the Garden State to re-join RGGI as a full member, and the addition of the two states would significantly increase the program's emissions coverage. New Jersey's proposed initial cap would be 18 million tons.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/rggi-states-applaud-virginias-proposed-utility-ghg-cap
-
Public Opinion Shifts Some GOP Views on Climate Change
Feb 26, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tiffany Stecker and Abby Smith
Some congressional Republicans are singing a different tune on climate change.
A decade ago, most GOP lawmakers responded to efforts to cap greenhouse gas emissions with skepticism. Carbon dioxide was innocuous, even helpful, to the environment, they argued.
“I’m going to continue to reject putting the word carbon and pollution together,” Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill.) said at a January 2010 House Energy and Commerce subcommittee hearing.
This time around, the response from the Republican Party is different. The introduction of a Green New Deal resolution in a Democratic House of Representatives has sparked the biggest discussion on climate since the 2009 bill to establish a nationwide carbon emissions trading system.
House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) will soon announce the members of the House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis. The panel was revived this Congress to provide a springboard for ideas to address climate change. Democrats have already announced their members.
Engaging the Public
Shimkus, who is now ranking Republican on the Energy and Commerce Committee’s panel on environment and climate change, has accepted the mainstream view that human activity, including burning fossil fuels, is contributing to climate change.
“We’re kind of defaulting on the fact that the public already is convinced that we play some part,” Shimkus told Bloomberg Environment. “So then the question is, how do you engage in doing something positive to affect this, without harming the economy and growth and placing big financial burden on the people who can afford it the least?”
To be sure, Republican skeptics remain on Capitol Hill. The best-known is Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), who in 2015 infamously brought a snowball into the Senate chamber to use as a prop to argue that scientists and climate advocates were exaggerating global warming.
Asked if he saw a decline in skepticism and more of a focus on solutions to accelerating climate change, Inhofe said, “Nothing has really changed on that.”
Southern, Xcel, Duke, Set Ambitious Goals
Shimkus joined Energy and Commerce ranking member Rep. Greg Walden (R-Ore.) and Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.) in writing an op-ed this month offering to try curbing catastrophic climate change using free-market principles, rather than regulations or taxes.
They promoted carbon capture and storage, hydropower, nuclear energy, energy storage, and business investments in renewable technology.
The evolution is in contrast to President Donald Trump’s White House. Trump has repeatedly cast doubt on mainstream climate science, and officials are weighing a plan to set up a panel led by skeptic William Happer to question conclusions finding climate change impacts could exacerbate national security concerns.
Republicans’ shift on climate change policy is driven by several factors, said Jeremy Harrell, managing director of policy for ClearPath, a conservative clean energy group.
“In general, the debate on this issue shifted because the data is clear,” he said.
Communities are feeling the impact of climate change, and industry is taking the issue seriously. Electric utilities such as Southern Co., Xcel Energy, and Duke Energy have all set ambitious mid-century decarbonization goals.
Climate change is also becoming more of a political issue. Voters in both parties want lawmakers to embrace a forward-leaning clean energy future for the country, Harrell said.
With Democrats in control of the House, Republican lawmakers know they will have to talk about climate change more, Harrell said. Many House committees—including Energy and Commerce, Science, and Natural Resources—already have held at least one major hearing on climate change. The House Appropriations and Transportation committees will hold climate hearings Feb. 26.
Taking the Climate Crisis Seriously
In addition, the party caucus’ makeup is different, Shimkus said.
California’s Dana Rohrabacher and Texas’ Joe Barton and Lamar Smith—House Republicans who vigorously questioned that climate change posed a threat to the country— all left Congress this year.
Republican lawmakers can “read the polls as well as anyone else,” said John Bowman, the Natural Resources Defense Council’s senior director of federal affairs. “They clearly see that for the first time maybe in our lifetime the American public is starting to take the climate crisis seriously and demand some action.”
But Bowman said he still wants to see Republican leaders such as Walden, Upton, and Shimkus offer some legislation to back up their calls for bipartisan climate and clean energy solutions or sign onto Democratic bills addressing the issue.
“They’re going to have an opportunity,” Bowman said. “There will be no shortage of bills that will have positive climate impacts, but will they get on any of those bills?”
Carbon Capture Bill Hearing This Week
Bipartisan movement is occurring this Congress for one technology to reduce carbon emissions.
Lawmakers in the House and Senate have introduced bipartisan legislation to spur the development of carbon capture technology, which catches emissions from smokestacks to either store it underground or reuse it for industrial purposes.
The Utilizing Significant Emissions with Innovative Technologies (USE IT) Act (S.383, H.R.1166) would authorize millions of dollars toward the research and development of commercial carbon dioxide use.
The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee will hold a hearing on the legislation Feb. 27.
Rep. David McKinley (R-W.Va.) is an original co-sponsor of the House bill with Democratic Reps. Scott Peters (Calif.), Cheri Bustos (Ill.), and Marc Veasey (Texas). He remains skeptical of some of the climate models that show the worrisome impact of greenhouse gases on climate, and believes that most carbon is emmitted from foreign countries.
But he doesn’t deny the progression of a warmer planet, rising seas and wild weather.
“The realization is it’s happening. so how are we going to deal with the results? Or how are we going to stop it or slow it down?” McKinley said. “We could stop all the fossil fuel use in America, we could, and Miami and Baltimore and New York would still flood with high waters.”
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/public-opinion-shifts-some-gop-views-on-climate-change
-
Why Not an 'Organic' Green New Deal?
Feb 26, 2019 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Grady Means
The Green New Deal will fail. At the same time, Sen Cory Booker (D-N.J.) has advocated a vegan diet for Americans and, though widely lampooned, that represents a far more practical way to address the climate crisis.
The Green New Deal will go nowhere because, for the past 40 years, America has tried it and invested hundreds of billions in government funding, regulatory mandates and private investment to lower the cost, store and expand "renewable" energy (solar and wind). It hasn't worked, is unreliable, and the costs remain several times higher than fossil fuels, nuclear and hydro.
Americans are not going to throw away their cars and buy more expensive electric ones, tear up their homes, give up air travel, bet on trains that are slower and much more expensive, pay two to three times more for food and all other consumer goods, and live in homes that are colder in the winter and hotter in the summer.
On the other hand, if Americans really believe that climate change represents an existential threat, there are better answers.
First, Green New Deal fanatics need to provide some wiggle room for cheaper, more reliable, and more environmentally friendly natural gas and nuclear energy, allow petroleum for air travel and shipping, and, please, ditch the high-speed train. Natural gas and nuclear will give America a 100-year cushion to develop practical, "sustainable" solutions.
More importantly, New Dealers should fully rebrand an "Organic" Green New Deal as the medium-term answer to the problem. Booker is right. We should begin to move America toward a vegan diet. And get President Trump off the cheeseburgers.
Today, 300,000 Americans die annually from being overweight or obese, and that number is growing. A million more Americans die each year from related illnesses —heart disease, stroke and diabetes — and tens of millions more are affected. An estimated 40 million Americans suffer from arthritis, and diet can help calm inflammation that contributes to arthritic pain. This is a bigger plague than worst-case climate-change predictions. These problems cost the American health care system close to a quarter-trillion dollars a year, and could be vastly reduced by better food choices.
The conventional American grocery store tells the story. Over 80 percent of floor space is covered with processed foods, packaged in paper or plastic (read: energy, water and environmental waste). Food manufacturers push addictive sugar, salt, gluten, fat, genetically modified ingredients, and chemical additives that help sell the product but in no way are healthy. The meat counter has products that are hard to digest and drive up cholesterol. The bakery is filled with products that convert to sugar. The dairy counter has products that are genetically modified and also hard to digest. None of it will kill you outright, but most of it can lead to serious health consequences. Americans are starting to demand healthier foods.
But I digress. The topic is climate change, and the end of the world.
To summarize the science, cows emit gas and it's no joke. They are responsible for 18 percent of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions, equaling more than all coal burning and a full third of all transportation emissions. When a family goes out for burgers, the meat represents more emissions than the car ride. The net carbon footprint of 8 ounces of lamb or beef is 40 times greater than an equivalent meal of fruit and vegetables. The same is true for water usage. While an 8-ounce steak has a water footprint of 900 gallons, a salad of tomato, cucumber and lettuce is 21 gallons. And feedlots are no rose gardens.
The bottom line is that an Organic Green New Deal would buy America several more decades to find solutions for climate change, water shortages and pollution.
Of course, it's hardball and “crazy.” It would require a serious regulatory push against processed foods. It would require serious nutritional education. It would require support to accelerate the conversion of the food sector to plant-based and organic. It would turn the focus from energy to Big Ag and the processed food industry.
But politics is all about tradeoffs and compromise. Americans would need to change, but if they had to make choices in order to prevent Armageddon, they'd probably go for better food and health over no cars or air travel. The Organic Green New Deal would not destroy the U.S. economy or weaken our international security, and it would dramatically improve American health.
The Organic Green New Deal is radical, but protecting the environment is serious. I'll dine with the big guys, Booker and Tom Brady, and we'll have salads.
https://thehill.com/opinion/energy-environment/431088-why-not-an-organic-green-new-deal
Industry and Association News
TSCA News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation and Infrastructure News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested