Preview Newsletter
AM ACC Clips Report - March 4, 2018
-
Hearing on the Chemical Risks of PFAS
Mar 6, 2019 | House Oversight and Reform Committee
Location: 2154 Rayburn / 10:00 AM -
Hearing on Agency Policies and Priorities
Mar 6, 2019 | House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources
Location: 1324 Longworth / 2:00 PM -
Hearing on Energy Efficiency Rules
Mar 7, 2019 | Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Energy
Location: 2123 Rayburn / 10:00 AM -
Hearing on Energy and Water Issues
Mar 7, 2019 | The House Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment
Location: 2318 Rayburn / 10:00 AM -
Hearing on the Energy Workforce
Mar 7, 2019 | Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies
Location: 2362-B Rayburn / 10:00 AM -
Hearing on Climate and the Electric Sector
Mar 5, 2019 | Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee
Location: 366 Dirksen / 10:00 AM -
Hearing on Improvements to U.S. Infrastructure
Mar 6, 2019 | Senate Environment and Public Works Committee
Location: 1100 Longworth / 10:30 AM -
Hearing on Infrastructure Investment in Highways
Mar 6, 2019 | Senate Environment and Public Works Committee
Location: 406 Dirksen / 10:00 AM -
Hearing on Air Rules and States
Mar 5, 2019 | Environment and Public Works Subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Safety
Location: 406 Dirksen / 10:00 AM -
(ACC Mentioned) Price of Plastic Falls as Demand in China Slows
Mar 4, 2019 | Financial Times
By Ed Crooks
The prices of commonly used plastics have fallen sharply since last summer, as a surge in supply from new plants coming on stream in the US has met flagging demand growth, particularly in China. -
(ACC Mentioned) U.S. Chemical Production Indicator Strong
Mar 3, 2019 | Osburn Oracle
According to the American Chemistry Council (ACC), the U.S. Chemical Production Regional Index (U.S. CPRI) expanded by 0.4 percent in July, following a 0.8 percent gain in June, and a 1.1 percent gain in May. -
(ACC Mentioned) Southeast Louisiana People in Business for March 3, 2019
Mar 3, 2019 | The Advocate
The board of commissioners for the Port of Greater Baton Rouge has elected Kevin Stevens, representing East Baton Rouge Parish, as president. -
(ACC Mentioned) J.P. Mascaro’s Exeter Recycling Facility Part of Pilot Program to Accept Flexible Plastic Packaging
Mar 4, 2019 | The Mercury
By Donna Rovins
J.P Mascaro & Sons and its TotalRecycle facility in Exeter, Berks County are on the front lines of an evolving recycling industry. -
U.S. and China Said to Appear Close to Deal to Roll Back Tariffs
Mar 4, 2019 | Reuters (In The New York Times)
By David Lawder and Mike Stone
The United States and China appear close to a deal that would roll back U.S. tariffs on at least $200 billion (£151 billion) worth of Chinese goods, as Beijing makes pledges on structural economic changes and eliminates retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods, a source briefed on negotiations said on Sunday. -
EPA Submits TSCA CBI Proposal for White House Review
Mar 1, 2019 | Inside EPA
EPA has submitted its proposed trade secret Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) inventory review rule for White House Office of Management & Budget (OMB) pre-publication review, a rule that will detail how the agency plans to review confidential business information (CBI) claims for chemicals on the inventory. -
(ACC Blog) New Cutting-Edge University Research Confirms Safe Exposure Level for Formaldehyde
Mar 4, 2019 | American Chemistry Matters
For years, formaldehyde chemistry has faced close scrutiny regarding appropriate regulatory levels, safe exposure threshold levels, and the potential link between formaldehyde exposure and cancer. -
Republicans Back Bill to Speed EPA Fluorochemical Response
Mar 1, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sylvia Carignan
Senate Republicans are joining Democrats in both chambers to push the EPA to quickly tackle a ubiquitous family of chemicals contaminating drinking water across the country. -
Imports of Used PFAS Into US Scrutinized
Mar 3, 2019 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Cheryl Hogue
To meet demands for nonstick-pan coatings and fuel-cell components, Chemours depends on a fluorinated chemical called GenX. -
Lawmakers Kick-Start PFAS Oversight
Mar 4, 2019 | E&E Daily
By Cecelia Smith-Schoenwalder
A House Oversight and Reform panel this week will question the government's handling of toxic chemicals found in drinking water. -
Manufacturers Seek To Dismiss Landmark Class Action Suit Over PFAS
Mar 1, 2019 | Inside EPA
By Suzanne Yohannan
Manufacturers of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are seeking to dismiss a potentially landmark class action suit that is pursuing industry-funded, independent nationwide health studies and testing to determine the effects of multiple PFAS found in the blood of nearly all Americans. -
New Mexico Court Push May Limit Impact Of Key Suit On State PFAS Powers
Mar 1, 2019 | Inside EPA
By Suzanne Yohannan
New Mexico officials are seeking to steer Defense Department litigation challenging their permit restrictions on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) to state court, a move that if successful could limit any precedent the litigation may set on federal officials' ability to challenge such state actions. -
Senators Introduce Bipartisan PFAS Bill
Mar 1, 2019 | E&E News PM
A bipartisan group of senators today introduced legislation that would force EPA to designate certain toxic chemicals found in drinking water as hazardous substances under a Superfund law. -
EPA’s Plan to Regulate Chemical Contaminants in Drinking Water Is a Drop in the Bucket
Mar 2, 2019 | The Conversation
By Laurel Schaider
After more than a year of community meetings and deliberations, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced in February 2019 that it would begin the process of regulating two drinking water contaminants, seeking to stem a growing national public health crisis. -
Wisconsin Governor Aims for Carbon-Free Electricity by 2050
Mar 4, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Stephen Joyce
Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers (D) wants his state’s electricity to be produced with no carbon emissions by 2050, but his ambitious plans will face opposition in the Republican-run legislature. -
Climate Momentum Hits Energy Committee
Mar 4, 2019 | E&E Daily
By Jeremy Dillon
The first specifically climate-focused hearing of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee in nearly seven years will occur tomorrow as members meet to consider climate change and the electric sector. -
U.S. Renewable-Energy Lab Pioneers Upcycling Technology to Turn Waste Plastics Into New, High-Value Products
Mar 1, 2019 | Plastics Today
By Clare Goldsberry
Reclaiming the value of plastic waste has been on the front burner for many companies recently, and several are on the path to commercializing their innovations, including Loop Industries Inc. and the folks at IBM’s laboratory with their VolCat process. -
In This Oil Boom Town, Even a Barber Can Make $180,000
Mar 4, 2019 | The Wall Street Journal
By Christopher M. Matthews and Rebecca Elliott
West Texas has seen its share of oil booms, but the people there say this one is unlike any they’ve seen. -
Feds Give Cheniere Energy Green Light to Begin Commercial Operations at Corpus Christi LNG
Mar 1, 2019 | Houston Chronicle
By Sergio Chapa
Federal officials have given Houston liquefied natural gas company Cheniere Energy permission to put its first production unit at Corpus Christi LNG into commercial service and begin exports. -
Hunger for U.S. Exports Grows in Surprising Ways Abroad
Mar 4, 2019 | E&E Energywire
By Nathanial Gronewold
The customer base for exports of natural gas from the United States is poised to rapidly diversify abroad. -
Deadly Pipelines, No Rules
Mar 4, 2019 | E&E Energywire
By Mike Lee and Mike Soraghan
Delaney Tercero, 3, was sitting on her family's couch with her father and sister that summer day. Her mother was doing laundry. -
Firefighters Corral Thousands of Gallons of Nitric Acid After Minneapolis Industrial Park Spill
Mar 1, 2019 | Minneapolis Star Tribune
By Greg Stanley and Tim Harlow
At least 2,000 gallons of nitric acid were spilled Friday morning when a valve was knocked from a tank, briefly shutting down traffic along E. Hennepin Avenue in Minneapolis. -
Report Finds Widespread Contamination at Nation’s Coal Ash Sites
Mar 4, 2019 | The Washington Post
By Steven Mufson and Brady Dennis
The vast majority of ponds and landfills holding coal waste at 250 power plants across the country have leaked toxic chemicals into nearby groundwater, according to an analysis of public monitoring data released Monday by environmental groups. -
How Safe Are America's Railroads?
Mar 3, 2019 | CBS News
By Lesley Stahl
There have been a number of catastrophic train crashes in recent years that may seem to have been isolated incidents. But, it turns out, they are connected in an important way. -
Democrats Renew Push for Water Infrastructure Trust Fund
Mar 1, 2019 | Inside EPA
House Democrats have reintroduced legislation to create a trust fund to finance water infrastructure projects funded through an increase in the corporate income tax rate, pointing to numerous public health risks posed by aging infrastructure and emerging contaminants like perfluorinated chemicals and highlighting the potential for job creation. -
Hearings Aim to Build Momentum for Broad Package
Mar 4, 2019 | E&E Daily
By Maxine Joselow
Congress is set to hold two overlapping hearings on infrastructure this week, as momentum builds for the broad legislative package sought by President Trump and leaders of both parties. -
Climate Panel’s GOP Leader Rejects Carbon Tax
Mar 1, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tiffany Stecker
Louisiana Rep. Garret Graves, the ranking Republican on a new House panel to address climate change, rejected the idea of a carbon tax as a lever to lower greenhouse gas emissions. -
Hearing On Proposed CWA Rule Previews Legal Arguments On Final Policy
Mar 1, 2019 | Inside EPA
By David LaRoss
Speakers at EPA’s public hearing on its proposed Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction rule gave early signals of how they plan to attack or defend the eventual final version of the rule in court, with environmentalists hinting at procedural and substantive arguments that they could raise in litigation aimed at striking down a narrow CWA test. -
'Green New Deal' Crusaders Back Kids' Climate Case
Mar 4, 2019 | E&E Climatewire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
The young activists pushing lawmakers for a "Green New Deal" are throwing their weight behind peers fighting climate change in the courtroom. -
Fact-Checking GOP Claims About the Paris Agreement
Mar 4, 2019 | E&E Climatewire
By Jean Chemnick
The rest of the world is free-riding on U.S. climate action.
Congressional Hearings
Industry and Association News
TSCA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
-
Hearing on the Chemical Risks of PFAS
Mar 6, 2019 | House Oversight and Reform Committee
-
Hearing on Agency Policies and Priorities
Mar 6, 2019 | House Natural Resources Subcommittee on Energy and Mineral Resources
-
Hearing on Energy Efficiency Rules
Mar 7, 2019 | Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Energy
-
Hearing on Energy and Water Issues
Mar 7, 2019 | The House Transportation and Infrastructure Subcommittee on Water Resources and Environment
-
Hearing on the Energy Workforce
Mar 7, 2019 | Appropriations Subcommittee on Energy and Water Development and Related Agencies
-
Hearing on Climate and the Electric Sector
Mar 5, 2019 | Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee
-
Hearing on Improvements to U.S. Infrastructure
Mar 6, 2019 | Senate Environment and Public Works Committee
-
Hearing on Infrastructure Investment in Highways
Mar 6, 2019 | Senate Environment and Public Works Committee
-
Hearing on Air Rules and States
Mar 5, 2019 | Environment and Public Works Subcommittee on Clean Air and Nuclear Safety
-
(ACC Mentioned) Price of Plastic Falls as Demand in China Slows
Mar 4, 2019 | Financial Times
By Ed Crooks
The prices of commonly used plastics have fallen sharply since last summer, as a surge in supply from new plants coming on stream in the US has met flagging demand growth, particularly in China.
The fall in prices is putting pressure on chemicals producers, including companies that joined in the massive investment boom in the US over the past five years to take advantage of low-cost shale gas as a feedstock.
Much of the new production is aimed at export markets in Asia, Europe and Latin America. But as signs of an economic slowdown have accumulated, the price in China of high-density polyethylene, a benchmark for other similar plastics, has dropped by 18 per cent from its peak last summer, according to ICIS, a petrochemical market information service.
China’s demand for polyethylene, used in a range of applications including packaging, is still growing, but the rate of increase dropped from 11 per cent in 2017 to 6 per cent last year, and is expected to slow further this year.
Plastics prices are also linked to oil, because many producers outside the US use oil-based feedstocks, and the fall in crude since October has added to the downward pressure on polyethylene. However, the rebound in oil this year has so far caused only a very modest recovery in plastics prices.
Companies including Dow Chemical and ExxonMobil have brought a wave of new capacity on stream over the past couple of years, and there are other large projects from companies including Formosa Plastics of Taiwan and Sasol of South Africa scheduled to start up this year.
In total, companies have announced about $200bn worth of investment projects in US chemicals and plastics to benefit from the cheap raw materials unlocked by the shale revolution, according to the American Chemistry Council, the industry group. US production of ethane, a natural gas liquid used as a raw material to make polyethylene, doubled over 2013-18, and is still rising fast.
Over 2016-22, the US is adding about 10m tonnes per year of polyethylene production capacity, an increase of about 60 per cent. Joseph Chang of ICIS said the increased production was hitting the market at a time when expected future demand growth had slowed significantly.
“They will still push the product out. It’s just a question of how profitable those sales are going to be,” he said. US plastics producers are also being forced to find other markets, as China’s government has targeted their products for retaliatory duties to strike back against the Trump administration’s tariffs.
In the second half of last year, US exports of polyethylene to China slowed sharply, with sales diverted to other countries in Asia and Latin America, according to analysts at S&P Global Platts.
Some chemicals companies have started saying they will now put a brake on further large-scale capacity expansions in the US. Dow, the chemicals and plastics group that will be spun out of DowDupont on April 1, said last week that it planned to limit its future capital spending to “at or below depreciation and amortisation”.
It will use its free cash flows for dividends and share buybacks that are intended to average about 65 per cent of operating net income over time.
The greatest enthusiasm recently for investing in new capacity in the US has come from oil companies, which are seeking to target faster-growing markets amid expectations of slow demand growth for oil-based fuels.
Royal Dutch Shell in 2017 started construction on a petrochemicals complex in western Pennsylvania, a consortium including Total of France last year broke ground on a new plant in Texas, and ExxonMobil and Sabic of Saudi Arabia are working on a planned plant, also in Texas.
https://www.ft.com/content/dd86beae-3e05-11e9-9bee-efab61506f44
-
(ACC Mentioned) U.S. Chemical Production Indicator Strong
Mar 3, 2019 | Osburn Oracle
According to the American Chemistry Council (ACC), the U.S. Chemical Production Regional Index (U.S. CPRI) expanded by 0.4 percent in July, following a 0.8 percent gain in June, and a 1.1 percent gain in May. During July, chemical output moved higher in all regions, with gains broadly distributed among the regions.
Chemical production was mixed over the same three month period. There were gains in the production three-month moving average output trend of organic chemicals; coatings; adhesives; other specialties; pesticides; fertilizers; industrial gases; consumer products; and synthetic dyes and pigments. These gains were offset by declines in the output trend in plastic resins; synthetic rubber; chlor-alkali; and other inorganic chemicals.
Nearly all manufactured goods are produced using chemistry in some form or another. Thus, manufacturing activity is an important indicator for chemical production. On a three-month-moving average basis, manufacturing activity edged higher by 0.4 percent in July, following a 0.1 percent gain in June. Output expanded in several chemistry-intensive manufacturing industries, including aerospace; construction supplies; machinery; fabricated metal products; computers & electronics; semiconductors; petroleum refining; plastic products; tires; structural panels; and textile mill products.
Compared to July 2017, U.S. chemical production was ahead 2.6 percent on a year-over-year basis. Chemical production was higher than a year ago in all regions.
The chemistry industry is one of the largest industries in the United States, a $768 billion enterprise. The manufacturing sector is the largest consumer of chemical products, and 96 percent of manufactured goods are touched by chemistry. The U.S. CPRI was developed to track chemical production activity in seven regions of the United States. The U.S. CPRI is based on information from the Federal Reserve, and as such, includes monthly revisions as published by the Federal Reserve. To smooth month-to-month fluctuations, the U.S. CPRI is measured using a three-month moving average. Thus, the reading in July reflects production activity during May, June, and July.
The American Chemistry Council (ACC) represents the leading companies engaged in the business of chemistry. ACC members apply the science of chemistry to make innovative products and services that make people’s lives better, healthier and safer. ACC is committed to improved environmental, and safety performance through Responsible Care, common sense advocacy designed to address major public policy issues, and and environmental research and product testing. The business of chemistry is a $768 billion enterprise and a key element of the nation’s economy. It is one of the nation’s largest exporters, representing fourteen cents out of every dollar in U.S. exports. Chemistry companies are among the largest investors in research and development. Safety and security have always been primary concerns of ACC members, and they have intensified their efforts, working closely with government agencies to improve security and to defend against any threat to the nation’s critical infrastructure.
https://osburnoracle.com/u-s-chemical-production-indicator-strong/25317/
-
(ACC Mentioned) Southeast Louisiana People in Business for March 3, 2019
Mar 3, 2019 | The Advocate
BATON ROUGE AREAThe board of commissioners for the Port of Greater Baton Rouge has elected Kevin Stevens, representing East Baton Rouge Parish, as president. He is co-owner of Blanchard’s Building Materialsin Plaquemine and co-owner of State Lumber and Hardware on Highland Road in Baton Rouge
Other officers are Clint Seneca, Iberville Parish, secretary; and Bob Kelly, East Baton Rouge Parish, treasurer. Seneca is a deputy assessor for the Iberville Parish Assessor's Office and an alderman for the town of Grosse Tete. Kelly is the board's Louisiana Farm Bureau representative and is a cattle farmer and employed in the chemical industry.
The Emerge Center and The Emerge Foundation announced the election of new members to their board of directors.
The Emerge Center added Dr. Catherine Katzenmeyer, a pediatrician at The Baton Rouge Clinic, and Paul Saltaformaggio, a wealth adviser at Hibernia Wealth Management. Officers are Melissa Gregg Blake, chairwoman; Mike DePaul, vice chairman; Janna Oetting, secretary; Stephen Cangelosi, treasurer; and Robert Pettit, immediate past chairman. Other directors are Marvin Borgmeyer; Vicki Crochet; Madison DeWitt; Terrence Ginn; Dr. Charlotte Hollman; Dr. Catherine Katzenmeyer; Sunny McDaniel; Jean-Paul Perrault, chairman of The Emerge School for Autism; Katie Sternberg, chairwoman of The Emerge Foundation; Audrey Wascome; and Sylvia Winder.
Newly elected to The Emerge Foundationboard of directors are Dr. Johnnie Hunt, a dentist at Pediatric Dental Specialists; Jody Montelaro, vice president of public affairs at Entergy; Anthony O'Connor, commercial lines sales associate at BXS Insurance; Melissa Samuel, vice president of human resources and associate general counsel at Bernhard LLC; Arthur Scanlan, public relations director at Eatel; Drew Tessier, director of public affairs at Union Pacific; Beau Wolfe, vice president of business development at MAPP Construction; and Paige Dampf Wormser, learning innovation instructor at the Knock Knock Children's Museum. In addition to Sternberg as chair, officers are Colleen Waguespack, vice chair; Sherry Spies, secretary; and Will Owens, treasurer. Other directors are Cangelosi; Ashley Gordon; Dr. Johnnie Hunt; Nathan Irby; Jody Montelaro; Anthony O’Connor; Perrault; Valerie Schexnayder; Katy Sinor; Andy St. Romain; Drew Tessier; Kelli Bondy Troutman; Beau Wolfe; and Paige Dampf Wormser.
Louisiana Radio Network has named Don Nelson as vice president of sales, overseeing sales efforts for the network, Tiger Rag and Tiger Rag Extra magazine.
Nelson began his radio career in the mid-1960s and has served in a variety of positions in sales and ownership. He arrived in Baton Rouge in 1986 with his purchase of the former WKJN-FM and WIBR-AM. Both stations were sold and are now part of Cumulus Media’s Baton Rouge group. In 2003, Nelson joined the sales team for WWL and the Saints Radio Network in New Orleans. He is a graduate of Northern Colorado University.
John Eskew, plant manager at Occidental Chemical Corp.'s Geismar facility, has been elected chairman of Solutions Through Science, a partnership of chlorine producers and users in Louisiana.
Other officers are Jaclyn Tubre, production leader for Olin Chlor Alkali’s St. Gabriel facility, vice chairman; Ed Flynn, vice president of health, safety and security of the Louisiana Chemical Association, treasurer; and Alexis Schlatre, executive director of Solutions Through Science, secretary.
Other members of the executive committee are Joe Andrepont, director of government affairs at Westlake Chemical Corp.; Tim Bergeron, environmental manager at Shintech Louisiana; Paul Heurtevant, plant manager at Formosa Plastics; and Judith Nordgren, managing director for the chlorine chemistry division of the American Chemistry Council.NEW ORLEANS AREA
Landis Construction has promoted Ryan Allen to vice president of preconstruction; Gary Hauptmann to superintendent; Jeff Blady to assistant superintendent; Shedrick Holden to carpenter foreman; and Tom Weathers to director of purchasing and systems innovation.
Allen was preconstruction manager. Hauptmann was assistant superintendent. Blady was carpenter foreman. Holden was labor foreman. Weathers was purchasing and cost control manager.
David A. Martin has been promoted to vice president of consulting engineering firm of H. Davis Cole & Associates LLC.
He was director of technical services and will take on a more active role in the overall management of the firm, a civil and environmental engineering consultancy with offices in New Orleans, Baton Rouge and Chalmette.
The Ernest N. Morial New Orleans Exhibition Hall Authority, the governing board for the New Orleans Ernest N. Morial Convention Center, has named Rocsean Spencer to its recently created position of small business program director to promote diversity, inclusion and small business development at the convention center.
Spencer was with the city of New Orleans Office of Supplier Diversity. She served as certification officer, reviewing disadvantaged business enterprise certification applications and attending state and local DBE program outreach events. She was later promoted to compliance officer, managing a portfolio of $150 million of public and private sector funds and supervising the DBE program.
https://www.theadvocate.com/acadiana/news/business/article_802601e8-3ad6-11e9-88b1-6f1b30b95980.html
-
Mar 4, 2019 | The Mercury
By Donna Rovins
J.P Mascaro & Sons and its TotalRecycle facility in Exeter, Berks County are on the front lines of an evolving recycling industry.
Over the next two years, the company will pilot single-stream curbside recycling of flexible plastic packaging (FPP) at its TotalRecycle materials recovery facility (MRF).
Once testing is complete and the company begins accepting the material, J.P. Mascaro’s TotalRecycle plant will be the only company in the nation recycling the material.
“Currently, there is no program in our nation that accepts flexible packaging in a curbside single-stream program,” said Joseph Mascaro, Sr., director of sustainability for J.P. Mascaro & Sons and director of the TotalRecycle facility.
The pilot program was outlined Feb. 22 at J.P. Mascaro & Sons’ Lower Providence headquarters for Mascaro municipal customers from across the region. It was the official launch of the company’s involvement in the pilot that was announced in June by the Materials Recovery for the Future (MRFF) program.
It is the first pilot to demonstrate the technical and economic feasibility of recycling household flexible plastic packaging from municipal residential single-stream recycling programs.
Flexible plastic packaging — which includes clear storage bags, bread bags, grocery store carry bags, pet food bags, granola pouches, tee-shirt bags, spouted baby food pouches, chip bags, product overwrap and pouches — is not currently widely recycled and typically ends up in landfills.
Yet, it is the fastest growing segment of consumer packaging today, introducing 12 billion pounds of the material into the market for consumer use every year, according to Resource Recycling Systems (RRS), which conducts the Materials Recovery for the Future research program.
According to Susan Graff, vice president of Global Corporate Sustainability at Resource Recycling Systems, there are benefits to the material that contribute to the growth of its use.
“The carbon profile is lower, it’s lighter in weight, there are transportation efficiencies and there are consumer savings because of that,” she said.
Specialized optical sorters have been added to the TotalRecycle facility, and are being tested. The sorters will target flexible plastic packaging and remove it from the single-stream flow, storing it in an area designated for the material.
“The team is onsite to complete the upgrade; and we expect to have it completed very soon,” Mascaro said, adding that the optical sorters “make a decision in a millionth of a second if it should recover a product.”
Mascaro stressed that the initiative is not live yet, and implementation will happen in phases over the next two years.
Once initial testing of the equipment is complete, the program will roll out first to one municipality that is serviced by J.P. Mascaro & Sons’ Berks Service District, and that already uses the covered receptacles that will be required. Mascaro said he anticipates that happening this summer. The selected municipality — in Berks or Montgomery County — has not yet been publicly identified.
“We want to be able to control as much of this project as possible. Control means picking it up off the street with a rear end truck and delivering it directly to the our facility — it means no transfer stations,” Mascaro said.
Once that process works smoothly, additional municipalities will be added: starting with those municipalities that get picked up by the Berks Hauling Division or that deliver directly to TotalRecycle, followed by those with their own transfer stations.
“The final and most exciting one we intend to get to within in the next two years is to put this program out to all of our customers,” he added.
Resource Recycling Systems estimates TotalRecycle will produce 3,100 tons per year of the material — dubbed R-Flex — suitable for various end market uses that are currently being tested.
“This is a national project. We are trying to change the game of recycling. R-flex is a new commodity and we’re excited to introduce it to the world,” Mascaro said.
“This is a journey and this is the first part. This is the bridging solution along that journey,” said Steve Sikra, Materials Recovery for the Future chairman and associate director of global research and development for Procter & Gamble.
Some of the members of the Materials Recovery for the Future include The Procter & Gamble Company, Target, The Dow Chemical Company, PepsiCo, Nestlé USA, the American Chemistry Council, the Flexible Packaging Association, The Plastics Industry Association, and the Association of Plastic Recyclers, among others.
“Our shared vision as a collaborative, is that we take flexible plastic packaging and recycle it curbside — it's not to put it into a landfill or see it incinerated. It's to use this material because it offers great value," Sikra added.
J.P. Mascaro’s TotalRecycle facility was chosen as the pilot facility in a nationwide search based on a number of factors, according to a statement from Resource Recycling Systems.
“J.P. Mascaro made an ideal partner for the pilot based on the strength of their operations and management team, as well as their interest and ability to upgrade to install additional equipment,” the statement read. “The area served by JPM (J.P. Mascaro) is nationally representative and includes communities with high-performing recycling programs.”
“Choosing Mascaro was a very easy decision for us. They are a committed MRF owner; a landfill owner that says ‘I want to pass landfill on to next generations – I don’t want to fill it up with it with a valuable material in there when I can use it,’” Sikra added.
TotalRecycle on Lincoln Road in Exeter, which opened in 2016, is capable of processing 700 tons of recyclables daily or almost 20,000 tons a month. TotalRecycle is approved to run 20 hours a day, six days a week. The facility currently has an estimated 65 employees.
https://www.pottsmerc.com/business/j-p-mascaro-s-exeter-recycling-facility-part-of-pilot/article_935e1f96-3b6e-11e9-9312-ab9d051d38e0.html
-
U.S. and China Said to Appear Close to Deal to Roll Back Tariffs
Mar 4, 2019 | Reuters (In The New York Times)
By David Lawder and Mike Stone
The United States and China appear close to a deal that would roll back U.S. tariffs on at least $200 billion (£151 billion) worth of Chinese goods, as Beijing makes pledges on structural economic changes and eliminates retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods, a source briefed on negotiations said on Sunday.
U.S. President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping could seal a formal trade deal at a summit around March 27 given progress in talks between the two countries, the Wall Street Journal reported on Sunday.
In an eight-month trade war, the United States has imposed punitive tariffs on $250 billion worth of imports from China, while Beijing has hit back with tariffs on $110 billion worth of U.S. goods, including soybeans and other commodities. The actions have roiled financial markets, disrupted manufacturing supply chains and reduced U.S. farm exports.
Trump administration officials have said they expect the two presidents to "close" a deal at a summit in coming weeks at Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida.
The source briefed on the talks said that no dates for a summit had been determined, but that Beijing had reserved a 10-day window from around March 20 for a possible summit.
Many details still needed to be worked out, including the terms of an enforcement mechanism to ensure that Beijing follows through on pledges to make changes to policies to better protect U.S. intellectual property, end forced technology transfers and curb industrial subsidies.
Another source familiar with the talks said that Washington and Beijing were close to agreement on non-enforcement issues, including China's pledges to increase purchases of farm, energy and manufactured products, as well as six agreements on structural policy changes.
The Wall Street Journal said that in the pending agreement, China would lower tariffs on U.S.-made goods including agricultural products, chemicals and cars in exchange for sanctions relief from Washington, citing people briefed on the matter on both sides.
The newspaper's sources cautioned that hurdles remain, and each side faces possible resistance at home that the terms are too favorable to the other side.
As a part of the deal there would be a $18 billion purchase of natural-gas from Houston-based Cheniere Energy Inc, the report said.
Cheniere declined to comment on the potential for a new LNG supply deal with China, a spokesman said. It last year signed a 20-year deal to supply state-run Chinese National Petroleum Corp (CNPC) with natural gas from its Louisiana export terminal through 2043.
The United States is working to hammer out a detailed trade agreement with China that will include specific structural commitments, U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin told CNBC on Thursday.
Last week, Trump said the U.S. could walk away from a trade deal with China if it were not good enough, even as his economic advisers touted "fantastic" progress towards an agreement to end the dispute with Beijing.
Trump a week ago delayed a tariff increase on $200 billion in Chinese goods that was previously scheduled to take place on Saturday, citing progress in the talks.
https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2019/03/04/business/04reuters-usa-china-trade.html
-
EPA Submits TSCA CBI Proposal for White House Review
Mar 1, 2019 | Inside EPA
EPA has submitted its proposed trade secret Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) inventory review rule for White House Office of Management & Budget (OMB) pre-publication review, a rule that will detail how the agency plans to review confidential business information (CBI) claims for chemicals on the inventory.
The proposed rule was triggered by a statutory deadline in TSCA as revised by Congress in 2016. The updated TSCA requires that within one year of EPA's publication of the final TSCA inventory denoting active and inactive chemicals, EPA must finalize a rule requiring companies to substantiate CBI claims.
EPA sent a proposed version of the rule to OMB March 1, according to its website. The agency projects a since-missed target of January this year for issuing the proposal, with a final rule targeted for December.
On OMB’s website, EPA explains that it is developing the rule as required in TSCA section 8(b)(4)(C). The section “requires EPA to issue a final rule, within 1 year of EPA's compiling of a list of active substances on the TSCA Inventory … that establishes a plan to review all claims to protect the specific chemical identities of chemical substances on the confidential portion of the active Inventory.
“Per the statute, the rule will require all manufacturers or processors asserting [CBI] claims for the identities of chemicals on the active Inventory to substantiate those claims in accordance with TSCA section 14 unless the manufacturer or processor already substantiated the claim in a submission to EPA during the previous 5-year period. Approved CBI claims will generally be valid for 10 years except as authorized by the statute.”
The law firm Bergeson & Campbell says in its “Forecast 2019” publication that environmentalists' ongoing lawsuit on EPA's “Inventory notification rule … may presage a challenge to the CBI review rule.”
The Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) claims that EPA’s 2017 inventory notification rule changes to criteria for substantiating businesses' CBI claims, compared to the proposed version issued late in the Obama administration, violated both the reformed TSCA law and rulemaking requirements in the Administrative Procedure Act (APA).
A D.C. Circuit panel heard argument in EDF v. EPA last October. All three judges appeared critical of the 2017 rule -- including comments that the Trump-era changes are illogical, contrary to the law and raise procedural concerns -- but an opinion has yet to be released.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/epa-submits-tsca-cbi-proposal-white-house-review
-
(ACC Blog) New Cutting-Edge University Research Confirms Safe Exposure Level for Formaldehyde
Mar 4, 2019 | American Chemistry Matters
For years, formaldehyde chemistry has faced close scrutiny regarding appropriate regulatory levels, safe exposure threshold levels, and the potential link between formaldehyde exposure and cancer. This is despite decades worth of peer-reviewed studies demonstrating safe exposure levels and lack of association with cancers at current relevant human exposure levels.
As part of an ongoing portfolio of formaldehyde research by scientists at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC), additional new data conclusively support existing science-based safe formaldehyde thresholds. Researchers measured impacts of low levels of formaldehyde on DNA adducts because that indicator has been demonstrated to be the most sensitive biomarker for exposure to formaldehyde. The result: No DNA damage detected in any tissue examined. UNC’s research is the most accurate measure of exposure – thus demonstrating that current safe exposure limits are more than adequately protective.
Why is this research cutting-edge?
First and foremost, you should know that over an ounce of formaldehyde is naturally formed in the human body every day and exhaled in every breath. Formaldehyde is present in every cell in our bodies, which makes it challenging to evaluate how much inhaled formaldehyde travels into the body when we are exposed to it from an outside source. What makes the UNC research revolutionary is that scientists were able to differentiate between inhaled formaldehyde from what the human body is naturally producing. This allowed the researchers to precisely determine how each source of formaldehyde affects the body and, most importantly, at what levels the body’s natural defense mechanisms could be overwhelmed.
Why is this differentiation so important?
By identifying how externally inhaled versus naturally produced formaldehyde affects the body, the UNC research team verified, using the most sensitive measurement technique available, that inhaled formaldehyde does not travel beyond the nose, thus limiting its ability to cause adverse health effects. Even more significantly, the research shows no inhaled formaldehyde reaches distant site organ systems such as the blood circulatory system, making it virtually impossible for formaldehyde to cause blood diseases such as leukemia.
What is a safe exposure level for formaldehyde?
Safe exposure levels for formaldehyde have been clearly demonstrated by years of scientific study. Federal and international agencies developing chemical assessments and evaluating chemical risk must consider the entire weight-of-evidence on formaldehyde when establishing exposure levels. The current science demonstrates that safe threshold levels developed by the World Health Organization,[2] for example, continue to be protective against all potential adverse effects.
Based on this portfolio of game-changing research at UNC, as well as the dozens of 30+ years of past peer-reviewed studies – minding the science leads to supporting the safe and responsible use of the chemistry of formaldehyde.
https://blog.americanchemistry.com/2019/03/new-cutting-edge-university-research-confirms-safe-exposure-level-for-formaldehyde1/
-
Republicans Back Bill to Speed EPA Fluorochemical Response
Mar 1, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Sylvia Carignan
Senate Republicans are joining Democrats in both chambers to push the EPA to quickly tackle a ubiquitous family of chemicals contaminating drinking water across the country.
A new Senate bill, introduced March 1, echoes a House bill that would give the Environmental Protection Agency the power to order cleanups of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances.
If the legislation becomes law, the EPA would have one year to designate the substances as hazardous under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, which guides the agency’s flagship contamination cleanup program. That designation would facilitate federally-mandated cleanup efforts.
The EPA is considering moving forward with that designation for those chemicals, the agency announced Feb. 14, but didn’t specify a time frame.
“This is an issue that must be addressed with urgency,” Sen. Tom Carper (D-Del.), ranking member of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, said in a press release.
The bill is the first piece of legislation on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances to gain support from both parties and both chambers during the 116th Congress. In the previous congressional session, separate legislation to deal with the substances never made it out of committee, suggesting uncertain prospects for the current bills.
Carper introduced the bill, which also has support from Sens. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Cory Gardner (R-Colo.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), Richard Burr (R-N.C.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), and Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.).
The House bill (H.R. 535), introduced Jan. 14 by Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.), is co-sponsored by 10 Democrats and one Republican.
The chemical compounds, also known as PFAS, have been used to manufacture nonstick and stain-resistant coatings in clothing, fast-food wrappers, carpets, and other consumer and industrial products.
PFAS compounds may cause adverse health effects, including developmental harm to fetuses, testicular and kidney cancer, liver tissue damage, immune system or thyroid effects, and changes in cholesterol, according to the EPA.
https://bnanews.bna.com/environment-and-energy/republicans-back-bill-to-speed-epa-fluorochemical-response
-
Imports of Used PFAS Into US Scrutinized
Mar 3, 2019 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Cheryl Hogue
To meet demands for nonstick-pan coatings and fuel-cell components, Chemours depends on a fluorinated chemical called GenX. This compound helps building-block materials link together into tough, resistant plastics and industrial membranes. During the process of making these materials, GenX, an ammonium salt, ends up in water and hydrolyzes into hexafluoropropylene oxide dimer acid (HFPO-DA). The three Chemours plants that use GenX extract HFPO-DA from process wastewater so the material can be remade into GenX.
Now, as environmental concerns about these fluorinated chemicals mount, Dutch and US environmental regulators are taking a close look at Chemours’s practice of shipping reclaimed HFPO-DA from its plant in the city of Dordrecht, the Netherlands, to one in Fayetteville, North Carolina. In addition, Dutch authorities are raising concerns about the environmental release of HFPO-containing material as it is hauled for reprocessing or disposal.
Chemours’s Fayetteville Works facility manufactures virgin GenX. For years, it has also made GenX from HFPO-DA reclaimed from operations at its site as well as at Chemours plants in Dordrecht and outside Parkersburg, West Virginia, company spokesperson Lisa Randall tells C&EN. Making GenX from captured HFPO-DA leads to lower emissions of fluoroethers into the environment than does manufacturing the material from scratch, Chemours says in a Jan. 25 statement. HFPO-DA is toxic, the US Environmental Protection Agency and Dutch authorities say. The substance contaminates surface water, groundwater, or both around all three Chemours fluorochemical factories. Both GenX and HFPO-DA are nonpolymer per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), a class of chemicals that are persistent or break down into persistent compounds.
North Carolina has been especially hard hit with HFPO-DA pollution. State regulators have struggled to address the contamination since HFPO-DA and other fluoroethers turned up in municipal drinking water drawn from the Cape Fear River downstream of Fayetteville Works a few years ago. Plus, high levels of HFPO-DA were discovered in private wells near the facility.
State officials did not know that the Fayetteville plant was receiving HFPO-DA material from the Netherlands until early last year, according to documents the North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality supplied to C&EN. State regulators wrote to the facility in January 2018 seeking details about the imports, including the average volumes sent to the plant per month. Most of Chemours’s response consists of confidential business information and can’t be released to the public, an agency spokesperson says.
Fayetteville Works hasn’t been the only destination for the Dordrecht plant’s captured HFPO-DA. For years, the Dordrecht facility shipped at least some of what Dutch officials describe as fluoroether waste to a chemical plant owned by Miteni in Trissino, Italy, for reclamation. The Miteni factory is under investigation in connection with PFAS pollution in Italy’s Veneto region. HFPO-DA was found in wells near the Miteni facility last year, the Regional Council of Veneto says.
Chemours no longer ships the fluoroether material to Miteni. The Italian facility shut down on Oct. 31, 2018, leaving its 121 employees out of work, according to the European Monitoring Centre on Change. An Italian court declared the company bankrupt in November 2018.
Now, the status of the HFPO-DA generated at the Dordrecht plant is in flux. Complicating the situation further is material piled up at the shuttered Miteni facility.
“The recent bankruptcy of our European recycling contractor requires us to take responsible actions to ensure we continue to recycle the vast majority of [HFPO-DA],” Chemours says in its Jan. 25 statement.
Chemours is asking Dutch authorities to allow the Dordrecht plant to accept and store for one year as much as 15 metric tons of HFPO-DA material from the Miteni site. That’s according to a Feb. 7 document from South Holland, the province that includes Dordrecht. The Dordrecht facility is seeking permission for temporary storage, the document says, because “Chemours in the United States does not yet have a permit to receive and process this waste stream.”
Meanwhile, Chemours says in its statement that it is asking the US EPA to allow the company to ship to North Carolina the unprocessed material that its Dordrecht plant sent to Miteni before the Italian firm’s bankruptcy.
Related: What’s GenX still doing in the water downstream of a Chemours plant?
For its part, the EPA asked Dutch regulators in December to temporarily stop the Dordrecht plant from sending fluoroether waste to Fayetteville Works, according to an agency document that surfaced in January and was first reported by the news site NC Policy Watch. The EPA asked the Dutch about the chemical makeup of the material shipped from the Dordrecht factory. It also sought details about “management of the wastes.” The EPA tells C&EN it has not yet received this information from the Dutch or Chemours. The temporary halt on US imports of the material will remain until the EPA gets the data, reviews the information, and makes a regulatory determination, the agency says.
Randall, the Chemours spokesperson, takes issue with the characterization of the HFPO-DA material as waste. “The Fayetteville Works site does not receive wastewater from any other Chemours facilities,” she says.
Under US law, if the material isn’t technically waste, the Fayetteville facility doesn’t need a permit to process the HFPO-DA material into GenX. The EPA tells C&EN that on the basis of information previously submitted by Chemours, the recovered material would not meet the US definition of hazardous waste.
EPA documents indicate that Chemours makes GenX from reclaimed HFPO-DA under the federal law governing the manufacture of commercial chemicals, the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). In doing so, it must adhere to a TSCA order in which the EPA set conditions for the production of virgin GenX, notably that Chemours must prevent fluoroether releases into the water and air. At the end of the process making GenX from HFPO-DA, the Fayetteville plant sends wastewater to licensed incinerators in Texas and Arkansas, says Randall, the Chemours spokesperson.
Chemours apparently did not inform the EPA about the amounts of GenX it made from imported, reclaimed HFPO-DA, as required, until after a 2017 inspection by the agency. The EPA cited the company on Feb. 14 for failing to report its annual production of GenX sourced from the material imported from the Netherlands. Chemours has since corrected this paperwork error, EPA enforcement documents indicate.
Related: GenX-related fluoroether taints water in wells near West Virginia Chemours plant
While the disposition of Chemours’s reclaimed HFPO-DA in Europe remains pending, Dutch officials are raising red flags about potential releases of the chemical during transportation for recycling. In response to a request from the Netherlands House of Representatives, the nation’s Human Environment and Transport Inspectorate examined how the Dordrecht plant characterizes and handles its waste streams, issuing a report in July.
Chemours has not systematically identified which of its waste flows contain fluoroethers, the report found. “Chemours takes no measurements to determine whether [GenX-related] substances are in the waste” it ships, the report says. “The investigation showed that little or no attention is given to [fluoroether] substances in waste throughout the entire chain” of waste handling. As a result, HFPO-DA and its chemical cousins were released into the environment at “various places” as the waste was hauled, the report says. Credit: Gerry Broome/AP The Chemours plant in Fayetteville, North Carolina, processes reclaimed HFPO-DA into GenX.
In addition, businesses that transport wastewater from the Dordrecht plant to waste processors don’t regularly clean the tankers they use and don’t test for residual fluorocarbons in these vessels, the report adds. This may have led to subsequent contamination with fluoroethers of other wastes hauled in the tankers. And fluoroethers may have ended up in sanitary sewers when tankers were rinsed out, the report says.
Dutch officials are suggesting that the European Union tighten regulation of GenX and reclaimed HFPO-DA. The Netherlands National Institute for Public Health and the Environment in November sent a risk-management analysis for GenX to the European Chemicals Agency.
“The unpredictable, wide spread and uncontrollable emissions” of HFPO-DA during the transportation and treatment of GenX-related waste “are no longer manageable in an efficient way,” the analysis suggests. “Regulatory measures should preferably be aimed at the production and use phase and should prevent a situation in which HFPO-DA containing waste cannot be traced and treated responsibly.”
The Dutch agency’s analysis also raises the possibility of a need for global controls on GenX and any other substances that form HFPO-DA. It suggests the world could take action against these fluoroethers under the Stockholm convention, a global treaty that restricts or bans persistent organic pollutants.
Related: EPA releases draft safe daily dose for Chemours’s GenX chemical
Ironically, GenX, which came to market in 2009, was developed as a “more sustainable” substitute for perfluorooctanoic acid, a toxic, persistent, and bioaccumulative chemical that is a candidate for control under the Stockholm convention. If GenX eventually ends up governed by the Stockholm convention—as its predecessor is likely to be—Chemours will be searching for another substitute to aid in the manufacture of fluoropolymers to coat nonstick pans and make industrial membranes.
https://cen.acs.org/environment/persistent-pollutants/Imports-used-PFAS-US-scrutinized/97/i9
-
Lawmakers Kick-Start PFAS Oversight
Mar 4, 2019 | E&E Daily
By Cecelia Smith-Schoenwalder
A House Oversight and Reform panel this week will question the government's handling of toxic chemicals found in drinking water.
The Environment Subcommittee plans to tackle per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS — a class of chemicals that has been linked to health problems like cancer.
Democratic lawmakers last month voiced complaints against EPA for the agency's plan to address these chemicals (Greenwire, Feb. 14).
The plan promised to start the regulatory process to create a maximum contaminant level for two PFAS — PFOA and PFOS — by the end of the year.
Critics worry EPA is moving too slowly. PFOA and PFOS are the two best-studied chemicals in the class of roughly 5,000 others, according to EPA.
The final witness list for the hearing has not been announced, but a subcommittee spokesman said that it will include EPA and Defense Department officials.
EPA is the lead agency in charge of regulating the chemicals, but DOD will play a large role in their potential cleanup.
Many current and former military bases were contaminated with PFAS after they were used as an ingredient in firefighting foam.
https://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2019/03/04/stories/1060122853
-
Manufacturers Seek To Dismiss Landmark Class Action Suit Over PFAS
Mar 1, 2019 | Inside EPA
By Suzanne Yohannan
Manufacturers of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) are seeking to dismiss a potentially landmark class action suit that is pursuing industry-funded, independent nationwide health studies and testing to determine the effects of multiple PFAS found in the blood of nearly all Americans.
3M Company, E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., the Chemours Company and several other manufacturers of the chemicals filed legal briefs last month in Kevin D. Hardwick v. 3M Company, et al., contending a federal district court should dismiss the case, arguing the plaintiff lacks standing and concrete injury and is seeking impermissible relief.
“If ever a complaint warranted dismissal, this is it,” write 3M and several other companies in a Feb. 14 brief seeking to dismiss the case, which is being overseen by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio.
“Plaintiff Kevin Hardwick, who is admittedly healthy, seeks no personalized relief. Rather, he wants to represent 99% of all Americans to establish an extrajudicial panel of science experts to research and render binding determinations on the potential health effects of a broad range of thousands of chemicals that Hardwick identifies as 'PFAS,'” it says.
The suit, filed last October, was brought by an Ohio firefighter who is seeking to represent all residents of the United States with a detectable level of PFAS in their blood.
Such a class could be huge, as the suit says testing by independent researchers and defendants has already found that 99 percent of the U.S. population has some kind of PFAS in their blood.
The suit aims to build on findings from an independent science panel created as part of an earlier settlement between DuPont and residents of West Virginia and Ohio who were exposed to C8, one of the thousands of PFAS, which tied the chemical to various adverse health effects, according to attorney Rob Bilott, who also represented plaintiffs in the earlier case.
Hardwick's suit seeks injunctive, equitable and declaratory relief for injuries to class members arising from alleged intentional, reckless and negligent acts by defendants in connection with the contamination of class members' blood from a variety of PFAS -- both older, long-chain versions as well as GenX and other newer, shorter-chain chemicals.
The suit specifically seeks an injunction requiring the defendants to fund a PFAS science panel, while alleging negligence, battery, and conspiracy by the defendants.
PFAS, used in a host of consumer and industrial applications including in firefighting foam, is a class of thousands of emerging contaminants that is increasingly drawing concerns due to its presence in drinking water systems.
But the defendants contend that the complaint “is unprecedented” in terms of the scope of claims it is making and the relief sought. “Not surprisingly, it is also non-justiciable and fails to state a claim, for a host of reasons,” they say.
The companies say the plaintiff lacks Article III standing, as the suit is an “abstract dispute” with Hardwick, who is not citing any illnesses or harm suffered. Further, they say the complaint fails to state a concrete injury under Ohio law, noting that “the mere presence of a substance” in a plaintiff's body does not “constitute” injury.
Also, they say the plaintiff is requesting impermissible relief, noting federal courts may only award traditional relief, and that this goes beyond that and would violate the Seventh Amendment, Article III and due process.
The complaint also contains pleading defects, they say, failing to provide “such basic information as which defendant allegedly did which thing to cause which purported injury in what way.” The complaint must contain such information in order to allow defendants to defend themselves, they say.
And, they contend, the Ohio Product Liability Act extinguishes the claims because they meet the statutory definition of a product liability claim.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/manufacturers-seek-dismiss-landmark-class-action-suit-over-pfas
-
New Mexico Court Push May Limit Impact Of Key Suit On State PFAS Powers
Mar 1, 2019 | Inside EPA
By Suzanne Yohannan
New Mexico officials are seeking to steer Defense Department litigation challenging their permit restrictions on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) to state court, a move that if successful could limit any precedent the litigation may set on federal officials' ability to challenge such state actions.
New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) officials last month asked the U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico to dismiss the case, United States v. NMED, saying a state court, rather than the federal district court, should hear the suit.
It called for the federal court to abstain from exercising its jurisdiction and to defer to the New Mexico Court of Appeals, where the Air Force has filed a concurrent appeal of the state Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) permit at issue.
“Because there is an ongoing state court proceeding which implicates important interests and provides an adequate forum for Plaintiff's claims, this court should abstain from exercising federal jurisdiction,” the motion says.
The Air Force has said it filed the concurrent appeal in state court merely “as a protective measure,” but planned to seek to stay that case in deference to the federal case.
In the alternative, the state's motion asked for a “more definite statement of the alleged inconsistencies between the permit, RCRA and the [state Hazardous Waste Act (HWA)]."
The state's motion came after the Air Force in January sued NMED, arguing its hazardous waste definition in a recently renewed 10-year RCRA permit for Cannon Air Force Base should be vacated.
The state permit governs contamination investigation and remediation at the base, according to a fact sheet on the draft version of the permit. But the service charges the language, which defines hazardous waste as including contaminants such as PFAS, munitions constituents, perchlorate and other chemicals, “exceeds the scope of RCRA's waiver of sovereign immunity.” While the service did not elaborate on why it believes the action is unlawful, it appears to stem from the fact that EPA does not regulate PFAS.
Marten Law policy adviser Nathan Frey and senior associate Jennifer Hammitt say in a Feb. 20 law post that the litigation may become a test case on attempts to limit state regulation on PFAS. The case “may provide additional insight into the viability of state regulation in the absence of federal rules."
EPA in a recently released PFAS action plan takes a multi-media approach to addressing widespread concern over PFAS contamination, promising to better monitor the extent of contamination and assess risks, but taking just preliminary regulatory steps on water and waste concerns.
Among EPA's measures is a plan to list two specific PFAS as “hazardous substances” under the Superfund law -- an action that would aid regulators and others in pursuing cleanup costs and could moot arguments the military has made in other disputes, where it has claimed it is immune from state enforcement of state laws for the release of anything other than listed Superfund hazardous substances.
But in the absence of EPA commitments, several states -- including New Jersey, New Hampshire, Colorado and New York -- are charging ahead and developing their own strict standards to address heightened public concerns over the spread of chemicals in drinking water systems.
'More Expeditious Solution'
Other states, like New Mexico, echoed concerns that any EPA action would take a long time but an NMED spokeswoman said the department will pursue whatever action it can to force the Air Force to remediate any releases in the absence of federal standards.
“In a state where PFAS is causing contamination and threatening human health today, it is critical we find a more expeditious solution in the interim. The Environment Department, in collaboration with other state agencies, will continue to use available avenues and resources to push the Air Force toward immediate action in addressing the contamination,” she said.
And a spokesman for New Mexico Attorney General Hector Balderas (D) added that NMED “has the authority and the duty to protect New Mexicans, and we will vigorously defend that authority to ensure proper environmental protections for the people of New Mexico."
The permit challenge at Cannon came after the Air Force appeared to be dragging its feet on responding to alleged violations of state groundwater and surface water requirements at the base from PFAS used in aqueous film-forming firefighting foam for the past 40 years there.
In early December, NMED announced it was “requiring swift action” from Cannon to comply with state water requirements, contending that PFAS are at “very high concentrations” in groundwater on and off the base due to the use of firefighting foam. The state is seeking mitigation including water treatment of polluted well sources for livestock and irrigated crops and an evaluation of the feasibility of installing treatment systems on wells.
The state refused a request by the Air Force to extend the time for complying with the violation notice, because it failed to give sufficient justification, according to NMED.
Frey and Hammitt, of the Marten law firm, say that the Air Force's suit signals federal officials plan to aggressively challenge state efforts on PFAS in the absence of EPA standards.
“By seeking a declaratory judgment in advance of any enforcement action on the permit, the United States made its first official action in the courts to cut back on state enforcement of PFAS limits (at least as applied to federal entities),” they write.
But NMED's push to have the case decided by a state, rather than federal, court could limit the reach of any precedent.
While the state is seeking to dismiss the federal suit, it nevertheless argues that the federal lawsuit fails as a matter of law and fact because it does not allege “any specific inconsistencies between the Permit, RCRA, and the [New Mexico Hazardous Waste Act (HWA)],” and therefore should be dismissed.
“[I]t is impossible to ascertain from Plaintiff's Complaint which aspect of the hazardous waste definition in the Permit Plaintiff believes is problematic. In addition to its failures to meet the federal pleading standard, the Complaint as written provides no basis on which NMED may formulate a thoughtful and informed response,” it says. If the court refuses to dismiss the complaint, it should call on the service to specify the alleged flaws in the permit, it says.
The permit being challenged is simply a renewal and revision of a past permit originally issued in 2003 that the Air Force did not challenge, it says. “Plaintiff does not allege that NMED failed to comply with its own administrative procedures in issuing its permit, nor does it allege that those procedures failed to fall within the express waiver of sovereign immunity,” the state says.
“Rather it appears that Plaintiff simply disagrees with the outcome of those procedures and now seeks to collaterally attack the contents of a permit lawfully issued by NMED under its delegated authority."
On sovereign immunity, New Mexico says the Air Force's claim of sovereign immunity appears to entirely depend on its claim that the hazardous waste definition for purposes of corrective action is not consistent with New Mexico's HWA. But, NMED says, the state court of appeals “is expressly empowered to provide judicial review of final NMED permitting actions,” so this issue fits “squarely within that court's competence to decide."
It adds, “Moreover, to the extent the federal sovereign immunity claim implicates any issue of federal law outside of the HWA, nothing in New Mexico law bars consideration of such a claim.”
Further, on the “unsupported” claim that the permit's hazardous waste definition exceeds RCRA's sovereign immunity waiver, the state says the permit was issued under New Mexico's RCRA authority -- which was recognized by the Air Force when it entered into the previous permit for the base.
“Plaintiff has failed to articulate any reason why it should now be exempted from the RCRA waiver of immunity,” it adds. “Therefore, the Complaint fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted.”
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/new-mexico-court-push-may-limit-impact-key-suit-state-pfas-powers
-
Senators Introduce Bipartisan PFAS Bill
Mar 1, 2019 | E&E News PM
A bipartisan group of senators today introduced legislation that would force EPA to designate certain toxic chemicals found in drinking water as hazardous substances under a Superfund law.
The policy shift would require polluters to pay for remediation at sites contaminated with per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, or PFAS.
"Designating these chemicals as hazardous substances will, at a minimum, start the process to ensuring contaminated sites across the country are cleaned up, and Americans are safer from the threat posed by these emerging contaminants," said Sen. Tom Carper of Delaware, the top Democrat on the Environment and Public Works Committee.
The bill, titled the "PFAS Action Act of 2019," would require EPA to designate the chemicals as hazardous substances under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act within one year of the bill's enactment.
Rep. Debbie Dingell (D-Mich.) introduced a companion bill in the House in January (E&E Daily, Jan. 15).
The chemicals are used in a range of products from firefighting foam to nonstick cookware and have been linked to several health problems, including cancer.
"This legislation is just one step in the effort to clean up our contaminated lands, but by listing PFAS as a hazardous substance the federal government will be able to coordinate response, assist with remediation and hold responsible parties liable for cleanup costs," said Energy and Natural Resources Chairwoman Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), who is a co-sponsor of Carper's bill.
EPA released its PFAS Action Plan earlier this year. During its unveiling, EPA Administrator Andrew Wheeler said the agency has already started the process to get two types of PFAS — PFOA and PFOS — covered by the Superfund law (Greenwire, Feb. 14).
Lawmakers said this bill would hold EPA to that promise under a set timeline.
Joining Carper and Murkowski on the bill are Sens. Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), Gary Peters (D-Mich.), Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), Marco Rubio (R-Fla.), Jeff Merkley (D-Ore.), Cory Gardner (R-Colo.), Jack Reed (D-R.I.), Richard Burr (R-N.C.), Michael Bennet (D-Colo.), Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), Tom Udall (D-N.M.), Martin Heinrich (D-N.M.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.), Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) and Maggie Hassan (D-N.H.).
https://www.eenews.net/eenewspm/2019/03/01/stories/1060122839
-
EPA’s Plan to Regulate Chemical Contaminants in Drinking Water Is a Drop in the Bucket
Mar 2, 2019 | The Conversation
By Laurel Schaider
After more than a year of community meetings and deliberations, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced in February 2019 that it would begin the process of regulating two drinking water contaminants, seeking to stem a growing national public health crisis. If EPA follows through, this would be the first time in nearly 20 years that it has set an enforceable standard for a new chemical contaminant under the Safe Drinking Water Act.
The chemicals at issue, PFOA and PFOS, have contaminated drinking water supplies across the country affecting millions of Americans. They belong to a class of synthetic chemicals called PFAS, or per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, that are widely used in products including firefighting foams, waterproof apparel, stain-resistant furniture, food packaging and even dental floss.
These chemicals have been linked with numerous health problems, including cancers, thyroid disease, high cholesterol, low birth weight and effects on the immune system. Studies show exposure to PFAS in children can dampen the effectiveness of vaccines – a topic my colleagues and I are currently investigating as part of a project called PFAS-REACH. In laboratory studies, low levels of PFAS can alter mammary gland development, which could have implications for increasing breast cancer susceptibility later in life.
What’s more, PFAS are highly persistent. Once released into the environment, they don’t break down – a fact that has led many to dub these substances “forever chemicals.”
A persistent problem
PFAS have been used for decades, but only in the last few years have we begun to grasp the full extent of contamination. A 2016 study reported that over 16 million Americans are exposed to these contaminants in drinking water, and a more recent estimate put that number at 110 million.
PFAS find their way into water supplies from military fire training areas and airports, as well as industrial sites and wastewater treatment plants. For instance, in 2010 my colleagues and I at the nonprofit Silent Spring Institute, which studies links between environmental chemicals and women’s health, first detected PFAS in public and private drinking water wells on Cape Cod, Massachusetts. The Department of Defense has identified approximately 400 current or former military sites with known or suspected contamination, stemming mostly from use of firefighting foams.
Today there are more than 4,700 PFAS substances in use. All are chemically similar and highly persistent. The United States phased PFOS out of products in 2000 and PFOA in 2006, but they are still turning up widely in drinking water, which is why states want EPA to set standards specifying what levels of exposure are safe. Meanwhile, studies suggest that some newer PFAS chemicals have similar health effects, and most have not been studied at all.
Scientists are working hard to better understand these chemicals in order to mitigate the public’s exposure. For example, researchers at the STEEP Superfund Research Program, a multi-institutional effort which I am a part of, are investigating how these chemicals move through the environment, their chemical characteristics, how they accumulate in our bodies, and their impacts on our health.
A shifting landscape
EPA has been considering regulating PFOS and PFOA in drinking water since 2009. The agency’s recent announcement is a step in the right direction, but still only addresses these two chemicals in drinking water and any new federal standard won’t be fully implemented for years.
Earlier this year my colleagues and I published an analysis in which we showed wide variation in the way state and federal regulators manage these contaminants in drinking water. We found that seven states have their own guideline levels for PFOA and PFOS. Of these, Vermont, Minnesota and New Jersey have adopted levels that are more stringent than EPA’s current non-enforceable levels.
More recently, New Hampshire, New York and California have also proposed guideline levels lower than EPA’s. The day after EPA announced its plan, Pennsylvania officials announced they would create their own standards, citing concerns about EPA’s sluggish efforts to address the issue.
Meanwhile, some states are developing their own guidelines covering additional PFAS chemicals. For instance, Minnesota has included in its guidelines a chemical called PFBS, which is used in Scotchgard. North Carolina regulators are focusing their efforts on a substitute called GenX that seeped into local water supplies from a plant upstream and has been detected in their air and soil.
A key question now is how EPA’s drinking water standard for PFOA and PFOS will compare with what states are doing. Will the agency consider the full body of scientific evidence on health risks associated with exposure to this class of chemicals when setting a “safe” limit in drinking water? Will it consider effects on sensitive populations, such as pregnant women and children? Although the science is still evolving, one thing is clear: The more we learn about these chemicals, the more we see health effects at lower and lower levels.
It is important to give states latitude to adopt more stringent approaches than those set by EPA, and a lot can be learned from how states set guidelines. However, the emerging regulatory patchwork raises concerns that some Americans are not adequately protected. Some states have the resources and technical know-how to conduct their own risk assessments, but others may lack the funding and expertise.
Political and social factors, as well as pressure from industry, can lead to wide disparities in exposure, with some communities protected and others left vulnerable. A federal standard would ensure that everyone is protected, regardless of whether their states have the will and the resources to develop their own standards.
It’s all in the family
EPA’s plan includes other steps that sound promising, such as listing PFOS and PFOA as “hazardous substances” under the Superfund law to establish liability for contamination and support cleanup, enhanced monitoring in drinking water, and better reporting of releases from industry. But the plan largely focuses on addressing problems at existing contaminated sites, not on keeping these chemicals out of water supplies and the environment.
Conducting risk assessments on individual PFAS compounds one at a time is impractical. As a result, many advocacy groups and scientists – including my colleagues at the Green Science Policy Institute – are calling for these chemicals to be regulated as a class.
Under the Toxic Substances Control Act, EPA has authority to restrict approval of new toxic chemicals. But in reality, new ones are approved all the time without thorough evaluations. Given concerns about the extreme persistence and mobility of PFAS compounds, in my view it makes good sense to restrict this entire class of chemicals.
There are precedents for such action. In 1979 the United States banned PCBs after these persistent and toxic chemicals became widespread in the environment. The global community banned chlorofluorocarbons in 1996 when scientists learned that they damage Earth’s stratospheric ozone layer. And in 2017 the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission voted to ban an entire class of toxic flame retardants from consumer products.
There is ample evidence for treating PFAS the same way. The question is whether federal regulators have the will.
https://theconversation.com/epas-plan-to-regulate-chemical-contaminants-in-drinking-water-is-a-drop-in-the-bucket-111243
-
Wisconsin Governor Aims for Carbon-Free Electricity by 2050
Mar 4, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Stephen Joyce
Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers (D) wants his state’s electricity to be produced with no carbon emissions by 2050, but his ambitious plans will face opposition in the Republican-run legislature.
Outlining his first budget proposal Feb. 28, Evers said he wants to spend $75 million for clean drinking water projects. He also plans to use a sizable amount of Wisconsin’s share of the national settlement with Volkswagen AG to pay for electric vehicle charging stations across the state.
However, both chambers of the state Legislature are controlled by Republicans who plan to design their own budget. State Assembly Speaker Robin Vos (R) called Evers’ request “a liberal wish list” in a statement issued after the governor’s speech.
Amber Meyer Smith, Clean Wisconsin vice president of programs and government relations, told Bloomberg Environment she recognizes the political realities of a Democratic governor proposing environmental initiatives to a Republican-dominated legislature. But energy issues shouldn’t be partisan, she said.
“The economics are there, the market is working to incentivize clean-energy options, so there should be a lot of bipartisan interest in how we can move our state forward,” she said.
WEC Energy Group Inc., a Wisconsin utility, set a goal of reducing carbon emissions by 80 percent by 2050 compared to 2005 emissions levels.
“We would need to count on other technology to either be developed or made more cost-efficient to meet a 100 percent goal,” Brendan Conway, WEC Energy spokesman, told Bloomberg Environment in an email.
Xcel Energy Inc., which is active in the Wisconsin market, committed in December to deliver 100 percent carbon-free electricity to customers by 2050.
“We were pleased to hear Governor Evers’ goal for Wisconsin, which is consistent with Xcel Energy’s vision, along with support for carbon-free nuclear generation,” Mark Stoering, Xcel Energy-Wisconsin president, said in a statement.
Xcel’s PlanThe push for carbon-free electricity in Wisconsin will be challenging.
Currently, about a quarter of Wisconsinites get their electricity from carbon-free sources, such as wind and solar power. The state currently relies on coal for 55 percent of its electricity; wind delivers just 3 percent of electricity while virtually zero comes from solar, Smith said.
With the governor’s carbon-free request, Wisconsin joins other Midwestern states pushing for greater use of carbon-free sources.
Bills introduced in both Minnesota and Illinois would require that all electricity sold in those states come from carbon-free sources by 2050.
But criticism over the budget proposals came from the real estate industry, state petroleum marketers, and convenience stores, as well as Republican lawmakers concerned about the governor’s plan to raise the gasoline tax by $0.08.
The American Council of Engineering Companies of Wisconsin applauded the proposal’s focus on water and energy infrastructure. And Kerry Schumann, Wisconsin Conservation Voters executive director, also praised the budget proposal as a “bold visionary commitment to clean energy, clean water, and science-based policy.”
Science RevivalEvers also wants to reorganize his administration’s energy and environment team, establishing an Office of Sustainability and Clean Energy within the Department of Administration. The office would promote the use of clean and renewable energy across the state and advance sustainability solutions that improve the state’s economy and environment.
A Bureau of Natural Resources Science would be created that would employ five scientists, including at least two who would work on per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances contamination issues. Five other staff would be hired in the state’s Department of Natural Resources to focus on the environmental effects of large animal feeding operations.
Wisconsin Farm Bureau Federation President Jim Holte said in a March 1 statement his group was grateful for the budget’s allocation of $1.4 million for agricultural research and for helping farmers meet water quality standards.
The addition of scientists marks a shift from the prior administration of Gov. Scott Walker (R), Smith said.
Walker critics accused him of favoring economic growth over environmental protection, and the governor scrubbed state government web sites containing climate change information.
“It’s very refreshing to have a restored view of a science-based decision making process on natural resource related topics,” she said.
“The governor is committed to bring science back to decision making at all levels of government,” a budget document said.
(Updates with more reporting throughout, including comments from various interest groups. )
https://bnanews.bna.com/environment-and-energy/wisconsin-governor-aims-for-carbon-free-electricity-by-2050-1
-
Climate Momentum Hits Energy Committee
Mar 4, 2019 | E&E Daily
By Jeremy Dillon
The first specifically climate-focused hearing of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee in nearly seven years will occur tomorrow as members meet to consider climate change and the electric sector.
The hearing represents the latest example of the increased focus on climate change by Republicans and Democrats alike in 2019 as both sides try to stake out climate policy positions following the introduction of the progressive "Green New Deal."
The ENR Committee's last hearing with climate as the central focus was held in August 2012 under then-Chairman Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) as part of a field hearing in New Mexico dubbed "Climate Change and Intermountain West."
Other Senate hearings since have touched on the subject, but not with the same vigor as is expected tomorrow.
The committee is not the central panel of jurisdiction over climate change in the Senate. That distinction belongs to the Environment and Public Works Committee, but ENR does oversee one of the leading emitting industries in the electric power sector.
Led in part by the growing shift from coal generation to natural gas and the addition of more renewable energy on the grid, the power sector has decreased its carbon dioxide emissions by 28 percent since 2005.
It now ranks as the country's second-greatest carbon-emitting sector after transportation replaced it in 2016, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.
For Chairwoman Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), the hearing may represent her broader effort to enact policies to help address climate change, as she hinted she would begin to do in the new Congress over the past few months.
Her home state of Alaska is at the front line of the impacts of climate, including sea-level rise and unseasonably warmer winters, among other areas.
Murkowski has preached about innovation as a means to addressing the problem. That will likely come through Department of Energy research and development programs that could ultimately improve costs and efficiencies of technology such as battery storage or advanced nuclear reactors.
"Our role here in the Congress is to help foster an environment that encourages that innovation," Murkowski said during a Feb. 7 hearing.
The hearing may offer more insight into how vigorously the committee's top Democrat, Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, will look to involve himself on climate change.
The coal-state lawmaker took the top Democratic spot earlier this year despite some cries from far-left environmental groups that criticized his prior support of fossil fuels — one of West Virginia's driving economic sectors.
Manchin has used his time as ranking member to reassure other Democrats about his seriousness on climate change.
"Climate change is real, and communities across our nation have suffered the destructive effects associated with it," he said during a Feb. 5 hearing.
Schedule: The hearing is Tuesday, March 5, at 10 a.m. in 366 Dirksen.
Witnesses:Lisa Jacobson, president of the Business Council for Sustainable Energy.Joseph Kelliher, executive vice president of federal regulatory affairs with NextEra Energy Inc.Kenneth Medlock, senior director of the Center for Energy Studies at Rice University.Ethan Schutt, chief of staff for the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium.Susan Tierney, senior adviser with the Analysis Group Inc.
https://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2019/03/04/stories/1060122875
-
Mar 1, 2019 | Plastics Today
By Clare Goldsberry
Reclaiming the value of plastic waste has been on the front burner for many companies recently, and several are on the path to commercializing their innovations, including Loop Industries Inc. and the folks at IBM’s laboratory with their VolCat process. This week, researchers at the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL; Golden, CO) announced their take on plastics upcycling—transforming discarded products into new, high-value materials of better quality and environmental value, with the goal of incentivizing recycling of waste plastics.
An article in Joule describes how the NREL team chemically combines reclaimed polyethylene terephthalate (PET) plastic, in the form of single-use beverage bottles, with bio-based compounds to produce higher-value, fiber-reinforced plastics (FRPs) that can be used in products ranging from snowboards and vehicle parts to wind turbines. Not only are the resulting composites worth more than double the original PET, the FRPs exhibit twice the strength and improved adhesion to fiberglass when compared with standard petroleum-derived FRP, claims NREL.
In an online press conference on Feb. 28, NREL Senior Research Fellow Gregg Beckham said that recycling can save between 40% and 90% of embedded energy in plastics and save money, as well. However, he noted that “most recycling today is downcycling—there’s very little financial motivation.” Beckham, one of the primary authors of the paper, added: “Knowing that 26 million tons of PET are produced each year but only 30% of PET bottles are recycled in the United States, our findings represent a significant advancement in enabling the circular materials economy.”
We can’t demonize plastics because they have contributed many benefits to society, but the fact is that “many countries don’t have the infrastructure to deal with plastic waste,” he said.
NREL started its project with PET because it is considered the easiest plastic to recycle. However, rather than going the mechanical recycling route, in which material properties are often compromised and, thus, go into lower-value products, the idea of the NREL team is to combine PET with diol (ethylene glycol) from non-food-plant biomass to produce fiber-reinforced composite materials to make products that are much more valuable, such as wind turbine blades, surfboards, snowboards and even automotive parts.
NREL performed a supply-chain analysis of the FRP materials that found substantial energy savings (up to 57%) and a 40% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions when compared to the process for producing petroleum-based composites.
Beckham noted that a life cycle analysis showed traditional energy consumption (collection, melting and so forth) for producing fiber-glass-reinforced plastics is 88 megajoules (MJ) per kilogram of material at a cost of $22/MJ. Using NREL’s process, that can be reduced to 42 MJ/kg at a cost of $10/MJ.
The NREL team also included staff polymer researcher Nic Rorrer, who has previously worked on bio-based muconic acid and breaking down reclaimed PET. “We are excited to have developed a technology that incentivizes the economics of plastics reclamation,” Rorrer said in a prepared statement. “The ultimate goal is to reduce the amount of waste plastics in landfills and oceans.”
NREL is doing additional research into upcycling high-performance polymers, such as polycarbonate, for use in high-end products. “We have other projects in the works,” said Beckham. “This is just the first one out.”
Beckham acknowledged that many others in industry are entering the upcycling arena to solve the problem of plastic waste. “There is not a single silver bullet—because of the different plastics involved, new and different solutions will be needed. This is just one potential partial solution. We’re going to need more upcycling solutions than just this one, and all solutions are on the table.”
Currently the NREL’s biggest challenge is access to plant-based monomers. “There’s not a lot of large-scale bio-based material available, and we need to intensify the bio-based monomers available,” Beckham said. Currently the NREL team is looking at agricultural residues from corn or waste wood chips from the timber industry.
Another challenge is that the bio-based fiber-reinforced composite/PET material is “not inherently recyclable at the end of the product’s life,” Beckham added.
The process is still “small-scale” in the laboratory, and NREL is working with industry partners to expand it. Commercialization of the process is still “several years” away.
That said, Beckham commented that the team at NREL is “hoping this will encourage the recycling of PET to a greater extent” than is currently being done. “Our goal is to incentivize recycling of waste plastic and incorporate plant-based building blocks and give a second life to waste plastics for high-value products,” he concluded.
https://www.plasticstoday.com/recycling/us-renewable-energy-lab-pioneers-upcycling-technology-turn-waste-plastics-new-high-value-products/123250750760355
-
In This Oil Boom Town, Even a Barber Can Make $180,000
Mar 4, 2019 | The Wall Street Journal
By Christopher M. Matthews and Rebecca Elliott
West Texas has seen its share of oil booms, but the people there say this one is unlike any they’ve seen.
Driven by shale drilling, a gusher of crude production has transformed the Permian Basin into America’s hottest oilfield, turning what was a remote stretch of towns spread among mesquite trees and scrubland into an industrial zone, seemingly overnight.
Fortunes are being made in this fracking-related gold rush, and money and workers are flooding in. But many necessities in the area now cost a small fortune, creating opportunities for businesses selling everything from dipping tobacco to sand for fracking. It can be hard to get a haircut, grab a plate of good Texas barbecue, or find a table at a popular bar, because demand outstrips supply. Housing is scarce and hotel room prices sometimes rival those of New York City at more than $500 a night.
There are more than 300 metropolitan areas across the U.S. with fewer than 1 million people. The Midland-Odessa job market, in the heart of the fracking boom, was the hottest of all of them last year, according to a Wall Street Journal analysis. Among those metro areas, Midland had the fastest job and labor-force growth, and one of the lowest unemployment rates, a monthly average of 2.3% in 2018.
Oil prices have fallen about 25% since October to around $57 a barrel. But West Texas residents are hopeful the boom won’t go bust soon because companies have pumped billions into building out the oilfield, and drilling is not expected to peak for years.
The Permian produced an average of more than 3.9 million barrels per day as of January, according to the Energy Information Administration. Analytics firm IHS Markit estimates Permian production could top 5 million barrels a day in 2023, surpassing Iraq.
Here’s what a modern-day boomtown looks like.$180,000 for a Barber
Pete McGarity opened Headlines Barber Shop in Odessa in 1998 and has ridden the boom-bust cycle before. This time around he decided to capitalize on it.
In 2017, Mr. McGarity spent about $25,000 to retrofit a trailer into a custom, mobile barber shop. That October, he drove it about an hour west to Pecos, Texas, and parked in front of the town’s only grocery store, hoping to catch oil field workers between shifts. It was an instant success.
“It was crazy, it went berserk,” says Mr. McGarity, 48. “I’d show up around one o’clock and we’d cut until after midnight.”
These days Mr. McGarity sends the trailer to Pecos, which is closer to the oilfields, six days a week with five barbers, who cut hair all day long. A cut costs as much as $40, more than the $25 he charged before the boom. There is usually a long waiting list, but patrons can cut the line if they pay $60, or $75 with a shave, a popular option with oil workers.
“It is flooded with oilfield workers galore, and these guys tip well,” he says.
Mr. McGarity’s barbers are raking it in. Those who venture to Pecos can make anywhere from $130,000 to $180,000 per year, he said. He is considering investing in additional trailers to send to farther-flung towns in the oil patch and says the additional revenue may allow him to retire soon. If there’s a bust, he’ll just store the mobile shops until things come back, he adds.Brisket Shortage
If you’re hoping to get some brisket at Pody’s BBQ in Pecos, you’d better show up early. During the week, there are usually 30 or more oil field workers lined up outside the restaurant before it opens at 11 a.m., an unusual sight for the small town before the boom.
Israel Campos says he has doubled his sales since starting the restaurant in 2012. Mr. Campos, 44 years old, says he is lucky his staff is family members, because many restaurants in the area struggle to keep workers, who are lured away by higher paying oil industry jobs.
The oil hands waiting in line will often order for their co-workers, sometimes 10 plates at a time, according to Mr. Campos. Company men frequently call ahead with larger orders they bring to drilling rigs or even fly out on private planes, he says.
“We sell out daily and we hardly see any locals because the oil field comes and buys us out,” Mr. Campos says. “Locals tell me ‘I won’t even attempt to come to your place,’ and I’m like, ‘sorry dude.’”
Mr. Campos grew up in Pecos, whose population neared 10,000 in 2017, according to the Census. He was recently elected Reeves County commissioner and says that if a bust comes, it just means locals will be able to eat at the restaurant again.No Seats at the Bar
When oil field workers want to blow off steam, many head to one of the most popular bars in Odessa, The Shack in the Back. Bar owner April Williams says patrons appreciate the Shack’s laid-back atmosphere and outdoor patio centered on a stretch of grass, uncommon in the area.
It’s so popular that oil companies pay $6,000 or more for tables while the bar is in season, about seven months a year. The bar is only open Wednesday nights, and is otherwise closed for weddings or corporate parties, so the fee works out to around 28 nights. Companies get a guaranteed picnic table on the patio and some employees and guests don’t have to pay the $10 cover. Reserving a table for just one evening costs as much as $100.
The tables are already booked for next season, says Ms. Williams, who opened the bar 15 years ago. It gets slower when oil prices are down, she adds, but she’s not that worried about a bust.
“People drink when they’re happy and people drink when they’re depressed,” she says.Townhouses for Teachers
The frenzy of money and workers has downsides. Chief among them is a paucity of affordable housing. There’s such a shortage that school districts in the Permian basin are considering building rental homes for teachers as rising housing costs make it increasingly difficult to recruit, even as public school enrollment in the Midland region has jumped 9% in five years, according to the Texas Education Agency.
The median home value in Midland, Texas was $256,600 as of January, according to Zillow Group Inc., up about 30% since oil dipped below $30 a barrel in 2016. Meanwhile, oil and gas workers earning top dollar have scooped up much of the available rental housing.
In Fort Stockton, about two hours southwest of Midland, the boom has exacerbated the already difficult problem of finding teachers willing to move out to the remote town of about 8,000, where new hires stand to earn $42,500. In response, the local school district is looking to build at least six duplexes to rent to teachers. The district already owns land where the homes could be located.
“If we have some keys we can dangle in front of them, it takes one thing off their plate if someone’s trying to move,” says Ralph Traynham, superintendent of the Fort Stockton Independent School District. The project is expected to cost about $2.8 million, Mr. Traynham said.Not Your Father’s Man Camp
Many oil workers live in temporary housing complexes, known as man-camps. Such camps have been a mainstay of oil booms over the last decade, offering frequently spartan, dormitory-like housing for influxes of temporary workers.
But as the man-camp game has become more competitive, some have become more upscale in a bid to win business. Target Lodging is the largest operator of man camps in the Permian basin. It’s invested hundreds of millions in the region and has gone from 80 beds in 2012 to 8,500 beds currently.
Chief Executive Brad Archer says Target’s facilities, which it calls lodges or communities, are vastly upgraded from the man-camps of years past. They include weight rooms, memory foam mattresses, executive chefs and even swimming pools.
“It’s definitely not my dad or your dad’s oil field,” Mr. Archer says.
Mr. Archer says that the influx of workers to the region, some of whom can make six figures, are requiring creature comforts one wouldn’t typically associate with the oil patch. Target’s customers are oil companies who sign up for long-term contracts to house their workers. The company declined to disclose its rates, but analysts say higher-end man camps can charge $1,500 to $3,000 per month, depending on food and other services included.
Target offers rotating menus from chefs Mr. Archer says have worked in top tier restaurants around the world. At the lodge in Pecos, a worker can eat salmon and fresh vegetables in the dining hall or order wood-oven pizza and watch a football game at the “Frac Shack,” a sort-of sports bar, sans alcohol.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/in-this-oil-boom-town-even-a-barber-can-make-180-000-11551436210
-
Feds Give Cheniere Energy Green Light to Begin Commercial Operations at Corpus Christi LNG
Mar 1, 2019 | Houston Chronicle
By Sergio Chapa
Federal officials have given Houston liquefied natural gas company Cheniere Energy permission to put its first production unit at Corpus Christi LNG into commercial service and begin exports.
Less than a month after an inspection, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission officials issued an order Friday morning giving Cheniere permission to put an LNG production unit known as Train 1 into service — adding that the company can begin export activities.
Receiving natural gas from the Eagle Ford Shale and other sources, the Train 1 production unit is used to supercool natural gas until it becomes a liquid that can shipped on tankers around the world.
Located along the La Quinta Ship Channel in Ingleside, the $15 billion Corpus Christi LNG facility is the first liquefied natural gas export terminal to be brought into commercial service in Texas.
Legal Dispute: Cheniere Energy sues former CEO Charif Souki over $46 million loan
Construction at Corpus Christi LNG started in 2015, with Train 1 completed in November 2018. As part of a months long-startup and testing process known as commissioning, Cheniere exported two cargoes of LNG from Train 1 to Greece and the United Kingdom in December.
With the FERC order in hand, Cheniere can now begin commercial operations and regular exports at the facility.
Train 1 is just the beginning at Corpus Christi LNG. Cheniere has already begun the startup process at the facility for a second production unit there known as Train 2 while construction for a third production unit known as Train 3 continues.
Fuel Fix: Receive daily energy news headlines in your inbox
In addition to Corpus Christi LNG, Cheniere owns and operates the Sabine Pass LNG export terminal in Cameron Parish, La., where the company has been exporting liquefied natural gas since February 2016.
Founded in 1983, Cheniere Energy employs nearly 1,400 people in Texas and Louisiana. Amid a record 273 export cargoes to 32 nations, the company closed 2018 with a $471 million profit on $8 billion of revenue.
https://www.chron.com/business/energy/article/Feds-give-Cheniere-Energy-green-light-to-being-13655531.php
-
Hunger for U.S. Exports Grows in Surprising Ways Abroad
Mar 4, 2019 | E&E Energywire
By Nathanial Gronewold
The customer base for exports of natural gas from the United States is poised to rapidly diversify abroad.
Market observers are increasingly confident that demand overseas for LNG will boom as new supply does, favoring U.S. LNG exporters. Such developments could move in line with the Trump administration's desire to fast-track the approval of export terminals and shipments abroad of domestic gas.
To date, East Asia — mainly China — has soaked up the most incremental LNG volume increases, but experts see Southeast Asia and Europe next in line to absorb rising volumes of shipments this year and beyond.
And another interesting customer may now be emerging: Australia.
Australia is overtaking Qatar as the world's largest LNG producer and has risen to become a primary source of global supply as megaprojects greatly increased LNG exports. And yet a new alarming report from Adelaide warns that Australia's own domestic gas supplies for its southeastern population centers are poised to diminish significantly, even as production and exports from the less populous north and west booms. Shortages in the southeast threaten steep price hikes for cities and industry.
LNG imports to Sydney and Melbourne are the solution, said Graeme Bethune, CEO of research firm EnergyQuest. Though Australians may have trouble wrapping their heads around the idea of the nation both importing and exporting LNG, Bethune said they'll have to have to get over it or pay steeply higher prices for gas.
"There are fears that such projects will lock the east coast into international gas prices, but that has happened already," Bethune argued. "What will lock the east coast into even higher gas prices, however, are restrictions on new supply, LNG imports and exploration."
There are now five outstanding proposals to build LNG importing infrastructure on the east coast of Australia.
Exxon Mobil Corp. says a facility it has in mind can be ready by 2022. Japanese, South Korean and Australian companies are all mulling new investments, projects that could incorporate floating storage and regasification units (FSRU). Building regasification takes less time than building new gas liquefaction.
For decades, Australia's gas market was kept isolated from the outside world and prices were kept low. That all changed as new LNG export projects emerged and opened competition for domestic supplies. Gas prices have since surged, and supply of domestic LNG has become a major political issue there.
Politics threaten to delay approvals for LNG importing facilities by regulators. Bethune said authorities should overcome their reluctance and authorize the investments as soon as possible. Otherwise, Australians may pay significantly higher prices by 2025, he said. Importing LNG into one of the world's largest LNG exporters may seem odd, he added, but this is already a reality in the United States, Malaysia and elsewhere.
"LNG imports are not all that is needed," Bethune said. "Development of domestic gas projects is also critical and should be more than competitive with imports."Growing demand hubs
Other emerging demand centers await rising volumes of U.S. exports.
Royal Dutch Shell PLC, currently the world's largest single producer of LNG, has said it sees great potential in the emerging economies of Southeast Asia.
Last week, Shell released its latest global LNG outlook, hosting analysts at a briefing in London streamed live online. Executive Vice President Steve Hill reiterated China's role as the most promising market for LNG sales growth. Last year, China became the world's largest importer of natural gas, with LNG's share rising.
But he advised investors and analysts to keep an eye on Southeast Asia — specifically Thailand, the Philippines and Indonesia — where "we expect to see an even faster growth rate for LNG imports," he said.
A larger market for Europe will also finally emerge after some delay, Hill predicted.
For the past two years, Shell has forecast that most new incremental LNG capacity would flow to Europe. It has instead flowed to Asia, with the region absorbing most of the increase in global supply. But 2019 should finally see a greater lift in exports from the United States to Europe, he said.
"Europe clearly needs ... more imports to balance its gas markets," Hill said.
Sellers of U.S. domestic gas and even members of Congress are also closely watching another emerging opportunity for exporters: the expanding market for LNG as a bunker fuel.
The International Maritime Organization (IMO) is mandating strict new limits on sulfur emissions from shipping beginning January 2020. The tighter environmental standards promise to upend both the shipping sector and global refining, and may hit oil prices (Energywire, Jan. 28).
In February, the Congressional Research Service released a report titled "LNG as a Maritime Fuel: Prospects and Policy," which found that the global LNG bunker fuel market could grow to several billion dollars by 2030.
According to the report, Congress can improve the prospects for such a development by embracing the IMO 2020 standards and by legislating incentives "through the tax code and regulation." The report also sees a role for Congress in enhancing LNG shipping and bunkering safety.
The United States, according to the Congressional Research Service, is uniquely suited to take advantage of and encourage the uptake of LNG as a fuel for ships.
LNG bunkering would provide another outlet for exports, as LNG-capable vessels could fuel up on U.S. gas at U.S. ports and then continue to their next destination. LNG bunkering could be expanded to multiple U.S. ports, the report concludes, beyond just existing and planned facilities at Jacksonville, Port Fourchon in Louisiana and the Port of Tacoma in Washington.
"If U.S. LNG producers were to supply a significant share of this market, on the strength of comparatively low LNG production costs, LNG bunkering could increase demand for U.S. natural gas production, transportation, and liquefaction," wrote the report's authors.
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2019/03/04/stories/1060122867
-
Mar 4, 2019 | E&E Energywire
By Mike Lee and Mike Soraghan
Delaney Tercero, 3, was sitting on her family's couch with her father and sister that summer day. Her mother was doing laundry.
They didn't know a pipeline with a dime-sized hole a few yards from their front door was filling their mobile home with raw natural gas.
Delaney's mother opened the dryer. The house blew up.
Men pulled Delaney from the rubble. A neighbor wrapped her in a scarf, trying to comfort her. Others rubbed burn cream on her sister's burns. Witnesses told responders her mother was burned "head to toe."
A helicopter whirled Delaney to a burn unit in Lubbock, but she died two days later, 100 miles from home. Her mother, father and sister were badly burned in the Aug. 9, 2018, explosion, but they lived (Energywire, Sept. 10, 2018). That still amazes their next-door neighbor, Ronnie Littlefield.
"Those poor people there," Littlefield said on a recent Sunday afternoon, looking over their fence at the debris field where the family's home once sat. "I don't know how anybody survived."
The state dispatched inspectors, and they found the pipe's anti-corrosion coating had been "compromised." They also found it had been leaking for "an undetermined length of time."
But Targa Resources Corp., the $9.6 billion Houston company that owns the line, will face no penalty from state or federal officials for the explosion.
Targa didn't violate any rules, because for this type of pipeline, there are no rules.
They're called "gathering lines," generally small pipelines carrying oil and gas from wellheads to processing sites. The Targa pipe was connected to a battery of tanks near the two homes in the pumpjack-studded farm fields outside Midland. Targa did not respond to repeated requests for comment.
It was a small part of a network of thousands of miles of pipes underlying the frenzied oil and gas development in the Permian Basin. Nationally, more than 450,000 miles of such gathering lines snake underground from wells, and reports of death and injury have emerged from Texas to Pennsylvania.
It's not known how many fatalities have occurred, because the federal government doesn't keep records on explosions from rural gathering lines. Neither do most states.
The federal government's pipeline safety watchdog, the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, has a set of rules for a little more than 18,000 miles of gathering lines — generally high-pressure lines in populated areas.
But another 439,000 miles of pipeline are classified as rural gathering lines and left unregulated. That's enough to wrap around the Earth more than 17 times.
Unlike long-haul transmission lines, which are closely regulated by the federal government, or utility pipelines usually monitored by states, rural gathering lines fall in a gray area.
They don't have to be marked, built to standards or regularly inspected. Unlike for transmission lines, operators don't have to have emergency response plans for when they leak or explode.
PHMSA has been contemplating safety standards on gathering lines for decades. But recent efforts have bogged down, and the oil and gas industry is lobbying for looser rules covering only large-diameter lines, those wider than 16 inches.
"The longer they stall, the longer they can put pipelines in the ground without worrying about construction standards and such," said Carl Weimer, executive director of the Pipeline Safety Trust.
Oil and gas industry representatives say they support broader regulation of gathering lines. But they say they want to push ahead with rules for the biggest gathering lines and gather more data on where the problems are with smaller lines.
"Sixteen inches seems to be a responsible break point for regulating without additional information," explained pipeline industry consultant Lindsay Sander. "It's hard to roll back a regulation, so we want to get it right."
The lack of federal rules leaves individual states to decide whether to monitor gathering lines. Most don't.
Texas, the biggest oil- and gas-producing state, is one of those that don't. The state Legislature passed a law in 2013 allowing the Railroad Commission of Texas to police gathering lines. But the agency hasn't followed up by writing the detailed regulations needed to enforce the law.
Texas alone has seen 14,000 miles of new rural gathering lines since 2014, on top of the 160,000 miles already there. The Railroad Commission, which does not regulate trains but does handle oil and gas pipelines, has often been criticized in legislative reports for lax enforcement and infrequent pipeline inspection (Energywire, Feb. 19, 2013).
The agency responded to passage of the law by holding a series of meetings with gathering line operators and surveying the companies for information about their systems.
More than a third of the 598 operators responding didn't conduct leak surveys on their pipelines, according to the 2015 survey obtained in an open records request under the state's Public Information Act. More than one-fifth of the systems had never been pressure tested, and more than half didn't have corrosion control or monitoring.
Agency officials told pipeline company representatives in a 2014 presentation that they would "almost certainly" impose rules on gathering lines, according to the documents.
But the Legislature hadn't provided any money for implementing the law. Railroad Commission spokeswoman Ramona Nye said the agency found it would need an extra 25 employees, at a cost of $1.8 million a year, to set up a safety program for gathering lines.
The agency, she said, also didn't want its rules to conflict with the rules that PHMSA has been working on.
That left the agency in a Catch-22 in the aftermath of the Tercero family's tragedy (Energywire, Sept. 10, 2018). The commission has the authority to investigate incidents like the fatal explosion, Nye said. But in the most rural areas, deemed "Class 1," inspectors can check only to determine if the company followed existing rules.
And, Nye said, "there are no federal or state rules governing Class 1 gathering lines."
The commission closed its investigation into the explosion just before Christmas last year after determining that there had been no rule violations. PHMSA's Accident Investigation Division determined that the line wasn't subject to regulation and sent no investigator.
Rural gathering lines were carved out of the legislation that created federal regulation of pipelines in the late 1960s. By 1974, the regulators were already dealing with confusion about what was and wasn't regulated. They proposed a fix, which was later withdrawn. But rural gas gathering lines remained unregulated when PHMSA proposed rules for them in 2011.
At the time, the shale drilling boom was taking off. Officials were growing worried about pipes that were legally considered unregulated gathering lines but had diameters and pressures as high as long-haul transmission lines.
Five years later, the agency proposed the 8-inch threshold for regulating gas gathering lines. The agency says it hopes to have rules in place by February 2020.
That 8-inch threshold would impose requirements on nearly 100,000 more miles of gathering lines, according to a recent PHMSA estimate. That is five times as many miles as currently regulated. But there are far more gathering lines even smaller than 8 inches, so more than 300,000 miles of lines would remain unregulated.
The agency estimated in 2016 that its proposal would cost the industry about $13 million to $15 million spread across 15 years. But industry says the costs would be in the billions of dollars.
The industry's 16-inch threshold would far more than double the miles of gathering lines subject to regulation. It would cover about one-sixteenth of the currently unregulated lines.
PHMSA's proposal would also require pipeline owners to give detailed information about all gathering lines, including those not currently regulated. The reports would include any reports of fires, leaks or other incidents.
Under current rules, Targa officials had no obligation to report details of the fatal explosion. Records show that when asked to fill out an accident report, they didn't.
The Railroad Commission's report doesn't include basic information like the Targa pipeline's operating pressure, its age or when it was last inspected. The damaged pipe was dug up by a contractor for Targa, according to the investigator's report, taken to a Targa location and placed under "lock and key."
One attempt to set new gathering line standards began in late 2017 when the American Petroleum Institute (API), the oil and gas industry's largest trade group, proposed a new industry standard for gathering lines. Drawn by a private committee consisting overwhelmingly of industry representatives, the standards were to be voluntary.
But the effort collapsed last summer. State regulators dropped out in June, saying the process was too dominated by industry. Pipeline company representatives split on issues such as whether they should have to determine the width of the blast zone around their lines. When voting concluded in early July, only about one-third of committee voters supported the proposal they had crafted.
API has regrouped and is trying again this year. Of the 74 members of the new "task group," 63 are from industry. The group is focusing on standards for gathering lines only larger than 16 inches.
Targa executives have been members of both groups, along with Sander, the industry consultant, and Weimer of the Pipeline Safety Trust.
A PHMSA advisory panel is scheduled to pick up the gathering line debate this summer and make recommendations. The meeting of the panel, called the Gas Pipeline Advisory Committee, had been set for January but was postponed because of the government shutdown. It is now scheduled for June 25 and 26.
Asked why changes to gathering line regulations have taken so long, a PHMSA spokesperson sent a statement Friday outlining the current proposal and noting that the agency expects to publish a final rule in December. If that happens, it would be effective in February 2020.
State regulators and safety advocates want to stick with the proposal to regulate lines 8 inches or more in diameter. But industry has put its weight behind the 16-inch threshold.
In advance of the June meeting, PHMSA has suggested splitting the difference and regulating lines wider than 12.75 inches.
But neither the industry proposal nor the PHMSA compromise would have covered the 10-inch line that exploded and killed Delaney Tercero. And others have died as industry, safety advocates and regulators haggled.
Two people died in two gathering line incidents within weeks of the explosion at the Tercero home. Both involved small pipes and were nearby in the booming Permian Basin region.
A "pig launcher" on a small line exploded about 70 miles away in Monahans on July 27, injuring two workers and killing one. Five days after that, a rupture in a 6-inch gathering line caused an adjacent 12-inch interstate line to explode in Midland. One worker was killed, and seven more were injured.
In 2016, a worker installing a pipeline in rural Pennsylvania hit an existing 12-inch pipeline with a bulldozer. The line exploded, and the man later died from his injuries. Since they're not tracked, it's difficult to know how many more deaths have occurred.
If statistics were kept, Littlefield could have been one of them. The same pipeline that blew up the Tercero home runs through his front yard.
The blast blew out the windows on his one-story house, about 180 feet from the pipeline rupture, and flung debris on his rooftop. Fortunately, he and his wife were at work. He couldn't get his home repaired until November, and he's still worried that the explosion caused structural damage.
On a cloudy day in January, the rubble was still scattered across the Terceros' lot. The roof was still peeled back atop the metal barn that was behind the leveled mobile home. Yellow tape fluttered near a trench in front where the pipe was dug up.
The Tercero family is suing Targa, and their attorney advised them not to give interviews. Family members are shuttling back and forth between the Midland area and Lubbock for treatment and surgery for Delaney's younger sister, Delayza.
Littlefield said he's spoken with a lawyer but hasn't filed suit.
He's not surprised by the state's inaction after the explosion. But he says it rankles him that the state oil and gas regulators at the Railroad Commission seem to side with big money more than with people who live in the oil patch.
"It's too bad that innocent people get hurt and killed," he said. "It bothers me. I think it bothers everyone."
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2019/03/04/stories/1060123021
-
Firefighters Corral Thousands of Gallons of Nitric Acid After Minneapolis Industrial Park Spill
Mar 1, 2019 | Minneapolis Star Tribune
By Greg Stanley and Tim Harlow
At least 2,000 gallons of nitric acid were spilled Friday morning when a valve was knocked from a tank, briefly shutting down traffic along E. Hennepin Avenue in Minneapolis.
The spill at Hawkins Inc. leaked out of the company’s containment system and poured between 600 and 700 gallons of the acid into storm drains, said Fire Department spokesman Bryan Tyner.
“We have it contained and there are no life safety concerns,” Tyner said.
As far as hazardous chemical spills go, nitric acid is one of the easier ones for fire crews to handle, he said.
Firefighters were able to corral the highly corrosive acid within storm pipes by using containment booms, starting far enough away from the spill that no traces of the acid were found, and working their way in until it was spotted. Once found, crews neutralized the acid with soda ash and then flushed the pipes clean with water, Tyner said.
“The only product that we have found was right in the immediate area of the facility, so it doesn’t appear it was able to travel very far,” he said.
The company was evacuated as a precaution, but no injuries were reported.
The spill occurred when a valve was knocked off a 10,000 gallon stainless-steel tank, according to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency (MPCA). Fire officials originally said that a total of 5,700 gallons spilled out of the tank. Richard Erstad, Hawkins general counsel, said it was closer to 2,100 gallons.
The acid flowed into a containment system, but the system apparently had a crack, which caused the leak into stormwater drains, Erstad said.
“We’ll obviously get that taken care of and make sure it doesn’t happen again,” Erstad said. “We just want to thank the city for their quick response.”
The company is a formulator, manufacturer, blender, distributor and sales agent for thousands of industrial chemicals. It has been responsible for several chemical spills of varying sizes over the past 20 years, said MPCA spokesman Walker Smith. The company’s spill response plan is up to date, he said.
Hawkins will be required to vacuum what’s left of the acid out of the storm pipes and continue neutralizing it before it is disposed.
The MPCA’s primary concern was making sure the acid didn’t make it to the Mississippi River, Smith said. Thanks in part to the weather, it didn’t.
“It just pooled up in the stormwater system and we were able to locate it,” Smith said. “There is almost no water in the system right now, but if it had been warmer and there was some snow melt …”
Nitric acid is a highly corrosive, strongly oxidizing acid. Fumes may cause immediate irritation of the respiratory tract, pain, and difficult or labored breathing.
http://www.startribune.com/authorities-responding-to-hazardous-material-spill-in-northeast-minneapolis/506548532/
-
Report Finds Widespread Contamination at Nation’s Coal Ash Sites
Mar 4, 2019 | The Washington Post
By Steven Mufson and Brady Dennis
The vast majority of ponds and landfills holding coal waste at 250 power plants across the country have leaked toxic chemicals into nearby groundwater, according to an analysis of public monitoring data released Monday by environmental groups.
The report, published jointly by the Environmental Integrity Project and Earthjustice, found that 91 percent of the nation’s coal-fired power plants reported elevated levels of contaminants such as arsenic, lithium, chromium and other pollutants in nearby groundwater.
In many cases, the levels of toxic contaminants that had leaked into groundwater were far higher than the thresholds set by the Environmental Protection Agency, the groups said.
The examples span the country. At a family ranch south of San Antonio, a dozen pollutants have leaked from a nearby coal ash dump, data showed. Groundwater at one Maryland landfill that contains ash from three coal plants was contaminated with eight pollutants. In Pennsylvania, levels of arsenic in the groundwater near a former coal plant were several hundred times the level the EPA considers safe for drinking.
The voluminous data became publicly available for the first time last year because of a 2015 regulation that required disclosures by the overwhelming majority of coal plants.
“At a time when the EPA — now being run by a coal lobbyist — is trying to roll back federal regulations on coal ash, these new data provide convincing evidence that we should be moving in the opposite direction,” Abel Russ, lead author of the report and an attorney for the Environmental Integrity Project, said in a statement.
The report acknowledges that the groundwater data alone does not prove that drinking-water supplies near the coal waste facilities have been contaminated. Power companies are not routinely required to test nearby drinking water wells. “So the scope of the threat is largely undefined,” the report states.
However, according to the EPA, nearly 90 million people rely on groundwater for their drinking supplies. Groundwater is also widely used in agriculture for irrigation. Monday’s report also details multiple instances, largely in rural areas, in which residential tap water has been affected by coal ash.
Coal ash ranks among the nation’s largest industrial waste streams. According to the EPA, in 2012, coal-fired electric utilities burned more than 800 million tons of coal in the United States, generating about 110 million tons of coal ash.
The Trump administration has sought to overhaul portions of the Obama-era requirements for handling the toxic waste produced by burning coal. For instance, the agency last year put in place changes aimed at providing more flexibility to state and industry officials in implementing the 2015 restrictions.
The 2015 regulations, which dictated how coal ash must be stored across the country, were finalized in the wake of two high-profile spills in Tennessee and North Carolina, which collectively contaminated waterways and damaged nearby homes. The Obama administration negotiated for years with environmental groups, electric utilities and other affected industries about how to address coal waste, which can poison wildlife and poses health risks to people living near storage sites.
Changes made under President Trump would extend the life of some existing ash ponds, empower states to suspend groundwater monitoring in some cases and allow state officials to certify whether a facility meets adequate standards. EPA officials estimate the rule changes will save the industry tens of millions of dollars a year in compliance costs.
The administration also has said it plans to make an additional proposal that would further water down existing coal ash regulations.
But that effort has been complicated by an August ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, which found that parts of Obama-era regulation around coal ash storage were not stringent enough to adequately protect public health. For instance, the court tossed provisions that would have allowed some unlined or clay-lined coal ash pits to continue operating, as long as testing revealed no leaks.
Monday’s report, which included information from thousands of groundwater monitoring wells, suggests serious questions remain about the long-term safety of coal ash ponds and landfills that dot the country.
The analysis found that a majority of the country’s more than 250 coal plants have unsafe levels of at least four potentially toxic substances, including arsenic, which the EPA has classified as a human carcinogen. In addition, the report found that few coal ash waste ponds have waterproof liners to prevent harmful substances from leeching into groundwater, and more than half are built beneath the local water table or within five feet of it.
Lisa Evans, an expert on coal ash and a senior attorney for Earthjustice, said in an interview that the findings raise only more questions about the impact of the leaks.
“With all of these, the contamination is really not in dispute. It’s the industry’s own numbers,” Evans said. “The question now is, where is the contamination going? Who’s in the path of a plume? Is it people? A waterway?”
Among the most striking examples cited in Monday’s report were near the San Miguel power plant located an hour south of San Antonio. The groundwater samples from beneath a family ranch there showed that at least 12 pollutants had leaked from the electric coop’s coal ash dumps.
The report also found that in Belmont, N.C., Duke Energy’s Allen Steam Station’s coal ash dumps were built beneath the water table and had leaked cobalt — which can cause thyroid issues and other health problems at high exposures — into groundwater at concentrations well above those considered safe. The power plant also reported unsafe levels of eight other pollutants.
At recent meetings, some residents have pushed for Duke to remove coal ash from the site.
The issue flared up last year when Hurricane Florence unleashed flooding at coal ash sites alongside Duke Energy’s L.V. Sutton power plant, spilling coal ash into the nearby Cape Fear River. The company at one point estimated that flooding washed away the equivalent of more than 150 dump trucks full of coal ash, but further flooding later caused the collapse of a dam separating more ash from the river.
James Roewer, executive director of the Utility Solid Waste Activities Group, which lobbies on coal ash issues on behalf of electric utilities, said the groundwater monitoring disclosures are a sign the industry is adhering to EPA regulations.
“I’d look at these reports as a visible, public demonstration of the industry working to comply with these rules and protect the environment,” Roewer said.
He said that where there is evidence of contamination that exceeds EPA standards, companies are required to take corrective measures. “It’s going to be a very public and transparent process,” he said. Roewer added that just because contaminants are detected near a coal ash storage site, “that doesn’t necessarily translate into people’s drinking water being contaminated.”
Cleaning up coal ash is costly. In December, a member of the Virginia State Corporation Commission said that it could cost ratepayers as much as $3.30 a month over 20 years — between $2.4 billion and $5.6 billion — to clean up Virginia-based Dominion Energy’s 11 coal ash ponds and six coal ash landfills in the state. And five Dominion facilities continue to churn out coal ash.
Monday’s report relies on data that was made public starting in March 2018 as required by a 2015 regulation known as the coal ash rule. The information was collected by a variety of environmental groups including the Sierra Club and Prairie Rivers Network. The data covers 265 coal plants and includes more than 550 coal ash ponds and landfills that were monitored by over 4,600 groundwater wells.
About a quarter of coal plants did not register data because they either closed their coal ash dumps before the regulation took effect or because they received extensions or exemptions.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/report-finds-widespread-contamination-at-nations-coal-ash-sites/2019/03/03/d80c82e6-3ac8-11e9-aaae-69364b2ed137_story.html?utm_term=.d47663328c99
-
How Safe Are America's Railroads?
Mar 3, 2019 | CBS News
By Lesley Stahl
There have been a number of catastrophic train crashes in recent years that may seem to have been isolated incidents. But, it turns out, they are connected in an important way. They illustrate a failure in the railroad industry to implement a life-saving technology that could have prevented them.
The list of accidents includes one last year in Cayce, South Carolina where an improperly aligned track switch sent Amtrak's Silver Star, its crew and more than 100 passengers careening off the mainline track and barreling into a CSX freight train parked on a siding.
Mark James: When it hit, I mean, you can couple up at six miles an hour, and it'll shake the ground. And this thing hit at 51 miles an hour. And the blast was unbelievable.
Mark James was right there. He was the engineer of the CSX freight train that night.
Mark James: And they're bringing people off with broke arms, legs, people fr-- mangled really. And this is something I'll never, I'll never get over. I couldn't imagine anybody else that's ever seen that before.
Lesley Stahl: And right up close.
Mark James: Yeah. That close.
As the engineer, Mark James was driving the CSX train along different tracks in the yard, in order to unload freight.
That night he and his conductor were working under unfamiliar conditions because the electrical signal system - that sends out alerts when the tracks are not lined up properly - was out of service.
Mark James: Nobody can see what we're doing. It's called dark territory.
It was the CSX conductor's job that night to throw the switches by hand like this to realign the tracks and thereby change the direction the train could go.
Lesley Stahl: Are there a lotta switches?
Mark James: Lotsa switches, yes.
Lesley Stahl: Like, how many?
Mark James: He probably handled close to 40 switches that evening.
But there was only one switch that would matter for the passengers and crew of Amtrak's Silver Star, the switch to keep Amtrak on the main line.
Mark James: That's when I ask him, "Did you get the mainline switch?" And he assured me that he had thrown it 100 percent.
Lesley Stahl: He said, "100 percent?"
Mark James: Uh-huh.
Lesley Stahl: In the training, does it say that you-- you should check, you should double-check?
Mark James: No. There's no way I can get off a locomotive and go check every switch he throws. That way, you'd get nothing done.
Lesley Stahl: But you had a feeling.
Mark James: Yeah. I did. I asked him multiple times. I trusted him that he had gotten the switch back.
At that moment, southbound Amtrak 91 was bearing down on that mainline switch that would send it into the CSX freight train. Mark James says he had gotten off the train to stretch his legs.
Mark James: I get down and I'm expecting these headlights very bright coming to get on past us. And then I see-- you could tell when that train hit the-- hit the switch and came in on top of us, you could see where it-- where it rocked., my mind was just crazy. I didn't-- "Oh, my God, no. Please no. Please no."
A surveillance camera near the tracks captured the Amtrak train as it went under a bridge and slammed into the stationary CSX train.
Mark James: And it was just tearing the locomotives up. And it went up over and turned over that way. And there was nothing left of where I was sitting. And I thought my conductor was dead.
Lesley Stahl: Was he sitting right at the point of impact?
Mark James: As the collision was happening, somehow he made it out the back door. So I'm talking to him. He's in shock. He's sitting there saying, "I know I got that switch back. I know I got that switch back--"
This is what was left of the other train's locomotive. That Amtrak train's engineer and conductor were killed. One of the passenger cars folded in half. More than 90 people were injured.
Robert Sumwalt: It only took about seven seconds from the time that it hit this switch--
Lesley Stahl: Oh.
Robert Sumwalt: And it collides with the stationary CSX.
Robert Sumwalt is the chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board, which is investigating the crash.
Lesley Stahl: What if that CSX train had toxic chemicals in it?
Robert Sumwalt: Well, we've certainly seen accidents with toxic chemicals onboard, where a switch was left in the wrong position right here in South Carolina, in fact.
It was just over 50 miles away, in Graniteville, where a Norfolk Southern freight train derailed in 2005, leaking tons of chlorine gas, killing nine people and leaving 554 with respiratory injuries.
Lesley Stahl: And the town has never been the same, as I understand it.
Robert Sumwalt: Well, that's right. So people might be thinking, "Well, I-- this-- I don't care about this story. I don't ride a train." But most communities have railroad traffic going through it.
Albert Linden: Every day you get some of the locomotives loaded with everything. They heading that way, and they moving 60 miles an hour, too.
Albert Linden owns an electrical contracting business next to the crash site in Cayce, South Carolina. It was his surveillance camera that captured the accident.
Albert Linden: These tracks are in horrible shape.
Lesley Stahl: Had you ever seen any other accident? Any derailment?
Albert Linden: Yes, ma'am. It's quite frequent.
Lesley Stahl: It's frequent?
Albert Linden: In the last ten years, there's probably been seven, eight of them. They forgot to flip the switch, and derailed them in here.
Lesley Stahl: The same thing?
Albert Linden: Yes, ma'am. Forgetting to flip the switch.
Lesley Stahl: And you're just sitting here, watching this unfold before your very eyes?
Albert Linden: They, they-- it's a common occurrence.
But those didn't involve the lives of more than 100 passengers who – along with engineer Mark James – were counting on the CSX conductor to make sure the tracks were pointing in the right direction for Amtrak to pass through.
Lesley Stahl: Is there anything that you should have done that you didn't do?
Mark James: No.
Lesley Stahl: Nothing.
Mark James: I can't see what my conductor's doing. And I have to trust him. We have to work together. And I did trust him. And he's human. He made a mistake.
What if we told you that mistakes like that, human errors, can be caught, and crashes prevented by a technology that was supposed to be in place by now. Congress mandated that most of the country's major railroads install the technology by 2015.
In a complex arrangement, Congress extended that deadline first to 2018 and now again to 2020. The technology is called positive train control – PTC.
It's a computerized system that uses technology like GPS and Wi-Fi to transmit information from sensors and signals installed along the tracks to and from the trains. It amounts to an automatic braking system.
Pat Desir, an engineer for the Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority, demonstrated how the system works.
Lesley Stahl: This is the speed limit and this is what you're going at the moment.
Pat Desir: Exactly. It enforces my speed.
Lesley Stahl: So it can stop the train, but it can also slow you down to keep you—
Pat Desir: Exactly.
Lesley Stahl: --at the right speed.
Pat Desir: See right now we're supposed to be doing 25 miles per hour. All right, I'm gonna go above it. And I'm gonna show you how PTC works. All right? I'll get to about 28 miles per hour. And I'm bringing it up. You feel (BEEPING) how fast we're going? And now-- (NOISE)
Lesley Stahl: Whoa.
Pat Desir: And we received a penalty brake application. Brought the train to a complete stop.
Lesley Stahl: Whoa.
This commuter railroad was one of the first to install the equipment. But others have been slow to follow. And that has led to deadly consequences. The PTC mandate was imposed after a crash in Chatsworth, California that killed 25 people. Since then, there have been 22 crashes, killing a total of 29 people and injuring more than 500.
If PTC had been installed, this derailment a year ago in Washington state - when Amtrak 501 was going twice the speed limit – wouldn't have happened.
And this crash in 2015 when an Amtrak train was going too fast in Philadelphia - wouldn't've happened either.
The major railroads – including CSX and Amtrak - each own miles of their own tracks and their trains ride on each other's tracks.
To make matters more complicated, they're installing different PTC systems and have to make them compatible with the other companies that ride on their tracks. They've also been stymied by software and equipment challenges and regulatory hurdles.
As of today only 10 percent of the mandated railroads have fully implemented PTC.
Lesley Stahl: It seems so obvious. It just seems so urgent that it's almost unfathomable that it doesn't get done.
Robert Sumwalt: That's why the NTSB is just flabbergasted that we still don't have it more than 10 years after Congress mandated Positive Train Control.
One issue has been the Federal Railroad Administration, FRA, the railroad's regulatory agency, criticized in government reports for not vigorously enforcing the PTC mandate. We tried to talk to the agency but they declined our interview request.
Its handling of PTC has been a source of frustration for Robert Sumwalt of the NTSB.
Lesley Stahl: The regulatory agency, The Federal Railroad Administration, are they just not doing their job?
Robert Sumwalt: Well, we have issued recommendations to the FRA and they've not acted upon those.
Lesley Stahl: Why are they so lenient with the railroads? Somebody told us that in his opinion they're captive to the railroad system, to the industry.
Robert Sumwalt: The regulator needs to step up to the plate and do their job and regulate.
Lesley Stahl: Who's responsible?
Robert Sumwalt: Well, ultimately, it's up to the railroads to put this system in place. It's a steep climb for them. It's going to cost, depending on who you talk to, anywhere between $10 and $14 billion for the system to be implemented.
Lesley Stahl: Okay. So?
Robert Sumwalt: You're right.
Lesley Stahl: I mean, it's safety. You're, they're, they have people's lives in their hands.
Robert Sumwalt: Yes, and we're confounded by that as well. And for every day that goes by we are at continued risk.
When there's a train crash involving Amtrak, it usually pays the damages. But because it is largely funded by the government, that means the taxpayers pay.
We have learned that Amtrak agreed decades ago, in secret indemnity contracts, to be responsible for damages even if the freight company is at fault and the accident occurs on the freight company's tracks.
The freight company in the South Carolina crash, CSX, declined our interview request, but sent us a letter saying it has already spent "$2.5 billion" on PTC and that the crash was "the result of human error, and violations of long-standing operating procedures." CSX fired both the conductor and engineer Mark James.
Lesley Stahl: Are you fighting this?
Mark James: Yes.
Lesley Stahl: Are you challenging--
Mark James: Yes.
Lesley Stahl: --the firing?
Mark James: Yes. There's nothing I could have done to prevent the accident. I did nothing to cause the accident and I got fired anyway.
James is unemployed. He's raising a teenage daughter and is facing large medical bills for PTSD.
Mark James: You can't sleep at night, you know. If you wake up, this is in your head.
Lesley Stahl: Still.
Mark James: Yeah, and nightmares, visions, like in – loud noises.
Lesley Stahl: Like a soldier.
Mark James: Yeah.
Lesley Stahl: In your opinion, is train travel safe?
Mark James: No.
Lesley Stahl: Would you put your daughter on an Amtrak train?
Mark James: No. I wouldn't get on one myself.
Amtrak, which declined our interview request, sent us a statement saying it has made substantial strides on implementing PTC.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/how-safe-are-americas-railroads-60-minutes/
-
Democrats Renew Push for Water Infrastructure Trust Fund
Mar 1, 2019 | Inside EPA
House Democrats have reintroduced legislation to create a trust fund to finance water infrastructure projects funded through an increase in the corporate income tax rate, pointing to numerous public health risks posed by aging infrastructure and emerging contaminants like perfluorinated chemicals and highlighting the potential for job creation.
At a Feb. 28 press conference announcing the bill, Rep. Brenda Lawrence (D-MI) said the poor condition of the nation's water infrastructure has created “a state of emergency” requiring “all hands on deck.” Lawrence, one of the sponsors of the bill, said the legislation is “about delivering justice, righting wrongs, and reaffirm[ing] that water is a human right."
“It would be a big mistake to think of Flint as an exception,” said Rep. Dan Kildee (D-MI), whose district includes Flint, MI, a city that has grappled with high lead levels in drinking water due in part to limited funding for infrastructure investment.
The bill, H.R. 1417, appears to mirror provisions in legislation Democrats introduced in the last Congress, that a rural utility source praised for its discussion of affordability and environmental justice.
The House bill currently has 43 Democratic co-sponsors though no Republicans have joined the effort.
Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) and Jeff Merkley (D-OR) will be introducing the companion bill in the Senate.
The legislation would create a $34.85 billion trust fund by increasing the corporate income tax rate from 21 percent to 24.5 percent, with the trust fund money being used to help fund the clean water and drinking water state revolving fund (SRF) programs, create a new grant program to install and update residential septic systems, fund nonpoint source management programs and provide technical assistance to rural, small and tribal water systems.
Additionally, the bill would require EPA to coordinate a study about water affordability, including water rates, shutoffs and the effectiveness of SRF funding for promoting affordable and equitable service. “In conducting the study, EPA will also investigate any discriminatory practices of water and sewer service providers and any violations of civil rights and equal access to water and sewer services. The study will also examine public participation in regionalization efforts and the decision making of regional water and sewer authorities,” a section-by-section summary of the bill says.
Other provisions of the bill would prohibit clean water SRF funds from going to new, sprawling development; allow municipalities to purchase privately owned systems or cancel contracts with private operators; require EPA to produce guidance to ensure affordable and reliable water and sewer services; allow drinking water SRF funds to provide grants to private property owners to replace lead service lines; and allow drinking water SRF money to support updating treatment systems or finding alternative water supplies when community water systems and household water wells are contaminated with per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).
Furthermore, the bill would provide funding to repair, replace, or install not just the drinking fountains but all the infrastructure necessary to remove lead from drinking water in schools, the section-by-section summary says.
“Every American, from schoolchildren to seniors, should be able to turn on their tap and access clean, safe drinking water,” Merkley said in a Feb. 28 statement. “The fact that this is not the case in 2019 is appalling and unacceptable. It’s time to make long-overdue investments in our nation’s water infrastructure and create good jobs in communities across the country at the same time."
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/democrats-renew-push-water-infrastructure-trust-fund
-
Hearings Aim to Build Momentum for Broad Package
Mar 4, 2019 | E&E Daily
By Maxine Joselow
Congress is set to hold two overlapping hearings on infrastructure this week, as momentum builds for the broad legislative package sought by President Trump and leaders of both parties.
The Senate Environment and Public Works Committee will convene Wednesday to discuss the "economic benefits of highway infrastructure investment and accelerated project delivery."
EPW Chairman John Barrasso (R-Wyo.) and other GOP members of the panel will likely call for further streamlining of the permitting process for large infrastructure projects, a priority for the Trump administration.
On the other hand, EPW Committee ranking member Tom Carper (D-Del.) and his Democratic colleagues will likely argue that any broad infrastructure deal must include climate change components, echoing a call by Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.).
The House Ways and Means Committee will also host a discussion Wednesday on "our nation's crumbling infrastructure and the need for immediate action."
Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-Ore.) spearheaded a push last year to create a new infrastructure subcommittee on Ways and Means, but Democratic leaders ultimately rejected the idea.
https://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2019/03/04/stories/1060122849
-
Climate Panel’s GOP Leader Rejects Carbon Tax
Mar 1, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tiffany Stecker
Louisiana Rep. Garret Graves, the ranking Republican on a new House panel to address climate change, rejected the idea of a carbon tax as a lever to lower greenhouse gas emissions.
In a March 1 interview with Bloomberg Environment, Graves said pricing carbon isn’t “the right approach right now” to reduce emissions. Graves was named ranking member Feb. 28 of the House Select Committee on the Climate Crisis.
“It’s more of a stick-type monetary incentive, whereas I think there are more carrot-based monetary incentives, more capitalism-type approaches that could yield much better outcomes,” he said.
It’s not the first time Graves has said he doesn’t favor a tax on carbon. But his comments clarify his place on the spectrum of Republican views as he becomes Congress’ top GOP spokesman on climate change, and distance him from some energy-company efforts to impose a carbon fee.
The idea of a carbon tax or fee, which would impose a cost to energy companies per ton of carbon dioxide emitted, has gained traction with some Republicans, including Reps. Francis Rooney (Fla.) and Brian Fitzpatrick (Pa.), who have introduced bipartisan legislation to establish a fee.
Former Rep. Carlos Curbelo (Fla.), who lost his election last fall, also promoted the idea.
‘Not the Right Approach’Energy companies Exxon Mobil and Shell have also lobbied for a carbon price as a way to pay for low-carbon technologies.
Those companies are “appropriately representing their interests,” Graves said. “But that’s not the right approach for the United States.”
Graves was appointed in 2008 to lead the Louisiana Coastal Protection and Restoration Authority, where he created a $50 billion, 50-year master plan to promote coastal restoration and improve hurricane protection.
He also coordinated the state’s response to the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. His work on coastal restoration and adaptation on Louisiana’s fast-disappearing coastline has earned him accolades from organizations such as the Environmental Defense Fund.
Graves “recognizes the established science of climate change. That recognition is critical in addressing carbon emissions—the unaddressed critical component of climate policy,” Elizabeth Gore, senior vice president of EDF said in a March 1 statement.
However, the League of Conservation Voters gave Graves a 0 percent score for his environmental voting record in 2018, and a 3 percent score over the course of his career.
And he has received $517,634 in oil and gas campaign contributions, according to the Center for American Progress.
(Adds comment from Environmental Defense Fund's Elizabeth Gore and includes additional reporting.)
https://bnanews.bna.com/environment-and-energy/climate-panels-gop-leader-rejects-carbon-tax-1
-
Hearing On Proposed CWA Rule Previews Legal Arguments On Final Policy
Mar 1, 2019 | Inside EPA
By David LaRoss
Speakers at EPA’s public hearing on its proposed Clean Water Act (CWA) jurisdiction rule gave early signals of how they plan to attack or defend the eventual final version of the rule in court, with environmentalists hinting at procedural and substantive arguments that they could raise in litigation aimed at striking down a narrow CWA test.
In contrast, supporters of the rule said at the hearing that it would provide clarity on the scope of the water law and do so in way that Congress intended and that complies with Supreme Court precedent, though some signaled they might seek to narrow it even further than the Trump administration has already proposed.
EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers co-hosted their only planned hearing on the proposed jurisdiction rule on Feb. 27-28 in Kansas City, KS, offering a forum for supporters and opponents of the standard to voice their comments ahead of the current April 15 deadline for written input.
The agencies argue that the Obama administration’s 2015 CWA rule was far broader in scope than the law or federal courts have intended, and they are proposing to replace it with a much narrower version.
While speakers’ remarks were limited to three minutes, they offer signs of what stakeholders see as the strengths and weaknesses of the proposal that would greatly narrow the universe of waterbodies subject to the CWA, previewing the arguments in store for court challenges to a final rule.
In their prepared remarks, environmentalists outlined what they see as major legal vulnerabilities in the rule that are both substantive, based on arguments that it does not achieve the CWA’s goal of preserving navigable waters’ physical chemical and biological health, and procedural such as a failure to analyze relevant science and vagueness on how regulators will decide when smaller or isolated waters are protected.
Meanwhile, remarks from industry and conservative speakers backed a narrow jurisdiction standard on principle, but displayed divisions between groups that support the Trump administration’s proposal as issued and others who see it as still too broad.
Such comments indicate the potential for court challenges to the eventual final rule from the right as well as the left, just as some environmental groups argued that the broader rule issued by the Obama administration -- which EPA and the Corps are now working to repeal and replace on the grounds that it goes beyond Congress’ intent -- was still too narrow.
As proposed, the new CWA standard would limit jurisdiction to navigable waters and tributaries or wetlands that “contribute flow” to those waters during “a typical year.” It would for the first time expressly revoke federal authority over “ephemeral” waters that flow only in response to rain and other weather events, as well as dropping the long-standing claim of federal jurisdiction over all interstate waters regardless of their relationship to navigable waterbodies.
Moreover, it would only cover wetlands that directly contact navigable waters or tributaries, a far narrower standard that prior rules that left room for jurisdiction over at least some apparently isolated wetlands if they share a hydrological connection with other waters.
The proposal is largely based on the plurality opinion authored by the late Justice Antonin Scalia in the court's last major CWA jurisdiction case, 2006's Rapanos, et al., et ux., v. United States, which said the CWA should only cover “relatively permanent” waters with a “continuous surface connection” to navigable waterbodies. The court in Rapanos split 4-4-1, with no opinion commanding majority support.
However, it also uses elements from former Justice Anthony Kennedy’s solo concurrence that sets out a broader test based on a "significant nexus" between waterbodies. Lower courts have generally held that Kennedy’s test rather than Scalia’s is the binding result from Rapanos, and it was the basis for the Obama administration’s 2015 rule. But observers see the high court’s reinforced conservative majority as likely to back Scalia’s test if the new rule comes before them.
Environmentalists’ Comments
Environmentalists’ prepared remarks argue that the proposed rule suffers from an array of legal flaws, echoing early signs that they would employ procedural as well as substantive challenges to a final CWA rule.
“First, though the agencies attempt to obscure this fact, the proposal relies on a Supreme Court opinion which was rejected by five justices and which the lower courts have resoundingly held cannot dictate the extent of Clean Water Act protections. Proceeding down this illegal path is a recipe for the rule’s invalidation and will undermine the stability of the law the agencies claim they want. That alone is reason enough to abandon this proposal,” Natural Resources Defense Council attorney Jon Devine said in his prepared remarks.
Devine continues that the rule “is full of vague new concepts that will not deliver the on-the-ground clarity the administration repeatedly says it wants,” which he says would create a raft of implementation problems. “Polluters and people affected by pollution will somehow have to figure out such things as what a particular water body looks like in a ‘typical year’ and whether streams are fed by groundwater or not.”
Meanwhile, former Obama EPA Region 7 Administrator Mark Hague said in his prepared statement that the lack of a scientific analysis underlying the proposal could sink it in court.
“The critical difference between the 2015 rule and this proposal is that the new definition of jurisdictional waters eliminates ephemeral waters, non-navigable interstate waters and many wetlands. Yet the agencies state in this proposal that there are no data available to identify where or how many of these excluded waters and wetlands exist. Public comments by senior agency officials, as reported by several media sources during the public announcement of the proposed rule, indicate that key elements of scientific data are either unknown, difficult to obtain or are unavailable,” his remarks say.
Supporters’ Comments
Meanwhile, Kent Eckles, the Kansas state director for the American Petroleum Institute, used his remarks to voice broad support for the Trump administration’s proposal. “The proposed rule properly considers and establishes the outer bounds for their authority under the Act that are consistent with its text, structure, legislative history and applicable Supreme Court precedent,” he said.
But he echoed the critics who said the proposed version of the rule is vague, calling for a “uniform” treatment of waters that flow on a seasonal basis.
“While we cannot summarize all our comments in a mere 3 minutes, we encourage the agency to look closely at the workability of its treatment of intermittent and perennial flow, which takes into account case-by-case regional and geographic variations. We believe that a more uniform and precise definition of seasonal surface flow could provide greater clarity to all stakeholders,” he said.
By contrast, attorney Anthony Francois of the free-market Pacific Legal Foundation attacked the proposal as overbroad, and argued that any use of the Kennedy test is illegal.
“Unfortunately the proposal misses the mark in important ways due to the agencies effort to read the Rapanosplurality and concurrence coherently . . . If the agencies are going to use the plurality, they must use the plurality as they find it, not blended with the concurrence,” his remarks say.
Specifically, he argued that the CWA should exclude any waterbody that is dry for at least a season out of the year -- which would be far more limited than the proposed language, which allows for waters that flow only in a single season to be considered tributaries.
“Proper application of the plurality would limit the proposal to continuously flowing tributaries, not intermittent ones, with a threshold flow criteria, and would allow at most for 90 or 120 days without continuous flow. This is the only way to give effect to the plurality’s statement that it is the ‘ordinary presence of water’ that is determinative, and that tributaries must be what would be called a stream in ordinary parlance,” Francois said.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/hearing-proposed-cwa-rule-previews-legal-arguments-final-policy
-
'Green New Deal' Crusaders Back Kids' Climate Case
Mar 4, 2019 | E&E Climatewire
By Ellen M. Gilmer
The young activists pushing lawmakers for a "Green New Deal" are throwing their weight behind peers fighting climate change in the courtroom.
The charitable arm of the Sunrise Movement last week urged federal judges to greenlight litigation from 21 kids and young adults attempting to hold the U.S. government accountable for climate change impacts.
The high-stakes lawsuit, Juliana v. United States, is before the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which could either halt the case or allow a trial to proceed in Oregon.
The so-called kids' climate case makes a variety of legal arguments, including that the government has violated what the plaintiffs call a constitutional right to a livable climate (Climatewire, Feb. 27).
In its court brief, the Sunrise Movement Education Fund focused on another claim: that the government has fallen short of an alleged public trust duty to protect the atmosphere.
"When the Government harms the youngest of the trust beneficiaries by actively damaging the climate system," the brief says, "the violation is that much more pronounced as young beneficiaries ... will have to endure the harms longer."
The group was part of a flock of supporters who filed amicus briefs Friday on the young plaintiffs' side.
Another youth-led brief came from Zero Hour, an organization founded by 17-year-old Washington state resident Jamie Margolin, who last year helped wage an unsuccessful legal battle against the state for inadequate climate action.
More than 30,000 young people signed on to a brief coordinated by Zero Hour in an aggressive social media campaign.
Also supporting the kids: Democratic members of Congress, national and international environmental groups, major public health organizations, academics, ski resort companies, and others.
The federal government has steadfastly rejected the youth plaintiffs' arguments under both the Trump and Obama administrations, maintaining that the purported constitutional and public trust claims are unfounded, and that climate policy must be decided in the executive and legislative branches rather than the courts.
The 9th Circuit is set to hear arguments in the appeal this summer.
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2019/03/04/stories/1060122973
-
Fact-Checking GOP Claims About the Paris Agreement
Mar 4, 2019 | E&E Climatewire
By Jean Chemnick
The rest of the world is free-riding on U.S. climate action.
So said several Republican members of a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee Thursday at a hearing on the Paris Agreement that marked a sea change in GOP lawmakers' acceptance of climate science.
Republican lawmakers expressed newfound concern that major developing emitters like China and India were letting their emissions grow unchecked. The European Union was accused of blowing past its Paris goals despite criticizing the United States for planning to leave the deal. The United States was described as showing the only meaningful emissions reductions of any country.
But while these statements rarely ran afoul of physics, they don't necessarily match the facts. And they betray scant understanding of the Paris Agreement by Republicans who largely ignored climate diplomacy during their eight years in the majority.
Here are some of the claims made at last week's hearing:
Claims: "While other developed nations may be 'staying in' the agreement so far, they are not actually following through on their promises," said Rep. John Shimkus (R-Ill.), ranking member of the Environment and Climate Change Subcommittee, in his opening statement. He added: "No single country in Europe is performing sufficiently to meet Paris Agreement goals."
"The European Union, which falls under the Paris accord, all 28 nations, none of which are on course to meet their objectives," said Rep. David McKinley (R-W.Va.) in a brief interview with E&E News.
Fact: That's not true.
The European Union pledged in Paris to cut emissions by at least 40 percent by 2030 compared with 1990 levels. Shimkus and McKinley say the union will miss that objective. But not only is Europe not on track to miss it, it's likely to exceed it. The only questions are by how much and whether or not it will opt to tighten its target.
The 28-nation European Union — which will have 27 members if the United Kingdom leaves on March 29 — adopted stronger renewable energy and efficiency policies last year. With emissions cuts from carbon trading, transportation and other policies, the bloc is now on course to deliver between 43 and 45 percent in emissions cuts by 2030. Before the end of 2020, progressive countries like the Netherlands and Sweden want the target tightened to 55 percent by 2030.
Shimkus cited four sources to support the argument that the European Union is blowing past its commitments: papers from climate advocacy group Climate Action Network Europe, the U.N. Environment Programme and research consortium Climate Action Tracker and an articlefrom The Washington Post.
But none is on the subject of the European Union's Paris commitment, or "nationally determined contribution," as national targets are called under the deal.
Instead, they all explore the "gap" between the net effect of the current NDCs from all countries and the greenhouse gas limits scientists say the world must maintain if it is to keep the world below a relatively safe — though still problematic — 1.5-degree-Celsius rise. CAN Europe's paper presses wealthy Europe to do more toward closing the gap, but none of the sources Shimkus cites doubt its 2030 pledge.
Wendel Trio, director of CAN Europe, whose research Shimkus cites, noted in an email to E&E News over the weekend that the European Union's recently adopted energy policies ensure it will meet its current 2030 goals.
"Now that that is done, there is a growing interest from multiple member state governments, the European Parliament and the European Commission to go beyond the agreed targets," he said, adding that the bloc could offer a tougher pledge before a leader-level U.N. summit in September.
Supporters of the Paris Agreement have always acknowledged that the first set of NDCs wouldn't be enough to avoid damaging climate change. Andrew Light, a State Department climate negotiator in Paris who is now a distinguished fellow at the World Resources Institute, testified to that at Thursday's hearing.
"We have to keep in mind that Paris was created as a process," he told the subcommittee. "Parties have to come back to the table at regular intervals to make new commitments of ambition."
The Climate Action Tracker's analysis on the European Union's Paris promise does argue that the European Commission is probably wrong and that the European Union will outperform its Paris promise by 7.5 to 9.7 percent, not 3 to 5 percent.
"Contrary to Rep. Shimkus's claims the Climate Action Tracker shows that a significant number of countries are reducing emissions due to policy action since 2015, including the European Union," Bill Hare, a physicist and a lead architect of Climate Action Tracker, told E&E News in an email.
Claim: "But yet China and India markedly continue to increase" their emissions, McKinley said at the hearing.
"China's up 240 some percent in carbon emissions, India's 190 percent, and America down 17. We're the only ones paying attention to this," McKinley added to E&E News.
Fact: Well ...
Climate Action Tracker judges India's NDC to be in line with keeping warming below 2 C. That was once the goal of the U.N. climate process. It's now considered dangerous but more likely than the 1.5 C threshold prescribed in last year's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change report.
India actually gets higher marks than either China or the Obama-era pledge to cut emissions 26 to 28 percent by 2025 compared with 2005 levels. That pledge — disowned by President Trump — was described by GOP members of the committee as a draconian assault on the U.S. economy. CAT called it "insufficient."
China's emissions have ticked up in 2017 and 2018, the researchers noted. And both China and India left themselves room in their NDCs to expand their coal use for power generation — though planned investment in both countries is shrinking.
"Because these countries are in a different stage in their development, their timeline may be longer than ours, but it is clear that they are committed to taking action and pursuing more sustainable development," said Rep. Paul Tonko (D-N.Y.), the subcommittee's chairman.
China promised in its Paris commitment to stop growing emissions no later than 2030, but it's expected to do so sooner. Light said a 2025 peak was likely, pointing to the launch last year in China of what will eventually be the world's largest emissions trading scheme.
China has also planned $360 billion in renewable energy investments by next year, when the Paris Agreement's term officially begins. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has pledged to install 100 gigawatts of solar energy and 60 GW of wind power by 2022.
McKinley argued that a serious response to climate change required the United States to develop carbon capture and storage, which could be exported to developing countries to allow them to use coal while curbing their emissions.
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2019/03/04/stories/1060122921
Congressional Hearings
Industry and Association News
TSCA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested