Preview Newsletter
PM ACC Clips Report - March 25, 2019
-
(ACC Mentioned) Trump Sees Strong GDP Growth. Here's What Business Economists Predict for 2019
Mar 25, 2019 | CBS News
The nation's business economists foresee a sharp slowdown in U.S. economic growth over the next two years. That stands in sharp contrast to the Trump administration's predictions that growth will accelerate this year and next. -
(ACC Mentioned) Business Economists Cut US Growth Forecast
Mar 25, 2019 | ThinkAdvisor
By Bernice Napach
The National Association of Business Economists has joined the Federal Reserve and Business Roundtable in downgrading its outlook for U.S. growth this year and next. The 55 business economists who contribute to the NABE... -
(ACC Mentioned) Interactive: AFPM '19: US February Specialty Chem Volumes Fall - ACC
Mar 25, 2019 | ICIS
US specialty chemical volumes in February fell on a three-month moving average (3MMA) basis, following gains in January and December, the American Chemistry Council (ACC) said. Of 28 specialty chemical segments, only 11... -
(ACC Mentioned) The World Agrees There's a Plastic Waste Crisis—Can It Agree on a Solution?
Mar 25, 2019 | National Geographic
By Laura Parker
It didn’t take long after the recent United Nations environmental assembly in Kenya ended for environmentalists to sharply rebuke the United States for allegedly derailing global ambitions to prevent plastic debris from flowing into the... -
(ACC Mentioned) Humans Must Curb Their Addiction to Plastic
Mar 25, 2019 | New Frame
By Tony Carnie
Can any of us imagine a future devoid of plastic? Mass production of this miracle invention only began about 80 years ago, the merest wink of an eye when viewed against modern humankind’s 300 000 year-long presence on Earth. -
Bill Would Block Local Fees, Bans On Plastic Bags
Mar 25, 2019 | AP (In E&E - Greenwire)
By Tim Talley
Oklahoma lawmakers are considering legislation to prevent cities and towns from imposing a fee on single-use plastic and paper bags, a measure that officials in one Oklahoma community say encroaches on their search for an innovative... -
(ACC Mentioned) EPA Publishes Reach Studies Underlying TSCA PV29 Evaluation
Mar 25, 2019 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
The US EPA has released two dozen studies used to underpin a TSCA risk evaluation that had previously been withheld as confidential. The protected status of the 24 health and safety studies – which the EPA used in developing the... -
California Sets Prop 65 Safe Harbour Level for N-Hexane
Mar 25, 2019 | Chemical Watch
California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (Oehha) has finalised Proposition 65 maximum allowable dose levels (MADLs) for oral and inhalation exposures to n-hexane. An MADL represents a safe harbour... -
Flint Water Woes Spur States to Act on Lead as EPA Struggles
Mar 25, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By David Schultz
The EPA has been struggling to update its regulations on lead in drinking water for nearly a decade now, pushing back its self-imposed deadlines to unveil new policies nearly a dozen times. Many states have stepped into this regulatory... -
Kentucky PFAs Firefighting Foam Restrictions Become Law
Mar 25, 2019 | Chemical Watch
A Kentucky measure restricting the use of firefighting foams containing intentionally added per- and polyfluoroalkyl (PFAS) substanceshas been signed into law. Governor Matt Bevin approved the bill (SB 104) on 22 March. -
Whitmer Budget Would Direct $180m More Toward Drinking Water
Mar 25, 2019 | AP (In E&E - Greenwire)
By David Eggert
Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D) is proposing a $180 million plan to boost the quality of tap water across Michigan, from replacing lead pipes and school drinking fountains to combating chemicals that are contaminating public supplies and... -
Boot-Melting Mexican Sewage Has San Diego Seeking Help
Mar 25, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Emily C. Dooley
Foamy, yellow plumes of toxic sewage are belching onto California’s beaches and waterways near Mexico, eating into the boots of border agents, sickening swimmers, and shutting down tourism. Raw sewage, solvents, and trash from... -
This Chemical Has Been Polluting N.J. for Decades. Now, 5 Companies Have to Pay Big to Clean It Up.
Mar 25, 2019 | NJ.com
By Michael Sol Warren
Five chemical companies polluted New Jersey’s water for years with a long-lasting, cancer-causing family of chemicals. Now, the state is directing those companies to clean up the mess. On Monday, the New Jersey Department... -
Shell Boosts Bet on North American LNG Exports
Mar 25, 2019 | Wall Street Journal
By Ryan Dezember and Inyoung Hwang
Royal Dutch Shell RDS.A -0.21% PLC and Energy Transfer ET -0.43%LP said they are pursuing plans to convert a liquefied-natural-gas import facility in Louisiana into an export terminal, a bet that the future of U.S. shale gas lies in... -
Big Oil, Gas Already Enlisting in Rise of the Machines
Mar 25, 2019 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Carolyn Davis
Data, considered by many to be the world’s most valuable resource, is offering the oil and gas industry more precise information to create better wells and safer operations, an Amazon executive said earlier this month. -
Oil-Stained Houston Channel Remains Closed as Testing Continues
Mar 25, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Joe Carroll and Rachel Adams-Heard
Vessels will be allowed to enter a tributary to the Houston Ship Channel this morning, a workaround allowing some shipping in the area as the main route into the region remains closed as a result of a cloud of cancer-causing benzene... -
Petrochemical Cleanup Continues; Houston Ship Channel Closed
Mar 25, 2019 | AP (In E&E - Greenwire)
An emergency dike has been repaired and a fire-damaged petrochemical tank stabilized during cleanup of leaking oil products that closed part of the Houston Ship Channel, the operator of the complex said yesterday. -
Texas Refineries Cut Output as Petrochemical Spill Curbs Shipping
Mar 25, 2019 | Reuters
By Collin Eaton and Erwin Seba
A petrochemical disaster outside Houston that has disrupted ship traffic for days at a major U.S. oil port led two major refineries on Monday to reduce fuel production, according to people familiar with the matter. A fire and fuel leak at... -
Environmental Advocates Announce Lawsuit Over EPA’s Dangerously Outdated Response Plan for Oil Spills
| Alaska Native News
By Emily Whitefield
The University of California-Berkeley Environmental Law Clinic today announced a lawsuit to compel the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to issue rules on the use of chemical agents such as Corexit (NASDAQ: ECL) to clean up oil... -
Romney Helps GOP Look for New Path on Climate Change
Mar 25, 2019 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Alexander Bolton
Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah), who is emerging as a pragmatic leader among Senate Republicans, is at the center of private discussions among GOP senators about crafting a legislative response to climate change. Senate Democratic... -
Rail Unions Endorse Two-Person Crew Legislation
Mar 25, 2019 | Progressive Railroading
The Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen (BLET) and the International Association of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail and Transportation Workers-Transportation Division (SMART TD) have announced their support of a bill that calls... -
Senate Expected to Vote on Green New Deal This Week
Mar 25, 2019 | Houston Chronicle
By James Osborne
Senators are expected to vote this week on a resolution regarding the Green New Deal, a Democratic proposal to tackle climate change through an unprecedented uptick in government spending on clean energy. Senate Majority... -
Ewire: Senate Republicans Push 'Innovation' Climate Stance
Mar 25, 2019 | Inside EPA
As the Senate prepares to vote on the Green New Deal (GND) later this week, several key Republican senators are seeking to forge a new stance for their party on climate change, joining a growing number of GOP lawmakers who are... -
Green New Deal Vote Tests Dem Unity in Senate
Mar 25, 2019 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Alexander Bolton
Senate Democratic Leader Charles Schumer (N.Y.) this week will face his biggest test keeping White House hopefuls aligned with the rest of the Democratic caucus when Republicans force a vote on the Green New Deal. Schumer wants...
Industry and Association News
TSCA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) Trump Sees Strong GDP Growth. Here's What Business Economists Predict for 2019
Mar 25, 2019 | CBS News
The nation's business economists foresee a sharp slowdown in U.S. economic growth over the next two years. That stands in sharp contrast to the Trump administration's predictions that growth will accelerate this year and next.
That finding comes from the latest survey by the National Association for Business Economics being released Monday. Its economists collectively project that growth, as measured by the gross domestic product, will reach a modest 2.4 this year and just 2 percent in 2020. Among the key factors in their dimmer assessment are a global slowdown and the ongoing trade conflicts between the Trump administration and several major trading partners.
By comparison, President Donald Trump's proposed $4.7 trillion budget is based on a forecast that the economy will grow by at least 3 percent a year through his presidency. The U.S. hasn't had a streak of GDP growth above 3 percent since the late 1990s, and the post-Great Recession years have been marked by annual growth of between 1.6 percent to 2.9 percent. Economists say they have been growing less optimistic in recent months.
"The panel has turned less optimistic about the outlook since the previous survey, as three-quarters of respondents see risks tilted to the downside, and only six percent perceive risks to the upside," said NABE President Kevin Swift, who is also the chief economist of the American Chemistry Council.
Still, the NABE economists say they think a recession remains unlikely any time soon. They peg the likelihood of a recession at 10 percent in the first half of 2019, and rising to 20 percent in the second half of the year.
Sluggish growth
For 2018, economic growth amounted to 2.9 percent, the government has estimated. The economy benefited last year from tax cuts and increased government spending, the gains from which are now thought to be fading. It's one reason why most economists foresee a more sluggish pace of growth.
The new NABE projections, from a panel of 55 professional forecasters, represent a significant drop from their previous forecast in December of 2.7 percent growth this year. And their estimate is much lower than the Trump's administration's new projection that GDP growth will remain above 3 percent this year and over the next six years.
But the administration is already projecting huge deficits above $1 trillion over the next four years. If growth falls short of its optimistic forecasts, those deficit figures could soar even higher and inhibit the economy's ability to accelerate.
Federal Reserve outlook
The NABE forecast is in line with the updated outlook that the Federal Reserve released last week. The Fed projected that GDP growth would slow to 2.1 percent this year and 1.9 percent in 2020, having downgraded its previous estimates to take account of the global slump and other risks.
The NABE economists attributed their weaker outlook in part to a growing economic drag from President Donald Trump's trade policies. The import taxes that Trump has imposed on China and some other nations have prompted retaliatory tariffs on U.S. exports.
"A majority of panelists sees external headwinds from trade policy and slower global growth as the primary downside risks to growth," said Gregory Daco, chief U.S. economist for Oxford Economics and the chair of the NABE survey panel.
The NABE said three-fourths of its forecasters had reduced their 2019 GDP growth estimates because of the likely consequences of the trade conflicts. Still, the NABE's panel put the likelihood that a recession will begin by the end of this year at around 20 percent and 35 percent by the end of 2020.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/american-economy-trump-sees-strong-gdp-growth-heres-what-business-economists-predict/#
-
(ACC Mentioned) Business Economists Cut US Growth Forecast
Mar 25, 2019 | ThinkAdvisor
By Bernice Napach
The National Association of Business Economists has joined the Federal Reserve and Business Roundtable in downgrading its outlook for U.S. growth this year and next.
The 55 business economists who contribute to the NABE outlook survey are now forecasting GDP growth, adjusted for inflation, of 2.4% this year, down from 2.7% previously, and 2% growth next year.
“NABE Outlook Survey panelists believe the U.S. economy has reached an inflection point,” said NABE President Kevin Swift, chief economist of the American Chemistry Council, in a statement.
Three-quarters of respondents see more downside risks, compared with 6% who see more upside, and a majority blame trade policy and slower global growth for the downside tilt.
Despite the more pessimistic outlook, NABE economists give low odds for a recession this year — around 20% — and just 35% odds for a recession in 2020.
“In part this reflects the federal Reserve’s dovish policy U-turn in January,” said Survey Chair Gregory Daco, chief U.S. economist at Oxford Economics, presumably referring to the minutes of the January meeting of the Federal Open Market Committee. The survey was conducted from Feb. 22 to March 7, before the Fed’s March 19-20 meeting.
The January minutes showed that officials favored ending the shrinking of the Fed’s balance sheet and were uncertain about raising rates again in 2019. In March, Fed policymakers were even more dovish, indicating that they likely won’t raise rates at all this year while slowing the drawdown of its balance sheet before ending the runoff in September.
A near majority of respondents anticipated only one more rate hike this year, but it’s important to remember that they were surveyed before the Fed’s latest policy announcement. Interestingly, 30% of respondents do not expect an inversion of the yield curve — between the 3-month Treasury bill and 10-year Treasury note — before the next recession. Almost every recession since 1955 has been preceded by an inverted yield curve, though the lag time before a recession can range from 6 months to 2 years, according to economists at the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco.
Other highlights of the survey include expectations for:
-Lower inflation: 2.1% in 2019 and 2020 for the GDP Price Index, down from 2.2% in 2018; CPI increasing 2.1% from Q4 2018 to Q4 2019, down from 2.4% forecast previously; and core PCE price index rising 2% Q4 2018 to Q4 2019, down from 2.1% forecast previously.
-Weaker corporate profits: median 4.2% growth projected in 2019, down from 4.6% forecast previously, and median 3.5% growth in 2020.
-Lower 10-year Treasury yield: 3% by year-end, down from 3.5% in previous forecast, with a wide range between 2.5% and 3.76% (The 10-year Treasury ended Friday, March 22, with a 2.4% yield).
-Slightly slower consumer spending growth of 2.6% in 2019, down from 2.7% forecast previously.Slightly higher unemployment rate in 2019: the median forecast has the jobless rate averaging 3.7% in 2019, up from 3.6% in the previous survey, with the rate rising to 3.8% in the first quarter and declining to 3.6% in the last two quarters.
-Moderate median payroll growth of 173,000 per month in 2019, versus a previous forecast or 166,000, and 127,000 in 2020Higher hourly earnings: The median forecast is for 3% growth in 2019 and 3.2% growth in 2010, up from an actual 2.7% gain in 2018.
-Wider federal budget deficit, growing to $960 billion in fiscal 2019 and $1.025 trillion in fiscal 2020 from an actual $779 billion in fiscal 2018.
-Increased U.S. trade deficit, growing from $914 billion in 2018 to $978 billion in 2019 and $1.018 trillion in 2020, reflecting a greater deceleration of export growth than import growth. NABE economists project that export growth, adjusted for inflation, will slow from 3.9% in 2018 to 2.6% in 2019, while real import growth slows from 4.6% in 2018 to 3.7% in 2019.
https://www.thinkadvisor.com/2019/03/25/business-economists-cut-us-growth-forecast/
-
(ACC Mentioned) Interactive: AFPM '19: US February Specialty Chem Volumes Fall - ACC
Mar 25, 2019 | ICIS
US specialty chemical volumes in February fell on a three-month moving average (3MMA) basis, following gains in January and December, the American Chemistry Council (ACC) said.
Of 28 specialty chemical segments, only 11 expanded in February. Four were flat, and 13 declined.
Year on year, overall specialty chemical volumes rose in February, with gains in 19 segments.
Specialty chemicals are materials manufactured with unique performance or function. They provide a variety of effects on which many other sectors and end-use products rely. Specialty chemicals may only have one or two uses, while commodities may have multiple or different applications for each chemical.
Hosted by the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers (AFPM), the IPC takes place on 24-26 March in San Antonio, Texas.
https://www.icis.com/explore/resources/news/2019/03/25/10339183/interactive-afpm-19-us-february-specialty-chem-volumes-fall-acc/
-
(ACC Mentioned) The World Agrees There's a Plastic Waste Crisis—Can It Agree on a Solution?
Mar 25, 2019 | National Geographic
By Laura Parker
It didn’t take long after the recent United Nations environmental assembly in Kenya ended for environmentalists to sharply rebuke the United States for allegedly derailing global ambitions to prevent plastic debris from flowing into the oceans.
“The tyranny of the minority,” their statement declared as environmentalists denounced the Americans for what they said was slowing progress on marine plastics by diluting a resolution calling for phasing out single-use plastic by 2025 and blocking an effort to craft a legally binding treaty on plastic debris.
Yet that unsparing critique doesn’t fully reflect the negotiations that played out in a small roof-top conference room on the UN’s campus in Kenya’s capital city of Nairobi. What happened is perhaps best viewed not as tyrannical but as isolationist, more akin to the U.S. withdrawal from the Paris climate agreement. Yes, the U.S. won concessions in Nairobi to the wording on two resolutions involving the fate of marine plastics, but it waged the argument essentially alone, with backing only from Saudi Arabia and Cuba.
“I would not say the U.S. is making itself irrelevant,” says David Azoulay, a Geneva-based lawyer for the Center for International Environmental Law, who observed the negotiations. “But it is true that the U.S. is setting itself further apart, as it did with the withdrawal from the Paris accord, from addressing the critical challenges of our generation. The whole world is addressing the plastic challenge at its roots. The EU is doing it, India is doing it. The world is moving forward.”
The Americans sought to define marine debris as an issue solved exclusively by waste management, said Hugo-Maria Schally, the European Union’s lead negotiator on marine plastics, in an interview, while “virtually everybody else in the room was focused on the idea that there is a problem with production and the use of single-use plastic.”
So, the goal of “phasing out” single-use plastics was replaced by the vaguer wording to “significantly reducing,” and target dates for action slipped from 2025 to 2030. The documents that emerged are not legally binding. But in the end, a deadline remains in place, and a UN working group on marine plastics will continue to work the problem, with the full backing of the UN purse.
“It's fair to say that the UN environmental assembly has put out a very clear message,” Schally says. “Single-use plastics are a problem. There are a variety of ways to address the issue. Waste management is one, but not the only one. We need to look at alternatives and reduce the use by 2030. That's the global message."
Ola Elvestuen, Norway’s minister for climate and environment, expressed disappointment after a panel discussion about the best solutions, but not defeat. “We didn’t get the wording we wanted,” he said. “But we have enough to continue.”
International treaties?
The only existing international treaty addressing marine debris on a global scale is MARPOL, adopted by the International Maritime Organization, which banned ships from dumping plastic waste into the oceans as of 1988–so long ago, that in the fast-accelerating world of plastics production, it is almost antique. Age aside, the trouble with MARPOL is that 80 percent of the estimated 8 million tons a year that flows into the oceans originates on land, according to research published in 2015.
Not surprisingly, as the visibility of plastic waste has become more prominent, so have calls for a new international treaty that gets to the crux of the problem. In 2017, a group of seven marine scientists tracking how microplastics have altered genes, cells, and tissues in marine organisms—causing death and decreased reproduction—reviewed those findings in an opinion piece published in Science that urged the UN to write a new treaty on plastic pollution.
Later that year, at the UN’s last environmental conference, 193 nations, including the U.S., endorsed a Clean Seas pact. It was nonbinding and toothless, though significant enough that Norway called it a strong first step.
Adopting global treaties is not supposed to be easy. The UN is, by design, slow-moving, cumbersome, bureaucratic. It took more than a decade, Azoulay points out, for the UN to adopt a treaty protecting human health from mercury poisoning.
What’s notable is how far marine plastic moved up on the agenda for this year’s conference.
Delegates pushed for substantial action. Guðmundur Ingi Guðbrandsson,Iceland’s minister for the environment and natural resources, arrived in Nairobi with hopes the conference would lay the groundwork for a legally binding treaty on marine plastic.
“It’s production of plastics that needs to be tackled,” he said in an interview. “We need less plastics. We need to look at how much we are putting into the system and we need to reduce that. We need to increase reuse of what we already use so that we are trashing as little as we can. Industry needs to find more solutions than we already have today and they may need a push from governments to do something.”
Siim Kiisler, the UN assembly president, who also serves as Estonia’s minister of environment, opened the assembly by urging delegates to take strong action on marine debris, and called for the phasing out of single-use plastic by 2025.
Even the visuals focused on plastics. A large dhow made from discarded plastic bottles and flip-flops stood tilted, as if tacking along the UN’s entry driveway, as its makers announced plans to sail from Kenya to Zanzibar to further the campaign against the plastic menace. A separate Clean Seas venue hosted day-long panel discussions throughout the entire week that drew in dozens of scientists, engineers, politicians, and activists from all corners of the world to debate best solutions.
Target waste management or production?
Joyce Msuya, acting director of the UN Environmental Program, cautions that global ambition “is one thing, but you have to translate that into what it means for the local condition.” Member states, she says, do not start “from the same baseline. We have to customize and look at what can be done and share the experience of what has worked elsewhere.”
The two marine plastics resolutions under consideration included a proposed legally binding agreement, promoted by Norway, Japan, and Sri Lanka. The phase-out of single-use plastics, contained in the second resolution, was argued by India, drowning in an estimated 550,000 tons of mismanaged plastic waste every year, with strong support from the Philippines and other Pacific island groups.
Few were surprised when the United States balked at targets, deadlines, and any reference to bans or levies on various plastic products or reductions in plastic production and consumption. The U.S. negotiators declined to be interviewed; a State Department spokesman said in a statement that the U.S. considers marine plastic “a growing issue” needing urgent action and that improved waste management is the fastest way to achieve that goal.
“We support reducing the environmental impacts from the discharges of plastics,” the statement says. “And we further note that the majority of marine plastic discharges comes from only six countries in Asia where improved waste management could radically decrease these discharges.”
Stewart Harris, director of marine and environment issues at the American Chemistry Council, an industry trade group, echoes the U.S. stance on waste disposal as the most practical immediate solution to reducing the flow of plastic litter to the ocean.
“We are looking at actions that will make the largest impact in the shortest amount of time,” he says. Product bans, he says, do not fall into that category: “They are not the most effective and not the best use of our time and resources. They fail to address that underlying cause–the lack of infrastructure to manage waste.”
By the UN’s own estimates, two in five people–or 40 percent of the global population–lack access to waste disposal systems. So far, no global entity has come up with any plan to address waste disposal on that scale.
One reason other nations are also seeking reductions in single-use plastics is the growing unease that even creation of the most comprehensive waste disposal systems may not be enough to keep up with the accelerating pace of plastics manufacturing. The plastics industry has grown so rapidly that half the plastic on Earth has been made since 2005, and production is expected to double in the next two decades. Disposable plastic products account for 40 percent of that production and are largely blamed for the plastic mess that’s been made of the seas.
Yet even as bans proliferate around the globe, Harris say consideration of reductions in production or consumption of plastics is premature. Too many unanswered questions remain about the effectiveness of various solutions, he says, adding: “Other discussions need to be had before that. The best answer is we’re not there yet.”
Who’s leading on plastic reform?
The United States’ go-it-alone stance was underscored inadvertently by the crash of the Ethiopian Airlines plane the day before the assembly convened. Among the 157 people killed on board the Nairobi-bound flight were 25 UN staff members and more than two dozen delegates, presenters, and members of environmental and health NGOs heading to the conference.
The aftermath of the tragedy was watched, with increasing incredulity, as the country-by-country groundings of the 737 Max jet unfolded over successive days, leaving the United States alone in its defense of the plane as safe to fly. Only after the U.K. and, finally, Canada grounded their own Max jets did the U.S. act to ground the world fleet.
In the Clean Seas tent, no one spoke of the obvious similarities to the word-wrangling over the pair of marine debris resolutions. Instead, delegates shrugged off the setbacks and departed to do at home what they couldn’t achieve in Nairobi. Kiisler, the president of the assembly, told National Geographic: “Better to have a weak resolution than no resolution.”
So far, 127 countries have adopted regulations regarding plastic bags, according to UN tallies as of July 2018. Twenty-seven countries have adopted bans on other single-use products, including plates, cups, cutlery, or straws.
India, home to 1.3 billion people and the world’s second most-populated nation, continues preparations to abolish all single-use plastic by 2022 in a plan announced last year that may be the world’s most ambitious undertaking.
The European Parliament is preparing to put into force a sweeping single-use plastics directive it passed last year that bans the single-use plastics most commonly found on European beaches by 2021 and sets up programs to significantly reduce containers and cups by 2028. With 28 mostly rich member nations, the EU is arguably the most influential world power after the UN. The latest measures have made it the world’s leading voice on the plastic crisis.
https://www.nationalgeographic.com/environment/2019/03/un-environment-plastic-pollution-negotiations/
-
(ACC Mentioned) Humans Must Curb Their Addiction to Plastic
Mar 25, 2019 | New Frame
By Tony Carnie
Can any of us imagine a future devoid of plastic?
Mass production of this miracle invention only began about 80 years ago, the merest wink of an eye when viewed against modern humankind’s 300 000 year-long presence on Earth.
Yet, it seems that we are now completely addicted to it.
Plastic – mostly derived from synthetic, petroleum-based formulations – has become so ubiquitous that our lives would surely be cast into turmoil if production were to be banned or scaled down significantly. If you doubt this, just take a quick peek around your home, starting in the kitchen.
Where do we keep the piles of “rubbish” generated from daily urban living? For most of us, the answer is a black plastic bag.
Now take a look inside your fridge at the plastic tubs of yoghurt, the plastic sachets of milk or pesto sauce, the plastic bottles holding water or mango juice and the airtight Tupperware containers and cling film that help keep leftover food from rotting.
The very lining of your fridge is made from lightweight and durable plastics. Underground pipes that deliver and remove water from our homes are made from polyvinyl chloride (PVC) plastic.
Looking carefully around our homes, offices and the world, we realise quickly just how much plastic there is. It is almost everywhere. Can we really do without it?
Environmental menace
For all its convenience and many benefits, discarded plastic has become an enormous and unsightly environmental menace on land and sea.
Formerly pristine beaches around the world are now blighted by piles of floating plastic detritus. A wide variety of sea creatures – turtles, birds, seals and fish – perish daily after eating or getting tangled up in the torrent of plastic litter that ends up in the sea.
Every year, roughly nine million tonnes of discarded plastic pollutes the world’s oceans.
According to the International Energy Agency, the cumulative load of plastic entering the oceans will exceed 500 million tonnes 30 years from now if no significant global action is taken to curb this flow.
Conservation group the Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF) estimates that three-quarters of all the plastic produced in the past eight decades has already become waste and that production is expected to surge by nearly 40% over the next decade, following major investments by the international plastics industry.
These reasons alone should be sufficient to inspire tougher regulations and political action. But purely from the selfish perspective of Homo sapiens, there is an even more compelling reason to take action: plastic and its associated toxic additives are sleeping slowly into the global food chain from a variety of land and sea sources.
Human health impact
In February, a report titled Plastic and Health: The Hidden Costs of a Plastic Planet acknowledged that the full impact of plastic pollution on human health remains poorly understood. But it asserts that almost every stage of the plastic life cycle poses distinct risks to human health.
The report, published by the Center for International Environmental Law and other groups concerned about the impact of plastic, suggests that “even with the limited data available, the health impacts of plastic throughout its life cycle are overwhelming … plastic threatens human health on a global scale”.
This is because plastic slowly breaks down into tiny pieces that are swallowed or absorbed by marine life. These fragments of microplastic can also enter the human body by two main pathways: airborne particles that enter our lungs or directly into our stomachs when eating seafood.
Dr David Azoulay, an attorney and the director of the centre’s environmental health programme, says these fragments can act as a delivery mechanism for toxic chemicals that have accumulated in the environment.
“Existing research shows that plastic additives such as phthalates, BPA and some flame retardants are endocrine disruptors and carcinogens. It also shows that plastic can accumulate heavy metals and adsorb toxic contaminants, such as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and organochlorine pesticides from the surrounding [sea] water.
“Further clues into the impacts of microparticles [including plastic] that enter the human body can be found in medical literature. Once inside the body, microplastic particles can cross biological boundaries.”
Watered-down ‘commitment’
Amid growing public concern about the scale of plastic pollution, the issue came to the fore at the fourth United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA 4) held in Nairobi, Kenya, from 11 to 15 March.
On the final day of the assembly, environment ministers from around the world issued a declaration that included “the first universal commitment” to reducing the volume of single-use plastics.
“We will address the damage to our ecosystems caused by the unsustainable use and disposal of plastic products, including by significantly reducing single-use plastic products by 2030, and we will work with the private sector to find affordable and environmentally friendly alternatives,” said the ministers.
But according to Azoulay and other sources close to the negotiations, the final declaration on marine plastic litter and phasing out single-use plastic was greatly watered down in comparison with earlier drafts.
One of the proposals, submitted by Norway, Japan and Sri Lanka, aimed to strengthen international cooperation on marine plastic litter and microplastics, including a new legally binding agreement. The second, proposed by India, aimed to phase out single-use plastics worldwide.
‘Very tough’ negotiations
“Despite sweeping agreement by the majority of countries that urgent, ambitious and global action is needed to address plastic across its life cycle – from production to use to disposal – a small minority led by the United States blocked ambitious text and delayed negotiations,” said Azoulay.
“Backed by a strong industry lobby with over $200 billion invested in petrochemical buildout to drastically expand plastic production, the US delegation was able to thwart progress and water down the resolutions.”
Estonian Minister of Environment and UNEA 4 president Siim Kiisler ducked questions on this issue at a press conference on the final day of negotiations. When asked if he could confirm that the United States delegation played a “spoiler role” in seeking to water down stronger action on environmental problems, Kissler responded: “I will not answer this question.”
Significantly, perhaps, Kiisler did not deny the claims, confirming that negotiations had been “very tough” and that the draft ministerial declaration had passed through five or six iterations during several nights of consultations.
Norwegian Minister of Climate and Environment Ola Elvestuen skirted similar questions, suggesting that the final ministerial declaration on single-use plastics was “good enough to work on” at future UNEA meetings.
‘Complicated and crucial’
American negotiators were not present at the press conference, but US delegation head Marcia Bernicat delivered a statement on the same day suggesting that governments were now facing “some of the most complicated and crucial problems humans have ever confronted”.
“How can we combat biodiversity loss while sustaining the livelihoods of those dependent on fishing and farming? How can we stop losing or wasting one third of the food we produce? How can we keep plastics out of our oceans?
“We have made great strides over the past two weeks,” said Bernicat. “There is a healthy debate on the preferred solutions to some of these problems, and we must continue working together to address them.”
Marco Lambertini, the director general of conservation group WWF International, reflected that there had been an explosion of interest in global plastic pollution over the past few years.
“We used to look at it mostly as a visible, aesthetic problem. Only recently have we realised that it’s also potentially dangerous.”
No accountability
Noting that nearly nine million tonnes of plastic is leaking into the sea each year, Lambertini said the pollution of the world’s oceans was not being treated with the urgency it deserved. If nine million tonnes of crude oil leaked into the sea each year, oil industry executives would be fired or prosected.
“But with plastic, there is no accountability. This has to change ... [Plastic] producers need to see this as a problem that they need to answer to and governments need to recognise that it is a problem they need to regulate. We need to be serious about dealing with this serious issue,” he said, expressing disappointment that the final ministerial declaration was not strong enough.
Fijian ministry of environment permanent secretary Joshua Wycliffe said his island nation had started to clamp down on the importation of non-biodegradable plastic.
“Our tourist beaches are beautiful and we want to keep them that way,” he said, noting that action by plastic producers only began when governments began to close the doors to trade.
European Commission environment director general Hugo-Maria Schally echoed this suggestion, saying: “Business needs to be helped – and legislation helps, even though industry does not like it.”
Schally said no legally binding global treaty on plastic pollution would make sense unless industry, government and society tackled the issue of plastics design and production. Industry would also have to provide detailed information on toxic additives used in plastic manufacture.
“We can’t live without plastic, but we need to make it possible to bring plastic back into the value chain [through recycling]. If industry does not reflect and come up with targets, perhaps we will have to close some doors.”
Product bans
Swedish Climate and Environment Minister Isabella Lövin said her country supported the goal of significantly reducing the use of single-use plastic by 2030, but that governments should consider going much further and ban single-use products such as plastic earbuds.
Representing the powerful US plastics industry, Stewart Harris argued in favour of strengthening existing global agreements and establishing new voluntary agreements rather than establishing a new global treaty focused solely on plastic pollution.
Harris, who is the director of marine and environmental stewardship at the American Chemistry Council’s plastics division, said a global alliance of plastics producers led by consumer goods company Procter & Gamble recently announced plans to fight plastic waste, pledging to spend $1.5 billion over the next five years.
The funds are to be spent mainly on waste collection projects in Africa and Asia, technology for recycling and reusing waste, the education of governments and local communities, and for cleaning up highly polluted areas.
Azoulay said the $1.5 billion, industry-led plan to deal with plastic pollution is but a fraction of what the industry plans to spend – more than $200 billion – building new plastic factories in the next five to seven years.
“We have to change the global narrative on plastics, however much time it takes. But the later you start, the later you are going to get there.”
https://www.newframe.com/humans-must-curb-their-addiction-plastic
-
Bill Would Block Local Fees, Bans On Plastic Bags
Mar 25, 2019 | AP (In E&E - Greenwire)
By Tim Talley
Oklahoma lawmakers are considering legislation to prevent cities and towns from imposing a fee on single-use plastic and paper bags, a measure that officials in one Oklahoma community say encroaches on their search for an innovative way to protect the environment from the problems of carelessly discarded bags.
Oklahoma is one of at least five states where lawmakers are considering pre-empting local governments from taxing or banning plastic bags that are used to carry everything from groceries to clothing and cosmetics, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures' website. Eleven other states, including Texas, Arizona and Florida, already have pre-emptions laws in place, the NCSL said.
The Oklahoma measure was proposed as leaders in Norman, about 17 miles south of Oklahoma City, consider imposing a 5-cent fee on single-use plastic and paper bags as city leaders explore ways to limit a leading source of litter and pollution.
Mayor-elect Breea Clark, a member of the Norman City Council, said that the city leads the state in participation in curbside recycling but that recyclers statewide are refusing to accept single-use plastic bags because they get stuck in the recycling equipment.
"Now that we can't recycle them, we have to throw them away. They're everywhere," Clark said. She said many wind up in nearby Lake Thunderbird, the city's main source of drinking water.
Clark said imposing a fee on single-use bags offers "an effective way to change consumer habits." In Boulder, Colo., where a 10-cent fee was imposed on plastic bags in 2012, city officials say plastic bag usage declined 70 percent.
But allowing hundreds of Oklahoma cities and towns to adopt their own guidelines would create a hodgepodge of rules that would make buying food and beverages more costly and inconvenient and create compliance problems for manufacturers and retailers, said state Sen. James Leewright (R), the pre-emption bill's author.
"We've already started to see some municipalities do some taxation of different plastics," Leewright said. "I think that's very regressive on raising food costs."
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2019/03/25/stories/1060128139
-
(ACC Mentioned) EPA Publishes Reach Studies Underlying TSCA PV29 Evaluation
Mar 25, 2019 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
The US EPA has released two dozen studies used to underpin a TSCA risk evaluation that had previously been withheld as confidential.
The protected status of the 24 health and safety studies – which the EPA used in developing the November 2018 draft evaluation for pigment violet 29 – has been the subject of controversy.
Consumer advocacy groups have argued that such data is not eligible for protection as confidential business information (CBI) and filed a public records request to access it. At the same time industry defended the commercial value of the studies, particularly for substances registered under the EU's REACH Regulation. Democrats in Congress, meanwhile, have continued to press for public release of the information.
In its announcement, the EPA says the data-owning companies have "revised their confidentiality claims, dropping most of them". This has resulted in the agency publishing full studies – including 20 submitted to Echa when PV29 was registered in Europe – where only robust summaries had been available previously.
The EPA has reviewed the remaining CBI claims and determined that the information is entitled to protection. That information, it added, has been redacted from the publicly released studies.
In announcing the release of the data, EPA Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention (OCSPP) Assistant Administrator Alexandra Dunn said the agency is "committed to being transparent with information on chemicals, as we work to develop risk evaluations under TSCA".
Ms Dunn made similar comments when speaking at the American Chemistry Council’s GlobalChem conference in Washington, DC earlier this month, telling attendees that the agency has learned from the responses it received on PV29 and will be more careful around CBI protections.
"We are committed to the transparency around this and the other nine chemicals" being evaluated under the reformed TSCA, she said at the time.
The release of the studies has not affected the ‘no unreasonable risk’ determination laid out in the draft risk evaluation.
The EPA said, however, that it will be reopening the comment period on the assessment to allow for feedback on the new information.
The peer review panel for PV29 – which was cancelled during the partial government shutdown earlier this year – is in the process of being rescheduled.
https://chemicalwatch.com/75381/epa-publishes-reach-studies-underlying-tsca-pv29-evaluation?q=%E2%80%9CAmerican+Chemistry+Council%E2%80%9D
-
California Sets Prop 65 Safe Harbour Level for N-Hexane
Mar 25, 2019 | Chemical Watch
California’s Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (Oehha) has finalised Proposition 65 maximum allowable dose levels (MADLs) for oral and inhalation exposures to n-hexane.
An MADL represents a safe harbour exposure limit below which a company is not required to provide a Prop 65 warning.
The MADLs for n-hexane, which take effect from 1 July, have been set at:
-28,000 micrograms per day for oral exposure; and
-20,000 micrograms per day for inhalation exposure.
The substance is used a degreaser, solvent component and low-temperature thermometer filling. It was listed as a reproductive toxicant under Prop 65 in December 2017.
Meanwhile, Oehha has also approved amendments to regulations around how ‘clear and reasonable’ warning can be provided at residential rental properties.
And last month, it released a fact sheet with information on the flame retardant tetrabromobisphenol A (TBBPA).
It joins more than 50 fact sheets available on a state-run informational site about Prop 65.
https://chemicalwatch.com/75382/california-sets-prop-65-safe-harbour-level-for-n-hexane
-
Flint Water Woes Spur States to Act on Lead as EPA Struggles
Mar 25, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By David Schultz
The EPA has been struggling to update its regulations on lead in drinking water for nearly a decade now, pushing back its self-imposed deadlines to unveil new policies nearly a dozen times.
Many states have stepped into this regulatory lurch and have pursued or enacted their own policies—everything from launching inventories of lead pipe locations to mandating lead pipe replacement. But there are some lead regulations that states simply don’t have the resources, expertise, or legal authority to pursue, water industry officials and observers say.
“States can take on this issue. They can do a lot and we’re already seeing it,” Tom Neltner, a food safety researcher who served as an adviser to the Environmental Protection Agency on lead issues, said. “But the reality is, we need a national solution.”
Out In Front
California is among the states that are furthest out in front of the federal government on regulating lead, a toxic metal that can cause irreversible, lifelong damage when children ingest it.
The primary sources of lead in drinking water are the millions of lead pipes still in use across the country, especially in older communities built before scientists fully understood the dangers of lead exposure.
The Golden State has required its water utilities to identify the material composition of all of the pipes currently in use by July 1, 2020, and also required the utilities to develop a time frame for replacing lead pipes.
Kurt Souza, an assistant deputy director at California’s Water Resources Control Board, said this policy arose because many utilities don’t know what their pipes are made of. But he told Bloomberg Environment the policy applies only to pipes owned by a utility, and not pipes on private property that connect homes to water mains.
Washington state’s Department of Health also launched an initiative to identify where lead pipes are in use, but its initiative was voluntary, according to Nathan Ikehara, an environmental engineer with the department.
But, Ikehara said, even though utilities weren’t required to give his department information, those that didn’t numbered in the single digits. He said this high participation rate was probably a function of increased awareness of the dangers of lead after the Flint, Mich., crisis.
“There was a lot of public concern,” Ikehara said. “We saw a lot of [utilities] that were very concerned about this.”
Illinois, Massachusetts, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin also revamped their lead regulations, launched lead pipe replacement initiatives, or both after the Flint crisis, according to research compiled by the Environmental Defense Fund.
Michigan’s Efforts
And then there’s Michigan itself.
The state overhauled its own lead regulations last year and went further than nearly every other state by lowering its safety threshold for lead concentrations in water by 20 percent. The federal government requires utilities to take action if lead reaches above 15 parts per billion in water, while Michigan’s new regulations lowers that number to 12.
The state also is also requiring its utilities to replace all lead pipes—on both public and private property—over the next 20 years. A group of Michigan utilities is currently suing the state on the grounds that this requirement is an unfunded mandate of more than $2.5 billion.
Scott Dean, a spokesman for Michigan’s Department of Environmental Quality, said in an email that the state provided $9.5 million in grants last year to help utilities get started on replacing the pipes. Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D) asked Michigan legislators earlier this month to provide her with an additional $120 million for utilities.
EPA Working Since 2011
So where have federal regulations on lead been during this time?
The EPA’s current framework for how to regulate lead in drinking water dates back to 1991. It lays out what water utilities must do to prevent their pipes from corroding and leaching lead into tap water—and the steps they must take if this does happen.
The EPA has been working on updating its regulatory framework since at least 2011. At that time, the agency expected it would be able to formally unveil its proposed update by the spring of 2012. (RIN: 2040-AF15)
But that self-imposed deadline came and went with no proposal. Many years later, the EPA still hasn’t formally proposed new lead regulations and it has pushed back its timeline to release this proposal on eight separate instances. Andrew Wheeler, the agency’s current administrator, told Bloomberg Environment that the EPA is now planning on releasing its updated lead regulations before the end of this year.
Neltner, head of chemicals policy with the Environmental Defense Fund, said his experience advising the EPA on this issue led him to believe that the agency is struggling to find a way to strengthen its lead regulations without mandating lead pipe replacement nationwide—essentially, managing lead rather than removing it. EDF is a nonprofit environmental advocacy group.
“Managing something in place—managing asbestos in place, managing radon in place—is hard,” Neltner told Bloomberg Environment. “But we’ve decided it’s easier to live with the lead pipes. When you manage it in place, it’s hard to get the rule right.”
Do States Need EPA?
But Neltner said this may be an issue states are uniquely qualified to solve without federal leadership.
With most environmental contaminants, only the EPA has the scientific resources and expertise to develop a numerical threshold for safe exposure. However, Neltner said, in this case the problem isn’t scientific but financial: States just need to come up with enough money to be able to find their lead pipes and then remove them.
“Tightening numbers is helpful in reducing exposure, but it misses the bulk of the problem,” he said. “It doesn’t really solve the problem, other than just cranking it tighter on utilities.”
Of course, if the problem is just a financial one, then that means the onus is on state officials and state legislators to exert the political will to allocate the potentially billions of dollars that will be needed to rip pipes out of the ground. Ikehara said, in his experience, it comes down to how highly a state and its citizens prioritize lead-free tap water.
“I think that Washington state has demonstrated the wherewithal to say that, if it’s important enough to the citizens and it’s important enough to the government, we’re not going to wait on making it a national priority,” he said.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/flint-water-woes-spur-states-to-act-on-lead-as-epa-struggles
-
Kentucky PFAs Firefighting Foam Restrictions Become Law
Mar 25, 2019 | Chemical Watch
A Kentucky measure restricting the use of firefighting foams containing intentionally added per- and polyfluoroalkyl (PFAS) substanceshas been signed into law.
Governor Matt Bevin approved the bill (SB 104) on 22 March.
It will ban the use of the products for training or testing purposes, with some exceptions from 15 July 2020. Their continued use in emergency situations will not be affected.
https://chemicalwatch.com/75386/kentucky-pfas-firefighting-foam-restrictions-become-law
-
Whitmer Budget Would Direct $180m More Toward Drinking Water
Mar 25, 2019 | AP (In E&E - Greenwire)
By David Eggert
Gov. Gretchen Whitmer (D) is proposing a $180 million plan to boost the quality of tap water across Michigan, from replacing lead pipes and school drinking fountains to combating chemicals that are contaminating public supplies and private wells.
The spending is included in a supplemental request for the current budget. Whitmer unveiled it this month in conjunction with the release of a $60 billion 2019-20 budget proposal.
Included in her request is $37.5 million to help water utilities comply with tougher lead and copper rules that were adopted by former Republican Gov. Rick Snyder's administration after the Flint crisis. While Flint's underground service lines connecting water mains to older houses and other buildings are being replaced with federal and state funding, utilities in other communities are expected to cover the cost themselves.
Whitmer is proposing that the state help swap out lines in other cities too. The regulations require all 500,000 service pipes in Michigan to be replaced by 2040, unless a utility can show it will take longer under a broader plan to repair and replace its water infrastructure. Large water suppliers in the Detroit area are challenging the rules in court, calling them a $2.5 billion unfunded mandate.
The state must "do everything we can" to replace the underground lines, said Department of Environmental Quality Director Liesl Eichler Clark. "It's absolutely something that we need to be spending time and attention on," she said. "So you'll see that commitment through the course of dollars and then also through the course of the work that we're doing."
The $37.5 million — an expansion of a pilot program that replaced nearly 1,000 service pipes in 18 communities — would go to some of the 40-plus systems where the 90th percentile of lead concentrations exceeds the new "action level" of 10 parts per billion.
Whitmer is asking for an additional $30 million to respond to and research drinking water contamination from perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances, known collectively as PFAS, and other emerging contaminants. She also wants $40 million to issue grants to water suppliers seeking low-interest loans for infrastructure projects and $12.5 million for asset management, improved data collection and corrosion control, and other priorities.
About a third of the funding, $60 million, would be used to install "hydration stations" in all public school buildings statewide. The combination water fountain/bottle fillers filter out contaminants, reduce the number of plastic bottles and are seen as a cheaper option than replacing fixtures or pipes containing lead fittings or solder.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2019/03/25/stories/1060128153
-
Boot-Melting Mexican Sewage Has San Diego Seeking Help
Mar 25, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Emily C. Dooley
Foamy, yellow plumes of toxic sewage are belching onto California’s beaches and waterways near Mexico, eating into the boots of border agents, sickening swimmers, and shutting down tourism.
Raw sewage, solvents, and trash from the Tijuana River in Mexico have prompted San Diego water authorities to urge state health officials to examine the risks to state employees and beachgoers, particularly in the border city of Imperial Beach.
The toxic flows have breached the border for decades after heavy rains, pipe failures, or even wind changes. But they’ve intensified recently as the population booms on the Mexican side without a corresponding increase in sewer, water, and trash collection efforts.
And budgeting problems and issues of jurisdiction are leaving state and local officials with few options.
Imperial Beach Mayor Serge Dedina said March 21 while the border gets attention nationally, his concerns are not about migrants but the flows of sewage, industrial runoff, and trash.
“A wave breaks over you and you find yourself in this toxic swamp,” Dedina said. “It’s overwhelming. You feel like you’re drowning in sewage.”
Beach closures are frequent, blocking the community off from the landscape and harming tourism, he said.
Call for State Investigation
Dave Gibson, executive officer of the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board, is asking the California Department of Public Health to examine the risks to state employees and beachgoers from pathogens and chemicals in wastewater and industrial flows, with a focus on Imperial Beach.
“The water board is concerned about the health and safety of the public and for their staff that are exposed,” Gibson told Bloomberg Environment March 21, with mosquito-borne diseases and inhaling contaminated air also a concern.
Dedina, the Imperial Beach mayor, worries the beach will often be closed this summer if a solution is not found.
The city of 27,000 is forced to rely on lifeguards, tide gauges, modeling, and Tijuana residents to tell them about sewage releases or dumps so they can avoid the yellow plumes in the ocean while surfing or swimming.
“I’ve gotten sick,” he said. “My kids have gotten sick. Our city manager has gotten sick. Our lifeguards are getting sick. The beach has become sort of an enemy.”
Navy Seals train nearby at a new $1 billion facility and U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents are also constantly exposed.
Wading In
In addition to water rescues, Customs and Border Protection agents have to routinely check the grates on culverts and connectors to be sure they have not been cut.
It requires wading into the water during wet season and kicking up dust during dry times, said Chris Harris, a retired agent who was also director of legislative and public affairs for his union.
Harris said welts and rashes are not uncommon, and one agent had to medically retire in his 30s after almost losing his arm to a flesh-eating bacteria.
“There’s a lot of ways to get exposed,” Harris said. “It’s been going on for years and it’s getting worse. We don’t know what we’re exposed to.”
Over a period of a few months, more than 80 cases of illness were reported by agents, he said.
In 2018, CBP ordered that water quality samples be collected at sites around the Tijuana River “to identify the full host of potential biological and chemical contaminants that could be present.”
Multiple Pollutants
A draft CBP report shows that volatile organic chemicals, uranium, iron, chromium, pesticides, herbicides, and biological contaminants were detected.
Much of the problem comes down to economics, faltering infrastructure, and jurisdictional questions.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s budget for its U.S.-Mexico Border Water Infrastructure Program got $15 million this year to cover needs along the entire 2,000-mile border.
The International Boundary and Water Commission is jointly operated by Mexico and the U.S. to focus on water quality, sanitation, and flood control along the border.
A 2015 agreement on transborder issues recommended evaluating possible sewage treatment upgrades or projects but it has not been implemented, Gibson said.
“There’s been a great deal of inconsistency with how IBWC has dealt with issues,” Gibson said.
Legal Actions
The water board and Imperial Beach have both filed lawsuits against the U.S. Section of the International Boundary and Water Commission over pollution and Clean Water Act violations.
San Diego has joined the state action while the Chula Vista and the San Diego Unified Port District joined the Imperial Beach claim. The Surfrider Foundation also has a claim.
Lori Kuczmanski, a spokeswoman for the commission, said she could not discuss transborder sewage issues because of the ongoing litigation. She was unaware if any report on proposed projects was on the horizon.
Meanwhile, the water board and partners are working on a feasibility study to examine about 20 projects that could be done on the U.S. side of the border to collect, stop, or divert the waste coming from Mexico.
“The reality is the local agencies have been tasked with trying to deal with what is really an international problem,” Gibson said.
-
This Chemical Has Been Polluting N.J. for Decades. Now, 5 Companies Have to Pay Big to Clean It Up.
Mar 25, 2019 | NJ.com
By Michael Sol Warren
Five chemical companies polluted New Jersey’s water for years with a long-lasting, cancer-causing family of chemicals. Now, the state is directing those companies to clean up the mess.
On Monday, the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection issued a directive to five companies -- Chemours, Dow DuPont, DuPont, Solvay and 3M -- aimed at addressing the contamination of what are known as “PFAS” chemicals (short for polyfluoroalkyl and perfluoroalkyl substances).
The chemicals, which are used for products ranging from nonstick cookware to firefighting foam, have been linked to cancer and other health effects, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Under the new directive, which the NJDEP called “groundbreaking,” the named companies are required to disclose all information related to their use and discharge of PFAS chemicals in New Jersey. The companies will also be held financially responsible for the remediation and treatment of PFAS-related contamination in the state.
“The PFAS group of chemicals are ubiquitous in our environment and pose significant health risks to the public,” NJDEP Commissioner Catherine McCabe said.
“In issuing this directive, we are putting these five companies on notice that many years of contaminating New Jersey’s precious drinking water and other natural resources will not go unchecked. On behalf of all New Jerseyans, we will hold these companies accountable and insist that they step up to address the problem they have created.”
Under the new directive, McCabe said that Solvay will be expected to pay more than $3 million for remediation work that was already done in West Deptford, where the company used perfluorononanoic acid (PFNA) from 1985 to 2010. McCabe said she was unsure at this point how much more money the companies will need to commit to clean up.
“We have already spent over $3 million in responding to the contamination in West Deptford," McCabe said. "So we’re asking Solvay to cut us a check, to reimburse us for our costs.”
None of the companies named in the directive immediately responded to requests for comment. Dow, Dow DuPont and Chemours are all part of the same conglomerate company.
A dangerous chemical has tainted N.J. water for decades and the feds are still dragging their feet
Waters across the Garden State are contaminated with PFAS, a family of chemicals now understood to be cancer causing. Now, for the first-time, there's a nationwide plan to deal with the problem.
The chemicals in the PFAS family have been produced and used commercially and industrially for more than 60 years, but regulatory agencies around the world are only recently starting to understand the health effects, according to the NJDEP.
The state said that PFAS chemicals are discovered on a near-daily basis in the state’s water, soils, air, fish, plants and other natural resources. The chemicals are widespread in New Jersey, according to the NJDEP, with the highest concentrations being found in traditionally industrial areas. West Deptford, where the Solvay plant used PFNA, is home to some of the highest levels of PFNA contamination in the world.
Military bases like Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst and Naval Weapons Station Earle also have high levels of PFAS contamination, particularly perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS) which is a common ingredient in firefighting foam.
“The Department of Defense, yes, is responsible for the PFOS contamination that you’ll find around the military bases, and so far they’ve been stepping up to do the monitoring and to look at the work that’s needed to get those under control around those bases,” McCabe said.
Among the most well-studied PFAS chemicals, according to the NJDEP, are PFOS, PFNA, perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and GenX, a separate family of chemicals developed to replace PFOA.
None of the chemicals are naturally occurring, according to the NJDEP, and the chemicals do not break down in the environment. According to the CDC, PFAS chemicals can increase the risk of cancer, lower a woman’s chance of getting pregnant and interfere with natural hormones.
The New Jersey Sierra Club, a leading environmental advocacy group in the state, praised the state’s action.
“This is a really important step forward in enforcing New Jersey’s cleanup laws against polluters,” said Jeff Tittel the director of the New Jersey Sierra Club.
The NJDEP’s directive comes as the federal government lags behind in regulating PFAS chemicals. In February, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency unveiled a nationwide action plan for the problem, but stopped short of setting a national drinking water standard for PFAS chemicals.
“Now is the time for action at the state level,” McCabe said. “The current EPA plan leaves millions of Americans exposed to harmful chemicals for too long by choosing a drawn-out process that will delay establishing a federal maximum contaminant level for PFAS.”
This new directive is not the first step that New Jersey has taken to address PFAS chemicals. Last September, New Jersey became the first state in the nation to set drinking water standards for PFNA. Earlier this month, the NJDEP issued interim groundwater standards for PFOA and PFOS.
McCabe said that state drinking water standards for PFOA and PFOS are expected to come “in the near future.” She added that upgrading drinking water systems across the state to address PFAS chemicals could cost hundreds of millions of dollars.
https://www.nj.com/news/2019/03/this-chemical-has-been-polluting-nj-for-decades-now-5-companies-have-to-pay-big-to-clean-it-up.html
-
Shell Boosts Bet on North American LNG Exports
Mar 25, 2019 | Wall Street Journal
By Ryan Dezember and Inyoung Hwang
Royal Dutch Shell RDS.A -0.21% PLC and Energy Transfer ET -0.43%LP said they are pursuing plans to convert a liquefied-natural-gas import facility in Louisiana into an export terminal, a bet that the future of U.S. shale gas lies in selling it for higher prices in overseas markets.
Shell and Energy Transfer said they are putting contracts out for bid to engineers and construction companies to reconfigure Energy Transfer’s existing import facility in Lake Charles, La. The proposed facility would have the capacity to ship 16.5 million tons of U.S. natural gas a year, the companies said Monday.
The Anglo-Dutch energy giant and U.S. pipeline operator own equal economic stakes in the project and will decide together whether they should proceed with construction pending the outcome of bidding and their analysis of the global LNG market.
A number of U.S. LNG export facilities are expected to begin operations in the coming years, as companies seek to mop up the cheap gas from U.S. shale and ship liquefied gas to customers overseas. China has emerged as a key source of LNG demand as the country aims to combat air pollution by moving away from coal-powered plants into cleaner fuels like natural gas and renewables. Shell currently supplies about 25% of China’s LNG.
Shell has already committed to another big LNG export facility in British Columbia that will transport gas gathered in western Canada to markets abroad. Shell’s leadership staked the company’s future on natural gas in 2016 with the $50 billion purchase of rival BG Group PLC, a major player in LNG markets. Shell’s bet is that natural gas will take market share from crude oil as global consumers seek cleaner alternatives and as electric vehicles begin to displace those with combustion engines.
Energy companies’ race to sell shale gas overseas comes at a time of rising U.S. consumption of the heating and power-generation fuel. The U.S. Energy Information Administration on Monday said domestic natural-gas consumption rose 10% in 2018 to an all-time high, as the fuel widened its lead over coal as the top source of electricity generation. Gas accounted for 35% of U.S. electricity generation, while coal’s share was 27% and nuclear was 19%, the EIA said.
Meanwhile, LNG export volumes from the mainland U.S. have surged to as high as 5.5 billion cubic feet a day this year, up from almost nothing in 2015, according to Tudor, Pickering, Holt & Co.
“With the U.S. accounting for more than 80% of global new export capacity expected online through 2020, U.S. gas prices will become progressively more influenced by the strength of the Chinese economy,” Barclays analysts said in a report last week.
U.S. natural gas futures for April delivery recently traded at $2.75, up about 5% from a year ago.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/shell-boosts-bet-on-north-american-lng-exports-11553534641
-
Big Oil, Gas Already Enlisting in Rise of the Machines
Mar 25, 2019 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Carolyn Davis
Data, considered by many to be the world’s most valuable resource, is offering the oil and gas industry more precise information to create better wells and safer operations, an Amazon executive said earlier this month.
Subscription required for full text of story.
https://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/117819-big-oil-gas-already-enlisting-in-rise-of-the-machines
-
Oil-Stained Houston Channel Remains Closed as Testing Continues
Mar 25, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Joe Carroll and Rachel Adams-Heard
Vessels will be allowed to enter a tributary to the Houston Ship Channel this morning, a workaround allowing some shipping in the area as the main route into the region remains closed as a result of a cloud of cancer-causing benzene from an onshore tank fire.
The San Jacinto River tributary will be opened intermittently for some tug and barge traffic, according to Jay Schroeder, a Coast Guard spokesman. The main channel won’t reopen until the U.S. Coast Guard verifies the benzene has dissipated and oily runoff from the region’s worst chemical disaster in 14 years poses no threat to vessels or their crews.
Oil refiners, chemical manufacturers and grain exporters in Houston’s eastern suburbs have been cut off from Gulf of Mexico shipping as the unfolding Intercontinental Terminals Co. calamity enters its second week.
ITC achieved a significant milestone Sunday in emptying more than half a million gallons of toxic liquid from an onshore tank wrecked in the four-day blaze that erupted March 17 and sent a mile-high plume of black smoke skyward.
The Coast Guard plans to move a test vessel through the channel’s 2-mile-long no-go zone to determine whether ship traffic can resume without disrupting efforts to skim gasoline ingredients that spilled into the waterway, Lieutenant Commander Jason Toczko said. He declined to estimate when the channel will reopen or specify when the test vessel will launch.
The channel, which isn’t a source of drinking water for Houston or its suburbs, connects the region’s dense warren of refineries, chemical processors and fertilizer warehouses to the rest of the world via Galveston Bay and the Gulf of Mexico. Dozens of major companies rely on the waterway to receive crude oil and other raw materials, and to send out finished products such as fuel and livestock feed.
LyondellBasell Industries N.V.’s Channelview and Bayport chemical facilities are experiencing constrained barge and vessel logistics because of the closure but are operating, spokesman Chevalier Gray said in an email. The company is evaluating the event’s effect on production.
ITC crews finally drained about 13,000 barrels (546,000 gallons) of a benzene-laced refining byproduct called pygas from a charred tank after two earlier unsuccessful attempts, Brent Weber, the company’s incident commander, said during a media briefing Sunday.
Tank 80-7
ITC said Monday in a statement it’s still pumping out the contents of 80-7 and one other tank, and is preparing to do the same with two others.
Clearing the tank -- numbered 80-7 on the facility map -- would be a significant achievement for ITC because it allows crews access to other damaged tanks still holding dangerous chemicals they need to drain to eliminate the danger of new fires. A 2-foot (0.6-meter) deep pool of chemicals on the ground around the damaged tanks was reduced to 2 inches by Sunday morning.
Benzene levels in the air over suburban Deer Park and neighboring communities remained below harmful levels, said Adam Adams of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
Trust ‘Not There’
That was a far cry from late last week, when readings of the pollutant linked to leukemia and other forms of cancer shut entire towns, triggered panic and sent 1,000 people to a pop-up medical clinic.
Residents remain on edge, wondering what’s next and when normal life will return. For many Houstonians, it’s the worst industrial disaster since the 2005 explosion at BP Plc’s Texas City refinery that killed 15.
“There’s more tanks in there. Is it going to reignite? It’s very uncertain,” said Mercy Reyna, 50, who’s been suffering from headaches, eye discomfort and chest tightness. “The trust is not there. We feel like we’re not being told the truth of what’s going on.”
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton filed a lawsuit accusing ITC of violating clean-air laws. Meanwhile, the U.S. Chemical Safety Board said it will be investigating the disaster.
Siphoning Gasoline
Dan Lowe, 52, sought treatment for eye and throat irritation. After ruling out strep throat and influenza, his doctor ordered blood tests to check for signs of benzene exposure. Lowe, who passed through Deer Park multiple time last week while driving for Uber, is awaiting the results.
“We used to siphon gasoline as teenagers and it felt like that,” he said of the pain in his throat. “It was stupid, but you don’t forget that taste.”
County officials said they have no plans for now to stand up an ad-hoc medical clinic that was open for three days in Deer Park. Anyone with symptoms was urged to contact their doctor or call 911.
“I’ve been here most of my adult life, and this is the scariest I’ve seen it.”
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/oil-stained-houston-channel-remains-closed-as-testing-continues
-
Petrochemical Cleanup Continues; Houston Ship Channel Closed
Mar 25, 2019 | AP (In E&E - Greenwire)
An emergency dike has been repaired and a fire-damaged petrochemical tank stabilized during cleanup of leaking oil products that closed part of the Houston Ship Channel, the operator of the complex said yesterday.
Authorities are still trying to determine what caused a March 17 fire at Intercontinental Terminals Co.'s Deer Park facility, which left several petrochemical tanks damaged or destroyed.
Some tanks leaked oil products and a containment area was breached Friday, leading to the mixture reaching the ship channel, said Brent Weber, an ITC spokesman. The channel — one of the busiest commercial waterways in the country — was closed to traffic that day.
Weber said the berm was fixed by yesterday.
At least 52 vessels are waiting for the waterway to reopen, Coast Guard Petty Officer Kelly Parker said.
Coast Guard Capt. Kevin Oditt said today it could be several more days before the closed section of the Houston Ship Channel is reopened.
The massive fire more than a week ago thrust plumes of black smoke into the air and burned on and off for days. Harris County and ITC officials initially said air quality was not affected by the blaze, but by Thursday the National Guard was called in and residents were warned to stay inside for their own safety because of high levels of benzene in the air.
Weber said yesterday that the company had been concerned about the possibility of benzene fumes escaping one tank damaged in the fire that contained pyrolysis gasoline. Starting Saturday, officials were pumping the flammable gas out of the tank to reduce that risk. That container has been secured and air monitoring continues, Weber said.
"We are in a safe place as far as protecting our responders and protecting the community," Weber told a news conference yesterday morning. He didn't elaborate.
Company officials say no pyrolysis gas leaked from the tank into the water.
A statement yesterday from Harris County Public Health said there continues to be a low health risk to the general public.
Oil products could be seen along a 2-mile stretch of the waterway, according to Lt. Cmdr. Jarod Toczko, another Coast Guard spokesman. Most of the product reached a bayou, but oil booms were helping to protect the area.
"The majority of the product is contained with booms," Toczko said.
About 60,000 gallons of oil product had been recovered from the water by yesterday, he said.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) said Friday that ITC has a history of environmental violations and filed a lawsuit against the company, vowing to hold it "accountable for the damage it has done to our environment."
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2019/03/25/stories/1060128147
-
Texas Refineries Cut Output as Petrochemical Spill Curbs Shipping
Mar 25, 2019 | Reuters
By Collin Eaton and Erwin Seba
A petrochemical disaster outside Houston that has disrupted ship traffic for days at a major U.S. oil port led two major refineries on Monday to reduce fuel production, according to people familiar with the matter.
A fire and fuel leak at Mitsui & Co Inc’s Intercontinental Terminals Co storage facility in Deer Park, Texas, last week sent gasoline, water and fire suppressant foam into the Houston Ship Channel, a waterway that connects Houston to the Gulf of Mexico.
Officials on Friday closed a seven-mile stretch of the channel after chemicals, including benzene, were detected in the water. That shutdown has caused a bottleneck of tankers unable to enter or exit a busy area of the Houston port.
On Monday, Royal Dutch Shell Plc and LyondellBasell Industries cut production at their oil refineries on the waterway, according to people familiar with their operations.
Shell reduced output at its 275,000 barrels per day Deer Park, Texas, joint-venture refinery with Mexico’s Pemex because of a shortage of crude, the people said. The size of the reduction could not immediately be learned.
Lyondell reduced its output by 14 percent because it cannot remove sulfur generated at the plant during fuels production and has limited storage capacity on site, the people said.
Some of the Shell Deer Park plant’s processing units are on circulation, a standby process that halts production but keeps unit at operating temperatures allowing a quick return to production, the people said.
Shell’s operations at Deer Park were stable, said spokesman Ray Fisher. The plant is near the ITC storage terminal that caught fire more than a week ago, releasing chemicals into the air and local waterways. Shell last week instituted a temporary shelter-in-place for workers after air monitors detected elevated levels of benzene.
On Monday, 31 vessels were waiting to enter the busiest U.S. oil port and another 31 were unable to depart, said Coast Guard Supervisor Ashley Dumont, up from 26 each on Sunday morning.
“We are experiencing constrained barge and vessel logistics capabilities,” said Lyondell spokeswoman Chevalier Gray. “We are currently evaluating the impact of this event on our production and logistics capabilities.”
The Coast Guard reopened the San Jacinto River, which connects to the Houston Ship Channel, to allow two-way vessel traffic for three hours until 12 p.m. CDT (1700 GMT)on Monday. It could not say when the entire channel could reopen to traffic, Dumont said.
As long as crews are working to remove fuel and chemicals in the industrial waterway, traffic will move only during daylight hours, Coast Guard Captain Kevin Oditt said at a morning briefing.
The oil market’s reaction to the ship channel closure has been muted, with Houston crude prices “slightly weaker” because vessel traffic was expected to resume soon, traders said.
West Texas Intermediate crude at Magellan East Houston for April delivery, also called MEH, traded at a $5.85 per barrel premium to U.S. crude futures in early trade, down from a $6.10 midpoint on Friday, traders said.
“I don’t think people expect this to be a prolonged issue,” one trader said.
https://uk.reuters.com/article/us-texas-energy-houston-fire/texas-refineries-cut-output-as-petrochemical-spill-curbs-shipping-idUKKCN1R61MY
-
| Alaska Native News
By Emily Whitefield
The University of California-Berkeley Environmental Law Clinic today announced a lawsuit to compel the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to issue rules on the use of chemical agents such as Corexit (NASDAQ: ECL) to clean up oil spills. Instead of mitigating environmental harm, Corexit dispersants have proven to be more toxic to humans and the environment than the oil alone.
In the first procedural step for such a lawsuit, the groups today filed a “Notice of Intent to Sue” on behalf of environmental justice and conservation groups and individuals who personally experienced the toxic effects of Corexit in the Exxon Valdez or BP Deepwater Horizon oil spills or who have actively worked to ban these products in their waters.
“The EPA’s failure to update its oil spill response plan since 1994 is inexcusable, unlawful and very dangerous,” said Purba Mukerjee, a supervising attorney at the UC-Berkeley Environmental Law Clinic, whose students are part of the legal team in today’s action.
“The next major oil spill is a matter of when, not if,” said marine toxicologist Dr. Riki Ott, director of the Earth Island Institute’s A.L.E.R.T. project and a plaintiff in the lawsuit. “When it comes to Corexit, the EPA has had the benefit of more than 25 years of scientific knowledge, advice from its own Inspector General, and extensive public input. Given the Trump administration’s plan to open up 90 percent of our U.S. coastal areas to oil and gas drilling, the need for action is critical.”
In addition to Dr. Ott, individual and organizational plaintiffs in the case are:The Earth Island Institute, a non-profit environmental advocacy organization headquartered in Berkeley and acting as fiscal sponsor of A.L.E.R.T.Kindra Arnesen, member of a commercial fishing family in Plaquemines Parish, Louisiana, who were sickened by BP’s oil and EPA’s authorized use of Corexit dispersants during the 2010 BP Deepwater Horizon disaster.Rosemary Ahtuangaruak, an Iñupiat living in the now oil-industrialized zone of the North Slope in Alaska who has worked with Tribal Councils to pass resolutions banning dispersant use in Arctic waters where Alaskan Natives hunt and fish.Alaska’s Cook Inletkeeper, which responded to the Exxon Valdez spill and spent two decades serving on a citizen oversight council created under the Oil Pollution Act.Alaska Community Action on Toxics, whose founder and executive director Pam Miller found long-term health harm among Exxon Valdez spill response workers.
“The Beaufort Sea is wide-open for oil and gas lease sales this year. That’s our grocery store—that’s where we hunt and fish,” said plaintiff Rosemary Ahtuangaruak, who successfully advocated for over a dozen tribal resolutions opposing the use of dispersants in the spill response plans for the Arctic. “My community lives in fear of an oil spill —and dumping of toxic dispersants in Arctic waters. The Iñupiat people depend on the animals of the land and the sea to live and thrive. The EPA’s failure to act is putting our lives, our land and our future at risk.”
Plaintiff Kindra Arnesen, a commercial fisherwoman in Louisiana, saw her life turned upside-down in the wake of the 2010 BP Deepwater Horizon disaster. Along with countless members of her community, she, her husband David and their two children were sickened with migraines, lesions, rashes, and respiratory problems that persist to this day. The damage to the Gulf waters also decimated their once-thriving family fishing business. “One reason the oil companies like Corexit is because it causes the oil to sink and makes the water look clear, when in fact it’s actually increasing the toxicity,” said Arnesen, who has become a leading community activist. “We need an oil response plan that’s a clean-up, not a cover-up.”
As explained in today’s filing, the use of dispersants like Corexit is an oil spill response method outlined in a set of federal regulations called the National Contingency Plan, which governs our nation’s oil and chemical pollution emergency responses. The Clean Water Act directs EPA to periodically review the Plan and update it to account for new information and new technology. But the EPA has not updated the plan since 1994, and that update did not even incorporate lessons learned from the long-term ecosystem studies following the Exxon Valdez disaster that occurred 30 years ago on March 24, 1989 — much less the 2010 BP Deepwater Horizon disaster.
In response to public pressure from Dr. Ott and other plaintiffs involved in today’s filing, the EPA finally initiated a rulemaking proceeding and invited public comment on the use of Corexit in oil spill response actions. By the time the rulemaking comment period closed in April 2015, the agency had received over 81,000 responses, the majority of which called for reducing use of oil-based chemical dispersants while decreasing their toxicity and increasing their efficacy. Since that time, the EPA has been silent on the issue.
The EPA’s failure to conclude the process to issue updated regulations, the groups say in today’s filing, not only violates the agency’s administrative obligations under the law, but also puts at risk the 133 million or so Americans who live near the coasts, making up 39 percent of the U.S. population, and the millions more who live near lakes, rivers, or along oil pipeline corridors and who are in harm’s way of the next ‘big one’.
As Claudia Polsky, Director of the Environmental Law Clinic, explains: “Use of toxic dispersants poses tragic, unnecessary, and too-often-invisible harms on top of the obvious harms caused by upscaling oil production on a warming planet.”
The Notice names Andrew Wheeler, Administrator of the EPA, as well as Attorney General William P. Barr. The EPA has 60 days from the date of today’s Notice to update its oil spill response plans and address the problems with the use of dispersants. If it fails to do so, the groups will file a lawsuit in federal court.
https://alaska-native-news.com/environmental-advocates-announce-lawsuit-over-epas-dangerously-outdated-response-plan-for-oil-spills/40886/
-
Romney Helps GOP Look for New Path on Climate Change
Mar 25, 2019 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Alexander Bolton
Sen. Mitt Romney (R-Utah), who is emerging as a pragmatic leader among Senate Republicans, is at the center of private discussions among GOP senators about crafting a legislative response to climate change.
Senate Democratic Leader Charles Schumer (N.Y.) has tried to put the focus on Senate Republicans for not having a plan to combat global warming, which has been linked to erratic weather events costing American communities billions of dollars in damages.
Amid that backdrop, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R), who represents coal-rich Kentucky, is at the forefront of efforts to roll back federal regulations on coal-powered energy, making him a close ally of President Trump on that issue.
But a group of Republicans -- Romney and Sens. Lamar Alexander(Tenn.) and Lindsey Graham (S.C.), who worked with Democrats in 2009 and 2010 to cap carbon emissions, as well as others -- have taken it upon themselves to come up with market-based approaches to addressing climate change.
“There’s no question that we’re experiencing climate change and that humans are a significant contributor to that,” Romney told The Hill. “In my view, the course forward is going to require innovation and technology breakthrough because nothing I’ve seen is going to reverse the warming trend other than that.”
“We’ve spoken about some ideas as to how we might encourage that,” Romney said of his conversations with GOP colleagues.
The group is looking at establishing a federal program that would incentivize businesses to come up with new technologies to reduce carbon emissions or even find economical ways to remove carbon pollution from the atmosphere.
And they hope to unleash that innovation through federal support.
Graham, who worked about a decade ago with then-Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) on a proposal to curb carbon emissions, agrees with Romney that spurring technological innovation to reduce carbon emissions or remove atmospheric carbon is better than penalizing companies for burning fossil fuels.
“I’ve talked to Romney. The Green New Deal is kind of a ridiculous proposal, but denying the problem is equally as bad,” Graham said, referring to the ambitious climate proposal championed by freshman Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) that has sparked a contentious debate in Congress on both sides of the aisle.
McConnell and other Republicans have torched Democrats over the Green New Deal, which the American Action Forum, a Republican-allied think tank, estimates would cost between $51 trillion and $93 trillion over a decade.
The proposal calls on the federal government to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions while creating millions of high-wage jobs by investing in sustainable infrastructure. It proposes a 10-year national mobilization to meet 100 percent of the nation’s power demand through renewable, zero-emission energy sources by 2030 and upgrading all buildings in the United States to achieve maximum energy efficiency.
“With the so-called Green New Deal, Washington Democrats want our government to spend more money than the entire gross domestic product of the entire world on the new spending programs to forcibly remodel Americans’ homes, take away our cars, dramatically increase energy costs,” McConnell recently said on the Senate floor.
McConnell will force a floor vote on the Green New Deal after senators return from a weeklong recess on Monday.
Schumer has tried to go on offense by attacking Republicans for not having their own plan to address climate change.SPONSORED CONTENTTomorrow is coming: Get cloud-readyBY ENTERPRISE.NXT, HPE
“I heard leader McConnell knocking the Green New Deal. I would ask the leader, and we’re going to keep asking him, and every Republican in this chamber, what they would do about climate change,” Schumer said on the floor.
Graham and other Senate Republicans, such as Romney and Alexander, say their party can’t just sit back and pick on Democrats without proposing constructive solutions of their own.
“What I want to do is show that I’m a Republican who believes the greenhouse gas-effect is real, that climate change is being affected by manmade behavior and try to find technological solutions,” Graham said.
“Romney had the best line of anybody: ‘We better hope it’s man-made, because if it’s not we’re in trouble,’” Graham said. “That would be my approach, for the party to acknowledge that climate change is a problem.”
Asked how many of his Republican colleagues agree with his approach, Graham said, “a lot of people, I think [are] in this camp.”
“I think man is contributing significantly enough that we should do something about it,” he said.
Alexander, the chairman of the Senate Appropriations subcommittee on energy and water development and a longtime proponent of expanding nuclear power, plans to speak on the Senate floor in the coming days about finding solutions to climate change, according to a GOP aide familiar with his plans.
“He’s going to say that climate change is real but the solutions are not command-and-control, Soviet-style proposals but innovation, nuclear energy, research and development, and efficiency,” said the aide.
Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.), who said he plans to vote against the Green New Deal, thinks there would be Democratic support for increasing federal support of private-sector innovation to combat climate change.
“God bless ‘em. There’s a difference between elimination and innovation. I’m for innovation, I hope they are, too, because we need to fix the problem, we really do. Them acknowledging it openly is a big first step,” Manchin told The Hill, referring to Republican colleagues.
“I think they would be very receptive of any changes and any improvements we can make,” he said of Democratic reactions to GOP proposals on climate change. “You’re going to have some out there that have already dropped their hammer on where they want to be, but the majority will be very much receptive to” bolstering private-sector innovation.
Romney told E&E News after he was elected to the Senate in November that he saw climate change as a “critical area.” In 2017, he praised as “thought provoking” a plan endorsed by 27 Nobel laureates to place a fee on carbon to reduce greenhouse emissions.
Since then, Republicans have rallied more in the direction of supporting technological breakthroughs to reduce carbon without levying tax penalties on polluters, with the view that such penalties would stifle economic progress.
But Graham acknowledges that GOP lawmakers don’t yet know what innovative technologies will solve the problem.
“The solutions I see haven’t even been developed yet. They have to be so practical that other countries would employ them,” he said.
“The political space you’ll find is Republicans willing to put money into a system to encourage research and development. That’s sort of the Bill Gates model, where you create a pot of money at the federal level and really incentivize the private sector to do its thing,” Graham said.
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/435328-romney-helps-gop-look-for-new-path-on-climate-change
-
Rail Unions Endorse Two-Person Crew Legislation
Mar 25, 2019 | Progressive Railroading
The Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen (BLET) and the International Association of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail and Transportation Workers-Transportation Division (SMART TD) have announced their support of a bill that calls for two-person rail crews.
Introduced by U.S. Rep. Don Young (R-Alaska), the Safe Freight Act (H.R. 1748)requires that two certified crew members operate freight trains. The legislation is necessary to "protect railroad workers and the American public," said BLET National President Dennis Pierce in a press release.
H.R. 1748 has been referred to the House Subcommittee on Railroads, Pipelines and Hazardous Materials.
"While the railroad industry talks of one-person train crews and even autonomous trains, the 2013 tragedy of Lac-Megantic is justification enough that we need two sets of eyes and ears in the locomotive cab," Pierce said.
Added SMART TD President John Previsich: "There is no doubt that the only safe rail operation is one that includes at a minimum a certified conductor and a certified locomotive engineer."
The accident in Lac-Megantic, Quebec, occurred July 6, 2013, when an unattended freight train carrying Bakken crude oil derailed and exploded, causing a massive fire that killed 47 people.
Meanwhile in Colorado, Gov. Jared Polis last week signed a bill that requires at least two-person crews on freight trains or light engines while they're moving.
https://www.progressiverailroading.com/federal_legislation_regulation/news/Rail-unions-endorse-two-person-crew-legislation--57186
-
Senate Expected to Vote on Green New Deal This Week
Mar 25, 2019 | Houston Chronicle
By James Osborne
Senators are expected to vote this week on a resolution regarding the Green New Deal, a Democratic proposal to tackle climate change through an unprecedented uptick in government spending on clean energy.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell is looking to use the vote as an opportunity to highlight many Democrats' unwilling to commit to such a large undertaking, which was proposed by upstart freshman Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, D-N.Y.Recommended Video
According to Politico, Democrats are planning to vote "present," not yes or no, "much like a previous effort over single-payer health care — which they also derided as a gimmick."
The move by McConnell has drawn cheers from Republicans such as Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, who have railed against the Green New Deal as "socialism."
He has also drawn fire from environmental groups, led by the League of Conservation Voters, who accused of him of engaging in "cynical political stunts."
"The climate crisis is a problem of epic proportions that requires a level of ambition just as big. This is an all hands-on-deck moment, and now is the time to challenge ourselves as never before," the groups wrote in a letter to McConnell.
https://www.chron.com/business/energy/article/Senate-expected-to-vote-on-Green-New-Deal-this-13714168.php?cmpid=ffpolitics
-
Ewire: Senate Republicans Push 'Innovation' Climate Stance
Mar 25, 2019 | Inside EPA
As the Senate prepares to vote on the Green New Deal (GND) later this week, several key Republican senators are seeking to forge a new stance for their party on climate change, joining a growing number of GOP lawmakers who are openly acknowledging anthropogenic climate change as a threat and pledging to support policies that drive technological innovation to address it.
The Hill is the latest to look at this trend, spotlighting Sen. Mitt Romney (R-UT) as an “emerging pragmatic leader” who is “at the center of private discussions among GOP senators about crafting a legislative response to climate change.”
The story also cites Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Lamar Alexander (R-TN) as saying that man-made global warming is a problem.
“I think man is contributing significantly enough that we should do something about it,” said Graham, who was involved in 2010 negotiations on a cap-and-trade bill that fell apart, and then in late 2017 announced he was in favor of a carbon “fee” to help cut greenhouse gases that fuel climate change.
According to the Hill story, the GOP senators are coalescing around a push for innovation to improve low-carbon technology, which is in line toward what many other Republican lawmakers have been saying since the start of the new Congress when Democrats have put a bigger focus on climate change.
“The political space you’ll find is Republicans willing to put money into a system to encourage research and development. That’s sort of the Bill Gates model, where you create a pot of money at the federal level and really incentivize the private sector to do its thing,” Graham said, according to the story.
His comments come as senators are sparring ahead of a vote later this week on the Democrats' GND resolution, which majority Republicans are bringing to the floor in an effort to highlight a policy they believe is extreme and fracture the Democratic caucus.
In response, Democrats -- including the primary sponsor of the measure -- are planning to vote “present” in an effort to paint the vote as a political “sham,” while strafing Republicans for being unwilling to address climate change.
Inside EPA's Doug Obey has been closely tracking the renewed Hill debate on climate. In one story from last month, he quoted one environmentalist as saying Republicans' shift from a climate skeptic stance is likely driven by a mix of genuine concern and a realization that outright climate skepticism poses a political problem.
“I think there's also a group that just realized, 'I can't deny this given where people in my district are.' And frankly if any Republican is concerned about the future of their party, young people are definitely in a different place” on climate change than the party leadership, the source argues.
Even so, the source says the new stance is still a problem to the extent it places an over-reliance on the “technology fairy” as a way to achieve GHG cuts, in the absence of other policies.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/ewire-senate-republicans-push-innovation-climate-stance
-
Green New Deal Vote Tests Dem Unity in Senate
Mar 25, 2019 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Alexander Bolton
Senate Democratic Leader Charles Schumer (N.Y.) this week will face his biggest test keeping White House hopefuls aligned with the rest of the Democratic caucus when Republicans force a vote on the Green New Deal.
Schumer wants all Democrats to vote “present” on the motion to proceed to the ambitious, and divisive, climate change measure championed by firebrand Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.), despite the fact that several presidential candidates in the chamber have already endorsed her proposal.
The Senate’s companion resolution, sponsored by Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), is co-sponsored by Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.), Kamala Harris (D-Calif.), Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), Cory Booker (D-N.J.) and Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), who are all running for president.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) scheduled the vote in hopes of driving a wedge between 2020 Democrats, who are trying to appeal to the party’s liberal base, and more centrist Democrats who face competitive reelection campaigns next year.
McConnell says the Green New Deal has all the components for “a good old-fashioned, state-planned economy,” and that it is “garden variety 20thcentury socialism.”
The proposal says the federal government must achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions and create millions of high-wage jobs by investing in sustainable infrastructure.
It sets a 10-year schedule to meet 100 percent of the nation’s power demand through renewable, zero-emission energy sources and upgrade all buildings to achieve maximum energy efficiency.
Democrats argue McConnell is setting up a “sham vote” and note that liberal advocacy groups like the Sunrise Movement and Credo Action that back the Green New Deal have given senators a pass to vote “present.” They also say polling shows majorities of Americans think climate change is a serious problem that requires action.
The Green New Deal, however, is a sensitive topic within Democratic circles and has failed to garner sponsorship from even ardent environmentalists like Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.).
Whitehouse says the Green New Deal “doesn’t have substance yet” and describes it as “aspirational.”
He said he likes the aspiration but hasn’t co-sponsored the resolution.
“I’m a legislator and I like bills,” he said.
Whitehouse instead is working on legislation to implement a “carbon fee,” an idea that has the backing of prominent economists such as former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan and Nobel laureate Robert Shiller.
A Democratic senator familiar with internal discussions about strategy said Schumer has asked all caucus members to vote “present” on the Green New Deal.
But at least one Democrat is preparing to break ranks. Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, a major coal-producing state, said he plans to vote against the measure.
“They can do what they want to do. I’m not a present-type guy,” he told The Hill last month.
Schumer has yet to face a test of this magnitude since the 116th Congress began in early January.
He easily kept Democrats on the same page during the 35-day partial government shutdown and with a resolution disapproving of President Trump’s emergency border declaration — two issues that badly divided Republicans.
Senate Republicans say the Green New Deal vote will be the first of several tests they're planning for Schumer.
“That will definitely happen,” said a GOP aide, adding that Democrats could also face votes on legislation previously sponsored by Sanders to provide Medicare for all, as well as votes on U.S.-Israel policy and Democratic calls to abolish Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).
“The fact that Joe Manchin is going to vote against the Green New Deal makes it tough to justify voting present,” said the aide about the upcoming vote.
The Republican strategy is to force rank-and-file Democrats, including those facing competitive races like Sens. Doug Jones (D-Ala.) and Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.), to stand with or against colleagues running for president on big, bold liberal proposals.
“Given that the presidential campaign is in full swing already, everyone is going to have to answer for the most prominent presidential candidates who are going so far left,” said the GOP aide, referring to the broader Democratic caucus.
Celinda Lake, a Democratic pollster, says it won’t be easy for presidential contenders to vote against the Green New Deal because it’s very popular with a base that expects candidates to stand by their principles.
“Green New Deal is very popular with the voters,” she said.
Polling by her firm, Lake Research Partners, found that 76 percent of likely Democratic primary and caucus voters in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada have a favorable view of the Green New Deal, and 47 percent have a very favorable view.
“If it gets defined as investing in clean energy, creating jobs and dealing with climate change, it’s going to be very, very popular,” she added.
Lake said that while general election voters are more forgiving of candidates who vote against the principles they endorse because they see specific legislation as flawed, Democratic primary voters want to see lawmakers back up their talk with action.
“Swing voters will tolerate the idea of flawed-bill-but-good-idea and want to know more about it. In the case of the base, they’re going to want to know, ‘What are you doing?’” she said. “They’re going to want to know, 'Why didn’t you fix the bill? Why didn’t you introduce your own?'”
A vote on Medicare for all could pose another test of Democratic unity.
Sanders introduced a bill in 2017 to establish a universal Medicare program that won the support of Harris, Booker, Gillibrand and Warren. Those candidates have doubled down on their support for universal Medicare as they jockey for position ahead of the 2020 Democratic primary.
Lake Research Partners found that 80 percent of likely Democratic primary and caucus voters in Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada have a favorable view of Medicare for all, with 53 percent voicing strong support for it.
Harris said during a CNN town hall in January that she felt “very strongly” about ensuring every American has access to health care and even went so far as to advocate for doing away with private health plans.
Booker and Warren, who support Medicare for all, aren’t yet willing to call for an end to private insurance plans.
Other Democrat argue that Medicare for all is not sound policy.
Sen. Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), who opted against a White House run, warned last month that providing Medicare for all Americans is not practical. He instead wants to lower the age for Medicare eligibility to 55.
McConnell sees this as another wedge issue to use against Democrats.
“Democrats have taken the pulse of the American people and here’s what they’ve decided: They’ve decided that American seniors want their Medicare hollowed out until the only thing left is the name,” the GOP leader said on the Senate floor earlier this month. “They decided that middle-class families are eager to be kicked off their health insurance plans and forced into a one-size-fits-all government alternative.”
When Sen. Steve Daines (R-Mont.) offered a single-payer health insurance proposal as an amendment in 2017 to embarrass Democrats, 43 Democratic senators voted “present” and four centrist Democrats facing tough races, as well as Independent Sen. Angus King (Maine), voted against it.
Lake says that while concepts of investing in clean energy and creating jobs and dramatically increasing access to health care are popular issues, votes on Medicare for all and the Green New Deal pose political risks.
“The biggest problem for our side with these bills coming up so early — and this of course is why McConnell is pushing it — is that we haven’t been able to define these bills yet,” Lake said. “As concepts they’re very popular, but we haven’t been able to define these bills, and [Republicans] have the bully pulpit to define it in negative ways.”
McConnell may also try to divide Democrats running for president from the rest of the caucus by proposing votes on pro-Israel legislation.
Harris, Sanders, Warren and Gillibrand have said they will skip the annual American Israel Political Action Committee (AIPAC) conference in Washington this week.
MoveOn.org, a liberal advocacy group that’s popular among the Democratic base, called on presidential candidates to boycott the event because of AIPAC’s opposition to former President Obama’s Iran nuclear deal and for allegedly promoting “anti-Muslim and anti-Arab rhetoric.”
Other Democrats, including Schumer and Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Calif.), plan to attend the conference.
McConnell could force a vote on a resolution condemning anti-Semitism, a topic that divided House Democrats. He needled Democrats on the subject earlier this month.
“Apparently, within the Speaker’s new far-left Democrat majority, even a symbolic resolution condemning anti-Semitism seems to be a bridge too far,” McConnell said on the floor.
The GOP leader may also force a vote on the controversial proposal endorsed by some Democratic presidential candidates, such as Gillibrand, to abolish ICE.
Warren last year called for rebuilding the nation’s immigration system “from top to bottom, starting by replacing ICE with something that reflects our values.”
Schumer has tried to temper that movement by calling for the agency to be reformed instead of eliminated.
“Look, ICE does some functions that are very much needed,” he told reporters in July. “Reform ICE? Yes. That’s what I think we should do. It needs reform.”
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/435362-green-new-deal-vote-tests-dem-unity-in-senate
Industry and Association News
TSCA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested