Preview Newsletter
AM ACC 3/26/2019
-
(ACC Mentioned) AFPM '19: Westlake's Chao Brothers Urge Action on Climate, Plastics Waste on Receiving Petchem Heritage Award
Mar 26, 2019 | ICIS
The petrochemical industry has to be more proactive in addressing the challenges of plastics waste and global warming, the CEO at US' producer Westlake Chemical said on Monday. -
(ACC Mentioned) Stormy Weather Ahead for Chemicals
Mar 24, 2019 | ICIS
By Paul Hodges
The first is the growing risk of recession, with key markets such as autos, electronics and housing all showing signs of major weakness. -
(ACC Mentioned) GDP to Cool This Year as Economy Reaches ‘Inflection Point,’ but Nonfarm Jobs Forecast Is Slightly Stronger: NABE
Mar 25, 2019 | Staffing Industry Analysts
Economists surveyed by the National Association for Business Economics lowered their prior growth projections for the US economy in 2019, the association announced today. -
(ACC Mentioned) We Must Learn from Others
Mar 25, 2019 | CropLife
By Chuck Magro
More than 30 years ago, on the night of December 2, 1984, at least 30 tons of a highly toxic gas called methyl isocyanate leaked from the Union Carbide plant in Bhopal, India. -
(ACC Mentioned) Report: Advanced Plastics Recycling Has Potential for $10 Billion Economic Output
Mar 25, 2019 | Plastics Technology
A report released by the American Chemistry Council finds the potential economic impact of expanding advanced plastic recycling and recovery technologies in the U.S. to be nearly $10 billion. -
(ACC Mentioned) 98% of European Plastics Production Covered by the Operation Clean Sweep Program
Mar 25, 2019 | Plastics Technology
Following the release of its first Operation Clean Sweep (OCS) report in 2017, PlasticsEurope made the OCS program a top priority in 2018, setting new targets for its members as part of our Plastics 2030 Voluntary Commitment. -
Activists’ Message to N.Y. Lawmakers: Expand 5-Cent Bottle Fee
Mar 25, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Keshia Clukey
More than 50 environmental advocacy groups and recycling industry organizations from across New York state called on the Legislature March 25 to expand the 5-cent fee on bottles in the 2019-20 state budget. -
EPA Seeks More Funding for TSCA Program as Activities Increase in 2020
Mar 25, 2019 | Inside EPA
By Maria Hegstad
The Trump administration is once again proposing to increase the budget for EPA's toxics office, a rare bump up for an EPA program, as it works to implement the bipartisan reform of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), an effort that is a priority to industry and agency leaders... -
Udall Is Retiring, but He Will Leave Behind a Weighty Environmental Legacy
Mar 25, 2019 | Roll Call
By Benjamin J. Hulac
When Sen. Tom Udall departs the Senate in 2021, he will leave behind a weighty environmental legacy built with bipartisan help, progressive principles, and a clarion call to tackle climate change. -
(ACC Blog) IRIS: Bad Science, Real World Consequences
Mar 25, 2019 | American Chemistry Matters
By American Chemistry
This week, the U.S. House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology will be holding a hearing on EPA’s troubled Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) program. -
(ACC Mentioned) California Legislators Move to Ban Certain Chemicals in Personal Care Products, Including PFAS
Mar 25, 2019 | Northern California Record
By Josh Breslin
California legislators are moving to try and ban a wide range of chemicals historically used in cosmetic products. -
N.J. Pressures Companies for Fluorinated Chemical Cleanup
Mar 25, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By John Herzfeld
New Jersey warned five manufacturers that they could be on the hook for millions to assess and clean up damage to natural resources from widespread contamination by fluorinated chemicals. -
New Jersey Cracks down on PFAS Pollution from Chemical Companies
Mar 25, 2019 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Cheryl Hogue
In a precedent-setting action, New Jersey is directing Chemours, DowDuPont, Solvay, and 3M to pay millions of dollars to investigate and clean up poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) pollution in the state. -
Illinois Senate Clears Bill Banning Animal Testing for Cosmetics
Mar 26, 2019 | Chemical Watch
Illinois' state Senate has passed a bill that would ban the import or sale of any cosmetic product developed using tests on animals from 2020. -
Paint Stripper Makers Examine Substitutes for Deadly Solvent
Mar 26, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
Lowe’s, Home Depot, Walmart, and other retailers may not be clear what the safest paint strippers are to sell following their decisions to drop methylene chloride-based coating removers. -
Nearly 3,000 UK Registrations Initiated for EU27 Transfer – Echa
Mar 25, 2019 | Chemical Watch
By Clelia Oziel
UK-based companies have initiated the transfer of nearly 3,000 REACH registrations to EU27 entities since the beginning of the year, Echa has said. -
California Verdict on Weedkiller Prompts Vietnam Import Ban
Mar 26, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Lien Hoang
A California verdict linking the weedkiller Roundup to cancer has ricocheted 14 time zones away in Vietnam, which responded by banning imports of the chemical. -
Appalachian Shales Present More Petrochemical Opportunities, Study Finds
Mar 25, 2019 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jamison Cocklin
Prospects for a wide variety of chemical manufacturing in the Appalachian Basin are robust as methane, propane and butane production is expected to continue increasing in the Marcellus and Utica shales in the coming years, according to a study released last week by IHS Markit. -
Fed Review Could Stymie Race to Export Texas Oil
Mar 25, 2019 | E&E Energywire
By Mike Lee
The Army Corps of Engineers is planning a full-blown environmental review of a major oil export project in Texas — a development that could delay its construction at a time when producers and the Trump administration are pushing to send crude overseas. -
House Passes Energy Legislation as Counter to Russian Influence
Mar 26, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tiffany Stecker
House lawmakers passed a bill 391-24 on March 25 to help European countries develop their energy resources outside of Russian influence. -
Duke Needs ‘Plan B’ if Atlantic Coast Pipeline Fails, CEO Says
Mar 25, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rachel Adams-Heard, Christopher Martin and Alix Steel
Duke Energy Corp. will need another way to shuttle natural gas to customers in the U.S. Southeast if the troubled Atlantic Coast shale pipeline fails to overcome legal setbacks, Chief Executive Officer Lynn Good said. -
(ACC Mentioned) Legal but Illegal: How Illinois Shut down a Company That Played by the Rules
Mar 26, 2019 | Legal News Line
By Daniel Fisher
As of Oct. 29, 2018, a medical sterilization firm called Sterigenics was in full compliance with state and federal regulations over its use of ethylene oxide, a carcinogen. Then on Oct. 30, it wasn’t. -
Shipping Resumes in Houston Channel Fouled by Chemical Spill (1)
Mar 25, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment
By Joe Carroll, Rachel Adams-Heard and Ben Foldy
The U.S. Gulf Coast’s most important industrial waterway partially reopened on Monday after it was polluted with cancer-causing benzene and toxic runoff from the region’s worst chemical disaster in more than a decade. -
Another 'Black Eye' for America's Energy Capital
Mar 26, 2019 | E&E Energywire
By Edward Klump
The fire-fueled plume that darkened a swath of the Texas sky last week was just the beginning of an unfolding disaster in this U.S. oil and petrochemical hub. -
House Infrastructure Package May Omit Water Provisions (1)
Mar 25, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By David Schultz
Republicans and Democrats in the House are working behind the scenes to draft a big infrastructure bill, but that bill may not include water provisions, a senior congressional staffer said. -
What We Need to Do to Fix Infrastructure in the US
Mar 25, 2019 | The Hill - Congress Blog
By Carlo A. Scissura
America’s infrastructure is more than just a network of roads, bridges, tunnels, ports, railroads and airports connecting our towns, cities and states. -
Gaetz Drafts Republican Alternative to ‘Green’ Deal
Mar 25, 2019 | Inside EPA
Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL), a member of the bipartisan Climate Solutions Caucus, is circulating a draft GOP alternative to the Democrats’ “Green New Deal” (GND), calling it the “Green Real Deal” and touting innovation on low-carbon technology as one way to reduce various threats posed by climate change. -
McConnell Formally Sets up Green New Deal Vote for Tuesday
Mar 25, 2019 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Anthony Adragna
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has formally set up a procedural vote related to the Green New Deal for Tuesday at 4 p.m. -
Senate Green Deal Vote’s Impact Won’t Linger, Some Observers Say
Mar 26, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Dean Scott
The Senate showdown over the Green New Deal follows more than 20 years of mostly symbolic votes that Congress has held on climate change. -
Alexander Unveils Vision for Addressing Climate Change
Mar 25, 2019 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Anthony Adragna
Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) today called for the federal government to double its current investments in clean energy research in a speech sketching out a GOP-friendly approach to addressing climate change. -
Democrats to Introduce Bill to Reverse Paris Withdrawal
Mar 26, 2019 | E&E Daily
By Nick Sobczyk
House Democratic leaders are expected to roll out their first major climate change messaging bill tomorrow morning, amid the backdrop of a Green New Deal vote in the Senate and Mueller report madness across Capitol Hill. -
Select Climate Committee to Organize This Week
Mar 26, 2019 | E&E Daily
By Nick Sobczyk
The Select Committee on the Climate Crisis will hold an organizational meeting Thursday morning, Chairwoman Kathy Castor (D-Fla.) said yesterday, setting its rules, and its tone, for the next two years. -
EPA Sends NSR Air Permit ‘Netting’ Proposal for OMB Review
Mar 25, 2019 | Inside EPA
EPA has sent for White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review its proposal to revise Clean Air Act new source review (NSR) permit “project emissions accounting,” or “netting,” one of several piecemeal NSR reforms that critics say will make it easier for companies to avoid strict air permits. -
In Blow to Climate, Coal Plants Emitted More Than Ever in 2018
Mar 25, 2019 | Washington Post
By Chris Mooney and Brady Dennis
Global energy experts released grim findings Monday, saying that not only are planet-warming carbon-dioxide emissions still increasing, but the world’s growing thirst for energy has led to higher emissions from coal-fired power plants than ever before.
Industry and Association News
TSCA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
-
Mar 26, 2019 | ICIS
The petrochemical industry has to be more proactive in addressing the challenges of plastics waste and global warming, the CEO at US' producer Westlake Chemical said on Monday.
“We are all in this together,” said Albert Chao after he and his brother James had accepted the Petrochemical Heritage Award 2019.
The Award winner is chosen by the Science History Institute and the Founders Club of the AFPM International Petrochemical Conference (IPC).
The winners received the Award at the opening session of the 44th IPC in San Antonio.
Albert and James Chao received the Award in recognition of their roles in founding and guiding Westlake Chemical into the successful company it is today and “for their dedication to the petrochemical community,” the Award sponsors said.
The two brothers founded Houston-based Westlake Chemical Corporation with their father TT Chao in the mid-1980s.
They also founded Titan Chemical of Malaysia and Suzhou Huasu Plastics Company in China.
TT Chao received the Petrochemical Heritage Award in 2005.
Albert Chao said that Westlake Chemical is a family-oriented company that places its employees and their safety first, alongside a focus on creating shareholder value.
James Chao said the company’s success was attributable to three factors: the work of its dedicated executive board members, the teachings of TT Chao, and being able to “stand on his shoulders” to take advantage of resources in the US that can be likened to “manna from heaven”.
Albert Chao said that between 2014 and 2017, Westlake Chemical had achieved a reduction on carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions of approximately 30% and had cut sulphur emissions from its plants to almost zero.
The producer is involved with the Materials Recovery for the Future (MRFF) pilot demonstration project that the US' chemicals trade group the American Chemistry Council's (ACC) members have established with recyclers.
It works on sustainability issues with the Vinyl Institute and has joined the Alliance to End Plastic Waste (AEPW) with the aim to advance solutions to eliminate plastic waste in the global environment.
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/2019/03/25/10339240/afpm-19-westlakes-chao-brothers-urge-action-on-climate-plastics-waste-on-receiving-petchem-heritage/
-
(ACC Mentioned) Stormy Weather Ahead for Chemicals
Mar 24, 2019 | ICIS
By Paul Hodges
Four serious challenges are on the horizon for the global petrochemical industry as I describe in my latest analysis for ICIS Chemical Business and in apodcast interview with Will Beacham of ICIS.
The first is the growing risk of recession, with key markets such as autos, electronics and housing all showing signs of major weakness. Central banks are already talking up the potential for further stimulus, less than a year after they had tried to claim victory for their post-Crisis policies.
Second is oil market volatility, where prices raced up in the first half of last year, only to then collapse from $85/bbl to $50/bbl by Christmas, before rallying again this year. The issue is that major structural change is now underway, with US and Russian production increasing at Saudi Arabia’s expense.
Third, there is the unsettling impact of geo-politics and trade wars. The US-China trade war has set alarm bells ringing around the world, whilst the Brexit arguments between the UK and European Union are another sign that the age of globalisation is behind us, with potentially major implications for today’s supply chains.
And then there is the industry’s own, very specific challenge, shown in the chart. Based on innovative trade data analysis by Trade Data Monitor, it highlights the dramatic impact of the new US shale gas-based cracker investments on global trade in petrochemicals.
The idea is to capture the full effect of the new ethylene production across the key derivatives – polyethylene, PVC, styrene, EDC, vinyl acetate, ethyl benzene, ethylene glycol – based on their ethylene content. Even with next year’s planned new US ethylene terminal, the derivatives will still be the cheapest and easiest way to export the new ethylene molecules.
The cracker start-ups were inevitably delayed by the hurricanes in 2017. But if one compares 2018 with 2016 (to avoid the distortions these caused), there was still a net increase of 1.7 million tonnes in US ethylene-equivalent trade flows.
This was more than 40% of the total production increase over the period, as reported by the American Chemistry Council. And 2019 will see further major increases in volume with 4.25 million tonnes of new ethylene capacity due to start-up, alongside full-year output from last year’s start-ups.
The problem is two-fold. As discussed here in 2014 (ICB, US boom is a dangerous game, 24-30 March), it was never likely that central bank stimulus policies could actually return demand growth to the levels seen in the Boomer-led SuperCycle from 1983-2000:
“Shale gas thus provides a high-profile example of how today’s unprecedented demographic changes are creating major changes in business models. Low-cost supply is no longer a guarantee of future profitability.”
This was not a popular message at the time, when oil was still riding high at over $100/bbl and the economic impact of globally ageing populations and collapsing fertility rates were still not widely understood. But it has borne the test of time, and sums up the challenge now facing the industry.
Please click to download the full analysis and my podcast interview with Will Beacham.
https://www.icis.com/chemicals-and-the-economy/2019/03/stormy-weather-ahead-for-chemicals/
-
Mar 25, 2019 | Staffing Industry Analysts
Economists surveyed by the National Association for Business Economics lowered their prior growth projections for the US economy in 2019, the association announced today. The median forecast now calls for real GDP growth of 2.4% on an annual basis this year, down from the December 2018 forecast of 2.7%. For 2020, respondents predict a 2.0% annual growth rate in real GDP.
In 2018, real GDP increased 2.9% on an annual basis.
The panelists’ forecast for nonfarm employment is slightly stronger.
Panelists for the NABE Outlook Survey believe the US economy has reached an “inflection point,” according to Kevin Swift, president at NABE and chief economist at American Chemistry Council. “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 6% perceive risks to the upside,” Swift said.
“A majority of panelists sees external headwinds from trade policy and slower global growth as the primary downside risks to growth,” said Survey Chair Gregory Daco, chief US economist, Oxford Economics. “Three-quarters of respondents have reduced their 2019 GDP growth outlook in response to trade policy developments. Nonetheless, recession risks are still perceived to be low in the near term.”
Panelists put the odds of a recession starting in 2019 at about 20%, and the odds of a recession by the end of 2020 at 35%. “In part,” Daco said, “this reflects the Federal Reserve’s dovish policy U-turn in January. A near-majority of panelists anticipates only one more interest rate hike in this cycle compared to the three hikes forecasted in the December survey.”
Employment outlook. The median projection for monthly nonfarm payroll employment growth in 2019 is 173,000 — a projection slightly stronger than the 166,000 anticipated in the December survey. The panel looks for employment growth to moderate in 2020, with the median forecast calling for 127,000 net job gains per month for next year.
The average unemployment rate for 2019 as a whole is still expected to be at 3.7% in 2019, up slightly from the 3.6% anticipated in the previous survey. Based on the median forecast, the unemployment rate will average 3.7% in 2020. On a quarterly basis, the median forecast is for the unemployment rate to be 3.8% in the first quarter of 2019, declining to 3.6% in the last two quarters of the year. The median forecast is for the unemployment rate to resume rising to 3.7% in the first two quarters of 2020, and to 3.8% in the third and fourth quarters.
Wage outlook. The median forecast for hourly compensation growth in 2019 is 3.0%, compared to the actual 2.7% gain in 2018. Wage compensation is expected to pick up in 2020, rising 3.2%.
NABE is a professional association for business economists and others who use economics in the workplace. The survey included 55 professional forecasters and was conducted between Feb. 22 and March 7, 2019.
https://www2.staffingindustry.com/site/Editorial/Daily-News/GDP-to-cool-this-year-as-economy-reaches-inflection-point-but-nonfarm-jobs-forecast-is-slightly-stronger-NABE-49418
-
(ACC Mentioned) We Must Learn from Others
Mar 25, 2019 | CropLife
By Chuck Magro
More than 30 years ago, on the night of December 2, 1984, at least 30 tons of a highly toxic gas called methyl isocyanate leaked from the Union Carbide plant in Bhopal, India. Thousands died, were injured or experienced residual health consequences. It was one of the world’s worst industrial disasters.
Chuck Magro, Nutrien President and Chief Executive Officer, remembers studying the Bhopal incident extensively while earning his degree in chemical engineering. When the North American fertilizer industry experienced its own disaster in West, Texas, in 2013, Magro was in his fourth year with Agrium, following a successful career with NOVA Chemicals.“If there’s an incident at a fertilizer facility. . . the entire industry gets a black eye.”
– Chuck MagroIn Bhopal, lives were lost, and an entire city was shaken. The Texas incident also caused loss of life and dramatically altered the community. When Magro heard about the disaster in West, Texas, he felt a sense of déjà vu. It awakened in him a commitment to and passion for preventing future incidents.
“If you’ve ever been part of something that negatively impacts people’s lives, it takes something away from you, and it’s not a good feeling,” says Magro. “We have to learn from other industries, and we have to prevent these things from happening.”
Responsible Care® works to prevent disaster
After the Bhopal incident, the chemical manufacturing industry vowed to prevent future incidents and banded together to improve its safety performance, forming Responsible Care®. For the past 30 years, Responsible Care has helped American Chemistry Council (ACC) member companies significantly enhance their performance, as well as improve the health and safety of their employees, the communities in which they operate and the environment. Magro points to Responsible Care as a model he believes the agricultural inputs industry should follow.
The initiative’s results are noteworthy. Based on 2017 performance reports, Responsible Care companies have an employee safety record 5 times better than the U.S. manufacturing sector, and almost 3 times better than the chemistry industry overall. The companies voluntarily track process safety incidents and, since 1995, have reduced occurrence by 56 percent. In addition, recordable injury and illness incidence rates have been cut by 79 percent since 1990, working toward an overall industry goal of no accidents, injuries or harm to human health. *
“Today, Responsible Care is the bellwether of safety for the chemical industry. Every chemical company ― big, small, distribution, production ― is a member. They all work together, investing to do what’s right for their employees and the communities where they live and work,” Magro says. “Responsible Care is for the industry, by the industry.”
Industry participation, collaboration is key for success
Having learned from the chemical industry’s example, Magro believes collaboration and unified participation in ResponsibleAg provides several benefits to the fertilizer industry. First and foremost is improved safety ― protecting people and communities. Second is prevention of incidents that can give the entire industry a black eye.
“If there’s an incident at a fertilizer facility, it doesn’t matter if your company is involved or not. It doesn’t matter if you do or don’t handle the product in question,” Magro explains. “These situations create unnecessary public attention. The entire industry gets a black eye, and that’s not good for anyone.” The outcome can be more legislation, increased regulation and added costs or complexity for agricultural businesses.
“Often, the groups proposing more regulation don’t know our business like we do. So, it’s important that members of the fertilizer industry step up and work together through ResponsibleAg. Doing so demonstrates that we know what’s right. We know how to keep our employees, neighbors, customers and communities safe, and we’re going to take responsibility and accountability for that.”
Nutrien is one of many companies that is “all in” with ResponsibleAg, having supported the initiative since it launched in 2013. Nutrien has adopted the program as a core part of its safety program and considers participation in the ResponsibleAg Certification Program an important investment the company and its retail facilities are making in employees and communities.
The hands-on learning provided through the ResponsibleAg program is another unique aspect of ResponsibleAg that Magro believes makes the program practical and easy to implement across the fertilizer industry.
For more information or to join, visit www.ResponsibleAg.org or call 270-683-6777.
® Registered service mark of the American Chemistry Council, Inc.
*American Chemistry Council.Chuck Magro is President and Chief Executive Officer of Nutrien
https://www.croplife.com/sponsor/responsible-ag/we-must-learn-from-others/
-
(ACC Mentioned) Report: Advanced Plastics Recycling Has Potential for $10 Billion Economic Output
Mar 25, 2019 | Plastics Technology
A report released by the American Chemistry Council finds the potential economic impact of expanding advanced plastic recycling and recovery technologies in the U.S. to be nearly $10 billion. The report examines a burgeoning class of technologies that convert used plastics into a range of products and raw materials such as chemicals and chemical feedstocks for new plastics, lower carbon transportation fuels and other petroleum-based commodities. By bringing used plastics back into the manufacturing system, these technologies are a key enabler in the drive toward a circular economy for plastics.
According to the report, “Economic Impact of Advanced Plastics Recycling and Recovery Facilities in the U.S.,” if widely adopted, these processes could result in nearly 40,000 direct and indirect U.S. jobs, as much as $2.2 billion in annual payroll, and another $9.9 billion in direct and indirect economic output.
“Advanced plastic recycling and recovery technologies have the potential to revolutionize the way we make, use, and reuse our plastic resources,” said Steve Russell, ACC’s vice president of plastics. “These technologies further demonstrate the untapped value of used plastics and have the potential to dramatically accelerate our transition to a circular economy.”
“Expanding advanced plastic recycling and recovery facilities could create thousands of U.S. jobs, result in billions of dollars in economic output, and eliminate the landfilling of 6.5 million tons of post-use recoverable plastics each year,” said Priyanka Bakaya, founder and CEO of Renewlogy and chair of the Plastics-to-Fuel and Petrochemistry Alliance, which commissioned the study. (For more about Renewlogy’s technology, click here).
Prepared by ACC’s Economics and Statistics Department, this report updates a similar analysis completed in 2014. The earlier analysis only examined the economic potential associated with converting used plastics into synthetic crude oil. Since then, these technologies have significantly expanded their range of outputs to meet demand for specific commodities.
The latest report examines chemical recycling, which includes pyrolysis and depolymerization. These advanced technologies complement mechanical recycling and could help society recover and repurpose a much broader range of post-use plastics.
https://www.ptonline.com/news/report-advanced-plastics-recycling-has-potential-for-10-billion-economic-output
-
(ACC Mentioned) 98% of European Plastics Production Covered by the Operation Clean Sweep Program
Mar 25, 2019 | Plastics Technology
Following the release of its first Operation Clean Sweep (OCS) report in 2017, PlasticsEurope made the OCS program a top priority in 2018, setting new targets for its members as part of our Plastics 2030 Voluntary Commitment. The 2018 new report provides an overview of the latest OCS developments in Europe and identifies further improvements to prevent pellet loss.
The number of OCS signatories doubled in Europe in 2018, reaching up to more than 500 companies handling plastics pellets. More than 98% of the total European plastics production have now signed up to OCS. PlasticsEurope is also strengthening its collaboration with the entire plastics value chain. The group announced that 250 new companies have signed the pledge in 2018, among them PD Port (Teesside UK), first port to follow the example of the Antwerp Port in 2017.
“The plastics industry remains fully committed to implementing solutions to end plastic waste in the environment. Working with the value chain for the implementation of OCS is an essential part of our 2030 Voluntary Commitment. Our aim is to drive best practices in pellet management and strive towards zero pellet loss,” stated Karl-H. Foerster, PlasticsEurope Executive Director.
PlasticsEurope’s objectives for 2019 are to actively contribute to global industry efforts. Together with the plastics value chain, its aim is to develop an OCS certification scheme and continue to support the implementation of the OCS program as a way to deliver its voluntary commitment.
View the 2018 report here.
Operation Clean Sweep (OCS) is a stewardship program of the Plastics Industry Association (PLASTICS) and the American Chemistry Council’s Plastics Division.
A Zero Pellet Loss (ZPL) initiative was initially launched by PlasticsEurope in 2013 to raise awareness among employees at manufacturing plants on how to properly manage pellets at each step of the production and supply chain. To align and concentrate global industry efforts under a common approach, ZPL was integrated on a pan-European base into the global OCS program in 2015.
https://www.ptonline.com/news/98-of-european-plastics-production-covered-by-the-operation-clean-sweep-program-
-
Activists’ Message to N.Y. Lawmakers: Expand 5-Cent Bottle Fee
Mar 25, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Keshia Clukey
More than 50 environmental advocacy groups and recycling industry organizations from across New York state called on the Legislature March 25 to expand the 5-cent fee on bottles in the 2019-20 state budget.
The expansion of the Returnable Container Act, commonly referred to as the Bottle Bill, was included Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s (D) budget proposal and would extend the fee to noncarbonated, nonalcoholic beverages such as juices, sports drinks, cider, tea, and coffee.
In a letter to Senate and Assembly leaders, the bill’s proponents, including the New York Public Interest Research Group, the New York League of Conservation Voters, and Environmental Advocates of New York said the bill is “urgently needed” to reduce plastic pollution littering the state’s beaches and waterways.
“It’s critical that we address this issue now,” Kate Kurera, Environmental Advocates of New York deputy director said at a news conference. “The fact is the bottle deposit program increases recycling rates and effectively redirects solid waste streams.”
Recycling Firms, Drink Makers Oppose
The legislation has received pushback from drinkmakers, recycling haulers, retailers, and some municipalities, citing the additional cost.
“By removing these items, recycling companies are eliminating some of the most valuable material contained in curbside recycling bins resulting in increased total costs which ultimately will be passed down to the customers,” Darren Suarez, senior director of government affairs at the Business Council of New York State, said in a statement released last week.
It also affects the beverage industry and increases the cost of getting into the market, he said in an interview March 25.
New York ranks first in the nation in the number of hard cider producers, with more than 1,100 craft beverage manufacturers, including 41 farm cideries, according to the governor’s office.
The fee issue is complicated, Suarez said.
“Discussions should be done outside the budget,” he said.
Part of the Budget?
The proposal was rejected earlier this month by both the Senate and Assembly, although lawmakers have indicated they want to discuss the legislation outside of the budget. The fiscal year ends March 31.
In their letter, advocates also called for the Legislature to go further, taking up a bill proposed by Assemblyman Steve Englebright (D), which would include wine, hard cider, and liquor bottles, among other changes.
Englebright, who chairs the Environmental Conservation Committee, also called for its inclusion in the budget. “I’m interested in getting this done as soon as possible,” he said at the news conference.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/activists-message-to-n-y-lawmakers-expand-5-cent-bottle-fee
-
EPA Seeks More Funding for TSCA Program as Activities Increase in 2020
Mar 25, 2019 | Inside EPA
By Maria Hegstad
The Trump administration is once again proposing to increase the budget for EPA's toxics office, a rare bump up for an EPA program, as it works to implement the bipartisan reform of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), an effort that is a priority to industry and agency leaders as they gain insight on the resources needed to operate the new program.
According to EPA's budget justification for fiscal year 2020, the Trump EPA is requesting a net increase of $5.3 million above the $61.1 million Congress provided in FY19 for its chemical risk, review and reduction program area and 20 new full time equivalent (FTE) employees.
The increase comes as EPA faces an ever-growing workload of new responsibilities under the statute, including doubling the number of ongoing risk evaluations for existing chemicals, starting risk management procedures for any chemicals deemed not to meet the TSCA risk standard, starting the risk management process for persistent, bioaccumualtive and toxic chemicals, and the ongoing pace of new chemical reviews.
“I think the reality has hit home to everyone that's going to [take] a lot of resources,” one EPA source says of the TSCA program, calling the process “learning as we go about how much it costs and how many people it takes.”
Resources to cover EPA's many new responsibilities under TSCA reform have been stretched, as its Office of Pollution Prevention and Toxics (OPPT) has brought in new staff on various details to beef up staffing levels particularly in its new chemicals program to deal with a backlog of reviews.
OPPT leaders have also transferred technical staff from the agency's Safer Choice green chemistry program to TSCA work, and a recent report from Congress' watchdog agency indicates that technical staff in EPA's Integrated Risk Information System -- located in EPA's research office -- were largely supporting OPPT.
The increase will provide some relief, and OPPT is anticipating that new funds from the increased TSCA fees -- EPA finalized the rule implementing this new authority last October -- will grow as well. “In FY 2020, fee revenues are expected to exceed $30 million due to collections from the planned commencement of 20 EPA-Initiated Risk Evaluations in December 2019,” EPA's Congressional Justification document states in a section on user fees.
“Fee revenues are estimated to return to $7 million to $10 million in FY 2021, since no new EPA-initiated risk evaluations are planned to begin that year. Despite the fluctuations in annual fee receipts, the fees are structured to collect 25 percent of associated program total costs (including agency indirect costs), averaging $15 million to $20 million per year.”
The document adds that its “fee estimates do not include fees for manufacturer-requested risk evaluations, which can recover 50 percent to 100 percent of the costs of these evaluations.” The justification says that EPA is currently considering two such requests.
Leaning on the anticipated influx of new fees, the Trump EPA again proposes to shift some 50 FTEs “from appropriated resources to TSCA user fee accounts.” EPA says that “increased non-pay resources support the implementation of efforts to meet statutory deadlines” for the TSCA program. The proposal is not surprising; the Trump EPA included similar efforts in the last two presidential budget proposals.
EPA could also see a further increase from Congress -- as it received in the past two fiscal years. The final appropriations bills for EPA in FY18 and FY19 included funds beyond EPA's request earmarked for TSCA implementation. In FY18, Congress gave EPA an additional $10 million for TSCA work. Similarly, Congress appropriated an additional $5 million beyond EPA's request for the TSCA program in FY19.
TSCA Deadlines
In its explanation of FY20 activities and performance plan, the budget request notes that EPA anticipates an “increased workload” in FY20 as the agency reaches a series of statutory deadlines, including requirements to complete the first ten risk evaluations for existing chemicals and initiate risk management actions as necessary.
In addition, the agency must “identify 20 Low-Priority chemicals for which risk evaluation is not warranted at this time, and identify 20 High Priority chemicals for which risk evaluation must begin immediately. At the same time, the Agency will work to reduce review timeframes for review of Pre-Manufacture Notices for new chemicals and will continue to carry out ongoing base program activities.”
Addressing an issue of growing concern for environmentalists and TSCA stakeholders, EPA says that in FY20, “EPA may utilize” the amended TSCA section 4 authorities to order industry to perform “testing on chemicals in connection with the prioritization and risk evaluation processes, where such testing is needed.” Environmentalists and others have protested EPA's lack of test orders since TSCA's reform, arguing that the information takes time to generate, and will be needed to help EPA better prioritize and assess chemicals, as they say many have insufficient data to do so.
On the troubled TSCA section 5 program, which governs EPA's pre-market review of new chemicals, EPA says that it expects to review approximately 1,000 new chemicals, “including nanomaterials and products of biotechnology.” The agency has struggled to review these applications in the 90 days allotted by the statute following TSCA's reform, as the changes, implemented without a phase in period, require findings for all chemical applications EPA receives, a significant departure from the original 1976 TSCA.
The agency says that it “plans to continue to reduce review times” in the new chemicals program such that “by FY2022, EPA will aim to make 80 percent of all final determinations within the initial 90-day review period.”
The document adds that EPA “will continue to make improvements to internal data and tracking systems stemming from lean projects undertaken by the program to enhance efficiency of the new chemical review process.”
Of EPA's TSCA section 6 activities, those regarding existing chemicals, EPA states that it intends to meet the statutory deadlines of completing its first 10 risk evaluations “no later than December 2019 … or by June 2020 if EPA invokes a statutorily allowed 6-month extension.” If unreasonable risks are found in any of the evaluations, EPA must begin risk management rulemakings, to be completed in two to four years.
EPA also comments on ongoing activities on confidential business information (CBI), an area of TSCA reform often ignored in the focus on the ongoing challenges in meeting the risk assessment activities of the new and existing chemicals programs. EPA notes that the amended TSCA section requires it “to review and make determination on [CBI] claims contained in TSCA submissions, to share -- under defined circumstances -- TSCA CBI with states, tribes, health and medical professionals, first responders, and similar persons, and to make non-CBI TSCA data available to the public. EPA is updating policies, regulations and guidance to implement the amendments.”
EPA says that in FY2020 it will “[c]omplete CBI claim reviews for more than 2,500 new cases … [c]omplete CBI claim reviews for approximately 1,900 chemical identity claims associated with Notice of Activity submissions; [c]omplete CBI claim reviews for approximately 1,500 CBI cases from the backlog that has developed since 2016 pending finalization of EPA’s review procedures; [and] [a]ssign unique identifiers to chemicals where CBI claims for chemical identify are upheld.”
EPA adds that its use of the term case “reflects a unique submission of a particular type from a particular company, and generally from a particular site. A 'case' may have a large number of individual CBI claims, each of which might be subject to individual CBI claim consideration.”
As it has previously, the FY20 request also proposes eliminating EPA's Endocrine Disruptor Screening Program (EDSP), zeroing out its FY19 appropriated $7.6 million budget and its 7.7 FTE. Though it notes that EDSP was created in response to Congressional direction in the 1996 amendments to the Federal Food Drug and Cosmetic Act and the Safe Drinking Water Act, the justification says that “[r]esources and FTE are proposed for elimination for this program in FY2020. EPA will absorb the remaining functions within the Pesticides Program using the currently available tiered testing battery.”
The budget request again proposes the elimination of EPA's pollution prevention (P2) program, another program where staff have been shifted to TSCA work. The Trump EPA proposes zeroing out its FY19 appropriated budget of $11.2 million and 46.2 FTE. The Safer Choice program falls within the P2 account, so this proposal would eliminate the program entirely.
“Based on previous investments in P2 solutions made under this program project, partners are expected to be able to continue to share best practices and pursue additional pollution prevention solutions. EPA will continue to meet other core statutory requirements under the Pollution Prevention Act of 1990 in other programs,” the justification says.
https://insideepa.com/daily-news/epa-seeks-more-funding-tsca-program-activities-increase-2020
-
Udall Is Retiring, but He Will Leave Behind a Weighty Environmental Legacy
Mar 25, 2019 | Roll Call
By Benjamin J. Hulac
When Sen. Tom Udall departs the Senate in 2021, he will leave behind a weighty environmental legacy built with bipartisan help, progressive principles, and a clarion call to tackle climate change.
In a statement on Monday announcing he would not seek re-election in 2020, the New Mexico Democrat described environmental destruction to Earth as a crisis that demands pressing urgency.
“That’s why, when I go back to Washington tomorrow, I’m going right back to work,” Udall said. “To fight the urgent threat of climate change, dramatically expand clean energy and to protect our public lands and forests.”
Udall, 70, who comes from a family synonymous in the American West with politics and conservation, joins Republican Sens. Lamar Alexander of Tennessee and Pat Roberts, of Kansas, on the list of senators who plan to retire at the end of this Congress.
“There will be more chapters in my public service to do what needs to be done,” Udall said.
First elected to the senate in 2008, Udall focused on environmental matters from the start of his term, including local pollution issues, such as toxic chemicals and asbestos, and global threats to the planet from climate change.
“He was tenacious and he was willing to work across party lines,” Elizabeth Gore, of the Environmental Defense Fund, told CQ, adding that Udall’s first bill in the Senate would have boosted requirements for renewable energy sources among electric utilities.
“He was a true environmentalist,” Gore said. “And he did it in a way that was both thoughtful and statesmanlike.”
Chief among his accomplishments is the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety for the 21st Century Act, which became law in 2016.
After then-Sen. Frank Lautenberg, died in 2013, 11 days after introducing a bill to update the Toxic Substances Control Act, Udall took up the New Jersey Democrat’s cause.
Congress passed the law overwhelmingly with bipartisan support, ushering in the first update to TSCA in 20 years. But it likely would not have happened without Udall, according to Richard Denison, senior lead scientist at EDF.
After the death of Lautenberg, who had been a public health advocate for decades, “it seemed like the end of the road really,” Denison said. “There was nobody in the wings who was there to take this up.”
Denison helped Udall on the bill and said Udall salvaged a deal with former Sen. David Vitter, who was willing to walk away from their TSCA-reform bill entirely.
“I still don’t know quite how he pulled that off,” the Louisiana Republican said. “I still don’t quite know what the magic dust was.”
Jon Horning, director of WildEarth Guardians, an environmental group headquartered in New Mexico, said Udall has long been an advocate for public land protection, efforts to address climate change and bedrock environmental laws, such as the Endangered Species Act.
It seems to Horning though that the Trump administration has drawn out the fighter in Udall.
“He doesn’t bask in the spotlight, he doesn’t need the spotlight,” Horning said. Still, he added, “In the last few years he’s really put on the gloves.”
https://www.rollcall.com/news/congress/udall-may-retiring-will-leave-behind-weighty-environmental-legacy
-
(ACC Blog) IRIS: Bad Science, Real World Consequences
Mar 25, 2019 | American Chemistry Matters
By American Chemistry
This week, the U.S. House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology will be holding a hearing on EPA’s troubled Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) program. Given the attention it will be receiving, we wanted to provide you with some important information about IRIS’s problematic track record.
What is IRIS?
EPA originally designed the IRIS program to support the agency’s mission to protect human health and the environment by identifying and characterizing health hazards of specific chemicals, which internal EPA offices would prioritize. This is an important distinction: IRIS assesses hazard only. It is not a risk-based system—its assessments do not take exposure into account and do not characterize actual risks to human health and the environment. And, unfortunately, the IRIS program has repeatedly demonstrated an inability to meet the scientific standards necessary to produce reliable hazard assessments. There are long-standing and well documented concerns from government and non-governmental organizations regarding the program’s lack of transparency, productivity, and inability to produce scientifically sound hazard assessments that meet EPA’s needs on a consistent basis.
A Program Plagued with Problems
Bad science has real-world implications that can lead to unwarranted restrictions including product de-selection, unfounded public alarm, and unnecessary costs for consumers and businesses. When EPA relies on questionable science, it undermines public confidence in government decision making.
In February 2019 the Competitive Enterprise Institute (CEI) provided some important perspective on those real world implications:
“Thanks to IRIS’ junk science, medical sterilization plants may close, putting people out of work and imperiling public health with the potential of increased disease transmission. Because there are no good substitutes, the elimination of [EO] for medical product sterilization would be ‘significant, and likely disastrous’ for public health and ‘would introduce the real risks of increased morbidity and mortality,’ according to the Ethylene Oxide Sterilization Association.”
That CEI publication is referring to the IRIS assessment of ethylene oxide (EO) that created concerns about EO exposures 19,000 times lower than occur naturally in the human body. So, according to IRIS, the natural production of EO from our own bodies represents a hazard to human health and the environment. That’s bad science.
EPA’s Responsibility to Ensure Program’s Scientific Credibility
The agency’s leadership, under any administration, has a duty to ensure that all of its programs are working efficiently, effectively and that they are actually serving the American people. The IRIS program has been plagued by serious issues for years as noted on many occasions by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), the Government Accountability Office (GAO), congressional committees (Democrats have scrubbed the House Science Committee website of any previous information regarding IRIS oversight hearings), members of Congress and other stakeholders. The program’s failure to address those issues means that IRIS hazard assessments cause unnecessary alarm and misstate the potential impact of a given substance on public health.
Given its problematic history, it should come as no surprise that EPA leadership decided last year to pause, take a closer look and reevaluate the IRIS program and how it functions. Part of that process, according to a recent GAO report, was for EPA program offices (e.g., Office of Air and Radiation; Office of Water; Office of Land and Emergency Management ) to reconfirm which ongoing chemical hazard assessments they consider as priorities for their programs. That’s exactly what we should expect from our leaders in government.
Hoping for the Best
While we agree that some progress has been made to improve the IRIS program, there are still many recommendations that were made years ago by GAO, NAS and others that have not been addressed, such as releasing a finalized IRIS handbook. IRIS program leaders have repeatedly promised but failed to deliver a completed handbook, which would detail the step-by-step guidance to selecting, evaluating and integrating evidence for developing IRIS hazard assessment values.
We hope that the IRIS program will one day be able to produce high-quality, scientifically sound toxicity values, but there is still a great deal of work to be done to get to that point.
https://blog.americanchemistry.com/2019/03/iris-bad-science-real-world-consequences/
-
Mar 25, 2019 | Northern California Record
By Josh Breslin
California legislators are moving to try and ban a wide range of chemicals historically used in cosmetic products.
Assembly Bill 495 lists 20 chemicals the legislators want banned, including ones that supporters say are carcinogenic or may be reproductive and hormone disruptors.
But the filing of the bill has drawn criticism from one industry group which claims that that the bill makes no sense.
"California already has a process in place to do exactly what this legislation is intending to do," said Andrew Fasoli, regional communication manager for the American Chemistry Council.
"In 2013 DTSC’s Safer Consumer Products Program took effect, creating a rulemaking authority that brings multiple stakeholders to the table to determine the risks that chemicals in consumer products pose and if a viable and effective alternative is available," Fasoli added.
"It does not make sense for the legislature to circumvent a program that they created and completely ignore the determinations made by qualified experts.”
The chemicals are often used as preservatives, which are a vital component of the personal care products as otherwise they can be a "breeding ground for bacteria, fungi, and mold," according to a recent piece in the Chemical & Engineering News (C&EN), the weekly newsmagazine of the American Chemical Society (ACS).
The ACS has been tracking the debate over the use of certain chemicals as preservatives, including the "unintended consequences" of the "shrinking list of approved preservatives."
At a national level, the ACS has noted that regulators are looking at the various preservatives in different cosmetic products to check their level of safety and potentially order lower concentrations or ban them. This view is disputed by the supporters of the bill, who claim there is little or no oversight of chemicals in personal care items.
California legislators are moving ahead with legislation that would force companies to remove the listed chemicals from their products.
"Many cosmetics companies are already reformulating their products to exclude these dangerous chemicals, but it’s important to establish a floor other companies can’t drop below,” said Ken Cook, president of the Environmental Working Group (EWG), in a press release. The EWG supports the bill along with CALPIRG, the consumer organization.
The legislation targets chemicals such as mercury, lead, phthalates, formaldehyde, triclosan and fluorinated compounds known as PFAS (polyfluoroalkyl substances) are “adulterated cosmetics” that may not be sold in California.
Formaldehyde is one of the most widely used chemicals in cosmetic products. It is often used as a preservative.
A piece authored by Marc S. Reisch, a senior correspondent at C&EN, contains a warning as "preservatives play a key role in cosmetics."
"They prevent mold, fungi and bacteria from growing in creams, makeup and shampoos. Left unchecked, contaminants can spoil products or cause skin or eye infections or worse," Reisch wrote. "At a minimum, these bad actors can make shampoos and skin creams look unappealing and smell bad. More seriously, they can cause eye, skin, and respiratory infections."
Formaldehyde is either banned or restricted in around 40 countries. It is, for example, banned in cosmetics and toiletries in Japan and Sweden, restricted in personal care products in the EU, where labeling is required, while there are restrictions on concentration in Canada.
The bill was introduced by Assembly members Al Muratsuchi (D-Torrance) and Buffy Wicks (D-Oakland).
"Californians deserve to know whether the cosmetic products they purchase in the state are not harmful to their health,” said Muratsuchi. “While cosmetic products sold in the U.S. are largely unregulated, other nations — and even retailers — have proactively banned or restricted the use of hundreds or thousands of cosmetic ingredients.
“Most of us, including me, use cosmetics on a daily basis,” said Wicks. “Some still contain chemicals that are harmful to our bodies."
California already has the Safe Cosmetics Program. Set up in 2006, it requires major cosmetics manufacturers to provide notification when one sells a personal care product containing a reproductive toxicant or a carcinogen.
Among those facing a ban, if the bill is passed, are lead, formaldehyde, parabens, which are various compounds used as preservatives, and flourinated PFAS compounds, which are used in a wide of products.
Under the bill, the Safe Cosmetics Program would be charged with policing the ban and reporting to the Attorney General, who would be required to investigate and potentially take companies to court for financial and criminal penalties if found to be violating law.
https://norcalrecord.com/stories/512322434-california-legislators-move-to-ban-certain-chemicals-in-personal-care-products-including-pfas
-
N.J. Pressures Companies for Fluorinated Chemical Cleanup
Mar 25, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By John Herzfeld
New Jersey warned five manufacturers that they could be on the hook for millions to assess and clean up damage to natural resources from widespread contamination by fluorinated chemicals.
In a March 25 directive, the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection ordered Solvay SA, DuPont Specialty Products USA LLC, DowDuPont Inc., Chemours Co., and 3M Co. to provide a detailed accounting of their use and discharge of the chemicals, which have been used for more than 60 years.
The directive was the first of its kind in the nation that directs chemical manufacturers to conduct a statewide assessment of damage from PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances) and set up a fund to remediate it, the state environment department said in a news release.
“The Department expects to incur hundreds of millions of dollars in costs assessing and responding to the discharge of PFAS into the environment of New Jersey,” the directive said. Included in its terms was a $3.1 million tab to Solvay for drinking water cleanup costs already incurred around the company’s West Deptford, N.J., plant.
Found Across U.S.
The chemicals known as PFAS have been found in drinking water systems across the U.S. They have been used to make plastics, nonstick and stain-resistant fabrics and coatings, and firefighting foams. Among them are perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) and perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS), two persistent chemical contaminants. States and the Environmental Protection Agency haven’t agreed on what levels are safe.
“Studies show that exposure to PFAS may cause testicular cancer, kidney and liver cancer, and autoimmune and endocrine disorders in adults as well as developmental effects to fetuses during pregnancy or to breastfed infants,” the directive said.
The New Jersey environment agency summoned the companies to a meeting within 30 days to discuss “a good faith estimate for future costs to investigate, test, treat, cleanup, and remove” the PFAS chemicals from the environment and discuss establishing funding sources for the work.
The directive puts the five companies “on notice that many years of contaminating New Jersey’s precious drinking water and other natural resources will not go unchecked,” Department of Environmental Protection Commissioner Catherine R. McCabe said in a statement.
Companies Pledge Cooperation
Chemours, in a statement, said it’s reviewing the agency notice. The company said it already shares information with the agency on fluorinated compounds and is committed to continuing to work with it to determine “the appropriate actions and next steps.”
All the plant sites Chemours now owns “had ceased using PFOA at least two years before the company was established,” the statement said. DuPont spun off Chemours in July 2015, before its December 2015 merger with Dow.
The specialty products division of DowDuPont issued a similar statement: “We engage with NJDEP on a regular basis regarding operations at our New Jersey facilities, and will work with them to better understand the directive.”
The agency’s directive was welcomed by the environmental group Delaware Riverkeeper Network. Together with the agency’s proposed limits for PFOA and PFOS in drinking water, the action provides “urgently needed” protection for New Jersey, where PFAS contamination is among the highest in the U.S., Tracy Carluccio, the group’s deputy director, said in a statement.
A spokesman for Solvay, David Klucsik, said in a statement that the company shares information with the agency and other groups in its response to “the presence of compounds in the vicinity of the West Deptford plant” and its remedial work.
The company never made PFOA or other surfactants at the 140-worker plant but used them as a processing aid there, he said.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/n-j-pressures-companies-for-fluorinated-chemical-cleanup
-
New Jersey Cracks down on PFAS Pollution from Chemical Companies
Mar 25, 2019 | Chemical & Engineering News
By Cheryl Hogue
In a precedent-setting action, New Jersey is directing Chemours, DowDuPont, Solvay, and 3M to pay millions of dollars to investigate and clean up poly- and perfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) pollution in the state.
New Jersey’s Department of Environmental Protection says its move marks the first time a state has cracked down on chemical manufacturers that formerly made, formerly released, or still emit PFAS.
“Now is the time for action at the state level” on PFAS pollution, says New Jersey environmental protection commissioner Catherine R. McCabe. The US Environmental Protection Agency’s recently announced action plan to address PFAS contamination will take years to implement, she notes.
The New Jersey agency says it believes the four companies are responsible for significant PFAS contamination in the state. Surface water, groundwater, sediments, soils, air, fish, plants, and other natural resources in New Jersey are tainted with PFAS from operations of Chemours, DowDuPont, and Solvay, it says. The agency is targeting 3M because it was the primary US manufacturer of perfluorooctanoic acid for decades and supplied this substance to Solvay and former DuPont facilities in the state. 3M also made fire-fighting foam with PFAS that taints drinking water near federal facilities in New Jersey, the department says.
The companies knew, or should have known, the health and environmental hazards of these persistent chemicals, the department says. Scientific studies suggest that some PFAS may cause health problems.
Under a March 25 legal directive, New Jersey is requiring the companies to meet collectively with state officials in the next month to discuss establishing a fund to pay for identifying and treating PFAS contamination. The state is also ordering the chemical makers to provide information on current and past use and on release of PFAS and sales of products containing these chemicals.
The directive singles out Solvay to reimburse the state $3.1 million for work already done to investigate and clean up PFAS around the company’s facility in West Deptford. That plant’s manufacture of polyvinylidene fluoride plastic “discharged massive amounts” of perfluorononanoic acid into air and water between about 1990 and 2012, the directive says. This facility is also responsible for PFOA pollution, it says.
“We will hold these companies accountable and insist that they step up to address the problem they have created,” says McCabe. The chemical companies—not New Jersey residents—should pay for the investigation and remediation of PFAS, she says.
Chemours and Solvay say they are working with New Jersey on the matter. Solvay says it “will respond to the department appropriately.” 3M did not respond before C&EN’s deadline.
https://cen.acs.org/environment/persistent-pollutants/New-Jersey-cracks-down-PFAS/97/web/2019/03
-
Illinois Senate Clears Bill Banning Animal Testing for Cosmetics
Mar 26, 2019 | Chemical Watch
Illinois' state Senate has passed a bill that would ban the import or sale of any cosmetic product developed using tests on animals from 2020. After unanimous approval of SB 0241, it arrived in the state’s House of Representatives for consideration on 21 March.
The bill – which would amend the state’s Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act – has certain exceptions to the prohibition, such as where animal tests are required by federal or state regulations. These are largely in line with a California bill which, when passed last autumn, became the toughest cruelty-free law on the books in the US.
Illinois’ action on animal testing comes as other state and federal authorities begin to push for alternatives. At least eight other states are considering animal testing restrictions this legislative session.
And last month the US Congress used the federal budget to direct the EPA to promote and use alternatives to "unnecessary" animal testing.
Meanwhile, earlier this month, Australia passed a country-wide ban on the practice.
https://chemicalwatch.com/75383/illinois-senate-clears-bill-banning-animal-testing-for-cosmetics
-
Paint Stripper Makers Examine Substitutes for Deadly Solvent
Mar 26, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Pat Rizzuto
Lowe’s, Home Depot, Walmart, and other retailers may not be clear what the safest paint strippers are to sell following their decisions to drop methylene chloride-based coating removers.
But there’s no going back now. The Environmental Protection Agency on March 15 banned strippers containing the sometimes deadly solvent from being in such consumer products.
Retailers aren’t asking about the safety of substitutes for it, said Sebastien Plourde, president of the Canadian firm Distribution J. des Serres, and other coating remover makers.
Disribution J. des Serres launched U.S. sales of its new paint stripper, New Generation Stripper, by D. Super Remover since 1979, made without methylene chloride this month and will be selling the product on Amazon in April, Plourde said.
U.S. manufacturers already are selling alternatives, according to Faye Graul, executive director of the Halogenated Solvents Industry Association which represents manufacturers, producers, distributors, and commercial users of methylene chloride and other solvents.
The organization she leads has commissioned a study, required by California, on the safety and efficacy of alternatives.
The information that will come from such studies should help guide retailers and consumers choices in the post-methylene chloride remover market, said Karl Palmer, acting deputy director of the safer products and workplaces program in California Department of Toxic Substances.
Alternatives Must Be Analyzed
The U.S. EPA announced in mid-March a final rule (RIN:2070-AK07) banning methylene chloride from paint and coating strippers sold to consumers.
Before that ban, at least 13 national retailers already had pledged to stop selling paint and coating strippers with methylene chloride, which is linked to the deaths of at least 53 consumers and commercial workers since 1976.
Yet when asked how they select methylene chloride-free paint strippers, neither Amazon, Home Depot, nor Walmart offered any criteria beyond making sure the substitutes complied with the nation’s primary chemicals law, the Toxic Substances Control Act.
It’s hard for retailers and consumers to be toxicologists and know whether the chemicals being substituted for methylene chloride are safe, Palmer said.
But information to help them make that choice should come as a result of a recent California requirement, he said.
Earlier this month, paint stripper manufacturers who used methylene chloride were required by California’s Safer Consumer Products program to identify themselves and their products.
A state regulation now requires that makers of paint-strippers submit a plan by July 1 for a detailed analysis of the performance; health, safety, and ecological risks; and costs and benefits of possible methylene chloride alternatives, with a full technical review due a year later, Palmer said.
Comparing Formulations
The HSIA is working with Gradient, a Massachusetts-headquartered consulting firm, to conduct an alternatives analysis as California requires.
Gradient will examine several dozen paint stripping formulations that are on the market or expected to be soon, said Tom A. Lewandowski, a principal in Gradient’s Seattle office.
The analysis won’t result in recommending any single formulation or paint stripper “recipe,” Lewandowski said.
Instead, Gradient expects to compare how alternatives—such as citrus oil- or water-based products—perform at various concentrations on different types of surfaces and with different coatings, he said.
Avoid ‘Regrettable Substitutes’
Plourde, from Distribution J. des Serres, thinks his firm has already cracked the performance and safety nut, by licensing a paint stripping blend developed by the Toxics Use Reduction Institute (TURI) at the University of Massachusetts-Lowell.
TURI works with its home state and companies seeking to replace hazardous chemicals with safer alternatives.
The Canadian company launched New Generation in Canada last November, its first U.S. sales were to Coastal Construction Products, a large distributor of caulking and sealants, waterproofing, concrete repair, and fire protection products in the U.S., and online sales begin in April, Plourde said.
The blend, which contains methyl acetate, dimethyl sulfoxide, and 1,3-dioxolane, was developed after four years of research aimed at solving both safety and performance concerns, said Greg Morose, a research manager at TURI.
It meets all the criteria Distribution J. des Serres set including global regulatory acceptance when it began seeking a methylene chloride-free blend five years ago, Plourde said.
The blend’s safety profile has convinced Plourde that he also won’t risk having to reformulate in a few years.
That’s been a problem, California’s Palmer said. Government agencies have a “bad history” of banning one chemical, only to find that compound’s substitute is equally bad, he said.
That’s why California’s program seeks to let manufacturers do what they do best, design products that people want, Palmer said. But they have to prepare that design with governmental and public oversight to avoid regrettable substitutes, he added.
Watchdogs
The public is watching, said Mike Schade, director of the nonprofit Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families’ Mind the Store campaign, which pushed retailers to voluntarily stop selling paint strippers containing methylene chloride.
“We have seen a number of paint removers on the market with other chemicals of concern, such as toluene,” Schade said.
Mind the Store is keeping up the pressure. It recently posted its assessment of whether retailers are meeting their voluntary commitments to stop selling paint strippers containing methylene chloride.
It also released its own conclusions about which products are safest.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/paint-stripper-makers-examine-substitutes-for-deadly-solvent
-
Nearly 3,000 UK Registrations Initiated for EU27 Transfer – Echa
Mar 25, 2019 | Chemical Watch
By Clelia Oziel
UK-based companies have initiated the transfer of nearly 3,000 REACH registrations to EU27 entities since the beginning of the year, Echa has said.
Such transfers are necessary for UK companies to continue to have access to the single market in a no-deal Brexit scenario. Since Echa opened its Brexit window on 12 March, nearly 2,000 registrations have been transferred, the agency said.
The IT window, which allows companies to make the changes before Brexit date, will now stay open beyond 29 March "subject to further developments", it said.
The UK was due to leave the EU on that date. But an extension to Brexit granted by member states last week means Britain will now leave on 22 May if Parliament approves Prime Minister Theresa May's withdrawal deal.
If not, Britain will have until 12 April to offer a new plan or decide to leave without agreement.
MPs are expected to make a series of indicative votes this week to pave the next steps for Brexit, with all options, including Ms May's deal, a no-deal exit, a second referendum on the deal, still on the table.
Echa said it would amend its advice "whenever there are further developments". For now, it added: "Our current advice and instructions for companies are still valid".
More expected
Earlier this month, the UK's Chemical Industries Association (CIA) said it expects a significant number of transfers because the number of substances registered by UK companies only is higher than originally thought.
Meanwhile, Cefic and the CIA have advised registrants to use the suspensive condition clause in contractual arrangements when appointing ORs.
If an only representative (OR) is not appointed, the EU27/EEA importers will have to submit their own registrations.
Last month, Echa sent messages to all UK-based registrants – about 1,800 companies – on how to prepare for Brexit. At the same time it published a list of the substances that are only registered by UK companies, which numbered 1,181.
The agency has also published comprehensive instructions regarding chemicals in view of the UK’s withdrawal.
https://chemicalwatch.com/75387/nearly-3000-uk-registrations-initiated-for-eu27-transfer-echa
-
California Verdict on Weedkiller Prompts Vietnam Import Ban
Mar 26, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Lien Hoang
A California verdict linking the weedkiller Roundup to cancer has ricocheted 14 time zones away in Vietnam, which responded by banning imports of the chemical.
Vietnam ordered companies and traders not to import herbicides made of glyphosate, commonly sold as Monsanto’s Roundup, state-run media in the communist country reported March 24.
The company, acquired by Bayer in 2018, also faces demands for reparations from Hanoi for the health and environmental impacts of its other chemical product, Agent Orange, which the U.S. sprayed to destroy forest cover during the Vietnam War.
“I think it’s good,” Saigon Center for International Studies environmental researcher Chung Chuong said. “There should be a moratorium until it [glyphosate] is proven safe.”
In response to the import ban, companies “have not found an alternative for glyphosate” yet, said a spokeswoman for chemical corporation Vinachem National Chemical Group in Hanoi.
But she said a Vinachem subsidiary is seeking government approval for a costlier substitute, glufosinate.
Eye on Glyphosate
Vietnam had been weighing a glyphosate embargo for years. It closely tracked another California court case last August, when a man won a $289 million lawsuit arguing Roundup caused his cancer.
Hanoi hopes that 2018 decision against Monsanto could bolster its own case for postwar damages. Vietnam in recent years also has sought to reign in use of herbicides and pesticides, which consumers fear are being sprayed indiscriminately on farms.
The Southeast Asian country finally opted to prohibit glyphosate imports this month, days after the latest court verdict to cast a shadow on Roundup. A federal jury in San Francisco found March 19 that the herbicide was probably behind the cancer diagnosis of the claimant in the case.
Bayer’s Ho Chi Minh City office didn’t return Bloomberg Environment’s call seeking comment. Vietnam’s Ministry of Agriculture and Rural Development didn’t answer calls and emails for comment.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/california-verdict-on-weedkiller-prompts-vietnam-import-ban
-
Appalachian Shales Present More Petrochemical Opportunities, Study Finds
Mar 25, 2019 | Natural Gas Intelligence
By Jamison Cocklin
Prospects for a wide variety of chemical manufacturing in the Appalachian Basin are robust as methane, propane and butane production is expected to continue increasing in the Marcellus and Utica shales in the coming years, according to a study released last week by IHS Markit.
Low feedstock and product delivery expenses make the basin an ideal location for the production of ammonia, urea, methanol and polypropylene, among other derivatives. Much of the market for those products is near the shales, which makes the region especially competitive with other North American petrochemical centers in Canada and along the Gulf Coast, the study said.
IHS forecasts that the Appalachian Basin will supply 45% of the nation’s natural gas production by 2040, with volumes projected to grow from 28 Bcf/d in 2018 to 51 Bcf/d in 2040. Natural gas liquids production is also expected to nearly double over that time, with IHS forecasting volumes will reach 1.17 million b/d in 2040.
As production swells while propane and butane supply outstrip demand, prices are forecast to drop and “present promising economics for petrochemical assets in the region.” Prices in other basins outside of Appalachia, IHS said, would remain influenced by associated gas production and pipeline constraints.
The study was commissioned by Shale Crescent USA, a group formed to promote the Mid-Ohio Valley in Ohio, West Virginia and Pennsylvania, and to attract more energy-consuming and petrochemical businesses to the region. Revealed last week in San Antonio, TX, at IHS Markit’s World Petrochemical Conference, the study follows a similar one the group released at the event last year showing the advantages for ethylene cracker projects in the region, as Royal Dutch Shell plc constructs a multi-billion dollar facility in Western Pennsylvania and another facility is thought close to becoming a reality in Ohio.
Feedstock and transportation cost advantages do exist in Appalachia, said Jim Cooper, a senior adviser for the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers association, who was not involved in the study. He added that those factors are some of the reasons why Shell chose to build a facility there.
IHS estimated that in 2020 the cost of methane, propane and butane in Appalachia would be anywhere from 6-15% cheaper than on the Gulf Coast. Shale Crescent Marketing Director Greg Kozera told NGI’s Shale Daily that the study is not immune to price swings.
“The pricing could change. The market is going to be the market. But here’s what doesn’t change: it’s not so much a cost advantage on the product as much as it is a transportation cost advantage,” he said of the shorter distances to move both feedstock and finished products from the region.
For 2020, the delivered cost of ammonia and urea from Appalachia, commonly used as fertilizer or in the manufacture of plastics and other chemicals, would be 12% less than from the Gulf Coast in the IHS analysis. The delivered cost of methanol from the region, used in solvents and antifreeze, would be 26% less compared to obtaining it from the Gulf Coast next year.
Anthony Palmer, vice president of chemical consulting at IHS, said the most advantaged NGL derivative for Appalachia would be a propane dehydrogenation plant to make polypropylene, which is used in a wide variety of applications including in carpeting, gas tanks, plastic containers and beverage caps.
While IHS said Canadian polypropylene plants have the lowest cash cost advantages well into the 2040s, both the Appalachian Basin and Gulf Coast remain competitive on a delivered cost basis due to their proximity to both U.S. demand centers and those overseas.
IHS said about 77% of the U.S. and Canadian polypropylene market is within a 700-mile radius of the Appalachian Basin, where ample supplies could easily support a propane dehydrogenation plant’s typical consumption rate of roughly 25,000 b/d.
To be sure, the Gulf Coast continues to have the upperhand, where Cooper noted a wave of investment in the petrochemical industry continues. About two-thirds of the nation’s petrochemicals come from the Gulf region.
“It’s a lot easier to get a permit to build on your existing property than it is to do a grassroots project, trying to acquire the land and having to build all the infrastructure for it,” Cooper said, offering one example to explain why more chemical manufacturers haven’t flocked to Appalachia to take advantage of growing supplies. “That’s a pretty complex process.”
But in time, Cooper said, more downstream projects are likely to be announced, especially after Shell’s facility begins operating in the early 2020s and if the underground NGL storage projects being developed in Appalachia are built.
https://www.naturalgasintel.com/articles/117825-appalachian-shales-present-more-petrochemical-opportunities-study-finds
-
Fed Review Could Stymie Race to Export Texas Oil
Mar 25, 2019 | E&E Energywire
By Mike Lee
The Army Corps of Engineers is planning a full-blown environmental review of a major oil export project in Texas — a development that could delay its construction at a time when producers and the Trump administration are pushing to send crude overseas.
The Port of Corpus Christi has been working with the Carlyle Group on a $1 billion plan to build docks that will handle the largest class of supertankers, which would require deepening the Corpus Christi ship channel to 75 feet.
The Carlyle Group has said the project will be dredged to the full depth by the end of 2021. But the environmental impact statement process, which takes as much as two years, could delay the start of construction until the middle of 2021, pushing the completion date back by months.
Preparing an EIS also will require the Army Corps to study the dredging project's effects on water quality, marine life and other aspects. Although it's rare, the corps could rule that the project causes too much harm to be built.
The project would make Corpus Christi the deepest harbor on the Texas coast and one of the deepest in the country, Bob Heinly, deputy director of the regulatory section at the Army Corps' district office in Galveston, Texas, said in an interview.
"It felt like it was fairly simple to say an EIS would be required," he said.
Carlyle, through its Lone Star Ports LLC subsidiary, is in discussions with the Federal Infrastructure Permitting Improvement Steering Council to shorten the timeline of the EIS or get the project approved with a less-rigorous study known as an environmental assessment, Ferris Hussein, a managing director for the private equity firm, said in an interview.
The ship channel is already being dredged to 54 feet under an EIS that was completed in the mid-2000s. Even if a second EIS is required to deepen the channel to 75 feet, the dredging contractor will be ready and much of the work will already be done, Hussein said.
"The timeline they gave us from 54 to 75 feet — it's a six-month job," Hussein said.
The timing is crucial because there are at least eight projects that have been proposed to expand oil exports along the Texas coast, and observers have said only a handful are likely to be completed (Energywire, Feb. 27). Easing oil transport constraints is a top goal for both the oil and gas sector and the Trump administration as part of its "energy dominance" agenda. There are enough pipelines to get oil to ports like Houston and Corpus Christi, but there may not be enough dock spaces.
Most harbors in Texas are too shallow to accommodate so-called very large crude carriers, a class of tanker that can carry 2 million barrels of oil.
Corpus Christi was shaping up to be the winner in that race, since it's the closest harbor to the Permian Basin and the Eagle Ford Shale oil fields, and there are pipeline projects headed to the port that will expand its export capacity.
At least two of the competing projects, including one under consideration about 25 miles from Corpus Christi, involve building offshore loading platforms connected to the shore via pipelines. Those projects wouldn't require dredging.
The Carlyle Group, which is splitting the cost of the export docks and dredging project with the port authority, has already lined up six shippers for the export terminal, Hussein said. Any delays could be costly because the firm has contracts with its shippers that require the 75-foot channel to be ready by the end of 2021.
Brewing environmental fight
The EIS process could provide some leverage to opponents of the Corpus Christi dredging project.
A Texas appeals court issued an injunction last week temporarily blocking the port authority from approving a lease with Carlyle, after an opponent said the port's commissioners hadn't provided adequate public notice of the vote.
Residents in Port Aransas, a resort town at the mouth of the ship channel, are concerned that the dredging project would harm the sport fishing and tourism industries their community relies on.
Sport fishing is so popular in Port Aransas that some restaurants in the town offer to cook fish their customers have caught.
"This is one of the most productive and environmentally sensitive estuaries in the entire Gulf Coast," John Donovan, an organizer for the Port Aransas Conservancy, said in an interview. "If there were an oil spill, it would kill the fishing industry."
The conservancy supports the idea of building an offshore loading system, Donovan said, since it would reduce the chance of an oil spill near the beach.
The docks for the project are planned for Harbor Island, which is just across the ship channel from Port Aransas. The island was previously home to an oil storage depot, but most of the Carlyle project's tanks and equipment will be farther inland, Hussein said.
"Harbor Island will have less infrastructure on it than it historically has," he said.
Sean Strawbridge, chief executive officer of the Corpus Christi port authority, said the dredging project will be a boon to the overall U.S. economy, since it will allow for more oil to be exported. And building an export terminal at the port would be safer than an offshore platform because ships would be shielded from weather and rough seas during the loading process.
"It is important that the terminal be operational as quickly as possible to take full advantage of the American taxpayer's investment in the Corpus Christi ship channel improvement project," Strawbridge said in an email.
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2019/03/25/stories/1060128103
-
House Passes Energy Legislation as Counter to Russian Influence
Mar 26, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Tiffany Stecker
House lawmakers passed a bill 391-24 on March 25 to help European countries develop their energy resources outside of Russian influence.
H.R. 1616 would authorize nearly $580 million through fiscal 2021 to increase the State Department’s work to reduce Europe’s energy dependence on Russia and spur private investment in alternatives.
“This legislation would help our European partners develop and diversify their own energy sources, which would increase their own security and defend against the malign activities of the Kremlin,” Rep. Adam Kinzinger (R-Ill.), the bill’s sponsor, said in a March 11 news release.
The bill would direct the State Department and other agencies to give diplomatic, political, and financial support for natural gas infrastructure, electricity transmission and generation, smart grid plans, and renewable energy projects.
Countries that rely extensively on Russian intelligence or defense would be ineligible for the funding.
Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.) has introduced similar legislation (S. 704).
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/house-passes-energy-legislation-as-counter-to-russian-influence
-
Duke Needs ‘Plan B’ if Atlantic Coast Pipeline Fails, CEO Says
Mar 25, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Rachel Adams-Heard, Christopher Martin and Alix Steel
Duke Energy Corp. will need another way to shuttle natural gas to customers in the U.S. Southeast if the troubled Atlantic Coast shale pipeline fails to overcome legal setbacks, Chief Executive Officer Lynn Good said.
“Atlantic Coast pipeline was sized and designed with a time frame to meet the needs of our customers,” Good said Monday in an interview with Bloomberg Television at the BNEF Summit in New York.
That time frame is in limbo after a federal appeals court vacated key permits that allowed the pipeline to cross the Appalachian Trail, a decision lead developer Dominion Energy Inc. is planning to appeal to the Supreme Court. Atlantic Coast has seen its start date pushed back several times and its price tag balloon to as much as $7.5 billion. Construction has been stopped since late last year.
If the embattled conduit fails to prevail, a potential Plan B could include a pipeline that would run from eastern to western North Carolina, versus north-to-south, Good said, adding that the company “remains committed” to completing Atlantic Coast.
The 600-mile (966-kilometer) project isn’t the only pipeline out of America’s hottest shale gas play facing backlash. EQM Midstream Partners LP has said the company is closely watching Atlantic Coast’s legal battles to see if there’s any impact to its Mountain Valley pipeline, which has also been ensnared in court battles.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/duke-needs-plan-b-if-atlantic-coast-pipeline-fails-ceo-says
-
(ACC Mentioned) Legal but Illegal: How Illinois Shut down a Company That Played by the Rules
Mar 26, 2019 | Legal News Line
By Daniel Fisher
As of Oct. 29, 2018, a medical sterilization firm called Sterigenics was in full compliance with state and federal regulations over its use of ethylene oxide, a carcinogen. Then on Oct. 30, it wasn’t.
In an 18-page complaint filed that day, Illinois Attorney General Lisa Madigan accused the Sterigenics plant in Willowbrook of violating state air pollution laws and creating a public nuisance by emitting ethylene oxide into the atmosphere, even though its emissions represented a fraction of the amount allowed under its operating permit.
In February, the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency shut the Sterigenics facility down, issuing a rare “seal order” most often used to keep trespassers away from hazardous waste dumps.
“This is the first time I’ve ever seen such a case in 26 years, where a company in full compliance is shut down,” said Mark Biel, chief executive of the Chemical Industry Council of Illinois, which represents chemical manufacturers. “I think it sets a terrible precedent.”
How can a company be legal and illegal at the same time? The Illinois Department of Environmental Protection declined comment, but the Sterigenics shutdown appears to stem from a confluence of bureaucratic overreaction, inflammatory press coverage and the political power of a new governor determined to satisfy the complaints of nearby residents.
Fueled by an August report the U.S. EPA later partially disowned, Willowbrook residents flooded state pollution regulators with complaints about the Sterigenics plant. It didn’t help that the facility is partly owned by GTCR, a private equity firm in which former Illinois Gov. Bruce Rauner once was an equity partner.
Rauner, a Republican, was defeated in November by Democrat J.B. Pritzker, who ran campaign ads linking Rauner to the Sterigenics plant even though Rauner himself called for the plant to halt operations while its emissions were investigated.
Sterigenics declined comment. But the firm is fighting the shutdown order in court, saying Illinois is “seeking to impose more stringent emissions standards” than are allowed under state or federal law. In its lawsuit, Illinois acknowledges the company is operating well within its permitted emissions of 18.2 tons, or 36,400 pounds of EO per year. Sterigenics reported emitting 5,080 pounds of the substance in 2014.
That amount may be within compliance but it still violates state air-pollution laws and the Illinois Constitution, the state says, because the chemical is a known carcinogen and citizens are guaranteed clean air. Illinois also claims the Sterigenics plant is a public nuisance because its emissions – and the cancer fears they generate – unreasonably interfere with the enjoyment of life and property in surrounding neighborhoods.
By citing public nuisance law, Illinois is following a now-familiar playbook in which states and cities use the loosely defined concept of “nuisance” to attack industries they disfavor. Private lawyers convinced a number of cities to sue gun manufacturers under a similar theory in the 1990s, a wave a litigation that was mostly ended when Congress passed a federal law prohibiting lawsuits over criminal acts by gun users. (But not entirely: the Connecticut Supreme Court recently allowed families of Sandy Hook victims to sue Remington over the gunmaker’s advertising, under the theory it induced killer Adam Lanza to select the gun from his mother’s collection that he used to kill her and 26 other people.)
More than 1,600 cities and counties are suing the opioid industry for creating a public nuisance by selling prescription painkillers, even though their activities are controlled by federal law and theoretically monitored by the Drug Enforcement Administration. And Sherwin-Williams was hit with a $400 million verdict in California to remediate lead paint it sold legally until the early 1950s, in a decision that appears to have inspired similar litigation in Pennsylvania.
The Sterigenics case was fueled by articles in the Chicago Tribune accusing the company of participating in industry efforts to downplay the risks of EO, which is used to sterilize medical devices and packets of surgical tools that can’t be exposed to high-temperature sterilization procedures. Sterigenics is one of a dozen medical facilities in DuPage and Cook counties that use the chemical, which is required under Food and Drug Administration regulations for certain types of sterilization.
The Tribune gave extensive play to an August report from the U.S. EPA, which cited another federal agency as saying EO emissions from the Sterigenics plant could lead to elevated cancer risks in the surrounding area. The Tribune didn’t report the underlying assumptions, however, which included using the highest levels of ambient EO recorded outside the plant and applying it to a hypothetical resident who spent 70 years breathing that level of EO 24 hours a day.
The EPA also later acknowledged it had mismeasured EO concentrations by incorrectly identifying trans-2-butene, a chemical emitted in vehicle exhaust, as EO. That news release came out over Thanksgiving weekend, however, and didn’t receive nearly the coverage of the earlier report.
Some critics of the EPA say bureaucrats released too much information, without proper context, to avoid accusations they had withheld information about cancer risks from nearby residents. Susan Hill, the former administration of U.S. EPA’s Region Five based in Chicago, resigned in 2016 amid accusations her office had failed to warn residents in Flint, Michigan, about the risk of lead poisoning after the city changed its water supply and didn’t take proper measures to prevent corrosion of municipal lead pipes.
Illinois relied upon the federal analysis to declare an emergency at the Sterigenics site and shut it down. Illinois EPA officials declined to comment on why a similar emergency doesn’t exist at other facilities using EO. The state also issued a seal order against the plant, barring employees from using EO. Seal orders are rarely used, and previous examples going back to the early 1990s mostly involved abandoned industrial sites contaminated with toxic chemicals.
Some of the controversy over the Sterigenics plant no doubt stems from confusion about how the U.S. EPA measures air pollution and cancer risks. The agency doesn’t require facilities using hazardous chemicals to monitor emissions but it does require them to submit estimates of those emissions which are then incorporated into a report called the Toxic Releases Inventory. Companies tend to overreport their estimated emissions, said Biel of the chemical industry association, because as long as they are in compliance with their permits they have no incentive to be more accurate.
Federal regulators at EPA and the Health and Human Resources Department use these estimates, as well as data from air samples, to construct a National Air Toxics Assessment. The risks in that report are based mostly on models, not direct observations, and reflect the highest possible risk. In its August report, the EPA estimated a risk of 64 excess cancer cases per 10,000 residents, compared with an acceptable level of 1 per 10,000. It later acknowledged using incorrect information for that assessment, but said the air samples it relied upon are no longer available so it must start over.
In the meantime, the EPA says Willowbrook remains “a potentially higher risk community.” Air monitors reported EO levels as much as 90% lower than previous measurements in the six days after the plant was shut down. The American Chemistry Council has requested a risk reassessment but so far the EPA hasn’t responded.
Lawyers representing local residents aren’t concerned about the back-and-forth over actual EO emissions. They launched a series of lawsuits against Sterigenics after the initial release of information last August and as of November declared they were still committed to those cases.
“It was a perfect storm,” Biel said. “I’d like to think it’s a one-off situation but for the companies that use ethylene oxide, they may not be so sure.”
https://legalnewsline.com/stories/512325170-legal-but-illegal-how-illinois-shut-down-a-company-that-played-by-the-rules
-
Shipping Resumes in Houston Channel Fouled by Chemical Spill (1)
Mar 25, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment
By Joe Carroll, Rachel Adams-Heard and Ben Foldy
The U.S. Gulf Coast’s most important industrial waterway partially reopened on Monday after it was polluted with cancer-causing benzene and toxic runoff from the region’s worst chemical disaster in more than a decade.
A two-mile (3.2-kilometer) stretch of the Houston Ship Channel’sthat’s been closed for three days will be open during daytime hours while the clean-up continues. Pilots have been ordered by the U.S. Coast Guard to stay at least 40 minutes apart so each vessel can be inspected to ensure it’s not dragging oily residue through the water.
The partial reopening means that oil refiners, chemical makers, grain exporters and other industries in Houston’s eastern suburbs are no longer cut off from the Gulf of Mexico and international markets.
More than 30 ships were stranded earlier Monday on either side of the no-go zone as the unfolding Intercontinental Terminals Co. calamity entered its second week, according to Coast Guard figures. Royal Dutch Shell Plc slowed fuel production at its Houston-area refinery because of the disruption to waterborne crude deliveries, Reuters reported.
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. As of Monday morning, five tanks had been emptied and two more were targeted for draining.
The Coast Guard said a test vessel successfully navigated the channel’s 2-mile-long no-go zone and another test sailing was planned for Monday. The tests are used to determine whether ship traffic can resume without disrupting efforts to skim gasoline ingredients that spilled into the waterway.
Coast Guard Capt. Kevin Oditt declined on Monday morning to estimate when the channel will reopen. But when it does, it will initially be restricted to daylight traffic, he said.
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.
ITC crews finally drained about 13,000 barrels (546,000 gallons) of a benzene-laced refining byproduct called pygas from a charred tank on Sunday after two earlier unsuccessful attempts, said Brent Weber, the company’s incident commander.
Tank 80-7
By Monday, that tank -- numbered 80-7 on the facility map -- had been completely drained, a significant achievement for ITC because it allows crews access to other damaged tanks still holding dangerous chemicals. 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 and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration are 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 several times 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.”
—With assistance from Sheela Tobben, Robert Tuttle, Jim Efstathiou Jr. and Kevin Crowley.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/shipping-resumes-in-houston-channel-fouled-by-chemical-spill-1
-
Another 'Black Eye' for America's Energy Capital
Mar 26, 2019 | E&E Energywire
By Edward Klump
The fire-fueled plume that darkened a swath of the Texas sky last week was just the beginning of an unfolding disaster in this U.S. oil and petrochemical hub.
The problems are centered east of Houston, where crews are trying to contain dangerous materials unleashed by tank fires at an Intercontinental Terminals Co. (ITC) facility. They've dealt with spiking levels of benzene, which can cause cancer; fires that reignited; and the breach of a dike that led to the partial closure of the Houston Ship Channel.
On Friday, Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton (R) announced a suit against ITC on behalf of Texas regulators, saying the state will hold the company accountable for environmental damage. Lawmakers are demanding answers, and the U.S. Chemical Safety Board has disclosed plans for a probe.
"ITC has a history of environmental violations, and this latest incident is especially disturbing and frightening," Paxton said in a statement. "No company can be allowed to disrupt lives and put public health and safety at risk."
Residents and businesses remain on edge, but the event goes beyond any one suburb or neighborhood.
The incident strikes at the heart of Greater Houston's ability to offer a safe environment for the roughly 7 million people who live in and around this longtime energy capital. The region's cluster of industrial plants and storage sites is vulnerable to accidents, natural disasters and intentional attacks.
The ITC fire started March 17 and morphed into a made-for-TV event that, like flooding after Hurricane Harvey in 2017, put the region's issues before a national audience. The advocacy group Environment Texas, citing regulatory filings, said the ITC incident appeared to release more pollution than Houston-area facilities emitted in unauthorized releases in all of 2017.
"It definitely puts a black eye on our city," said Daniel Cohan, an associate professor of environmental engineering at Rice University in Houston.
Industrial problems aren't uncommon in the region, as an Exxon Mobil Corp. fire illustrated this month (Energywire, March 18).
The ITC disaster stands out because of its length and visibility, from multiple days with a plume and odor in various areas to localized pollution issues after fires initially were extinguished last Wednesday.
The company said tanks involved in the incident contained products such as naphtha and xylene, which are components in gasoline, and toluene, which is used to produce nail polish remover and paint thinner.
ITC reported progress yesterday in some cleanup efforts at the site. But pollution in and around the Houston Ship Channel hampered movement of industry products over the weekend.
Texas state Rep. Briscoe Cain (R) called events surrounding the ITC fire "devastating to our community." He requested a hearing.
"The nation has been captivated by dramatic images of flames and smoke plumes, but our community has had to deal with the very real questions about air and water quality while waiting for information from ITC," Cain said in a statement.
'Pretty egregious'
In an online post last week, Eric Berger of Space City Weather, a popular website for local forecasts, called the incident "pretty egregious."
Elected officials should be held accountable, Berger wrote, for people they appoint to agencies such as the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), "which theoretically should be preventing accidents like these, monitoring them, and ensuring they don't happen again."
"The chemical industry provides many good paying jobs for the Houston region," he said, "but that doesn't mean we should accept accidents such as these as part of the bargain."
Houston has sought to project a modern image in recent years that includes a downtown makeover and an ability to host major events, from the Super Bowl to the annual CERAWeek by IHS Markit energy conference. The region also continues to seek ways to reduce flooding worries, though it will take years to bolster resilience as much as leaders say is needed.
Clint Pasche, senior vice president of marketing and communications for the Greater Houston Partnership, described concern about residents' health and the region's image in a statement about the ITC fire. He said he was relieved that the "smoky plume" was no longer over parts of the city.
"Even if the recall of such an incident by people outside of Houston is relatively short-lived, and I suspect it will be, it does detract from our efforts to position Houston in a positive light — not only as the home of oil & gas, but also as a leader in renewable energy, digital tech, and life science, to name a few," Pasche said.
The ITC fire highlighted industrial exposure in Texas, which in 2017 included flooding and explosions at an Arkema chemical facility northeast of Houston in the wake of Harvey (Energywire, May 25, 2018).
With the ITC fire, much of everyday life in and around Houston has continued even as social media saw dramatic photos and questions about where pollution might end up.
Still, some school districts canceled classes for days, and the Houston Independent School District took steps to limit outdoor exposure for students. Experts said the region didn't see more initial air problems from last week's tank fires in part because the plume often was several thousand feet in the air. But that gave way to worries about localized pollution after water and foam helped to extinguish the fires.
Rep. Brian Babin (R-Texas), whose district includes the affected area, pledged via Facebook "to do all within my authority as a federal official to ensure a thorough investigation into the cause so we can obtain the information needed to prevent similar accidents in the future."
Economy and health
Rice University's Cohan said it's important for TCEQ and EPA to be strict in monitoring events, "so that you keep these accidents to a minimum and so that the public has a reason to trust."
Luke Metzger, executive director of Environment Texas, said there are questions about TCEQ and its reliability. He noted gaps in monitoring data as the ITC event unfolded, and he expressed support for legislative efforts to make sure polluters are penalized when they break the law.
If TCEQ had a more robust regulatory enforcement regime, Metzger said, "we might have prevented this and similar accidents from happening." On Twitter, he noted the state's lawsuit over the recent incident and said Texas should seek a "massive penalty" as well as an overhaul of how companies such as ITC operate.
TCEQ has faced questions about a decision not to use potential NASA assistance in monitoring air quality after Harvey in 2017. The Texas commission recently defended its decision in a letter to lawmakers (Greenwire, March 20).
In a recent news release, TCEQ described work with an environmental contractor and the Coast Guard to contain runoff from the ITC site via booms and storage containers. TCEQ also noted periods with high levels of benzene.
Last week, the Houston Chronicle reported that various regulators had hit ITC with penalties over the years.
In a recent editorial, the Houston newspaper argued that Texas agencies should do more than deliver another "paltry fine" if investigations show ITC regulatory violations were a factor in the fire.
"We shouldn't have to choose between a thriving economy and our health," the editorial said. "Responsible companies can and should deliver both."
Ed Hirs, an energy economist with the University of Houston, questioned the coordination between industry and government once the fire started. He was surprised the fire lasted several days.
The event reinforced Hirs' view about the strategic vulnerability of the Houston Ship Channel and surrounding facilities. An attack on the area that's widespread could be devastating, he said.
If companies aren't willing to make expenditures to maintain an effective first response team, Hirs said, Harris County government will have to take it on. He said that could mean levying "some sort of tax on these entities."
For now, ITC has a website in place as a way to help people submit business and individual claims related to the event. The company has apologized publicly for the incident. E&E News sought — but didn't receive — a comment from ITC on Texas' lawsuit.
More details are expected to emerge about the incident and its aftermath. The Texas attorney general's court filing cites ITC in pointing toward a leak in a pipe.
Cohan said last week that authorities will need to get to the bottom of what allowed the fire to happen.
The risk of a serious incident looms in the Houston area, Cohan said, "even if 99.9 percent of the facilities and tanks are doing fine."
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2019/03/25/stories/1060128131
-
House Infrastructure Package May Omit Water Provisions (1)
Mar 25, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By David Schultz
Republicans and Democrats in the House are working behind the scenes to draft a big infrastructure bill, but that bill may not include water provisions, a senior congressional staffer said.
Many in the House and Senate are determined to pass a narrow, transportation-focused bill because a key provision of the Highway Trust Fund expires next year and they are hesitant to risk a lapse by broadening the bill to include water issues, Jacqueline Cohen, the chief environmental counsel on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, said.
“I think it is entirely possible that we come out of this Congress without an infrastructure package,” Cohen told a March 25 meeting of state drinking water regulators in Alexandria, Va. “I also think it’s entirely possible that we come out of this Congress with just a highway fix.”
Cohen said Democrats on her committee are working on updating a comprehensive infrastructure bill that they introduced last year. This new version will be more ambitious, however, and may include new funding for the replacement of lead water pipes and to address lead in schools, she said.
Narrow Package?
If the infrastructure package is narrowed to cover only transportation issues, that means lawmakers who want to address lead, perfluorinated chemicals, and other water problems will have the more difficult task of passing stand-alone water legislation.
Congress was able to enact some significant water quality provisions last year, but only when they were added onto a broader bill that authorized several Army Corps of Engineers infrastructure projects.
Cohen said a narrow infrastructure package would especially disappoint communities that are struggling with water contaminated by nonstick perfluorinated chemicals, also known as PFAS.
PFAS chemicals are extremely slow to break down in the environment and have been linked to numerous health problems, especially in communities near airports and military bases, where the chemicals are used in firefighting foam.
“I don’t want an infrastructure package to go by without taking an opportunity to make a difference for people who are being affected right now,” she said.
But Alex Schaefer, legislative director for natural resources issues with the National Governors Association, said Senate Environment and Public Works Committee staffers told her that lawmakers in the upper chamber are especially reluctant to do anything that could jeopardize passing a transportation bill before the Highway Trust Fund’s deadline at the end of the 2020 fiscal year.
Mike Danylak, a Republican spokesman with the Senate environment committee, said “significant, bipartisan highway infrastructure legislation” is a priority for the committee’s chairman, Sen. John Barrasso (R-Wyo.).
Appetite for PFASCohen said that Democrats in the House have a strong appetite to pursue PFAS issues aggressively during this session of Congress.
She said they would rather focus on taking these chemicals out of the environment altogether than cleaning them up after they are already in groundwater supplies.
“Dealing with PFAS in the drinking water is the last resort,” Cohen said. “We’re looking at what we can do at the manufacturing level. We’re trying to take that as far upstream as we can.”
She also added that Democrats were considering legislation that would force the EPA to set a nationwide standard for PFAS in drinking water much earlier than it planned.
The agency has said it will decide by the end of this year whether it will set a standard for several PFAS chemicals but has declined to give a timeline for how soon a legally enforceable standard could be put into effect.
(Updated with comment from Senate environment committee in 11th paragraph.)
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/house-infrastructure-package-may-omit-water-provisions-1
-
What We Need to Do to Fix Infrastructure in the US
Mar 25, 2019 | The Hill - Congress Blog
By Carlo A. Scissura
America’s infrastructure is more than just a network of roads, bridges, tunnels, ports, railroads and airports connecting our towns, cities and states. It serves as a backbone of economic growth and preserves our safety, quality of life and prosperity. The United States has long been a global leader in innovation, transportation and smart fiscal policies, yet the infrastructure that keeps our country open for business is now far out of date.
According to the American Society of Civil Engineers, the current condition of our infrastructure earns a grade point average of D+, and there is an estimated $2 trillion funding gap to bring it to a state of good repair by 2025. While we have benefited from past centuries of building, neglect has befallen our once greatest achievements – in the 1930s, 4.2 percent of the country’s GDP was spent on infrastructure investment, but by 2016, that number fell to 1.5 percent. In other words, our nation’s infrastructure is crumbling, and we need real, sustainable investment – and we need it now.
For many of these challenges, Americans must be willing to pay, rates and fees that reflect the true cost of using, maintaining and improving all infrastructure, including our water, waste, transportation and energy services. Most Americans support this approach. In last November’s elections, 79 percent of all state and local ballot measures supporting transportation infrastructure investments passed. Voters across 31 states raised their own taxes and fees in exchange for better roads, bridges and transit.
There is no single funding solution that will solve all our infrastructure investment challenges. It is important that we have a large toolkit of funding and financing options available that can be utilized to provide the infrastructure we need. Our funding plan brings together a collection of 10 bold ideas to significantly invest in our nation’s infrastructure.
The first – and most logical – step in raising money for infrastructure should be to raise the federal tax on gasoline and diesel. Eventually, this would give way to a system that would impose a tax on vehicle miles traveled, as we adapt to increasing fuel economies and the proliferation of hybrid or all-electric vehicles. The fuel tax has not been raised since 1993, and since that time, the money generated from those taxes has lost over 40 percent of their purchasing power. Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.), chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, continues to point out that we’re borrowing $16 billion a year to backfill the Highway Trust Fund, while the majority of states around the country have raised their gas tax. It’s time we put the Highway Trust Fund on a long-term path to solvency, and raising the existing user fees is the only way to achieve this.
Other user fees include updates to the Harbor Maintenance Fee, raises to the Airline Passenger Facility charge, and the introduction of a new Rail Passenger Charge – each helping to fund direct capital investments for their respective users.
These long-term funding streams will need to be leveraged in the short term to provide the capital needed to get large infrastructure projects underway. By issuing bonds backed by the projected revenue of long-term solutions, the federal government will deliver the vital capital needed to jump start infrastructure revitalization across the country.
Beyond fees and bonding, we’re proposing the expansion of programs like the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act, Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act and Railroad Rehabilitation & Improvement Financing, as well as making new money available through federal loans for infrastructure improvement. There are also a set of easily achievable suggestions that could help move along current and future projects, such as streamlining the regulatory process, removing statutory and regulatory barriers to promote private-public partnerships and supporting municipalities implementing their own funding mechanisms like congestion pricing in New York City.
The Building Congress believes that a robust, long-term federal infrastructure modernization program, combined with greater investment by state, local and private stakeholders, can engender the partnership necessary to ensure America has a 21st century infrastructure network. However, without a serious commitment from federal lawmakers, we will not make the kind of progress demanded by the challenges we’re facing.
Infrastructure investment has a history of creating jobs and strengthening the economy in this country. Direct funding from the federal government has resulted in some of the most transformative infrastructure projects that have had the greatest lasting effects. From the Hoover Dam, to rural electrification and the interstate highway system, significant investments in infrastructure have paved the way for our country’s current economic success.
We have an incredible opportunity to use the momentum and support from the American people for infrastructure investment to provide long-term, sustainable revenue as part of an infrastructure package. The Building Congress calls on Congress and the Trump administration to put forth and approve a robust and comprehensive bipartisan package that includes sustainable funding to get America’s infrastructure not just back to a state of good repair, but to make us a global leader. If we do not invest now and fail to rise and meet this crisis, then we cannot guarantee America’s long-term economic development, productivity and international competitiveness.
The United States must be at the forefront of the world, and the foundation of our position is our infrastructure.
Carlo A. Scissura is president and CEO of the New York Building Congress.
https://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/politics/435562-what-we-need-to-do-to-fix-infrastructure-in-the-us
-
Gaetz Drafts Republican Alternative to ‘Green’ Deal
Mar 25, 2019 | Inside EPA
Rep. Matt Gaetz (R-FL), a member of the bipartisan Climate Solutions Caucus, is circulating a draft GOP alternative to the Democrats’ “Green New Deal” (GND), calling it the “Green Real Deal” and touting innovation on low-carbon technology as one way to reduce various threats posed by climate change.
The undated draft resolution, first obtained by Politico, touts U.S. accomplishments in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and promoting clean energy. For example, it notes that domestic GHGs “have decreased to a level approximately 10 percent below 2005 levels as of 2018”; and that the United States “leads the world in gross emissions reductions.”
The document does not set an emissions reduction goal, though it says the government must achieve robust economywide GHG cuts, create more clean energy options through innovation and position the U.S. as a global leader in clean energy.
It acknowledges that “climate change creates new risks and exacerbates existing vulnerabilities in communities across the United States,” and says mitigation and adaptation efforts “do not yet approach the scale considered necessary to avoid substantial damages to the economy, environment and human health over the coming decades,” citing earlier federal findings.
The non-binding document calls for investment in carbon capture, storage and use, and “otherwise reducing or achieving net-zero emissions from fossil energy”; driving investments in renewable and nuclear energy; modernizing the electric grid; allowing “fair and equal access” to energy development on federal lands; modernizing the National Environmental Policy Act to drive investment in clean energy infrastructure; and removing regulations that hamper advanced energy deployment, among other steps.
Gaetz argues the plan is a more “realistic” alternative to the GND, which was introduced in February by Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) and is slated for a vote in the Senate this week over the objection of Democrats. The GND calls for a 10-year “mobilization” of zero-carbon energy sources, in an effort to reach net-zero carbon emissions across the economy by 2050. The plan also includes broad social changes such as guaranteed jobs for displaced fossil fuel workers and universal health care.
The sponsors touted the GND as the start of a larger debate on ambitious climate policy, while saying it would mobilize broader support before locking in details. Markey said the GND “deals with principles.” Ocasio-Cortez added that the resolution shows “that small incremental policy solutions are not enough. They can be part of the solution, but they are not the solution unto itself.”
It is unclear when Gaetz will introduce the resolution or whether a similar version would be introduced in the upper chamber. Gaetz is a vocal supporter of President Donald Trump who previously called for the abolition of EPA. But last week he said on Twitter that “climate change is real” and “humans contribute.”
And he has long been a member of the biparrtisan Climate Solutions Caucus that seeks to address the issue.
Gaetz represents a coastal Florida district impacted by rising seas, and his rhetorical shift on the topic may be more evidence of GOP willingness to take some modest steps to curb GHGs.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/gaetz-drafts-republican-alternative-%E2%80%98green%E2%80%99-deal
-
McConnell Formally Sets up Green New Deal Vote for Tuesday
Mar 25, 2019 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Anthony Adragna
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell has formally set up a procedural vote related to the Green New Deal for Tuesday at 4 p.m.
The vote, formally known as cloture on the motion to proceed to the resolution S.J. Res. 8 (116), requires 60 votes for passage, according to a McConnell spokesman. Democrats are expected to almost entirely vote present on the motion.
"I just want to say that I could not be more glad that the American people will have the opportunity to learn precisely where each one of their senators stand on this radical, top-down, socialist makeover of the entire U.S. economy," McConnell said on the floor today.
https://subscriber.politicopro.com/energy/whiteboard
-
Senate Green Deal Vote’s Impact Won’t Linger, Some Observers Say
Mar 26, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Dean Scott
The Senate showdown over the Green New Deal follows more than 20 years of mostly symbolic votes that Congress has held on climate change.
Like almost all of the others, this week’s vote is unlikely to have much staying power, some climate observers say.
“Over the years there have been scores of climate resolutions introduced or voted on, and I would say the vast majority have long been forgotten,” Elliot Diringer, a former environmental policy adviser to the Clinton administration, told Bloomberg Environment.
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) plans to have a final Senate vote on a green deal resolution (S.J.Res.8) in the next few days, following a procedural vote March 26, in hopes that forcing Democrats to vote on the ambitious climate platform could hurt them politically.
Some Democrats are expected to vote “present” on McConnell’s resolution in protest of the majority leader’s tactics. They say a subject as weighty as climate change deserves more thorough deliberation.
All of the Senate Democrats running for president in 2020—Cory Booker (N.J.), Kirsten Gillibrand (N.Y.), Kamala Harris (Calif.), Amy Klobuchar (Minn.), and Elizabeth Warren (Mass.), as well as Vermont Independent Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.)—have endorsed the Green New Deal, which calls for a decade-long transition to 100 percent renewable energy and huge investment in green jobs.
Republicans say it’s smart politics to make those candidates prove their support by voting for the resolution.
“Politically, the Green New Deal offers a little more to Republicans in terms of political points than a lot of things in recent memory—maybe anything in recent memory,” Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) told reporters March 25. “Because it is so far-fetched and so extreme, and a good number of Democrats both in the House and Senate were quick to jump on board. And they are probably regretting that right about now.”
The House Green New Deal resolution (H.Res.109), authored by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) has 90 co-sponsors in the House, all Democrats. Eleven Democrats are backing Democrats’ Senate version (S.Res.59), introduced by Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.).
1997 Resolution
Beyond such messaging votes, neither the Senate nor the House have voted on significant climate legislation in nearly a decade.
The one exception: a 1997 resolution by coal-state Sen. Robert Byrd (D-W.Va.) and Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.)—the latter of whom later served as President Barack Obama’s defense secretary—that warned the Clinton administration that the Senate wouldn’t ratify an international climate agreement that didn’t bind China and other rapidly developing nations.
The lopsided result—it was adopted 95-0—was one reason the Obama administration fought to make sure that the 2015 Paris climate deal applied to developed and developing nations alike, with each nation allowed to pledge their own actions to cut greenhouse gas emissions.
The Byrd-Hagel vote “was iconic, even unique among those having a lasting political impact,” said Diringer, now executive vice president of the Center for Climate and Energy Solutions (C2ES).
Other nations look at such resolutions “as a signal of intent of where Congress is,” said Alden Meyer, the Union of Concerned Scientists’ director of strategy and policy. “Sure, Byrd-Hagel was nonbinding, but the way it was read was that the U.S. wouldn’t go along on a global deal without developing countries.”
But McConnell’s strategy of forcing Democrats to defend the Green New Deal by contrast is being seen overseas as more a domestic squabble, “a bit of posturing” and a “gotcha moment” to trap Democrats, Meyer said.
Other Messaging Showdowns
Some other climate messaging showdowns in the House and Senate have included:
· A 2005 Senate vote backing efforts to “enact a comprehensive and effective national program” that would include mandatory U.S. caps on greenhouse gas emissions. The nonbinding resolution, offered by former Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) and approved by voice vote, also put the Senate on record for agreeing that emissions contribute to global warming.
· A July 2018 resolution that House Republicans used to force Democrats to defend a carbon tax just months before the November election. It framed carbon tax policies as detrimental to U.S. families and businesses and not in the best interest of the U.S., and it passed 229-180. The results disappointed advocates of climate action hoping Republicans on a bipartisan climate caucus would come out in force against the resolution: only six Republicans voted no.
· A 2014 resolution by Klobuchar that said “global climate change is occurring” and poses “ongoing risks and challenges” to the people of the U.S. Klobuchar sought unanimous consent on her language, meaning it would pass unless a single senator objected. An objection by Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), who has long questioned whether humans are causing climate change, killed the measure.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/senate-green-deal-votes-impact-wont-linger-some-observers-say
-
Alexander Unveils Vision for Addressing Climate Change
Mar 25, 2019 | PoliticoPro - Whiteboard
By Anthony Adragna
Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) today called for the federal government to double its current investments in clean energy research in a speech sketching out a GOP-friendly approach to addressing climate change.
Alexander, who’s retiring at the end of this term but chairs the Appropriations subcommittee responsible for Energy Department funding, also called for greater deployment of technologies like advanced nuclear, carbon capture, electric vehicles, more efficient buildings and batteries, advanced computing, solar and even fusion during a floor speech as part of his approach, which he dubbed the five-year New Manhattan Project for Clean Energy.
“I believe climate change is real,” Alexander told reporters afterwards, echoing his comments on the floor. “I believe humans are a major cause of it and I think a new Manhattan Project for Clean Energy is something that most Republicans could support and I would hope most Democrats could too.”
Alexander said he’s discussed his plan with Sens. Mitt Romney (R-Utah) and Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), as well as “a number of other colleagues who have similar views.” He plans to further discuss ways forward at a Wednesday hearing of his subcommittee.
The Tennessee Republican has previously called for 100 nuclear plants to be deployed around the country and long acknowledged human activity is the primary driver of climate change, but he said the “completely changed” world of clean energy in the last five years drove him to “update the ideas” in his speech.
His call for climate action comes as the Senate prepares to vote on the ambitious Green New Deal resolution that calls for the decarbonization of the U.S. economy within a decade. Alexander described the concept on the floor as “so far out in left field” that “not many” people would take it seriously.
https://subscriber.politicopro.com/energy/whiteboard
-
Democrats to Introduce Bill to Reverse Paris Withdrawal
Mar 26, 2019 | E&E Daily
By Nick Sobczyk
House Democratic leaders are expected to roll out their first major climate change messaging bill tomorrow morning, amid the backdrop of a Green New Deal vote in the Senate and Mueller report madness across Capitol Hill.
H.R. 9 — a bill number reserved for leadership — would attempt to force the Trump administration's hand on the Paris climate agreement by preventing it from using any money to withdraw, according to Democratic sources.
It would require the administration to draw up a plan to meet the emissions targets laid out in the agreement within 120 days, though one lawmaker said that "the details are being worked out."
Like other major measures pushed by Democratic leadership, the bill is unlikely to get a Senate vote. But it's intended to be an easy rallying point for Democrats, and even some Republicans, on what has occasionally been a divisive issue during the last few months.
The Green New Deal, the progressive plan to address climate change, has sucked up much of the oxygen, but leadership and moderates have hesitated to get behind its far-reaching goals.
H.R. 9 is expected to be announced at a press conference tomorrow morning, the day after the Senate votes on the Green New Deal. That vote, set for this afternoon, was set up by Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) as an attempt to divide Democrats and peg them as extreme.
Democrats downplayed talk that the bill introduction is meant to counter the Senate vote.
"We're still in this agreement until November of 2020, so we're going to put something on the floor to let folks clock in on where their values are, where they stand," said Rep. Kathy Castor (D-Fla.), chairwoman of the Select Committee on the Climate Crisis, who is expected to be involved in the rollout.
The announcement comes during a hectic week, as lawmakers on both sides of the aisle face a media firestorm after special counsel Robert Mueller submitted his report to the Justice Department over the weekend. Attorney General Bill Barr said the report could not prove the Trump campaign colluded with the Russian government during the 2016 election.
Rep. Paul Tonko (D-N.Y.), chairman of the Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Environment and Climate Change, said he expects the legislation to move to the floor quickly, noting that it would set the tone for other work being done by congressional panels on climate change.
His subcommittee has already held a hearing on the Paris Agreement, and he said it would hold another hearing next week on what state and local communities are doing on climate.
Tonko added that the bill would "reinforce the fact that our caucus believes we should stay in" the Paris accord.
The United States pledged to reduce its greenhouse gas emissions by 26 to 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025, but the Trump administration announced plans to withdraw from the Paris Agreement in 2017, causing fury among climate advocates and Democrats.
"We belong at the table; we are the only industrialized nation not at the table," said Tonko, adding that he believes that view is widely held by the general public.
Reporter George Cahlink contributed.
https://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2019/03/26/stories/1060128587
-
Select Climate Committee to Organize This Week
Mar 26, 2019 | E&E Daily
By Nick Sobczyk
The Select Committee on the Climate Crisis will hold an organizational meeting Thursday morning, Chairwoman Kathy Castor (D-Fla.) said yesterday, setting its rules, and its tone, for the next two years.
Many climate advocates have been eagerly waiting for the panel to begin its work, whether they're big-name environmental groups that hope it is an important tool or progressives who think leadership declawed the committee by declining to give it legislative or subpoena power.
Either way, it's expected to be a forum for both parties to flesh out their messages on climate change, even if it has little power.
The organizational meeting will come during a busy week, with the Senate set for a vote on the Green New Deal this afternoon and Democrats expected to roll out a bill on the Paris climate agreement tomorrow (see related story).
Castor and Rep. Garret Graves (R-La.) have been meeting informally to discuss the select panel over the past few weeks. They have spoken well of each other publicly, but it remains unclear whether the committee will become heavily partisan.
"I'm giddy. See my face?" Graves jokingly said yesterday when asked whether he was excited for the committee to meet.
He was holding a draft copy of the select committee rules, but he suggested he didn't know yet whether Republicans would find any of it objectionable.
"We'll have the organizational meeting, and I know that we're both excited to get things going sooner or later," Graves said, adding that he expects the first formal hearing early next month.
https://www.eenews.net/eedaily/2019/03/26/stories/1060128611
-
EPA Sends NSR Air Permit ‘Netting’ Proposal for OMB Review
Mar 25, 2019 | Inside EPA
EPA has sent for White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) review its proposal to revise Clean Air Act new source review (NSR) permit “project emissions accounting,” or “netting,” one of several piecemeal NSR reforms that critics say will make it easier for companies to avoid strict air permits.
The agency took its initial steps to implement the policy in a March 13, 2018, guidance memo that enables industry permit applicants to consider emissions decreases, as well as increases, at the first step of the NSR permitting process. If the applicants predict a net emissions decrease at this stage, they do not need to undergo a more complete and onerous “netting” analysis that takes into account other nearby sources. Prior to the memo, companies could not consider project emissions decreases in the first NSR review step.
EPA generally considers guidance memos not to be final agency actions subject to judicial review, and said it would formalize the netting policy in an upcoming rulemaking.
The pending proposal that the agency sent for OMB review on March 21 would take that formal step. OMB review typically takes up to 90 days, but can be longer or shorter, depending on the circumstances. EPA has already missed its prior non-binding target of issuing the proposal in February.
Environmentalists say the policy change will allow industrial pollution sources to avoid tough NSR reviews that can lead to stringent new emissions control requirements. But EPA argues it is a logical step that will ease an unnecessarily burdensome permitting process. Industry groups also welcomed the policy shift.
The new memo reflects input from agency air chief Bill Wehrum, who in his prior tenure at the air office under the George W. Bush administration tried to ease NSR permitting through a rule change allowing project netting. EPA never finalized that 2006 proposal.
Environmentalists are challenging the policy memo in a lawsuit now in abeyance before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, Environmental Defense Fund, et al. v. EPA, et al. The court has placed that suit on hold pending EPA’s issuance of the formal rule. Some 17 industry groups are intervening in the suit to defend the agency’s new netting policy.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/epa-sends-nsr-air-permit-%E2%80%98netting%E2%80%99-proposal-omb-review
-
In Blow to Climate, Coal Plants Emitted More Than Ever in 2018
Mar 25, 2019 | Washington Post
By Chris Mooney and Brady Dennis
Global energy experts released grim findings Monday, saying that not only are planet-warming carbon-dioxide emissions still increasing, but the world’s growing thirst for energy has led to higher emissions from coal-fired power plants than ever before.
Energy demand around the world grew by 2.3 percent over the past year, marking the most rapid increase in a decade, according to the report from the International Energy Agency. To meet that demand, largely fueled by a booming economy, countries turned to an array of sources, including renewables.
But nothing filled the void quite like fossil fuels, which satisfied nearly 70 percent of the skyrocketing electricity demand, according to the agency, which analyzes energy trends on behalf of 30 member countries, including the United States.
In particular, a fleet of relatively young coal plants located in Asia, with decades to go on their lifetimes, led the way toward a record for emissions from coal fired power plants — exceeding 10 billion tons of carbon dioxide “for the first time,” the agency said. In Asia, “average plants are only 12 years old, decades younger than their average economic lifetime of around 40 years,” the agency found.
As a result, greenhouse-gas emissions from the use of energy — by far their largest source — surged in 2018, reaching an record high of 33.1 billion tons. Emissions showed 1.7 percent growth, well above the average since 2010. The growth in global emissions in 2018 alone was “equivalent to the total emissions from international aviation,” the body found.
Monday’s report underscores an unnerving truth about the world’s collective efforts to combat climate change: Even as renewable energy rapidly expands, many countries — including the United States and China — are nevertheless still turning to fossil fuels to satisfy ever-growing energy demand.
“Very worrisome” is how Michael Mehling, deputy director of the Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, described Monday’s findings.
“To me, all this reflects the fact that climate policies around the globe, despite some limited pockets of progress, remain woefully inadequate,” he said in an email. “They’re not even robust enough to offset the increased emissions from economic expansion, especially in the developing world, let alone to spur decarbonization at levels commensurate with the temperature stabilization goals we’ve committed to under the Paris Agreement.”
Mehling questioned whether the Paris climate agreement — the 2015 global accord in which countries vowed to slash their carbon emissions — has the capacity to compel nations to live up to their promises and ramp up climate action over time.
“This will require overcoming the persistent barriers that have prevented greater progress in the past,” Mehling said.
Overcoming those barriers is complicated, as the agency report makes clear.
China, for instance, satisfied a demand for more energy last year with some new generation from renewables. But it relied far more on natural gas, coal and oil. In India, about half of all new demand was similarly met by coal-fired power plants.
In the United States, by contrast, coal is declining — but most of the increase in demand for energy in this country was nonetheless fueled by the burning of natural gas, rather than renewable energy. Natural gas emits less carbon dioxide than coal does when it is burned, but it’s still a fossil fuel and still causes significant emissions.
Granted, there’s some slight good news in the new report, in that as renewables and natural gas have grown, coal has a smaller share of the energy pie overall.
Yet the fact that it’s still growing strongly contradicts what scientists have said about what’s needed to curb climate warming. In a major report last year the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change found that global emissions would have to be cut nearly in half, by 2030, to preserve a chance of holding the planet’s warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius (or 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit).
That would require extremely fast annual reductions in emissions — but instead, the world is still marking record highs.
And when it comes to coal use, that same report found that to limit temperatures to 1.5 degrees C, it would have to decline by as much as 78 percent in just over 10 years. Again, coal emissions are still rising.
Rob Jackson, a professor of Earth system science at Stanford University, said the substantial growth of wind and solar energy detailed in Monday’s report was overshadowed by the world’s ongoing reliance on fossil fuels.
“The growth in fossils is still greater than all the increases in renewables,” Jackson said, adding that few countries are living up to the pledges they made as part of the Paris climate accord. “What’s discouraging is that emissions in the U.S. and Europe are going up, too. Someone has to decrease their emissions significantly for us to have any hope of meeting the Paris commitments.”
The new results dash earlier hopes that global emissions might be flattening and starting to decline. From 2014 through 2016, they fell slightly, and coal emissions in particular dipped as well. But with a renewal of growth in 2017 and record highs in 2018, turning the corner on emissions remains nowhere in sight.
As a result, optimism from earlier this decade has largely faded. International efforts to combat climate change have struggled to maintain momentum and the U.S. government has undergone a reversal of priorities.
“We are in deep trouble,” Jackson said of Monday’s findings. “The climate consequences are catastrophic. I don’t use any word like that very often. But we are headed for disaster, and nobody seems to be able to slow things down.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2019/03/26/blow-climate-coal-plants-emitted-more-than-ever/?utm_term=.23182f5b69c2
Industry and Association News
TSCA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested