Preview Newsletter
PM ACC Clips Report - April 11, 2019
-
(ACC Mentioned) Iowa, Tennessee Legislature Pass Bills in Support of Plastics Recovery
Apr 11, 2019 | Recycling Today
By Kelly Maile
The Iowa House and Senate passed Senate File 534 and the Tennessee House and Senate passed Senate Bill 0923 in support of advanced recycling facilities that convert plastic scrap into raw material using pyrolysis or chemical recycling. -
(ACC Mentioned) PP Prices Down, PS and PET up in March
Apr 11, 2019 | Plastics News
By Frank Esposito
March held different narratives for North American commodity resins, with polystyrene and PET bottle resin prices each moving up, while prices for polypropylene declined. -
US EPA Issues Proposal for CBI Substantiation
Apr 11, 2019 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
The US EPA has issued a proposed rule that would establish a procedure for confirming certain confidentiality claims under TSCA. -
EPA's Confidentiality Proposal Lacks Key Details, Greens Say
Apr 11, 2019 | E&E Greenwire
By Corbin Hiar
EPA's new plan for verifying chemicals that companies claim as trade secrets has some of the same shortcomings as a previous regulation currently tangled in litigation, according to critics. -
US EPA Round-Up
Apr 11, 2019 | Chemical Watch
The US EPA has published in the Federal Register significant new use rules (Snurs) for 13 substances that were released in pre-publication form earlier this month. The rules represent the first time since TSCA was amended in 2016 that the agency has issued Snurs in the absence of a consent order to address concerns with a reasonably foreseen use of a new chemical being brought to market. -
(ACC Mentioned) US Congress Round-Up
Apr 11, 2019 | Chemical Watch
Both chambers of Congress are considering legislation aimed at supporting the development of substances and products that pose fewer negative environmental and human health effects. -
California Bill to Ban Certain Cosmetics Stalls in Committee
Apr 11, 2019 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
A California bill to ban cosmetics containing any of more than a dozen substances of concern has been placed on hold until next year. -
Researchers Urge More Protection for Workers From Organic Flame Retardants
Apr 11, 2019 | Chemical Watch
By Maria Delaney
More attention should be given to protecting workers exposed to organic flame retardants, according to new research. The workers most at risk are identified as electronic waste recycling staff, electronic manufacturers, firefighters and aircraft personnel. -
US Agencies Set to Study Health Effects of PFASs
Apr 11, 2019 | Chemical Watch
By Lisa Martine Jenkins
Two US agencies plan to fund a study of the human health effects of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs), especially via drinking water exposure. -
New York Legislators Drop Ingredient Disclosure Proposal
Apr 11, 2019 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
A proposal from New York Governor Andrew Cuomo to require increased ingredient disclosure in consumer products has been excluded from the state’s budget. -
Echa, AskREACH Trying to Align SVHC Databases
Apr 11, 2019 | Chemical Watch
By Vanessa Zainzinger
Echa and the pan-European AskREACH project are "working closely together" to reach a harmonisation of their two SVHC databases, the German Environment Agency (UBA) has said. -
Echa Round-Up
Apr 11, 2019 | Chemical Watch
Echa has released an improved version of its poison centres notification (PCN) format. The format structures the information on hazardous mixtures submitted to the member state appointed bodies. -
‘Free From’ Claims in Cosmetics Face Possible EU Restrictions
Apr 11, 2019 | Chemical Watch
By Caterina Tani
The cosmetics industry has been warned that from 1 July it might need to stop using ‘free from’ claims on products containing substances listed in the annexes of the cosmetics products Regulation. -
Brexit: REACH Registration Transfers Exceed 5,000
Apr 11, 2019 | Chemical Watch
Over 5,000 UK-based companies have now initiated transfers of their REACH registration transfers to EU27 entities ahead of a potential no-deal Brexit scenario. -
(ACC Mentioned) Officials Push Petrochemical Expansion, Protestors Fight Back
Apr 11, 2019 | West Virginia Public Broadcasting
By Brittany Patterson
State and federal politicians announced initiatives this week to move forward an effort to build a major underground natural gas liquids storage facility in the Ohio Valley, an effort opposed by environmental activists who fear a petrochemical expansion in the region will threaten not only the environment, but public health. -
U.S. Natural-Gas Market Is Taking Cues From China
Apr 11, 2019 | The Wall Street Journal
By Ryan Dezember
The rise of the U.S. as a major exporter of liquefied natural gas has helped balance the domestic market amid surging production. It has also connected the price of gas in Louisiana to the weather in China—a development that is adding pressure on already low U.S. prices. -
Republicans Revive Push to Scrap LNG Export Constraints
Apr 11, 2019 | E&E Greenwire
By Geof Koss
Republicans in both chambers are resurrecting legislation to eliminate a long-standing legal requirement that the Department of Energy approve exports of liquefied natural gas before they're sent abroad. -
Trump's Energy Orders Spark Partisan and Legal Brawl
Apr 11, 2019 | E&E Energywire
By E&E Staff
President Trump lamented yesterday that it takes 20 years to get an energy pipeline permit approved but vowed to speed up the process to just 60 days. -
Senate Set to Confirm Ex-Lobbyist Bernhardt as Interior Chief
Apr 11, 2019 | Reuters (In The New York Times)
By Valerie Volcovici
The U.S. Senate is set to confirm former energy lobbyist David Bernhardt as the next Interior Secretary on Thursday, even as coastal state senators from both parties raise concerns about his plans to vastly expand offshore drilling. -
Trump Plan to Ship Natural Gas by Rail Stokes ‘Bomb Train’ Fears
Apr 11, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Jennifer A. Dlouhy
President Donald Trump wants to allow natural gas to be shipped in railroad cars, a move that would open new markets hungry for the fuel but could risk catastrophic accidents if one were to derail. -
Republicans Who Can’t Ignore Climate Change Seek GOP Solutions
Apr 11, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ari Natter
Texas Senator John Cornyn, who once voted against a measure that said climate change was man-made, is now helping fellow Republicans craft legislation to combat global warming through “energy innovation.” -
Ex-Trump Adviser Credits Green New Deal for GOP Shift
Apr 11, 2019 | E&E Energywire
By David Iaconangelo
President Trump's former energy adviser George David Banks predicted yesterday that the Green New Deal would continue to spark Republican counterproposals on climate, particularly plans focused on low-carbon technologies. -
EPA Floats Nine New Candidates for CASAC Vacancy
Apr 11, 2019 | Inside EPA
EPA is floating nine candidates to fill one vacancy on its Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC), the panel charged with overseeing reviews of federal air quality standards that has been facing a volley of criticism in recent months from former panel members, Democrats and environmentalists. -
'This Is What We Would Expect From Climate Change'
Apr 11, 2019 | E&E Climatewire
By Daniel Cusick
More than 10 million Americans are seeking shelter this morning from rain, sleet, snow, hail, ice and wind as one of largest spring storms on record churns across the Great Plains into the Missouri and Mississippi river basins. -
Despite Cancer Risks, EPA Proposes Status Quo for Turbines
Apr 11, 2019 | E&E Greenwire
By Sean Reilly
EPA has tentatively decided to make no changes to its existing limits on emissions of hazardous air pollutants from a type of turbine used in power plants and pipeline compressor stations.
Industry and Association News
TSCA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
-
(ACC Mentioned) Iowa, Tennessee Legislature Pass Bills in Support of Plastics Recovery
Apr 11, 2019 | Recycling Today
By Kelly Maile
The Iowa House and Senate passed Senate File 534 and the Tennessee House and Senate passed Senate Bill 0923 in support of advanced recycling facilities that convert plastic scrap into raw material using pyrolysis or chemical recycling.
“In passing SF 534 and SB 0923, Iowa and Tennessee become the most recent states to create a welcoming environment for businesses to convert more post-consumer plastics into valuable raw materials, keeping more of our plastic resources out of landfills,” states Craig Cookson, senior director of recycling and recovery, The American Chemistry Council’s Plastics Division. “Iowa and Tennessee join Florida, Wisconsin and Georgia in passing such legislation, reinforcing states’ growing recognition of the economic and environmental benefits of reusing our plastic resources.”
The legislation defines pyrolysis—a process that converts post-consumer polymers into fuels, chemical feedstock, waxes or resin pellets—and pyrolysis facilities as being separate from solid waste disposal facilities.
“We applaud Rep. Sorenson and Senator Brown in Iowa and Rep. Hulsey and Senator Southerland in Tennessee for their leadership in sponsoring such important legislation, and we urge Iowa Governor Reynolds and Tennessee Governor Lee to sign these bills into law,” Cookson states.
A report released in March by the ACC, Washington, found that expanding advanced recycling technologies has a potential $10 billion impact in the U.S. The passage of legislation in the five states is “helping to support implementation of these innovative technologies," Cookson states.
In Iowa, converting 25 percent of the state's post-consumer plastics into feedstocks and transportation fuels could support five advanced recycling and recovery facilities and generate $309 million in economic output annually, according to ACC.
In Tennessee, converting post-consumer plastics into transportation fuel could power an estimated 219,000 vehicles per year. Converting 25 percent of the state’s post-consumer plastics into manufacturing feedstock and transportation fuels could support eight advanced recycling and recovery facilities and generate $264 million in economic output per year.
https://www.recyclingtoday.com/article/iowa-tennessee-plastics-recovery-facilities-legislation/
-
(ACC Mentioned) PP Prices Down, PS and PET up in March
Apr 11, 2019 | Plastics News
By Frank Esposito
March held different narratives for North American commodity resins, with polystyrene and PET bottle resin prices each moving up, while prices for polypropylene declined.
The biggest change was in polypropylene, where prices slid an average of 3 cents per pound. That marks the fifth consecutive monthly price drop for PP, with those declines now totaling 24.5 cents.
The March downturn came as resin prices once again followed those for polymer-grade propylene monomer feedstock.
Full-year 2018 North American PP sales were down 0.5 percent, according to the American Chemistry Council, with a plunge of more than 30 percent in export sales canceling out an increase of less than 0.5 percent in domestic sales.
But market watchers said regional PP production issues caused a large amount of the resin to be imported into North America during 2018. As a result, true North American PP consumption likely grew 3-4 percent.
Officials with global polyolefins leader LyondellBasell Industries in Houston said earlier this year that its 2018 results were boosted partly by an increase in the spread between PP resin prices and those of propylene monomer.PS up 2 cents
Regional solid polystyrene prices increased an average of 2 cents per pound in March, after being flat in February and declining 2 cents per pound in January. Prices for benzene feedstock, which is used to make styrene monomer, influenced these market moves for PS. Benzene prices had declined in February, but not enough to bring PS resin prices down.
North American solid PS sales struggled in 2018, dropping almost 5 percent. Exports provided a bright spot, growing more than 13 percent and reducing the impact of a 5 percent drop in domestic sales.
PET up a penny
Prices for PET bottle resin ticked up an average of 1 cent per pound in March, marking the second consecutive month that prices had increased by that amount. Prices fell 1 cent in January. Market watchers said the March hike was largely feedstock-driven, with some help from higher oil prices.
PET demand typically moves up in the spring months as processors prepare for higher sales of bottled water and carbonated soft drinks when temperatures rise across most of the United States.
At the recent Plastimagen trade show in Mexico City, an official with materials maker Alpek SAB de CV, which owns PET producer DAK Americas, said that firm's plant making PET feedstock PTA in Altamira, Mexico, has recovered from a fire that caused the site to close for several weeks in mid-2018. No one was injured in the fire, which was caused by a leak in a seal in the plant's oxidation sector. Officials said the plant now is back to the same level of production it was at before the fire.
In March 2018, Alpek, Indorama Ventures and Far Eastern Investment Ltd. formed a joint venture to complete a massive PET resin plant in Corpus Christi, Texas. M&G Group began to build the plant before filing for bankruptcy. Alpek officials at Plastimagen said there's no timeline for when the plant will be completed and that it is expected to operate as a separate entity.
No changes for PE, PVC
Regional prices for all grades of polyethylene and suspension PVC were flat in March. PE prices now have been flat for three consecutive months after buyers were able to fend off a 6-cent increase that had been announced by suppliers for Jan. 1. Some market watchers thought that half of the 6 cents might stick in February, but prices rolled over to March instead and stayed flat.
PE prices had slid down 3 cents in both November and December. Market watchers cited lower oil prices and lower global demand, especially from packaging. Oil prices affect global resin markets, even though most North American PE is made from natural gas.
U.S. and Canadian high and linear low density PE sales reported major growth in 2018, resulting from larger amounts of new capacity being sold into the export markets as well as domestic sales that have reported strong growth.
HDPE sales in the region were up 12 percent for the year, according to ACC, with domestic growth of more than 5 percent amplified by export sales growth of more than 42 percent. In LLDPE, 11-month sales soared more than 24 percent, with domestic sales up almost 5 percent and export sales almost doubling.
Regional PVC prices were flat in March after moving up an average of 2 cents per pound in February. That 2-cent hike was the result of higher prices in the export market, a market source told Plastics News. Higher demand from the construction market and low resin inventories also played a role.
The February hike ended a streak of nine consecutive months of flat pricing for North American PVC. Market prices had not moved since April 2018, with supply and demand being closely balanced. Regional PVC prices were up a net of 3 cents in 2018.
PVC-related operating profit for 2018 jumped more than 40 percent to $913 million for Houston-based Westlake Chemical Corp. Earlier this year, company officials said that was mainly because of higher sales prices and volumes for caustic soda, lower ethylene costs, improved operating rates and lower costs associated with planned turnarounds and unplanned outages, as compared to 2017.
U.S. and Canadian PVC sales were solid in 2018, climbing 3 percent vs. the previous year, according to ACC. Domestic PVC sales were flat, but the overall growth rate was bolstered by a jump of 10 percent in export sales.
At the macro-feedstock level, West Texas Intermediate crude oil prices began March at $56.25 per barrel but jumped to $61.50 by the end of the month, a gain of just over 9 percent.
Regional prices for natural gas moved in the other direction, declining from $2.85 per million British thermal units to $2.70 in the same comparison, for a decline of more than 5 percent.
https://www.plasticsnews.com/article/20190411/NEWS/190417352/pp-prices-down-ps-and-pet-up-in-march
-
US EPA Issues Proposal for CBI Substantiation
Apr 11, 2019 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
The US EPA has issued a proposed rule that would establish a procedure for confirming certain confidentiality claims under TSCA.
The proposal, which was developed in accordance with the 2016 amendments to TSCA, relates to existing claims to protect as confidential business information (CBI) the specific chemical identity of an active substance.
There are 7,757 active confidential substances, according to the 19 February update to the TSCA inventory.
The EPA is required to put a final rule in place within one year of publishing its updated ‘active-inactive inventory’, outlining how companies must substantiate these claims. The agency then must complete reviews of that substantiation within five years, or by 19 February 2024.
The procedure applies to companies that asserted a confidentiality claim during the 2017-18 inventory notification reporting process (‘inventory reset’) in a Notice of Activity (NOA) Form A submission.
The EPA has proposed to exempt claims that have otherwise been substantiated in the past five years. But companies would still need to report and identify these past submissions to the agency.Substantiation process
The EPA has proposed to require that all substantiation, or request for exemption, be filed electronically no later than 90 days after the final rule takes effect.
The types of substantiation required to demonstrate the confidentiality claim include:demonstration that disclosure of the information would likely result in substantial competitive harm;steps the business has taken to protect the confidential information;outcomes of previous confidentiality determinations by the EPA, other federal agencies or a court; anda statement certifying the accuracy of the information.
The agency plans to review submissions – together with previously issued confidentiality determinations and other reasonably available information – to "determine the information’s entitlement to confidential treatment".
Approved claims will be valid for a ten-year period. If, however, the EPA denies a claim, it would notify the submitter of its intent to disclose a chemical identity 30 days before doing so. Submitters could challenge a denial in court.
For those claims that are not notified within the 90-day timeframe, the EPA is proposing to consider them "deficient" and to make those chemical identities public without further notice. The agency, however, has requested comment on the validity of this, particularly for those cases where a party may have substantiated the claim within the past five years but simply failed to notify them.Review procedure
The EPA says it intends to complete its reviews by the 2024 deadline. It will set annual goals that "take into consideration this target completion date, the number of claims needing review and available resources."
And it said it may begin reviewing claims that were already voluntarily substantiated during the inventory reset process (subject to the outcome of pending litigation on that rule – see box), or for those substances that "appear to be clearly not entitled to protection from disclosure based upon other information," even before the final rule takes effect.
The agency plans to publish annual updates on its goals and completed reviews.
Although there is the possibility of a two-year extension, it does not currently anticipate a need for it; however, "possible justifications" for an extension might include competing TSCA obligations or litigation over the process.
There will be a 60-day comment period on the proposed rule.Outcome of CBI litigation looms
Even as the EPA’s CBI procedure takes shape, litigation is ongoing over its treatment of confidentiality under the amended TSCA.
The Environmental Defense Fund sued the agency over its inventory notification rule in 2017, allegingthat the rule inappropriately allowed any person to maintain an existing confidentiality claim, regardless of whether they were the original claimant.
The EPA has defended in court, however, that its interpretation of the statute was "reasonable".
Oral arguments in the case were heard last autumn, with a ruling possible before the year’s end.
https://chemicalwatch.com/76291/us-epa-issues-proposal-for-cbi-substantiation
-
EPA's Confidentiality Proposal Lacks Key Details, Greens Say
Apr 11, 2019 | E&E Greenwire
By Corbin Hiar
EPA's new plan for verifying chemicals that companies claim as trade secrets has some of the same shortcomings as a previous regulation currently tangled in litigation, according to critics.
The draft rule would allow companies that claimed data about specific chemicals they used or sold in the past five years as confidential business information to seek permission from EPA to continue limiting public scrutiny of those compounds for up to a decade. There are currently around 41,000 chemicals that EPA has determined are currently used in commerce, about 8,000 of which companies have claimed as confidential.
To substantiate those confidential claims, the proposal says chemical producers and users will need to prove to EPA that they've tightly held information about the compounds they're seeking to keep secret and that disclosing such chemical data more broadly would "likely result in substantial harm" to business.
"We continue to be committed to fostering transparency about information on chemicals while protecting verified confidential information," Alexandra Dunn, EPA's assistant administrator for chemical safety, said in a statement yesterday.
"With this proposed rule, we are meeting another obligation under TSCA, as amended by the Frank R. Lautenberg Chemical Safety Act," she said, referring to the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976 and the law that overhauled it for the first time 40 years later.
The agency will accept comments on the confidential business information proposal for 60 days and aims to finalize it later this year. By law, the agency has until Feb. 19, 2024, to finish vetting the confidential claims associated with existing chemicals.
Richard Denison, the Environmental Defense Fund's lead senior scientist, plans to criticize the proposal's alleged failure to address a Lautenberg law requirement that chemicals claimed as confidential can't be reverse-engineered and the lack of information about how EPA will deal with confidential business information claims for chemicals that other companies have already made public.
The environmental group is currently suing the agency over similar perceived confidentiality deficiencies in EPA's process for determining which chemicals are in commerce.
If the proposal were to take effect without major changes, "the concern would be that more of the chemicals on the TSCA inventory would remain confidential and that would deny that info to the public," Denison said in an interview. "Every one of those chemicals is a chemical that is on the market, being used, to which people may be being exposed without the ability of the public to know even the identity of the chemical."
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2019/04/11/stories/1060154313
-
Apr 11, 2019 | Chemical Watch
EPA formally publishes 13 Snurs
The US EPA has published in the Federal Register significant new use rules (Snurs) for 13 substances that were released in pre-publication form earlier this month. The rules represent the first time since TSCA was amended in 2016 that the agency has issued Snurs in the absence of a consent order to address concerns with a reasonably foreseen use of a new chemical being brought to market.
NGOs, however, have described this ‘Snur-only’ approach as "unlawful".
The rules take effect on 4 June.Agency watchdog flags up ‘inaccurate’ TRI data
The EPA’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) has issued an "immediate management alert" to notify the public of its discovery of "inaccurate" toxics release inventory (TRI) data related to releases of hazardous substances from publicly owned treatment works (POTW).
According to the internal watchdog, an investigation identified discrepancies between the total pounds of chemicals released to the environment as reported in the publicly available TRI data for 2013-17 versus information provided by the agency.
The OIG said its audit is ongoing, but it found this "to be of sufficient concern to warrant immediate reporting." It will post any response from the EPA on its website.
https://chemicalwatch.com/76314/us-epa-round-up
-
(ACC Mentioned) US Congress Round-Up
Apr 11, 2019 | Chemical Watch
Both chambers of Congress are considering legislation aimed at supporting the development of substances and products that pose fewer negative environmental and human health effects.
According to its backers, the Sustainable Chemistry Research and Development Act of 2019 aims to encourage the development of "new and innovative chemicals, products and processes with an improved environmental footprint through efficient use of resources, reducing or eliminating exposure to hazardous substances, or otherwise minimising harm to human health and the environment."
The bill has been endorsed by the American Chemistry Council (ACC), the Environmental Working Group (EWG), the American Sustainable Business Council (ASBC) and a variety of other trade groups and corporations.
Past sessions of Congress have seen the introduction of similar measures.House Dems blast formaldehyde prioritisation
Two Democrats have declared it "unacceptable" that the US EPA omitted formaldehyde from its Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS) programme list of priorities
In a letter to the agency's Administrator Andrew Wheeler, Eddie Bernice Johnson (D–Texas) and Mikie Sherrill (D–New Jersey) – both leaders on the House of Representatives' science committee – said that the EPA’s naming formaldehyde a high priority under TSCA, but not one under IRIS is "absurd".
"These processes are not mutually exclusive, nor do they serve the same purpose, and it is unacceptable that the agency is apparently treating them as such," they wrote.
The Congresswomen have requested that the EPA provide a briefing on the issue.PFAS Registry Act
Senators Jeanne Shaheen (D–New Hampshire) and Mike Rounds (D–South Dakota) have introduced the PFAS Registry Act.
The legislation would create a database for veterans and armed service members who are experiencing health problems that could have been caused by exposure to per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs). This could be used to inform them about scientific developments on the effects of PFAS exposure and point them to resources and treatment options.
https://chemicalwatch.com/76309/us-congress-round-up
-
California Bill to Ban Certain Cosmetics Stalls in Committee
Apr 11, 2019 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
A California bill to ban cosmetics containing any of more than a dozen substances of concern has been placed on hold until next year.
The Toxic Free Cosmetics Act (AB 495) seeks to prohibit the sale of cosmetics containing asbestos or lead, as well as those with intentionally added ingredients like formaldehyde, toluene, triclosan, PFASs and certain parabens and phthalates.
But the bill hit a roadblock at a committee hearing this week, when it became clear that the votes were not there to pass the measure through the Assembly Committee on Environmental Safety and Toxic Materials.
Susan Little, senior advocate of California government affairs at the Environmental Working Group – which is sponsoring the bill – told Chemical Watch that some legislators were concerned that not all of the chemicals included in the bill have been banned outright elsewhere in the world, but rather have only been restricted.
Lawmakers, she added, want to see "conclusive evidence" that people are getting sick from specific ingredients, rather than acting on their potential to cause harm.
An agreement was therefore struck, she said, to bring the bill back again in January after its backers work with the committee chair and other members "to come up with a proposal they felt more comfortable with".
"We are in the process now of looking at what sort of language will be workable for them; it will be similar to what we have now, but focusing more on chemicals that have been banned outright by other nations," she said.Opposition
The Personal Care Products Council’s Jay Ansell was among those who testified at the 9 April hearing in opposition to the bill. It would "adversely affect tens of thousands of products and potentially compromise the ability to provide consumers with the safe, high-quality products they expect," he said.
Among the trade group’s concerns is that the bill would ban whole classes of widely used preservatives, which could deprive industry of having a suitable pallet of substances to ensure products remain free from contamination.
And the PCPC opposes the prohibition on naturally occurring impurities, like lead, which are not intentionally added to products and often have impurity limits in cosmetics already established.
The California Chamber of Commerce and the PCPC have both argued that California’s Safer Consumer Products (SCP) programme is a more appropriate venue to address ingredient safety concerns.‘Not immediately embraced’
Despite the setback, Ms Little said the EWG is hopeful that the measure will regain traction next winter.
"It’s the first bill of its kind," she said. "Typically when these types of bills are up first they’re not immediately embraced, so there needs to be a little more discussion and education of the members."
But, she added: "We have a strong commitment from the chair and other members on the committee to keep this bill alive and spend some time to determine how to craft it so that they're comfortable moving it [forward] in January."
https://chemicalwatch.com/76304/california-bill-to-ban-certain-cosmetics-stalls-in-committee
-
Researchers Urge More Protection for Workers From Organic Flame Retardants
Apr 11, 2019 | Chemical Watch
By Maria Delaney
More attention should be given to protecting workers exposed to organic flame retardants, according to new research. The workers most at risk are identified as electronic waste recycling staff, electronic manufacturers, firefighters and aircraft personnel.
Organic flame retardants (FRs) are added to many common goods and some, such as polybrominated diphenyl ethers, are toxic. While many of these toxic products have been removed from the market, legacy goods are still present in workplaces, the researchers report in the UK's Annals of work exposures and health.
One issue with exposure to FRs is that the effects are not instantly noticeable to workers because they do not irritate the lungs.
"Some have been shown to be associated with endocrine disruption, which can have detrimental effects on health," according to the lead author, Sabrina Gravel from the Institut de Recherche Robert-Sauvé en Santé et en Sécurité du Travail (IRSST) and the Department of Environmental and Occupational Health at the University of Montreal.
In order to replace toxic FRs, manufacturers are using compounds such as organophosphate esters (OPEs) and novel brominated substances. The review, Assessment of occupational exposure to organic flame retardants, recommends that the toxicity of these newer substances should be further evaluated. "The industry is coming up with new substances faster than we can study them," added Ms Gravel. "We don’t know with very solid evidence what the potential toxic effects are."
The review also found a lot of inconsistency in the methods used to measure workers' exposure. This needs to be addressed, according to Ms Gravel, who recommends that more standardised procedures are used across industry for air and dust sampling.
Knowledge of exposure pathways also allows better protection of workers. Inhalation is the main pathway researched for FR exposure but the review states that other pathways, such as involuntary ingestion and skin permeation, need more research.
The findings of another project by the IRSST, which looked at the effect of FR exposure in electronic waste recycling, will be published in the coming months. It recommends engineering controls such as ventilation to reduce the amount of dust in the air. "Protective equipment is always recommended when you have airborne particles, but it’s the least effective control measure," Ms Gravel added.
https://chemicalwatch.com/76293/researchers-urge-more-protection-for-workers-from-organic-flame-retardants
-
US Agencies Set to Study Health Effects of PFASs
Apr 11, 2019 | Chemical Watch
By Lisa Martine Jenkins
Two US agencies plan to fund a study of the human health effects of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFASs), especially via drinking water exposure.
The 1 April announcement from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) said the study will look at the associations between PFAS compounds and:lipids;renal function;kidney disease;thyroid hormones and disease;liver function and disease;glycaemic parameters;diabetes; andimmune response and function in both children and adults.
It will focus on six yet to be selected communities where there has been current or past presence of PFASs in drinking water. The draft protocol outlines its structure, calling on researchers to recruit at least 2,000 children and 6,000 adults.
"Understanding the relationship between exposure and health outcomes will allow communities and governmental agencies to make science-based decisions about how to protect public health," said the agencies.
However, the announcement has come in for some criticism. The NGO Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) is concerned that the agencies will not assess whether exposure to PFAS causes cancer.
The organisation describes the omission as "perplexing", and on 4 April sent a letter to CDC director Robert Redfield, asking him to intervene "to ensure that the study addresses the cancer risks of exposure to PFAS as part of its study, or to lay out an alternative plan … for the CDC to study cancer and PFAS."
"There’s no harm in at least studying it," Kyla Bennett, PEER science policy director, told Chemical Watch. "It seems like the CDC is burying its head in the sand if they aren’t going to look at carcinogenicity."
Applications for participation in the study will be accepted until 30 May.
PFASs have been used for several decades as surfactants in fire retardants, in furniture, food packaging and non-stick cookware, among other uses, though they have drawn increasing attention for their biopersistence and potential for human toxicity. Where long-chain PFASs (such as PFOA and PFOS) have been phased out in recent decades, short-chain chemistries have largely replaced them. Questions remain about the human health effects of these.
The CDC and ATSDR are also conducting a separate study of the impact of PFAS-containing firefighting foam on communities around military bases.
https://chemicalwatch.com/76278/us-agencies-set-to-study-health-effects-of-pfass
-
New York Legislators Drop Ingredient Disclosure Proposal
Apr 11, 2019 | Chemical Watch
By Kelly Franklin
A proposal from New York Governor Andrew Cuomo to require increased ingredient disclosure in consumer products has been excluded from the state’s budget.
Floated in January as part of the governor’s 2020 executive budget legislation, the ‘Consumer Right to Know Act’ would have expanded the state’s existing cleaning product ingredient disclosure scheme to personal care products and introduced new labelling requirements for a variety of consumer products.
But state legislators sent the governor a 2020 budget package earlier this month that dropped the concept. The relevant section in the Transportation, Economic Development and Environmental Conservation (TED) funding bill (S 1508C) is listed as "intentionally omitted".
The Household Consumer Products Association welcomed the move. The group said the governor’s proposal would have put in place disclosure requirements that were "dangerously vague and ultimately unworkable."
The American Cleaning Institute added that it is thankful the legislature is "taking a thoughtful approach to cleaning product ingredient communication."
The two trade groups are currently engaged in litigation over the state’s existing chemical ingredient programme. They filed a lawsuit last year in opposition to the "unworkable and impractical" scheme.
The state’s Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) delayed the 1 July compliance deadline to October, to allow the state attorney general’s office more time to weigh the programme’s potential implications.‘Not by any means the last opportunity’
Controversy over the state’s existing scheme notwithstanding, Kathleen Curtis, executive director of NGO Clean and Healthy New York, told Chemical Watch the state "missed a golden opportunity to protect people and communities from toxic chemicals" by failing to enact the governor’s proposal.
But she said the move "is not by any means the last opportunity, nor does it indicate a lack of support for the concept."
"The New York state legislature remains both willing and able to require disclosure of toxicants in products, and take action when strong science suggests restrictions are in order," she added.
The ACI said in a statement shared with Chemical Watch that the consumer products supply chain is "fully committed to providing consumers with information that is scientifically based and accurate."
"[We] hope that we can work with the Assembly and Senate to achieve a workable, pragmatic solution," it added.
The HCPA and ACI have advocated for following California’s ingredient transparency law as a national model.
https://chemicalwatch.com/76307/new-york-legislators-drop-ingredient-disclosure-proposal
-
Echa, AskREACH Trying to Align SVHC Databases
Apr 11, 2019 | Chemical Watch
By Vanessa Zainzinger
Echa and the pan-European AskREACH project are "working closely together" to reach a harmonisation of their two SVHC databases, the German Environment Agency (UBA) has said.
The UBA addressed the overlap between the two projects in a workshop, Compliance digital – Simplified corporate communication on SVHCs in articles, in Berlin this week.
Both Echa and AskREACH are developing databases where companies feed in information on SVHCs in articles. The consumer and supplier awareness-focused AskREACH project was launched by the UBA and 19 project partners in September 2017. Echa’s database came out of the revised waste framework Directive (WFD) that entered into force in July.
Although they will collect the same information, there are obstacles to joining up the two projects just yet, UBA’s Ioannis Dosis told the workshop.
Echa can’t tap into the information collected under AskREACH because it is legally tied under the WFD to build and operate its own database, he said.
The two projects also serve different purposes, with AskREACH fostering consumer awareness and supply chain communiction, and Echa’s project aimed at waste operators.
In addition, they work to different timelines and use different identifiers for articles, as well as different formats for inputting the data, the UBA said.
But Mr Dosis said the two parties are "working together closely" and "exploring opportunities for synergies" between their two databases.
In any case, the consumer app that will be linked to the AskREACH database could become a "valuable add-on" for passing on information about SVHCs in articles to consumers, Mr Dosis said. And AskREACH will have access to the information held in Echa's database.Industry concerns
With both projects gearing up for different launch dates, however, industry is wary of being asked to submit information on their products twice and in different formats.
This could discourage them from contributing to the voluntary AskREACH database and focus their resources on the mandatory Echa database instead, workshop attendees said.
Concerns at the meeting also centred on whether different players in the supply chain – from the manufacturer to the retailer – can input different information on the same article in the AskREACH database.
One attendee put forward the possibility of only the manufacturer having the right to input data on an article, saying it would be "sensible if information is added at the earliest point possible in the supply chain".
Addressing fears that other actors in the supply chain could enter false information without the article manufacturer knowing, the UBA said the latter will be notified of any changes to their articles’ entries. And, it added, manufacturers will be encouraged to get involved in the project, by checking any information given by retailers.Next steps
Companies can now take part in the project's beta test phase and start filling up the AskREACH database, the UBA said in Berlin.
The project is preparing to ‘soft launch’ the AskREACH app in June, with field testers visiting shops, scanning barcodes and sending SVHC information requests to the article suppliers.
Besides testing the app, this should help article suppliers prepare for the rising number of consumer requests, the UBA says. The agency expects about 3m app downloads and 30m Article 33 requests to suppliers across Europe, by the time the project finishes in August 2022.
The app will be fully launched in October, accompanied by consumer awareness raising campaigns that will run until early 2022. A supply chain communication tool for companies will also be launched in the autumn.
Echa, meanwhile, has until the end of the year to develop its SVHC database.
https://chemicalwatch.com/76298/echa-askreach-trying-to-align-svhc-databases
-
Apr 11, 2019 | Chemical Watch
New poison centres notification format
Echa has released an improved version of its poison centres notification (PCN) format. The format structures the information on hazardous mixtures submitted to the member state appointed bodies.
Update to list of substances registered only by UK companies
The agency's list of chemicals that are registered only by UK companies has been updated. The list is intended to help companies prepare for Brexit.
It now contains 21 newly registered substances and 926 substances that were on the previous list.Webinar on Iuclid 6
Echa will release an update to its Iuclid software package on 24 April with an explanatory webinar to follow on 29 April. Attendees can register online.
New CLH intentions
The agency has received new intentions from Sweden to harmonise the classification and labelling of:sodium chlorate: as oxidising liquid 1, H271 and acute toxicity 4, H302; andpotassium chlorate: as oxidising solids 1, H271 and acute toxicity 4, H302 under REACH.BoA rules against Echa in compliance check case
The Board of Appeal (BoA) has ruled in favour of a registrant that challenged Echa’s refusal to take into account a dossier update that arrived after the agency had sent its draft decision to the registrant.
The board found that because the cut-off point was communicated in an inconsistent manner, German registrant BrüggemannChemical could not know unambiguously what its rights and obligations were.
The decision (case A-001-2018) is available on Echa’s website.
https://chemicalwatch.com/76292/echa-round-up
-
‘Free From’ Claims in Cosmetics Face Possible EU Restrictions
Apr 11, 2019 | Chemical Watch
By Caterina Tani
The cosmetics industry has been warned that from 1 July it might need to stop using ‘free from’ claims on products containing substances listed in the annexes of the cosmetics products Regulation.
Speaking at the In-Cosmetics global regulatory conference in Paris on 1 April, a representative from trade association Federation of Beauty Companies (Febea) spelled out implications from an EU guidance document to delegates.
The federation’s science and regulatory affairs vice president Anne Dux reminded the conference that Annexes III and IV from the document could be applicable in certain member states in the summer.
Annex III provides guidance for the application of the European Commission regulation of 2013 laying down common criteria for the justification of ‘free from’ claims in cosmetic products, including illustrative and non-exhaustive examples.
Annex IV issues advice on the application of the common criteria to the specific type of claim ‘hypoallergenic’.
The criteria are on legal compliance, truthfulness, evidential support, honesty, fairness and informed decision-making.
The document, which was generated by a working group chaired by the Commission in 2017, is a tool to help member states decide what kind of ‘free from’ claims could be made into national law, Dr Dux said. It is not legally binding and member states can each decide if they want to adopt it.
Among the examples of claims which will no longer be allowed according to the common criteria are:'free from corticosteroids’ – these are banned by EU cosmetics legislation (legal compliance);'free from preservatives' should not be used when a product contains an ingredient showing a protective effect against microorganisms (honesty);'free from allergenic/sensitising substances' is not allowed, as a complete absence of the risk of an allergic reaction cannot be guaranteed (honesty);'free from parabens' should not be accepted, as it denigrates the entire group of parabens (honesty); and'free from perfume' should not be used when a product contains an ingredient which exerts a perfuming function in the product, regardless of its other possible functions (honesty).
Dr Dux recommended companies use ‘not perfumed’ instead. Permitted claims
However, Dr Dux told delegates that industry will still be able to use ‘free from’ claims for ingredients that are not in the annexes of the cosmetics Regulation and comply with the common criteria.
But decisions to include such claims must allow for an "informed choice to a specific target group", such as for children, she added.
Examples provided in the technical document include the ‘free from alcohol' claim, for instance in a mouthwash intended as a family product, and the ‘free from animal-derived ingredients' which is applied to products for vegans.
Hypoallergenic claim
Annex IV of the technical document targets the use of the claim ‘hypoallergenic’. It states that the claim can be used when the cosmetic product has been designed in a way that minimises its allergenic potential.
The problem with that, Dr Dux said, is that in reality "any ingredient could lead to an allergic reaction", even those considered as hypoallergenic.
According to the Commission, the presence of known allergens or allergen precursors should be totally avoided when the substance:is identified as a sensitiser by the European Commission’s Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS) or other relevant committees;falls under the classification of skin sensitisers of category 1, sub-category 1A or sub-category 1B, on the basis of CLP criteria;is identified by the company on the basis of the assessment of consumer complaints;is generally recognised as a sensitiser in scientific literature; orhas missing relevant data on its sensitising potential.
The conditions mean it is "nearly impossible to claim that this product is hypoallergenic any longer", Dr Dux added.
https://chemicalwatch.com/76287/free-from-claims-in-cosmetics-face-possible-eu-restrictions
-
Brexit: REACH Registration Transfers Exceed 5,000
Apr 11, 2019 | Chemical Watch
Over 5,000 UK-based companies have now initiated transfers of their REACH registration transfers to EU27 entities ahead of a potential no-deal Brexit scenario.
According to the latest figures from Echa, 5,200 companies took the initiative using the agency’s Brexit window, which will stay open "subject to further developments".
Such transfers are necessary for UK companies to continue to have access to the single market if the country leaves the EU without a deal.
The UK was due to leave the trade bloc on 29 March but secured an extension until 12 April following a lack of support for Theresa May’s withdrawal deal in parliament.
On 10 April, the EU agreed to allow the UK an extension until 31 October to break the impasse. The UK must now hold European elections on 23 May, or leave on 1 June without a deal.
https://chemicalwatch.com/76310/brexit-reach-registration-transfers-exceed-5000
-
(ACC Mentioned) Officials Push Petrochemical Expansion, Protestors Fight Back
Apr 11, 2019 | West Virginia Public Broadcasting
By Brittany Patterson
State and federal politicians announced initiatives this week to move forward an effort to build a major underground natural gas liquids storage facility in the Ohio Valley, an effort opposed by environmental activists who fear a petrochemical expansion in the region will threaten not only the environment, but public health.
The Appalachian Storage and Trading Hub has been in the works for almost a decade. Developers are seeking billions in loan guarantees from the Department of Energy.
This week, Gov. Jim Justice met with officials from the U.S. Department of Energy to discuss the hub and developing the petrochemical industry in West Virginia. In a press release the governor said he would appoint a liaison to work with Energy Department officials on these issues.
“It is absolutely vital that we create a petrochemical industry in West Virginia versus building more pipelines that leave our state without creating any long-term manufacturing jobs,” Justice stated.
Officials from West Virginia, Ohio and Pennsylvania support efforts to bring cracker plants and other plastics manufacturing infrastructure to the Ohio Valley, which sits upon two of the nation’s most productive natural gas and natural gas liquids repositories, the Marcellus and Utica shale formations.
A 2018 study by the Department of Energy estimates the largest growth in natural gas liquids production is expected from this region.
"Ethane production in Appalachia is projected to continue its rapid growth in the coming years, reaching 640,000 barrels per day in 2025 – more than 20 times greater than regional ethane production in 2013," the report states.
The announcement coincided with the Marcellus to Manufacturing Development Conference held this week in Morgantown. The conference, organized by the West Virginia Manufacturers Association, brought together officials and business representatives from across the region, largely to discuss expanding petrochemical manufacturing in West Virginia.
Conference keynote speaker West Virginia Commerce Secretary Ed Gaunch told attendees his agency actively wants to help bring plastics and other petrochemical manufacturers to the state.
“The sun’s about to shine on this wonderful state,” he said. “Opportunities abound in West Virginia.”
‘People Over Petro’
Not everyone sees it that way, and those opposed to the petrochemical buildout say they've struggled to be heard by elected officials.
“Petrochemicals are not energy. It's plastic,” said Belmont County, Ohio resident Bev Reed. “It's a dead product that doesn't go anywhere except to poison people.”
Reed was one of about 40 protestors who gathered outside the conference. Protestors carried colorful signs, some with plastic grocery bags attached that whipped in the wind, and chanted “people over petro, people over plastics, people over profit.”
Activists voiced concerns that turning the region into the next plastics manufacturing center would place the state's natural resources at risk, and harm its people, many of whom are already impacted by resource extraction.
Lawmakers in favor of the proposed of the petrochemical expansion often cite an American Chemistry Council study that projects the industry would bring 100,000 jobs to the region. It also estimates 60% of plastic production would be for food products.
Potential investment into the Ohio Valley’s petrochemical buildout comes at a time when some cities and companies around the globe are pledging to discontinue use of single use plastic.
Protestor BJ McManama with the Indigenous Environmental Network pushed back on the argument that a petrochemical future is the only one that can bring new jobs to the area.
“They shout jobs, jobs, jobs, making it sound like we don't want jobs. We want handouts. We don't want you guys have jobs. No, that’s not right,” she said. “We want clean, safe, sustainable jobs that create resilient, happy and peaceful communities.”
Federal Support
A long-sought, and key component, to creating a petrochemical industry in the Ohio Valley is building storage for ethane. Ethane is a component of the natural gas liquids abundant in the region, and a building block of plastic.
Both of West Virginia’s U.S. Senators, Democrat Joe Manchin and Republican Shelley Moore Capito, support the Appalachian Storage and Trading Hub.
At a budget hearing last week, Manchin pressed Energy Secretary Rick Perry about its progress.
“Are you all looking seriously at a natural gas storage hub in the mid-Atlantic region, and advancing that as quickly as we possibly can to have that backup for security? And how does that play into the national security of our country?” Manchin asked.
Perry said the hub was “not happening as fast as I’d like to see it,” but noted the Trump administration’s support.
“I think there is extraordinary potential in those four states and the Appalachian region – Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Kentucky, Ohio,” he said.
About a year ago, the project got approval for the first of two application phases for a $1.9 billion U.S. Department of Energy loan guarantee.
To bolster the argument that this development would improve national security, this week Manchin introduced a bill, the Appalachian Energy for National Security Act, which would task the Energy Department with studying the national security benefits of the proposed gas hub.
But for the protestors who picketed Tuesday, the fight isn’t over.
“We need to keep them from taking away what we have left,” said Ashley Funk, with the Mountain Watershed Association, an environmental group based Fayette County, Pennsylvania. “We must stand together from death alley to the Ohio River Valley to say to these companies that want to profit from our communities that we are not disposable.”
https://www.wvpublic.org/post/officials-push-petrochemical-expansion-protestors-fight-back#stream/0
-
U.S. Natural-Gas Market Is Taking Cues From China
Apr 11, 2019 | The Wall Street Journal
By Ryan Dezember
The rise of the U.S. as a major exporter of liquefied natural gas has helped balance the domestic market amid surging production. It has also connected the price of gas in Louisiana to the weather in China—a development that is adding pressure on already low U.S. prices.
The U.S. gas market, long isolated from global trade, had relied on domestic supply and demand for the heating and power-generation fuel to set prices.
Now, though, enough liquefied natural gas, or LNG, is being shipped overseas that forecasting prices is becoming as complex as calculus. There are smog-battling policy makers in Beijing to consider, as well as nuclear-power plant maintenance schedules in Japan, Chilean weather forecasts and gas inventories in the Netherlands to monitor.
“Our supply and demand balances are increasingly linked to what’s going on in other places in the world,” said Barclays analyst Samuel Phillips. “That quite simply was not the case five years ago, or even really a couple years ago.”
Lately a sharp decline in Asian and European LNG prices is reverberating back to the U.S. market. The Japan Korea Marker, a widely used Asian benchmark, has fallen below $5 per million British thermal units in recent weeks, down from more than $10 before winter.
Asian prices have plunged in response to a warmer-than-expected winter in China and neighboring importers, which resulted in gas that was stockpiled in autumn being available for spring. At less than $5, the Asia price is right around the cost of U.S. gas plus processing and shipping expenses.
U.S. natural-gas futures for May delivery settled at $2.70 per million BTUs on Wednesday. Though processing and shipping costs can vary by exporter and destination, $2 per million BTUs is typical, analysts say.
In Asia, U.S. exports are “basically out of the money,” said Jordan McNiven, an analyst with energy-focused investment bank Tudor, Pickering, Holt & Co. “They’re saying, don’t send us any more LNG, we’re good.”
Some shipments are being steered from the Far East to Europe, where prices have also declined after mild winter weather left local markets unusually well supplied. Diverting more LNG cargoes to Europe risks pushing down prices there as well.
This all has the potential to weigh on already depressed U.S. prices this year, analysts say. LNG export terminals scheduled to come online this year are expected to sop up about half of U.S. production growth. If prices are depressed in major overseas markets, like Europe and China, exporters may delay plans to start liquefying gas. Existing export facilities may take advantage of weak international markets to shut down for maintenance.
“There’s a fairly big wave of LNG projects set to come on this year,” Mr. McNiven said. “Do they take a little bit longer to phase in their production volumes if prices stay this bad?”
Though expectations are for LNG demand to continue to surge around the world, and even outpace supply in coming years, U.S. gas inventories could swell more than expected in the spring and weigh on local prices. Since much of the added U.S. gas output is a byproduct of oil drilling, many domestic producers are unlikely to dial back, given the rise in crude prices.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-natural-gas-market-is-taking-cues-from-china-11554984002
-
Republicans Revive Push to Scrap LNG Export Constraints
Apr 11, 2019 | E&E Greenwire
By Geof Koss
Republicans in both chambers are resurrecting legislation to eliminate a long-standing legal requirement that the Department of Energy approve exports of liquefied natural gas before they're sent abroad.
The bill, introduced by Sens. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), John Kennedy (R-La.) and Shelley Moore Capito (R-W.Va.), would overhaul the Natural Gas Act of 1938 by tossing out the law's requirement that DOE approve LNG exports only if they meet a "public interest" test.
Exports to nations that have trade agreements with the United States automatically qualify for DOE approval.
Critics have long contended that the existing process for approving LNG exports is overly cumbersome and unnecessary; backers of the current law argue it plays a key role in ensuring that U.S. exports don't reach levels that would cause domestic price hikes.
According to the bill's sponsors, the measure retains DOE's ability to limit exports and imports of natural gas during national emergencies or disasters. The federal government's ability to restrict shipments to "unfriendly" nations is also maintained.
The legislation further requires DOE to submit a report to Congress on possible steps to foster additional exports of natural gas, which the bill notes "may help lower global emissions of carbon dioxide" due to its lower carbon content when compared with other fossil fuels.
"Decades-old restrictions on importation and exportation have stalled LNG projects that would benefit Louisiana workers, the economy, and the environment," Cassidy said in a statement on the legislation today.
"This legislation brings good-paying jobs to Louisiana while lowering global greenhouse gas emissions by replacing high emitting energy sources in foreign nations with cleaner burning American natural gas."
Natural gas's potential to curb climate change is a central tenet of Cassidy's approach to dealing with the problem and one that he's pushed in multiple bills in recent years (Greenwire, March 15).
Overhauling the DOE application process for exports has been a long-standing goal of industry and its Hill allies, but it still faces hurdles given the concerns of Democrats and environmentalists over methane pollution.
Rep. Clay Higgins (R-La.) is sponsoring the House companion, H.R. 2248, a version of which was offered in the last Congress as well (E&E Daily, June 23, 2017).
While Republicans have signaled they'd like to see permitting reforms made to expedite the construction of LNG export terminals, the current process led by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is kept "intact" in the bill, according to its sponsors.
Separately, House Transportation and Infrastructure Chairman Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.) yesterday introduced legislation, H.R. 2198, that would amend the Natural Gas Act "with respect to application of the right to exercise eminent domain" in constructing pipelines for exporting natural gas.
DeFazio's office did not immediately respond to a request for more information about the measure, but it came the same day President Trump signed executive orders intended to expedite the construction of pipelines.
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2019/04/11/stories/1060154271
-
Trump's Energy Orders Spark Partisan and Legal Brawl
Apr 11, 2019 | E&E Energywire
By E&E Staff
President Trump lamented yesterday that it takes 20 years to get an energy pipeline permit approved but vowed to speed up the process to just 60 days.
"We're going to make it easier for you," the president told an enthusiastic crowd of hundreds of heavy equipment union workers after signing two executive orders aiming to help the oil and gas industry.
Speaking at a union training facility in Crosby, Texas, Trump signaled his intent to boost production in the United States at a time when the country's energy output has already hit historic highs as a result of the shale oil boom.
What started months ago as a White House effort to address pipeline bottlenecks has unfolded to a multiheaded initiative that directs federal agencies from EPA to the Labor Department to review policies on energy development.
The pair of orders have been in the works for months and were shaped partly by the American Petroleum Institute, executive director Mike Sommers told E&E News.
"I think the role we played was to make sure they understand how big of a problem it was because of statewide efforts to delay pipeline infrastructure from being built," he said.
Yesterday, Trump declared his administration has torn down "barriers to production."
"We made a lot of progress in the past 2 ½ years," he said, adding, "At the same time, we have to protect the environment. The U.S. has the best air and water in the world."
The president signed the orders, the 103rd and 104th of his presidency, between two fundraisers yesterday in Texas that the campaign is expecting to raise $6 million. The first fundraiser was in San Antonio at lunch followed by a later event in Houston.
The most significant part of his initiatives are aimed at conflicts with Democratic governors in the Northeast over sections of the Clean Water Act.
"Texas is the heart and soul of the energy industry in the U.S.," said Stefan Krantz with Hogan Lovells. "It seems appropriate that for an announcement like this where he is prioritizing energy he would do that in Texas even though the genesis originated elsewhere."
Trump blamed "radical activists" for driving up household heating costs fourfold in the Northeast because New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) blocked pipeline construction over water quality concerns.
"The two executive orders will fix this dramatically," Trump asserted.
But close observers were unclear how these directives would affect the energy sector, much of which is overseen by state officials and, more importantly, driven by energy markets.
Members of Congress, meanwhile, celebrated or decried the executive actions along party lines.
Senate Environment and Public Works Chairman John Barrasso (R-Wyo.), who Tuesday reintroduced a bill also aimed at state certifications, applauded the actions saying, "Washington state and East Coast states have used this authority to slow down important energy projects."
"I will continue to work with the Trump administration on this critical shared priority," he said.
Similarly, Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska), chairwoman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, lauded the move.
"We need fewer delays, greater predictability in our permitting process and better coordination among government stakeholders to ensure needed projects can become reality," she said.
House Energy and Commerce Chairman Frank Pallone Jr. (D-N.J.), whose state could be home to the planned controversial PennEast pipeline, vowed "to fight this tooth and nail."
"Allowing a president to force through pipeline projects regardless of a state's wishes would prevent both the state and its residents from having their voices heard," he said.
"In my home state of New Jersey, there are concerns about these pipelines, and the last thing we want to do is strip away a state's opportunity to have input into the siting of these facilities," Pallone said.Limiting states' rights?
The executive orders target states' ability to block Clean Water Act permits.
President Trump did not mince words when speaking about who would benefit from the executive actions, specifically mentioning one New York natural gas project.
"In New York they are paying tremendous amounts of money more for energy to heat their homes because New York state blocked a permit to build the Constitution [natural gas] pipeline," he said. "And we actually buy a lot of oil from other countries because we aren't being permitted to build a pipeline through New York state.
"How about that? Not too good."
The executive order directs EPA to review agency guidance and potentially limit the amount of time states have to certify that projects meet state and federal water quality standards. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act gives states a "reasonable timeframe" to make decisions on whether to approve, deny or condition permits. Different federal agencies have set that as meaning anywhere from 60 days to one year after a state deems an application complete.
That means some state reviews — including New York's review of the Constitution project — can actually take several years from the time an application is filed as states continue to ask for more information.
"You know about delays, where it takes you 20 years to get a permit," Trump asked the audience in Crosby. "Those days are gone. Now, you may not get it at all, but it's going to be quick."
The order also directs EPA to consider "the appropriate scope of water quality reviews" and "types of conditions that may be appropriate to include in a certification," language that is likely a direct response to Washington state's blocking a permit for a coal export terminal in 2016.
The Millennium Bulk Terminals case has been a poster child for groups looking to rein in states' certification because Washington blocked the permit not only on water quality grounds but also cited reasons related to increased boat traffic, climate change and air pollution.
EPA began reviewing existing agency guidance on state certifications months ago, and Administrator Andrew Wheeler indicated yesterday the agency will forge ahead with that effort, while consulting with states and tribes.
"Many states implement Section 401 of the Clean Water Act faithfully, however, on occasion, inconsistent implementation and outdated guidance and regulations have caused delays in infrastructure projects with significant national benefits," Wheeler said in a statement.
Beneficiaries of the executive orders were quick to herald the actions yesterday.
Chris Stockton, a spokesman for Constitution pipeline developer Williams Cos., said the company "supports efforts to foster coordination, predictability and transparency in federal environmental review and permitting processes for energy infrastructure projects."
"These projects are essential to our economy, creating jobs and fueling growth by ensuring that clean, safe and affordable natural gas is readily available for families, power generation, businesses and manufacturers," he said.
But Gov. Cuomo called the executive order a "gross overreach" and said other Trump administration rollbacks of environmental regulations only underscored the importance of the role of states in the Clean Water Act.
"Especially at a time when the federal government has abdicated its responsibility to protect our environment and public health, states like New York are on the front lines protecting our clean water and the public health," he said in a statement.
Other state leaders, some of whom usually agree with streamlining regulations, are also worried about how the orders will affect states' rights.
The Western Governors' Association said in a statement that it has "concerns" about the order's impact.
Spokesman Joe Rassenfoss noted in an email that WGA members and other associations of state officials "have repeatedly expressed to this administration and Congress that any legislative or regulatory changes to Section 401 water quality certification program must preserve states' vital authority under a system of cooperative federalism."
He said the group is looking forward to "substantive, meaningful consultation with federal partners" about any rulemaking efforts.Rewriting LNG rules
The order calls on the Transportation Department's Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration to rewrite the safety rules governing LNG, which it notes were developed nearly 40 years ago primarily to address small facilities for seasonal natural gas storage.
Since then, companies have built first LNG import terminals and then, when domestic gas reserves were unlocked through hydraulic fracturing, LNG export terminals.
Trump gave DOT 13 months to finalize an "update" of the regulations, stipulating that it use "risk-based standards" as much as practical.
Fred Hutchison, the president and CEO of industry group LNG Allies, said modernizing the regulations is most important to companies that have already put new LNG export terminals into operation or are in the midst of building them. They would like to see operational rules similar to those used in other countries.
"PHMSA has been, on its own, trying to initiate such an approach but they have a small LNG-related staff and this, I think, heightens the priority for the agency to move forward with a rulemaking that the industry has been working with them to initiate for a while," Hutchison said.
"It's a good thing to do, and we're glad the administration has decided to get on with it," he added.
But most of the companies he represents are at earlier stages of LNG project development and place a higher priority for federal action on the promotion of trade in U.S. LNG and ensuring that projects can move through the broader federal review process with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, he said.
Another element of the order would address LNG transport by rail car, for which regulations do not currently exist. The Association of American Railroads has pushed for new rules that could allow more domestically produced LNG to meet demand in markets like New England, where pipeline capacity can run short during demand spikes.
Charlie Riedl, executive director at the Center for LNG, said updating the regulations within the timeframe should not be problematic since the industry has been discussing it with regulators.Shareholder resolutions
The part of the orders that caught observers most by surprise was on shareholder resolutions.
A provision regarding energy project financing appears to target increasingly effective efforts by some investment funds to force publicly traded energy companies to address questions about climate change and other issues.
The plan would require the federal agency that oversees funds subject to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, better known as ERISA — which covers common types of retirement plans such as 401(k) and 403(b) plans — to look for "discernable trends" in their investments in the energy sector.
It also calls for the Department of Labor, which oversees ERISA rules, to review its guidance on the fiduciary responsibilities associated with proxy voting.
Danielle Fugere, president of shareholder advocacy group As You Sow, said that because ERISA-compliant funds are required to put their investors' interests first in deciding how to invest, the new guidance could have a chilling effect on their willingness to consider climate change among the factors they weigh.
"I don't think there's anybody who invests solely" on environmental and social governance issues, Fugere said. "These are simply factors among many factors that a company might look at."
"Climate change really is an important risk factor that the market is starting to take into account, as it should. And it's uncomfortable to companies," she added.Legal fallout
Trump's energy orders also set up some juicy legal questions, experts said yesterday.
The border-crossing order attempts to broaden authorities laid out in Trump's Keystone XL oil pipeline permit last month. Trump revoked an earlier State Department approval — one that had been struck down by a federal court — and replaced it with a new presidential permit that may not be subject to National Environmental Policy Act review.
That approach is now being tested in a fresh lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Montana (Energywire, April 8).
"While this order could speed the issuance of a presidential permit, it does not impact the timing or issuance of the multitudes of state and federal permits and authorizations that are required to construct a major piece of cross-border infrastructure," said Fred Jauss, a partner at the law firm Dorsey & Whitney.
Environmental groups, as well as some states and lawmakers, appear poised to oppose Trump's Clean Water Act order, but litigation won't begin until EPA implements the recommended changes.
"They can't circumvent the Clean Water Act and its requirements," said Hana Vizcarra, an attorney at Harvard Law School's environment and energy program. "This is going to be a long process."
Like the Trump administration's proposal last year to open up most federal waters to oil and gas development, the president's Clean Water Act order has the potential to draw heated bipartisan backlash from states.
"This tramples the notion of federalism," said University of Richmond law professor Carl Tobias. "Republicans — at least some of them — purport to care about that. One of the most important compromises in the tension around the federal-state relationship has been to give some of that power back to the states.
"This upends that understanding," he said.
The changes outlined in Trump's order would require an act of Congress, said Jauss.
"The executive order is designed to amplify pressure on state governments that are not providing certifications," he said. "Implementation of this order will undoubtedly end up in the courts."
While Trump's orders could be considered a win for industry, their benefits are an agency action — and a judicial review — away, said David Quigley, an attorney for Akin Gump.
The fact that the border-crossing order still requires some input from the secretary of state, even if ultimate authority rests in the president's hands, is concerning, he said.
"You'll see arguments that the agency involvement may still trigger environmental review," Quigley said.
"You'll be back in the same place."
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2019/04/11/stories/1060153471
-
Senate Set to Confirm Ex-Lobbyist Bernhardt as Interior Chief
Apr 11, 2019 | Reuters (In The New York Times)
By Valerie Volcovici
The U.S. Senate is set to confirm former energy lobbyist David Bernhardt as the next Interior Secretary on Thursday, even as coastal state senators from both parties raise concerns about his plans to vastly expand offshore drilling.
Bernhardt would replace former Montana Congressman Ryan Zinke as the head of the Interior Department, which manages federal and tribal lands and waters and is key to President Donald Trump's efforts to boost domestic crude oil, natural gas and coal production.
He is expected to be approved by the Republican-controlled Senate over the objections of Democrats concerned that his former lobbying for industry means he will favor energy and minerals development over conservation.
Republican Senators including Marco Rubio and Rick Scott of Florida have also raised concerns over the Interior Department's looming five-year offshore drilling plan, which could expand drilling into new parts of the U.S. Gulf of Mexico, Atlantic, Pacific and Arctic. Coastal states like Florida are concerned about the impact of a spill on their tourism industries.
But in a sign that Bernhardt has assuaged some of those concerns in recent days, Rubio said on Twitter Wednesday evening he would vote for Berhardt's confirmation.
"I am VERY confident that when all is said & done no oil drilling is coming to our coastline," Rubio said.
Rubio and Scott had sent a letter to Bernhardt last month urging him to keep Florida protected from offshore drilling and honor a promise Zinke had made prior to his resignation that Florida would be exempted from the plan.
Scott did not comment on Bernhardt's confirmation.
Democratic senators continued to urge that the Senate reject Bernhardt's confirmation because of his close ties to some of the industries that the Interior Department would regulate.
Oregon Democratic Senator Ron Wyden, for example, asked the Department of Justice earlier this week to investigate whether Bernhardt was in violation of lobbying disclosure laws.
“Add these troubling allegations to the long list of reasons why the nomination of David Bernhardt should be stopped, or at minimum delayed, until the Senate and the American people get all of the facts,” said Wyden.
https://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2019/04/11/us/politics/11reuters-usa-interior-bernhardt.html
-
Trump Plan to Ship Natural Gas by Rail Stokes ‘Bomb Train’ Fears
Apr 11, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Jennifer A. Dlouhy
President Donald Trump wants to allow natural gas to be shipped in railroad cars, a move that would open new markets hungry for the fuel but could risk catastrophic accidents if one were to derail.
Trump on Wednesday ordered the Transportation Department to write a new rule permitting super-chilled natural gas to be shipped in specialty tank cars. The order follows a multiyear lobbying campaign by railroads and natural gas advocates, who argue it is needed to serve customers in the U.S. Northeast, where there aren’t enough pipelines, and making it possible to use the gas to power ships and trains.
“There are all sorts of new opportunities where you can use rail much more efficiently,” said Charlie Riedl, head of the Center for Liquefied Natural Gas trade group.
The effort, which could help offset falling rail shipments of coal, mirrors how the oil industry turned to trains to ship crude when there weren’t enough pipelines to meet demand. But a series of spills and other accidents -- including a runaway oil train that derailed and killed more than 40 people in a small Quebec town in 2013 -- have safety advocates warning against putting gas on the rails.
“It’s a disaster waiting to happen,” said Emily Jeffers, a staff attorney with the Center for Biological Diversity, who added that Trump’s initiative evokes earlier concerns about crude-filled “ bomb trains” traveling through American cities. “You’re transporting an extraordinarily flammable and dangerous substance through highly populated areas with basically no environmental protection.”
LNG is natural gas that has been chilled to minus 260 degrees Fahrenheit (minus 167 Celsius) in a process that removes water, carbon dioxide and other compounds, leaving mostly methane in a fluid that takes up less than 1/600th the space it previously occupied as a gas. It is already shipped across oceans around the globe, ferried across the U.S. in trucks and stashed in storage tanks to ensure natural gas is on hand when demand escalates.
LNG does not burn on its own, and it can’t ignite in its liquefied state. The risk comes if a tank car were ruptured and LNG were exposed to the air, triggering the LNG to rapidly convert back into a flammable gas and evaporate.
City RisksFred Millar, an independent rail consultant working with citizen groups opposed to moving LNG by trains, says Trump’s policy change would pose “an unprecedented new level of risk for American cities,” and is being pursued hastily “because of enormous pressure to sell our fracked gas.”
Millar warns that LNG is especially hazardous because of its ability to easily warm to a vigorous boil, forming a flammable gas cloud that can erupt into an unquenchable fire. A 1944 explosion in Cleveland killed more than 100 people after liquefied natural gas from an East Ohio Gas Co. storage tank seeped into the city’s sewer system and ignited, leveling homes and businesses across several city blocks, he said.
However, supporters of rail transport stress that natural gas dissipates rapidly and has such a narrow ignition window it is only able to ignite when mixed with air at a ratio of about 5 to 15 percent, unlike other flammable materials carried by rail. LNG won’t dissolve in water and, if spilled, generally evaporates, leaving no residue behind.
“It’s really hard to even get it to ignite to begin with in a gaseous format, let alone in a liquid format,” the Center for Liquefied Natural Gas’s Riedl said.
The Association of American Railroads emphasizes that LNG is “similar in all relevant properties to other hazardous materials that are currently authorized to be transported by rail.” Besides crude oil, hydrogen chloride and other liquefied gases are now widely transported over American train tracks.
There have been only two accidental releases of cryogenic liquids approved for U.S. rail transport in DOT-113 tank cars in the past 16 years, the association said in a 2017 petition asking regulators to allow the LNG shipments. Railroad group representatives did not respond to emails requesting comment.
“The record reflects that railroads transport cryogenic liquids very safely,” and “rail is undeniably safer” than transporting LNG in trucks, the group said.
Trains already move some liquefied natural gas in North America. The Obama administration in 2015 authorized the Alaska Railroad Corp. to ship LNG using portable containers on flatcars. Canada’s transportation department also allows LNG to be shipped in DOT-113 tank cars.
Open MarketsThe policy change could expand existing gas markets and open up new ones. A prime opportunity is creating a new avenue for getting natural gas to New England, where high winter demand and limited pipeline capacity have caused prices to rise sharply and lured cargoes from Russia. The railroad association said some shippers are interested in transporting LNG by rail from the prolific Marcellus shale formation in Pennsylvania to New England, as well as on routes between the U.S. and Mexico.
Rail shipments could out-compete other sources of LNG in the region, analysts said, even factoring in added costs to liquefy natural gas and transport it in tank cars. New England imported six cargoes of LNG at an average price of $8.88 per million British Thermal Units in January, even though the same quantity of Appalachian natural gas traded at $3.25.
Maritime Fuel“That means liquefaction and transport costs of over $5 would still make it economic to liquefy U.S. gas and ship it by rail to New England,” said Anastacia Dialynas, a BNEF oil and gas analyst.
Rail transport could similarly ease bottlenecks getting Permian gas from West Texas and New Mexico to the U.S. Gulf Coast, Riedl said.
Industry leaders point to other possibilities, including serving burgeoning demand for LNG as a maritime fuel, amid looming international restrictions on high-sulfur diesel. Rail shipments of LNG could enable the creation of new fueling locations at ports in Florida and the U.S. West Coast, without requiring expensive new liquefaction infrastructure.
It could take more than a year for the Transportation Department to write new rules governing LNG in tank cars.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/trump-plan-to-ship-natural-gas-by-rail-stokes-bomb-train-fears
-
Republicans Who Can’t Ignore Climate Change Seek GOP Solutions
Apr 11, 2019 | BNA Daily Environment Report
By Ari Natter
Texas Senator John Cornyn, who once voted against a measure that said climate change was man-made, is now helping fellow Republicans craft legislation to combat global warming through “energy innovation.”
“Coming up with lower emissions is a good thing,” Cornyn said in an interview.
He’s not alone. With the exception of President Donald Trump, Republicans have largely gone from ignoring or expressing doubt about climate change to acknowledging the scientific consensus in the face of growing public alarm over storms and wildfires and pressure to come up with an alternative to progressive Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s “Green New Deal.”
That’s forced them to craft a policy response that doesn’t alienate supporters in the fossil-fuel industry or contradict their long-standing emphasis on increasing energy production.
Some of those proposals may get an airing Thursday when Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Chairman Lisa Murkowski, a Republican from oil-rich Alaska, convenes a hearing on “potential solutions to help address global climate change.”
“There is a remarkable shift going on,” said Alex Flint, the executive director of Alliance for Market Solutions, a conservative group that favors a tax on carbon to reduce emissions of the planet-warming gas. “There is a sincere effort by several Republicans to develop policy proposals to address climate change.”
Among the ideas under discussion are clean-energy mandates and tax credits that promote the use of alternative power sources as well as spending on new energy technology and electric vehicles -- ideas that just a few years ago were shunned by the party.
“It’s up to Republicans to say what we are for,” said Tennessee Republican Lamar Alexander, who recently took to the Senate floor to propose a New Manhattan Project for Clean Energy -- a nod to the massive mobilization during World War II to build an atomic bomb. “Instead of ending a war, the goal of this New Manhattan Project will be to minimize the disruption on our lives and economies caused by climate change.”
He proposes spending $6 billion a year on energy research and scoring huge advancements in nuclear power technology, electric vehicles and their batteries, as well as solar power, natural gas and carbon capture.
And Alexander, who serves as a senior member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, said he believed “almost all of it” could be achieved through Congress’s regular spending bill process, such as through boosting funding for the Energy Department.
“We are moving ahead,” Alexander said in an interview.
Other Republicans are exploring mandates that require states to produce a certain percentage of electricity from sources such as renewables and nuclear power. In the case of one so-called clean energy standard being crafted as part of a larger package by West Virginia Representative David McKinley, carbon capture technologies would count as well.
Though largely unproven on an industrial scale, carbon capture aims to render coal climate-friendly by intercepting carbon dioxide emissions.
“We’ve had an approach here in Washington for too long: Pay penalties first and then innovate later,” McKinley, a staunch advocate of his home state’s coal industry, said in an interview. “Why don’t we do the reverse? Innovate first and then once we do the innovation then we can set standards that are achievable.”
Murkowski, the Alaska senator who has long acknowledged climate change, said a clean energy standard is something she might back. “I’m open to a discussion about what that could look like,” she said in an interview.‘Political Peril’
Critics of the Republican climate measures question their sincerity and say they don’t go nearly far enough.
“Republicans are under pressure because the underlying concern is rising across the political spectrum,” said David Doniger, a senior official at the Natural Resources Defense Council. “Maybe now they see political peril in blowing the problem off.”
It’s not an easy transition for the party that not long ago fired up supporters with chants of “drill, baby drill.” One solution to conundrum is embracing energy innovation -- a broad term that has come to encompass increasing research and development that critics have said amounts to a delaying tactic.
The innovation bill being crafted by Cornyn takes aim at spurring the development of new technologies to capture carbon emitted when natural gas is used to generate electricity. Florida Republican Representative Matt Gaetz, a Trump ally, last week unveiled the “Green Real Deal” in contrast to New York’s Ocasio-Cortez and her “Green New Deal.”
It’s a climate resolution that calls for reducing carbon dioxide emissions through increased spending on “next generation” low-emission energy technologies including carbon capture, renewables and nuclear power.‘Crushing Regulations’
“Unilaterally disarming the American economy through crushing regulations will empower Washington but few others,” Gaetz said. “Our rise in global leadership on climate must be fueled by American innovators.”
“Are the politics influencing this? Certainly,” said Carlos Curbelo, a former Florida Republican representative who backed a carbon tax but lost his re-election campaign last year. “Many Republicans probably realize the path back to the majority in the House means having a serious answer on climate change.”
For New York Republican Representative Tom Reed, the answers lies within a tweak to the tax code. The member of the House tax writing committee said he plans to introduce legislation that would provide new “technology-neutral” tax credits that reward new energy sources and energy storage. Similar to a bill Reed introduced late last year, the value of the credits would scale-down as an energy source’s share of generating production increases.
Senator Thom Tillis, a Republican from North Carolina, who as a member of his state legislature helped craft policies that aided the booming solar industry, said he was eyeing legislation that could help advance solar power nationally. One way it might do that is by spurring advancements in energy storage -- a technology capable of supplying grids with solar power, even when the sun isn’t shining.
And Utah Republican Senator Mitt Romney said he is working on a “climate plan” with Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. “We’re looking at all the options,” Romney said.
Environmentalists are largely taking a wait and see approach, awaiting more details and what, if anything Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell would bring to the Senate floor for a vote.
McConnell, a Republican who hails from the coal-heavy state of Kentucky, said last month he believed humans were causing climate change.
“The question is how do you address it,” he said.
https://news.bloombergenvironment.com/environment-and-energy/republicans-who-cant-ignore-climate-change-seek-gop-solutions
-
Ex-Trump Adviser Credits Green New Deal for GOP Shift
Apr 11, 2019 | E&E Energywire
By David Iaconangelo
President Trump's former energy adviser George David Banks predicted yesterday that the Green New Deal would continue to spark Republican counterproposals on climate, particularly plans focused on low-carbon technologies.
"I really do credit the Green New Deal — at least in part, I'm not going to say it's totally responsible — for some of the change in the way Republicans approach the climate messaging component, particularly in the House," said Banks on a panel at the Columbia Global Energy Summit in New York.
"I'm really pleased with the steps Republicans have taken on that front. ... I do expect more of that to occur, and not just in the House, but in the Senate, as well. [With] most of the focus in the innovation space," he added.
Banks, who left his administration post in early 2018, now serves as executive vice president at the American Council on Capital Formation, where he runs a conservative energy and climate project.
He also suggested the Trump administration was guilty of "overreach" in its ongoing attempt to freeze fuel-efficiency and emissions standards.
"You could make the argument from a Republican perspective that, OK, the previous administration overreached on the regulatory side, and maybe now the extreme has happened, that we've overreached on the other side," he said. "I don't know where the balance is."
On the sidelines of the Columbia event, Banks applauded Trump executive orders signed yesterday that limit states' permitting authority over pipeline projects, which some liberal governors have used to keep fossil-fuel infrastructure from being built.
The orders are an "incredibly important step" for the administration's foreign and domestic energy goals, he said.
"I don't really buy the argument" that new pipelines would create a long-term competitive advantage for fossil fuels over renewables, he said.
"You need to have reliable baseload generation ... until we figure out some of these breakthrough technologies for renewables, they're not going to be dispatchable 24/7."
The panel also featured Christy Goldfuss, senior vice president for energy and environment policy at the Center for American Progress, a liberal think tank, and Jason Bordoff, who directs Columbia's Center on Global Energy Policy.
Much of the discussion centered around the Green New Deal, a policy concept and climate plan in Congress that none of the panelists fully supported.
At least two competing policy sketches have surfaced from conservatives since the Green New Deal resolution was introduced in February, although neither include timelines or specific emissions-reduction figures. One alternative released in March by Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) would double funding for clean-energy research and development over a five-year period.
Among the ideas that Banks cited as possible objects of Republican support included a clean-energy standard and resilience infrastructure.
"Some of these pieces, if we can pull it apart, have some promise," he said.
https://www.eenews.net/energywire/2019/04/11/stories/1060153401
-
EPA Floats Nine New Candidates for CASAC Vacancy
Apr 11, 2019 | Inside EPA
EPA is floating nine candidates to fill one vacancy on its Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC), the panel charged with overseeing reviews of federal air quality standards that has been facing a volley of criticism in recent months from former panel members, Democrats and environmentalists.
In a list published for public comment April 9, EPA outlines the experience and qualifications of the replacement candidates to fill a seat once occupied by a departing former U.S. Army Corps of Engineers environmental specialist. EPA will take public comment on the candidates until April 30.
The successful candidate will step into a committee under siege, with critics charging that it lacks the capacity and expertise to properly advise EPA on how to set its national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS).
The Trump EPA scrapped a subcommittee formed to help the seven-member chartered committee with its oversight of the agency’s review of NAAQS for particulate matter (PM), and also opted not to recruit a similar subpanel for its ozone NAAQS review.
The agency is hoping to speed the reviews and minimize CASAC’s involvement, but CASAC has struggled to cope with the workload presented by the PM review, due for completion in December 2020 under EPA’s self-imposed deadline. That review is already two years past its Clean Air Act-mandated deadline for completion. The panel has not started its work in earnest on the ozone review, which faces an October 2020 statutory deadline to be finished.
Adding to the problems, the Trump EPA’s CASAC chairman, industry consultant Tony Cox, is pushing a controversial new approach to NAAQS reviews that would take a much more restrictive view of how EPA determines that air pollution causes a given health problem. This has prompted pushback from some current CASAC members, who want a more measured approach. The committee has agreed on the need for additional manpower, however, beyond just replacing departing member Timothy Lewis, who recently retired from federal service.
EPA called for candidates with expertise in ecology. This is evident in some of the candidates, for example, Dr. Robert W. Howarth, a professor of ecology and environmental biology at Cornell University. Howarth is a noted skeptic of hydraulic fracturing for natural gas, warning that more drilling may lead to increased greenhouse gas emissions.
Another candidate, Dr. Katherine von Stackelberg, is a research scientist at the Harvard Center for Climate, Health and the Global Environment and an affiliate at the Harvard Center for Risk Analysis. EPA describes her as experienced in “designing and implementing human health and ecological risk assessments.”
A third candidate, Bill Jackson, recently retired from the National Forest System of the USDA Forest Service, where he provided technical advice to land managers and state air agencies on how air pollution affects forest resources, with particular expertise in the concept of pollution “critical loads” on the ecosystem.
And a fourth possible pick, Dr. Danica Lombardozzi, is a project scientist in the Terrestrial Sciences Section of the Climate and Global Dynamics Laboratory at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, and an expert in the ecosystem effects of air pollution, and ozone in particular, EPA says.
Another nominee, Dr. José D Fuentes, is an atmospheric science professor at the Pennsylvania State University, and one of two candidates with a primary expertise in atmospheric chemistry and air pollution. The other such candidate, Dr. Richard Peltier, is an environmental health science professor at the University of Massachusetts Amherst. He has a “substantial focus in chemical speciation of aerosol components, source apportionment, and attribution of specific sources to specific health outcomes,” EPA says.
Other candidates have particular expertise in toxicology, including: Dr. Ronald J. Kendall, head of the Wildlife Toxicology Laboratory and professor of environmental toxicology in the Department of Environmental Toxicology at Texas Tech University; Dr. Wayne Landis, professor and director at the Institute of Environmental Toxicology at Western Washington University; and Dr. Bernard Singleton, associate professor of biology at Dillard University.
https://insideepa.com/daily-feed/epa-floats-nine-new-candidates-casac-vacancy
-
'This Is What We Would Expect From Climate Change'
Apr 11, 2019 | E&E Climatewire
By Daniel Cusick
More than 10 million Americans are seeking shelter this morning from rain, sleet, snow, hail, ice and wind as one of largest spring storms on record churns across the Great Plains into the Missouri and Mississippi river basins.
The storm, created by a powerful collision of cold and warm air masses over the central Rockies and western plains, has been described by some as a "bomb cyclone," a technical term referring to an atmospheric pressure drop of at least 24 millibars over 24 hours.
This week's storm may fall just short of the 24x24 definition, experts say, but it bears striking similarity to an earlier bomb cyclone that tracked across the same region of the country in mid-March.
"We're seeing a very similar path to that [earlier] storm," said Marc Chenard, a meteorologist at NOAA's National Weather Prediction Center in College Park, Md. "That one was a little stronger, and it intensified quicker and deeper. We may not get the same extremes out of this one, but it's not going to be too far off."
As of yesterday afternoon, atmospheric pressure at the storm's center had dropped 19 millibars and was still falling, Chenard said. Much of the storm's precipitation was trending north, he said, meaning it could produce more snow than rain.
Experts say such storms, which undergo a rapid intensification process called "bombogenesis," are not uncommon in the spring.
But the close timing and high intensity of the recent storms have raised new questions about whether the middle of the country is experiencing a distinct climate change signal, just as the Atlantic and Gulf coasts have seen a recent rise in hurricane frequency and intensity.
Andreas Prein, a climate scientist and expert on extreme weather events at the National Center for Atmospheric Research, said it is certain that this year's Midwest cyclones, like other extreme events, are influenced by changes in the climate.
These include higher average air temperatures that fuel warm, wet air masses drifting up from the Gulf of Mexico. Pronounced shifts in the jet stream also cause greater temperature swings across North America and can intensify weather where very warm and very cold air meet.
"In many ways, this is what we would expect from climate change," Prein said from NCAR's offices in Boulder, Colo., which saw a 50-degrees-Fahrenheit drop in temperature between Tuesday and yesterday. "The stronger the temperature gradient between the cold air in the north and the warm air in the south, the more intense these cyclones will be."
Blowing snow was accumulating last night as far east as Minneapolis-St. Paul. The National Weather Service issued high wind and red flag fire warnings from Missouri to southern Arizona, where low humidity, high wind and dry vegetation have turned millions of acres into a tinderbox.
Officials said heavy snow across portions of Nebraska, South Dakota and Minnesota will also exacerbate already severe flood damage across the Midwest, especially on the Missouri River, which saw record flooding in parts of Iowa, Nebraska and Missouri less than a month ago.
Republican governors of those three states issued a public plea last week to the Army Corps of Engineers and the Federal Emergency Management Agency to help flood-ravaged communities "in cutting red tape and rebuilding bigger and better than before to keep people safe."
The March extreme weather caused breaches to dozens of levees, both federal and nonfederal. State and local officials remain unsure how they will be repaired, who will pay and at what cost.
Yesterday's storm was also disrupting air travel to and from hub airports like Denver and Minneapolis. It may resubmerge critical rail and road infrastructure as runoff from heavy rain and melting snow enters the Missouri and Mississippi river basins late this week and early next.
The nation's two largest railroads, Union Pacific and BNSF, said last week they had reopened most of the rail lines affected by the March floods. Spokespersons for the two railroads did not respond to inquiries yesterday.
In an April 5 notice to customers, Union Pacific Executive Vice President Kenny Rocker said workers had "made significant progress restoring operations throughout the Midwest, and as a result, our performance metrics are showing signs of improvement."
Farmers remain among the most vulnerable to the extreme weather. They faced $1 billion in damages to farm property, equipment, buildings and other essential infrastructure during last month's floods.
Many farmers are also worried about field conditions after the water recedes, as saturated soils and erosion create delays in spring plantings. One small consolation for farmers is that soils have had several additional weeks of thawing, which will improve absorption capacity.
Snow totals were expected to be deepest in eastern South Dakota and southwestern Minnesota, where as much as 30 inches of new snow were forecast through tomorrow.
South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem (R) closed nonessential government offices in 52 counties and reopened the state's Emergency Management Center as weather conditions deteriorated yesterday. "We're calling it historic because of the widespread heavy snow. We will set some records," Mike Connelly, a NWS meteorologist in Aberdeen, S.D., told the Associated Press.
The governors of Minnesota and Colorado said National Guard troops would be ready to assist citizens in need. Officials in Colorado closed a 150-mile stretch of Interstate 76 from east of Denver to the Nebraska border, the AP reported.
Minnesota could challenge a decade-old record for a single April snowstorm. A spring blizzard in 2008 dumped 32 inches in northeast Minnesota, according to records kept by the Department of Natural Resources.
https://www.eenews.net/climatewire/2019/04/11/stories/1060153257
-
Despite Cancer Risks, EPA Proposes Status Quo for Turbines
Apr 11, 2019 | E&E Greenwire
By Sean Reilly
EPA has tentatively decided to make no changes to its existing limits on emissions of hazardous air pollutants from a type of turbine used in power plants and pipeline compressor stations.
The decision comes despite the agency's acknowledging that the status quo poses an added cancer risk to thousands of people.
Under a recently signed proposed rule, EPA regulators would leave in place the original 2004 standards for what are formally known as stationary combustion turbines. While the proposal says that about 42,000 people currently face "an increased cancer risk at or above" the agency's 1-in-1-million benchmark because of toxic turbine emissions, it adds that the potential peril to the individuals most exposed is still "well below ... the presumptive limit of acceptability."
The proposal, set for publication in tomorrow's Federal Register, comes in the wake of a residual risk and technology review and will carry a 45-day public comment period; a public hearing will be held upon request.
If made final, the rule would apply to about 240 facilities that collectively release more than 5,300 tons of formaldehyde and other toxic pollutants each year.
In keeping with recently promulgated air toxics updates for other industrial sources that follow a 2008 court decision, the proposal would scrap regulatory exemptions for excess emissions stemming from plant shutdowns, startups and malfunctions; it would also require electronic reporting of performance test results and compliance reports. Otherwise, EPA has preliminarily determined that risks from turbine emissions "are acceptable and that no new cost-effective controls are available," according to a summary accompanying the draft rule.
EPA classifies formaldehyde as a probable human carcinogen under conditions of unusually high or prolonged exposure, according to the National Cancer Institute. The some 42,000 people at increased risk of contracting cancer because of turbine emissions disproportionately include low-income and minority populations, according to data in the proposed rule.
Under the Clean Air Act, EPA was supposed to have conducted the review within eight years after setting the original standards; the updated assessments are intended to explore whether emissions controls have since improved or whether any "residual risk" remains to the public that would merit stricter pollution limits.
As E&E News reported in January, the agency had previously concluded that no changes in long-standing air toxics standards were needed for more than a half-dozen other industrial sources in the wake of similar reviews (Greenwire, Jan. 21).
Under an EPA schedule set in response to a 2017 order from Judge Tanya Chutkan of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, EPA plans to finish the turbine standards review by next March (Greenwire, March 15, 2017).
https://www.eenews.net/greenwire/2019/04/11/stories/1060154307
Industry and Association News
TSCA News
Chemical Management News
Energy News
Chemical Security News - There are no clips to report at this time.
Transportation and Infrastructure News
Environment News
Add recipients
Suggested