Preview Newsletter
ACC PM
-
(ACC Blog) Registration is Now Open for North America’s Longest-Running Polyurethanes Conference
Apr 7, 2015 | American Chemistry Matters
The 2015 Polyurethanes Technical Conference, hosted by the Center for the Polyurethanes Industry, offers the unique convergence of industry expertise, professional networking and regulatory insight. -
Environmentalists Fault TSCA Bill's High Bar For EPA Regulating 'Articles'
Apr 7, 2015 | InsideEPA
By Bridget DiCosmo
Environmentalists are criticizing language in a bipartisan Senate Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) reform bill they say would "hamstring" EPA's ability to regulate chemicals in "articles," or products, by requiring the agency to prove that consumers face "significant exposure" to harmful substances in articles before EPA could regulate them. -
EPA Consults on Proposed Nano Reporting Rule
Apr 7, 2015 | Chemical Watch
The US EPA has published its proposed Rule on record keeping and reporting requirements for nanomaterials. Under the proposal companies will have to report on:production volume;exposure and release information; andexisting data concerning environmental and health effects (CW26 March 2015). -
Chemicals in Pet Products Bill Enters New York Senate
Apr 7, 2015 | Chemical Watch
A bill on the regulation of toxic chemicals in pet products and the establishment of an interstate chemical clearing house was introduced to New York state's Senate Environmental Conservation Committee on 6 April by Democratic senator Tony Avella. -
Infrastructure Facing Serious Attacks Online, Survey Finds
Apr 7, 2015 | The Hill - Cybersecurity
By Elise Viebeck
Hackers are trying to tamper with critical infrastructure with cyberattacks designed to delete files, manipulate equipment and shut down networks, according to a new international survey. -
Oil Spills in Mont. River Invite More Scrutiny Over Pipeline Regs
Apr 7, 2015 | E&E - Energywire
Two pipelines consecutively dumping 70,000 gallons of crude oil into Montana's Yellowstone River within the past four years have sparked concerns over federal standards set for pipeline safety. -
(ACC Mentioned) Green Day
Apr 7, 2015 | The Sacramento Bee
By Alexei Koseff
The Green California Summit, a two-day exposition of new technologies and practices that could help the state achieve its environmental goals, kicks off at 8:30 a.m. in the Sacramento Convention Center with a keynote speech from de León, who is pushing legislation this year to increase the percentage of electricity California derives from renewable resources. -
Maryland Lawmakers Pass Two-Year Fracking Ban
Apr 7, 2015 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
Maryland’s Senate passed a bill that would institute a two-year ban on the controversial hydraulic fracturing process. -
States, Industry Groups Back Push For High Court Review Of CWA 'Shield'
Apr 7, 2015 | InsideEPA
By David LaRoss
Three states and several major mining, energy and other industry groups are backing calls for the Supreme Court to review an appellate decision limiting a Clean Water Act (CWA) “shield” against legal liability under EPA's industrial stormwater general permit, saying the case was flawed and the ruling creates uncertainty for permit holders. -
Carly Fiorina: 'Liberal Environmentalists' to Blame for Calif. Drought
Apr 7, 2015 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
Potential presidential candidate Carly Fiorina blamed “liberal environmentalists” for California’s historic drought. -
McConnell Campaign a 'New Level of Antagonism' -- Former EPA Chief
Apr 7, 2015 | E&E - Greenwire
By Robin Bravender
Former U.S. EPA Administrator William Reilly said yesterday that a political campaign waged by the Senate's top Republican is without precedent. -
Bechtel's Avidan Discusses Future-Proofing the U.S.'s Energy Infrastructure
Apr 7, 2015 | E&E - TV
With the Department of Energy's Quadrennial Energy Review on the country's energy infrastructure expected to be released this month, how can the private sector work toward future-proofing the nation's power infrastructure? -
Hope for Bipartisan Action on Energy
Apr 7, 2015 | The Hill - Congress Blog
By Susan Stephenson
Hold onto your hats, there just may be bipartisan legislation on the horizon. And who would have guessed that after the hyper-partisan Keystone XL showdown, the topic to come together on would be of all things, energy? -
Obama Seeks to Link Climate Change to Health
Apr 7, 2015 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
The Obama administration is launching a series of efforts aimed at confronting what it says are the negative health effects of climate change. -
White House Plays Up Health Link in Newest Warming Initiative
Apr 7, 2015 | E&E - Greenwire
By Jean Chemnick
President Obama today will try to drum up public concern about the link between climate change and health problems, hosting a roundtable with senior staff and announcing a set of administration actions boosting research on the issue.
Industry and Association News
Chemical Management News
Chemical Security News
Energy and Environment News
Transportation News - There are no clips to report at this time
-
(ACC Blog) Registration is Now Open for North America’s Longest-Running Polyurethanes Conference
Apr 7, 2015 | American Chemistry Matters
The 2015 Polyurethanes Technical Conference, hosted by the Center for the Polyurethanes Industry, offers the unique convergence of industry expertise, professional networking and regulatory insight.
Featuring more than 80 presentations on topics spanning everything from cutting-edge polyurethanes technologies and chemistry-focused technical discussions to big-picture analysis of industry technology trends, the 58th annual Polyurethanes Technical Conference remains a benchmark for the industry’s top technical discussions and presentations.
Additional events include CPI’s annual Polyurethane Professional Development Program, the Industry Reception, the Table Top Exhibition, the Innovation Award and a Pre-Conference Workshop on Environmental, Health and Safety Issues.
During this year’s Conference, CPI will unveil the 2014 End-Use Market Survey on the Polyurethanes Industry in the United States, Canada and Mexico. The survey has been published for more than 25 years and provides a breakdown of polyurethane production by type and by major end-use market for each country over a two-year period, as well as historic trends, market drivers, and key issues.
The conference takes place at the Gaylord Palms Resort in Orlando, Florida, from Monday, October 5, to Wednesday, October 7, 2015.
Click here for more information on early registration specials and discounted room rates.
-
Environmentalists Fault TSCA Bill's High Bar For EPA Regulating 'Articles'
Apr 7, 2015 | InsideEPA
By Bridget DiCosmo
Environmentalists are criticizing language in a bipartisan Senate Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) reform bill they say would "hamstring" EPA's ability to regulate chemicals in "articles," or products, by requiring the agency to prove that consumers face "significant exposure" to harmful substances in articles before EPA could regulate them.
"To be clear, the bill would set up a new hurdle for the EPA that would be more harmful to public health than current law," Environmental Working Group's (EWG) Alex Formuzis and Tina Sigurdson write in a recent blog postanalyzing the bill floated by Sens. David Vitter (R-LA) and Tom Udall (D-NM).
EWG claims that the language could result in EPA having to individually evaluate every product containing a chemical the agency has determined does not meet its safety standard in order to take action to restrict the substance in that product, or "article" -- an impossible task given limited agency resources.
But industry is pushing back on the concerns, saying EPA's existing TSCA authority to regulate use of substances in articles has long been in need of clarity, and that the agency should have to show a "clear link" between use of a substance in an article and potential harm to human health prior to restricting that substance in a product.
"We are not advocating that EPA should not have the authority to regulate chemicals in articles, we are simply saying that a higher threshold should be met before doing so," one industry source says.
The source adds that, "Obviously, there is a threat of exposure if a particular chemical is found in baby bottles or baby cribs. But what if that same chemical is also found in wire coverings underneath the hood of the car? Does it make sense to ban it for that use if there is virtually no potential for exposure? No."
The articles language at issue in the Vitter-Udall legislation says that if EPA intends to "prohibit or otherwise restrict an article on the basis of a chemical substance contained in that article, the [agency] Administrator shall have evidence of significant exposure to the chemical substance from such article."
The language is a change from the existing TSCA enacted in 1976, which does not explicitly address regulations to restrict articles but allows EPA to label articles that contain a chemical substance the agency has determined does not meet its safety standard of "unreasonable risk" to health and the environment.
But EPA has become increasingly "more vocal on the issue" of its TSCA authority regarding articles, the industry source says, pointing to the agency's December 2014 significant new use (SNUR) rule for Benzidine-Based Chemical Substances; Di-n-pentyl Phthalate (DnPP); and Alkanes, C12-13, Chloro.
The SNUR would specifically require manufacturers or processors of nine substances to notify EPA at least 90 days before commencing such activities for uses designated in the rule, but specifically states that the rule also covers substances that are "part of an article" which EPA has previously exempted from such SNURs.
"In doing so, the rule breaks with the vast majority of SNURs to date, and illustrates EPA's more aggressive interpretation of its authority under TSCA," says a Jan. 7 news alert authored by Beveridge & Diamond attorneys Mark Duvall and Alexandra Wyatt. "It likely provides the groundwork and justification for future TSCA rules targeting chemicals in articles," according to the alert.
Regulating Articles
Despite the industry view of EPA taking a more "aggressive" approach to regulating articles, the EWG analysis warns that the TSCA reform bill could make future articles regulation impossible.
EWG's concerns closely mirror remarks made by EPA toxics chief Jim Jones during a March 18 Senate Environment & Public Works Committee hearing on the bill. He said the agency has some concerns over the articles language being at odds with EPA's 2009 principles for TSCA reform, particularly the principle that "EPA should have clear authority to take risk management actions when chemicals do not meet the safety standard."
In response to a question from Sen. Ed Markey (D-MA) on EPA's ability to regulate flame retardants under current TSCA, Jones expressed some concerns, saying, "This refers to the articles discussion," adding that the language could create a "fair amount of analytical burden" for EPA to assess chemicals already a component of a product.
Markey and Sen. Barbara Boxer (D-CA) have introduced a competing TSCA reform bill that would give EPA broad authority to regulate chemicals in articles. The Democratic bill has EWG's backing, while the Environmental Defense Fund is supporting the Vitter-Udall legislation.
Vitter at the hearing said lawmakers were aware of EPA's concerns and believed they could come to an agreement on the issue, just one of several contentious issues in the TSCA debate.
But a second industry source says that further clarification on the issue would likely be useful as discussions on the legislation continue, but that it is "not clear that the language in the bill is imposing an obligation for EPA to review products at the level of specificity suggested by the EWG comments."
That source points out that exposure is an essential element of determining which "risks" warrant action, given that risk is calculated by measuring a combination of exposure and hazards of a substance.
"The world of articles is much more diverse and complex than we see in the traditional TSCA world of substances and mixtures, and the range of exposures is quite broad," the source says.
A third industry source says EPA's policy on articles under TSCA is currently unclear, and that industry for years has urged the agency to issue a "coherent policy that both protects the public and addresses some serious competition issues raised by imported goods and articles containing chemical substances believed to be of concern."
However, while the bill, S. 697 is aimed at addressing the issue, that source says, the lack of a definition of what constitutes a "significant exposure" in absence of clarity "could pose problems," and that the "answer is to be clearer in the legislation to define broadly the circumstances under which an article should be regulated."
Regulating Asbestos
EWG in the blog post writes that the articles language in the Vitter-Udall bill would likely pose an obstacle for EPA in regulating the use of asbestos in articles. EPA tried in 1991 to ban asbestos under TSCA but failed in large part due to a federal court's finding that EPA had not met the law's burden of identifying the "least burdensome" alternative.
The asbestos ban, struck down by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit in 1991 in Corrosion Proof Fittings v. EPA is commonly used to illustrate a major failing of current TSCA and highlight the need to overhaul the decades-old law.
A legal source says that EWG's interpretation appears to be "basically correct," but the second industry source says that under the S. 697 bill, "EPA would have no difficulty banning or restricting asbestos nor would they have difficulty in showing that asbestos in articles meets the higher harm needed to regulate an article."
Supporters of the legislation say that the bill has successfully eliminated the major statutory obstacles that prevented EPA from regulating asbestos, but environmentalists argue that while the cost considerations may be modified in the S. 697 bill, the legislation still "explicitly requires" cost to be a factor in risk management decisions under section 6.
Instead, some environmentalists are supporting the Boxer-Markey bill that would explicitly require EPA to immediately list asbestos in all its forms as a high priority chemical under the new prioritization regime the reform bills would establish, to complete a safety assessment and determination within two years, and take final action on a rule within three years of passage.
-
EPA Consults on Proposed Nano Reporting Rule
Apr 7, 2015 | Chemical Watch
The US EPA has published its proposed Rule on record keeping and reporting requirements for nanomaterials. Under the proposal companies will have to report on:production volume;exposure and release information; andexisting data concerning environmental and health effects (CW26 March 2015).
Comments must be submitted to the agency by 6 July.
-
Chemicals in Pet Products Bill Enters New York Senate
Apr 7, 2015 | Chemical Watch
A bill on the regulation of toxic chemicals in pet products and the establishment of an interstate chemical clearing house was introduced to New York state's Senate Environmental Conservation Committee on 6 April by Democratic senator Tony Avella.
A similar bill was introduced in the New York Assembly in January.
-
Infrastructure Facing Serious Attacks Online, Survey Finds
Apr 7, 2015 | The Hill - Cybersecurity
By Elise Viebeck
Hackers are trying to tamper with critical infrastructure with cyberattacks designed to delete files, manipulate equipment and shut down networks, according to a new international survey.
Groups that manage critical infrastructure in North and South America reported that they field cyberattacks that are intended to be destructive, as well as to those meant to steal data.The finding challenges the notion that most cyberattackers around the world are more interested in gleaning information than sabotaging target computer systems. Security experts warn of the possibility of a major infrastructure outage connected with nation states’ growing access to U.S. systems.
While critical infrastructure is frequently under attack, however, breaches are rarely disclosed to the public.
The survey, conducted by the Organization of American States, found that hackers have sought to shut down computer networks, delete files and manipulate equipment within 40, 44 and 54 percent of the respondent groups.
Another 60 percent have fielded attempts to steal data, according to Reuters, which reported the findings prior to their official release on Tuesday.
Respondents include companies in the communications, security and finance industries. Close to one-third were public entities, Reuters reported.
One security expert predicted that 2015 will be the year that the Western hemisphere suffers a “catastrophe” related to a cyberattack on its infrastructure.
“We are facing a clear and present danger where we have non-state actors willing to destroy things,” said Tom Kellerman, vice president with security firm Trend Micro, which compiled the survey. -
Oil Spills in Mont. River Invite More Scrutiny Over Pipeline Regs
Apr 7, 2015 | E&E - Energywire
Two pipelines consecutively dumping 70,000 gallons of crude oil into Montana's Yellowstone River within the past four years have sparked concerns over federal standards set for pipeline safety.
At least 39 gas and oil pipelines are buried fewer than 10 feet underneath the Yellowstone River. Federal regulations requires a minimum of 48 inches of soil to cover pipelines set in rivers 100 feet or wider.
The Yellowstone River's wildly fluctuating channel flow, along with its tendency to cut deeper into its riverbeds, increases the danger of leaks into the water from shallowly buried pipelines.
Karen Boyd, a geomorphologist who has documented decades of change along the Yellowstone River, said that federal regulations fail to plan for site-specific issues.
"I guess my issue with the pipelines is that there are very general requirements for the pipelines, and it's really hard to take into account all those things," Boyd said.
However, pipeline companies in Montana have restyled plans to dig deeper for new pipelines near rivers.
"Obviously, we're in the business of transporting petroleum, and that's a responsibility, one we take real serious," said Mike Stahly, pipeline safety manager in the Montana-based energy outfit CHS Inc. "We need to take care of the public and the environment, and obviously leaks on the Yellowstone aren't acceptable" (Tom Lutey, Casper [Wyo.] Star-Tribune/Billings Gazette, April 5). -- KS
-
Apr 7, 2015 | The Sacramento Bee
By Alexei Koseff
The Green California Summit, a two-day exposition of new technologies and practices that could help the state achieve its environmental goals, kicks off at 8:30 a.m. in the Sacramento Convention Center with a keynote speech from de León, who is pushing legislation this year to increase the percentage of electricity California derives from renewable resources. The bill will be up for its first hearing later in the Senate Energy, Utilities, and Communications Committee, 9:30 a.m. in Room 3191 of the Capitol, with billionaire environmentalist Tom Steyer on hand to testify in its favor. With a renewed focus this year on reducing California’s greenhouse gas emissions, theAmerican Chemistry Council, the California Building Industry Association and others have also planned a showcase of environmentally-friendly construction that could help homes and business save energy and water, 11 a.m. on the north lawn.
Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article17585741.html#storylink=cpy -
Maryland Lawmakers Pass Two-Year Fracking Ban
Apr 7, 2015 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
Maryland’s Senate passed a bill that would institute a two-year ban on the controversial hydraulic fracturing process.
The 45-2 vote Monday follows a House vote to ban fracking for oil and natural gas for three years and require a study into its health and economic impact, the Baltimore Sun reports.
Environmentalists, who say that fracking can be linked to groundwater contamination and earthquakes, were more pleased with the House bill’s study provision that the Senate bill lacks.
“We are unconvinced that a regulatory approach can protect Maryland, and we are also disappointed the panel to review the available public health studies on fracking was removed from the original bill,” Ann Bristow, spokeswoman for Don’t Frack Maryland, told the Sun.
Gov. Larry Hogan (R) said he supports fracking in the state, but has not taken a position on the moratorium bills.
State Sen. George Edwards (R), the lead opponent of efforts to curb fracking, voted for the Senate bill and said it was a “good first step” toward eventually instituting a proper regulatory environment for fracking, and it would take two years for a fracker to get a permit anyway.
Edwards’ district would be the most likely to host frackers, owing to its location atop the Marcellus shale formation.
-
States, Industry Groups Back Push For High Court Review Of CWA 'Shield'
Apr 7, 2015 | InsideEPA
By David LaRoss
Three states and several major mining, energy and other industry groups are backing calls for the Supreme Court to review an appellate decision limiting a Clean Water Act (CWA) “shield” against legal liability under EPA's industrial stormwater general permit, saying the case was flawed and the ruling creates uncertainty for permit holders.
In an April 2 amicus brief, the states and industry groups say the justices should step in to protect permit holders from the lower court's “hyper-technical” reading of EPA's multi-sector general permit (MSGP) for stormwater, which they say will open “good-faith permit holders” to citizen suits and other enforcement actions. They want the high court to reverse the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit's ruling to lift the limit on using the shield.
Under normal circumstances, if a Clean Water Act (CWA) permit fails to achieve water quality goals, regulators “can, through applicable regulations, alter or revoke permits as necessary to achieve environmental protection,” says the brief. “However, the [9th Circuit] decision below threatens to upend this well-established permitting regime and ascribe liability to permittees who are acting in good-faith reliance on the assurances of their regulators.”
The amici who signed the brief include Oklahoma, West Virginia, Alaska, the National Mining Association, the Association of American Railroads and the Domestic Energy Producers Alliance.
They are backing coal industry groups' recent petition for a writ of certiorari asking the high court to reverse the 9th Circuit's Sept. 3 unanimous ruling in Alaska Community Action on Toxics (ACAT), et al. v. Aurora Energy Services, LLC, et al., which held coal mining company Aurora liable for releases of solid coal from its Seward, AK, loading facility on the grounds that the MSGP's list of allowed discharges did not include coal.
Under the CWA, a permit holder is not liable for discharging pollutants within the limits set by a valid National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit -- a provision commonly known as the permit shield.
But environmentalists and EPA have lately pressed courts to narrow the conditions where the shield protects dischargers that release pollutants not specifically addressed in their permits. For example, environmental group ACAT pursued a CWA citizen suit against Aurora that ultimately led to the 9th Circuit's ruling.
In ACAT, the three-judge appellate panel held that the terms of the MSGP only protect facilities from liability for discharges of stormwater, with a short list of explicitly enumerated exceptions for non-stormwater releases that does not include coal spillage. Therefore, the court said, Aurora was liable for its discharges of coal.
Aurora in its writ petition countered that the 9th Circuit “ignores the statutory mandate that a permittee in compliance with its permit is not liable under the Clean Water Act, even for discharges not explicitly covered by a permit. Thus, contrary to the other circuit courts, the Ninth Circuit leaves permittees exposed to liability, even when both they and the permitting authority agree that no further permitting is required.”
The company said that the ruling conflicts with a subsequent ruling by the 6th Circuit, which appeared to use a more lenient test for legal liability for discharges not addressed in CWA permit terms.
Potential Liability
The April 2 amicus brief by the states and industry groups backs Aurora's arguments and adds that if the 9th Circuit's decision is allowed to stand, it would expose other permit holders to expanded liability by “upending” the established balance between regulators and dischargers under the water law.
“[T]he permitting agency has the responsibility to design a satisfactory permit. As EPA has explicitly acknowledged, the permit shield provision 'places the burden on permit writers rather than permittees to search through the applicable regulations and correctly apply them to the permittee through its permit. This means that a permittee may rely on its EPA-issued permit document to know the extent of its enforceable duties,'” the brief says.
The amici add that the 9th Circuit broke with the landmark 4th Circuit test for when the permit shield applies, set out in Piney Run Preservation Association v. County Commissioners of Carroll County, MD.
In its unanimous 2001 ruling, the 4th Circuit said a permittee's discharge of a pollutant not expressly authorized by the permit does not violate the CWA provided that the permit's express terms are obeyed and the pollutant was "within the reasonable contemplation" of the regulator at the time the permit was granted.
Aurora and its supporters have argued in ACAT that EPA and state regulators were fully aware that the Seward facility could release coal into nearby waters and chose to grant coverage under the MSGP regardless, which they say should protect the company from liability regardless of the court's interpretation of the permit terms.
The amicus brief says, “Where the permitting agency is fully informed of a potential discharge and subsequently determines how to permit the operation, the permit shield defense applies regardless of whether the discharge is specifically enumerated in the permit, and the scope of the shield should not be arbitrarily narrowed by general prohibitory language contained in a permit.”
In addition to their arguments that the 9th Circuit misread the terms of the MSGP, the amici also argue that the ruling should be vacated because ACAT's suit was premature.
Since the advocates' goal is to force Aurora to seek coverage under an individual discharge permit, the state and industry groups argue, they should have petitioned EPA under a CWA rule, under section 509 of the act, that allows citizen groups to ask the agency to “require any discharger authorized by a general permit to apply for and obtain an individual NPDES permit.”
“ACAT could have petitioned EPA or Alaska [Department of Environmental Control] under this provision at any time during the past decade, but they did not, instead choosing to inappropriately frame their case as an 'unpermitted discharge,'” under section 505 of the CWA, the brief says.
“The Ninth Circuit’s decision would render Section 509 meaningless by allowing Section 505 to be used to challenge whether an issued permit was appropriately granted or contains the proper conditions,” it continues.
ACAT is due to file their reply to Aurora's writ petition May 4.
-
Carly Fiorina: 'Liberal Environmentalists' to Blame for Calif. Drought
Apr 7, 2015 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
Potential presidential candidate Carly Fiorina blamed “liberal environmentalists” for California’s historic drought.
Fiorina told radio host Glenn Beck that the drought, which led last week to the state’s first mandatory restrictions on water use, show greens’ willingness to put the environment ahead of people’s livelihoods.
“With different policies over the last 20 years, all of this could be avoided,” Fiorina said Monday, according to Beck’s website The Blaze.
“Despite the fact that California has suffered from droughts for millennia, liberal environmentalists have prevented the building of a single new reservoir or a single new water conveyance system over decades during a period in which California’s population has doubled,” she said.
Fiorina, who was Hewlett-Packard's CEO from 1999 to 2005, has said there is a “higher than 90 percent chance” she will run for the Republican nomination for 2016’s presidential election.
She called the drought a “classic case of liberals being willing to sacrifice other people’s lives and livelihoods at the altar of their ideology. It is a tragedy.”
Republicans in California and in Congress have proposed multiple times to beef up the state’s water storage with more dams and reservoirs. Environmentalists have pushed back and questioned the impact that the projects would have on the state’s water needs.
-
McConnell Campaign a 'New Level of Antagonism' -- Former EPA Chief
Apr 7, 2015 | E&E - Greenwire
By Robin Bravender
Former U.S. EPA Administrator William Reilly said yesterday that a political campaign waged by the Senate's top Republican is without precedent.
"That's a new level of antagonism to the agency," Reilly said of Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell's campaign to urge states to ignore pending EPA rules to crack down on power plants' greenhouse gas emissions.
"I didn't get the kind of pressure that he's exerting, and actually I don't recall anyone recommending simply not implementing the state implementation plans, for example," former President George H.W. Bush's EPA chief said in an interview.
The Kentucky senator has been urging states to ignore EPA's proposed rule by refusing to submit their own strategies -- known as state implementation plans, or SIPs -- for complying with the administration's draft Clean Power Plan.
McConnell wrote an op-ed last month contending that the rule is "unfair" and "probably illegal."
He urged states to "think twice" before submitting their own plans, "which could lock you in to federal enforcement and expose you to lawsuits -- when the administration is standing on shaky legal ground and when, without your support, it won't be able to demonstrate the capacity to carry out such political extremism" (Greenwire, March 4).
EPA's draft regulation aims to give states flexibility to decide how to meet emissions reduction targets through the strategies they submit to the agency. But if states refuse to submit their own plans, the Clean Air Act authorizes EPA to enforce federal plans.
Reilly said such a move would be "tactically unwise."
"If you decide that you will not submit a SIP ... which really is designed to provide a role for the state to tailor its accommodation of laws to its own situation, then you better be satisfied with what EPA does, because they'll have to do it themselves," he said.
And for states who want to contest the regulation, Reilly added, "Your moral high ground when you say you don't like what they did is certainly undercut by the fact that you had your chance, and a judge may well see it that way, too."
-
Bechtel's Avidan Discusses Future-Proofing the U.S.'s Energy Infrastructure
Apr 7, 2015 | E&E - TV
With the Department of Energy's Quadrennial Energy Review on the country's energy infrastructure expected to be released this month, how can the private sector work toward future-proofing the nation's power infrastructure? During today's OnPoint, Amos Avidan, senior vice president and corporate manager of engineering and technology at Bechtel, discusses the financial and policy challenges to improving the resilience of the U.S. energy infrastructure.Transcript
Monica Trauzzi: Hello and welcome to OnPoint. I'm Monica Trauzzi. With me today is Dr. Amos Avidan, senior vice president and corporate manager of engineering and technology at Bechtel. Amos, thank you for joining me.
Amos Avidan: Thank you. It's a pleasure.
Monica Trauzzi: Amos, Bechtel has been involved in some of the most significant energy infrastructure projects in the United States, and a current key focus for your company is the idea of future-proofing power infrastructures. What are the primary challenges facing our current infrastructure that require a different approach to how we're currently producing and advancing our energy infrastructure?
Amos Avidan: Well, first of all, I think that energy infrastructure is critical to all infrastructure, you know? We rely more and more on energy. Energy growth is, you know, driving global growth and energy infrastructure, well, we don't think about it, but energy means water. It means power. It means Internet connectivity. It means cellphones working. It means transportation, so people are paying increasing attention to the resiliency and to the sustainability of the global energy infrastructure, including in the United States, of course.
Monica Trauzzi: And is that as a result of climate change? I mean what are some of the key elements that are playing into that decision?
Amos Avidan: Well, I think it's a confluence of several things. It's increased urbanization in the U.S. and elsewhere, which means people live more closely and rely more on energy infrastructure. It means being ready for extreme weather events, which can be caused by global climate change, and of course we are more susceptible to them, as we are closer to the coastlines and we are in more concentrated areas. Superstorm Sandy of course was a very good reminder to us of the importance of the energy infrastructure.
Monica Trauzzi: So what are some of the strategies to making energy infrastructure more resilient?
Amos Avidan: Well, you know, there's been a lot of change in that. In the past, people focused on making individual power plants or individual -- very distinct elements of the infrastructure to be just more hardened, if you wish. And that's still important, but today we recognize much more interdependency between this system.
So one quick example is when Superstorm Sandy hit, for example, and you didn't have electricity for a while. The gas stations in your area wouldn't be able to pump gas because they didn't have a backup system for electricity, or when Hurricane Katrina hit years ago, the pipelines that supply refined products of the Gulf Coast to the Northeast were shut down for a couple of weeks. So there's much more interdependency in the energy infrastructure and hence it's important for us to look at systems and make those systems more resilient for the future, and that's what we call future-proofing.
Monica Trauzzi: So do the technologies and innovations exist to bring our energy infrastructure to the next level?
Amos Avidan: Yes, I think so. The biggest change that we are going through today -- I believe we live in a revolutionary time. The revolutionary time is basically summarized by a few key catchphrases you hear a lot, like the Internet of Things. It's basically the age of information and the amount of information available to us today is many times what it was 10, 20, 30 years ago, and we can make use of this information. We make use of it in our own projects for designing those systems much better to understand the interdependencies where they're good for you, because they're more efficient that way and when you have to decouple them when there's an emergency.
And we also use a lot -- all the vast amount of information, for example. Geographic information systems which not only give you detailed maps of an area, but you can use them to simulate if there is this kind of increase in sea water level and this kind of an extreme weather effect, like a hurricane or a tsunami. How would you protect those systems so we can design for that? And we can use the information to prepare for the disaster, to avoid it if we can, and during the -- when there's an extreme weather event, people tend to use this kind of information, social media and others to react much faster to it. As you know, resiliency means recovering quickly from events that you couldn't stop.
Monica Trauzzi: But what about cost? Is it more costly to bring these sort of more resilient elements of infrastructure online?
Amos Avidan: I think that's a very good question because when you look at the needs globally for investment in infrastructure, they are huge -- trillions of dollars, so we really got to focus on reducing those costs and these technologies do allow us to reduce costs in many ways. For a quick example, because we have so much detailed satellite and laser scanning technologies, we don't have to send as many surveyors to the field. It's safer for them. It's faster. It's less costly. When we design today our big projects and we use three-dimensional models.
Today it's all data-driven, and data is much cheaper than all the physical systems we had in place. So the promise is that the more we use this information, all this vast amount of information, project costs are going to come down. Schedules are going to be reduced and they're more predictable. One of the big concerns about massive infrastructure projects is just costs are getting out of control, so these information technology systems allow you to lower the costs and manage those projects much better, and we do that on all projects today.
Monica Trauzzi: Is there enough of a discussion in Congress and in the federal agencies about infrastructure, resilience, and how do you think these discussions should play into the broader energy policy conversation?
Amos Avidan: Yeah, no. I think there's much more awareness of the need for these discussions and much more awareness of the need to improve our response systems. And this is in response to some of these extreme weather events I mentioned, like Superstorm Sandy. Everybody reacted to it and realized we need to do better. I was involved recently together with many others in the National Petroleum Council study that was just finished in December of last year about how the Department of Energy and other local stakeholders can respond better to extreme events, which cause problems to our energy infrastructure.
And the recommendations are not earth-shattering. They are: cooperate better, have the right channels of communications, respond quicker, and be able to quickly trust each other when you know each other and react better to those systems. One quick example of that is if, let's say you run out of a refined product in one part of the country. If you can bring another one that doesn't meet the same specs, but you get a quick waiver, today a waiver can take months from the Department of Energy.
So if you can quickly do it, then you can supply an area that is short on, let's say, gasoline much quicker. So that's one example. Of course, you know, we are focusing on the U.S., but our projects are global. We do that also in the U.K., in Africa, all over the world.
Monica Trauzzi: This is a fascinating, ongoing discussion. I thank you for your time and your ...
Amos Avidan: Thank you very much, Monica. I enjoyed it.
Monica Trauzzi: Thanks for coming on the show and thanks for watching. We'll see you back here tomorrow.
[End of Audio]
-
Hope for Bipartisan Action on Energy
Apr 7, 2015 | The Hill - Congress Blog
By Susan Stephenson
Hold onto your hats, there just may be bipartisan legislation on the horizon. And who would have guessed that after the hyper-partisan Keystone XL showdown, the topic to come together on would be of all things, energy?
First, in the wee hours of March 27, after the contentious budget resolution was passed at 3 a.m., Sens. Rob Portman (R-Ohio) and Jeanne Shaheen (D-N.H.) appeared on a nearly empty Senate floor and quietly passed a stripped down version of their energy efficiency bill with a unanimous vote of two. Not exactly a conventional process, but it did succeed in moving forward a bill that has been stalled for years – albeit a “mini” version that focuses on improving energy efficiency in commercial buildings and government agencies.
Now, another bipartisan energy efficiency bill is garnering support from both sides of the aisle. In fact the very senator who sponsored the bill to approve the Keystone pipeline, John Hoeven (R-N.D.), has introduced the Nonprofit Energy Efficiency Act (S 600) of 2015. Along with lead co-sponsor Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), the bill already has four co-sponsors from both parties.
The Energy Efficiency for Nonprofits Act would set up a pilot program to help nonprofit organizations retrofit buildings in order to save energy. This funding is crucial because it will allow congregations and other nonprofits, which are not eligible for tax credits, to get past the hurdle of up-front costs for renovation. Grants could cover up to 50 perrcent of energy efficiency improvement projects -- up to $200,000.
Reps. Bob Dold (R-Ill.) and Matt Cartwright (D-Pa.) plan to introduce a companion measure in the House. Despite the notorious partisan rancor of that chamber, energy efficiency that will benefit nonprofits and religious institutions may be able to bring both sides together to help nonprofits serving the public to save energy and save money.
Funding for energy efficiency will enable America’s hospitals, youth centers, YMCA’s, museums, and houses of worship to cut operating costs and contribute to America’s energy independence while curbing pollution and creating jobs.
Thousands of Interfaith Power & Light congregations across the United States have already made strides toward energy efficiency as they endeavor to care for creation. The Nonprofit Energy Efficiency Act would allow congregations with fewer resources to implement cost efficient and environmentally friendly energy efficiency improvements.
According to the U.S. Green Building Council, buildings account for 39 percent of all carbon dioxide emissions in the United States. Energy efficient houses of worship can be models for their local communities. With the help of the Nonprofit Energy Efficiency Act, congregations will have access to technological advances that decrease pollution and increase cost-savings.
Perhaps energy efficiency is the unexpected but common sense issue that members of Congress will find common ground on this year. As the cherry blossoms begin to open and our thoughts turn to regeneration and renewal this Easter season, let’s hope seeds of cooperation on behalf of the greater good are also sprouting in Washington.
Stephenson is executive director of Interfaith Power & Light, a national organization with 40 state affiliates working with 15,000 congregations of all faiths to use energy efficiently and address climate change.
-
Obama Seeks to Link Climate Change to Health
Apr 7, 2015 | The Hill - E2 Wire
By Timothy Cama
The Obama administration is launching a series of efforts aimed at confronting what it says are the negative health effects of climate change.
A warming climate, caused by humans through greenhouse gases, can exacerbate asthma, lengthen allergy seasons and increase the risk of injuries from extreme weather, the administration said Tuesday.
Children, the elderly, minorities, the sick and the poor are especially at risk, officials say.
“The sooner we act, the more we can do to protect the health of our communities, our kids, and those that are the most vulnerable,” the White House said Tuesday in a fact sheet.
Brian Deese, a top adviser to Obama, said the initiative is meant to show some of the more immediate impacts of climate change.
“The president has been consistently focused on the fact that no challenge poses a greater threat to future generations than climate change,” Deese told reporters Tuesday.
“But this is not just a future threat,” he said. “This is a present threat, and I think what the data and what the evidence shows that we’re highlighting today is that climate change is posing a threat to more people in more places to their basic health.”
Obama will speak about the nexus between climate and health later Tuesday in a roundtable with health professionals at Howard University in Washington.
He will bring Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Gina McCarthy and Surgeon General Vivek Murthy.
The initiative provides more justification for President Obama’s sweeping policies to cut greenhouse gas pollution, like limits on emissions from power plants and cars.
The first event under the initiative will come this week, when the White House gathers health and medical experts for a workshop on climate change's link to health. Later this spring, the White House will host a summit on the issue with Murthy.
Other pieces of the effort will include a report from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on what some cities have done to reduce health risks from climate change. It will also release new data to help scientists and communities understand the link and a separate report from the U.S. Global Change Research Program to synthesize various studies on health and climate.
Private companies are pledging to build tools with that data, and deans from 30 health and medical schools say they’re incorporating climate change into their curricula.
Obama is also tying the effort to this week’s celebration of National Public Health Week.
--This report was updated at 11:33 a.m.
-
White House Plays Up Health Link in Newest Warming Initiative
Apr 7, 2015 | E&E - Greenwire
By Jean Chemnick
President Obama today will try to drum up public concern about the link between climate change and health problems, hosting a roundtable with senior staff and announcing a set of administration actions boosting research on the issue.
The president will lead a roundtable discussion at Howard University this afternoon with U.S. EPA Administrator Gina McCarthy and Surgeon General Vivek Murthy that will weigh the effect of warming on respiratory disease and other illnesses. And this morning, the White House announced a series of initiatives, including a White House summit to be hosted by Murthy later this spring aimed at arming medical professionals and local communities against climate-driven health concerns.
On a call this morning with reporters, White House senior adviser Brian Deese said the message resonates with Americans who are already noticing the impacts of warming.
"The most salient arguments around climate change are associated with the health impacts and the ones that meet people where they are, and that requires making an argument around how climate change is affecting local communities and individuals," he said.
The White House in March 2014 unveiled the Climate Data Initiative, which shared federal data on climate projections with local communities to help them plan (Greenwire, March 19). Today's move builds on that initiative by adding 150 new health-related datasets to the list of those available to non-federal entities, including ones compiled by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and other agencies.
"This announcement today is about steps that we are taking as an administration to try to facilitate better use of data and better understanding of impacts for the public writ large," Deese said.
Other White House actions outlined this morning include a CDC report on steps cities are taking to limit warming-related disease, a new collaboration with medical and nursing schools aimed at incorporating climate change into curriculums, and the release of a new draft report by the interagency U.S. Global Change Research Program synthesizing data on warming and health.
But while today's announcement focuses on adaptation, Deese said the administration's regulations will also have "incredibly powerful impacts on improving public health by reducing carbon pollution, and impacts where those benefits far outweigh the cost of action."
He promised the administration would continue to "lift up" that message when discussing the Climate Action Plan.
Private and non-federal partners joined the administration today in pledging to make their own data publicly available to aid in adaptation planning. On the call with reporters, Ethan Jackson of Microsoft Research discussed his work to use mosquitoes in disease surveillance, which he said could help inform communities about the presence of pathogens in their environments prior to outbreaks.
His project would use drone-deployed devices to collect mosquitoes autonomously and conduct gene-sequencing and pathogen detection, searching for vector-borne disease outbreaks that are projected to increase in a warming world.
Other partners announcing actions today include Google, mapping software company Esri and Harvard University.
Health and environmental advocates praised the administration's efforts, saying it would help communities safeguard their citizens' health while also focusing attention on the need to rein in warming.
Lyndsay Moseley Alexander of the American Lung Association said the link between warming and health is not sufficiently understood.
"This is a really important opportunity to change the conversation," she said. Besides contributing to more respiratory illness, climate change is also projected to fuel wildfires and other occurrences that will endanger the public, she said.
Alexander said the summit with the surgeon general would be particularly effective at highlighting the health effects of warming because he has "a lot of trust and credibility, and has a very high bar in terms of the state of the science."
Natural Resources Defense Council President Rhea Suh said that by highlighting health impacts, the president is making a case for "swift, decisive action to reduce the now-unrestricted carbon pollution that fuels climate change."
"The president's Clean Power Plan -- the centerpiece of his Climate Action Agenda -- will reap untold health benefits and protect all future generations," she said in a statement.
This is not the first time the president has spotlighted the health costs of global warming. He introduced EPA's Clean Power Plan proposal last June by appearing on an American Lung Association call where he claimed the power plant carbon curbs would help guard against childhood asthma (E&ENews PM, June 2, 2014). McCarthy and other administration officials have often sounded the same theme to explain the need for regulations.
Industry and Association News
Chemical Management News
Chemical Security News
Energy and Environment News
Transportation News - There are no clips to report at this time
Add recipients
Suggested