TOP HEADLINES

 

Trump Touts Report US Is Set To Become World’s Top Oil Producer

 

State Attorneys To Pruitt: Repeal, Don't Replace

 

EPA Advisory Board Hasn't Met In 6 Months

 

GAO To Examine EPA Political Appointees’ Roles In Picking Advisory Committee Members

 

Perry To Testify Before House Appropriators March 15

 

 

White House And Diplomacy

 

Trump Touts Report US Is Set To Become World’s Top Oil Producer. According to The Hill, “President Trump on Tuesday celebrated a report from the International Energy Agency which claims the U.S. will become the world’s leading oil producer by 2023. In a tweet linking to the report, Trump touted his administration’s focus on ‘jobs and security.’ The report states that U.S. oil exports are expected to double to 4.9 million barrels a day by 2023, a marked change from just a few years ago when the U.S. was prohibited from exporting crude oil by law. Trump’s tweet comes on the heels of his announcement of controversial new tariffs on steel and aluminum imports, a new policy that America’s petroleum industry says will have a negative effect on its business. ‘Today’s announcement by the Department of Commerce to recommend sweeping tariffs around all steel and aluminum imports, in the guise of national security concerns, doesn’t make sense for the U.S. economy,’ said American Petroleum Institute President Jack Gerard. ‘These tariffs would undoubtedly raise costs for U.S. businesses that rely heavily on steel and aluminum for the majority of their products — and ultimately consumers.’ Trump has said that the expected tariffs could be imposed as early as this week. ‘We’ll be signing it next week. And you’ll have protection for a long time in a while,’ Trump said Thursday.” [The Hill, 3/6/18 (=)]

 

Cohn Is Out. Here's What It Means For Climate. According to E&E News, “The globalists are on their way out of the White House, further diminishing the voices close to President Trump that say humans are warming the planet. Departures of key personnel have left an energy and environment policy vacuum that many within the White House expect to be filled by nationalist advisers. More exits are likely on the way. The resignation of National Economic Council Director Gary Cohn, announced yesterday at a White House meeting, was the latest blow to those who remain hopeful for climate policy. His departure is seen as a potential dam break, with other aides likely following his path. The former Goldman Sachs Group Inc. executive supported remaining in the Paris climate accord and convened conversations with carbon tax advocates. … Peter Navarro, Trump’s trade adviser, is seen by some as likely to make a play for Cohn’s job. Navarro, known as a nationalist voice in the administration, has curried favor with the president for his defense of tariffs on steel and aluminum that have engendered widespread backlash globally and within the GOP. … The NEC had already been weathering turmoil. George David Banks left last month after failing to get a permanent security clearance. He handled international energy issues and was viewed as a top voice pushing for re-engagement in the Paris climate accord. That, combined with Cohn’s exit, weakens the prospects that the United States will remain in the global agreement. Trump has said he’ll pull out of the Paris pact, but he can’t formally do that until November 2020.” [E&E News, 3/7/18 (=)]

 

Experts Push To Allow Trading Of Emission Cuts. According to E&E News, “Allowing countries to satisfy part of their Paris climate agreement commitments by trading credits for emissions cuts could bring down implementation costs and make tougher future commitments more politically appealing. That’s the argument of an article by three academics published Friday in Science. The authors hope the forthcoming rulebook to guide the implementation of the Paris deal will be flexible enough to encourage countries to take advantage of such relationships. Setting good accounting rules for linkages and otherwise taking a light hand in regulating them ‘may ultimately foster stronger engagement between parties (and non-parties), as well as with regional and subnational jurisdictions,’ they wrote. The article was penned by Michael Mehling, deputy director of the Center for Energy and Environmental Policy Research at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Gilbert Metcalf, an economics professor at Tufts University; and Robert Stavins, director of Harvard University’s Project on Climate Agreements. The 2015 Paris climate deal allows parties to transfer emissions cuts. For example, a wealthier nation in Europe could enter an agreement under which it would fund and take credit for efficiency improvements in a lower-income nation.” [E&E News, 3/6/18 (=)]

 

Federal Agencies

 

How Trump’s Climate Skeptics Are Changing The Country. According to Politico, “At the Interior Department, decisions about Pacific island territories threatened by rising seas are in the hands of an assistant secretary who has criticized ‘climate alarmists’ for ‘once again predicting the end of the world as we know it.’ Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue’s top advisers include a former talk radio host who has dismissed much climate research as ‘junk science.’ Trump’s nominee to head research and technology at the Department of Transportation claimed three years ago that global warming had ‘stopped’ — a position at sharp odds with the findings of federal agencies like NASA. Trump has chosen at least 20 like-minded people to serve as agency leaders and advisers, according to a POLITICO review of his appointees’ past statements on climate science. And they are already having an impact in abandoning former President Barack Obama’s attempt to help unite the world against the threat of rising sea levels, worsening storms and spreading droughts. Most famously, the president and his team have scrubbed mentions of climate change from government websites, kicked scientists off advisory boards, repudiated the Obama administration’s greenhouse gas regulations and made the U.S. the only nation on Earth to reject the 2015 Paris agreement on global warming. More quietly, Trump’s White House excluded rising temperatures from the list of threats in its December national security strategy, contradicting the approach of both the Obama and George W. Bush administrations. Last year, just before Hurricane Harvey drowned Houston, the White House rescinded requirements that projects built with federal dollars take into account the way warming temperatures might intensify extreme weather.” [Politico, 3/7/18 (+)]

 

EPA

 

EPA Advisory Board Hasn't Met In 6 Months. According to E&E News, “The U.S. EPA Science Advisory Board has not met in at least six months, and some of its members say it’s being sidelined to avoid getting in the way of agency Administrator Scott Pruitt’s anti-regulatory agenda. Agency officials say the lapse isn’t intentional and that it’s just the result of delayed paperwork. That has prevented the group from meeting because there weren’t enough members to make a quorum. The board, which typically has about 45 members, is tasked by Congress to evaluate the science used by EPA to craft policy. The full board has not met since August, nor has it had any conference calls or votes. In the past, members would have had multiple interactions during that time period, said William Schlesinger, a board member who is an emeritus professor of biogeochemistry at Duke University. ‘I guess the Science Advisory Board still exists; I guess I’m still on it,’ he said. ‘I think the answer is maybe they’re giving it what we used to call the ‘pocket veto’: If you don’t meet, then the scientists are not a pain, because they don’t have a forum.’ EPA officials disputed that characterization. The full board has not had a quorum and therefore could not meet, said Michael Honeycutt, who heads the board. Subcommittees have met in that time. He blamed the delay on the government’s bureaucratic human resources process and said the official start date for many new members was Feb. 18. He expects to have a meeting at the end of May or in June.” [E&E News, 3/6/18 (=)]

 

GAO To Examine EPA Political Appointees’ Roles In Picking Advisory Committee Members. According to The Hill, “Congress’s watchdog agency is looking into the role that political appointees at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) played in picking new scientists and other agency advisory committee members. In a letter that Senate Democrats made public Tuesday, a Government Accountability Office (GAO) official accepted the request last month by Sens. Tom Carper (D-Del.) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) to add the matter to an existing review the agency is conducting. The GAO agreed last year to examine EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt’s actions and policies regarding the agency’s 22 advisory committees, which advise the EPA on matters like science, health and air quality. … Last month, Carper and Whitehouse published documents that showed that the EPA’s career staff responsible for reviewing potential advisers had flagged some candidates for potential problems in their qualifications or conflicts of interest, but political appointees overrode the recommendations. The senators have asked the GAO to examine whether Pruitt’s actions fit with his own directive regarding advisory committee membership and the Federal Advisory Committee Act, the law governing such panels.” [The Hill, 3/6/18 (=)]

 

Man Hired To Sweep Scott Pruitt’s Office For Bugs Is In Business With A Top EPA Security Official. According to The Washington Post, “Two senior Senate Democrats asked Environment Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt on Tuesday to provide details about how a business associate of the head of his security detail got a security contract with the agency. Pasquale ‘Nino’ Perrotta — who heads Pruitt’s security detail and also serves as a principal of Rockville-based Sequoia Security Group — suggested last year to EPA officials that they hire a fellow member of the management team at Sequoia, Edwin Steinmetz, according to an administration official who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal agency decisions. The roughly $3,000 contract to sweep Pruitt’s office for concealed listening devices was conducted by Edwin Steinmetz Associates, the official said. Two senior Senate Democrats asked Environment Protection Agency Administrator Scott Pruitt on Tuesday to provide details about how a business associate of the head of his security detail got a security contract with the agency. Pasquale ‘Nino’ Perrotta — who heads Pruitt’s security detail and also serves as a principal of Rockville-based Sequoia Security Group — suggested last year to EPA officials that they hire a fellow member of the management team at Sequoia, Edwin Steinmetz, according to an administration official who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal agency decisions. The roughly $3,000 contract to sweep Pruitt’s office for concealed listening devices was conducted by Edwin Steinmetz Associates, the official said. ‘These facts raise questions about Mr. Perrotta’s compliance with EPA regulations and concerns that he may have used his position at the agency to influence the award of EPA contracts to a person or company in which he has a financial interest,’ they wrote in Tuesday’s letter.” [The Washington Post, 3/6/18 (+)]

 

AP | Dems: Did EPA Security Staffer Steer Contract To Associate? According to The Washington Post, “Senate Democrats are pressing Environmental Protection Agency chief Scott Pruitt on whether a key member of his taxpayer-funded security team improperly steered a government contract to a personal business associate. The Associated Press reported in December that EPA paid $3,000 to Edwin Steinmetz Associates to have Pruitt’s office swept for hidden listening devices. In addition to operating his own consulting business, Edwin Steinmetz also works for a larger company called Sequoia Security Group. Sequoia’s CEO and founder is Pasquale ‘Nino’ Perrotta, a former Secret Service agent who is listed in EPA travel records as a member of the EPA administrator’s around-the-clock security detail. According to Perrotta’s online resume, he describes himself as the ‘Acting Special Agent in Charge’ working with a protective security detail with an unnamed U.S. government agency. On Sequoia’s webpage, Perrotta is described as being ‘charged with a dual mission, protecting a member of the U.S. presidential cabinet and coordinating protective intelligence information.’ … ‘These facts raise questions about Mr. Perrotta’s compliance with EPA regulations and concerns that he may have used his position at the agency to influence the award of EPA contracts to a person or company in which he has a financial interest,’ wrote Sen. Tom Carper of Delaware and Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island. EPA spokesman Jahan Wilcox said security sweeps are ‘common practice in government’ and former EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson also had her office swept. ‘We looked at a couple of different vendors and career administrative officials approved the same vendor that the Office of the Inspector General used and other offices within EPA,’ he said.” [The Washington Post, 3/6/18 (+)]

 

Senate Democrats Say EPA Security Contract Raises Red Flags. According to Politico, “A business partner of a top security agent for EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt was awarded a $3,000 contract to sweep Pruitt’s office for bugs, Senate Democrats are charging in a letter with questions for Pruitt sent today. Nino Perrotta, the EPA special agent in charge who has guarded agency chiefs since George W. Bush was president, has also been principal at Sequoia Security Group Inc. for five years, according to his LinkedIn profile. His firm’s website says he specializes in threat mitigation, physical and facility security, event logistics and VIP travel. The company’s management team includes Edwin Steinmetz, whose practice — Edwin Steinmetz Associates — received a contract in April to look for listening devices in Pruitt’s office, according to the Associated Press and The Hill. Sequoia’s website calls him vice president of technical surveillance countermeasures. Sens. Tom Carper (D-Del.), the ranking Democrat on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), say the connection may violate EPA regulations and raises concerns Perrotta ‘may have used his position at the agency to influence the award of EPA contracts to a person or company in which he has a financial interest.’ They note that Perrotta has accompanied Pruitt on at least four separate trips when he flew on government and private planes, according to EPA records. EPA regulations require an ethics official to sign off on outside employment. John Konkus, a political staffer in EPA’s communications office, has approval for a side job as a media consultant, House Democrats wrote in a letter to EPA yesterday questioning his potential conflicts of interest. EPA spokesman Jahan Wilcox said the agency would respond to the senators ‘through the proper channel.’” [Politico, 3/6/18 (=)]

 

DOE

 

Perry To Testify Before House Appropriators March 15. According to Politico, “Energy Secretary Rick Perry will return to Capitol Hill on March 15 to testify before the House Appropriations Energy-Water Subcommittee on the agency’s fiscal 2019 budget request, according to a notice. The Trump administration’s budget proposal called for a less than 1 percent reduction in the DOE’s overall budget to $30.6 billion. But the request does call for deep cuts to many programs and eliminating ARPA-E entirely, while maintaining funding for the science office and boosting support for weapons cleanup and fossil fuels. In addition, the subcommittee will hold a hearing March 14 on the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and Bureau of Reclamation’s budgets. Army Corps chief R.D. James, Bureau of Reclamation Commissioner Brenda Burman and Interior’s assistant secretary for water and science, Timothy Petty, are among those testifying. The Trump administration proposed a cut of more than 22 percent to the Army Corps of Engineers’ budget. WHAT’S NEXT: The Energy-Water Subcommittee hears testimony from Army Corps and Bureau of Reclamation officials March 14 at 10 a.m., followed by Perry the next day at 10 a.m.” [Politico, 3/6/18 (=)]

 

Perry Takes CERAweek Stage. According to Politico, “Energy Secretary Rick Perry will make two scheduled appearances at the CERAWeek conference in Houston today. The former Texas governor will join Daniel Yergin for the opening session this morning, then appear with Canada’s Minister of Natural Resources James Carr and Mexico’s Secretary of Energy Pedro Joaquín Coldwell for an afternoon ministerial dialogue. ME will be listening for what Perry says on Trump’s proposed steel import tariffs. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said Tuesday the tariffs may not apply to Canada and Mexico, provided the U.S. negotiates a new NAFTA deal. Mnuchin told a House Appropriations panel that in the case of Canada and Mexico, ‘our objective is to have a new NAFTA, and once we do that — which I’m cautiously optimistic on — the tariffs won’t apply to them.’ Read more on that here and see the conference’s agenda here. Views from the Hill: Senate EPW Chairman John Barrasso said Tuesday he’s worried the tariffs on aluminum and steel will trigger retaliatory actions against U.S. energy exports. ‘I worry about any recrimination with tariffs,’ Barrasso told Pro’s Anthony Adragna. ‘For us in Wyoming, it’s energy for sure with natural gas, with coal. But it’s also our number one cash crop, which is beef. And then there’s soda ash.’” [Politico, 3/7/18 (=)]

 

Heritage Adviser Jumps To DOE. According to E&E News, “Janet Naughton, who served as a top adviser at the Heritage Foundation last year focused on executive branch relations, is now a senior adviser at DOE, according to the agency’s internal registry. Naughton, who formerly served at the Interior Department, is also the owner of D.C.-based consulting firm Federal City Partners LLC, whose clients include federal and state lobbyists and nonprofits seeking advice on legal, compliance, public affairs and administration support services, according to her LinkedIn page. From 2007 to 2009, Naughton served as the chief of staff to Interior’s assistant secretary for fish, wildlife and parks. From 1993 to 2006, she was an attorney adviser for the federal government across ‘various agencies and departments’ specializing in ‘regulatory practice focused on Federal conflict of interest statutes and Executive Branch standards of conduct regulations,’ according to her bio. Naughton has a law degree from Mississippi College School of Law and a degree in finance from the University of Mississippi. DOE did not immediately respond to a request for comment.” [E&E News, 3/6/18 (=)]

 

Congress

 

Senate

 

Now Seeking WOTUS Carve Out. According to Politico, “Republicans are pushing a policy rider that would exempt a repeal of the Waters of the U.S. rule from some legal requirements under the Administrative Procedures Act, effectively speeding up the process for its undoing. This comes despite GOP complaints that former President Barack Obama’s environmental regulations violated the rule of law. But lawmakers don’t seem too concerned this time around. Pro’s Annie Snider and Anthony report: ‘Legislative language that Republicans want added to the government spending deal would go further than previous policy riders aimed at killing the Waters of the U.S. rule by exempting Pruitt’s withdrawal of the regulation from the requirements of ‘any provision of statute or regulation’ that might be relevant.’ ‘Republicans who are pushing this rider, they clearly understand that Pruitt’s scheme to get rid of the Clean Water Rule is flatly illegal, and so the rider is designed to make the law go away,’ said Jon Devine, senior attorney at the NRDC. But claims of overreach are falling on deaf ears on the Hill, the duo reports. For one, Sen. John Hoeven , a top critic of the Obama rule and member of the Appropriations Committee, said he ‘wouldn’t be concerned’ about allegations of inconsistency. ‘Anything we can do to eliminate the Obama-era WOTUS, that’s just a bad rule that we need to get rid of,’ he said.” [Politico, 3/7/18 (=)]

 

Barrasso Worries Tariffs Would Spark Retaliation On Energy Exports. According to Politico, “Sen. John Barrasso, chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee, says he fears the tariffs sought by President Donald Trump on aluminum and steel will trigger retaliatory actions against U.S. energy exports. ‘I worry about any recrimination with tariffs,’ he told POLITICO today. ‘For us in Wyoming, it’s energy for sure with natural gas, with coal. But it’s also our number one cash crop, which is beef. And then there’s soda ash.’ ‘The president’s position is different than mine on this. I’m a free trader, as are people from my state, and I’m going to continue to work on that,’ he added. Senior Republicans have pushed Trump to soften his approach on tariffs, warning of massive congressional resistance and a potential backlash in the midterm elections. WHAT’S NEXT: The White House could slap a 25 percent tariff on imported steel and 10 percent on imported aluminum as soon as this week.” [Politico, 3/6/18 (=)]

 

House of Representatives

 

Alexander Plans To Stick With Energy And Water Panel. According to Politico, “Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn.) says he plans to stick with his chairmanship of the Appropriations Energy and Water Subcommittee despite the likelihood of a reshuffle in top committee spots triggered by the retirement of full committee Chairman Thad Cochran (R-Miss.). ‘I like where I am,’ he told reporters today. ‘We’ve made really good progress on record funding for the Corps of Engineers, for the Office of Science, for supercomputing.’ Alexander also said he enjoyed working with Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), the subpanel’s top Democrat. Cochran announced his resignation effective April 1, setting off a potential shuffle of chairpersons atop the powerful spending panel. Sen. Richard Shelby (R-Ala.) is expected to grab the top gavel. On a more immediate level, Alexander said negotiations on his portion of the omnibus are going ‘very well’ ahead of the March 23 government funding deadline. ‘We’ve met with our House counterparts,’ he said. ‘We fundamentally agree on what the bill should be.’” [Politico, 3/6/18 (=)]

 

Bipartisan Lawmakers Urge Resilience For Real Estate. According to E&E News, “A bipartisan duo of lawmakers representing coastal communities is urging climate change resilience in real estate and building communities. Republican Rep. Lee Zeldin of New York and Democratic Rep. Charlie Crist of Florida, both members of the House Climate Solutions Caucus, yesterday hosted a conversation about the future of real estate in the face of a changing climate that is likely to spur an increase in destructive extreme weather events. ‘Coastal resiliency is incredibly important for homes, for business, for local governments,’ Zeldin said at the event yesterday, which was orchestrated in collaboration with Citizens’ Climate Lobby and the Environmental and Energy Study Institute. The New York congressman said one more storm could bring his home on Fire Island dangerously close to the coastline. Crist said, as a Floridian, he knows the power of hurricanes is increasing exponentially. ‘It’s inevitable that this is going to continue,’ he said. … [Brandi Gabbard, the chairwoman of the National Association of Realtors Insurance Committee and newly elected City Council member in St. Petersburg, Fla.] said that as climate change continues to pose risks for property, Realtors, investors and affected communities are beginning to grapple with potential solutions. ‘However, the available risk information and resources are limited,’ she said, creating uncertainty in the investment marketplace. ‘Is real estate still a good investment?’ she asked. ‘Can we afford to stick with the status quo as it pertains to issues such as sea-level rise?’” [E&E News, 3/7/18 (=)]

 

Judiciary And Legal

 

State Attorneys To Pruitt: Repeal, Don't Replace. According to E&E News, “The Trump administration is considering a replacement for the Obama-era Clean Power Plan, but a coalition of Republican state attorneys general wants the climate rule scrapped with no substitute. West Virginia Attorney General Patrick Morrisey (R) is leading a coalition of 20 other state attorneys general arguing that U.S. EPA doesn’t have authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from power plants because they are already regulated for mercury and air toxics under a different section of the Clean Air Act. Morrisey, who’s running for Senate in West Virginia and helped lead the charge against the Obama climate rule in court, was the lead signatory on a letter sent to Pruitt this week. The letter — which echoes an argument that has been repeated by many critics of the Clean Power Plan — comes in response to the agency’s request for public comment on a proposed plan to replace the rule. EPA has suggested it intends to replace the rule, which cuts carbon emissions from power plants through a sectorwide approach, with a scaled-back regulation that focuses instead on facility-level efficiency improvements. If EPA does write a climate rule for power plants, Morrisey and his allies are pushing for an approach where states would have greater authority in determining how they would cut greenhouse gas emissions. They repeat many of the arguments Pruitt also supported as Oklahoma’s attorney general when he was suing EPA over the Clean Power Plan. The comments by the attorneys general advocate bolstering states’ control over developing emissions regulations and what energy sources they use. This includes inserting provisions for exempting certain facilities from regulation and maintaining states’ authority to regulate their own power sectors.” [E&E News, 3/6/18 (=)]

 

5th Circuit Judges Doubt EPA's NSR Enforcement For 'Ongoing' Violations. According to Inside EPA, “A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit appears to be doubting EPA’s long-running claim that it can enforce alleged violations of its Clean Air Act new source (NSR) permit program as ‘ongoing’ rather than one-time events, which could significantly limit NSR enforcement if the court rejects EPA’s position. Although the Department of Justice (DOJ) on EPA’s behalf is defending the claim that NSR violations are ongoing, a loss for the administration could boost EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt and agency air chief William Wehrum in their bid to reform and ease the NSR program. Pruitt previously issued a policy memo deferring to industry data on when a facility should trigger NSR, which critics say will make it easier to avoid permits. The memo addresses projected future emissions from a facility, and does not affect the 5th Circuit case, USA, et al. v. Luminant Generation, LLC, et al., which hinges on whether NSR violations are ongoing. A loss for EPA would make it harder to pursue NSR enforcement by imposing time limits on when cases could be filed, and would apply in the 5th Circuit states of Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas -- echoing existing decisions in at least five other circuits. A win for EPA that finds NSR violations to be ongoing would create a split with those other circuits, significantly increasing the chance that the Supreme Court might hear an appeal of the 5th Circuit’s eventual ruling.” [Inside EPA, 3/6/18 (=)]

 

 

Ally Groups

 

The Green Movement Lacks Diversity. She's Here To Help. According to E&E News, “At the Sierra Club, the nation’s oldest environmental organization, the senior staff is around 92 percent white. Nellis Kennedy-Howard is on a mission to improve diversity at the Sierra Club and across the mainstream environmental movement. The 36-year-old is the organization’s first-ever director of equity, inclusion and justice. When she took the job in fall 2016, she was counting on the Sierra Club to take those issues seriously. ‘In some areas, I believe that diversity and inclusion can be treated as a fad. Like, it’s here today, it’s gone tomorrow,’ Kennedy-Howard said in a recent hourlong interview. ‘So when the position opened up, I thought, ‘I really, really, really want this to not just be a fluff thing for Sierra Club to take on,’ she said. ‘It’s clear that Sierra Club is an imperfect organization. ... It’s not as diverse as it could be.’ Kennedy-Howard grew up in Denver and made frequent trips to the Navajo Nation in the Southwest, where her grandmother and other family members live. ‘My loyalties, the blood in my veins, everything about me is connected to the Navajo people,’ she said. The concept of environmental justice first hit home for her when she learned about a radioactive spill in 1979 that directly affected her family. The spill unleashed a torrent of waste into a New Mexico river used by Navajo residents, who weren’t told of the danger until later. It was the largest release of radioactive waste in U.S. history, but she’d never even heard of it until she read about the spill in law school. ‘It changed the trajectory of my life,’ Kennedy-Howard said.” [E&E News, 3/6/18 (=)]

 

Opposition Groups

 

Tomorrow’s Grim, Global, Green Dictatorship. According to Heartland Institute, “Greens hate individual freedom and private property. They dream of a centralised unelected global government, financed by taxes on developed nations and controlled by all the tentacles of the UN. No longer is real pollution of our environment the main Green concern. The key slogan of the Green religion is ‘sustainable development’, with them defining what is sustainable. Greens hate miners. They use nationalised parks, heritage areas, flora/fauna reserves, green bans, locked gates and land rights to close as much land as possible to explorers and miners – apparently resources should be locked away for some lucky distant future generation. And if some persistent explorer manages to prove a mineral deposit, greens will then strangle it in the approvals process using ‘death by delay’. Greens hate farmers with their ploughs, fertilisers, crops and grazing animals. They want Aussie grazing land turned back to kangaroos and woody weeds. They plan to expel farmers and graziers from most land areas, with food produced in concentrated feedlots, factory farms, communal gardens and hydroponics. Greens hate professional fishermen with their nets, lines and harpoons. Using the Great Barrier Reef as their poster-child, they plan to control the Coral Sea using marine parks, fishing quotas, bans and licences, leaving us to get seafood from factory fish farms.” [Heartland Institute, 3/6/18 (-)]

 

Opinion

 

Op-Ed: Cass Sunstein: The Sense Behind The Noise On Regulation. According to an op-ed by Cass Sunstein in Pioneer Press, “Very quietly, the Trump administration recently issued a draft of its annual report on the costs and benefits of federal regulations. It’s a responsible and highly professional document – and a corrective to the noisiest claims, from both the White House and its critics, on the whole topic of regulation. … This year’s report is especially interesting, because the Trump administration’s Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs is cataloging the work of its predecessors — above all, that of the Barack Obama administration. (I was administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs from 2009 to 2012, and helped to oversee regulation and the annual cost-benefit report during those years.) The report’s numbers suggest that the benefits of previous regulations far exceeded their costs. In fiscal year 2016, for example, the anticipated costs of regulations range from $3.3 billion to $4.6 billion — but the anticipated benefits range from $13.6 billion to $27.3 billion. (The range accounts for uncertainty about the precise numbers.) That means that the net benefits are, at a minimum, a whopping $9 billion — $24 billion at a maximum. The report also offers a 10-year accounting, with eight of those years coming under Obama. The estimated aggregate costs are between $59 billion to $88 billion. The aggregate benefits are much higher than that: between $219 billion to $695 billion. … There’s a lot of chest-thumping on regulation, both by those who act as if it’s the most serious problem facing the United States today, and by those who have never seen a health or safety regulation they don’t like. Last week’s sober, fair-minded report is a reminder that everything turns on the numbers — and that political dogmas mask all of the serious questions.” [Pioneer Press, 3/6/18 (+)]

 

Cass Sunstein Weighs In On Reg Reform 'Chest-Thumping.' According to E&E News, “In an op-ed published today in the St. Paul Pioneer Press and earlier in Bloomberg, Sunstein argues the White House Office of Management and Budget report is a ‘corrective to the noisiest claims, from both the White House and its critics, on the whole topic of regulation.’ … Public interest and environmental groups have argued that OMB intentionally buried the report because it highlighted the benefits of regulations — a message at odds with the Trump administration’s push to roll back a host of federal actions. ‘What do you do when a new report undermines a narrative you’ve used to forcefully promote your agenda? You release it on a Friday evening with minimal media outreach, hoping nobody takes notice,’ wrote Keith Zukowski, campaign communications manager for the Environmental Defense Fund, in a blog post published today. Rather than criticizing the report’s timing, Sunstein upheld the report’s substance as ‘responsible and highly professional.’ … Sunstein — who drew the ire of environmental groups for his deep scrutiny of regulations and their impact — noted that the report offers some significant caveats. For instance, it says that for some regulations, agencies failed to provide a complete accounting of costs and benefits. The document also doesn’t imply an endorsement by the Trump administration of the Obama team’s cost-benefit analyses.” [E&E News, 3/6/18 (=)]

 

Research And Analysis

 

Arctic Has Warmest Winter On Record: 'Never Seen Anything Like This'. According to The Guardian, “The Arctic winter has ended with more news that is worrying even the scientists who watch the effects of climate change closely. The region experienced its warmest winter on record. Sea ice hit record lows for the time of year, new US weather data revealed on Tuesday. ‘It’s just crazy, crazy stuff,’ said Mark Serreze, director of the National Snow and Ice Data Center in Boulder, Colorado, who has been studying the Arctic since 1982. ‘These heat waves – I’ve never seen anything like this.’ Experts say what’s happening is unprecedented, part of a global warming-driven cycle that probably played a role in the recent strong, icy storms in Europe and the north-eastern US. The land weather station closest to the North Pole, at the tip of Greenland, spent more than 60 hours above freezing in February. Before this year, scientists had seen the temperature there rise above freezing in February only twice before, and then extremely briefly. Last month’s record-high temperatures have been more like those typical of May, said Ruth Mottram, a climate scientist at the Danish Meteorological Institute. Of nearly three dozen different Arctic weather stations, 15 of them were at least 10F (5.6C) above normal for the winter.” [The Guardian, 3/6/18 (+)]

 

13 Cities May Exceed 2C Temperature Rise By 2020s, Say Scientists. According to Reuters, “Thirteen cities worldwide are projected to see temperature hikes that could exceed 2 degrees Celsius (3.6°F) over the next decade or so, according to a new report. The Belgian city of Leuven faces the highest potential increase among a hundred cities that are included in a report several years in the making by the Urban Climate Change Research Network, based at Columbia University. ‘It’s all alarming,’ William Solecki, one of the study’s editors, told the Thomson Reuters Foundation on Tuesday at a United Nations-backed climate summit. Cities that could see the steepest temperature increases during the 2020s include Geneva in Switzerland (2.5C), Shenzhen in China (2.3C) and Tsukuba in Japan (2.3C), the study showed. All predictions included a lower limit too. For instance, temperatures in Leuven could increase by as little as 1.1C. The new data provides ‘foundation knowledge’ for cities at the forefront of efforts to rein in the effects of global warming, said Cynthia Rosenzweig, an editor of the report and a researcher with NASA. The new findings come on the heels of a U.N. draft report already causing alarm with projections that the global temperature rise is on track to exceed a 1.5C target included in the Paris pact to curb global warming.” [Reuters, 3/7/18 (=)]

 

Experts Try To Find A Good Way To Talk About Warming. According to E&E News, “The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine are grappling with how to communicate the science of climate change effectively in a country that’s increasingly defined by political truths and divisiveness. The academies are exploring how to use ‘rapid and effective communication’ to reach policymakers and the general public as climate science continues to be a highly partisan area of research. The goal is to craft a definitive body of resources for the public that cuts across ideologies, in the same way that the academies addressed evolution during the George W. Bush administration. Using climate science as a political wedge and dismissing the growing body of research that shows humans are warming the planet at an unprecedented pace is largely an American concept, said John Gastil, a political science professor at Pennsylvania State University. ‘We’ve traveled around the world; this is not a big, polarized issue,’ Gastil said yesterday during the launch of the Climate Communications Initiative, an effort by the academies to make climate science accessible to the public. The divide over climate science is as prevalent as ever, and scientists have been portrayed as ‘pointy-headed’ academics out of touch with regular people, said a number of speakers at the organization’s headquarters in Washington, D.C. As a result of that distrust, scientists are not necessarily the best source of information about the dangers of climate change, said Dominique Brossard, a researcher at the University of Wisconsin, Madison.” [E&E News, 3/7/18 (=)]

 

 

Texas

 

Texas Climate Champions Advance To Runoffs. According to E&E News, “Democrats are headed to runoffs in four Texas congressional districts following closely contested primaries yesterday, and each one is eager to address climate change. It’s an early glimpse into Democratic positioning on the environment, and the candidates’ views on climate mark sharp contrasts in Texas, where skepticism about global warming has dominated the political landscape. The Lone Star State held the first primaries in the nation yesterday — and the first congressional primaries since President Trump’s election. In a possible harbinger of things to come, Democratic turnout was way up compared to recent election cycles. ‘Texas showed the country that a blue wave is here,’ state Democratic Party Chairman Gilberto Hinojosa said in a statement last night. ‘Our grassroots energy and enthusiasm are unmistakable, and Trump Republicans should be terrified.’ … In the Houston-area 7th District, now considered a ‘Toss-Up’ by The Cook Political Report, attorney Lizzie Pannill Fletcher and journalist and activist Laura Moser are headed to a Democratic runoff to take on nine-term Rep. John Culberson (R). In a district ravaged by severe storms and flooding, Democrats have been vocal about climate change, while Culberson, a senior appropriator, has touted his efforts to find funding for storm cleanup and mitigation and extend the National Flood Insurance Program.” [E&E News, 3/7/18 (=)]