Table Of Contents

    Reports indicate the Trump Administration may call upon a rarely used pair of national security laws to back up its bailout of failing coal-fired power plants. Photo courtesy of wikipedia.org.

     

    Department of Energy Expected to Use Emergency National Security Laws to Justify Coal Plant Bailout

    On June 1, President Trump directed Department of Energy (DOE) Secretary Rick Perry to deploy rarely-used federal measures to prop up financially vulnerable coal and nuclear power plants to prevent them from shutting down. The White House claimed “impending retirements” of aging power plants would have a detrimental effect on the “resilience of [the U.S.] power grid.” A draft proposal from DOE obtained by the press indicated the administration could mandate electric utility companies purchase power from facilities that have become uncompetitive and are at risk of closing. It is unclear if the administration will ultimately adopt this plan, which came under fire from grid operators, energy industry groups, and environmental organizations. The administration has used Section 202 of the Federal Power Act to justify the pending action. The Act grants DOE the authority to keep power plants operational “in times of war or emergency.” DOE also intends to leverage the Defense Production Act, which allows the president to “influence domestic industry in the interest of national defense.”

    For more information see:

    CNBC

     

    Trump Administration Rescinds Tailpipe Emission Monitoring Requirement

    On May 30, the Federal Highway Administration (FHA) announced in the Federal Register that it would be repealing an oversight rule regarding vehicle tailpipe emissions. The rule required around 400 state transportation departments and municipal planning organizations to track the annual amount of carbon dioxide emitted by vehicles traveling on the country’s national highway system. The effort would have also captured traffic congestion data and had an initial report scheduled for completion by October 2018. The repeal will officially take effect at the end of June 2018. The rule also ordered states to set two or four-year emission reduction plans, but the provision did not establish any binding targets. The transportation sector was responsible for more than a third of all U.S. carbon emissions in 2016. A coalition of states, including California, Massachusetts, Washington, and Iowa, had previously sued in 2017 to require the Trump administration to continue enforcing the rule, contingent on a formal review of the rescission proposal.

    For more information see:

    Reuters

     

    Trump Administration Files Repeal of National Vehicle Emission Standards, Setting Up Clash with California

    On May 31, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a proposal to repeal a rule requiring automakers to nearly double the average fuel economy of its passenger vehicle fleet to more than 50 miles per gallon by 2025. The auto industry had expressed opposition to the rule and had been discussing a potential rollback with Trump administration officials. An EPA spokesperson said the proposal had been sent to the White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review, indicating a formal rule could soon appear in the Federal Register for public comment. The move sets up a showdown between California and the federal government over the state’s special exemption status. Under the Clean Air Act, California may set its own vehicle emission standards, which have been adopted by 12 other states. These 13 states account for one-third of the total U.S. auto market. Industry experts fear the administration's policy shift could create two divergent sets of fuel economy standards in the United States, which could create significant compliance burdens for the auto industry as a whole.

    For more information see:

    New York Times

     

    EPA’s Science Advisory Board to Revisit Administrator’s Recent Policy Rollbacks

    On May 31, EPA’s Science Advisory Board (SAB) voted to review a series of rules that the agency had proposed over the past eight months. The rules include a proposal to limit the types of scientific studies EPA may use to justify its rulemaking decisions. EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt issued the decision to push back against so-called “secret science,” referring to studies that use non-public data, namely vital public health studies that intentionally withold medical data to preserve patient confidentiality. Members of the SAB viewed Pruitt's decision with alarm. The chair of a recent SAB working group, Alison Cullen, explained, “The working group is very much in favor of transparency,” but added that the proposal contained a “very real lack of clarity” on how it may be applied. The SAB also agreed to review the research underpinning a series of proposals to repeal EPA climate change policies, including the Clean Power Plan and vehicle emission standards.

    For more information see:

    Nature

     

    Climate Change Makes Life Harder for Stakeholders in Senegal’s Fishing Economy

    The fish sellers of Senegal are struggling to keep up with the impacts of climate change. Warmer water temperatures and rising sea levels have caused commercial fish populations to either migrate farther north or decline altogether. In addition to climate change, growing competition and territorial disputes with neighboring Mauritania and fleets of foreign industrial fishing ships operating illegally in the area have placed enormous pressure on Senegal’s fishing economy. In the coastal city of Saint-Louis, women largely occupy the job of processors, who purchase and prep fish for salting. The salted fish has a long shelf life and serves as a crucial nutritional supplement for people of modest means. However, the decline in fish stocks has led to an increase in price, threatening the livelihood of the processors and those who buy their products. Seventy percent of the fish processed in Saint-Louis goes to landlocked communities. Khady Sané Diouf of the Collaborative for a Sustainable Fisheries Future said, “Women are very vulnerable because of climate change, and also because of bad living conditions, which all makes them have less revenue than they did before.”

    For more information see:

    Pacific Standard

     

    Canadian Government Invests in Controversial Oil Pipeline

    Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is drawing steady criticism from environmental organizations and indigenous communities for his administration’s support of the oil sands industry. The administration announced it will be purchasing an oil pipeline from Kinder Morgan for CA$4.5 billion and moving forward with expansion plans, despite oil sands being one of the most carbon-intensive sources of petroleum in the world. The project is viewed as a central piece of Canada’s petroleum industry and is expected to lower the cost of oil extraction. However, Trudeau defended the project by saying it would also be part of the government’s efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Trudeau said, “In order to be able to protect our environment, we do need to be able to have a strong and growing economy. That's why our plan to fight climate change features both a national price on pollution [and] getting our oil resources to new markets through responsible pipelines." The pipeline is part of an effort by the Canadian government to secure support from the oil-rich province of Alberta for a national carbon pricing proposal.

    For more information see:

    InsideClimate News

     

    Former Climate Negotiators: Trump Did Serious Damage to Paris Agreement

    A year after President Trump announced his intention to eventually withdraw the United States from the Paris Climate Agreement, former members of the American delegation that helped negotiate the agreement say the decision did significant harm to global efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Todd Stern, the Obama administration’s lead climate envoy, said, “It is really damaging for the United States to be on the way out.” Stern added, “In the absence of the United States, you have … a fair number of countries … trying to pull back a little bit on some of the things that were agreed to.” Former French prime minister Laurent Fabius, who presided over the 2015 Paris talks, said the withdrawal brought “dire consequences.” Nevertheless, many countries deepened their resolve to uphold the Paris Agreement following the Trump administration’s announcement, while major coalitions of U.S. cities, counties, states, and private companies pushed forward with their own emission reduction plans.

    For more information see:

    Climate Home News

     

    Reports Find Rogue Methane Emission Monitoring Equipment Falls Short in Extreme Cold

    Recent oil and gas industry reports have found that the most common technology used for detecting methane leaks does not work reliably in extremely cold weather. This fact presents a significant challenge for monitoring rogue emissions at fossil fuel extraction facilities in places like Alaska’s North Slope. Other studies nationwide have found that methane leaks from oil and gas operations are under-reported, posing concerns that the industry’s climate change impact could be significantly larger than previously believed. Methane remains in the atmosphere for less time than carbon dioxide, but it has a much more potent effect on global warming. Since 2008, oil and gas companies operating in the United States have been required to use infrared imaging tools to detect methane leaks. Industry representatives tend to view reducing methane leaks as beneficial, since the rogue emissions represent a loss of product and profits. Companies operating in Alaska’s North Slope successfully argued for an exemption from the monitoring rules due in-part to the physical limitations of the imaging equipment in the region’s harsh environment.

    For more information see:

    InsideClimate News

     

    Study: Meat and Dairy Production Accounts for Vast Majority of Farmland Demand and Food-Related Climate Impacts

    According to a new study appearing in the journal Science, demand for meat and dairy products has an outsized environmental impact relative to other types of food. The researchers found that without meat and dairy consumption, farmland could be reduced by 75 percent and still meet the global population’s food needs. Although meat and dairy provide just 18 percent of humanity’s calories and 37 percent of its protein, it uses 83 percent of all farmland and generates 60 percent of the agricultural sector’s greenhouse gas emissions. The study discovered that even the “lowest impact” meat and dairy products still have a significantly outsized environmental impact when compared to the “least sustainable” vegetable and cereal-based products. The researchers also accounted for impacts on water and air pollution and freshwater usage. The study drew upon a dataset of nearly 40,000 farms in 119 countries, while covering 40 food products representing 90 percent of global consumption.

    For more information see:

    Guardian

     

    Headlines

    NASA Staff Share Fears Over Speaking Openly on Climate Change Under Trump Administration

    Full Power Restoration for Puerto Rico to Take at Least Two More Months

    Global Funds Seek to Bring Solar Power to 250 Million Residents of Africa’s Sahel Region

    Debt Restructuring Could Be Effective Tool to Help Caribbean Nations Achieve Climate Resilience

    Study: Students’ Exposure to Warmer Temperatures Contributes to Decline in Academic Performance

     

    Writer and Editor: Brian La Shier